Defining the terms Event, Competition, Discipline, ...

This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.

Comments about this discussion:

Started 23 Apr 02:28

During the last Rulebook update, the Track Committee realized that keywords such as Event, Competition and Discipline are not clearly defined in the Rulebook and are used differently in different places, which can lead to confusion.
As an example, if the rules state that there is a disqualification for that event - but if it is not clearly defined what is meant by event, this can lead to problems.

For the track chapter, we started collecting all occurrences of the terms and looking at what is meant where. Overall, we found that the terms are used very inconsistently. (The full discussion from the last rulebook can be found here: https://iuf-rulebook-2022.committees.unicycling-software.com/discussions/39)

Since this topic is by no means something that only concerns the Track Chapter, I would like to have this discussion again here in the Main Committee and see if we can come up with a definition for individual terms and, in the long term, standardize their use in the entire Rulebook. But before we go through the entire rulebook and collect all the occurrences of the terms, I would suggest that we think about which things we need to differentiate at all. I had already given this some thought during the discussion in the last rulebook:

I think there are essentially three entities that should be defined in any case and, if necessary, an additional intermediate level:

1. The smallest entity as an attempt of a rider - this can either be in the form of a heat, a wave, an individual attempt/run. (Of course we can also define these separately, but I think they fall out of this scheme, because they are discipline specific. We need therefore first of all a generic term for this entity.)

2. Next, the entity that contains all attempts of all riders competing in a common ranking - this would be e.g. the 100m Female 17-18

X. If necessary, as an intermediate level, the entity that summarizes all attempts of all riders of all rankings of one discipline - as e.g. the 100m. However, I'm not sure if a separate term is really needed for this, or if you can just say "all 100m entities according to 2." - if you understand what I mean?
(Assuming that 2. is defined as "competition", one could also talk about all 100m competitions and it would be clear which entity is meant).

3. The biggest entity, which contains all the entities according to 2. of all disciplines and all rankings - e.g. the Unicon.

Comment 24 Apr 13:07

That looks pretty clear. "Attempt" sounds a little odd for single-try events, like a 100m race, but using the same word for all will be less confusing than doing something else. In typical races, each rider gets one attempt. When a rider advances to a final, that's a new attempt. For competitions where riders get multiple attempts, they can be numbered; First attempt, second attempt, etc.

Comment 24 Apr 14:21

I need to repeat this back in my own phrasing for clarity:

Attempt - this one makes sense to me. A heat, a wave, an individual attempt/run. It is essentially a catch all phrase for the individual element with a competition.

Competition - I'm not clear on this one... I think it could be interchanged with Event the way I understand it currently. When I was asked how many events or competitions would be held at Unicon 21, I thought of it in terms of street and flat are each a competition/event, each road race is a competition/event. So in the end there are the same number of competitions as there are events.

Disciplines - I've thought of these as the "big 6": Track, Freestyle, Urban, Teams, Muni, and Road.

What am I missing here?

Comment 25 Apr 02:17

@Kirsten: This is exactly what I mean when I say that the Rulebook is currently very vague and imprecise with the terms used. For example, I would understand discipline to mean something different (for me it would be 100m, individual freestyle, etc. and not the overarching "section").

That's why my idea was to start by defining which entities exist at all/which entities should be defined. In a second step, a term should then be found for each entity and defined accordingly in the rulebook. This would then make it clear what is meant by this term in the context of the rulebook.

Comment 25 Apr 12:38

Very good idea to define these terms. That's how all my sport science literature starts. In order to come up with good fitting terms, its good to validate them against a set of examples one might express with a given term. So here is my idea (of how I used them in the past or learned while studying).

(Sport) Event - Gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn and/or compete in the shared interest of sports (/unicycling)

Valid: Unicon, GUC, EUC, Freestyle Convention, GMTW

Invalid: 100m, Artistic Freestyle, Last Trick

(Sport) Competiton - Comparison of athletic achievement/accomplishment of individuals, teams or nations based on competition rules to determine a winner and a ranking. The result, according to the rules, is judged in meter, kilogram, seconds, points, hits and many more.

The definition here is my personal free translation from my sport science book:

Schnabel, G., Harre, H.-D. & Krug, J. (2014). Trainingslehre - Trainingswissenschaft (Bd. 3. aktualisierte). Aachen: Meyer & Meyer.

The german original (p. 515):

> Definition sportlicher Wettkampf: Vergleich sportlicher Leistungen von Individuen, Mannschaften und Nationen auf der Basis von Wettkampfregeln zur Ermittlung von Siegern und Platzierten. Das Ergebnis wird entsprechend den Regeln in Meter, Kilogramm oder Zeiten, Punkten, Treffern u. a. m. bewertet.

Valid: 100m, Artistic Freestyle, High Jump, Best Trick (you CAN rank the winners here)

Invalid: Unicon, NAUCC, GUC

(Sport) Discipline - A field with either a specific environment in which athletic actions are performed and/or a certain distinct set of skills is required to perform in a competition of that discipline.

(oof, I tried to put this into words, this is hard)

Valid: Track, Freestyle, Urban, Teams, Muni, and Road (you can NOT rank the winners here)

Invalid: 100m, Individual Freestyle, Unicon, GUC, Marathon, Best Trick, Last Trick

See also: Sportdisziplin (de), Academic Discipline

Until here, I'm always pretty solid with these terms and using them that way. Now, these _are_ very generic and I included samples, such as best trick. They still fall under that definition and that is correct. However I think what many people here have in mind (or seeking) is how it relates to the rulebook. The solution is plain dead simple. An _IUF competition_ or _IUF discipline_ are those listed in the rulebook (as such, best trick is a competition, but not an IUF competition).

Attempt - I tried to use that:

2 attempts _per_ height/length in jumps (ok, you get a new one then - that would work for me)
x attempts in a best trick contest (you start to have three attempts?)

I think I found examples, where the definiton of attempt above is clearly failing:

Last Trick (of a flatland run) - (you attempt a run to then have three attempts for your last trick ? - this is an overload of the word)

It's tricky. I wanna throw in "start" as a point of raising a discussion. I picked the word as in "you go to the start", in the meaning of "now it counts", aka you jumped the rubicon (if you are familiar with what that word means here). The opposite is a (coasting) practice _try_.
I picked it as "now you start your x attempts". You have at least one attempt, that always can fail (ie. gear breaks).

Comment 25 Apr 13:55

Thanks Gossi, this is exactly what we need. Apologies from me, as the author of much of this stuff we're cleaning up. Things were much simpler back in the 90s and 2000s, but as you add new disciplines and more competitions, your Events need more definitions and consistent use of terminology. :-) We'll have to take a search tool to the whole document to look for those words, and probably others, that have been used inconsistently.

I think we can make "Attempt" work unless we run into too many exceptions. Last Trick is a known part of the given competition, where the rider gets three "tries" or "chances" to successfully do that trick.

Comment 28 Apr 01:52

Thanks gossi for the definitions from the literature. I think that's a good starting point - but I have the feeling that not all of the theoretical definitions match what is actually used in practice.

(Sport) Event - I would agree with the definition and for me that is exactly how I use the word event. Perhaps also because I always use the word “Veranstaltung” for this in German and “event” is the most common translation into English.
In my opinion, the term and the associated definition would be something for what I called “3. the biggest entity” in my post above.

(Sport) Competition - I can understand the definition. However, I would still see competition as something more specific than just the 100m, for example. For me, a competition would be where a winner is actually determined very specifically, e.g. 100m Female 17-18; 100m Female Final etc. (in German I would call this entities "Wettbewerb")- than what I called above in general “2. the entity that contains all attempts of all riders competing in a common ranking”.
In my opinion, the combination of all these entities into a larger group (e.g. 100m) does not need its own term in practice, as you can easily say “all 100m entities according to 2.” or concrete "all 100m competitions".

(Sport) Discipline - I can understand the definition in principle, but I don't quite understand why it's not a valid definition for the 100m, for example. I see a discipline less as an organizational unit at a event and more as something that represents the framework of a sport. A discipline is something with a defined set of rules in which I can organize events and competitions. So for me, 100m would certainly be a discipline, because it is something where I have defined rules that describe how a competition takes place. For me, discipline therefore has a different level than the entities I mentioned above, which are about organizational units of a competition and not about the organization of the sport itself - do you understand what I mean?
For example, the Rulebook currently uses the headings “2B.2 Racing Disciplines” - which in my opinion makes perfect sense and corresponds to how "discipline" is used in practice.

Comment 29 Apr 15:35

I'm bringing more complexity to the question, but hopefully some answers as well (the word proposals are very tentative, and overall quality vary). Sorry for the English quality.

Level 1: Unicon, GUC, EUC, Freestyle Convention, GMTW, CFM
Def: Gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn and/or compete in the shared interest of sports (/unicycling)
Word: Event
Comment: This level is clear and mandatory.

Level 2: Track, Freestyle, Urban, Teams, Muni, and Road (the big 6)
Def: The main broad categories in which one can compete, unified by the type of needed infrastructure.
Word: Group of discipline
Comment: To explain the broad possibilities in sportive unicycling to a non-unicyclist (a spectator, the press).

Level 3: Jumps, Track, Freestyle, Trials, Street and Flat, Basketball, Hockey, Muni, Road
Def: The categories in which one can compete which require the same type of infrastructure, competitor skills, and organizer skills.
Word: Discipline
Comment: Level 2 was about communicating, this level is more operational. There are in fact at least two variants: the one of the Rulebook sections, and the one of the directors (e.g., https://www.unicon21.us/our-team/directors). One can also view it as the groups of "things" in which a competitor can specialize (if a person is good in one, it is usually good in all those of this level).

Level 4: High jump over bar, 100m, Freestyle pair, Trials Expert, Basketball B, Intermediate Cross-country, 10k standard
Def: Specific athletic event in which competitor persons/teams can be compared, typically through measures (time, distance, points, etc.), regardless of the gender/age but otherwise fairly (same rules).
Word: Competition
Comment: At this level, comparison is the key. Basketball A and Basketball B are different because we cannot compare the teams in A with the teams in B (no games between them). Note that this not entirely clear (10k unlimited: geared/ungeared distinction or not). A variant is to define it so that level 4 corresponds to the number of medals a single individual can have. In such a case, Freestyle Pair and Freestyle Solo would still be separate, but Basketball A and Basketball B would be merged (a single person cannot compete in both). This one would also be ambiguous (one races once for the 10k but one can have two medals, age-group and all-age).

Level 5: 100m Female 17-18, Basketball B, 10k standard male all-age, 10k standard male 15-18 regrouped
Def: Specific athletic event which gives rise to a podium and medals.
Word: Podium?
Comment: This one would really correspond to the actual podium/medals.

Level 6: Anything below level 5
Def: Specific athletic (almost-)continuous effort.
Word: Many, depending on the context (race, heat, wave, attempt, try, game, run, show, etc.)
Comment: I'm tired and don't know how to deal with this level. But maybe it really shouldn't be defined overall but only in each level 4 context.

Comment 30 Apr 05:25

Thanks for your input. I can understand de definitons but I'm unsure if we really need to define all this terms in the rulebook.

