Define rules for Individual Time Trials

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

Comments about this discussion:

Started 23 Feb 05:36

Right now, 3D.10 mentions the following about ITTs:

"If this is an Individual Time Trial format race, use individual start."

3D.10.1 Individual Start
Each rider is individually started at a fixed time interval, such as every 20 or 30 seconds. Riders are sorted by speed with the fastest rider going first. (Except in the case of an Individual Time Trial, where the race can start with either the fastest or slowest rider.)

Apart from the starting configuration, as far as I know there are no further definitions about what an ITT is. I suggest to create a new section to define such a race format and especially create rules for rider behavior during the event (i.e., generally no drafting and efficient overtaking of other riders).

Here are discussions from last year that proposed ITT for the 10k event:

https://iuf-rulebook-2022.committees.unicycling-software.com/discussions/22
https://iuf-rulebook-2022.committees.unicycling-software.com/discussions/23

At this point, I would rather introduce it as a general way of running a competition and not limiting it to a certain distance.

Comment 23 Feb 05:46

Thank you for taking up this topic again from the last Rulebok Committee. In the discussion on the restructuring of section 3B, I already suggested introducing a section in which the disciplines are described. We could therefore discuss in detail what exactly should be included in this section for the Time Trials.

For the purpose of clarity, I would like to see the rules that apply during the race integrated into the proposed Racing Rules section. For example, the existing rules on passing could be expanded to include a paragraph for races in which drafting is allowed and a paragraph for races in which drafting is not allowed.
But the integration into the existing rules can be done in a second step - first of all, of course, it must be clear which rules should apply to the time trails at all.

Comment 23 Feb 06:18

This sounds good to me. Maybe as a starting point, here are the UCI rules for ITTs (Chapter 4): https://assets.ctfassets.net/761l7gh5x5an/6FEzFHeA2oKMBGb5sdIvQ7/9ad8344aef0741a4fdaa85fcd0eab00d/2-ROA-20250101-E.pdf

Racing procedure
2.4.017 If one rider is caught up by another, he may neither lead nor follow in the slipstream of
the rider who caught up.
2.4.018 A rider, upon catching up with another shall leave a lateral gap of at least 2 metres
between himself and the other rider.
After 1 km, the rider caught up shall ride at least 25 m away from the other.
2.4.019 If necessary, the commissaire shall force the riders to leave the 2 metre lateral gap and
the distance of 25 metres respectively, without prejudice to the penalties provided for in
the scale of penalties (article 2.12.007).

Comment 23 Feb 12:18

I think it's always a good idea to have a look at what is used in other sports that are comparable.

@Simon did you also have anything prepared based on the discussions in the World Record Committee regarding rules for Time Trials? We coud bring everything together in this discussion.

Comment 24 Feb 10:44

I thought about it, but didn't come up with a formal proposal. My main difficulty was to identify at which level of the rulebook “time trial” could be integrated into the rulebook.

I think that the definition of fixed time trial distances for WRs should be discussed separately from the rules for a time trial competition.

A time trial competition can be organized over a fixed distance or a free distance. And as I mentioned in the discussion on fixed-distance races, I think it's a format that's best suited to relatively short distances. It's possible to organize very long time trials, but in practice this doesn't seem ideal to me, either for the competitors (significant fatigue), or for the organizers (heavy organization), in an event where there are numerous competitions.

This format has a major impact on drafting, which is particularly prevalent in the unlimited category. One option for making the organization of a time trial realistic in terms of organization would be to reserve the time trial for at least wheel sizes of 29” or more (or bigger ?). What will 24” riders think if the race format differs according to wheel size?

This would have an impact on the number of participants, which might be more favorable to a realistic organization of a time trial.

Comment 25 Feb 01:46

> This format has a major impact on drafting, which is particularly prevalent in the unlimited category. One option for making the organization of a time trial realistic in terms of organization would be to reserve the time trial for at least wheel sizes of 29” or more (or bigger ?). What will 24” riders think if the race format differs according to wheel size?

I would assume that the interest of 24” riders in a time trial is rather low - although there has never been a race in this format for this category. But I think it would be okay to define the rules and reserve time trials for the bigger wheels.

Comment 10 Mar 07:39

Here are the parts I propose to discuss:
1/ Starts
2/ Drafting and overtaking
3/ Unicycles
4/ Distance
5/ Number of participants

This doesn't mean that I'm proposing these subsections, but it may be a starting point for a discussion and building a proposal.

1/ Starts
Individual start:
Just because the start is individual doesn't mean the course has to be narrow. It's preferable for the course to allow overtaking over most of its length.
If it's possible to overtake on most of the course, I think it's best to have the slowest start first, with a start every 20-30 seconds.
If the course isn't ideal for overtaking, the only option would be to have the fastest start first. But I can see 2 problems: 1/ if there are seeding problems, there could be traffic jams (a slow competitor entering a fast seed time could get in the way of the other competitors) and 2/ making the slowest start last could considerably increase the overall duration of the competition.

Timing:
This type of event is generally run with an automatic “Netto time” start. Netto time is not a stationary start, as Brutto time is. Brutto time” would require a regular automatic countdown and validation of each participant's start by the timekeeper. I have the impression that “netto time” is easier to implement (to be checked with a timekeeper).

2/ Drafting and overtaking
We can base ourselves on the UCI but I think we can be more flexible. The link between speed and the effect of drafting follows an exponential function. Between 25 and 50 km/h, the effect of drafting doesn't vary by a factor of two, it's closer to a factor of 1 to 10.
In any case, it's always interesting to objectify distances and times between 2 competitors, but the marshals won't necessarily have the right tools to objectify these distances and times.
I think judges/marshals will be more comfortable judging a rider's intention to draft. You have to bear in mind that a faster runner who has caught up by 20 or 30 sec (or more) should have little interest in staying behind a competitor who is obviously slower.
I see 2 cases to avoid:
1/ the most frequent case: a competitor who is being overtaken tries to follow the one who is overtaking him.
2/ a rare case: a competitor sets off at full speed to catch up with the competitor ahead of him (who has a similar level) and take his drafting to rest.
When a faster competitor catches up with a slower competitor who set off earlier, the slower competitor should be warned (by the faster competitor or/and by a marshal) so that he knows what to do (e.g. squeeze right).

