Sprint/sprinters lane rule question
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Sprint/sprinters lane rule question
Ok, this had a positive outcome, so it's more of a rules clarification for the future. This was on a 333 m track where the 200 m line is after you exit turn 2 and just past the beginning of the back straight. It was a two up sprint and one person was the designated lead out (we'll call him rider one). First lap, rider two just stayed just behind rider one's back wheel, on his right up against the rail. Rider two was close enough that he could keep an eye on rider one, but far enough back that he was keeping his options open. As they started to exit turn 4, it became obvious that rider one wasn't going to go for a flying lap as he stayed high and slow. As they came out of turn 2, rider one still stayed really high and picked up just a little speed, but not winding up for a sprint speed, so rider two let him get just enough gap that he could control things and started his sprint...rider two jumped and got in a couple of pedal revolutions by the time rider one realized and started his wind up. Rider two reached the red line of the sprint lane midway down the back stretch and was on the black line about 5-10 meters before entering turn 3. Rider one took a little less aggressive line than rider two that put rider one crossing the red line and entering the sprint lane at the beginning of turn 3. Rider two was on the black line when rider one started to cross the red line into the sprint lane, at this point, rider one's back tire was about 2-3 ft in front of rider two's front tire, but rider two was going faster.....rider two went into collision avoidance mode, pulled up just long enough to create enough space that he could make a hard move to the right without hitting rider one's rear wheel. Rider two got back on the gas and had enough power to goover the top of rider one and take the win.
Had rider two held his line and kept on hammering, there would have been contact. So my question is, was that a perfectly legal move on rider one's part or a possible grey area tactic to get a win? I honestly don't know if rider one was aware of rider two's position or not, if he was trying to intimidate rider two or not or if he even had a clue what happened....hard to tell what's going through someone's head during a race.
As far as I'm concerned, rider two had control of the sprint lane and rider one did not have the speed or necessary clearance to come down on rider two, but I may be wrong...that's why I'm asking. Not pointing fingers, just trying to use this as a learning experience and gain more knowledge.
Had rider two held his line and kept on hammering, there would have been contact. So my question is, was that a perfectly legal move on rider one's part or a possible grey area tactic to get a win? I honestly don't know if rider one was aware of rider two's position or not, if he was trying to intimidate rider two or not or if he even had a clue what happened....hard to tell what's going through someone's head during a race.
As far as I'm concerned, rider two had control of the sprint lane and rider one did not have the speed or necessary clearance to come down on rider two, but I may be wrong...that's why I'm asking. Not pointing fingers, just trying to use this as a learning experience and gain more knowledge.
Last edited by Divebrian; 05-03-17 at 05:59 PM.
#2
aka mattio
It's hard to say without video, but whoever gets there first gets it. Sounds like Rider 2 got there first. 2 got to the lane first but was behind 1, so that makes it an unusual situation. But, based on how the rules are written, it sounds like 1 encroached and impeded - albeit from the front instead of coming over the top.
#3
Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Essentially, this was against the rules.
3.2.044 A rider passing on the right of his opponent, who is in the sprinters’ lane, may not
crowd him or cause him suddenly to reduce speed.
He crowded him by moving over without ample room and speed.
3.2.045 A rider starting the sprint outside the sprinters’ lane may not drop into that lane if it is
already occupied by his opponent unless there is a clear cycle-length lead.
2-3ft is not a cycle-length, let alone a "clear" cycle-length
https://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/R...-E_English.PDF
3.2.044 A rider passing on the right of his opponent, who is in the sprinters’ lane, may not
crowd him or cause him suddenly to reduce speed.
He crowded him by moving over without ample room and speed.
3.2.045 A rider starting the sprint outside the sprinters’ lane may not drop into that lane if it is
already occupied by his opponent unless there is a clear cycle-length lead.
2-3ft is not a cycle-length, let alone a "clear" cycle-length
https://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/R...-E_English.PDF
#4
Elitist
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times
in
77 Posts
I don't know.
The phrase that was left out of the story is that, "the trailing rider tried to dive under the leading rider and the leading rider dove as well".
Divebrian, I'm fairly certain that you were the trailing rider that dove under based on how the story is being told, right?
jfiveeight, those rules are generally for the mass start races. For sprints, they may be interpreted differently. For example, the same situation happens here:
(skip to the 1:30 mark)
Notice how Hoy (leading) is watching over his right shoulder "guarding" Bos' move over the top. When he loses sight of Bos (trailing) Hoy immediately dives down to the left (to guard his left) WHILE STILL LOOKING RIGHT. That is a trained response...and the right one.
Basically the tactic is:
- If you are gonna pass me, you will have to do it on the right where you have to climb the track and go further around.
- If you try to pass me on the left, I will block you with my bike.
The phrase that was left out of the story is that, "the trailing rider tried to dive under the leading rider and the leading rider dove as well".
Divebrian, I'm fairly certain that you were the trailing rider that dove under based on how the story is being told, right?
jfiveeight, those rules are generally for the mass start races. For sprints, they may be interpreted differently. For example, the same situation happens here:
(skip to the 1:30 mark)
Notice how Hoy (leading) is watching over his right shoulder "guarding" Bos' move over the top. When he loses sight of Bos (trailing) Hoy immediately dives down to the left (to guard his left) WHILE STILL LOOKING RIGHT. That is a trained response...and the right one.
Basically the tactic is:
- If you are gonna pass me, you will have to do it on the right where you have to climb the track and go further around.
- If you try to pass me on the left, I will block you with my bike.
#5
aka mattio
the rules that jfiveeight quoted are right from the Sprint Race section of the rule book.
last night i figured that Rider 1's actions were a sprint lane violation, but this morning, I don't think that they were - Rider 1 entered the sprint lane well clear of Rider 2, regardless of the speed differential.
However, there are other rules under which it could be considered a violation. I'm not an official, but say I was running an informal sprint session and had a copy of the rule book in my hand. If I thought the move was flagrant I could point to these two rules. One could argue that dropping into the lane in front of somebody, at a whole bunch less speed, could apply.
3.2.041 Before the last 200 metres line or the start of the final sprint, riders may avail themselves of the full width of the track but must nevertheless leave sufficient space for their opponent to pass and shall refrain from any manoeuvres that could provoke a collision, a fall or cause any rider to ride off the track.
3.2.042 During the final sprint, even if launched before the last 200 metres, each rider shall remain in his lane up to the finish, unless he has at least a clear cycle-length lead and shall not make any manoeuvre to prevent the opponent from passing.
last night i figured that Rider 1's actions were a sprint lane violation, but this morning, I don't think that they were - Rider 1 entered the sprint lane well clear of Rider 2, regardless of the speed differential.
However, there are other rules under which it could be considered a violation. I'm not an official, but say I was running an informal sprint session and had a copy of the rule book in my hand. If I thought the move was flagrant I could point to these two rules. One could argue that dropping into the lane in front of somebody, at a whole bunch less speed, could apply.
3.2.041 Before the last 200 metres line or the start of the final sprint, riders may avail themselves of the full width of the track but must nevertheless leave sufficient space for their opponent to pass and shall refrain from any manoeuvres that could provoke a collision, a fall or cause any rider to ride off the track.
3.2.042 During the final sprint, even if launched before the last 200 metres, each rider shall remain in his lane up to the finish, unless he has at least a clear cycle-length lead and shall not make any manoeuvre to prevent the opponent from passing.
#6
Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The Hoy vs Bos example occurred before the final 200m, which is where a lot of the rules are more concrete/enforced. From what I understand in Divebrian's case, they were already in the final sprint. The rules I quoted were specifically from the Sprint section. Doesn't mean I still can't be wrong, just going with what I have seen.
Hoy tried to cover that move because he lost to Bos doing the exact same thing in the first heat.
Hoy tried to cover that move because he lost to Bos doing the exact same thing in the first heat.
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
That's probably the most ignored rule in the book. I've never seen a rider relegated or warned at local or elite competition for entering the sprinters lane with less that a "clear" cycle-length, as long as wheels weren't actually overlapping. 2-3 feet is a wheel diameter, which is plenty of room for the following rider to respond.
#8
Elitist
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times
in
77 Posts
jfiveeight, the sprint it not necessarily engaged if the riders are inside of 200M of the finish. 200M has absolutely nothing to do with a Match Sprint.
TV broacasters like to time the last 200M of a Match Sprint to let the viewers know how fast the riders are going, but to the officials, the 200M mark means nothing. It is only relevant in the time trial.