The biggest entity/the highest level/Level 1 mentioned by David
It seems to me that we agree that “event” is an appropriate term for this and that we should define it in the rulebook in any case.

Level 2 mentioned by David
I realize that in unicycling we often think in terms of these six broad categories, but I don't know if we really need to define a separate term in the rulebook. I think these categories/areas/groups can also be described with terms that don't need an explicit definition.

Level 3 & Level 4 mentioned by David
I see a certain mixture between the two levels here. I would describe a discipline as a unit that has a certain independence with regard to the specific execution of the competitions held in this, the characteristics of the competition and the competition rules. A further subdivision of a discipline is only possible for me through the organizational process of the competitions, e.g. in different age groups. However, it would also always be possible to create a common ranking for a discipline.

The entity that contains all attempts of all riders competing in a common ranking/Level 5 mentioned by David
I think a term in the rulebook is essential for this entity, as we need it in a wide variety of places. For me, it has always been most logical to call this level competition, as a ranking takes place at this level and medals are awarded (which actually also fits the definition of competition given by gossi).
I don't think podium is a suitable term, as it is generally understood to mean what can be seen at the award ceremony, the stepped podium with three people on it - but there is much more to the competition, including all the participants who don't end up on the podium.

The smallest entity as an attempt of a rider/Level 6 mentioned by David
I agree that there will be most terms for this level that will differ greatly from discipline to discipline. Nevertheless, a definition of Attempt seems to make sense to me, as it allows other terms commonly used in the respective disciplines to be explained simply and it is clear what is meant by the discipline-specific term. I would therefore only define a very general term in Chapter 1 and leave it to the individual sub-chapters to decide whether they use it to explain specific terms or use the general term.

Comment 30 Apr 14:03

What confuses me the most Jan is that you are using the word "entity". Not even a german would be using that word. It took me very long, but I wanna do a guess here: Is it you are asking this to write a software for evaluation and you are looking for a term here? entity is a word you'd use here (I'm making a living as a software engineer). That would to me explain the motivation behind all this =)

I can answer a question here:

A competition is something you train for. 100m, individual freestyle, speed trials.
17-18 is NOT something you train for. Thats a winning group.

100m, 17-18 = Competiton x Winning Group (no need to give this a special name, there are two descriptive ones).

ad David: The terms work very broad, inside and outside of what the IUF recognizes. Don't be confused or tempted to put extra words in for the separation, that is not needed :)

Comment 02 May 03:59

I use the word “entity” (DE: "Einheit") because I wanted to avoid using the terms “event”, “competition” etc. in the descriptions as long as they are not defined. Otherwise I would try to describe something that I think needs to be defined with the term I would use for the definition.

> A competition is something you train for. 100m, individual freestyle, speed trials.

I would always say that I train for a specific discipline, because the discipline is the thing (which is completely separate from a competitive event) that sets the rules and framework conditions and for which I can train - as you write, that would be 100m, individual freestyle, etc.

For me, competition is what is offered organizationally at an event for a specific discipline. I am assigned to this competition by the organizer, depending on which competitions he offers at his event. Therefore, I would never say that I train for a certain competition, because the allocation to a competition depends on what the organizer offers.

> 100m, 17-18 = Competiton x Winning Group (no need to give this a special name, there are two descriptive ones).

The way I always use the terms in German and how they fit the entities I proposed would be the following:
Competition = Discipline x Age Group/Winning Group

The discipline is what defines the rules, describes what it is about (e.g. 100m) and together with an age group / “Winning Group”, which defines in general which athletes are grouped together (i.e. not specifically for one discipline), it becomes an organizational unit for a competition, to which the individual athletes are assigned on the basis of registrations of athletes for the specific discipline and the fulfilment of criteria of the athletes for an age group / “Winning Group”.
I would therefore completely disagree with you when you say that no term is necessary for this entity - for the organizational process of a event, the entity (Discipline x Age Group/Winning Group) is one of the most important of all.

Comment 02 May 10:43

I would tend to switch what you call "competition" and "event".
I get your logic, but of you look at other sports, the term "event" often refers to the specific thing you train for. For example, the 100m freestyle is a swimming event, and floor exercise is a gymnastics event. (Interestingly, I would keep the german terminology as you used it, Gossi. It's the English translation that changes)

So, going back to the levels you have been discussing that would be:

Level 1: Competition (Unicon, EUC, CFM, GMTW...)- Your destination / what you travel to

Level 2: Section / Area / possibly not necessary to define (and overlaps with level 3) the broad ways we categorise unicycling: Track, Freestyle, Urban, Teams, Muni, and Road (the big 6)

Level 3: Discipline : an event or group of events following the same set of rules: Freestyle, Trials, Road, Flatland, Track, Basketball

Level 4: Event: the specific thing you sign up for (you have a start list for each event): 100m, Speed Trials, Large Group Freestyle....

Level 5 (not always applicable) : Division Any broad separations within an event (not the same as age groups) For example: Junior/Senior expert (for individual freestyle), standard/Unlimited for road races

Level 6: Within each division or event, you can have gendered classes (Depending on the recommendations of the gender committee)

World Champion titles are given at this stage - some divisions do not award world champion titles because they are separated by skill level (such as B tournaments)

(Level 7) And within each event, division or class (depending where each competition stops dividing), you can have age groups or subdivisions that can get a (so called "age group") medal: for example Beginner Downhill, Hockey B, 100m U15 ...

(Level 8) Additionally, each event can be organised into smaller heats/battles/routines/matches but the terminology will be specific to each discipline

So for instance,for the 10k race at Unicon it could be:
Competition: Unicon
Discipline: Road
Event: 10k
Division: Standard
Class: Female
-> Whoever comes first at that level at Unicon is World Champion

Each competitor will start in a specific heat or wave
Each competitor will also get a ranking (and potentially a medal) in their age group

Comment 02 May 11:37

Thanks for your input Elise.

> I would tend to switch what you call "competition" and "event".

I also have the feeling that “competition” and “event” are used differently in English than the usual German translations. This is one of the reasons why I think that the rulebook should include a definition, so that there is no confusion when the rules are translated into other languages or non-native speakers interpret terms differently.

In German, the word “Veranstaltung” or “Wettkampf” would probably be used for the top level, the former is usually translated as “event” and the latter as “competition”. In German, however, there is another term for the entity "discipline x winning/age group", namely “Wettbewerb” or just “Bewerb”, which is unfortunately also translated as “competition”. I think thats why germans would more frequently use "event" for the Level 1.

> Level 1

I think in athletics the term “meeting” is sometimes used for this level. I have no idea how widespread this is in English and whether it could be an alternative term to “event” or “competition”?

> Level 2 / Level 3

As you write yourself, these two levels overlap a lot and I don't understand why on the one hand basketball and hockey are disciplines (which I would agree with), but on the other hand 100m and IUF slalom are not - but track is supposed to be the discipline here, where track is at the same time should also be an area like team sports. 100m and IUF Slalom (and not just the two) have their own very clear rules that describe how these things are to be run and executed. So for me they are clearly on the same level as hockey, basketball, flatland, street etc. - they are disciplines I would say. I'n every discipline you can host a competition/event and make a ranking.

> Level 4: Event: the specific thing you sign up for (you have a start list for each event): 100m, Speed Trials, Large Group Freestyle....

I am still not convinced not to call these things disciplines. Each of these things has a very specific set of rules that describe how it is to be performed. These things are also called “Disciplines” in the current Rulebook (e.g. 2B.6 Racing Disciplines). These things are completely independent of any competition related organizational component, they simply describe something that has a very specific set of rules and in which I can organize events/competitions. Both the term “event” and the term “competition” have an organizational component for me. I can organize events/competitions, but I would find it strange to have a list of events/competitions in the rulebook. A list of possible disciplines, on the other hand, makes sense to me.

> Level 5 / Level 6 / Level 7

Even if I can understand the subdivision, I wonder for which of these subdivisions separate terms are really necessary. As already written, the rulebook very often refers to what I described above as “the entity that contains all attempts of all riders competing in a common ranking”.
That would be what is made up of levels 5 - 7 in your case, e.g. Discipline x Age Group/Age Class/Categorie (where for me Age Group/Age Class/Categorie is alsways combined from Age x Gender (Class/Categorie)) - and it is precisely this organizational unit of a competition/event that is often referred to, which is why I think we need a suitable term for it. In German, I would call this organizational unit a “Wettbewerb” or “Bewerb”. A ranking takes place within this organizational entity and medals may be awarded.

Comment 05 May 01:57

I am in line with Elise's uses of the words. I think here in France, it is what makes sense to us. Language specificity tend to influence us I guess, as you (Jan) said with the German translations.

Comment 11 May 08:51

Elise's definitions make great sense to me on the whole.

Comment 12 May 06:07

Even if I can understand Elise's definitions and, as I said, can live perfectly with the use of “competition” and “event” in the interchanged meaning (compared to the one I usually use), I still lack a term for what I described in my initial post as 2. “the entity that contains all attempts of all riders competing in a common ranking” (e.g. the 100m Female 17-18). This entity is referred to in several places in the Rulebook, which is why we in the Track Committee of the last Rulebook considered it absolutely necessary to define a term for this.

At the same time, some things are associated with different terms in the definition of Elise at level 2 and 3 - according to the definition of Elise, freestyle, track and road would be both sections and disciplines. In my view, this is extremely impractical and I would find it much more practical to define disciplines as those in which specific events can actually be organized: i.e. 100m, individual freestyle, 10 km, and so on.

This would allow the term event to be defined and used in the same way as it is already partly used in the rulebook, namely for what I described in my initial post as 2. “the entity that contains all attempts of all riders competing in a common ranking” (e.g. the 100m Female 17-18).
So “event” would be something that represents an organizational unit at a competition, i.e. something that an organizer specifically offers at his competition. So Event = Discipline x Age Group/Age Class/Category (with Age Group/Age Class/Category is combined from Age x Gender (Class/Category)) or Event = Discipline x Age Group/Age Class/Category x Gender Class/Category.

For me, the following terms would be detached from the organizational aspects of an competition:

Discipline Section / Discipline Area / Discipline Group

The broad ways we categorise unicycling. Group of disciplines that represent a common unit based on certain criteria. I think that a definition of this term is not necessary as long as the term discipline is defined.
I am aware that this level is defined as a discipline e.g. by the IOC, but in my opinion it would mean a lot of work to reorganize our rulebook so that we only use the term discipline for this level. In addition, this definition contradicts what many athletes call discipline in practice, which is usually the level below.

Discipline

The unit that has a certain independence with regard to the specific execution of the events held in this, the characteristics of the events and the rules.
That would be 100m, individual freestyle, 10 km, and so on and would therefore (in my experience) correspond to what many athletes call discipline.

Then there are the terms that are linked to the specific organization of a competition:

Competition

Gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn and/or compete in the shared interest of sports.
Since it is obviously more common in the english-speaking world to use the term competition instead of event, I would adapt these terms according to the usual usage.

Event

Unit of a competition in which all participants are compared and which leads to a common ranking at the end on the basis of which awards can be made.
It therefore depends on the organization of the competition which events there are in a specific competition. In particular, the event contains the specific discipline, an age category and a gender category. All components together form a unit in which a ranking is created at the end and medals can be awarded.
As a term for this unit is regularly required in the rules and also when organizing competitions in practice, I am against using the term “event” instead of the term “discipline” or, if so, we would need another suitable term for this unit here.