3/ Unicycles
Should we limit the range to unlimited? Should the 29” category be included? If a time trial is organized over a free distance, it seems to me that it would be better for it to be a time trial for every competitor. For the competitors, it seems to me that it would be better if a free distance race offered something extra.
That's why my initial proposal (2 years ago) was for a 10km time trial. This would enable unlimited competitors to do a time trial and standard competitors to do a fixed-distance race on the same course.

4/ Distance
As I've already mentioned, I think that time trials are better suited to short distances. There are several reasons for this:
1/ over a short distance, you can concentrate on your individual effort, without being distracted by a strategy.
2/ since you're not riding in a group, there's no rest phase (the fastest riders benefit from riding in a group for drafting), so the effort is potentially more intense.
3/ even over a short distance, there will be time gaps of several seconds between competitors who on long events could ride together for hours and be separated by less than 1 second at the finish.
4/ the shorter the distance, the fewer overtakes (less interference between competitors).
5/ the shorter the distance, the easier it is for the organizers (shorter race duration, fewer marshals).

We could recommend that time trials should be run over distances of 5 to 20 km (I'm proposing a range from 10/2 to 10x2 in reference to 10km... it's just a suggestion), without however prohibiting longer formats.
For formats other than the fixed 10km distance, classes would have to be defined. I'd be inclined to propose 2 classes: 29” standard and unlimited.

5/ Number of participants
We need to consider the number of participants. Without even mentioning setting a limit, it's easy to see that this can be a blocking factor in the organization of a time trial.
If there's a start every 30 seconds, we can get 120 competitors off every hour. Moreover, it would be easier to opt for a start every 20 seconds for the standard 29” and every 30 seconds for the unlimited.
For a time trial to be realistic, it would have to be organized over half a day (like most road races today).
If there are over 200 competitors and the slowest have to start last, it can start to take a long time. That's why I think it's particularly interesting to have a course where it's possible, at almost any time, to overtake and start the slowest riders first.

Comment 10 Mar 10:38

I basically agree with all these points.

Starts: yes, I think reverse order starts would be good. There must be enough space for passing in any case. With live timing, it could be also really exciting to watch, with riders continuously improving the time and going into the lead. Besides that, I think we can mostly use already existing rules (also from muni DH).

Overtaking: While the UCI values are too high for unicycling speeds, I still think we should mention some values as a guideline for judges/course marshals. 5 m front/back, 1.5 m lateral would be reasonable I think. Sure, no one can check this exactly during the race, but a rule purely based on intention might leave a bit too much freedom for interpretation.

Unlimited + 29" categories make most sense to me.

Distance: indeed, something around 10k would be ideal (5k would be really short though, so I would rather say 8-20k), assuming that there is also a longer road race available (free distance of 40k+ or marathon).

Comment 12 Mar 02:56

Thank you for all the good points. From my point of view, this looks like a really good basis.

1/ Starts
I would agree that an individual start is the only option for a race like this in any case.
As long as the course is wide enough for overtaking, the option of starting with the slowest drivers seems to make the most sense to me. But I think the course should be wide enough even if the starting order is reversed, otherwise it will be really difficult to prevent drafting. Some riders will always catch up with those ahead and the course has to be designed for that.

1.1/Timing
I don't think an automatic start every X seconds would be a problem either. Most electronic starting devices have an interval mode in which they automatically trigger a start every X seconds. This means that the use of brutto times would also not be a problem.

2/ Drafting and overtaking
Good ideas - the World Record Committee discussed whether it might be easier to judge distances in seconds rather than meters? I don't know how this is viewed here. But I think if you look for a fixed point, you can actually judge quite well how big the time gap between two riders is.

3/ Unicycles
I would be open for both.

4/ Distance
I'm not an Unlimited rider, so I might be wrong, but 5 km seem to me to be a little bit to short for Unlimited races?

5/ Number of participants
If a competition organizer only has a limited capacity for participants, he is free to limit the number of participants. This also happens regularly in other disciplines at many competitions. I don't think this needs to be regulated by the rulebook.

I would add one more point:
6/ Venue
The World Record Guidelines currently stipulate a circuit as the competition venue for Time Trials. This works well for a single participant and makes it easier to measure the course - but for competitions with several participants this limitation seems difficult to me, as it would certainly increase the number of overtakes considerably.

Comment 17 Mar 04:57

I agree with most points except for 3/ unicycles. Of course the standard class has to be included. Whether it is 29" standard or 24" standard would depend on the distance.

In terms of 4/ distances, I think we should leave it as a free distance event for organisers to decide. The most fun (and only) time trial race I've done on a unicycle was at Ride the Lobster. From memory the top riders took over 40min on a combination of 36" ungeared, 36" and 29" geared unicycles. I don't think I would enjoy a 5km race that is essentially like a prologue in a bicycle stage race. You are concentrating on your effort whether it is 5km or 50km. It's just that you will pace it differently. eg Do you save yourself for the climb near the finish, or go hard on the flat? A short race means you go hard from start to finish.

In terms of Jan's point on venue:

"6/ Venue
The World Record Guidelines currently stipulate a circuit as the competition venue for Time Trials. "

I mentioned in the WR committee that what we refer to as time trials for world records are referred to as track records in bicycling. I think for world record purposes, the intention is to have a closed circuit (track) that you do multiple laps on; whereas for a time trial race, it can be point to point or a single loop.

Not sure whether the best option is to rename the time-trial records in the WR guidelines (and call them track records), or if we should stipulate that a time-trial races do not have to be on a circuit.

Comment 19 Mar 03:14

Regarding the point 6/ Venue:

I understand your point, but I also think that we should make sure that world records and competition disciplines go together. If we offer time trials at competitions - which I think would be a good development - then these should also be included in the world records.

However, I can see that no “maximum distance” competitions are likely to be offered at any event; in my opinion, closed courses on which several laps are ridden are essential for this type of time trail.
For the fixed distance time trial records, however, I think it would also be possible to allow point-to-point races or single loop races. This format would then also be what could be offered at competitions and where world records could also be set in the competition.