"when the sprint engages" is and has always been a judgment call. Is it when the first guy hauls azz? The second? Can the sprint be engaged when both riders are above the stayer's line? Most officials are like, "I know it when I see it." Granted, most match sprints don't have any issues and it's obvious. But, other times it's a judgement call. That's why officials are in place. That's their job, to interpret and judge.
In the Hoy/Bos clip I presented, Hoy could have been relegated for pushing Bos off the track. Bos could have been relegated for being off the track (notice that he restrained himself from passing Hoy). But, the officials simply "let them race". That was a long time ago. Not sure how the UCI would call that race these days.
Also, local tracks have varying degrees of enforcement. Some tracks are really strict and allow no drama. Others allow sweeps, headbutts, chops, etc... and say, "If it ain't rubbin' it ain't racin'"
TV broacasters like to time the last 200M of a Match Sprint to let the viewers know how fast the riders are going, but to the officials, the 200M mark means nothing. It is only relevant in the time trial.
"when the sprint engages" is and has always been a judgment call. Is it when the first guy hauls azz? The second? Can the sprint be engaged when both riders are above the stayer's line? Most officials are like, "I know it when I see it." Granted, most match sprints don't have any issues and it's obvious. But, other times it's a judgement call. That's why officials are in place. That's their job, to interpret and judge.
In the Hoy/Bos clip I presented, Hoy could have been relegated for pushing Bos off the track. Bos could have been relegated for being off the track (notice that he restrained himself from passing Hoy). But, the officials simply "let them race". That was a long time ago. Not sure how the UCI would call that race these days.
Also, local tracks have varying degrees of enforcement. Some tracks are really strict and allow no drama. Others allow sweeps, headbutts, chops, etc... and say, "If it ain't rubbin' it ain't racin'"
#9
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I don't know.
Divebrian, I'm fairly certain that you were the trailing rider that dove under based on how the story is being told, right?
jfiveeight, those rules are generally for the mass start races. For sprints, they may be interpreted differently. For example, the same situation happens here:
(skip to the 1:30 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ1j8sXtMqI
Notice how Hoy (leading) is watching over his right shoulder "guarding" Bos' move over the top. When he loses sight of Bos (trailing) Hoy immediately dives down to the left (to guard his left) WHILE STILL LOOKING RIGHT. That is a trained response...and the right one.
Basically the tactic is:
- If you are gonna pass me, you will have to do it on the right where you have to climb the track and go further around.
- If you try to pass me on the left, I will block you with my bike.
Divebrian, I'm fairly certain that you were the trailing rider that dove under based on how the story is being told, right?
jfiveeight, those rules are generally for the mass start races. For sprints, they may be interpreted differently. For example, the same situation happens here:
(skip to the 1:30 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ1j8sXtMqI
Notice how Hoy (leading) is watching over his right shoulder "guarding" Bos' move over the top. When he loses sight of Bos (trailing) Hoy immediately dives down to the left (to guard his left) WHILE STILL LOOKING RIGHT. That is a trained response...and the right one.
Basically the tactic is:
- If you are gonna pass me, you will have to do it on the right where you have to climb the track and go further around.
- If you try to pass me on the left, I will block you with my bike.
You aren't the first to make an incorrect assumption concerning myself. I was riding around the infield cooling down from the race I just won, in which I took a flying lap....figured I would eventually meet the winner of the race in question if we both kept winning, so I was trying to figure out each ones tactics. Rider one was smaller and turned out not to be the fast little roadie hoping to turn in a long distance flyer, it turned out his tactic was to wait as close to the finish as possible to spin up his small gear. Rider two had a bigger gear and was more of the flying lap type guy.
I ended up racing rider two and kept the pace relatively high throughout the first lap to discourage him from taking too long of a flyer....I was good with one flying lap, but I didn't want him going from the gun. I ended up winning...but it brought me to the thought that I could have easily been rider two in the scenario in question. I want my sprint started by the beginning of the back stretch and would go early on someone trying to hold off to the last minute.
In the scenario,both riders came from up on the rail and crossed the whole track to enter the sprinters lane, they weren't starting at the stayers line. There was about a 15-20' gap between rider one and two when they both set similar trajectories to the sprinters lane. Neither made an aggressive cut and rider two made it there faster and was fully occupying the sprinters lane and got in one or two pedal revolutions before rider one's front wheel touched the red line to enter the sprint lane. Rider one probably got in one or two more pedal revolutions before his back wheel crossed the red line and then another one or two revolutions before he reached the black line....very different from the Hoy/Bos video. In other words, it wasn't a fast, aggressive dive...it was just the continuation of his trajectory path. As I previously stated, I don't know what was going through rider one's head or if he even realized rider two was there. Maybe he thought he was further ahead.....
Either way, it doesn't really matter....my question was pertaining to who would have been assessed fault and how would the results stand if there was contact and one rider went down. As I said, I could have easily been rider two...easily enough that you assumed I was.
Last edited by Divebrian; 05-04-17 at 07:08 PM.
#10
Elitist
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times
in
77 Posts
If there was contact, who would be at fault would honestly be a tossup...and in that case, who ever made it back first wins.
I say that because it is a legit tactic to block the trailing rider if they are doing maneuvers. There are several ways that a leading rider can impede a trailing rider, for example by letting his front wheel inside of your rear wheel and slowly pining him to the boards. This is an advanced/pro technique will freak out beginner and intermediate riders and when done right. The leading rider will hold the trailing rider up there indefinitely then dive off taking the optimal line gapping off the trailing rider and leaving him a not-optimal line. If the trailign rider hits the brakes and backs-off, then that's the cue for the leading rider to haul azz for the win. That maneuver begins by impeding the trailing rider.
Also because you say that it could be that the leading rider simply may not have known what the trailing rider was doing or his pace.
#11
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
It should be notes that the clear cycle lenght is from front wheel to front wheel. This means that if that there is 2-3 feet from the back wheel to the other rider front wheel there is plenty of space.
Essentially, this was against the rules.
3.2.045 A rider starting the sprint outside the sprinters’ lane may not drop into that lane if it is
already occupied by his opponent unless there is a clear cycle-length lead.
2-3ft is not a cycle-length, let alone a "clear" cycle-length
https://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/R...-E_English.PDF
3.2.045 A rider starting the sprint outside the sprinters’ lane may not drop into that lane if it is
already occupied by his opponent unless there is a clear cycle-length lead.
2-3ft is not a cycle-length, let alone a "clear" cycle-length
https://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/R...-E_English.PDF
#12
Full Member
Had rider two held his line and kept on hammering, there would have been contact. So my question is, was that a perfectly legal move on rider one's part or a possible grey area tactic to get a win? I honestly don't know if rider one was aware of rider two's position or not, if he was trying to intimidate rider two or not or if he even had a clue what happened....hard to tell what's going through someone's head during a race.
As far as I'm concerned, rider two had control of the sprint lane and rider one did not have the speed or necessary clearance to come down on rider two, but I may be wrong...that's why I'm asking. Not pointing fingers, just trying to use this as a learning experience and gain more knowledge.
As far as I'm concerned, rider two had control of the sprint lane and rider one did not have the speed or necessary clearance to come down on rider two, but I may be wrong...that's why I'm asking. Not pointing fingers, just trying to use this as a learning experience and gain more knowledge.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
That's probably the most ignored rule in the book. I've never seen a rider relegated or warned at local or elite competition for entering the sprinters lane with less that a "clear" cycle-length, as long as wheels weren't actually overlapping. 2-3 feet is a wheel diameter, which is plenty of room for the following rider to respond.
Given your description, rider two should have expected rider one to move into the sprint lane at some point within the last 200m and he should have sought to pass rider one on the right from the very beginning. IMHO, if there was an accident, rider two would have most likely received the blame.
A separate point is that Rider 2 did the right thing by going around and winning anyway. You often see someone sit up and protest rather than racing it out. Even if you think you were fouled, the best thing to do is race it to the end like you mean it -- if you win, the protest is unnecessary, and if you lose you can protest. If you sit up you'll probably be deemed to have stopped racing and have your protest rejected unheard. A similar thing goes with being lapped - don't go to the top of the track and wait for them to come around, you may be pulled. Ride tempo at the black line and accelerate up to the speed of the pack as it comes around to catch you.
Last edited by bitingduck; 05-14-17 at 01:59 PM.
#14
Full Member
Rider 2 should certainly expect Rider 1 to drop in on him and plan accordingly, but the converse is also true - Rider 1 should have expected Rider 2 to already be there, and probably should have had his head turned around like Linda Blair and seen it. If Rider 2 is there first, even from behind, and even with Rider 1 also headed for the lane, Rider 2 owns it. (EDIT: And if the rider wants to appeal to the 2-3 feet gap, I'd go with Queerpunk's impeding rules. If Rider 1 drops in to the lane in a way that impedes Rider 2's progress, it's a violation, even if he had 2-3 feet. If Rider 1 had tried a kilo and failed and was just noodling in the lane with plenty of time for 2 to see, then it wouldn't be impeding).