Attempt

Single run of a rider according to the rules of the respective discipline.

Comment 22 May 16:13

I like Elise's propositions. The levels below are hers.

Level 1. (key concept: when and where you travel to)

"Competition" is the term used in the World Athletics Rulebook for this level. "Meeting" is only used for invitational meetings. For unicycling, it has the drawback of being close to "competitive", although many events are not or contain a significant non-competitive part. I would say that since the IUF Rulebook provides rules, it mostly concerns events that are at least partly competitive. Therefore, we may use the word "competition", but I would write explicitly in the definition that it has to be understood in a broad sense, which includes venues with significant non competitive parts.

Level 2. (key concept: for non specialists)

This level does not need to be named. It is apparently not named for athletics: https://worldathletics.org/our-sport . If we choose a name, it shouldn't sound too technical as this level is mainly used to explain our sport to non specialists. The one I prefer so far is probably "discipline groups".

Level 3. (key concept: similar skills and infrastructure, possibly rulebook sections and directors)

Again, for me, this level groups what needs roughly similar skills and infrastructure. The Olympic Games use "discipline" for this level :
https://www.olympics.com/ioc/faq/sports-programme-and-results/the-olympic-programme-comprises-sports-disciplines-and-events-what-is-the-difference-between-the-three
"Discipline", especially compared to "event", does not bear a competitive or timely aspect (for me). It thus seems more suited to level 3 than to level 4. You train for a discipline, and you don't need rules and competitions for defining a discipline.
Therefore, I would use the following disciplines inside Track meant as level 2 (I focus on the groups rather than on the group names): track races (100m, 400m, 50m1f 30mww, 4x100m, etc.), IUF slalom, balance (slow fwd, slow bwd, stillstand), jumps.

Level 4. (key concept: rules)

Athletics and Olympic Games both use "event" for this level (although it sounds rather strange for a French, at least for me). The fact that the word "event" bears some organizational component is not a problem for me. Rules only make sense if something is organized. Individual Freestyle and Pair Freestyle are different events (you can register to both).

Level 5. (key concept: registration choices that do not prevent from becoming a world champion)

Differences between "divisions" and "subdivisions" (that appear in level 7) are not clear to me. I would say that they both correspond to mandatory choices (typically made at the registration time) as opposed to splits imposed by the rules (you don't choose to be 17-18). Among those choices, I would make the distinction between those that prevent from being a world champion (Basketball A vs Basketball B, Individual Freestyle expert vs non-expert, Downhill distinctions) and those that don't (10k standard vs 10k unlimited). I think that levels 4 and 5 might be merged, that only one of them really needs to be named, and that an "event" could be what lies at level 5 rather than at level 4.

Level 6. (key concept: world champion titles)

This level should indeed correspond to world champion titles. If so, then level 5 should only include the distinctions/choices that do not prevent from being a world champion.

Level 7. (key concept: medals)

I agree that this level is also an important one and should probably be directly named (as opposed to just "event x age group" for example), because it corresponds to medals.

Level 8. (key concept: discipline specific)

"attempt" sounds very inappropriate for some disciplines (like basketball). I wouldn't give a general name for this level.

Comment 05 Jun 10:15

A lot has already been written here about which levels could all be subdivided - but on the one hand I don't think that all the levels described fit into a strict hierarchical structure and on the other hand I don't think that we really need terms for all these levels. Therefore I would like to come back to what I started with at the very beginning: In the current rulebook, the three terms “event”, “competition” and “discipline” are used very frequently - but one and the same term does not always refer to one and the same thing - and I think we should change that by defining one term for one thing and use this term consistently.

Essentially, the terms (at least in the track section of the rulebook) refer to one of the three entities I mentioned in my initial post:
1. A single attempt of a rider
2. All attempts of all riders competing in a common ranking
3. All entities according to 2. of all rankings

While 1. is quite discipline specific and "attempt" might sound quite inappropriate e.g. for basketball or hockey, I think in the end it might still work as general term and if the term is not used in some rulebook sections thats fine.
I also believe that the majority would agree to define the 3. point as “competition”.
I don't see a consensus on what the 2. point should be called - a majority seems to be in favor of calling what I would call disciplines (100m, IUF Slalom, Individual Freestyle, High Jump over Bar) an “event”. However, this lacks a term for the 2. point and I personally don't have a good alternative term to use here.

I would therefore be in favor of defining 2. as an “event” and 100m, IUF Slalom, Individual Freestyle, High Jump over Bar, etc. as “disciplines” for very practical reasons.
However, I am still open to alternative suggestions for terms and would be happy to receive input from the committee or feedback on whether the members would also agree with my proposed definition of “event” and “discipline”.
With the definition it would also be consistent to speak of discipline groups or discipline sections if the superordinate groups “Track”, “Muni”, “Freestyle”, etc. were meant.

Comment 08 Jun 12:42

I'm getting a bit confused, Jan.
I understand what you mean by "1. A single attempt of a rider." And I think what you means is that "3. All entities according to 2. of all rankings" would be something like "Unicon22" or "CFM2024"?

But I'm not sure what your difference between "event" and "discipline" are?

In your mind, would "event" be how we display results? Like "100m, U12, Female"? And "discipline" just all of 100m ?

Comment 08 Jun 13:26

> And I think what you means is that "3. All entities according to 2. of all rankings" would be something like "Unicon22" or "CFM2024"?

Yes, exactly.

> In your mind, would "event" be how we display results? Like "100m, U12, Female"? And "discipline" just all of 100m ?

Yes, you could say that. For me, an event (or “Wettbewerb” in German) is something that results in a ranking - a combination of a discipline, an age group and a gender class.
A discipline, on the other hand, describes purely "what to do", without taking into account the organizational levels of age and gender separation. I would therefore always say, for example, that the Rulebook lists disciplines (e.g. “Track Racing Disciplines” or “Freestyle Disciplines”). For me it doesn't sound logical to talk about track racing events here, because in my opinion it only becomes an event if it is offered at a competition for a certain age group and gender class.

And since the Rulebook often referes to this combination "Discipline x Age Group x Gender Class" I think it is important to define a term for this.

Comment 09 Jun 02:06

I would still stick to how the Olympic Games define discipline and event. Therefore, disciplines would be track races, jumps, trial, basketball; and events would be 100m, high jump on platform, etc.

I agree with Jan that the term "event" induces something actually taking place, but it seems that in English the usual term for the level corresponding to 100m is actually "event" (I have seen this in several sports).

I would like to propose a new term for the level corresponding to "100m Female 15-16" that a friend gave me last week. It could be an instance of an event, or simply an instance. By the way, Jan, could you give us a precise place in the rulebook where this level needs to be named? I am still not fully convinced that a term must be found for this level.

As a minor side note, we might use the term "domain" for level 2 (the big six).

Comment 09 Jun 03:16

> I would still stick to how the Olympic Games define discipline and event.

But what is the advantage of defining discipline in the future in a way that differs from the way it has been used in our rulebook up to now and in a way that differs from the way the majority of unicyclists (at least in Germany) use it in everyday life?
I don't think we can really change how unicyclists use the terms in everyday life and so a “double definition” of discipline will continue to exist. In my opinion, it would be easier to take over the definition used in everyday life and thus prevent a “double definition”.

> but it seems that in English the usual term for the level corresponding to 100m is actually "event" (I have seen this in several sports).

At this point, however, we should also consider that in many sports at a level such as the Olympics or World Championships etc. there is no further subdivision into age groups. There is often only one "event" (per gender) in 100m. So of course it's easy to say that you use the same term for 100m and the event that results in the ranking at the end, because there is simply no further subdevision. But that is not the case with unicycling. All our competitions always have numerous rankings and there is always a fundamental difference between the 100m, for example, and the events organized within it. Our competitions are organized primarily in these individual events and not at the level "100m".
So for our organizers the diffenciation between the "discipline" (100 m, IUF Slalom, etc.) and the events organized in this is quite important and our terms shoud reflect this.

> I am still not fully convinced that a term must be found for this level.

I am involved in the organization of about 10 competitions a year (mainly track, freestyle, a bit of muni and urban) and the term for this level is probably the one that is used most often in the organization - because it is the most important level for the organization of unicycling events. A general term like “instance” doesn't seem to me to be very suitable - in German there is also a term for this level that is used outside of unicycling, namely the often-mentioned term “Wettbewerb/Bewerb”. Unfortunately, there seems to be no real English translation for this other than “event” or “competition”, perhaps “contest”.

> By the way, Jan, could you give us a precise place in the rulebook where this level needs to be named?

"Thereafter, any rider(s) causing a false start are disqualied for this event."
-> you get only disqualified for e.g. the level "100 m Female Final" not the whole "100 m"
"For any other Track discipline, a 'final' may be held at the discretion of the organizer, after all age group competition for that discipline has been completed."
"In disciplines for which no finals are held, finalist status will still be awarded on the basis of results in age group competition."
-> Perfect example for the differentiation between "event/competition" and "discipline"
"Finals are subject to the same rules as age group competition, including false start rules and number of attempts."

These are just a few examples that illustrate the use of a term for the level I am talking about. You can already see from the examples that the term “competition” rather than “event” is currently used for the level (which also seems more logical from a German perspective).
In addition to the use of these terms in the rulebook, however, I think it is extremely important to bear in mind that organizers also use this term all the time. For example, they have to be aware of the total number of “events/competitions” in order to procure medals, the races are always sorted by “events/competitions”, the results lists are sorted by “events/competitions” - basically the entire organization of the competition is based on this division into “events/competitions”.

Comment 09 Jun 13:32

Thanks for clarifying, Jan, I now see why defining that level is important

I have a few thoughts and I'll try to be as clear as possible.

Firstly, we should focus on finding a term that works in English and ideally that term is used similarly in other sports. Focusing on how an English term sounds for various non-native speakers is unsolvable (but bringing up words in other languages is really useful in explaining what we are talking about)

Regarding the term for something that results in a ranking - (a combination of a discipline, an age group and a gender class).
I don't think event nor discipline would work here, for two reasons: first, because that's not how those terms are used in other sports and secondly because things are handled differently in different disciplines within unicycling: some disciplines will group competitors by age during the competition while others don't (For example: in age group freestyle, an entire [ranking group] competes close together, one after the other but for Cyclocross, this isn't the case - everyone starts together. So I would suggest the term "contest" for that.

Going back to the concepts that need defining (a combination of my earlier big list and subsequent comments for everyone and Jan's recent clarifications) - from smallest to biggest.

Competiton: What you travel to (for example: Unicon21, CFM 2024, GUC 2025, NAUCC 2022...)

Discipline: The way individual events are grouped - particularly useful if competitions do not cover the whole range of disciplines (for example: Track, Basketball, Trials, Freestyle...)

Event: The thing you sign up for (for example: 100m, 10km standard, Basketball B tournament)

Contest: The way the competitors are grouped within each event (according to age and gender) resulting in a separate ranking. This includes the grouping of qualifying riders for a final. (for example: "100 m Female Final", "Trials, Male, U15"). In some disciplines, riders in the same contest will be in the same start group, in other disciplines this is not the case.