So my suggestion would be to keep the current rules for the course for all “maximum distance” competitions (perhaps we should rename this to “fixed time” to avoid confusion with free distance time trials?) as before and allow all courses for all fixed/free distance competitions that are also permitted for other road races (The start and finish points of a course, measured along a theoretical straight line between them, shall not be further apart than 50% of the race distance and the overall decrease in elevation between the start and finish shall not exceed 1:1000, i.e. 1m per km (0.1%).).

Comment 20 Mar 04:04

>I'm not an Unlimited rider, so I might be wrong, but 5 km seem to me to be a little bit to short for Unlimited races?

A short race would allow you to go fast without having to worry about race strategy. This is a problem with the unlimited 10km today. It's very difficult to strategize over 10km, you have to rely on the spectators' reactions. Personally, from an unlimited rider point of view, I'd rather do a timed 5km than a 10km race.

> I think we should leave it as a free distance event for organisers to decide.

I think it's a good thing to make recommendations. In my opinion, there are enough arguments for preferring a short distance for time trial in most situation. The organizers can propose something else, but in that case, I think it's up to the organizers to justify their choice.

> I don't think I would enjoy a 5km race that is essentially like a prologue in a bicycle stage race. You are concentrating on your effort whether it is 5km or 50km.

The most decisive thing is that it has to fit into the Unicon program (or another event).
We discussed this in the topic on fixed-distance races.
It hasn't yet been proposed and voted on, but we seem to be moving towards a recommendation of 3 road races, one of which should be a fixed-distance race (which I think is more likely to be the 10km), and there's also an expectation for a long, confrontational race (mass start or, failing that, heat start): marathon or longer distance (free). And there's also a wait for a criterium.
If a 10km race is organized, I don't see any point in organizing a 5 or 10km time trial in addition to a classic 10km race. I think it would be more appropriate to organize an individual start (time trial) for unlimited rider in 10km.
And if a 50km time trial is organized, I think it would be a shame if it were to replace the long race with a confrontation.

Comment 20 Mar 04:40

> Of course the standard class has to be included. Whether it is 29" standard or 24" standard would depend on the distance.

Of course, there's a psychological impact to riding alone rather than in a group. But the main specificity of a time trial is the absence of drafting.

According to Jan, most 24" riders don't see the point of a time trial, which doesn't surprise me. Organizing a 24" time trial seems to me to be of limited interest.

The advantage of doing a time trial over the fixed 10km distance is that you can organize a classic 24“ race, a time trial for unlimited riders (and possibly for 29” riders too). On a free distance, the interest may be less for the 24".

Comment 20 Mar 13:22

I can definitely understand your thoughts.

Maybe I am wrong in my assumption about the interests of the 24” riders, but personally I think the nice thing about the race is definitely that it is a race against each other and I would like it to be started more often with a mass start to strengthen this character even more.
I therefore find the idea of holding the 10 km race as a classic race for the 24” class and as a time trial for the unlimited riders interesting. But, as I said, I'm not an unlimited rider either, so I can't assess what the interests are here.

Comment 24 Mar 04:35

"According to Jan, most 24" riders don't see the point of a time trial, which doesn't surprise me. Organizing a 24" time trial seems to me to be of limited interest."

We've never had one, how would you know? Is it any different to an unlimited time trial?

Yes, drafting effect is less for a 24", but it is not zero, particularly into a head wind. However, the point of a time trial is not to get rid of drafting, but to race against the clock rather than against other riders.

There are no standard class time-trial records. If we hold the standard class to the same level as unlimited, then there should be. I would love to see standard class time-trial world records- for the Hour and even the 24 Hour. What you are seeing with these world records is not athletic progression, it is technological progression. I consider Stefan Gauler's 1991 24 Hour World record to be one of the greatest feats in our sport, yet no one is going to challenge it by attempting to ride a 26" unicycle for 24 hours and be denied a world record.

Standard Class time-trials (fixed distance or fixed time) will allow unicycle performances to be comparable across different eras and generations of riders. To have this, we need to allow time-trials in the rulebook for standard riders.

Comment 24 Mar 08:34

> We've never had one, how would you know? Is it any different to an unlimited time trial?

It is true that there has never been a time trial for 24“ at any competition - but I know a lot of 24” riders who ride the 10 km precisely because of the head-to-head race, i.e. the race format. My assumption was therefore that these riders would not necessarily be interested in racing against the clock.
Personally, I also like to ride somewhat longer distances than the 800 m on the track and I find a comparatively short road race on the 24”, which I have from the track races anyway, a very nice addition to the racing program on the track.
But if it was simply a race against the clock, I wouldn't take part on a 24”. With the comparatively long cranks and the small wheel diameter, it's simply not a unicycle I would want to race against the clock on.
Based on these considerations, I found Simon's idea of holding the 10km for the 24” as a head-to-head race in the current format and going more in the direction of a time trial for Unlimited interesting. It seems rather unrealistic to me that there is a time trial and a normal 10km race at a competition.

> There are no standard class time-trial records. If we hold the standard class to the same level as unlimited, then there should be. I would love to see standard class time-trial world records- for the Hour and even the 24 Hour.

I'm not sure whether it's really an advantage if all classes are offered in all disciplines - there would be an incredible variety of possible classes (Standard 24“, Standard 29”, Unlimited Ungeared, Unlimited Geared). I have the feeling that not all classes are equally suitable for all disciplines and with an already not too large base of athletes, we make the individual classes even weaker.

> I consider Stefan Gauler's 1991 24 Hour World record to be one of the greatest feats in our sport, yet no one is going to challenge it by attempting to ride a 26" unicycle for 24 hours and be denied a world record.

I don't know if it's really just the lack of a world record that stops people from trying to beat it - I think for many people it's just not attractive to ride such long distances on a small unicycle with comparatively long cranks, when there has been so much technical development and unicycles offer completely different possibilities in terms of size and gearing.

This is not to say that I would vote against integrating a standard class into the Time Trails, but I think we should think carefully about whether this really makes sense and fits in to the development of unicycles and so on. I think where there are historically grown disciplines for the standard class, it is one thing to continue to offer them, but “new” disciplines may not necessarily have to be based on the history, but rather on the expected development.

Comment 28 Mar 17:14

"But if it was simply a race against the clock, I wouldn't take part on a 24”. With the comparatively long cranks and the small wheel diameter, it's simply not a unicycle I would want to race against the clock on."

