High jump tie breakers, Prelims not showing up in result report and measurements for discus and javelin

I have 3 questions concerning Racetab 3.053.  How do I show the tie breakers for high jump.  If 3 people have cleared 6-2 and they all have a different number of misses at the previous height how do I indicate that in the results?  So far t only shows them all as splitting the points.  How do I get the discus and the javelin to be recorded to the partial inch measurements such as 105-06.25.  Currently it rounds down.  If I am running prelims/semis/finals in a running event how do I get the all rounds to show up in the results report?  I can only get the semis and finals to show up in the complete results report.

Thanks in advance for any help!!!!  I have to score my team's league meet in 10 days and I want to make sure that there are no glitches.  Also I have tried some of the newer versions on Racetab and I feel more comfortable with this version.

Views: 553

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Few things....

1) You should upgrade to 3.7 .... really if you want to run the meet well then you should use the new version. Lots better and lot of fixes.

2) If you put in the misses either at the bottom or put in the entire series under "Field Series" button then when you score it will break the ties. You can also score and then break the ties by manually changing the places. There is an option in advanced customize of the results if you want to show the field series data

3) Discus and javelin should not be reported to the fraction of the inch. It is against the rules of the sport. So in this case, RaceTab is saving you from yourself and there is no work around for this, because it is what it should do.

4) I have never heard of this problem of all three rounds not showing up... then again I can't be certain that anyone has ran a meet this way with RaceTab since that is rather rare. I'll have to test it.

Thanks for letting me know about the discus and the javelin.  I am a track/jumps guy and was recording the throws in the program as they were written down.  I will tell the officials to not mark partial inch measurements.

You can manually assign the positions for the jumpers instead of leaving them tied.  You can have the program break the tie by typing in the entire field series for each of the athletes in the competition.

Sorry, can't help with the imperial measurement, I do just about everything in metric.

Never done a meet with RaceTab that had 3 rounds so not sure about that, tried in 3.71 and it showed up as three rounds.

Should have also read Jason's reply,  IAAF allows long throws to be reported to the 1cm, Only time I did a major meet in the States we measured in metric and the Results were reported in imperial with the distance converted and shown to the 1/2 inch.


I don't know if this is just how computer guys talk but the bolded statement bellow seemed a little rude... I appreciate the help with a program that is free of charge and hope this is just your direct way of telling me that I don't need to worry about the partial inch measurements reported to me by officials that should know the rules more than I do.


Jason Byrne said:

Few things....

1) You should upgrade to 3.7 .... really if you want to run the meet well then you should use the new version. Lots better and lot of fixes.

2) If you put in the misses either at the bottom or put in the entire series under "Field Series" button then when you score it will break the ties. You can also score and then break the ties by manually changing the places. There is an option in advanced customize of the results if you want to show the field series data

3) Discus and javelin should not be reported to the fraction of the inch. It is against the rules of the sport. So in this case, RaceTab is saving you from yourself and there is no work around for this, because it is what it should do.

4) I have never heard of this problem of all three rounds not showing up... then again I can't be certain that anyone has ran a meet this way with RaceTab since that is rather rare. I'll have to test it.

Nope..... I didn't know it was the rule until just a few years ago when the diehard throws guys brought it to my attention and suggested I build that into RaceTab. So you are not alone. Pardon my directness. I am a to the point person, don't read any malice into it.

Seriously, he informed you of an important rule ... when you said having no hiccups was important.  "Thank you!" was the proper response.  Computer guys say thank you a lot when someone helps them.

"Thanks for letting me know about the discus and the javelin.  I am a track/jumps guy and was recording the throws in the program as they were written down.  I will tell the officials to not mark partial inch measurements".

Above is my initial response to Jason's post.  I was and am extremely appreciative of Jason bringing this rule to my attention.  Who the hell are you to add your 2 cents to this anyways?!?  If something someone says something to me or writes to me sounds rude, I will question it.  Jason cleared it up and that was the end of it.  If you would have taken the time to read my initial response you probably would not have stuck your nose into something that didn't concern you.

Don Passenger MichianaTiming.com said:

Seriously, he informed you of an important rule ... when you said having no hiccups was important.  "Thank you!" was the proper response.  Computer guys say thank you a lot when someone helps them.

