Tris and banned iPods?

Lafayette, CO

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 7:55 AM

COSkiGirl - 2010-09-29 9:49 AM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 7:33 AM I say Garmins should be banned, too. Honest. I'll let you keep your watch, though.

On a totally personal level I'd be upset by this. On a general if we're going to disallow things that help a person with pacing beyond a clock and a mile marker then I can't disagree. But, if you're going to go to that based on pacing assistance then why not go so far as to not have any watches/clocks/mile markers other than the finish? Where do you draw the line? It's not an easy question.

Watches in and of themselves do not help you with pacing. You have to know how far along you are. And that is public knowledge provided to everyone on the course. Same thing with on-course timekeeping; it is publicly available to everyone racing. Therefore it is not limited to a select few. Garmins, Nike +, etc. are all ways of giving an advantage to an individual, and potentially un-leveling the playing field. Plus, it irritates me to have to listen to someone's device beep incessantly.

Let me say that the only beeps I have set up are mile beeps. I tried the pacing ones and about threw the watch in a ravine. I can totally see how it would bother the non-wearer next to them.

I think you're splitting hairs saying a watch doesn't provide pacing. How about we say no watches but you get mile markers. Everyone can see the mile markers so that's level. We both know that if you're wearing a watch and have mile markers in your head you can (and I'd argue many to most will) know your pace from that.

My Race Log

Lafayette, CO

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

Pector55 - 2010-09-29 8:08 AM

jdwright56 - 2010-09-29 9:14 AM Just got done with this discussion on a conference call yesterday so I will recap (from the USAT point of view):

You are allowed, however, to sing if you really need the music to get you through.

Exactly! This is why I am going to spin off the Rick Roll into a Live Rick Run! If you pass me, and you will, I will chase you singing, "Neva gonna give you up!! Neva gonna let you down..."

Seriously, that would crack me up. You'd then pass me because I'd be laughing so hard.

My Race Log

Runner

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

COSkiGirl - 2010-09-29 10:13 AM

I think you're splitting hairs saying a watch doesn't provide pacing. How about we say no watches but you get mile markers. Everyone can see the mile markers so that's level. We both know that if you're wearing a watch and have mile markers in your head you can (and I'd argue many to most will) know your pace from that.

Of course I'm splitting hairs. Because the hairs need split.

The rule disallows devices that give you outside information, or pacing information. A watch, in and of itself, does not give pacing. All it shows is elapsed time. The fact that this information could be used to derive pacing information is not what's at question. A Garmin explicitly provides pacing information, as do several other devices. Those devices should be, in my opinion, banned for the same reason iPods and whatnot would be banned.

Again, in my opinion, the reason Garmins and other similar devices are not banned is simply because the logistics of it would be entirely too difficult to maintain. How can a course marshal judge exactly what the device is on the wrist of several runners going past at various speeds from a distance of 5 or more feet? He/she cannot. Therefore the ban is unenforceable. This is also most likely why the USATF has amended its rules allowing the RD's discretion for headphones for all but elite runners. It is a hard rule to enforce on-course.

My Race Log

Member

210

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

Not really sure of the reason but headphones are banned at just about every race including 5k/10k types ive ever been in.

I ran about 28 races in 2009: 5k's, 10k's, half-marathons, 1 full marathon and 6 triathlons. Only the triathlons banned headphones. In many of the running races, I'd say 75-80% of the folks had music in their ears. The Capitol 10k had over 15,000 participants, and I didn't see or hear of a single accident caused by someone listening to music. I'm not saying there weren't any, I'm just saying I didn't witness any.

In the shorter distances, I certainly used my mp3 player to set my pace. I consciously selected tracks that would force me to run harder at the times when I knew I'd be tired. Would I have been slower without headphones? I doubt it. I've been slower WITH headphones in some races.

Expert

936

Salisbury

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 10:47 AM

COSkiGirl - 2010-09-29 10:13 AM
I think you're splitting hairs saying a watch doesn't provide pacing. How about we say no watches but you get mile markers. Everyone can see the mile markers so that's level. We both know that if you're wearing a watch and have mile markers in your head you can (and I'd argue many to most will) know your pace from that.