There are several standard class wheel sizes. For a longer distance time-trial, it would be a 29" standard class.

Based on these considerations, I found Simon's idea of holding the 10km for the 24” as a head-to-head race in the current format and going more in the direction of a time trial for Unlimited interesting. It seems rather unrealistic to me that there is a time trial and a normal 10km race at a competition.

I'd like to know what other unlimited riders think of the 10km TT proposal. I can see Simon's argument that the 10km is now essentially a sprint race, getting dangerous, difficult to pass, and challenging for organisers to find a wide enough track. On the other hand, people like racing against each other.

If we are making a generic rulebook proposal (not just about about 10km), then we have to be sure we're not excluding standard or unlimited class from participation. I don't want to see an organiser offering, say, a 30km time trial without including standard class.

We don't need every possible format, but the main difference is between standard and unlimited. One allows progress to be tracked across time/eras, the other is a measure of technological progress.

If you take bicycling- there are human powered vehicles which are much faster than bicycles. The UCI limits this by specifying what a bicycle should look like. Someone attempting the bicycle Hour record today can compare themselves to Eddy Merkx in 1972:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hour_record

Currently, there is no unlimited class record that cannot be done comfortably on a 29" standard.

It's smaller than a 29" standard, but is legal in that class. If we establish a standard 29" TT records for 24hr and 1hr, it would be a pretty solid record for anyone trying to beat, even with a 29". Right now I have no idea whether I could have beaten Stefan Gauler's 24hr record. Someone on a geared unicycle in future will have no idea how they compare to Sam Wakeling/Lars Clausen/Myself a 36" ungeared unicycle.

The other advantage is that Unicon is perfect opportunity for world records to be beaten (400m athletic track, timing system, witnesses are all available). It means those who travel from the other side of the world don't have to carry a geared 36" unicycle if they race in standard class.

It could be one day we even have a recumbent unicycle with an aerodynamic fairing and multiple gears, which is what the human powered vehicle records are set on. It would be highly customised and allow only those with the money and technology to set world records.

Comment 30 Mar 12:41

The discussion of world records in the standard category is another matter. I think world records are great, but we shouldn't let that stop us from making improvements to the rules.

> I'd like to know what other unlimited riders think of the 10km TT proposal. I can see Simon's argument that the 10km is now essentially a sprint race, getting dangerous, difficult to pass, and challenging for organisers to find a wide enough track. On the other hand, people like racing against each other.

I've talked to other unlimited 10km competitors, many of whom don't have an opinion on an TT individual start on 10k, but others, especially the fastest, do. In any case, no one told me that they thought it was a pity that the 10km was no longer confrontational. Competitors like confrontational races, and fortunately so, because at the moment all races are more or less confrontational - they're wave starts races, not mass start races. I think it's very important to have a long-distance race in confrontation.

If we can organize time trial races with an interesting format (the fastest start last and hot seat). I'm sure that unlimited competitors will be happy.

Comment 01 Apr 02:42

>>"But if it was simply a race against the clock, I wouldn't take part on a 24”. With the comparatively long cranks and the small wheel diameter, it's simply not a unicycle I would want to race against the clock on."

>There are several standard class wheel sizes. For a longer distance time-trial, it would be a 29" standard class.

However, my argument was explicitly related to the 24" class. The fact that a 30 km Tim Trail could be interesting for the 29" standard class was not up for discussion from my side. So I was only concerned with the race format for 10km, where in my opinion a time trail for the 24" class would be rather uninteresting.

And when we talk about fixed distance time trials, then it's also about explicitly mentioning the corresponding distances in the rulebook - this would be the distances where world records can be set.

> It could be one day we even have a recumbent unicycle with an aerodynamic fairing and multiple gears, which is what the human powered vehicle records are set on. It would be highly customised and allow only those with the money and technology to set world records.

To be honest, I would personally think that such custom-made products should not be allowed in competitions, even in the unlimited class. Yes, the class is called unlimited, but of course we have to make sure that a fair competition is still possible. Otherwise, at some point the class will no longer have any place in a competitive sport.

Comment 11 May 14:29

To move forward, I've created a proposal. Given the discussions, I'm having trouble coming up with a proposal that would suit everyone. The link between the time trial format and a fixed-distance 10km race adds complexity.

From an unlimited rider's perspective, I think we should avoid organizing a short race (10km) with wave starts (as is currently the case with two categories: 24" standard and unlimited) AND a short time trial. We have to choose between the two.

Comment 12 May 02:07

Thank you Simon for preparing the proposal. I think the most important points for a time trial are included. However, since we already have separate sections for some of the aspects (Start Configuration) or want to introduce them (Drafting), I would try to keep the explanations in the Time Trial section as short as possible to avoid duplication.

I have summarized some ideas and added my comments in italics:

3B.2.4 Time Trial

1. Time Trial is a non-drafting race, with an individual start for each rider, where each rider races against the clock. Time trials are typically held over short distances, usually less than 20 km.
- I have tried to summarize a short but as complete as possible description with the most important aspects of the discipline in paragraph 1: non-drafting, individual race against the clock and short distances (Do we really want to add this? We have World Records for 10 km, 100 km and 100 mile right now, I would make this the officiall fixed-distances!?). What about one word to fixed-time Time Trials? I think it would be worth mentioning in the rulebook since we have world records in this.
The exact rules that apply to a non-drafting race should be explained in a separate “Drafting” rule, which will then also set out the principles for other road races. We already have a rule on the “Individual Start” (which could possibly be expanded to include some aspects of the original proposal). -
2. The organizer may choose between brutto timing (elapsed time from the official start time of each rider) or netto timing (measured using a chip or electronic device triggered upon crossing the start line).
- The wheel sizes/categories in which races are offered are currently defined for all road races in section 3B.2 Unicycles, I would tend to stick with this approach. Alternatively, we could move this consistently to the corresponding description for all disciplines, but I don't think that would make it any clearer. -

The whole thing about 10km 24 Class and 10km Time Trail I think is a very Unicon specific organizational thing and I don't know if we should really include that in the Time Trial discipline description.

