I should probably read the rules before posting...

They do things differently in Belgium.

In article <[email hidden]>,

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

But this holding up the break in the Tour de l'Aude due to the field
being stopped by a train doesn't seem right.
See below, from
http://www.cyclingnews.com/riders/2006/diaries/kimberly/?id=kimberly0612

JT

With about 40km to go, we rode through a town and were stopped for a
train. Actually, we were stopped for a couple of trains as we sat
there for over 5 minutes. Now we knew the gap would be ridiculously
high. The French girl was now the leader on the road, the virtual
yellow jersey.

With 2 cat 2 climbs remaining, Mirjam Melchers of Buitenpoort went to
the front of the field and started chasing for her team. Due to the
train situation, the officials did neutralize the break for 3 minutes.
Ina told us later that luckily they neutralized the two of them at the
top of a climb, and not at the bottom. She figured this was only
because there was a French girl in the break! Otherwise they would
have made them wait at the bottom of the climb!"

I should reread the rules, but I believe this is kosher. The confusion
comes when the gap between break and chase is fairly small and the break
is stopped by a train, at which point they just let the chase catch them.

The essence of the rules is this: don't run your race over railroad
tracks.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Ryan Cousineau said:

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

But this holding up the break in the Tour de l'Aude due to the field
being stopped by a train doesn't seem right.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

With about 40km to go, we rode through a town and were stopped for a
train. Actually, we were stopped for a couple of trains as we sat
there for over 5 minutes. Now we knew the gap would be ridiculously
high. The French girl was now the leader on the road, the virtual
yellow jersey.

With 2 cat 2 climbs remaining, Mirjam Melchers of Buitenpoort went to
the front of the field and started chasing for her team. Due to the
train situation, the officials did neutralize the break for 3 minutes.

I should reread the rules, but I believe this is kosher. The confusion
comes when the gap between break and chase is fairly small and the break
is stopped by a train, at which point they just let the chase catch them.

The essence of the rules is this: don't run your race over railroad
tracks.

The rules don't look that way to me. It's UCI rules section 2.3.035.
In general a level crossing should be a "race incident" which
means they don't do anything to compensate for it. The exceptions
are: clause 2: The break has more than 30 seconds lead but
gets held up for long enough that the field catches up before
the gates open. In this case they restart with the same gaps.
clause 4: "Any other situation (prolonged closure of the barrier,
etc) shall be resolved by the commissaires." That is, the refs
can do whatever they want.

It seems like in this case clause 3 should apply, which
essentially says that if a train gets in between the field and
the break, it's tough luck for the field. Maybe the commissaires
decided that the barriers were closed for so long they had to do
something about it, although 5 minutes doesn't seem
exceptionally long for a big freight train. I figured that the point
of clause 4 was to keep 30 minute gaps from happening - you
wouldn't want a grand tour GC to be decided by a slow train.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted post said:

Ryan Cousineau said:

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

But this holding up the break in the Tour de l'Aude due to the field
being stopped by a train doesn't seem right.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

With about 40km to go, we rode through a town and were stopped for a
train. Actually, we were stopped for a couple of trains as we sat
there for over 5 minutes. Now we knew the gap would be ridiculously
high. The French girl was now the leader on the road, the virtual
yellow jersey.

With 2 cat 2 climbs remaining, Mirjam Melchers of Buitenpoort went to
the front of the field and started chasing for her team. Due to the
train situation, the officials did neutralize the break for 3 minutes.

I should reread the rules, but I believe this is kosher. The confusion
comes when the gap between break and chase is fairly small and the break
is stopped by a train, at which point they just let the chase catch them.

The essence of the rules is this: don't run your race over railroad
tracks.

The rules don't look that way to me. It's UCI rules section 2.3.035.
In general a level crossing should be a "race incident" which
means they don't do anything to compensate for it. The exceptions
are: clause 2: The break has more than 30 seconds lead but
gets held up for long enough that the field catches up before
the gates open. In this case they restart with the same gaps.
clause 4: "Any other situation (prolonged closure of the barrier,
etc) shall be resolved by the commissaires." That is, the refs
can do whatever they want.

It seems like in this case clause 3 should apply, which
essentially says that if a train gets in between the field and
the break, it's tough luck for the field. Maybe the commissaires
decided that the barriers were closed for so long they had to do
something about it, although 5 minutes doesn't seem
exceptionally long for a big freight train. I figured that the point
of clause 4 was to keep 30 minute gaps from happening - you
wouldn't want a grand tour GC to be decided by a slow train.