Attempt: A single attempt by a rider. (for example a run, heat, match, battle or routine)

Comment 10 Jun 02:40

> Firstly, we should focus on finding a term that works in English and ideally that term is used similarly in other sports. Focusing on how an English term sounds for various non-native speakers is unsolvable (but bringing up words in other languages is really useful in explaining what we are talking about)

In principle, I completely agree with you here - nevertheless, if there are obvious problems or possible misunderstandings when translating the term, we should consider whether the term has been chosen optimally or whether alternatives are possible.

> I don't think event nor discipline would work here, for two reasons: first, because that's not how those terms are used in other sports and secondly because things are handled differently in different disciplines within unicycling: some disciplines will group competitors by age during the competition while others don't

That was also my impression, which is why I didn't think either term made sense for this unit.

I would agree with the terms proposed by Elise, with one exception: "Discipline". With regard to the term “Discipline”, I would put up for discussion whether we actually need this term somewhere in the Rulebook and therefore have to define it? The problem I see here is the resulting “double definition” between the Rulebook and what is often used in everyday life.
To explain: In German, the term “event”, as suggested by Elise and used by other sports in English, would commonly be translated as “Disziplin”. I think this is where the confusion between the German and English usage of the term comes from. German unicyclists will therefore use and understand the term “discipline” differently to native speakers. We could avoid this “double definition” by either not using the term “Discipline” in the rulebook or by adding a phrase like “Discipline Group/Discipline Section” or something similar.

In my opinion, all other terms fit perfectly and do not lead to misunderstandings and could also be clearly translated into German, for example, without causing problems.

Comment 10 Jun 14:47

Thank you Jan for the clarification.

I like Elise's propositions. "Contest" sounds slightly odd to me but I think any term would do for this level.

About "discipline", I better understand Jan's concern with respect to German. However I wonder whether this is that problematic in practice:

Even if German riders misunderstand "Discipline" as "Disziplin", are there really actual situations in which they will behave differently and suffer bad consequences in actual contests?
Rulebooks are eventually translated for the main languages (including German I suppose), which would make the problem disappear (if the translators are careful enough). I nevertheless admit that translations are hard to get done on time (or even at all).

Jan, how strongly do you request an alternative to just "Discipline"?

Just a remark about the "double definition", in French "discipline" matches perfectly with Elise's use of it and would sound quite odd for the Elise's "event" level. “Discipline Group/Discipline Section” sounds quite odd to me and would rather correspond to the big six.

Comment 12 Jun 07:30

> Rulebooks are eventually translated for the main languages (including German I suppose), which would make the problem disappear (if the translators are careful enough). I nevertheless admit that translations are hard to get done on time (or even at all).

My fear here is exactly the opposite. I believe that by translating “event” as “Disziplin" in German, there would be the same term twice for different things in a German translation, which would definitely lead to confusion. And even if there were no official German translation, in Germany what is referred to as “event” in the rulebook would still be called “Disziplin”. This can quickly lead to misunderstandings in international communication if “discipline” is defined differently in the rulebook.

> “Discipline Group/Discipline Section” sounds quite odd to me and would rather correspond to the big six.

Yes, but that's exactly what I would mean by “Discipline Group/Discipline Section”: “the big six”. In Elise's suggestion, however, I consider the definition “Discipline” to be practically for “the big six” - Track, Freestyle, ... they are all part of the big six.
I don't think it would really make sense to introduce another level between the “big six” (which is basically how the rulebook is organized) and the individual “events”. Otherwise you end up in a situation where the categorization becomes ambiguous. I think that athletes and organizers either use the generic term (from the “big six”) or refer to a specific event (100m, trial, individual freestyle). I find an additional subdivision between these two levels difficult and, in my opinion, not necessary.

Comment 15 Jun 18:35

Lots of good discussion here, and I see merit in almost all the ideas. I like most of Elise's suggestions with similar scepticism as David regarding "contest":

Competition (although we could even consider Convention, as competition has a very vague meaning). So Unicon or CFM or EUC could each be a "unicycle convention". But I think Competition is also fine if we define it as such.
~~Discipline~~: I agree with Elise that it's perfect in English. My German is pretty decent but not good enough for it to be confusing for me in German. But maybe as Jan suggested, we don't need an official definition for this. --> so omit.
Event: yes, perfect.
~~Contest~~: I think Division or Category would be better, with my preference being Division, e.g. U15 female 100m (probably translates as "Altersklasse" in German, meaning age group, but in German generally also implies separation by gender, so works well)
Attempt: as the usage in different events/disciplines varies a lot, I think it might be best to define multiple possibilities at the top level and let each discipline (maybe we do need that term?) choose or define its own. I would list the possibilities as Attempt (jumps), Wave (road, muni), and Heat (track) and probably irrelevant for team sports (game is probably about the same level), and Battle/Attempt for Flat, oh, and "Run" for Street.

I agree with Jan that we don't need two levels for "discipline" so we don't need Discipline Group.

If we define Discipline, it should be as the big six, as that's what makes sense in English (and I think French).

Comment 16 Jun 02:06

I am not sure either that we need to define a term for levels 2 and/or 3 (in my or Elise's sense). However, if we need one, I think it is for level 3, not level 2. Indeed, for me, level 2 (the big six) is only useful when talking to the press or to non-unicyclists. On the other hand, level 3 is useful because it corresponds to the sections of the rulebook and to the "event directors" as they are (now improperly) called on the UNICON21 website.

Comment 16 Jun 02:15

~~> Contest~~: I think Division or Category would be better, with my preference being Division, e.g. U15 female 100m (probably translates as "Altersklasse" in German, meaning age group, but in German generally also implies separation by gender, so works well)

Why I don't like the words division or category for what I try to define is that they do sound a lot like age group or gender category, but what I try to define here is the combination of event, age group and gender category. Even though “contest” might sound a bit odd, I think it's a good term for the definition, as it can then be used clearly and unambiguously without any misunderstandings or ambiguity, because otherwise it wouldn't be used.

Comment 16 Jun 03:44

I needed to finish another project, which is done now, so I can shift back my focus here.

As somebody who has done definitions for the past years and also learned them at university, I spotted a couple of mistakes in this discussion (I have done them myself, too). Let me go over them.

1. Make things hierarchical

There is a tendency for us humans to make things hierarchical as means to manage things (think cities and their divisions, municipalities, districts, etc.) - that's mostly helpful for administrative purposes. For definitions, it can be helpful, but can never work, because these terms stand on their own. I would need to add the hierarchy level to it to express the term, aka: "Do you mean competition/2 or competition/3?". A competition is a competition, whether I use it during practice or defining rules (no need to differ).

PS. I fall for it, too (see above).

2. Express through relationships

A term is defined based on the characteristics/traits it expresses, not through its relationships.

Example: the mayor of a city has certain responsibilites towards its citizens and therefore is the mayor, not because they have (a certain) uncle, aunt, (grand)parents.

Defining terms through their relationships as such does not work. The characteristics must be worked out.

3. Too many terms

A natural thing in definitions is coming up with too many terms, that you will then use to define others. Basically you would end up defining your own language (that no other person will be able to understand). At some point a reduction needs to happen. (For designers, this is called the (double) diamond method).

For this round it is enough to have good definitions for event, discipline and competition (the other can become a follow up if needed)

4. Being Emotional about your own picks

You will become emotional about your own choice of words, that's happening to all of us (myself included). Not making strong bounds and the ability to give them up for the sake of a better one is a hard earned skill.

5. Ignoring Expertise

Let's come to the biggets problem: Ignoring existing expertise

For the terms here, two expertises are relevant:

Event Management
Sports Science

You can study both and they come with definitions that people (professors) dedicated their life to find these definitions. I happen to be a sport scientist, and even quoted one such definition above - but I guess I didn't give it its importance it deserves, so let me follow up (a teaser):

The two big fields of sport science are motion/movement science and trainings science. We are in the latter for the matter of this. Now the book I quoted is 600 pages on trainings science. A subfield of trainings science is competitions and the book has ~70 pages to that. I at least used my time reading up these pages and was finding the definition for competition and discipline (both based on their characteristics). In short we have this process in sport:

Athletic profile -> trainings plan with training phases -> competition

There is still an athlete as most important stakeholder that was entirely left out of the discussion here.

Also this literature is available in many languages and thus eliminates the translation problem (it's an effort though). We have seen this in the past with wrong translations. Eg. en: theme -> de: thema caused a massive problem for freestyle (even to this day), so when we introduced the new performance rules Patricia and me spend many hours to get the translation right and it worked pretty well.

5. Signs we messed up

And I think this is were it becomes worrying for me. The rulebook has educational character when it comes to definitions as they are relevant to athletes. The expectation of responsibility for this committee is to put in the required research towards this. Or this is where I as a sport scientist should jump in to provide that expertise (as in contrast to other sports that are much more researched than unicycling) - and sport scientists are rare in our sport.

We can put up two cases that showcase we messed up:

We need an event manager to help athletes with their training
We could use the help of a sport scientists with organizing our event

The potential for spreading missinformation is very high right now.

6. I'm gossi, I'm helping

I thought what's the best way to help here and bring in the sport scientific point of view. Doing this in written form will be a huge effort on my end and for readers to make the right connections (not suitable). For other parts in the rulebook commitee I was speaking to other members and figured a way to explain my material. I will take that opportunity to also explain these terms here (as I need to use them). As I freed up my time, I can focus on that this week. Please be a bit mor patient for the more thorough explanation I owe you now.

Comment 16 Jun 05:43

Even though I would certainly agree with you on many things, I would always bear in mind that scientific wording does not necessarily correspond to what is used in everyday life - not even in other sports. In unicycling, I have the feeling that our rulebook has a very practical approach in large parts and is therefore much closer to the athletes than is the case with other sports. That's why I think it's perfectly justified if a definition in our rulebook doesn't match the sports science definition 100%. In the end, I don't think we can (or want to) rewrite our entire rulebook, but rather find a solution that allows us to work as optimally as possible with what we have.

Comment 25 Jun 16:09

I agree with Jan that we don't want to rewrite everything but only address particularly important and relevant terms.

With Jan's comment that the term Contest/Division/Category should include the combination of all items (event, age group and gender), I think that Category matches that almost perfectly. "Contest" in comparison is very generic and doesn't directly imply a combination like Category does.

So when we leave Discipline out, we have the following terms:

Competiton: What you travel to (for example: Unicon21, CFM 2024, GUC 2025, NAUCC 2022...)

Discipline: The way individual events are grouped - particularly useful if competitions do not cover the whole range of disciplines (for example: Track, Basketball, Trials, Freestyle...)

Event: The thing you sign up for (for example: 100m, 10km standard, Basketball B tournament)

Category~~Contest~~: The way the competitors are grouped within each event (according to age and gender) resulting in a separate ranking. This includes the grouping of qualifying riders for a final. (for example: "100 m Female Final", "Trials, Male, U15"). In some disciplines, riders in the same contest will be in the same start group, in other disciplines this is not the case.

Attempt: A single attempt by a rider. (for example a run, heat, match, battle or routine).

I don't think this term is really necessary at the top level. Just let each event can define its own, e.g. Attempt (jumps), Wave (road, muni), and Heat (track), Battle (flat), etc.

Or is there a concrete benefit to defining it at the top (competition) level?

Comment 26 Jun 01:45

> With Jan's comment that the term Contest/Division/Category should include the combination of all items (event, age group and gender), I think that Category matches that almost perfectly. "Contest" in comparison is very generic and doesn't directly imply a combination like Category does.

I don't like Categorie at this point for the following reasons:
1. Category sounds a lot like Age Group/Category or Gender Category or Competition Level (Beginner/Expert), i.e. a rather general subdivision of competitions.
2. I see the risk with this term that it is also used in other places and is therefore no longer unambiguous in the end or easily leads to double meanings.

3. For me, the term lacks the aspect that it should describe a unit in which participants compete against each other(*), in which a ranking is determined at the end. For me (as a non native speaker), this aspect is much more contained in the word “contest”.

(*) This is also the reason why it always seemed perfectly logical to me as a non-native speaker to call this level competition, because it describes the group in which the participants compete against each other.
Where I travel to (e.g. Unicon) consists of several of these units in which participants compete against each other, but there is no competition between “100 m Female 15-18” and “Trials, Male, U15”, so it seemed illogical to me to call the combination of these units a competition.
But if the terms are used differently in everyday life, then I think we should give priority to this everyday use and orient ourselves to it and not define terms that are used quite differently in everyday life. That's why for me it's also fine defining what you travel to as competition, even if if seems illogical to me.

> Or is there a concrete benefit to defining it at the top (competition) level?

I think it's easier to say in the individual sections that a run or a routine is an attempt than to simply use the terms run or routine.
In the track chapter, for example, it is often said that an attempt is invalid under certain circumstances - but for this statement to be clear, it should actually be defined somewhere what counts as an attempt. But I would also be happy to leave the definition out of the first chapter and come up with a solution elsewhere.

Comment 03 Jul 01:14

I've tried to write down definitions that I think could also fit into Rulebook - since my English is far from perfect I'm happy to get suggestions for improvement :)

Competition: An organized competitive gathering in which individuals or teams compete against each other. Within a competition, there may be several different contests in one or more events, each with specific rules and requirements. Competitions can take place at different levels, from local to international formats.

Event: A specific competitive activity within unicycling that has specific rules and requirements ( e.g. 100m, 10km, Individual Freestyle, Trials, High Jump, Hockey). Each event requires different skills and techniques from the riders and is held as part of competitions.

Contest: A dedicated division within an event that covers certain ages and genders. A contest aims to directly compare the performance of riders/teamsm to form a ranking and determine the best rider/team.

Please also give some feedback on whether we should include Attempt or whether we should leave out the definition in the first chapter. We don't really have another place for definitions, but I think if the majority is against including the definition here, we can find another solution.

Comment 03 Jul 03:38

@Jan: I like your suggestion a lot, and the English is quite good (or did you use ChatGPT?). I corrected a typo under Contest.

I think adding examples would be good, which I have done below. Otherwise I think it is very good, and with the compromises on the terms, now in a good state.

Although I was skeptical at first, I think the addition of Attempt is also warranted. Perhaps adding examples here too.

My additions underlined and corrections with strikethrough:

Competition: An organized competitive gathering in which individuals or teams compete against each other. Within a competition, there may be several different contests in one or more events, each with specific rules and requirements. Competitions, for example Unicon, national competitions like NAUCC (USA) or CFM (France) as well as local or regional competitions, can take place at different levels, from local to international formats.

Attempt: A single performance or effort by an athlete during a contest aimed at achieving a specific result. Each attempt is scored according to defined rules and contributes to the athlete's overall score in the contest. Depending on the event, only one attempt per contest may be possible or several. Events may define more specific terms for an attempt as appropriate such as match, routine, heat, wave, start, run, battle, etc.

Comment 04 Jul 02:03

Thank you Nathan for the improvements and correcting the typos. I also like the idea of giving examples for the other definitions.

In the definition of Competition, however, the “different levels” are now somehow mentioned twice in the last sentence. How about the following wording here: "Competitions can take place at different levels, from international formats such as Unicon, to national formats such as NAUCC (USA) or CFM (France), to local or regional formats."

By the way: Is the NAUCC a national competition or a continental competition?

And regarding the attempt: I don't know if heat and wave are really suitable examples of alternative terms for attempt - the two terms actually describe the format in which the attempt takes place, but not the attempt itself. For example, it wouldn't really make sense to say that for rider XY the heat is invalid, whereas you could say that the attempt is invalid or he is disqualified for the attempt. For all other terms mentioned, it works to use them as an alternative to Attempt in my oppinion.

Comment 04 Jul 16:10

>> By the way: Is the NAUCC a national competition or a continental competition?

Yes, you are right of course. I have changed it to North America.

By the way, the newly defined term "competition" matches perfectly with the NAUCC name: North American Unicycling Competition and Convention (NAUCC).

Contest: A dedicated division within an event that covers certain ages and genders. A contest aims to directly compare the performance of riders/teams to form a ranking and determine the best rider/team.

Comment 05 Jul 11:23

I tried to go through all the discussion here and I hope to not be ignorant.

However, I do not like that "Event" is defined as a competitive activity.

How can we call non competitive events then? Unicycling event is everything from big to small unicycling gatherings, competitive or not.

Comment 05 Jul 17:19

From the perspective of the current and more general use of "event" as any organized meeting, I very much see you point.

However, with the framework of the proposed definitions above, I think it is still workable:

>>How can we call non competitive events then? Unicycling event is everything from big to small unicycling gatherings, competitive or not.

As above:

competition is an organized competitive gathering/event
a non-competitive gathering could be called a convention
and a gathering/event with both competitive and non-competitive could be called a competition and convention.

For example, the NAUCC name fits this perfectly with both competition and convention in the name: North American Unicycle Competition and Convention.

Although I think it works okay with event defined as a specific entity like 100m, the double meaning of event is less than ideal, so maybe we can find another term(s) that would be better... (I know it's difficult as many of the terms have multiple usages in different contexts...)

This discussion began with the proposal of event as the top level by Gossi:

(Sport) Event - Gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn and/or compete in the shared interest of sports (/unicycling)

However, event does not imply competing, which is why I think competition is more appropriate as the top level for the rule book (the rule book does not need to specify rules for gatherings to socialize, learn or just have fun).

Both terms "event" and "competition" are pretty vague and used to mean very different things in different contexts. However, I think competition is more narrowly defined as it requires competing, so excludes purely for fun events without results.

So here would be an option retaining event as the top level:

Event - Gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn and/or compete in the shared interest of sports (/unicycling).

Competition: An organized competitive ~~gathering~~event in which individuals or teams compete against each other. Within a competition, there may be several different contests ~~in one or more events~~, each with specific rules and requirements. Competitions can take place at different levels, from international formats such as Unicon, to national formats such as NAUCC (North America) or CFM (France), to local or regional formats.

Contest~~Event~~: A specific competitive activity within unicycling that has specific rules and requirements ( e.g. 100m, 10km, Individual Freestyle, Trials, High Jump, Hockey). Each contest~~event~~ requires different skills and techniques from the riders and is held as part of a competition.

Division~~Contest~~: A dedicated grouping~~division~~ within an contest~~event~~ that covers certain ages and genders. A division~~contest~~ aims to directly compare the performance of riders/teams to form a ranking and determine the best rider/team.

Attempt: A single performance or effort by an athlete during a contest aimed at achieving a specific result. Each attempt is scored according to defined rules and contributes to the athlete's overall score in the contest. Depending on the contest~~event~~, only one attempt per contest may be possible or several. Events may define more specific terms for an attempt as appropriate such as match, routine, start, run, battle, etc.

I actually like this a lot, as I think contest fits better at this level and division is perfect as it is extremely clear that it is a subgroup while also avoiding the vagueness of category (particularly the usage of Categorie in German as Jan stated).

As a test: Someone could ask, "In how many contests are you competing in tomorrow at Unicon?" and, "In which division are you for 100m?" and both would be completely clear.

I don't think Convention necessarily needs to be in the definitions, and I'm not even sure about Event (but perhaps include it to show the hierarchy).

Comment 07 Jul 04:25

>How can we call non competitive events then? Unicycling event is everything from big to small unicycling gatherings, competitive or not.

I would completely agree with Nathan here - anything that is not a competition can be called a convention (even if this is irrelevant for the rules, as they are competition rules). This term can already be found in numerous names, including Unicon, which is called the “Unicycling Convention and World Championships”.

> Both terms "event" and "competition" are pretty vague and used to mean very different things in different contexts.

I would also agree with that. My initial thought (as a non-native speaker) was to define event and competition differently. But Elise and Kirsten are right that in English, in the context of competitions, the terms are used in the way I suggested in my last definition. And since we want to define these terms for a set of competition rules, I think it makes sense to use the usual definition.

> So here would be an option retaining event as the top level:

However, the newly created level is not relevant for our competition rules. So why should we define this level in the rulebook if it makes it difficult to define all the other terms?

Contest vs. Event:
I am against defining this entity as a contest - it is not a term that is currently used by anyone for this entity, nor is it common in other sports. As Elise and Kirsten have confirmed here in the discussion, the term “event” is mainly used here. This is also the case in other sports such as athletics. In German, this unit is often referred to as “Disziplin” in everyday life, which can be translated as "discipline" or “event” in English (why both are fine for me), but taking into account that "event" is more frequently used in english we should stick to this term.
“Contest”, on the other hand, is not a common term for this unit in any respect, which is why I would be very much in favor of sticking with the term “event” here.

Division vs. Contest:
For me, division and category would be two words with a comparable meaning. As already written several times in the discussion, this entity is the one on which the participants are actually competing against each other, which is why my initial thought was to call this a competition - but I understand that this term is not used in this way in English. Hence the suggestion of "Contest" as, unlike "Division" or "Category", in my opinion it still contains the aspect of competing against each other and having a ranking in the end.

All in all, I would be very much in favour of defining the terms as suggested above: Competition, Event, Contest, Attempt
A definition for "gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn and/or compete in the shared interest of sports" is not needed in the rulebook and should therefore not be included in the rulebook. Especially if this means that other things can no longer be defined properly (which is also the reason why we decided not to include a definition of discipline).

Comment 08 Jul 16:40

I would also stick to "Competition, Event, Contest", because there is a sort of consensus about these words and it already took a lot of discussions to converge to them. I'm not in favor of keeping "Attempt" as a general definition (very few sections would use it as such).

I think Nathan's proposition from 4 days ago is a good basis. Adding examples for Contest would help.

In my opinion, we still need to give a name to what was "Event Director" on the Unicon21 website. I would be in favor of "Discipline Director" if there weren't such big issues with German (according to Jan).

Comment 09 Jul 04:02

> I'm not in favor of keeping "Attempt" as a general definition (very few sections would use it as such).

But the sections that would use it would benefit from it. Does the definition put all others at a disadvantage?

> In my opinion, we still need to give a name to what was "Event Director" on the Unicon21 website.

