Cycotic Posted February 16, 2016 Share We had the same. I told a few of them to back off, nobody listened, then the VB commissaire shouted at them and they dropped off... Glad to hear that. For you guys in the racing categories, there are a lot of reasons not to be interfered with. For me as an open seeded rider, I'm not bothered too much about anything other than safety. I know its a generalisation, but having done many years of both short and long rides, the short riders tend to have all the willingness in the world but very little in the way of bunch-riding skills. You combine that with some tired 100km+ legs who are in some way relying on the riding ability of those around them and you get a recipe for disaster. Add to that the fact that a lot (again a generalisation) of the short riders are riding mountain bikes, whose handlebars don't tend to fit too well into a bunch. I saw the wider bars clip a rider or bike a few times on Sunday. Luckily nobody came off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 16, 2016 Share Gerald, what are the correct CSA/UCI sizes? I have just gone through the CSA websites long list of PDFs and could not find anything."certain size".i posted it somewhere when it was first discussed. It's one of the event threads for 2016. I'll try find it... edit: found it https://community.bikehub.co.za/topic/156548-event-the-value-logistics-fast-one/?p=2805998 Posted in the Value Logistics Fast One thread.UCI regulations dictate that bib numbers and frame numbers must be a specific size. Screen Shot 2016-01-29 at 9.01.48 PM.png Screen Shot 2016-01-29 at 9.01.58 PM.png Screen Shot 2016-01-29 at 9.02.03 PM.png Printing of a number at home, while possible, cannot be controlled (size wise). Doesn't mean I'm against it, the complete opposite. From a rational point of view, licensed riders are the only one's required to wear them - as identification to the race officials and to identify their position on the line (photo finish, rather than the previous century's method of writing down numbers). The alphabet groups don't need a number - except to identify that they're official paid-up entrants. The timing chip determines the first person over the line right down to the last place, so I would say... why waste money on a number? I really like the idea of a frame number - a permanent number for the year for everyone. You have no choice but to buy one if you want to take part in any sanctioned event - your number can be the CSA Membership number. I would even go as far as ensuring a mounting bracket is included for the rear brake or seat post, so every number can be fixed without modification. If you lose your number, it works like the SAS board, you pay for a replacement (I haven't used mine in years, so I assume you still pay for the replacement). The only difference is that it doesn't have to be a RFID type board. Licensed cyclists get a sticker pack issued together with their licence number for the year based on their age category. It can be coloured the same as the licence, and number range grouped per batch, i.e. Elite & U23 (1-149), Vets 30-34 (150-249), Vets 35-39 (250-349), etc. Then, you enter and receive a barcode receipt as confirmation of your entry, together with your batch number. No need to print anything - you have a permanent number, and proof of entry. CSA officials said the organiser could lose out if people ride without paying. How the organiser controls it is up to them - but I know it's too crowded and rushed at the start, so it won't work there - alternative solutions need to be proposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veebee Posted February 16, 2016 Share Are the PPA seeding okes for real... I just see R4S seeding has been updated with a Beta of 0.81 which is 0.01 lower from last year yet the conditions were soo much worse and all the times were slower this year. Guess their formula will remain a mystery... flippin joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HBO Posted February 16, 2016 Share Are the PPA seeding okes for real... I just see R4S seeding has been updated with a Beta of 0.81 which is 0.01 lower from last year yet the conditions were soo much worse and all the times were slower this year. Guess their formula will remain a mystery... flippin joke my R4S results aren't up yet, but all of the sudden there is a penalty of 15 points added to my index for last years races of which is older than 5 months yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmw1za Posted February 16, 2016 Share my seeding gets worse after every race in spite of race times improving ... so the mystery continues Im on a wonderful 28 now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Kaze Pete Posted February 16, 2016 Share Are the PPA seeding okes for real... I just see R4S seeding has been updated with a Beta of 0.81 which is 0.01 lower from last year yet the conditions were soo much worse and all the times were slower