Of course I'm splitting hairs. Because the hairs need split.The rule disallows devices that give you outside information, or pacing information. A watch, in and of itself, does not give pacing. All it shows is elapsed time. The fact that this information could be used to derive pacing information is not what's at question. A Garmin explicitly provides pacing information, as do several other devices. Those devices should be, in my opinion, banned for the same reason iPods and whatnot would be banned.Again, in my opinion, the reason Garmins and other similar devices are not banned is simply because the logistics of it would be entirely too difficult to maintain. How can a course marshal judge exactly what the device is on the wrist of several runners going past at various speeds from a distance of 5 or more feet? He/she cannot. Therefore the ban is unenforceable. This is also most likely why the USATF has amended its rules allowing the RD's discretion for headphones for all but elite runners. It is a hard rule to enforce on-course.

They'd have to ban bike computers of kinds as well.

My Race Log

Expert

936

Salisbury

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

bryancd - 2010-09-28 2:13 PM

nc452010 - 2010-09-28 12:11 PM In a medical emergency, the benefit of urgency should be greater than the convenience of the latest Justin Bieber tune.

CLASSIC!

x2 well said!

Just to play devils advocate and not pointed toward anyone in particular here...Should deaf people be able to race?

My Race Log

Runner

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

Rencor - 2010-09-29 12:18 PM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 10:47 AM

COSkiGirl - 2010-09-29 10:13 AM
I think you're splitting hairs saying a watch doesn't provide pacing. How about we say no watches but you get mile markers. Everyone can see the mile markers so that's level. We both know that if you're wearing a watch and have mile markers in your head you can (and I'd argue many to most will) know your pace from that.

Of course I'm splitting hairs. Because the hairs need split.The rule disallows devices that give you outside information, or pacing information. A watch, in and of itself, does not give pacing. All it shows is elapsed time. The fact that this information could be used to derive pacing information is not what's at question. A Garmin explicitly provides pacing information, as do several other devices. Those devices should be, in my opinion, banned for the same reason iPods and whatnot would be banned.Again, in my opinion, the reason Garmins and other similar devices are not banned is simply because the logistics of it would be entirely too difficult to maintain. How can a course marshal judge exactly what the device is on the wrist of several runners going past at various speeds from a distance of 5 or more feet? He/she cannot. Therefore the ban is unenforceable. This is also most likely why the USATF has amended its rules allowing the RD's discretion for headphones for all but elite runners. It is a hard rule to enforce on-course.

They'd have to ban bike computers of kinds as well.

I have no problem with that either.

My Race Log

Champion

5376

PA

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

Rencor - 2010-09-29 12:20 PM

bryancd - 2010-09-28 2:13 PM

nc452010 - 2010-09-28 12:11 PM In a medical emergency, the benefit of urgency should be greater than the convenience of the latest Justin Bieber tune.

CLASSIC!

x2 well said!

Just to play devils advocate and not pointed toward anyone in particular here...Should deaf people be able to race?

I see where you are going but if we simply made it black and white it would be discrimination against those who have no control over their hearing. Do you really think allowing making it unable to communicate with thousands is the same as accomodating a few with a disability beyond their control? I am not intending that to sound harsh, I'm just throwing out that I believe it to be a bad point.

I found the rate of hearing impaired is around 3%. At a marathon of 5000 people, that is 150 people in the crowd. Spread over 26 miles, it would not be difficult to get the attention of one or more if needed. Now, if the ambulance had to use just 1/4 mile of that course and that number was 50% hearing impaired (due to iPods) it becomes a bigger issue IMO.

My Race Log

Extreme Veteran

829

Tennessee

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

I enjoy music but have no desire to swim/bike/run with it. I have also noticed all the folks at the gym who have an ipod on their arm, including my two teen-age daugthers, spend more time "tuning" and "messing" with their ipods than they do working out? I mean if you want to listen to music stay home and listen to music, if you want to train then train!

My Race Log

Champion

5868

Urbandale, IA

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

Rencor - 2010-09-29 11:20 AM

bryancd - 2010-09-28 2:13 PM

nc452010 - 2010-09-28 12:11 PM In a medical emergency, the benefit of urgency should be greater than the convenience of the latest Justin Bieber tune.

CLASSIC!

x2 well said!

Just to play devils advocate and not pointed toward anyone in particular here...Should deaf people be able to race?

I think that the fact that people that are hard of hearing deal with it constantly makes them more acclimated to use their other senses in order to be safe.
Humans that are not hard of hearing do not have surrounding noises that have cues in them blocked out 100% of the time (exceptin g my daughters who seem to always be lsitening to an ipod

)

My Race Log

Regular

136

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

"Hmmm... Because on my half marathons I need them. I am a very slow runner, so I'm on the course for quite a while. I can't imagine running that far without it. "

In the most polite way possible I say HTFU. YOu don't need music. Everything you have is in you to succeed.