Comment 25 May 06:20

> I have tried to summarize a short but as complete as possible description with the most important aspects of the discipline in paragraph 1: non-drafting, individual race against the clock and short distances (Do we really want to add this? We have World Records for 10 km, 100 km and 100 mile right now, I would make this the officiall fixed-distances!?).

For me, it is not desirable to organize a 100km or 100 miles time trial in an official competition. For several competitors to participate, this event should not take place on a closed track. The course could take place on a road loop, but large enough so that overtaking is possible. If there is no loop, the official measurement of the course and its security by volunteers would become a colossal burden for the organizers. For the competitors, this event should only take place on the last day of an event like a UNICON, it takes at least as much and often much more time to recover than for a race of the same distance. And above all, it would be a shame if this event replaced a long confrontation race. In a race where everyone starts at the same time, you can know your ranking during the race and there is drafting, which allows you to spend much less energy. In a timed event, if you don't have the instructions in your earpiece, you give it your all until the finish line. The main advantage of time trial event is the absence of drafting, and therefore the fact that gaps can be made over short distances. There is no need to organize an event where it will take a week to recover in order to establish a ranking.

> What about one word to fixed-time Time Trials? I think it would be worth mentioning in the rulebook since we have world records in this.

Time trials with a fixed time are not possible to organize in an official competition. They necessarily require the start and finish to be at the same location. The loop would have to be long so that the participants are spread out and short so that their effort is close to the fixed time. This could be a race format with a mass start, but for a time trial collective event this is not possible.

> The whole thing about 10km 24 Class and 10km Time Trail I think is a very Unicon specific organizational thing and I don't know if we should really include that in the Time Trial discipline description.

I think that the fixed distance of 10km is the only fixed distance that is compatible with the organization of an individual time trial in a collective competition. But this would require reviewing the organization and the current program of road races. For unlimited riders, there is no interest in doing a 10km race and a 10km time trial.

Comment 25 May 21:18

"1. Time Trial is a non-drafting race, with an individual start for each rider, where each rider races against the clock. Time trials are typically held over short distances, usually less than 20 km."

I'm still at odds with the distance. I appreciate Simon likes short distance time trials, but having ridden one of the few unlimited TTs, I think longer distance TTs are more appealing. Do we need to be prescriptive or can it be left to the race organiser (ie leave out the 20km recommendation)?

"For me, it is not desirable to organize a 100km or 100 miles time trial in an official competition. For several competitors to participate, this event should not take place on a closed track. The course could take place on a road loop, but large enough so that overtaking is possible. If there is no loop, the official measurement of the course and its security by volunteers would become a colossal burden for the organizers."

Agree. Fixed distance only make sense for world records, and I really think we need change the reference to 'Time-Trial Records'. If we compare ourselves to sports like bicycling and athletics, they should be called 'track records'. That means multiple laps of a circuit, not point to point or one big loop.

I agree with the new wording in 3B.2.4.5, which is the reason Simon started this proposal. The alternate option for the 10km makes sense, because for many Unicons the 10km unlimited has to be a wave start due to narrow courses, and for safety the numbers in each wave tend to be small, which defeats the purpose of a mass start race format.

Comment 26 May 05:46

> I'm still at odds with the distance. I appreciate Simon likes short distance time trials, but having ridden one of the few unlimited TTs, I think longer distance TTs are more appealing. Do we need to be prescriptive or can it be left to the race organiser (ie leave out the 20km recommendation)?

I would also be open to leaving the distance recommendation out.

> Fixed distance only make sense for world records, and I really think we need change the reference to 'Time-Trial Records'. If we compare ourselves to sports like bicycling and athletics, they should be called 'track records'. That means multiple laps of a circuit, not point to point or one big loop.

I would clearly disagree here - if we want to recognize world records in fixed distance time trials, then this must also be reflected in our rules. The rules are the basis for our sport and I find it absolutely illogical to recognize records in something that we don't see as part of our sport. In my opinion, whether and how many competitions are actually held in the relevant disciplines plays a very subordinate role. The decisive factor is that we have a basis for world records and that it is theoretically possible to organize competitions and that these competitions are therefore also IUF-approved. A competition can also take place with two participants and I think such competitions would also be feasible for other formats in which we currently hold world records.

Comment 27 May 07:17

You're quite right. I agree that the proposal should not be prescriptive on length. This rule should help define what a timed event is, and organizers should be free to propose the format they wish to organize. However, I think that giving a concrete example can help organizers make the decisions. The 10km example seems to me to be an important one.

I've just updated the proposa:
- I've added the official distances recognized as WR.
- I've added a definition paragraph.
- I've distinguished between events with only one participant and those with more than one participant.
- I removed the subsection on drafting (now it's in the definition).
- I moved the 10km example to distance.
- I left the unicycle sub-section for now, but maybe I could put a sentence in the definition. I think this is a topic related to other open discussions (29” in 10k and unlimited ungeared awards).

I know the format isn't standardized, but we need to make progress on the content.

Comment 27 May 10:07

We could also make a structure of the same type as for the criterium:

3B.2.4 Individual time trial

3B.2.4.1 Definition

An Individual Time Trial is a race in which each rider starts alone and competes against the clock. Drafting is strictly prohibited at all times during the race, as defined in section on drafting.

Time trials may be held either as part of an official unicycling competition or as independent events, such as record attempts. In this rule section, a distinction is made between time-based and distance-based time trials.

3B.2.4.2 Time-based time trials

Time-based time trials are events in which riders attempt to travel the greatest possible distance within a fixed amount of time. Official formats include 1-hour and 24-hour time trials (we can add 12-hour here). These events are not held as part of official competitions, but are recognized for the purpose of establishing official records.

Time-based time trials must take place on a closed circuit, either on a road or a track. The course must be designed so that the start and finish occur at the exact same location.

3B.2.4.3 Distance-based time trials

In distance-based time trials, riders attempt to complete a predetermined distance in the shortest possible time. These events may be held either during an official competition or independently, including for official record purposes. The distances currently recognized for record attempts include 10 kilometers, 100 kilometers, and 100 miles.

a) In Official Competitions

There is no fixed distance requirement for time trials held within a competition. Organizers may choose any course length that fits the format of their event. Riders must start one by one at fixed intervals, typically every 20 to 30 seconds. The starting order should be based on estimated performance, with slower riders starting first and faster riders starting later. Riders are allowed to overtake one another, and those being overtaken must allow sufficient space to ensure a safe and unobstructed pass. The organizer may choose between brutto timing (elapsed time from the official start time of each rider) or netto timing (measured using a chip or electronic device triggered upon crossing the start line). It is recommended that competition time trials use a point-to-point course without loops, in order to minimize interactions between participants.

