Gun time or Chip time (Read 1384 times)

It's a race, not a time trial. Racers places are determined by finish order. Time is actually irrelevant to the ranking of competitors in the race. If you expect to be competitive you are allowed and encouraged to line up near the front.

Point taken but I am not yet likely to line up at the front and I still consider myself competitive. At the moment I am competing in the middle of the pack but it does matter to me if I am placed 34th instead of 32nd - or 12th instead of 11th. I don't think that my place being correct is any less important than if I was ranked 3rd instead of 1st - because lets be honest, most of us would be spitting bones if that happened. I guess it's just one of those things that you have to accept or you start running in the front of the pack and look elite for at least a few moments. Claire xxx

Okay, since I'm sitting up nursing a sick puppy dog, I decided to let the magic of Google satisfy my curiosity here. There is (surprise) a lot of argument on this one, and threads in other forums titled "gun time or chip time" are a dime a dozen. It looks like nobody is completely happy, for a variety of (obvious) reasons. The basics of what I found - in answer to the original post: * The rule (USATF - no idea what happens in other countries) is definitely that overall PRIZE MONEY awards are determined by gun time. If you're planning on winning the thing (at least most of the majors), the chip doesn't matter. * By contrast, AGE GROUP awards are generally determined by CHIP time. If this is actually IN the rules I can't find it - and if it's prohibited, I can't find that, either. I think the point is that "the rules" don't much care about us slowpokes. * A lot of races - especially smaller races, especially if there's no real prize money - seem to ignore all the rules and do whatever they please. And apparently even some of the bigger marathons don't exactly follow the guidelines - at least once they're outside the real prize money. I seriously doubt the 5th place guy is going to get bumped to 4th because of a chip time. Once you're out of the money, though ... well, see my above posts. All of the above makes some kind of sense, too ... since anyone actually planning on winning would almost certainly have had the same starting chip time, anyway. In my own recent marathons - the CMM is all over the place outside the top 10, Rocket City seems (I think) to strictly follow gun time, and the prestigious Flying Monkey Marathon did not have chips. Or a gun. There may have been a clock. And I vaguely remember a small girl scribbling my time on a piece of paper with one of those stubby pencils you find at golf courses. High-tech all the way on that one. Here's a random example of the general rule (from the P.F. Chang's RnR marathon in Arizona):

All age group awards will be determined by chip time, but in accordance with USATF rules, all prize money awards and age group records will be determined by gun time.

And (of course ...) not everybody likes this (from Scott Douglas):

Most of the dissension has had to do with skewed age-group results, such as at the 10-miler in Maryland, in which a woman finishing behind who was thought to be the first master had a faster net time. Most races using the Chip have based open awards on gun time, but age-group awards on net time. This policy, some claim, quashes the spirit of competition.

I had the obvious question: suppose two runners in the same age group finish first and second overall ... but the second place runner finishes first by chip time? According to the standard, you'd give the money to the first guy but the age group trophy to the second - even though he actually won? And did you notice that bit in the P.F. Chang's rules about age group awards versus age group records? Theoretically, you could run faster than someone in your age group and actually WIN the age group - but they could set a record for the age group, if their gun time was that fast. This sort of thing led me to the fridge for a beer, at which point I contemplated abandoning running and taking up professional checkers. At that exact moment, the dog threw up next to my chair, just to share her opinion of the whole thing. None of this made sense to me ... until I realized that this non-sensical rule was actually made-up for people exactly like me. Middle-of-the-packers who might one day be fast enough (read: old enough) to have a chance to win an age group award, but who should never, ever be allowed to line up at the front of the pack. If you had to line up at the front to win an age group award, the crowding would get ugly. Imagine all the 80 and over runners elbowing you out of the way to chase an age group award. This way, my overall time - at least in a race actually following USATF guidelines - might be wrong reported wrong (i.e. not the chip time), but my age group award placing would be right. And I still have no idea what they'd do in my hypothetical up there with the two guys from the same age group finishing 1st and 2nd. I'm guessing when you're that good, you're too pissed at being second overall to care much. In other news, if you ignore the dog who puked long enough, they'll actually clean it up for you. Now that's recycling. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Glad you asked the question, Ron. Now that I know the above, if I'm ever fast enough (or in a small enough race) that any of this matters, I'll be asking some questions ahead of time, and lining up based on what the answers are. In the meantime, I am now telling everybody that I came in 5th place in my age group in that Thanksgiving 5-k, not 6th place. Rules are rules, dammit.

it does matter to me if I am placed 34th instead of 32nd - or 12th instead of 11th.

Speaking of your finishing place - did you get official results yet?

I will preface this with in most races the race directors rely on the timers of events to set the standard for placement. That said most timers I know try to follow the USATF rules as close as possible. (Spend some time reading the rules and all you come out with is confusion). I work with the Nashville Striders and we time about 30 events a year in the area. The general rule that we follow is that overall placement for events for both men and women is done by Gun Time(regardless of if they go 1 deep or five deep) all other times are determined by Chip time including age groups, masters, grand masters, Athena, Clydesdale, etc. Generally with overall placement Gun time and chip time follow the same order, but we have had races where this does not occur. Most of the races that we do in Nashville with the Striders have mats at the beginning and end of the race. Two mats in each location a primary and secondary system to prevent errors. I know of one race that does not use the starting mat at the beginning of the race. The Team Nashville Half Marathon (Yes I am the race director and lazy). Having to keep the road open in theory for traffic and the fact that there are only about 225 runners I did not feel that the 25 seconds it takes all the runners to cross the start line in a half marathon to be a huge issue. We do announce repeatedly that the faster runners need to get near the front of the pack at the start.However if people feel that we need mats at the start I would be more that happy to listen to the majority of participants wishes. Most race directors main goal is keep the runners happy and coming back to their event. For some reason my email address is not linked. It is runfro@gmail.com

I run so fast that I win the race according to chip times. Only thing is, by the time I cross the finish line, the elites have finished, the medals have been awarded, and they've all gone home. What on earth does the RD do?! Their famous star athlete who was paid to run the race was awarded the medal for crossing the line first, but the official times show he was well beaten by an unknown pleb!! OK so I know it's never going to happen....but it's the kind of "what if" question that my mind likes to dream up when i'm bored.....!

You're screwed. But the babes would be really impressed. Since you're fantasizing, why not give it a movie ending and just beat the front-runners even though they got a head start? Babes AND trophies, man. Dare to dream.

Since you're fantasizing, why not give it a movie ending and just beat the front-runners even though they got a head start?

Now that would be a funny film ... Ben Stiller stars as the unlikely hero! Chariots of Fire meets Dodgeball!

Overall -  Gun -      Pace -  Chip -     Name -            Gender #- Age Group #...
620        1:47:15.8  5:06    1:46:48.4  SPERANO, PATRICK  533/1056  195/381 Men 30-39

656        1:48:07.8  5:08    1:45:59.6  BEIROUTI, RONALD  560/1056  204/381 Men 30-39 

Here's what I mean above. A HM I ran last year. I ended up 36 places after this other guy and ran the race almost a minute faster according to chip time. I also took a big hit in terms of ranking for the other rankings. Weird, I think. - R

Here's what I mean above. A HM I ran last year. I ended up 36 places after this other guy and ran the race almost a minute faster according to chip time. I also took a big hit in terms of ranking for the other rankings. Weird, I think.

Weird, and wrong in my opinion. In all the races I've run, from 8Ks to the marathon, my overall, gender and age group rankings have been based on chip timing. I think its the only fair way to do it in a large to medium sized race.