But why not “Event Director”? The person is the director for at least one event - but even if he is responsible for several events, like in track racing, the term Event Director still applies. I don't see that the term can only be used if the person is responsible for exactly one event.

Comment 09 Jul 08:34

As above, Contest isn't my favorite but is okay with me if that is the consensus.

I agree with Jan, that it is beneficial to also define Attempt.

And Event Director is still fine. It's not explicit if that person is responsible for one, multiple or all events, but I think that is okay. I don't think there is any easy way to get around the double meaning with event as "general gathering" with the "Competition, Event, Contest" hierarchy, other than something like my last suggestion of "Competition, Contest, Division" that avoids the term Event altogether, but the consensus seems to be for Event. But this is not so bad, as the double meaning already exists in the English language, so the hierarchy doesn't make it worse.

Comment 09 Jul 09:20

It seems, you make terms black and white, while in reality they are fuzzy (though I don't know how many people get that sentence, I'll continue).

An event is a competition and a competition is an event.

Unicon is both an event and a competition — depending on the context in which you're referring to it.

As an Event/Convention:
Unicon includes not only competitive disciplines but also workshops, demonstrations, community activities, and social gatherings. It brings together unicyclists from around the world to share knowledge, experience, and culture.
As a Competition:
Within Unicon, there are multiple competitions across various unicycling disciplines — such as freestyle, trials, mountain unicycling (muni), track racing, urban, etc.

Event is the broader term and could also be a wedding, a birthday. In sports we can "constrain" in to: Event = Convention | Competition

Event: Gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn and/or compete in the shared interest of sports (unicycling)

You could use the help of an event manager organizing it. Also IUF Recognized events include conventions much alike (eg Elsbet or GMTW). "Redefining" it as competition marks it clearly invalid.

Take away the convention from NAUCC: NAUC - it still is an event
Take away the competition from NAUCC: NAUC - it still is an event
The event organizing aspect for either is a given

Competition = Comparison of athletic achievement of individuals, teams or nations based on competition rules to determine a winner and a ranking. The result, according to the rules, is judged in meter, kilogram, seconds, points, hits and many more. (Schnabel, Harre, Krug, 2014, p. 515)

it is already defined by sport science. You could use the help of sport scientist/coach to help with your training for it. It doesn't really work if you call it an event. If the event is a wedding, the help of a sport scientist might not be the best of help.

Contest is a synonym to competition, but competition is the term used in literature.
Do not ever. under any circumstances. attempt at giving synonyms a different meaning - sincerly everybody.

It is still possible to call it a "best trick contest" (better sound than competition).

Through an event, the competiton gains its time dimension. So I'd still say "I'm at a competition over the weekend" as it makes the combination implicit: remember an event is a competition and a competition is an event.

My hunch is that the implicit part is what makes it hard for people to understand this fuzziness.

---

Discipline = A field with either a specific environment in which athletic actions are performed or a certain distinct set of exercise to practice for the main skill required to perform in a competition of that discipline. (see Schnabel, Harre, Krug, 2014, p. 522p)

Also defined by sport science. Don't invent new terms for those that already are defined - grab a book :)

The quoted literature:

Schnabel, G., Harre, H.-D. & Krug, J. (2014). Trainingslehre - Trainingswissenschaft (Bd. 3. aktualisierte). Aachen: Meyer & Meyer.

---

Now, your take on how much you ...

... want to ignore science (do you want to give me the feeling of a climate researcher?)
... want to ignore existing IUF definitons for events that honor our sport (they were cleverly chosen for a purpose that this discussion puts at risk)
... want to exclude help from outside unicycling

I think I also invented a funny game:

The next time you want to use the word event to describe a competition try to use the word "wedding" instead and see if it still makes sense: 100m wedding (event) vs. 100m competiton.

Comment 09 Jul 10:13

> It seems, you make terms black and white, while in reality they are fuzzy

We do not make terms black and white, but try to define fuzzy terms for our specific set of rules so that the meaning is not fuzzy within the framework of this specific set of rules. This is because we cannot use fuzzy terms to establish clear and unambiguous rules.

@gossi: If you really want to help, then make some suggestions for the terms we need to define... the description of what we want to define is mentiond several times in this discussion and we need terms for this.

By the way: Event and Competition are really often used in the sense of the proposed definition - so it seems to depend on who you ask how a word is defined. Probably because words are fuzzy.

Comment 09 Jul 11:53

@Jan, Nathan: You convinced me about "attempt" (it does not harm and there are already very specific definitions in 1D.1) and "event director" (it still works even if many directors will handle several events).

@gossi: As a summary, we need to find a term for "Event X Winning group", e.g. 100m Female 17-18. Note that we somehow already ruled out the possibility of leaving it as a combination of "Event" and "Winning group" (or similar terms). We need to converge now and to be as constructive as possible, although I agree the terms we have so far are not perfect.

Comment 09 Jul 17:18

So I consulted Chat-Gpt to maybe get some new ideas and verification as well as a suggestion for alternatives to Contest. I primed it for track and field, and then asked it to expand for other sports including team sports.

I think the information is pretty helpful with confirmation that Event is appropriate as we have proposed.

And while stating that Contest could be used, ChatGpt offered the suggestion "Medal Group" as better than Contest with these 2 hierarchy options:

Competition → Event → Division → Medal Group

and Event → Category → Medal Group

Here my queries (I hope the formatting will be retained well enough - looks like everything but the tables formatted okay in the browser, but not sure how it will convert to text):

In looking to define hierarchical terms for track and field, what would be a good term for an "event" like 100m, 200m, 800m? and for a subgroup that receives medals like 100m female, 100m male Masters?

In track & field, a clear hierarchy helps organize competitions and medal awards. Here’s a structured breakdown:

🏃‍♂️ 1. Event & Event Group (Discipline)

Event: A specific race, jump, or throw — e.g., 100 m, 200 m, 800 m.
Event Group (aka Discipline): A collection of similar events.
– Example: The “Men’s 100 m” group includes the 100 m as its main event and similar sprints like 60 m and 50 m Wikipedia+7bigdatarunning.com+7pausatf.org+7World AthleticsWorld Athletics+1World Athletics+1.

2. Category (Age and Sex Division)

This is the group in which medals are awarded.

a. Open / Senior

All elite athletes, regardless of age (typically 20+).
Includes under-20 (“Junior”) and under-18 (“Youth”) divisions Wikipedia.

b. Masters / Veterans

Subdivided into 5‑year age brackets (international Masters start at 35‑39 as “M35” or “W35”, then M40, W40, up to 100+) Everything Explained Today+5world-masters-athletics.org+5Midwest Masters+5.
In the U.S., USATF adds a "Pre-Masters" category (25‑29) and "Sub-Masters" (30‑34) before 35+ at championships Midwest Masters+8Wikipedia+8Reddit+8.

c. Gender

Divided into Male (M) and Female (W) within age brackets (e.g., “M45”, “W35”).

3. Putting It Together: Event → Category → Medal Subgroup

Using your examples:

Level Example Name

Event Group 100 m (includes similar sprints)

Event 100 m

Category 100 m Men’s Open / 100 m Women’s Open

Age Subgroup 100 m M35‑39 / 100 m W50‑54

So for medals:

100 m Female Open — top women in the open division.
100 m Male Masters M40‑44 — men aged 40 to 44 in Masters.
100 m Female Pre-Masters (25‑29) — US-specific.

🗂️ Terminology Summary

Discipline/Event Group: e.g., “Men’s 800 m group”
Event: e.g., “800 m”
Division/Category: Specifies sex and broad age group (Open, Masters, Pre‑Masters)
Age Bracket: e.g., M35, W40, W75
Medal Group: Combines event + category + bracket — e.g., “800 m W35‑39”

Why this matters:

Ranking & awards: Medals are given by event within each category and bracket, not just overall .

✅ Final Term Suggestions

Event Group — overarching discipline (e.g., “100 m group”)
Event — specific contest (e.g., “100 m”)
Category/Division — open vs Masters, by sex
Age‑Bracket — 5‑year bands such as “M45” or “W35”
Medal Subgroup — combination of event, sex, and bracket (e.g., “100 m W35‑39”)

Could "contest" be an appropriate term for the medal subgroup?

Yes, the word “contest” can work to describe a medal subgroup, but it’s more commonly used to refer to the overall competition rather than a specific medal category.

🏅 Common Track & Field Terminology

Event: A specific discipline, such as the 100 m, 200 m, or 800 m.
Meet or Competition: The broader gathering of these events, e.g., the “National Championships.”
Category/Division: Defines sex and age group (e.g., Women’s Open, Men’s M50‑54 Masters).
Medal Group: The intersection of event + category.

Where "Contest" Fits

"Contest" often means an overall competition or challenge—e.g. “the running contest” or “track-and-field contest” Wikipediaonlinecrosswords.net+1crosswordheaven.com+1.
In American English, smaller or informal competitions (like deciding who gets the last slice of cake) might even be called a “contest” .
In athletics, "contest" aligns with the origin of “athletics” from Greek athlon, meaning “contest” .

⚠️ But…

Sports/governing bodies tend to use terms like “event,” “race,” “discipline,” or “category”, rather than “contest,” for medal subdivisions.
When we say “100 m Female Masters,” we’re typically referencing a specific event + category, not calling it a “contest.”

🛠️ So, is “contest” appropriate?

Yes, it's linguistically acceptable to refer to, say, the "100 m Women’s Masters contest."
However, in official or competitive jargon, it’s clearer to refer to it as:
- “100 m Women’s Masters event”, or
- “100 m Women’s Masters division/category.”

✅ Recommendation

If you're defining a hierarchy or taxonomy, you might standardize with:

Event: “100 m”
Division/Category: “Women’s Open” or “Men’s M50‑54 Masters”
Medal Race/Medal Event: Combine the two (e.g., “100 m Women’s Masters”)
Contest: Could be used informally or synonymously, but isn’t the preferred official term.

🗂️ Example Hierarchy

Discipline/Event: 100 m
Division: Female Masters (e.g., W40‑44)
Medal Event: 100 m Female Masters W40‑44
You could call this a contest, but in structured data it's clearer as an event in a category.

Bottom line:
Yes, "contest" works as a general English term—but for clarity and common usage in track & field, stick with "event" or "category" when defining medal subgroups.

And would the hierarchy of competition, event, division and medal group also be appropriate for other sports such as basketball, hockey or cycling?

Yes—with some adjustments, the same four-tier structure of Competition → Event → Division → Medal Group works quite broadly across many sports, including basketball, hockey, and cycling.

🏆 1. Competition

A complete tournament or league—e.g., NBA Playoffs, Stanley Cup Playoffs, Tour de France, or the U.S. Open (tennis).
Across team sports and individual sports alike, this is the top‐level gathering of events. odf.olympictech.org+1odf.olympictech.org+1theredneckintellectual.com

2. Event

A specific contest within the competition:

Team sports: a single game or match (e.g., Game 1 of the Finals).
Individual sports: a race or match (e.g., Stage 5 of the Tour de France, 200 m freestyle swim).
In Olympic Data Feed terminology, an "event" is precisely the unit that yields medals. odf.olympictech.org

3. Division

A subdivision within the event—organized by gender, age, skill, or geography:

Team sports: might not subdivide by gender, but could by conference/division structure (e.g., NHL’s Eastern Conference, Division 2).
Individual sports: categories like Men’s, Women’s, Juniors, Masters, or weight classes in combat sports.
For example, Empire State Games splits events into Open, Scholastic, and Masters divisions Peace, Love, and Barbells+12Reddit+12Reddit+12Wikipedia.

