quote:

Originally posted by MTBChik:
Ahhhhhh, I feel much better now....

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_6013305

We are in the bicycle forum, here, so the typical problems as outlined in the article of having a very big amount of competitors, very close to each other, may not be our situation. The Ipico system does not seem all too equipped for this anyway. And when I look at their web site, it looks like Championchip all over again. That was also a system based on generic RFID tags. (Unlike e.g. AMB that makes their transponders specifically for sports applications, hence their pricing.) The Championchip system has always been useless for serious bicycle racing applications anyway, so the Ipico system may be too. Apart from all this, I'd want to say to the defense of Ipico, that there may have been also a number of issues in the back-end software solution. I think this may have been underestimated for the Boulder event, however, I don't feel it pointing to any structural shortcomings that would be of concern to us, the bicycle guys'n'girls.

Transponders cost quite a bit more than an extra photo-finish camera and for a good quality provisional result, you still need to cross-check at least, the first 15.

I think the major decision factors are:

1: How fast do you really need the result? (and are prepared to pay for ultimate speed).

2: Are you expecting many split times or a large split in the peloton?

Where transponders really pay their way is when you have a direct feed to live TV and a finish with many split times. You will get a very accurate provisional GC quickly with less guessing than with camera only.

With a bunch finish, I think two cameras or one camera and bunch of transponders would be nearly equal in speed for getting a top 10.

AHHHBSOLUTELY Seamus! Still doesn't banish the magic bean theory for promoters, but at least the real timing pros get the idea.

At the 2007 Tour of California, we did in fact have live TV, and we did not use transponders. I wrote an interface directly from Lynx's software to one of my character generators. Because both the ATOC commisaires and the Lynx operator (Fred Patton) were very adept & experienced, we had accurate, verified Top 10 (stage) results on the air before the broadcast went to commercial, and Top 10 (GC) after the broadcast returned from the post-finish commercial.

As each racer was ID'd on the Lynx, the Lynx software, in effect, blatted the info straight onto the on-air graphic via my software interface.

Commissaires and photofinish operators from a Track Cycling background (rather than road or mtn) tend to have this exercise down pat, because Points Racing and Madisons require fast and accurate photofinish analysis over and over again for hours at a time. Road cycling provides one chance per day to practice, whereas track cycling provides dozens if not hundreds.

The software interface, frankly, was the easy part.

Yep, I've been part of a similar operation on the Tour de Langawi, aided by the excellent guys from DeportPublic who operated a Lynx and AMB transponders. The answer was always: "Si!, No problem!"

We'll have live TV on the new Tour of Ireland and are looking at all of these options.

Meanwhile, I'm off to a low-budget local 'B' category event in two weeks. I will be using a DV camcorder and SLR!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Seamus Shortall,