From the 2017 USAC rule book:
2F(d) If the leader is riding above the sprinters line, he or she shall make no abrupt motion to keep other riders from passing and may make no move to the right (whether abrupt or not) that could have caused a fall or that exceeds 90 cm. (same as the width of the sprinters lane). Following riders may pass on either side. The leader may move to the left into the sprinters lane only if the trailing edge of the leader's rear wheel is ahead of the leading edge of the front wheel of the following rider [relegation for foul riding]. There is no penalty at the finish if the lead rider accidentally drops below the measurement line or even onto the blue band.
Next weekend, I will be officiating with an International and three National Track Commissaires, so I will try to get their opinions on this scenario.
The chief ref will more than likely motion you to move up track before the field laps you. Depending on the ref, you might actually increase your chances of being pulled if you stay low.
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Maybe USAC's rules provide some insight into where the bike length measurement starts.
From the 2017 USAC rule book:
2F(d) If the leader is riding above the sprinters line, he or she shall make no abrupt motion to keep other riders from passing and may make no move to the right (whether abrupt or not) that could have caused a fall or that exceeds 90 cm. (same as the width of the sprinters lane). Following riders may pass on either side. The leader may move to the left into the sprinters lane only if the trailing edge of the leader's rear wheel is ahead of the leading edge of the front wheel of the following rider [relegation for foul riding]. There is no penalty at the finish if the lead rider accidentally drops below the measurement line or even onto the blue band.
From the 2017 USAC rule book:
2F(d) If the leader is riding above the sprinters line, he or she shall make no abrupt motion to keep other riders from passing and may make no move to the right (whether abrupt or not) that could have caused a fall or that exceeds 90 cm. (same as the width of the sprinters lane). Following riders may pass on either side. The leader may move to the left into the sprinters lane only if the trailing edge of the leader's rear wheel is ahead of the leading edge of the front wheel of the following rider [relegation for foul riding]. There is no penalty at the finish if the lead rider accidentally drops below the measurement line or even onto the blue band.
The chief ref will more than likely motion you to move up track before the field laps you. Depending on the ref, you might actually increase your chances of being pulled if you stay low.
#16
Full Member
Implicit in the stuff in red is that the lead rider is moving faster than the trailing rider. If the lead rider is moving slower, even if the rider isn't overlapped, the lead rider is likely to get relegated for interference. If you're not up to speed and you drop into the sprinters lane onto a faster rider because you didn't look, it's just dangerous riding.
Not down here. You'll more likely hear from the announcer to stay at the black line and ride tempo. When I ran the riders meetings before racing we'd remind people not to go to the top and wait.
Not down here. You'll more likely hear from the announcer to stay at the black line and ride tempo. When I ran the riders meetings before racing we'd remind people not to go to the top and wait.
#17
Full Member
Implicit in the stuff in red is that the lead rider is moving faster than the trailing rider. If the lead rider is moving slower, even if the rider isn't overlapped, the lead rider is likely to get relegated for interference. If you're not up to speed and you drop into the sprinters lane onto a faster rider because you didn't look, it's just dangerous riding.
Since we will have a another sprint competition next weekend, I will have plenty of opportunities for more questions.
Originally Posted by bitingduck
Not down here. You'll more likely hear from the announcer to stay at the black line and ride tempo. When I ran the riders meetings before racing we'd remind people not to go to the top and wait.
Up here, the chief ref instruct riders who are about to be lapped to move up track to get out of the way. If they didn't get out of the way in time, then we tell them to stay on the bottom and hope the 20 or so racers in the field are paying attention to the slower traffic at the bottom.
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I think it is less of an implicit assumption and more of a desirable state. I think the implicit assumption is that the riders are at nearly the same speed, but being that the sprint is on, somebody is likely trying to overtake. Our scenario has the lead rider up to final sprint speed, he just wasn't as fast as the second rider on the track. Maybe I'm picturing this sprint differently from other folks, but with a 2-3' gap, I'm not sure why the second rider backed off vice moving up track to overtake without incident.
