J
John Hardt
Guest
This past weekend, I participated in an Olympic distance
triathlon organized by HFP Racing at Deer Creek State Park
in Ohio. The race was supposed to be a standard 1500m,
40k, 10k Olympic format but there were problems with the
course that resulted in the bike leg being stretched to
nearly 31 miles.
According to the organizer (in an apology issued Monday), a
volunteer blew their assignment and failed to turn
competitors around at the correct turnaround point along a
dead-end state park access road. Not knowing they were
supposed to turn around, all of the participants kept right
on riding until they literally ran out of road in the state
park's lodge parking lot and were forced to turn around and
head back.
The entire field followed the same route and I've always
thought one of the prime principals of triathlon is that no
matter the course, the weather, a competitor's ability, or
other circumstances, if everyone rides the same course in
the same conditions then things are inherently "fair".
On the other hand, USAT rule 5.3 states "The sole
responsibility of knowing and following the prescribed
cycling course rests with each participant. No adjustments
in times or results shall be made for participants who fail
to follow the proper course for any reason whatsoever."
Here's the rub: a few of us knew during the race that
something was very wrong. The Pineman IM distance race is
held on the same course and that race includes 4 laps on a
28 mile bike route. Because of this, we KNEW the turnaround
for a 24.8 mile Olympic distance course HAD to be somewhere
short of the 28 mile Pineman turn around (certainly no
farther). There were cones at the correct turn around point,
although no indication of what they were for.
The question is this: Should those of us (myself included)
that knew something was wrong have gone ahead and turned
around? I averaged a mundane 20 mph on the course, so
turning around at the correct location would have knocked 6
miles off the route and given me a 20 minute advantage on
the field.
What is the consensus opinion out there?
John
triathlon organized by HFP Racing at Deer Creek State Park
in Ohio. The race was supposed to be a standard 1500m,
40k, 10k Olympic format but there were problems with the
course that resulted in the bike leg being stretched to
nearly 31 miles.
According to the organizer (in an apology issued Monday), a
volunteer blew their assignment and failed to turn
competitors around at the correct turnaround point along a
dead-end state park access road. Not knowing they were
supposed to turn around, all of the participants kept right
on riding until they literally ran out of road in the state
park's lodge parking lot and were forced to turn around and
head back.
The entire field followed the same route and I've always
thought one of the prime principals of triathlon is that no
matter the course, the weather, a competitor's ability, or
other circumstances, if everyone rides the same course in
the same conditions then things are inherently "fair".
On the other hand, USAT rule 5.3 states "The sole
responsibility of knowing and following the prescribed
cycling course rests with each participant. No adjustments
in times or results shall be made for participants who fail
to follow the proper course for any reason whatsoever."
Here's the rub: a few of us knew during the race that
something was very wrong. The Pineman IM distance race is
held on the same course and that race includes 4 laps on a
28 mile bike route. Because of this, we KNEW the turnaround
for a 24.8 mile Olympic distance course HAD to be somewhere
short of the 28 mile Pineman turn around (certainly no
farther). There were cones at the correct turn around point,
although no indication of what they were for.
The question is this: Should those of us (myself included)
that knew something was wrong have gone ahead and turned
around? I averaged a mundane 20 mph on the course, so
turning around at the correct location would have knocked 6
miles off the route and given me a 20 minute advantage on
the field.
What is the consensus opinion out there?
John