Excuse my putting in an other comment, Just went to look at some of the rule books.

The present I.A.A.F, and the USTFA books have measurement done in metric, the distance reported to the next lowest .01 meter.  (as an aside 1 inch = 2.54 cm)  ( prior to E.D.M. in the 80's IAAF long throws were measured to the next lowest even cm)  There are no rules at present for how to report the conversion to feet and inches ( in 80's conversion could be reported to the 1/4 inch below the " true" conversion using the 1 to 2.54 for calculation)

NFHS book has long throws measured in either metric or feet and inches. when using metric measured to the next lowest even cm ( like 30 yr. old IAAF) when using feet and inches to the next lowest inch.

NCAA has this

ARTICLE 14. a. Performances that result in a pass or foul shall be recorded as:
P=Pass, F=Foul.
b.
Metrics is the system of measurement. Distances measured shall be recorded
to the nearest lesser centimeter (that is, fractions less than one centimeter must
be ignored).
c.
Performances shall be announced in imperial and metric measure. The display
shall be imperial measure and, when possible, metric.
d.
For world, American and NCAA championships records, marks must be

measured and recorded metrically

So I think the problem comes from having too many rule books.

One interesting thing I also noticed, for record purposes,  for IAAF and USTFA and NCAA landing sectors can only slope away at 1 to 1000 or less.  For NFHS slope away can be 1 to 100 or less. 

And you should have left it at that.  You didn't send him a private email, you accused him of being rude on a public message board on a site that he pays for for a product that he donates to the community.  I've watched him spend countless hours for the love of the sport on this software.  I've read and re-read his response and frankly it isn't any rude.  So who am I?  A dedicated user AND SUPPORTER via donation and via evangelization of this product.  It is what it was.

Welcome to the software.

One interesting thing I also noticed, for record purposes,  for IAAF and USTFA and NCAA landing sectors can only slope away at 1 to 1000 or less.  For NFHS slope away can be 1 to 100 or less.

Unfortunately this is NOT TRUE more often than true.  Seldom does it go uphill unless it is towards a crowned field and usually it falls away slightly.  1to 100 is almost none and 1to 1000 is infinitesimal.

You shouldn't have posted in this thread in the first place unless you had something to add to the conversation.  You obviously had nothing constructive to add.  I didn't accuse him of being rude.  I simply said that the comment seemed rude and I said so in a non aggressive inquisitive way.  I am sorry that i offended you.  I am grateful to Jason and guys like him that put in so much time to make the RACETAB program possible.  I have been using it for 2 years now and it has truly saved me a lot of time.  Spending 30 plus hours with the 100 plus kids I coach every week doesn't leave me a lot of time to spend with my family.  This program gives me back precious time with my family.  I am not sure why you think you should be posting in this thread.  I am sure you are an important person and all but this discussion had nothing to do with you.  I am sure that you will have something more to say about the matter though.........



Don Passenger MichianaTiming.com said:

And you should have left it at that.  You didn't send him a private email, you accused him of being rude on a public message board on a site that he pays for for a product that he donates to the community.  I've watched him spend countless hours for the love of the sport on this software.  I've read and re-read his response and frankly it isn't any rude.  So who am I?  A dedicated user AND SUPPORTER via donation and via evangelization of this product.  It is what it was.

Welcome to the software.

The books allow up hill sectors because it does not give an advantage to the athlete.  down hill sectors do provide an advantage, If you assume an implement comes in at a 45 degree angle for every cm the landing is below the rim of the circle the throw will measure a cm longer than if the sector was flat.  I found it interesting because there have been several new tracks put in near me by American companies and When we walk to the new sectors before a meet see that they look to be about 1:100,  Then get out the Total station and find the slope to be about 1:150 and have to void "record" throws because all the governing bodies in Ontario require the 1: 1000 slope rule.

 MichianaTiming.com said:

One interesting thing I also noticed, for record purposes,  for IAAF and USTFA and NCAA landing sectors can only slope away at 1 to 1000 or less.  For NFHS slope away can be 1 to 100 or less.

Unfortunately this is NOT TRUE more often than true.  Seldom does it go uphill unless it is towards a crowned field and usually it falls away slightly.  1to 100 is almost none and 1to 1000 is infinitesimal.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Facebook Page

© 2018   Created by Jason Byrne.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service