4. Medal Group

The specific subgroup in which medals are awarded—combines event + division.

Basketball: “Game 7, NBA Finals” (implicitly male, pro).
Hockey: “Ice Hockey, Top Division” at Worlds. PMC
Cycling: “Stage 10, Men’s General Classification” or “Women’s Road Race.”

✅ How this Applies Across Sports

Sport | Competition | Event | Division | Medal Group

Basketball | NBA Playoffs |Game 7 (Finals) | Men's Pro (implicitly one) | NBA Finals Game 7 Winner

Ice Hockey | IIHF World Champs | Top Division Tournament | Men's Top Division | 2025 Top Division Champion

Cycling | Tour de France |Stage | 10Men's General |Stage 10 Men’s Winner

Track & Field | USATF Nationals |100 m | Women's Open Master's W40‑44 |100 m W40‑44 Winner

🧭 Why It Works

Built on common data modeling: ODF (Olympic Data Feed) outlines Sport → Discipline → Gender → Event → Phase → Unit researchgate.net+15Wikipedia+15Wikipedia+15scribd.com+14odf.olympictech.org+14Wikipedia+14Wikipedia+2Reddit+2Wikipedia+2Reddit+3odf.olympictech.org+3uventexlabs.com+3Reddit+1theredneckintellectual.com+1.
Whether it's elimination tournaments in team sports or heats and finals in track, the four-tier setup covers key organizational levels.
Adjustments: some sports add intermediate levels (e.g., “phase” in tournaments, “weight class” in martial arts).

⚠️ Notes

Team sports often embed geography-based divisions (like conferences), which affect scheduling and playoff paths—but those are still “divisions.”
Weight classes, skill levels, age brackets (masters/juniors) are all forms of division tailored to the sport.

✅ Bottom Line

Yes—the schema Competition → Event → Division → Medal Group is not only appropriate for track & field, but adaptable to a wide range of sports. It:

Accommodates gender, age, weight, and geography
Maps cleanly onto competition formats
Bridges team and individual sports effectively

Comment 17 Jul 12:27

A little late for where this discussion has lead, but here's a little history of the acronym "NAUCC". The earliest mention of it I can find in old emails is from January 2002; Unicon 11 host Tom Daniels (a non-unicyclist) was figuring out insurance and other details for back-to-back conventions. In the previous year (2001) The Unicycling Society of America's NUC (National Unicycle Championships) was held in Toronto, Canada. It was decided to formally expand the scope of our "Nationals" to North America, because that was the region covered by the USA's liability insurance policy.

In the email referenced above, NAUCC is not defined. In the USA Inc.'s Annual Board Meeting agenda, July 20, 2002, NUC is still used when referencing future national events. I guess I wrote that; I was USA President at the time. I believe Tom Daniels should be credited with the use of NAUCC.

In all my saved emails for those conventions in 2002 and 2003, "NAUCC" is not spelled out in words. This has lead to several variations.

ORIGINAL VERSION:
NAUCC stood for "North American Unicycling Championships and Convention" OR "North American Unicycling Convention and Championships". Because this was not usually spelled out anywhere (except probably the USA's Rulebooks), it has suffered from deterioration over the years, with "Competition" creeping in for one or more past annual events, apparently including this upcoming one.

If you have a choice between Competition and Championships, in terms of naming events, T-shirts, marketing, etc., the word Championships should be used. This may not be equivalent in other languages but in English, 'Championships' suggests a larger, more decisive event than 'Competition', which could be anything and does not suggest much in terms of scope.

My point, if anyone has read this far, is that Championships is a better word for promoting events. That said, I've got to start packing for NAUCC 2025 (whatever that stands for) as we have a very early flight tomorrow! :-)

Comment 23 Jul 09:22

I would say that "High Jump" is not an "Event", but both "High Jump over Bar" and "High Jump onto Platform" are. If you agree, "High Jump" should be replaced by "High Jump over Bar" (for example) in the proposal.

Besides, it is not very clear for me whether "10km" should be the event or rather both "10km Standard" and "10km Unlimited".

Comment 23 Jul 11:29

I completely agree with Gosi comment from 2 weeks ago.

"Event" has a broad meaning, and I am against of narrowing its meaning to specific race, match or contest.

I understand that you try to define it for use within the rulebook but it will not be a natural meaning of this word and would put many people into confusion.

Maybe we could just clarify that within the Rulebook some terms may have wider or narrower meaning and that this have to be taken from the context.

Comment 23 Jul 11:47

One of the example of why we should not redefine word "event" is that the wider meaning of it is used by the Facebook. If we make unicycling facebook event it will appear as event and not as convention or competition.

Comment 23 Jul 13:35

> I would say that "High Jump" is not an "Event", but both "High Jump over Bar" and "High Jump onto Platform" are. If you agree, "High Jump" should be replaced by "High Jump over Bar" (for example) in the proposal.

You are absolutely right, High Jump is not an event - High Jump over Bar would be one or High Jump onto Platform. I have changed it.

> Besides, it is not very clear for me whether "10km" should be the event or rather both "10km Standard" and "10km Unlimited".

10 km is indeed a bad example, as “Standard” and “Unlimited” could be seen as separate events. I have taken it out.

Comment 23 Jul 13:55

> Maybe we could just clarify that within the Rulebook some terms may have wider or narrower meaning and that this have to be taken from the context.

But that is precisely the point why we need to define terms: A set of rules does not work if it is not clear which meaning is referred to at which point, and that is currently the case. So we can't use terms in our rulebook that have a very broad meaning without specifying exactly what they mean in the context of our rulebook. In particular, we cannot use one and the same term for different things within our rules. This makes our rules ambiguous and can cause them to be interpreted completely differently by different people. So we have to make sure that a term is used unambiguously within our rules - which we are trying to do by including a definition in our rules.

> I understand that you try to define it for use within the rulebook but it will not be a natural meaning of this word and would put many people into confusion.

As some native speakers have already confirmed here in the discussion, “event” is a very common term for exactly what I have proposed in the definition.
Yes, as a non-native speaker I wouldn't have intuitively defined it that way either, but I don't see a problem if native speakers say that the term fits and everyone else can read the definition in the rulebook. I find it much worse to use ambiguous terms in the rulebook that are then actually interpreted differently by different people in the absence of a definition.

> One of the example of why we should not redefine word "event" is that the wider meaning of it is used by the Facebook. If we make unicycling facebook event it will appear as event and not as convention or competition.

But in this case, the scope is completely different. In the context of “Facebook”, everyone knows what a “Facebook event” is and if an event is presented or displayed to someone there, then the term is unambiguous within this scope. However, this scope is not our set of rules and anyone who reads our set of rules should be able to separate the scope “IUF Rulebook” and “Facebook” without any problems (You wouldn't start rewriting our rules just because Facebook suddenly comes up with the idea of renaming the "function" Facebook Events, would you?).
Especially because on Facebook you can also give the events names and these names then refer to the “scope” of unicycling. Nobody is preventing you from using the terms “Competition” or “Convention” in these names.

Once again: the aim here is not to write a definition for a dictionary that has to cover the entire spectrum of a term - the aim is to make terms unambiguous within our set of rules so that the meaning does not depend on the reader's interpretation.
And if anyone has a better suggestion for terms, I'm still open to it - but unfortunately no one has really come up with alternative terms yet.

Comment 23 Jul 15:25

> As some native speakers have already confirmed here in the discussion, “event” is a very common term for exactly what I have proposed in the definition.
Yes, as a non-native speaker I wouldn't have intuitively defined it that way either, but I don't see a problem if native speakers say that the term fits and everyone else can read the definition in the rulebook. I find it much worse to use ambiguous terms in the rulebook that are then actually interpreted differently by different people in the absence of a definition.

I agree with Jan in both aspects. Although event can have many meanings in English, the use as above is one of them. (For me as an English speaker, the choice of "contest" differs a bit from the expected meaning, although it is also okay as a "defined term".) But Event in the more specific case, as in an Olympic event, is common usage.

Comment 30 Jul 06:59

I still find it difficult to estimate from the discussion how much support there actually is for the two chosen terms. However, I consider it extremely important that we define terms for the two things so that we can finally make the rulebook unambiguous in this regard in the future and prevent different people from interpreting the terms and thus the rules differently.

I therefore urge once again all those who would not agree with the proposal as it stands to suggest alternative terms that would be acceptable to them. We must find some way to define things so that we can use unambiguous terms in the rulebook.

Comment 30 Jul 07:24

There has been prior art for these terms, that is already in use, that is defined for our purpose - and the propsal aims to flip these terms to make it more chaotic, as they were ignored.

These terms comes from two sources. (1) The IUF itself with IUF events, that was a purposefuly chosen (2) sport science (hell yeah, they do research our field)

There has been constant warnings about flipping these terms by Maksym and me, both also ignored. - Under all circumstances DO NOT CHANGE the IUF Events terms: this will be disaster for all conventions that no longer will attempt to ask to be recognized, because of the word (as it will be made exclusive).

---

Here are the terms with their definitons that are conflict-free:

Event*: Gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn and/or compete in the shared interest of sports (unicycling)

Competition**: Comparison of athletic achievement of individuals, teams or nations based on competition rules to determine a winner and a ranking. The result, according to the rules, is judged in meter, kilogram, seconds, points, hits and many more. (Schnabel, Harre, Krug, 2014, p. 515)

Discipline**: A field with either a specific environment in which athletic actions are performed or a certain distinct set of exercise to practice for the main skill required to perform in a competition of that discipline. (see Schnabel, Harre, Krug, 2014, p. 522p)

And the quoted literature:

Schnabel, G., Harre, H.-D. & Krug, J. (2014). Trainingslehre - Trainingswissenschaft (Bd. 3. aktualisierte). Aachen: Meyer & Meyer.

*Event: has the explanatory braces on it, they would need to be dropped then.
**: They don't need to include the word of unicycling or IUF, they work just fine for unicycling as they are.

---

The proposal has a field for references, please put them in accordingly. Also link to the IUF website for current event definitions.

If you wanna stand with the terms as they currently are proposed. Please include a disproval of the existing terms on the level they were established in your proposal.

Comment 30 Jul 07:36

> There has been prior art for these terms, that is already in use, that is defined for our purpose - and the propsal aims to flip these terms to make it more chaotic, as they were ignored.

No, the proposal aims to define the two things mentioned in the proposal – see below. Neither of these things are currently clearly defined in the IUF Rulebook, which regularly leads to the rules being interpreted differently by different people – this is chaotic.

Both proposed terms are used in other sports in exactly the same way as they have been proposed here. Sports science does not seem to be entirely unanimous on how to define this term. Or do different scientists use different definitions?

