Jwolf wrote:I still don't understand why the timing company would do it like this with such an obvious flaw and fix.
It is not the timing company's fault if runners cannot follow instructions.
Jwolf wrote:I still don't understand why the timing company would do it like this with such an obvious flaw and fix.
Double Bellybuster wrote:Jwolf wrote:I still don't understand why the timing company would do it like this with such an obvious flaw and fix.
It is not the timing company's fault if runners cannot follow instructions.
Jwolf wrote:could they really expect everyone to start in their assigned corrals?
Double Bellybuster wrote:Jwolf wrote:could they really expect everyone to start in their assigned corrals?
Only entrants who are either intelligent or respect posted rules could be expected to start in their assigned corrals.
Jwolf wrote:While it is the runners' responsibility to follow the rules it's also the timing company's job to report people's times correctly. Your chip time should not depend on where and when you start.
I also doubt most people starting in a different corral expected that their time would be affected.
Jwolf wrote:Double Bellybuster wrote:Jwolf wrote:I still don't understand why the timing company would do it like this with such an obvious flaw and fix.
It is not the timing company's fault if runners cannot follow instructions.
could they really expect everyone to start in their assigned corrals?
And how hard is it for the system to subtract the actual time the runner crosses the mat? Every other race seems to get it right.
In all the races I know that have a wave start (yes, with guns at every start) people are allowed to move back a corral. Not forward, although many people jump. Jumping forward might contribute to congestion problems but shouldn't affect timing.
Double Bellybuster wrote:Jwolf wrote:While it is the runners' responsibility to follow the rules it's also the timing company's job to report people's times correctly. Your chip time should not depend on where and when you start.
I also doubt most people starting in a different corral expected that their time would be affected.
I don't understand the need for rework. The gun time is accurate. Anyone making a false start does not get an accurate chip time.
You paid your 40 bucks, file a complaint if you don't like it.
Double Bellybuster wrote:Jwolf wrote:While it is the runners' responsibility to follow the rules it's also the timing company's job to report people's times correctly. Your chip time should not depend on where and when you start.
I also doubt most people starting in a different corral expected that their time would be affected.
I don't understand the need for rework. The gun time is accurate. Anyone making a false start does not get an accurate chip time.
Joe Dwarf wrote:Is it possible that gun time is what is being published? It would make sense to have a different gun start time for each wave.
Jwolf wrote:...was where SL and Chiptime got messed up.
Robinandamelia wrote:They've adjusted the times....my friend that ran says the times were adjusted and her first 5K split changed from 27 to 33 minutes.
jonovision_man wrote:Apart from the timing, how did they do? Similar quality/organization to the old SL10k?
jono
Sporting Life 10K raises $1.9 million
May 14, 2012
More than 22,000 runners took part in Sunday’s Sporting Life 10K run in Toronto, raising almost $2 million for Camp Oochigeas.
According to an article in the Toronto Star, runners raised $1.9 million to fund the camp for children with cancer, as well provide funds to the camp’s in-hospital facility at Sick Kids and after-school camp at Ooch Downtown in Toronto.
The first person to cross the finish line was wheelchair athlete Rich Vanderwal, who finished in 22:22. The first male runner was Waterloo’s Shoaib Ikram in 31:13, while Megan Van Keulen, from Beamsville, Ont., took first place among the women in 35:18.
A young woman, however, collapsed 100m before the finish line and is still in life-threatening condition in hospital. According to the Star, off-duty nurse Jules McKernan helped revive the woman by performing CPR until Emergency Medical Services arrived.
Dave Viljakainen, a spokesperson for EMS, told the star it is likely the woman, 23, suffered from pre-existing medical conditions.
JWolf wrote: I don't doubt the improvement to 54-minute 10k. That's totally reasonable for someone who is reasonably athletic. But no fast course gives someone an improvement from 34 min to 22 min for a 5k in six months.
jonovision_man wrote:Apart from the timing, how did they do? Similar quality/organization to the old SL10k?
Double Bellybuster wrote:jonovision_man wrote:Apart from the timing, how did they do? Similar quality/organization to the old SL10k?
It was great Jono. The downhill on this course was a big help as promised - but you were flying when you went sub-41 here!
purdy65 wrote:jonovision_man wrote:Apart from the timing, how did they do? Similar quality/organization to the old SL10k?
jono
I'm only going to give you my opinion.
It was fantastic. There were issues common to many races this size (number of port-o-pottiies) etc, but the start was orderly, course fast and fantastic, and the finishing area very large - although somewhat disorganized. They needed signs for the food, bag check etc.
There was also long lineups for the free yogurt and coffee - so I skipped that.
I dunno - I thought it was every bit as well done as the previous organizers - which is an accomplishment considering the doubling in size.
Plus the amount of money raised for Camp Ooch was amazing!
Most other people I know felt this way.
I will categorically be back next year.
Cupcake Girl wrote:JWolf wrote: I don't doubt the improvement to 54-minute 10k. That's totally reasonable for someone who is reasonably athletic. But no fast course gives someone an improvement from 34 min to 22 min for a 5k in six months.
Says who? Anything is possible and you don't know anything about this person.
geobandito wrote:I think another huge factor is that the race is largely downhill! Especially the first half (which probably partly accounts for her splits being so different). And the second is very flat.
phorunner wrote:geobandito wrote:I think another huge factor is that the race is largely downhill! Especially the first half (which probably partly accounts for her splits being so different). And the second is very flat.
Yup! The course is a little lopsided that way, there's big drops in the beginning, and slower, more level drops in the end. Couple that with just generally feeling less fatigued, and most people will have way better 1st half times...
Return to “General Running Discussion”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests