[Event] 99er Cycle Tour

[Pure Savage]

Now very much confused.

 

Last year beta was 1.18, finish time 2.26 for 108 km. this year its 1.03 with finish time 2.28 for 102km. 

 

Surely if the winner time is 2min SLOWER for 6 km shorter the beta should at least be simular if not higher?

 

(just trying to get head around beta)

 

You have to consider the field, the adjustments are to make it as if the best riders in SA rode the race, therefore as many were at other races, hence the adjustment, hence why the Cycle tour gets a 1 beta, as best riders in SA taking part.

[Karman de Lange]

You have to consider the field, the adjustments are to make it as if the best riders in SA rode the race, therefore as many were at other races, hence the adjustment, hence why the Cycle tour gets a 1 beta, as best riders in SA taking part.

 

They adjust winner time based on riders, not beta .... well, according to there explanation .. Beta is purley based on how difficult

 

"[beta] is a number that indicates the difficulty of the conditions where more than 1 means windy or hilly and less means flat or calm"

 

 

​"First, an extract is done of all the riders who did the event in question, as well as the base event. Every rider with an index better than 100 is taken for this calculation. The assumption is made that the same riders should have the same index for both events, so the winner’s time of the event is now adjusted and the “beta” is calculated to achieve this."​

[Pure Savage]

They adjust winner time based on riders, not beta .... well, according to there explanation .. Beta is purley based on how difficult

 

"[beta] is a number that indicates the difficulty of the conditions where more than 1 means windy or hilly and less means flat or calm"

 

 

​"First, an extract is done of all the riders who did the event in question, as well as the base event. Every rider with an index better than 100 is taken for this calculation. The assumption is made that the same riders should have the same index for both events, so the winner’s time of the event is now adjusted and the “beta” is calculated to achieve this."​

 

Yup, but if guys with the best Beta's in base event did not take part then they adjust winners time accordingly. 

 

Its pretty much spot on, the only thing that stuffed up the seeding this year was the two hill climbs...

[Sidmouth]

I had a $ number but got there a bit late{also not looking forward to the climbs with skinny guys AKA cannot climb} so I jumped into group #, however racetec has me starting in $, did they not time from the start, 

[Pure Savage]

I had a $ number but got there a bit late{also not looking forward to the climbs with skinny guys AKA cannot climb} so I jumped into group #, however racetec has me starting in $, did they not time from the start, 

 

For the bigger events that have pre printed seeding numbers the start mat sometimes just registers that you crossed it and did not cross before your start time. 

 

Then your chip crosses the finishing mat and then deducts the finish and start time.

[Flowspeed]

For the bigger events that have pre printed seeding numbers the start mat sometimes just registers that you crossed it and did not cross before your start time.

 

Then your chip crosses the finishing mat and then deducts the finish and start time.

 

Same thing happened to me.. Fell back from $ to % and got penalized with about 8 minutes.

Why do they have timing mats at the start then ?

[Pure Savage]

Same thing happened to me.. Fell back from $ to % and got penalized with about 8 minutes.

Why do they have timing mats at the start then ?

 

To make sure you cross the line at some point during the morning and not start on the N7.

 

I am sure if you were to pop them a friendly email and a link to strava they would be able to adjust it for you if you so wish.

[Flowspeed]

To make sure you cross the line at some point during the morning and not start on the N7.

 

I am sure if you were to pop them a friendly email and a link to strava they would be able to adjust it for you if you so wish.

Makes sense..

I emailed them last night, will wait and see.

[Flowspeed]

... well , at least now I know not to try that trick again

[J∆kk∆ls]

I had a $ number but got there a bit late{also not looking forward to the climbs with skinny guys AKA cannot climb} so I jumped into group #, however racetec has me starting in $, did they not time from the start, 

My mate jumped back from C to G to ride with me. His Racetec time started him in G. So cant say what went wrong with your timing!

[Sidmouth]

My mate jumped back from C to G to ride with me. His Racetec time started him in G. So cant say what went wrong with your timing!

that is  interesting, 

[nazmo]

that is  interesting, 

 

I jumped back from B to G, my time was initially from B start time, so worse. Contacted racetec and gave my GPS data. They amended it.

[Sparki 1]

If I can recall, when I went over the start mat I didn't hear it beap. I took off in E. Maybe racetec had some issues with their starting mats for the earlier start groups. I also saw some F riders joining our group when we took off. Normally if you jump to a higher start group u get disqualified, well that's what I was told anyway.

Did any1 else also experience the "silent" start or was I mistaken?

[Rouxenator]

Climbed in 39-25 again. Last year I vowed to swop out my 11-25 for an 11-27. 

But i had forgotten the pain I went through and did it again. 

 

Still it was a fun day in the saddle and got 3:14 G group. 

Will be back next year for sure. 

Get a MTB cassette, makes way more sense. I cover about the same ratios on 1x8 11t-34t than I did on a 3x8 12t-25t

[meathead]

Give this man a Bells! 

Make it a Double

[Karman de Lange]

My mate jumped back from C to G to ride with me. His Racetec time started him in G. So cant say what went wrong with your timing!

 

I fell back from D to F and also, no issues, picked me up fine in F group and end times was 100%