Oh sure. You had to consult primary source documents like a big-brained
Usenet know-it-all, didn't you?

Okay, clause 4 is a clear CYA for the commis, but maybe a better
question is this: what is the fairest thing to do when a race gets
interrupted by a train, or any other disruption?

I think when an incident clearly affects the race standings for most or
all of the field, is utterly beyond the control of riders to influence,
and can be as easily compensated as this was, it's better to fix it than
to leave it.

So my magic principle would decline to fix anything after a bike crash
(within the control of riders, including responsibility for the
durability and performance of their equipment), but would adjust things
in this case.

Or maybe the race guide in the morning should just include the
anticipated train crossing times on the course. Not that those would
necessarily reflect reality.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Ryan Cousineau said:

Or maybe the race guide in the morning should just include the
anticipated train crossing times on the course. Not that those would
necessarily reflect reality.

Livedrunk(tm) reality perhaps.

Ryan Cousineau said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted post said:

Ryan Cousineau said:

John Forrest Tomlinson <[email hidden]> wrote:
> But this holding up the break in the Tour de l'Aude due to the field
> being stopped by a train doesn't seem right.

Quoted message said:

> With about 40km to go, we rode through a town and were stopped for a
> train. Actually, we were stopped for a couple of trains as we sat
> there for over 5 minutes. Now we knew the gap would be ridiculously
> high. The French girl was now the leader on the road, the virtual
> yellow jersey.
>
> With 2 cat 2 climbs remaining, Mirjam Melchers of Buitenpoort went to
> the front of the field and started chasing for her team. Due to the
> train situation, the officials did neutralize the break for 3 minutes.

I should reread the rules, but I believe this is kosher. The confusion
comes when the gap between break and chase is fairly small and the break
is stopped by a train, at which point they just let the chase catch them.

The essence of the rules is this: don't run your race over railroad
tracks.

The rules don't look that way to me. It's UCI rules section 2.3.035.
In general a level crossing should be a "race incident" which
means they don't do anything to compensate for it. The exceptions
are: clause 2: The break has more than 30 seconds lead but
gets held up for long enough that the field catches up before
the gates open. In this case they restart with the same gaps.
clause 4: "Any other situation (prolonged closure of the barrier,
etc) shall be resolved by the commissaires." That is, the refs
can do whatever they want.

It seems like in this case clause 3 should apply, which
essentially says that if a train gets in between the field and
the break, it's tough luck for the field. Maybe the commissaires
decided that the barriers were closed for so long they had to do
something about it, although 5 minutes doesn't seem
exceptionally long for a big freight train. I figured that the point
of clause 4 was to keep 30 minute gaps from happening - you
wouldn't want a grand tour GC to be decided by a slow train.

Oh sure. You had to consult primary source documents like a big-brained
Usenet know-it-all, didn't you?

Okay, clause 4 is a clear CYA for the commis, but maybe a better
question is this: what is the fairest thing to do when a race gets
interrupted by a train, or any other disruption?

I think when an incident clearly affects the race standings for most or
all of the field, is utterly beyond the control of riders to influence,
and can be as easily compensated as this was, it's better to fix it than
to leave it.

So my magic principle would decline to fix anything after a bike crash
(within the control of riders, including responsibility for the
durability and performance of their equipment), but would adjust things
in this case.

Or maybe the race guide in the morning should just include the
anticipated train crossing times on the course. Not that those would
necessarily reflect reality.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

My first impulse also would have been to hold the break up, if we had
had a good split time. This is beyond the control of the athletes, and
have a problem with having the race decided by acts of god that affect
only some of the riders. A crash is on the riders, and is a normal part
of racing, getting stuck behind a train is on the race organizers if
anyone.
IMO the fair thing was done, and that was to continue the race with
the same gaps from before the train. There's "racing luck" and just
plain luck. I'd rather not have the latter decide races.
I don't know what the field situation was, but you try and
resestablish all the gaps as close as you can on the restart and pray
for the best.
Just my opinion though.
Bill C

email hidden said:

It's UCI rules section 2.3.035.

I like a number with lots of decimal points. Oh, sorry, another
thread...

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

In article <[email hidden]>,

Donald Munro said:

Ryan Cousineau said:

Or maybe the race guide in the morning should just include the
anticipated train crossing times on the course. Not that those would
necessarily reflect reality.

Livedrunk(tm) reality perhaps.

You say that now, but if I was in charge, the bike races would run on
time, and the trains would be delayed.

Passengers would be halted at train stations to maintain the time gaps,

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos