General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Chip Time versus Gun Time Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
2008-03-10 4:07 PM

Vancouver, BC
Subject: Chip Time versus Gun Time
I did an 8 km on the weekend. I noticed a blurb on the results website:

Gun Time is the OFFICIAL time. All awards and finishing positions are based on the time from the start of the race (GUN) to when you cross the finish line as per IAAF, Athletics Canada, BC Athletics, USATF, AIMS and International Awards standards.

To me, this seems like it would penalize anyone who isn't at the start of the pack. Also, it encourages slow runners who want a good "official time" to start as close to the front as possible. Is that right?

Why isn't chip time the official time?


2008-03-10 4:14 PM
in reply to: #1263792

User image

Resident Curmudgeon
25290
50005000500050005000100100252525
The Road Back
Gold member
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
Those to whom it would matter do start as close to the front as possible. This includes all who would be seriously competitive for winning the overall or age group places. All others should consider their chip time only.
2008-03-10 4:34 PM
in reply to: #1263792

User image

Champion
5575
5000500252525
Butler
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time

The thing is going in you should know that as most races (except races with wave starts) go by this so it sucks if you don't start at the front but if you think you can win jockey for position.  If the race is large enough for it to be a problem chances are most people aren't getting in the top 3 for it to be a big deal and from there all I care about is my chip time for PR purposes.

2008-03-10 4:42 PM
in reply to: #1263792

Vancouver, BC
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
I found this:

"In theory - Someone could wait 10 minutes to start the race and win. The 1st person crossing the finish line could have run much faster, but was just looking for the win. It is only fair when you know you are battling the person ahead/behind you and if you cross the line 1st you win."

So from that perspective, it seems more fair to base the results on gun time.

I guess slow runners who start up at the front would be there regardless of what time is used.
2008-03-10 4:48 PM
in reply to: #1263792

User image

Champion
11641
50005000100050010025
Fairport, NY
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time

At the start of road races I place myself relative to where I expect to finish plus a little extra to account for people placing themselves incorrectly. It seems to generally work out well.

Slow runners who intentionally start up front are doing a disservice to themselves and the other racers. Placing yourself between the finish line and a whole bunch of runners who are faster than you just isn't a good idea for all kinds of reasons.

2008-03-10 5:56 PM
in reply to: #1263792

User image

Champion
5781
5000500100100252525
Northridge, California
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
I've yet to participate in an event that had chip timing where chip time wasn't used in determining AG awards and that also seems to be the time picked up from the results for import by sites like Athlinks. Gun time may certainly be the required time for reporting to and use by sanctioning/governing bodies, but--functionally--chip time seems to be used in the local context. I can't speak for anyone else's experience, but if the 8K mentioned by the OP gave out AG awards based on gun time, that's unusual from what I've seen. (As far as O/A placements go, obviously in most races the pros/elites all are given preferential starting positions, so they are all effectively starting at once with the gun.)


2008-03-10 6:03 PM
in reply to: #1263943

User image

Resident Curmudgeon
25290
50005000500050005000100100252525
The Road Back
Gold member
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time

tcovert - 2008-03-10 5:56 PM I've yet to participate in an event that had chip timing where chip time wasn't used in determining AG awards and that also seems to be the time picked up from the results for import by sites like Athlinks. Gun time may certainly be the required time for reporting to and use by sanctioning/governing bodies, but--functionally--chip time seems to be used in the local context. I can't speak for anyone else's experience, but if the 8K mentioned by the OP gave out AG awards based on gun time, that's unusual from what I've seen. (As far as O/A placements go, obviously in most races the pros/elites all are given preferential starting positions, so they are all effectively starting at once with the gun.)

Your experience is vastly different from mine as I have never seen a road race where the overall or AG places were based on chip time and not gun time. Perhaps you're confusing wave-start triathlons with road races? In the former, chip time is the same as gun time, with each wave having a different starting time. Also in a time-trial start, winners are determined by chip time from their staggered start. But never in road races. Not IMHExperience.

2008-03-10 6:17 PM
in reply to: #1263943

Vancouver, BC
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
tcovert - 2008-03-10 3:56 PM
if the 8K mentioned by the OP gave out AG awards based on gun time, that's unusual from what I've seen.


The age group results are also ordered by gun time. There are a couple cases where the 3rd place AG winner had a faster chip time than the 2nd place AG winner. There was also a case where the 4th place chip time was faster than 2nd and 3rd place chip times. So, the 4th place guy could've won a $75 gift certificate and medal (plus bragging rights). All-in-all, the gun time and chip time usually correspond. Maybe that just means the winners are smart enough to stand as close as possible to the front.
2008-03-10 7:38 PM
in reply to: #1263951

User image

Extreme Veteran
510
500
Falls Church, VA
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
the bear - 2008-03-10 6:03 PM

tcovert - 2008-03-10 5:56 PM I've yet to participate in an event that had chip timing where chip time wasn't used in determining AG awards and that also seems to be the time picked up from the results for import by sites like Athlinks. Gun time may certainly be the required time for reporting to and use by sanctioning/governing bodies, but--functionally--chip time seems to be used in the local context. I can't speak for anyone else's experience, but if the 8K mentioned by the OP gave out AG awards based on gun time, that's unusual from what I've seen. (As far as O/A placements go, obviously in most races the pros/elites all are given preferential starting positions, so they are all effectively starting at once with the gun.)

Your experience is vastly different from mine as I have never seen a road race where the overall or AG places were based on chip time and not gun time. Perhaps you're confusing wave-start triathlons with road races? In the former, chip time is the same as gun time, with each wave having a different starting time. Also in a time-trial start, winners are determined by chip time from their staggered start. But never in road races. Not IMHExperience.

I can tell ya this for sure that the Green Bay Marathon does award AG's by chip time but the overall awards/prize money are given by gun time.  I was pretty sure this was true but I just double checked it on their website.  I also really thought this was typical but don't have any other specific examples off the top of my head.  I knew og the GB marathon since it's the one I ran participated in.



Edited by StarGazer 2008-03-10 7:39 PM
2008-03-10 8:01 PM
in reply to: #1263792

User image

Expert
1049
100025
Jacksonville, FL
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
I just completed the River Run in Jacksonville. It is the largest 15k in the US and they go by gun time. Last year it took me 7 minutes to get to the start line so this year I moved towards the front and it only took 1min 15 secs. For those people expecting to place in their division, they need to realize this going into the race.

What really pisses me off is all the walkers and extremely slow runners that I have to pass at the start.
2008-03-10 8:09 PM
in reply to: #1263792

User image

Veteran
437
10010010010025
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
Big races that require seeding proof for the decent corrals ROCK!! Indy mini (the largest 13.1 in the US) does this and it is great. Many races will put you in corrals based on your estimate which is not ideal. The Indy Mini does that after the first few blocks of corrals.


2008-03-10 8:14 PM
in reply to: #1263792

User image

Veteran
437
10010010010025
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
oh yeah, I agree that races that have prize money in any way need to use gun time. Racing is about knowing how you are dong and those around you. If the lead group is paced to a slow (relative) pace and then just a kickoff at the end . . . their overall time is not as good as it could be. If someone starts 10 minutes later and is able to draft of a variety of fast runners (doing short spurts) they could crush the first across without them being able to race against them.
2008-03-10 8:25 PM
in reply to: #1263861

User image

Elite
2423
2000100100100100
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
marmadaddy - 2008-03-10 5:48 PM

At the start of road races I place myself relative to where I expect to finish plus a little extra to account for people placing themselves incorrectly. It seems to generally work out well.

Slow runners who intentionally start up front are doing a disservice to themselves and the other racers. Placing yourself between the finish line and a whole bunch of runners who are faster than you just isn't a good idea for all kinds of reasons.




I do the same and think the same. Except I have placed myself forward, and 5 miles into my last race people started to pass me, and I was running very consistent.
2008-03-10 8:42 PM
in reply to: #1264185

Extreme Veteran
356
1001001002525
Orlando, Florida
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
indygreg - 2008-03-10 9:09 PM

Big races that require seeding proof for the decent corrals ROCK!! Indy mini (the largest 13.1 in the US) does this and it is great. Many races will put you in corrals based on your estimate which is not ideal. The Indy Mini does that after the first few blocks of corrals.


I have to agree with that. Here in Atlanta we have the Peachtree road race, the worlds largest 10K with 50,000 runners and walkers. I always hated starting in the later time groups. Now with a qualifying time I dont have to weave through the masses
2008-03-10 9:21 PM
in reply to: #1263792

User image

Expert
957
5001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time

The New York Road Runners (the group that organizes the NYC Marathon, as well as dozens of smaller races throughout the year is the only group I can think of that uses chip time for age group scoring.  But many of their races have huge fields (the Bronx half marathon had over 3000 runners in February for example) in large part because of the 9 race qualifying process to get guaranteed entry in the following year's race, so things are a bit different with them.  And they are about to start seeded corrals for all of their races.

From their website:http://www.nyrr.org/races/procedures/race_scoring.asp :

Official Time

In all NYRR scored races, each participant's official time, the net time, is recorded from when a participant crosses the start mats to when he or she crosses the finish mats. This official time is used to establish the order of finish and to determine award winners. However, the first male and female runner to cross the finish line will always be the winner of the race.

 

2008-03-10 10:18 PM
in reply to: #1263861

User image

Champion
10154
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Chip Time versus Gun Time
marmadaddy - 2008-03-10 4:48 PM

At the start of road races I place myself relative to where I expect to finish plus a little extra to account for people placing themselves incorrectly. It seems to generally work out well.

Slow runners who intentionally start up front are doing a disservice to themselves and the other racers. Placing yourself between the finish line and a whole bunch of runners who are faster than you just isn't a good idea for all kinds of reasons.

 

This is so true and I think there ought to be time penalties for this!  I signed up for the Disney 1/2 marathon recently and was looking at last year's finish times.  I found the race results with the 'chip time' and 'clock time' (or whatever they called the times) and it was totally obviously who lied!  People who had only a few seconds diferrence between the two times obviously started in the front of the herd yet some had times that indicated they should have been in last corral as they must have waked much of the course.  I suppose someone could have had a 'bad day' but there were way too many like this.

~Mike



New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Chip Time versus Gun Time Rss Feed