J
John Hardt
Guest
"User" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>> There are two types of triathletes I know: (1) those who draft at
>>> every opportunity, but maybe take an occasional time penalty, maybe
>>> even less occasional DQ, but for the most part, get by with it. (2)
>>> Those who vehemently **** and moan about group 1 at every opportunity,
>>> complain about how unfair it is, etc.
>>>
>>> In essence, you have an unenforceable rule. If you want a
>>> draft-prohibited bike race that is truly functional, you must do as
>>> the elite professionals do: time trial with individual starts and a
>>> car with a referee behind every cyclist. Anything else, and you have
>>> a rule that is not enforceable and a sport that is not respectable.
>>Oh, I see your point. Any sport which has a rule that is difficult to
>>enforce is not respectable and should be changed to eliminate the rule.
>>
>>Your argument is that drafting is difficult to enforce in triathlon
>>because
>>there is a disproportionate number of participants to referees. OK then,
>>let's try it your way and allow drafting in triathlon. While we're at it,
>>we'll allow outside assistance in marathons; holding in football; moving
>>your ball from a bad lie in golf. God knows we can't watch every golfer
>>out
>>there.
> It is an arbitrary rule. When choosing between arbitrary rules, logic
> and fairness dictate choosing the one that is most easily enforced.
Arbitrary in what regard? It's the rule of the sport. Drafting rules were
put in place to ensure that triathlons would be an individual, time trial
event rather than a team event (while recognizing that logistics prevent
"time trial starts"). They perform that functionvery well - note that no
one has ever pointed to a significant, documented instance where multiple
individuals have teamed up to determine the outcome of a triathon. The
reason? It's illegal and downright impossible to do it under the rules.
Take away the rules (draft-legal) and it happens instantaneously (e.g. the
Olympics). There is nothing arbitrary about it.
All sports have rules which to some degree were arguably arbitrary when the
sport was conceived, but nevertheless are part of what makes the sport what
it is. Dr. James Naismith decided that basketball players must dribble to
get from one place to another and banned traveling - was that arbitrary?
You might say yes, but that is what makes basketball basketball. If you
don't like drafting rules, invent your own sport - just leave ours alone.
>>Where do we stop? Let's allow throwing elbows in bike races - 'cuz we
>>can't
>>watch everybody. Hell, let's even allow drugs in the TDF because it sure
>>takes a lot of resources to enforce that rule.
>>
> Most sports have random testing for drugs. How do you propose to have
> random testing for drafting?
I would propose that the current system does a perfectly fine job of random
testing for drafting.
John
news:[email protected]...
>>> There are two types of triathletes I know: (1) those who draft at
>>> every opportunity, but maybe take an occasional time penalty, maybe
>>> even less occasional DQ, but for the most part, get by with it. (2)
>>> Those who vehemently **** and moan about group 1 at every opportunity,
>>> complain about how unfair it is, etc.
>>>
>>> In essence, you have an unenforceable rule. If you want a
>>> draft-prohibited bike race that is truly functional, you must do as
>>> the elite professionals do: time trial with individual starts and a
>>> car with a referee behind every cyclist. Anything else, and you have
>>> a rule that is not enforceable and a sport that is not respectable.
>>Oh, I see your point. Any sport which has a rule that is difficult to
>>enforce is not respectable and should be changed to eliminate the rule.
>>
>>Your argument is that drafting is difficult to enforce in triathlon
>>because
>>there is a disproportionate number of participants to referees. OK then,
>>let's try it your way and allow drafting in triathlon. While we're at it,
>>we'll allow outside assistance in marathons; holding in football; moving
>>your ball from a bad lie in golf. God knows we can't watch every golfer
>>out
>>there.
> It is an arbitrary rule. When choosing between arbitrary rules, logic
> and fairness dictate choosing the one that is most easily enforced.
Arbitrary in what regard? It's the rule of the sport. Drafting rules were
put in place to ensure that triathlons would be an individual, time trial
event rather than a team event (while recognizing that logistics prevent
"time trial starts"). They perform that functionvery well - note that no
one has ever pointed to a significant, documented instance where multiple
individuals have teamed up to determine the outcome of a triathon. The
reason? It's illegal and downright impossible to do it under the rules.
Take away the rules (draft-legal) and it happens instantaneously (e.g. the
Olympics). There is nothing arbitrary about it.
All sports have rules which to some degree were arguably arbitrary when the
sport was conceived, but nevertheless are part of what makes the sport what
it is. Dr. James Naismith decided that basketball players must dribble to
get from one place to another and banned traveling - was that arbitrary?
You might say yes, but that is what makes basketball basketball. If you
don't like drafting rules, invent your own sport - just leave ours alone.
>>Where do we stop? Let's allow throwing elbows in bike races - 'cuz we
>>can't
>>watch everybody. Hell, let's even allow drugs in the TDF because it sure
>>takes a lot of resources to enforce that rule.
>>
> Most sports have random testing for drugs. How do you propose to have
> random testing for drafting?
I would propose that the current system does a perfectly fine job of random
testing for drafting.
John