Special case – 10 km individual time:
If a 10 km fixed-distance course is used for a 24" Standard race, it may also be used for a time trial. Two options are possible:

Preferred option: Hold the 24" Standard fixed-distance race on a different day. This allows the time trial to be held with both 29" Standard and Unlimited categories.
Alternative option: If it is not possible to separate the events across different days, the time trial may include only an Unlimited category and should take place just before or after the 24" Standard race on the same course.

b) Outside Official Competitions

For time trials held outside of official competitions, such as those organized for the purpose of record attempts, it is recommended to use a closed course on a road or track. The course must be measured and verified in accordance with the WR guidelines.

Comment 27 May 10:08

Sorry for the font size, I don't have the tools to change the size

Comment 29 May 03:14

I think it is a good idea to design the structure in the same way as the Criterium rule.

However, I would leave out the heading “3B.2.4.1 Definition” and name the paragraphs that define the discipline directly under the main heading “3B.2.4 Individual Time Trial”. I would also leave the wording as it is, so that the corresponding keywords “individual start” and “non-drafting race” appear exactly as they are mentioned in the corresponding rules.

3B.2.4 Individual Time Trial

1. An Individual Time Trial is a non-drafting race, with an individual start for each rider, where each rider races against the clock.
2. An Individual Time Trial can be run in one of the following two variants, either as part of an official unicycling competition or as independent events, such as record attempts:
2.1 As a distance-based time trial, in which a given distance is completed as fast as possible.
2.2 As a time-based time trial, in which the greatest possible distance is completed in a fixed amount of time.

I would swap the order of the two subsections so that the variant that is also suitable for large competitions is mentioned first.

3B.2.4.1 Distance-based Time Trials

1. - Here I would perfere to mention the curse recomodation for both variants, inside and outside of officiall competions -
2. Official formats recognized for the purpose of establishing official records are
i) 10 km time trials and
ii) 100 km time trials and
iii) 100 miles time trials.

- Here I am unsure how the rule can be formulated with the distinction between official competitions and outside official competitions. But I will think about it further. If anyone has any good ideas, I'm open to it. -

3B.2.4.2 Time-based Time Trials

1. Time-based Time Trials must take place on a closed circuit, either on a road or a track. The course must be designed so that the start and finish occur at the exact same location.
2. Official formats recognized for the purpose of establishing official records are
i) 1-hour time trials and
ii) 24-hour time trials.

Comment 29 May 07:39

Taking this structure, here is what I would propose:

3B.2.4 Individual Time Trial

3B.2.4.1 Distance-based Time Trials

1. These events may be held either during an official competition or independently, including for official record purposes.
1.1 In official competitions, there is no fixed distance requirement for time trial course. Organizers may choose any course length that fits the format of their event. It is recommended to use a point-to-point course without loops, in order to minimize interactions between participants. The course should allow riders to overtake safely with sufficient space over most of the course.
1.1.1 Riders must start one by one at fixed intervals, typically every 20 to 30 seconds. The starting order should be based on estimated performance, with slower riders starting first and faster riders starting later.
1.1.2 The organizer may choose between brutto timing (elapsed time from the official start time of each rider) or netto timing (measured using a chip or electronic device triggered upon crossing the start line).
1.1.3 If a 10 km fixed-distance course is used for a 24" Standard race, it may also be used for a time trial. Two options are possible: 1/ Preferred option: Hold the 24" Standard fixed-distance race on a different day. This allows the time trial to be held with both 29" Standard and Unlimited categories. 2/ Alternative option: If it is not possible to separate the events across different days, the time trial may include only an Unlimited category and should take place just before or after the 24" Standard race on the same course.
1.2 For time trials held outside of official competitions, such as those organized for the purpose of record attempts, it is recommended to use a closed course on a road or track. The course must be measured and verified in accordance with the WR guidelines.
2. Official formats recognized for the purpose of establishing official records are
i) 10 km time trials and
ii) 100 km time trials and
iii) 100 miles time trials.

3B.2.4.2 Time-based Time Trials

1. Time-based Time Trials must take place on a closed circuit, either on a road or a track. The course must be designed so that the start and finish occur at the exact same location. These events are not held as part of official competitions, but are recognized for the purpose of establishing official records.
2. Official formats recognized for the purpose of establishing official records are
i) 1-hour time trials and
ii) 24-hour time trials.

Comment 30 May 01:28

The proposal looks very good to me, I just have two comments that we could discuss:

1. In paragraph 1.1 of rule 3B.2.4.1 I would point out that point-to-point courses should fulfill the same criteria as other point-to-point road races. We may need to amend rule 3D.1 Venue again to cover all types of road races.
(Rule 3D.1 Venue
(1) The start and finish points of the course, measured along a theoretical straight line between them, shall not be further apart than 50% of the race distance.
(2) The overall decrease in elevation between the start and finish shall not exceed 1:1000, i.e. 1m per km (0.1%).

2. Paragraph 1.1.1 of rule 3B.2.4.1 is, in my opinion, something that belongs to the start rules in rule 3D.10.1 Individual Start and does not need to be repeated here. If necessary, we should adapt rule 3D.10.1 Individual Start to cover all aspects there.

Comment 30 May 05:13

> 1. In paragraph 1.1 of rule 3B.2.4.1 I would point out that point-to-point courses should fulfill the same criteria as other point-to-point road races. We may need to amend rule 3D.1 Venue again to cover all types of road races.

The elements you mention are the requirements for WR in fixed-distance races. Are you concerned that a 10km time trial will be organized without considering the record requirements mentioned in section 3D.1?
I don't think we need to add a statement about the requirements for WRs to section 1.1.
For me, the current section 3D.1 isn't inconsistent; perhaps we could be more explicit by mentioning "including time trial" and deleting "(traditional)"... That said, we said we would review section 3D.1 Venue, but we still haven't agreed on the plan. I'm thinking about it.

