Sweet! I’ll be there.
I am planning a Colorado unicycle weekend for this summer that will be pretty awesome as well, I will be posting a thread in the next few days. I will make sure it won’t conflict with NAUCC or other awesome events going on this year (Ken’s Mongolia tour for one, this is still a possibility for me).
Yes, there will be a good number of people who can ride Chaparral with no dismounts, downhill. I can’t imagine anyone will be able to ride all the way up with no dismounts.
Two runs is an interesting idea. It would double the length of the event, which could be a problem.
At NAUCC, XC will be on a different day than the uphill and downhill.
It is an option in the current rules. We did it more in the past when the courses were shorter, meaning less time per rider.
If the schedule permits, I would like to lead a day ride at Rockville Hills Park. That’s a great park, with trails for every level. Long as you don’t get lost!
Touché!
Rockville Hills would be a great day ride, and please, lead away! We have a MUni Fun Ride slotted on Sunday and Thursday morning, and possibly Friday.
Really we should take this over to the NAUCC Discussion thread
So that would include basketball and hockey?
The direction the sport is going depends entirely on where you are. You could conclude that unicycling is not heading in the direction of Artistic Freestyle if you live where you do, yet it is still probably the biggest discipline in unicycling (even if it’s concentrated in a few areas). Likewise, no one in NZ really plays basketball or hockey. Track racing is big in Japan.
I think for the moment there are enough MUni events for now. XC, DH, and Hillclimb. Even the Mountainbike World Champs stick with these. I think they might have even dropped the Hillclimb and added short track, but their glamour events remain the DH, and XC. Not sure if they still do dual-slalom.
There are more track events simply as it’s similarity is more akin to athletics. How many athletics disciplines are there in the Olympics? As opposed to Mountainbike? There is only one MTB event- the XC.
Road races- I’ve love to see a time-trial as well as a road-race. We tried to make the 10km race more like a criterium (yes I know it needed more laps), but the principle was there- lot’s of corners and lot’s of spectators. They actually take a lot more to organise than the ‘facilities intensive’ events. We had to do a traffic management plan as well as organise a lot more marshals and volunteers than most of the other events.
Another interesting thing might be a crossover of bicycle track racing and unicycling. It doesn’t fit with our track events which are more like running/athletics events. So that would be having the Sprint, individual and team pursuit, Madison etc. but on a unicycle. Then the question becomes how do we add so many events and who’s going to organise them.
Ken, on that note, ungeared/geared categories please.
My 2 cents
Now that this thread has died down and I have some extra time on my hands, I’d like to put in my 2 cents, rants and complaints.
First, I think the XC and uphill were both fantastic. Most of the top riders for both races had 24" wheels which shows that they both were pretty technical races. The XC was a bitch to race but so much fun after you finished. Same with the uphill.
The only complaint I have for these 2 races is for the XC start. Originally they had printed in the Unicon Booklet that they would have a sign up sheet for the first 20 riders who thought they had a chance to win, in order to start in group one. So after reading that I made sure to check the bulletin board everyday and sign up when it was posted. I believe I was one of the first to sign up because I wanted to be in the first group as I thought I was a contender for placing in the top 3. Sweet, looked like I had a chance.
This was like a week before race day. I checked the bulletin board daily and never heard of anything otherwise until race day. Race day comes and I go to the start of the race an hour before it starts. I look at the starting group order, and to my surprise see my name in Group 2 and not Group 1. I was shocked and did not understand what had happened as there were no signs or notes anywhere. So I went up to Connie Cotter, the chief MUni judge/organize and asked her.
She said that because over 20 people signed up (like 30 or so), they had to randomize the 30 and only take 20 of the original signed up. The rest of the 10 were placed in group 2, which I was now in. Let’s just say I was not happy, especially since I question the randomizing of it and whether or not it was legit. So I got a registration/rulebook and re-read it where it stated the first 20 to signup would be in the 1st group. Took it to show Connie and to protest the starting order but she said it was too late and nothing she could do.
Now I love Connie and have known her for years, like over 20 now and she’s a great person so nothing against her. But it was not fair for the organizers to change their mind and not post anything up anywhere regarding the starting order until an hour or so before race time. The rules clearly stated the first 20 to sign up would be in the first group period. No ands ifs or buts about it. They should have stuck with it and anyone who signed up after the first 20 should have been placed in group 2. OR they should have let all 30 people start in group one. There was plenty of area/field for 30 to start, before turning into a fire road to narrow down the riders. Yes, it would have been tighter but the top riders would have sprinted to the front and the others would slowly separate as they hit the first hill.
Could someone please explain why they changed the rules and why they didn’t inform anyone of it? Why couldn’t they start with the original first 20 that signed up first? Or start with 30?
I was and still am pretty upset about this. It may not seem like a big deal to some people but it makes a HUGE difference starting in the first group with the top riders. You know exactly what position you are in, who’s in front and behind you and how you are doing. You know if you need to push yourself more or not. Basically it makes you ride faster. I believe I would have placed at least one or two positions higher if I was in the first group, which is why I am/was so upset.
I tried protesting it but nothing was done. I asked what would happen if I started in the first group anyways, and Connie stated I would be disqualified. I really thought about it just to make a point. Kinda like how David rode the downhill course on a 20" freestyle. Then, even though I wouldn’t have technically placed or gotten a medal, I would at least know how I would have placed. I was this close from starting in the first group but pulled back at the last minute. I thought I’d try to use some of my built up anger to help fuel my race, which it did for the first lap as I was passing people left and right, within the first few minutes of the race. Yes, the first group started a minute after the second group and I passed (well ran into as they had fallen in front of me) them on the first downhill singletrack! Clearly they should have not been in the first group.
My point of the matter is that I was and am very upset how this happened and how nothing was done. They could have easily started me and a couple other top riders in the first group. Also, if something is randomized, they should have the option of the riders being present in order to watch it and make sure it is legit. Or have the riders draw numbers at the start of the race. Fair is fair.
I have more to say about the DH and the walking/running rule, but I’ll post that another time and give ya’ll a chance to read, comment and question the above…any opinions for or against me?!
Downhill vs Muni
We live in Rotorua NZ and have great off road down hill tracks http://rotorua.mtbclub.org.nz/ . Evolution of Uni sport might see fast down hill racing And technical trial like Muni. Basically two different racing styles. My son is 11yrs old and went with Tony on the first downhill ride and rode well. Jacob Smith under 15yrs Male came 17th 3:47:00 on a standard 20" nimbus. Thanks for a great event.
You have to give the organizers something of a break with this kind of stuff, because of the open nature of our sport. If we were a serious and mature international sport, everyone would have had to have qualified for the XC race, we’d have data to show who was the fastest, and each country would have an organizing body deciding the pecking order of the national team. We don’t have any of those things; we have sign up sheets and volunteers. At some point you have to make a choice about how many people go in the heat or the first wave, and then you have to draw a line.
Personally, I don’t think randomizing is a great choice, but I don’t think first-come-first-served is, either. Ideally you want all the fastest people in the first heat, so you should be making choices based on the speed of the riders (their speed on the course, not their speed to get on the sign-up sheet). That’s hard to do when you have riders from 20 countries, many of whom you might not know personally or might not have seen race.
I think the biggest problem with starting it that way is that Tony Melton sneaked third place ahead of Scott Wilton by mere seconds. It would have been much different if they’d both in the first wave. In fact, while we were lining up I saw Tony in the second wave and thought it didn’t make sense.
Believe me, I understand. But you also don’t know if other riders in the other groups would have done the same. In other words, not all the fast riders were in the first group. But most of them were, so it sucks to not have been able to pace them.
Like Tom said, the only way to do it right would be to have a qualifying race to get riders ranked by speed, not by self-election on a list. Basically “finalists” vs. “experts”. Some fast riders may not have known about the list, while others may not have known how fast they were. Being random, though sucky, was one of the few fair ways to deal with that problem. If it were me in charge, I’d like to think I would get that group together and have them decide, but you may have ended up with the same basic result. In other words, some faster riders would still probably end up in the other group.
Let David Weichenberger be aware of this situation for next Unicon…
I would give them a break but not going to on this one because there was an easy solution. Either stick with the original rules as stated in the rules/registration booklet and only let the 1st 20 who signed up to race. OR let everyone that signed up start in the first group. Maybe it was too many to start but it would have been sorted within the first few minutes of the race. My biggest issue, is that they changed the rule without notifying any of the racers. If they would have changed the rules to what it ended up being and informed everyone via the bulletin board a day or two before the race, then I wouldn’t be nearly as upset even if I was in the 2nd group.
It’d be kind of like if they changed the final basketball game to half the playing time right before you started the game. Or to go to an extreme, changing the rules so you can play with 6 people on a team. I know you’d be upset if they changed the rules like this an hour before you played the final game.
I repeat, I’m not mad at the rule change (well I am but just a little bit), but mad by the way they went around and changed it without informing people. That is the issue here.
Randomizing the way they did it was terrible. If they were to randomize it they should have done it with EVERYONE so that all groups had some fast and some slow riders. This would make it more fair for everyone. To put all the fast riders in group 1 and only a few in group 2, put a huge disadvantage to group 2.
Did you mean you saw me in the second wave and thought it didn’t make sense? Must’ve been a typo! 
It didn’t make much sense to have Tony in the second wave cos he was so fast perhaps- allowing him to beat Scott even though he finished afterwards. If Scott had seen him in front of him he might have pedalled a little bit faster and come third instead of Tony- but it also proves that you don’t need someone ahead of you to ride fast. Since you were in the slow second group why didn’t you pace yourself with Tony who was not much slower than the fastest riders in the first group? You wouldn’t know what the front riders in the first group were doing but at least you’d be going fast.
I agree that it is a bit stink to change the rules last second and not inform people. If rules are written then some effort should be made to adhere to them, and then make changes to the rules if needed, rather than bending rules willy nilly to suit circumstances. I’m much happier being a participant than an organiser as it seems like it would be nearly impossible to please everyone.
Sorry Rowan, that was a joke as I was being sarcastic. I know why he said Tony, cause Tony is fast, faster than me but not by much! The reason I didn’t pace myself with Tony was because I thought he was going to place first and I didn’t want to wear myself out and flop on the last lap. If I would have known the results, then now looking back I wish I would have cause I would have placed higher. Here lies the problem of how it was set up, that you don’t know what place you are in which is hard for a race. Yes, you should push as hard as you can no matter what, but it’s so much easier to do when you know what place you are in and how far the people are in front and or in back of you. To be fair for everyone, they should have either A) started each rider separately one minute apart, B) started everyone at the same time or C)started all those who thought they had a chance to place in the top 3 at the same time not D)start almost all of the fastest riders in group one and then a couple fast riders in group 2.
I can understand that you are upset about the way it worked. But I still think that randomizing is the best way to do it if the riders cant figure it out in which group they belong themself.
I would have been upset if they had put me in the second starting group just because I saw the list where I had to put my name in to late or if I had to be in a crowdet groupstart with over 30 people because they just put everybody in the first group (extialy I started in the second starting group because I hurt my knee before the race and told Conny that I dont want to be in the first group if I cant ride 100%).
I am also a little bit upset that so many rider thought there where fast and put there name on the list even in the end they are not even in the top 20.
But you cant make everybody happy and I am glad that atleast the XC track stayed at the hard course.
Randomizing is fine but they should have taken all riders and randomized them together so all groups had some fast and some slow. How did Connie let you race in the 2nd group after you were in the first group? She told me that it couldn’t be changed…did you find out the starting order and rule change more than an hour before the race? Just curious… And I agree the XC hard course was awesome!
And any serious competitor should read the rulebook pamphlet that you get when you pick up your registration packet so they know the rules and other important info like signing up to be in the first group. And/or check the bulletin board daily for any updates…It took several days before the sign-up sheet was full so no excuse for not signing up on time!
I hurt my knee 3 days before the start of the race so I told it Conny 3 days before because I already knew that there where way to much people on the first group list.
We have to figure something out to solve this starting group problem next time. I can completly understand that you didnt like it the way it was. I just wanted to point out that there usualy is no way to satisfie everybody.
Oh ok. That makes sense Lutz. And yes we need to find a way that works. I think we have three options.
1)start everyone at the same time if there is enough room. Have a big wide field that hopefully doesn’t narrow to single track right away but fireroad. This would be best case as then it’s fair to everyone but not always an option depending on the course and how many people sign up.
2)when people register have a tick box for the serios racers that think they have a chance to place in the top 3. Then the organizers will know how many people need to start in group one to make sure it will work. If there isn’t enough room then they will have to do option 3.
3)take all racers and randomize everyone into groups. The thing I don’t like about this is the front groups get a huge advantage as they won’t need to pass people but it is luck of the draw.
4)I guess there is a fourth option and that is starting everyone at one minute intervals like the downhill was run. But that’s no fun to watch nor race as u are racing against the clock instead of riders.
So my vote would be for option 1 or 2. Then option 3 and 4 if 1 or 2 doesn’t work. Does that seem legit?
Let’s look at this from a historical perspective. The XC race at Unicon XIV was a starting area disaster. Basically you had to be lucky to have had a chance in that race. You absolutely had to be an excellent sprinter, probably near the middle of the starting area, and with no sloppy riders around you. Rules were drafted to help avoid that situation, and many improvements were made. The Unicon XV race was broken into groups to avoid the problems of Unicon XIV.
This is the best way to work a head-to-head race, but is limited by number of participants. Even with a big field like we had in Wellington, 100 riders would have made it too messy for the first lap, especially in the singletrack sections. Though I believe there’s a time when being stuck behind someone on singletrack is just a part of the race, this only holds true when it’s broken up by places were passing can occur.
So that first option should work in most cases, except at the very big events (like Unicon). But with 100+ riders, even doing 1 km of dirt road would favor the sprinters, leaving the slower riders, who might be much better climbersand more fit, struggling to pass 50 riders with too much of a crowd for it to be considered “even”.
This works as long as the self-elected fasties don’t exceed the space in the firsts starting group. Nobody knows who’s the fastest. Can’t even compare to last year, when one guy may have been at peak fitness, while this year he didn’t train and someone else is maximally fit. Most riders know roughly where they fit in, but that leaves many that have no idea.
This carries the disadvantage you mentioned, plus it makes for a much less interesting spectator event, and less fun for the top riders.
But then it’s not a mass-start race, it’s a Time Trial. That doesn’t solve the problem you’re having in your rant. And you would still have to pass lots of slower riders if the starts are random.
You forgot this one:
5) Preliminary race. It doesn’t have to be as long, but needs to be long enough for riders to demonstrate superior fitness level beyond sprinting. Should be a sample of what’s found on the main race course. For the Unicon XV course, a simple one would be to do one lap. Can be held days before, or hours before, so riders aren’t all tuckered out. Could even be done in the form of a workshop, as part of a MUni outing, if a few officials are present to maintain order and record the results. Top riders from the qualifying race go in Group 1. If there are riders who can’t make it to a much-earlier preliminary race, or have conflicts with other competition events, they can request Group 1 based on space. People who were slow in the preliminary race don’t need to be in Group 1.
It’s more complicated, but it’s the only way I can think of to get all the actual fastest riders into one group.
Good luck with that. I will point out that the race in question is now in the past, and cannot be changed. All that can be changed is the future, so for best results work on future changes. 