Champion

5781

Northridge, California

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 6:55 AM

COSkiGirl - 2010-09-29 9:49 AM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 7:33 AM I say Garmins should be banned, too. Honest. I'll let you keep your watch, though.

On a totally personal level I'd be upset by this. On a general if we're going to disallow things that help a person with pacing beyond a clock and a mile marker then I can't disagree. But, if you're going to go to that based on pacing assistance then why not go so far as to not have any watches/clocks/mile markers other than the finish? Where do you draw the line? It's not an easy question.

Watches in and of themselves do not help you with pacing. You have to know how far along you are. And that is public knowledge provided to everyone on the course. Same thing with on-course timekeeping; it is publicly available to everyone racing. Therefore it is not limited to a select few. Garmins, Nike +, etc. are all ways of giving an advantage to an individual, and potentially un-leveling the playing field. Plus, it irritates me to have to listen to someone's device beep incessantly.

Well, audible pacing devices ARE banned per USAT rules...

Look, I'm a Garmin user and I like it...but my 5K PR was run (last year) with just my watch. If USAT decided that they conferred an unfair advantage and banned them, I'm okay with that.

My Training Log My Race Log

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

I've said it before. The only truly fair running race is a completely naked race, including shoes, in which you have to find and, if necessary kill, your own nutrition on the course. the rest is all bonus

Edited by ChrisM 2010-09-29 12:20 PM

My Race Log

Champion

5781

Northridge, California

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

tcovert - 2010-09-29 10:17 AM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 6:55 AM

COSkiGirl - 2010-09-29 9:49 AM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 7:33 AM I say Garmins should be banned, too. Honest. I'll let you keep your watch, though.

On a totally personal level I'd be upset by this. On a general if we're going to disallow things that help a person with pacing beyond a clock and a mile marker then I can't disagree. But, if you're going to go to that based on pacing assistance then why not go so far as to not have any watches/clocks/mile markers other than the finish? Where do you draw the line? It's not an easy question.

Watches in and of themselves do not help you with pacing. You have to know how far along you are. And that is public knowledge provided to everyone on the course. Same thing with on-course timekeeping; it is publicly available to everyone racing. Therefore it is not limited to a select few. Garmins, Nike +, etc. are all ways of giving an advantage to an individual, and potentially un-leveling the playing field. Plus, it irritates me to have to listen to someone's device beep incessantly.

Well, audible pacing devices ARE banned per USAT rules...

Look, I'm a Garmin user and I like it...but my 5K PR was run (last year) with just my watch. If USAT decided that they conferred an unfair advantage and banned them, I'm okay with that.

...Then again, if a Garmin unit actually confers an advantage...then why was my PR in the one 5K I've run without one?

(Rhetorical question, btw.)

My Training Log My Race Log

Runner

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

tcovert - 2010-09-29 1:26 PM

tcovert - 2010-09-29 10:17 AM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 6:55 AM

COSkiGirl - 2010-09-29 9:49 AM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 7:33 AM I say Garmins should be banned, too. Honest. I'll let you keep your watch, though.

On a totally personal level I'd be upset by this. On a general if we're going to disallow things that help a person with pacing beyond a clock and a mile marker then I can't disagree. But, if you're going to go to that based on pacing assistance then why not go so far as to not have any watches/clocks/mile markers other than the finish? Where do you draw the line? It's not an easy question.

Watches in and of themselves do not help you with pacing. You have to know how far along you are. And that is public knowledge provided to everyone on the course. Same thing with on-course timekeeping; it is publicly available to everyone racing. Therefore it is not limited to a select few. Garmins, Nike +, etc. are all ways of giving an advantage to an individual, and potentially un-leveling the playing field. Plus, it irritates me to have to listen to someone's device beep incessantly.

Well, audible pacing devices ARE banned per USAT rules...

Look, I'm a Garmin user and I like it...but my 5K PR was run (last year) with just my watch. If USAT decided that they conferred an unfair advantage and banned them, I'm okay with that.

...Then again, if a Garmin unit actually confers an advantage...then why was my PR in the one 5K I've run without one?

(Rhetorical question, btw.)

I know it's rhetorical, but I would like to respond anyway.