> 2. Paragraph 1.1.1 of rule 3B.2.4.1 is, in my opinion, something that belongs to the start rules in rule 3D.10.1 Individual Start and does not need to be repeated here. If necessary, we should adapt rule 3D.10.1 Individual Start to cover all aspects there.

You're right, and at the same time, I'm a little bothered by the scattered information. The problem with section 3D.10 is that even if the time trial is mentioned, the choice between a classic race and a time trial should be made in advance.

I think the simplest thing would be for section 3D.10. to not cover Individual Time Trial:

~~- If this is an Individual Time Trial format race, use individual start.~~
~~- If the course is too narrow to allow for racers to safely and fairly start in heats, use individual start.~~
~~- If you cannot safely start five or more riders across, use individual start.~~
=> If the course is too narrow to safely start riders in a group (less than 5 riders across), see section Individual Time Trial

So we can remove 3D10.1 and offer both solutions for the starting order in the ITT section. Mentioning that it is preferable to let the slowest start first if the course allows it.

Comment 30 May 21:54

It looks good to me. I would still prefer to call time-trial records 'track records' but inserting the requirement for a closed circuit is a good compromise. I think it's a good idea to have a minimum and maximum circuit size. It's theoretically possible to use a 35km circuit and try to ride it in under 1hr for the hour record, or 5km circuits with additional distance calculation. I don't think these extra large circuits are consistent with other sports that we compare ourselves with (eg Bicycling Hour and 24 Hr records). I propose we have a circuit size minimum of 200m, and maximum of 800m.

Also, there is no specification in terms of standard class and unlimited class, which means, all else being equal, we need to start keeping records in both.

The way we can do this is either:

Use the 29" standard class for the time trial records or
Make a new 36" standard class

Comment 03 Jun 06:23

> The elements you mention are the requirements for WR in fixed-distance races. Are you concerned that a 10km time trial will be organized without considering the record requirements mentioned in section 3D.1?

The current proposal only states “It is recommended to use a point-to-point course without loops [...]” - so it does not impose any restrictions on the course. Rule 3D.1 is currently mainly focused on the traditional fixed and non-fixed distance road races. By adapting the rule, we can of course change this and avoid confusion. In this case, in my opinion, it is not necessary to explicitly state anything in the rule on time trails about the requirements for the course for world records.

> You're right, and at the same time, I'm a little bothered by the scattered information. The problem with section 3D.10 is that even if the time trial is mentioned, the choice between a classic race and a time trial should be made in advance.

However, rule 3D.10 does not deal with the decision between a classic race and a time trail, but describes the different start variants. And I find it much more impractical if the start variant for one discipline is described under 3D.10 and for other disciplines the start variant is described directly in the discipline rule. In my opinion, it would be much better to specify which start variants are applicable in the description of the discipline and to describe all start variants together in section 3D.10.

> I think the simplest thing would be for section 3D.10. to not cover Individual Time Trial:

But this scatters the rules much more than simply specifying in the Time Trial rules that the start is an individual start and then describing how an individual start is carried out in the same way as for all other disciplines under 3D.10.

> The way we can do this is either:

Use the 29" standard class for the time trial records or
Make a new 36" standard class

We don't have a 36" standard class anywhere - and I don't see any reason to introduce another class. We can't introduce a separate official class for every available wheel configuration.
Personally, I would have no problem with just one class, the unlimited class. Every race organizer is free to introduce additional rankings and take other wheel classes into account anyway. For free-distance races, the rulebook also does not currently specify which wheel classes must be offered.

Comment 08 Jun 14:56

> In this case, in my opinion, it is not necessary to explicitly state anything in the rule on time trails about the requirements for the course for world records.

For me, WR requirement is not an element that is specific to time trial, it is a fixed distance requirement which is why I think it should be mentioned in a more general rule like 3D.1 Venue

> I think it's a good idea to have a minimum and maximum circuit size.

Personally, I'm not in favor of setting size limits. I know that several records have been set on 400m tracks, it adds an extra difficulty to do this type of event on a 400m track, but I don't think it justifies setting limits. But nowadays, most time trial records have been set on tracks longer than 1000m. It's true that in some countries it's easier to access beautiful trails several kilometers long, but that doesn't seem to me to be a sufficient argument to exclude them. Especially as there are also disadvantages to choosing circuits that are too big (if you have to do an extra lap).

> But this scatters the rules much more than simply specifying in the Time Trial rules that the start is an individual start and then describing how an individual start is carried out in the same way as for all other disciplines under 3D.10.

You may be right, but for me it raises the silly question: is a race with an individual start a time trial? In my opinion, the current rulebook is unclear and individual starts should be exclusively associated with time trials.

Comment 09 Jun 05:18

"We don't have a 36" standard class anywhere - and I don't see any reason to introduce another class. We can't introduce a separate official class for every available wheel configuration.
Personally, I would have no problem with just one class, the unlimited class. Every race organizer is free to introduce additional rankings and take other wheel classes into account anyway. For free-distance races, the rulebook also does not currently specify which wheel classes must be offered."

Thanks Jan. This is specifically referring to Time-Trial track records. In the world record committee- you didn't approve my proposal to for both unlimited and standard time-trial records to be kept, saying this is a rulebook issue.

This is where we need to specify this. It is unfair and strange to have time-trial records for only the unlimited class. I would like to see a standard class for the Hour and 24 Hour records, as well as the 100km and 100mile. Otherwise, it's hard to keep track of progress when there are big jumps in technology- shorter cranks, bigger wheel sizes, geared hubs etc. If someone sets a 29" standard Hour record, another rider a generation later can compare themselves with this record. With unlimited, we have a progression of technology making it difficult to compare records. How does Patrick Schmid's Hour record (36"/125mm) compare with ones done on a geared unicycle?

Comment 09 Jun 05:31

"Personally, I'm not in favor of setting size limits. I know that several records have been set on 400m tracks, it adds an extra difficulty to do this type of event on a 400m track, but I don't think it justifies setting limits. But nowadays, most time trial records have been set on tracks longer than 1000m. It's true that in some countries it's easier to access beautiful trails several kilometers long, but that doesn't seem to me to be a sufficient argument to exclude them. Especially as there are also disadvantages to choosing circuits that are too big (if you have to do an extra lap)."