> Here are the terms with their definitons that are conflict-free:

You have already mentioned these terms several times, but unfortunately, with the exception of “event,” they do not describe the things we need to define... A constructive suggestion would therefore be to name terms for the things we need to define. Because if we define something else that is not used in our rules, it does not help us to make our rules unambiguous.

So here again is what we need to define – and I am still willing to replace “TERM1” and “TERM2” with anything other than ‘competition’ and “event.” But we need a definition for these things:

TERM1: An organized competitive gathering in which individuals or teams compete against each other. Within a competition, there may be several different XY in one or more TERM2, each with specific rules and requirements. TERM1 can take place at different levels, from international formats such as Unicon, to regional or national formats such as NAUCC (North America) or CFM (France), to local formats.

TERM2: A specific competitive activity within unicycling that has specific rules and requirements (e.g. 100m, Individual Freestyle, Trials, High Jump over Bar, Hockey). Each TERM2 requires different skills and techniques from the riders and is held as part of TERM1.

Comment 30 Jul 07:59

The terms are there, not in the rulebook yet, sure - but they are present.

> You have already mentioned these terms several times, but unfortunately, with the exception of “event,” they do not describe the things we need to define

WRONG. They do exactly define what we need - unless you require certain words in the definition. Apply them, they work. In fact the current proposed definition for a competition falls short on mentioning athletic aspects and determine a winner (it would include playing a card game sitting on a unicycle and nobody winning - ok, its a bit far off, but re-read the proposed definiton and compare it). If you wanna sprinkle some unicycling terminology into them, go for it. I'm open for a call to help this (usually helps and is faster).

---

Important for me is not to change term event for how it is already with IUF Events. The word event is inclusive and encourages conventions to ask for an IUF recognized event. If this is changed to competition, this option is by definition off the table for convention organizers. I want to prevent the terms from becoming exclusive in its usage.

Comment 31 Jul 11:24

> They do exactly define what we need - unless you require certain words in the definition. Apply them, they work.

So replacing *TERM2* with Competition should work? I thought the core of the Competition you mentioned was that a winner is determined and a ranking is created? That would make it strange to replace *TERM2* with Competition, since the definition of *TERM2* is purely about the activity performed—the term does not include anything about the unit within which a winner is to be determined. *TERM2* would be used anywhere in the rulebook where the individual activities are listed and their rules are described. What your definition of Competition describes is the unit of “activity x gender categorie x age group” – this is a unit in which a ranking and a winner are determined. But that's not what *TERM2* is intended for.
Discipline wouldn't really work either, because the definition of discipline you mentioned doesn't refer to a single activity, but to an entire field—even though in everyday life (in Germany), the term “discipline” is often used to refer to a single activity and not to a entire field.

> it would include playing a card game sitting on a unicycle and nobody winning - ok, its a bit far off, but re-read the proposed definiton and compare it

That's right, if it's a competitive activity with defined rules, then it would be appropriate to describe this activity as *TERM2* in accordance with the rulebook. I don't see any problem with that.

> The word event is inclusive and encourages conventions to ask for an IUF recognized event.

But why would conventions be discouraged from asking for IUF recognition if there were both IUF-recognized competitions (for everything with a competitive focus) and IUF-recognized conventions for everything with a non-competitive focus?

> If this is changed to competition, this option is by definition off the table for convention organizers.

Only if the IUF does not want to have IUF-recognized conventions—otherwise, conventions can simply be listed as IUF-recognized conventions. Whatwould be the issue with that?

Comment 31 Jul 16:06

Here are my thoughts about all this:

In what Jan proposes:

IUF Recognized Competition or Convention: A Competition or Convention acknowledged by the IUF for its meaningful contribution to the development, promotion, or visibility of the sport.

I don't see why convention organizers would feel excluded.

Gossi's definition of "Event" makes perfect senses, but Jan's one also (although they are not compatible). Again, both athletics and Olympic Games use the term "Event" as Jan does.

It seems that at least in French and English, "discipline" corresponds to Gossi's definition (so rather an entire field than a specific activity). But I agree with Jan that this level is not the one we are looking for (at least, it does not correspond to TERM1 or TERM2).

Jan's proposal is a synthesis/compromise of the overall discussion. It is not perfect, but it fulfills its goal of removing ambiguity (especially if we always use capital letters for the defined terms that may have other informal meanings, like "Event" or "Competition"). I hear Maksym's and Gossi's complaints, but they are generally rather "non-constructive" and I fail to extract from these comments actual alternatives for the specific levels for which we desire terms.

Comment 03 Aug 11:59

So, Jan and me had an hour(s)-long call to disuss this proposal. Here is the digest of it.

---

First some notes:

The context in which these terms must work is the IUF itself: That includes the rulebook, but also for the IUF PR in promotion your event, there can't be two different terms for the same thing
Explicit vs implicit: When we speak to people we often rely on implicit meaning (and only go and explain if we notice our conversation partner doesn't understand), but in written form (the rulebook sorta is a "law") we need explicit terms. As such you can say: on the weekend I will be on a competition/wedding (both implicitely are events) - and also this is is not the context we are dealing with
Discipline - as it stands people agree with my definition here, but it ain't be needed as the rulebook is not using it. It's optional addition. Even though it may not be needed, it helps to tell what the other terms are not.

The other terms, it is about which way they will be used: event/competition or competition/event. We found what's the difference between the two.

PS. I went not fully accurate for the definitons as I provide them, they are subject to finalize once the direction is clear (I did copypasta).

## Option 1: Accurate

Accurate as in based on literature as well as linguistically (eg. in a competition you compare based on rules), with these definitions:

Event: Gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn and/or compete in the shared interest of sports (unicycling)

Example: Unicon, NAUCC, GMTW, Elsbet

Competition: Comparison of athletic achievement of individuals, teams or nations based on competition rules to determine a winner and a ranking. The result, according to the rules, is judged in meter, kilogram, seconds, points, hits and many more.

Example: 100m, Individual Artistic Freestyle, Cross-Country

IUF Events: can stay as they are.

## Option 2: Not-so-accurate-but-word-of-mouth

Well, the option name says it all, we were lacking a good descriptor ourselves:

Competition: Gathering of people with the objective to or compete in the events of sports (unicycling)

Example: Unicon, NAUCC

Convention: Gathering of people with the objective to exchange, socialize, learn in the shared interest of sports (unicycling)

Example: GMTW, Elsbet

Event: A specific competitive activity within unicycling that has specific rules and requirements (e.g. 100m, Individual Freestyle, Trials, High Jump over Bar, Hockey). Each event requires different skills and techniques from the riders and is held as part of competitions.

Example: (the definition holds the examples already)

IUF Events: They need to adjust to make them inclusive, for the recognized ones, they go as:

IUF Recognized Competition
IUF Recognized Convention
(IUF Recognized Convention & Competition)

---

Me personally, as the sport scientist, am for sure for the accurate terms (the other is against my education). And those convention organizers must be able to spot theirs is recognized by the IUF by noting from the term itself (inclusive) and not upon reading the definition of these (reading the fine print is exclusive).

Comment 03 Aug 14:24

Gossi asked me to weigh in as a native English speaker here, so I just re-read the whole discussion above, and my eyes hurt. Also my brain, but not as much. If the question being asked is between the two above options; "accurate" vs. "not so accurate but word of mouth", that's an easy call for me. Wish I had started reading from the bottom!

Unicon and NAUCC are not competitions, they are conventions. Said conventions being dominated by competitions is beside the point, they would each be much lesser events if they consisted only of competitions. They would be much less attractive to attend, especially by non-unicycling family members IMHO. Competition is a subset of the convention. Therefore, my recommendation is to ask people to wrap their brains around "Event" as the top level term. It may take a little practice but it shouldn't be very hard.

That way, using Competition as the word for individual "contests" actually makes more sense; we'll just need a little time to get used to using these terms.

If it helps people make the transition, various competitions within the overall Event can be referred to as sub-events, if necessary, but I don't recommend it as it could blur the definitions.

As an early author of our rulebooks, and creator of some of this problematic terminology, I believe this is the right way to go for future clarity. That being said, we should definitely highlight the new set of terms/definitions in the front part of the new document to help people to get acquainted with it and to have an easy reference they can find their way back to when needed.

Comment 04 Aug 02:05

Thank you, John, for your feedback. If you say that “competition” is appropriate for the examples mentioned (100m, Individual Freestyle, Trials, High Jump over Bar, Hockey) based on the given definition from a native speaker's perspective, then I would adjust the proposal accordingly.

For me, it is still very counterintuitive to define 100m by saying that a winner and a ranking are determined—that never happens; it is always a combination of 100m and an age range or at least a gender category in which winners and rankings are determined. But if you say that the term is appropriate, then I have complete confidence that it is a definition that makes sense to native speakers.

Comment 04 Aug 19:47

Yes our competition events are subdivided. I think I see the issue, and possibly how it may not be a good fit depending on a rider's native language. Every heat is also a competition, but taking place as part of the overall 100m competition. I don't know how to approach that for someone who has trouble with the various "parts" of the overall 100m competition (or event).

Comment 05 Aug 01:16

> Every heat is also a competition, but taking place as part of the overall 100m competition.

Yes, I would agree with that immediately. My problem with defining 100m as competition is that, with the definition proposed by gossi, the activity of 100 m/High Jump over Bar Hockey itself becomes a competition.
In my opinion, however, this only describes the activity, without anyone competing against anyone else. Of course, I can organize competitions in this activity, which would then be a 100m competition. Do you understand what I mean?
I can also take chess as an example—chess is the activity, I can learn the rules, I can practice this activity, and then I can go to a chess competition and compete against others. I just find it strange to define chess itself as the competition, because then I would also say that I am training a competition – but I am actually training for a competition and not the competition itself.
Maybe it doesn't actually make any difference in English? For me, it just feels very wrong to define an activity itself as a competition. I would always say that I'm training for a competition in a particular activity and not that I'm training for a competition.

Comment 05 Aug 01:18

* I would always say that I'm training for a competition in a particular activity and not that I'm training a competition.

Comment 12 Aug 03:54

Besides the Rulebook Committee, I talked to a few more people and decided that I won't put the proposals for defining the terms “event,” “competition,” “contest,” and “attempt” to a vote in this round of the Rulebook update.
Overall, I think the participation in the discussion and the consensus on these terms aren't enough for me to make such a big decision for the rules with a clear conscience. I believe that, unlike “normal” rules, whose wording can be adapted relatively easily and without major problems in the next update, the terms discussed here have a much greater impact on our rules and, ideally, once they have been defined, they should not be adapted again.
It is probably not possible to find a term that everyone finds 100% appropriate, but perhaps we can at least find something that everyone can live with and that no one considers totally inappropriate.

I sincerely hope that this discussion has led to us discussing these terms outside of the Rulebook Committee between now and the next Rulebook update and that we will ultimately reach a consensus that can then be incorporated into the Rulebook. I would therefore like to take this opportunity to once again express my warmest thanks to all those who actively participated in this discussion and provided important input for finding suitable terms. This topic will definitely be pursued further, and your input will also be taken into account in future discussions.

Comment 12 Aug 06:55

Thank you so very much Jan. This is a difficult discussion to have and you lead us through it. We made progress even if it’s not able to be fully decided yet.