Because races are not about PRs. They are about how you finish compared to other people. In that regard, having a Garmin could confer an advantage. Having any device that confers to you, the competitor, any knowledge regarding the race that is not available to everyone else on the course is an advantage. Ultimately, it is still a race that orders and ranks people based on finishing position.

I'm not getting on anyone here. I'm just trying to point out a rationale for decisions.

Edited by Scout7 2010-09-29 12:42 PM

My Race Log

Champion

5376

PA

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

ChrisM - 2010-09-29 1:19 PM I've said it before. The only truly fair running race is a completely naked race, including shoes, in which you have to find and, if necessary kill, your own nutrition on the course. the rest is all bonus

Plus we all have to be exactly the same weight and the junk needs to be tied down.

My Race Log

Pro

5011

Twin Cities

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

sugarmagnolia70 - 2010-09-28 1:24 PM

Kido - 2010-09-28 11:14 AM I'm not going to repeat what everyone else said but I will offer an observation...

You won't even MISS the Ipod. Trust me. I train with one a lot. Bike rides and runs... But I have yet to ever "miss" or "need" an Ipod in a race. Even in an Ironman.

Hmmm... Because on my half marathons I need them. I am a very slow runner, so I'm on the course for quite a while. I can't imagine running that far without it.

You don't NEED them. You want them. You NEED two legs of some sort. You WANT headphones to entertain you.

Pro

6191

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

I used to listen to music all the time. I switched to audiobooks, and those are even more wonderfully distracting.

However, with more tri training and more cycling (cycling = no music/books at all), I've stopped running with an mp3 player.

To each his own, though. Until race rules come into effect! To me, races are fun and I chat with people a lot throughout the course.

My Race Log

Resident Curmudgeon

25290

The Road Back

Gold member

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

tcovert - 2010-09-29 12:17 PM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 6:55 AM

COSkiGirl - 2010-09-29 9:49 AM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 7:33 AM I say Garmins should be banned, too. Honest. I'll let you keep your watch, though.

On a totally personal level I'd be upset by this. On a general if we're going to disallow things that help a person with pacing beyond a clock and a mile marker then I can't disagree. But, if you're going to go to that based on pacing assistance then why not go so far as to not have any watches/clocks/mile markers other than the finish? Where do you draw the line? It's not an easy question.

Watches in and of themselves do not help you with pacing. You have to know how far along you are. And that is public knowledge provided to everyone on the course. Same thing with on-course timekeeping; it is publicly available to everyone racing. Therefore it is not limited to a select few. Garmins, Nike +, etc. are all ways of giving an advantage to an individual, and potentially un-leveling the playing field. Plus, it irritates me to have to listen to someone's device beep incessantly.

Well, audible pacing devices ARE banned per USAT rules...

Look, I'm a Garmin user and I like it...but my 5K PR was run (last year) with just my watch. If USAT decided that they conferred an unfair advantage and banned them, I'm okay with that.

Under which rule?

My Race Log

Expert

936

Salisbury

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

jdwright56 - 2010-09-29 12:54 PM

Rencor - 2010-09-29 11:20 AM

bryancd - 2010-09-28 2:13 PM

nc452010 - 2010-09-28 12:11 PM In a medical emergency, the benefit of urgency should be greater than the convenience of the latest Justin Bieber tune.

CLASSIC!

x2 well said!

Just to play devils advocate and not pointed toward anyone in particular here...Should deaf people be able to race?

I think that the fact that people that are hard of hearing deal with it constantly makes them more acclimated to use their other senses in order to be safe.
Humans that are not hard of hearing do not have surrounding noises that have cues in them blocked out 100% of the time (exceptin g my daughters who seem to always be lsitening to an ipod

)

Actually, this is much more the point than what is usually the answer to why ipods are illegal. Most of the time I see people say it's because they can't hear what is going on around them. Implying that the music is louder than their surroundings. However, I believe it's usually more that they "zone out" to the music and become unaware of their surroundings.

My Race Log

Member

94

Ogden, Utah

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

You know the best part about all this...? The H20 ads on the side, right now, about waterproof, sweatproof, music player/earphones/ear buds, whatever.

I guess the advertisers haven't been reading the forums.

My Race Log

Master

2426

Central Indiana

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

kath9dav - 2010-09-28 2:06 PM It's a matter of safety and possibly pacing, but that is a weak argument. At my last tri a competitor received a 2 minute penalty for an ipod.