The problem with taking option 2 is that officials often notice the reaction (the pass under and hip check), not the initial infraction (sprinters lane infringement) that caused the rider to have to react and go under, so the second rider might get relegated if the officials weren't in a position to see well and don't have a camera on it.
Okay, if that is how your riders are instructed, but I think the risk to the entire field passing a single rider on the bottom of the track is higher than if that rider got out of the way and jumped back into the back of the field. I also think it's rare that a lapped rider can accelerate and integrate into the front part of the field from the bottom of the track.
I've been on both sides of trying to move up out of the way as breaks take off, and once you've been on the passing side of it rather than the being passed, it's clear why it's better to hold your line at the bottom of the track.
If they didn't get out of the way in time, then we tell them to stay on the bottom and hope the 20 or so racers in the field are paying attention to the slower traffic at the bottom.
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Suppose rider #2 is in the sprinters lane going full blast with a lap still to go, and rider #1 is in back and decides to come around. Rider #1 has a lot of speed, but doesn't have nearly as much gas as he thinks, so he gets his 2-3 foot gap while outside the sprinters lane and blows up completely. Rider #2 is the world kilo champion and is still speeding up. If blown up rider #1 (with his 2-3 foot lead, but slowing down like he's got a parachute) then moves into the sprinters lane in front of #2 what call are you going to make?
#20
Full Member
As I posted previously, I will be working a sprint competition with International and National Commissaires next weekend, so there's not really much point in arguing every little detail of the scenario from an official's perspective today. Based on what I read into the scenario, I stated how I would call it as a new official (also as an experienced racer.) Much more experienced officials may enlighten me otherwise. For example, at the last sprint competition I was the back-straight assistant ref and I reported a sprinters lane violation to the chief ref (Nat Comm) and it was determined to be inconsequential, thus a non-call. So, what do I know at this point in my officiating career?
It all depends on the timing of the pass. If the rider is paying attention to the officials, the rider should be waived up the track long before any potential impedance to the oncoming field. If the rider is oblivious to the officials and what is going on during the race, then the rider needs to stay buttoned down on the bottom of the track. The danger in the field passing this rider is the potentially significant difference in speed and that if the field is 3-4 riders a abreast, the riders at the stayers line may not be aware or concerned that the riders beneath them are dealing a much slower rider. I've seen a slower rider take out the back third of the field. I've never seen a rider at the top of the track take out anyone.
Wait a minute... isn't that basically what I said about the sprint?
Wait a minute... isn't that basically what I said about the sprint?
Last edited by dunderhi; 05-14-17 at 08:16 PM.
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
It all depends on the timing of the pass. If the rider is paying attention to the officials, the rider should be waived up the track long before any potential impedance to the oncoming field. If the rider is oblivious to the officials and what is going on during the race, then the rider needs to stay buttoned down on the bottom of the track. The danger in the field passing this rider is the potentially significant difference in speed and that if the field is 3-4 riders a abreast, the riders at the stayers line may not be aware or concerned that the riders beneath them are dealing a much slower rider. I've seen a slower rider take out the back third of the field. I've never seen a rider at the top of the track take out anyone.
Wait a minute... isn't that basically what I said about the sprint?
In the sprint situation that we've been discussing there are specific rules for when riders can move laterally in order to have a safe and fair sprint - if the slower outside rider (rider #1 in the original situation) suddenly impedes the progress of rider #2 via a sprinters line violation, rider #1 should be relegated. Rider #2 should still (and always) try to pass safely. Edit to add: the situation in the sprint is like a "swoop and squat" on the freeway, where a driver moves in front of another car and slows down, leaving the rear car with little option but to run into them. The sprinters lane rules are designed to make it safer for the inside rider once the sprint is engaged.
Last edited by bitingduck; 05-14-17 at 08:42 PM.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Trying to get out of the way, especially on a shorter track, leads to the possibility of getting into the way of someone else. If the race is going full bore, or is already broken into a couple pieces, you might head up track just as an attack is taking off and the attack will come up on you going half their speed.
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
(he didn't have to slow down for it to be like a swoop and squat, he just had to be moving enough slower that rider 2 had to slow or swerve to avoid him)
Last edited by bitingduck; 05-14-17 at 09:09 PM.
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
On a short steep indoor track, you may be right. But on a big shallow outdoor track, there is plenty of time between when you get dropped to when you get caught from behind to move up track. If you can't safely move up track, then you don't need to be racing. Or riding on the track at all.