this year. Guess their formula will remain a mystery... flippin jokeThey also adjusted the winning time from 2:53:55 to 2:48:40 - this fiddling was to expected with SAs being on the same weekend, drawing a lot of top talent away...But the beta of 0.81 is a real insult - two years ago, with much friendlier weather, the beta was 0.88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted February 16, 2016 Share Are the PPA seeding okes for real... I just see R4S seeding has been updated with a Beta of 0.81 which is 0.01 lower from last year yet the conditions were soo much worse and all the times were slower this year. Guess their formula will remain a mystery... flippin jokeWho at PPA can we talk to about this? Edit: I can never understand why they adjust the "winning time" when they have the beta to manipulate the diffculty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted February 16, 2016 Share i posted it somewhere when it was first discussed. It's one of the event threads for 2016. I'll try find it... edit: found it https://community.bikehub.co.za/topic/156548-event-the-value-logistics-fast-one/?p=2805998 Posted in the Value Logistics Fast One thread. Thanks Gerald. I will now trim my numebers to the exact dimensions required. 18x16 for back numbers and 13x9 for frame numbers. If they give me *** about it, they can eat my shorts!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veebee Posted February 16, 2016 Share Who at PPA can we talk to about this? Edit: I can never understand why they adjust the "winning time" when they have the beta to manipulate the diffculty.I sent a mail to them so will post the reply here if I ever get one. The "powers" who make the call for these things need to also be on a bike at the events to experience the conditions first hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 16, 2016 Share Gauteng Cycling needs to step up BIG TIME and implement a single seeding system for use at ALL Gauteng based races. Time for change is now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatek Posted February 16, 2016 Share Who at PPA can we talk to about this? Edit: I can never understand why they adjust the "winning time" when they have the beta to manipulate the diffculty.My PPA seeding for Fast one is 8 and Ride for Sight 14. I did have a health problems but hell it wasn't that bad. High cross winds will always mean closer racing and slower times. My 2c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Kaze Pete Posted February 16, 2016 Share Gauteng Cycling needs to step up BIG TIME and implement a single seeding system for use at ALL Gauteng based races. Time for change is now... They should make submitting results to a "seeding ladder" a condition for sanctioning of the event. Everybody who has a sanctioned event can use the results... easy, or just theory? Can we do something to help them do it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted February 16, 2016 Share Where do the event organizers that do not want their seeding used get their seeding from ? Name and shame those event organizers that refuse to release their results for seeding purposes, or at least display the races that the seeding is obtained from and those missing will be the ones that do not want to release theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted February 16, 2016 Share They just pointed me to RaceTec for an explanation on the beta value?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andydude Posted February 16, 2016 Share They also adjusted the winning time from 2:53:55 to 2:48:40 - this fiddling was to expected with SAs being on the same weekend, drawing a lot of top talent away...But the beta of 0.81 is a real insult - two years ago, with much friendlier weather, the beta was 0.88 Maybe it's part of their learning curve, the beta changing per year. Or look at it like this: If you rode 3:00:00 and the adjusted winner's time was 2:48:40 and the beta is 0.81, your index would be ( 180 / 168.67 - 1 ) / 0.81 = 0.083 = 8.3%. We know there were not a lot of pros (31 in 2016 compared to 75 last year). So let's make the beta 1.00 meaning it was as difficult as the CTCT, but we use last year's winning time of 2:41:35 without adjustment (because all pros were there). Then the same 3h would be (180 / 161.58 - 1 ) / 1.00 = 0.114 = 11.4% So I think in total the penalisation remains the same, with the adjusted time not adjusted down enough, but the beta adjusted worse. I don't know if I am making sense?! Edit : Maybe the table makes more sense. They can either adjust the winning time, or the beta, or both. I guess they can use one "beta" for both, but different factors influence each so it might be better to split it into two factors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted February 16, 2016 Share Have you read their explanation? http://results.pedalpower.org.za/seedingfaq.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.