pjcampbell

If you ever do a triathlon you notice they all do chip timing. I did one race recently, where they had the results broadcast to the internet within minutes, from the race site. How frustrating is it when you do a race, you came in like 13th and they don't even acknowledge you finished.

Around here nobody does chip timing. I'm wondering what one could charge for timing an event, considering the chips cost 100 bucks a pop at wholesale. I have no clue what timing costs in general???

Snuffleupagus

Bike racing isn't triathlon. In general, nobody cares if you finished out of the top ten.

Participation medals = not bike racing.

snoboard2

don't come in 13th

Psimet2001 

There are a lot of bike races that use chip timing. The ones I have ben in have been just as poor at scoring as any other. In other words the chips don't necessarily make anything better.

king-tony

I've raced with chips before. The results were no quicker as they had a lot of trouble with the technology. The only cool thing was comparing lap times during the crit.

esammuli

+1

I went to Sea Otter in 2007 and the chip timing was terrible. The results were screwy and it took them forever to post. Not to mention it's very expensive.

pjcampbell

Not sure why the chip timing should be bad... perhaps people who didn't know how to use the system? With a chip it pretty much either works or it doesn't... I am looking at this from a timers perspective not a racer who comes in 13th.

Psimet2001 

The issue at the events I have been at has been mainly keeping track of who got which chips, running out of chips. It seems like they had problems with pre-laps and free-laps as well although I may be wrong about that.

I have done 2 races with chips and one "ride" with a chip an pretty much everything has been kind of worthless. The problem shouldn't be with the technology, but how it seems to get deployed.

Remember if your officials take an hour to post results like ours do what makes you think adding a layer of complexity to it (they will still keep manual score) will make it any easier or efficient? It's kind of a novelty after the fact.....WAY after the fact.

ottsville

+1

We just had our state racing assoc. meeting and discussed chip timing. It is very expensive overall...something like $7k for the timing system minus the chips. Which means race fees would have to go up. For tri geeks who do a handful of races a year, paying $70 and up per race is no big deal. It's a little different for guys racing 2 days 3 weekends a month for 6 months.

And the fact is that the results that matter can be posted just as quickly by hand scoring events since you still have to verify the chip results. Chip timing does allow for posting results deeper though, but who really cares about being 23rd in a 50 man field?

Duke of Kent

What does time matter, outside of a time trial?

It's the first man who crosses the line. Simple as that.

Racer Ex 

Sea Otter has chip timing, charges like you are buying the chips, then hoses the results after a 4 hour wait.

king-tony

What kind of question is this? Chip timing allows me to taunt 32nd - 54th place with e-mails about how badly I beat them.

Duke of Kent

Hmmm. You raise a good point. Now I can ridicule the three people that finish behind me at Elk Grove next year after I blow sky high with a mile to go.

pjcampbell

i am surprised at the responses here. i would have expected fast, accurate results would be something all cyclists would appreciate whether first or last place.

the same can be said about a triathlon -- that place is all that matters, but that does not stop them from giving out splits for every leg + transition area. i am not trying to compare triathlon to bike racing. i've done a LOT of bike races, and 2 triathlons and in those 2 triathlons, results and reporting was better than any bike race I've ever done, with exception of Westwood Velo's time trials. why do cyclists not demand the same???

I was looking into buying a timing system... trying to get a very rough idea as to what one could charge for timing, or what it might be worth to a promoter/race director.

bdcheung

The experiences shared in this thread indicate that the results generated from electronic timing systems are neither fast nor accurate.

Duke of Kent

I've never had to wait more than an hour for results. And the longest wait was for something I would never trust a chip for; a photo-finish between my teammate and a Time Factory Pro Team dude.

And if people want to see data from their races, they can extrapolate it rather easily from their HRM or powermeter. Lap times, average speed, HR are all quite simple to figure out, and the people that are interested in that information can access it if they desire. Why should everyone else be forced to pay to see information for which they have no need?

Psimet2001 

Yup.

There is a reason we got to the method of scoring that we have...experience. Instead of trying to change the method of scoring to match what electronic timing systems were designed to do (which is what people try to do and tend to fail at) one should look at creating an electronic scoring system based on our system of scoring.

....it's not time based....it's position based.

Goes to DOK's point

bdcheung

I wonder what system they use at the Grand Tours... those little yellow boxes that hang from the chainstays.

ottsville

Believe it is AMD's system. Very expensive, and they still verify the results visually.