Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A z rider started in D.

2 Marshalls attempted to get him to leave. He refused.  He also refused to helpmpull an aborted chase back on when D split just after the technical beginning. The second split from D  dropped him before the left turn towards Hermon. Some F riders dragged him back. We dropped him again just after the coffee shop at Hermon.

On the up side, i loved seeing all the different shapes and ages of riders and their bikes on the shorter route when we joined them. Very gratifying.

Edited by Mamil
  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

A couple with Z numbers were adamant they wanted to start in C. 🤣

I heard them arguing with the marshall, to the point where the guy said: "What if I take off the number and just ride the route by myself?" 🤦‍♂️ I think the marshall gave up at that point.

Geezuz, there's always one (in this case, two) at every event.

Edited by mikkelz
4 hours ago, Mamil said:

A z rider started in D.

2 Marshalls attempted to get him to leave. He refused.  He also refused to helpmpull an aborted chase back on when D split just after the technical beginning. The second split from D  dropped him before the left turn towards Hermon. Some F riders dragged him back. We dropped him again just after the coffee shop at Hermon.

On the up side, i loved seeing all the different shapes and ages of riders and their bikes on the shorter route when we joined them. Very gratifying.

 

Jip, the lady marchall tried ....

 

I thought he would be DQ'd, based on Durbie Dash.

 

 

I dont see any DQs in the results.

14 hours ago, Denis Dell said:

It does look like Skubarra is correct, here are the fastest riders per group/wave:

Wave A: 2:24:16

Wave B: 2:37:24

Wave F: 2:38:36

Wave D= 2:40:48

Wave Z: 2:41:23

Wave Y: 2:42.09

Wave G: 2:44:09

Wave C= 2:45:27

Wave M: 2:48:55

Somebody is going to start in different starting groups soon....

 

image.jpeg.73e907247cf571c9c547d754780e251f.jpeg

 

Z1.JPG.515e7444e49cfad30e75c7a6f2c843fc.JPG

Can somebody with a full STRAVA membership check if this gent started at 6:20 .... we KNOW at least two of Z riders started early.

 

From personal experience at Durbie Dash I know that Finish Time missed many riders at the batch start, then defaulted their start times to their allocated groups.  Strava tells all ....

 

Edited by ChrisF

I was at the front of L (haven't raced in 10 years) going up the big climb and a solo guy from Z came past bloody fast - I rode with him for a bit and he said he'd started in Z because he was a late entrant.

I finished in 3:02 and he'd already taken more than 10mins off us by that point so he must have finished in a fast time - don't know if it was this guy - may have been Christian Truter who finished first in Z in 2:28 but don't know if anyone could have ridden solo that fast? He was wearing a Munga shirt.

The next Z riders only caught us after the 40km riders joined and it was a group of about 8 riders.

Edited by ianct
17 minutes ago, Bub Marley said:

I think they have messed up the distances or something. 2:28 solo for a 100km insane. It’s probably 50km race.

 

Either that, OR it may be one of the gents that started in D, and got a Z start time ..... 

 

At Durbie Dash a number of riders were not scanned at the start , and their start times defaulted to their group.  I was one of them - I see Finish Time since changed the data fields and no longer publish that some were not scanned at the start.

 

The rider that came in at 83rd may have some questions for Finish Time, even more so those in the age cat ....  questions which only the rider's Garmin/Strava record can answer.

1 minute ago, Mamil said:

 It always seemed to me that there was nothing wrong with the orange chips and blue mats ... Doesn't look to me this new system improves things much.

And I already have a little collection of ugly rubber seatpost thingies all of which have required a zip tie.

 

Think the main issue with the previous system is that it was expensive to set up and use. Racetec was much more expensive than other timing companies and losing out on a lot of business.

Also the database software behind the system was very outdated and again would have been expensive to rebuild, hence the decision to go with finishtime rather than rebuilding the whole racetec business.

But yes, agree 100% Can't say I have seen any improvement other than that initial results are available quicker.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout