IHPVA Forums
IHPVA Forums
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
 All Forums
 IHPVA Topics
 IHPVA Records
 records we should retire
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

SeanCostin

USA
32 Posts

Posted - 01/08/2009 :  19:27:05  Show Profile
Over the years, the 500M, 1000M, and 1 mile flying start have become irrelevant as the 200M record typically requires a record at these distances. For many years we have not bothered to put down tapes at these distances because it is too much trouble.

I think these records should be retired, meaning that new records will not be be accepted at these distances, but the information will still be available as records on the list with the distinction that the records are no longer being accepted.

Sean Costin
VP Land



Matjaz Leskovar

Slovenia
4 Posts

Posted - 01/09/2009 :  00:29:40  Show Profile  Visit Matjaz Leskovar's Homepage
I agree, except for the 500 m flying start, since this is a UCI record category (http://www.uci.ch/templates/UCI/UCI1/layout.asp?MenuId=MTUxMjc). I think that the IHPVA should have at least all UCI record categories (so we are able to directly compare IHPVA and UCI records).

Best regards, Matjaz
Go to Top of Page

SeanCostin

USA
32 Posts

Posted - 01/10/2009 :  06:04:36  Show Profile
Matjaz,
Comparing 500M Flying Start times with UCI is like comparing Formula One to a fast production car.

We have not been timing the 500M and do not have immediate plans to do it in the future. The record time is no longer a true representation of the actual time of a record level performance. Therefore I think it has become obsolete and with your perspective inaccurate even as a comparison to UCI.

Sean
Go to Top of Page

Matjaz Leskovar

Slovenia
4 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2009 :  04:02:18  Show Profile  Visit Matjaz Leskovar's Homepage
Sean, I agree. In UCI cycling there is a difference between 200 m and 500 m due to the riders fatigue, whereas in IHPVA cycling the speeds and the kinetic energy are so large that the difference in the average speed over both distances is negligible (and also the record holder over 200 m and 500 m would be the same person). We should have this in mind when argumenting why the IHPVA will not have the 500 m UCI record category. And if someone will ask about the IHPVA speed over 500 m, we can explain that it is the same as over 200 m.

Best regards, Matjaz
Go to Top of Page

beitexure

1 Posts

Posted - 01/08/2010 :  18:18:07  Show Profile  Visit beitexure's Homepage
I was just dropping in to say hi and introduce myself! Im a computer nerd that found this forum and hope to become an active member soon! So if you come up with any computer questions feel free to ask. Otherwise see you all on the boards.

Tauro
Go to Top of Page

Don S

USA
83 Posts

Posted - 01/12/2010 :  23:07:07  Show Profile
If the records are not being used that only means they do not have a relevance at current record events. I'm having difficulty understanding what purpose would be served by retiring the category and at the same time maintaining the records. The value of knowing that Sam and Barbara recorded the fastest 200 M speeds in the world would be reduced forever if we were to pass a rule that effectively meant no one could ever challenge their achievements.

I don't disagree that there is a certain amount of redundancy in the categories but what is the value of eliminating that oportunity? Diversity has it's own links to creativity and inovation, and as chip timing and other technologies improve setting up for timing could become as simple as stationing a receiver at the various distances and reading several results at the same time on a computer screen.

Don S.

"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS
Go to Top of Page

Larry Lem

USA
40 Posts

Posted - 09/21/2010 :  10:29:46  Show Profile
golly, there's an IHPVA forum.

I guess it depends on how we retire the old records. They've all been broken through the attempts that established the latest 200m record runs, but none were recorded. So the "records" for those are already messed up and shouldn't be used as carrots for breaking them. Then again, anybody intersted in the 200 m record isn't interested in the 500, 1000, and mile. When I brought this up a couple of years ago at the WISIL site, a couple of people said they were, but haven't done anything about it (whether facilitating the measuring of the elapsed times at these distances at subsequent events, or discussing retiring the records).

Larry Lem
Go to Top of Page

Don S

USA
83 Posts

Posted - 09/23/2010 :  20:17:08  Show Profile
Larry,

I see your point but the 1 mi, 1000 M and 500 M distances are all set up on the Battle Mtn course. The problem is with the current method of recording speed based on timing tapes laid on top of the roadway. Given the 20 minute road closure allowed by NVDOT it's impracticle to time the other distances and the speed challenge at Battle Mt'n is specifically dedicated to ultimate speed which is generally accepted as based on the time through the 200 meter trap.

If there was another event for the 1000 M or the mile I'd be loading up the Arrow Hawk right now. <G> I suspect there are other racers who would welcome the opportunity to break those records as well.

Maybe as our timing methods catch up with technology it will be possible to record a rider's speed over multiple distances for the same run. Just imagine chip timing with a chip in the nose of each vehicle recording time at several distances.

It would surprise me if riders like Sam, Barbara, and a few others aren't routinely surpassing the current world records for the longer distances. It's unfortunate we lack the techology to measure their times and give them credit for their achievements but it would be more unfortunate to close those categories and rule out future challenges.

Don

"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS
Go to Top of Page

Larry Lem

USA
40 Posts

Posted - 10/28/2011 :  09:01:54  Show Profile
But do we need these distances as records? If they had never existed, would we be lobbying now to add them?

Just because they exist does not mean that they are necessary.
I think they have become superfluous with the speeds now being attained. They have become secondary with respect to the speed runs at the WHPSC at Battle Mountain. If there were timing tapes set at these distances, do we think that people would focus on their speeds through these distances? As of now, we simply use the distance signs to help us maintain our intended power profiles as we try to achieve top speed through the 200 m-to-finish section. I don't think anyone would revise the way they run the course to set records at these distances; everyone is trying to hit top speed at the 200m trap.

Side note:
In the topics that Mike Mowett has started, as categories are defined by rider, vehicle, and event, he has left out the 500, 1000, and mile flying start records. His proposals are "complete" as this is how the categories are defined in the records list whereas I was suggesting we separate the events from the types of riders and vehicles.

Larry Lem
Go to Top of Page

upright mike

USA
27 Posts

Posted - 10/28/2011 :  10:00:44  Show Profile
Hi Larry,
The reason why I didn't add the 500-meter, 1000-meter, Flying Mile etc to my proposed categories of Junior, Student-Built, Trike is to not dillute the overall record list with too many records.
Go to Top of Page

Don S

USA
83 Posts

Posted - 10/28/2011 :  21:30:03  Show Profile
Change is inevitable and essential and this may be another area where the most meaningful records will be those in events recognized by other organization. Maintaining categoies that aren't recognized by other organizations may be similar to creating a category that doesn't exist just so a record can be set but someone somewhere dreamed up the first Tour de France and the first 24 hour record attempt.

Maybe there is a compromise to archive the discontinued event records as none active but keep them open for challenge given the possibility that sometime in the future there may be a revived interest.



"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
IHPVA Forums © 2008 International Human Powered Vehicle Association Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000