Having seen an iPod-wearing female competitor almost hit by a car at an intersection after she could not hear a police officer's SHOUTED warnings to stop, I think it's a pretty strong argument. Major injury accidents have a way of discouraging municipalities approval of triathlon traffic permits.

My Training Log My Race Log

Champion

5781

Northridge, California

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

the bear - 2010-09-29 6:00 PM

tcovert - 2010-09-29 12:17 PM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 6:55 AM

COSkiGirl - 2010-09-29 9:49 AM

Scout7 - 2010-09-29 7:33 AM I say Garmins should be banned, too. Honest. I'll let you keep your watch, though.

On a totally personal level I'd be upset by this. On a general if we're going to disallow things that help a person with pacing beyond a clock and a mile marker then I can't disagree. But, if you're going to go to that based on pacing assistance then why not go so far as to not have any watches/clocks/mile markers other than the finish? Where do you draw the line? It's not an easy question.

Watches in and of themselves do not help you with pacing. You have to know how far along you are. And that is public knowledge provided to everyone on the course. Same thing with on-course timekeeping; it is publicly available to everyone racing. Therefore it is not limited to a select few. Garmins, Nike +, etc. are all ways of giving an advantage to an individual, and potentially un-leveling the playing field. Plus, it irritates me to have to listen to someone's device beep incessantly.

Well, audible pacing devices ARE banned per USAT rules...

Look, I'm a Garmin user and I like it...but my 5K PR was run (last year) with just my watch. If USAT decided that they conferred an unfair advantage and banned them, I'm okay with that.

Under which rule?

Hmm...nope...not a USAT rule. I noticed that in the rules published for Vineman...guess it was an RD-imposed rule.

My Training Log My Race Log

Member

73

Virginia Beach -- Rudee Inlet

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

mmrocker13 - 2010-09-29 5:55 PM

sugarmagnolia70 - 2010-09-28 1:24 PM

Kido - 2010-09-28 11:14 AM I'm not going to repeat what everyone else said but I will offer an observation...

You won't even MISS the Ipod. Trust me. I train with one a lot. Bike rides and runs... But I have yet to ever "miss" or "need" an Ipod in a race. Even in an Ironman.

Hmmm... Because on my half marathons I need them. I am a very slow runner, so I'm on the course for quite a while. I can't imagine running that far without it.

You don't NEED them. You want them. You NEED two legs of some sort. You WANT headphones to entertain you.

Ok...not to be too remedial...but what is so bad about wanting to have one's run/race be entertaining? Some people like hot sauce, others don't. That doesn't mean the people who don't use it "are too weak" to handle it, and neither does it mean the people who do "Need a crutch" to get through a meal. It's just a matter of taste. Why can't the same be true for music while exercising/competing? It seems there is a "weakness" undertone to the storyline against iPods though, and I'm not sure it's a fair characterization.

My Race Log

Regular

126

Subject: RE: Tris and banned iPods?

nvandyke - 2010-09-30 10:33 AM

mmrocker13 - 2010-09-29 5:55 PM

sugarmagnolia70 - 2010-09-28 1:24 PM

Kido - 2010-09-28 11:14 AM I'm not going to repeat what everyone else said but I will offer an observation...

You won't even MISS the Ipod. Trust me. I train with one a lot. Bike rides and runs... But I have yet to ever "miss" or "need" an Ipod in a race. Even in an Ironman.

Hmmm... Because on my half marathons I need them. I am a very slow runner, so I'm on the course for quite a while. I can't imagine running that far without it.

You don't NEED them. You want them. You NEED two legs of some sort. You WANT headphones to entertain you.

Ok...not to be too remedial...but what is so bad about wanting to have one's run/race be entertaining? Some people like hot sauce, others don't. That doesn't mean the people who don't use it "are too weak" to handle it, and neither does it mean the people who do "Need a crutch" to get through a meal. It's just a matter of taste. Why can't the same be true for music while exercising/competing? It seems there is a "weakness" undertone to the storyline against iPods though, and I'm not sure it's a fair characterization.

THANK YOU! That's the feeling I've been getting, too. I am new to this site, and new to tris (doing my first one this weekend). I don't see anything wrong with wanting to listen to music, or to podcasts, or whatever while I run. I understand the reasoning why it's banned in competition, and am totally cool with that. I don't listen to music while I swim or bike, and I guess I don't NEED it while I run...but I enjoy it, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Tris and banned iPods? (Page 3)

REGISTER TODAY