That's the problem with calling our track records Time-Trial records. Similar sports have defined multiple lap circuits- whether it be ice-skating, an IAAF athletic track, bicycle velodrome, that allows spectators and officials to witness the race/record. We have no definition of a track except it has to be a circuit. So a single lap circuit is fine for record setting, eg a 35km circuit for the hour record. Or a 20km long circuit could be used for the 24 hour record.

Yes, 400m tracks are tight for unicycling (that's why I suggested 800m upper limit), but it also applies to running and cycling. The bigger the track, the fewer turns required and less force applied on each turn. Yet we don't have 2km long running tracks and velodromes.

Comment 10 Jun 05:37

> For me, WR requirement is not an element that is specific to time trial, it is a fixed distance requirement which is why I think it should be mentioned in a more general rule like 3D.1 Venue

As I said, I completely agree with this, as long as it is appropriately reflected within 3D.1.

> That's the problem with calling our track records Time-Trial records.

I have the impression that we don't have track records, but really time-trail records - so I can understand Simon's point of view very well and would also tend to think that a very long circuit is more of a disadvantage if you want to use the option of calculating the additional distance of the last lap in a time-based time trial - because you then have to cover a significantly longer distance. I would therefore tend to follow Simon and not limit the length of the course.

> You may be right, but for me it raises the silly question: is a race with an individual start a time trial? In my opinion, the current rulebook is unclear and individual starts should be exclusively associated with time trials.

But that should not stop us from keeping all start variants together in one rule. We can easily define for the other disciplines that only Wave Starts and Mass Starts are possible - so it is clear that the Individual Start may only be used for Time Trails (if we want to achieve this). This way, we can still keep the structure of the rules consistent and clear.

> This is specifically referring to Time-Trial track records. This is where we need to specify this.

I would say this discussion is mainly about defining rules, what time trails are and what official distances / times there are. Of course this has an influence on the records, but this is primarily about describing the discipline.
Which wheel classes there are should not be defined individually for each discipline - there are separate sections in the rules for this and I think we should also keep our rules as consistent as possible and thus describe the wheel classes in one rule and not spread this over the individual disciplines. This can also ensure that there is not a 24, 26, 29, 32, 36 and Unlimited class spread across the different disciplines, but that the whole thing is somehow sensibly limited.

So I'm fine with thinking about which wheel classes make sense for Time Trails - but I don't think we should integrate this into the rule that describes the discipline. Or we should do it consistently for all disciplines, but then we have to make sure that we don't end up with completely separate classes for each discipline.

Comment 14 Jun 19:08

It's hard to keep track of riders doing very long circuits- they disappear completely from view so have to be GPS tracked. It just seems there is no consistency in our records- one person riding a 400m track, another uses a 4000m track.

A very long circuit may not be a disadvantage- eg if you have a 35km out and back circuit- you can have a very straight course, with a single turn. That would be possible (eg somewhere like the Bonneville Salt flats). It would mean the target for the hour record is 35km- no more, no less. One could make multiple attempts until they manage to break the 1hr barrier on this course.

A 10-20km circuit would work perfectly fine for a 24hr record. On the final lap, you assess whether there is much to gain from additional distance. After 24hrs of riding, getting extra distance is not a big deal if you have broken the record already. You make up for this by having a very straight course. Turning costs energy because you are changing the velocity vector. So a large circuit uses less energy than a small one. How do you assess the athletic performance of someone using a 400m athletic track vs a 4000m circuit?

For records to be comparable, there needs to be standardisation of circuits size. That's why I think there needs to be an upper and lower limit.

Which wheel classes there are should not be defined individually for each discipline - there are separate sections in the rules for this and I think we should also keep our rules as consistent as possible and thus describe the wheel classes in one rule and not spread this over the individual disciplines.

Where should we describe this? To be consistent, there needs to be both a standard class and unlimited class in all road/track disciplines.

Comment 16 Jun 10:53

> It's hard to keep track of riders doing very long circuits- they disappear completely from view so have to be GPS tracked.

It is true that on very long courses it is certainly not enough to have an judge standing permanently in one place - but this can also be the case on shorter courses, e.g. if the course is in the forest (as with the current female 1 h time trail record). For the purpose of observing the rider, other measures may also have to be taken on shorter courses to ensure permanent observation, such as a vehicle following the rider at a sufficient distance (this is how the current female 1 h time trail record was observed). Observability would therefore not be a reason for me to exclude long courses.

> It just seems there is no consistency in our records- one person riding a 400m track, another uses a 4000m track.

That is of course true - but in the end I have the impression that we don't want to compare performances on a specific track, but the best performance against the clock. Of course the course plays a role, but the time trails are not records like the 400m or 800m, where the track is clearly part of the discipline, but I think it's also a bit about being able to get a bit more out of yourself on an optimal course.

> One could make multiple attempts until they manage to break the 1hr barrier on this course.

But this is true for all records that can be set outside of official competitions and is not dependent on whether a course has a certain length or not. Even with a maximum limit of 800 m (or 1000 m or whatever), someone could keep trying to break the record on this short course by doing attempts again and again until they manage it at some point.

> After 24hrs of riding, getting extra distance is not a big deal if you have broken the record already.

If the record has already been broken, then that's true - but if you're still 300 m short of the new record, then you have to complete the whole lap. At some point you will get to the point where not every new record is so clearly different (10 km - 20 km) from the previous one, and I believe that very long courses will become a disadvantage at some point.

> For records to be comparable, there needs to be standardisation of circuits size.

I would agree for track records, but I wouldn't agree for Time-Trail records. Marathon records also don't have a standardized course and of course it will not be possible to set a new record on every course. Nevertheless, I think it makes sense to keep records here.

> Where should we describe this?

I think section 3B.2 Unicycles is most suitable for this. By defining it in a central place, it can also be ensured that the rules are consistent and it is easy for riders to understand which wheel classes there are.

Comment 22 Jun 07:37

From my bicycling background, I've always considered the Hour Record to be a track record, not a time-trial. Marathons are road races, not a track race in athletics, so should be run on a road course.

Ok, I will work on an amendment to require a standard class for all road racing and time-trial events, which will allow for record keeping in both categories.