3D.7 Criterium
Comments about this discussion:
Started
At the last UNICON, there were two categories in the Criterium: 24" standard and unlimited. This isn't explicitly stated in the rules. I think it should be made clear and there shouldn't be any inferences based on the fact that the Criterium is short and therefore the standard is 24" and not 29".
Furthermore, I wonder if it's necessary to specify that the length of a Criterium can be defined by time (like for cyclocross). The Criterium is much shorter, and I think setting the number of laps in advance is preferable, especially since we can more or less standardize the Criterium course if we have the will to do so.
I'm not talking about standardizing the Criterium like the IUF slalom, but we could limit the maximum length of the straights to limit the advantage of geared competitors. I would think that the standard 29" would have a better chance of winning in the unlimited category (rather than creating a 29" category for the Criterium). That said, it is important to keep in mind that it remains extremely technical to use a geared unicycle on a Criterium like the UNICON21.
Comment
In two-wheeled cycling, common criterium race configs are time+1 lap or fixed number of laps. Both of these are fine configurations for our races and I don't see a justification to force one or the other within the rules.
On limiting the length of straights, I think that can be difficult to achieve in some venues. A quite good crit course I raced on was quite technical, but then ended with one big gradual turn into the home straight, which might have been too long if you applied a limit to the straights. You also run the risk of having no natural passing zone if the limit is too small.
Maybe a descriptive approach where the crit is defined as a technical road course typically constructed in a parking lot, comprised of 10 or more corners, with both right and left hand corners.
Comment
> In two-wheeled cycling, common criterium race configs are time+1 lap or fixed number of laps. Both of these are fine configurations for our races and I don't see a justification to force one or the other within the rules.
I get the impression that the current unicycle Criterium format is pretty far from the cycling format: the course is set in a parking lot, the total duration is much shorter and there is the possibility of qualifications and finals. I was thinking that maybe the Americans had accumulated enough experience to know what was better and what was worse. I have the feeling that setting the number of laps in advance is more suitable for very short races, but maybe it's not necessarily useful to specify it.
> On limiting the length of straights, I think that can be difficult to achieve in some venues. A quite good crit course I raced on was quite technical, but then ended with one big gradual turn into the home straight, which might have been too long if you applied a limit to the straights. You also run the risk of having no natural passing zone if the limit is too small.
At UNICON21, I didn't get the impression that it was systematically easier to overtake on the straights, or at least if the straight meanders with obstables on both sides, without any real bends, it's particularly difficult to overtake. And I also wonder if it's necessary to have different courses for 24" and unlimited. At UNCION21, I didn't feel that the laps were very different (I haven't tried the 24" course), and this adds complexity to the organization.
In the rulebook, we could also mention the qualifications and final phases. I think it would be a great help to precise in the rulebook what a Criterium is, if we want to see this competition go to Europe or elsewhere.
Comment
> Both of these are fine configurations for our races and I don't see a justification to force one or the other within the rules.
I would agree that both formats have their justification. I also see no reason why we should exclude one of the two formats unless there is experience that qualifies one of them as unsuitable.
> I think it would be a great help to precise in the rulebook what a Criterium is, if we want to see this competition go to Europe or elsewhere.
I absolutely agree with that. We have already created a new sub-chapter on this in section 3B - 3B.2 Road Racing Disciplines, 3B.2.3 Criterium - we should definitely briefly explain here what a criterium is. There is currently already a short section on this (3B.6): "A Criterium race is a short road race with distances of 5k to 10k. Courses should have left and right turns and multiple laps.", but I think this description can definitely be improved. And I personally would also tend to move the two possible formats of the criterion to section 3B and integrate them into the description.
With regard to the description in section 3B, I could imagine something like this:
3B.2.3 Criterium
1. A Criterium race is a short road race with distances of about 5k to 10k. It can be held around city block(s) or within a large parking lot. The courses should have left and right turns and multiple laps.
2. A Criterium can be run in one of the following two variants:
2.1 As a set distance race, where all riders will complete the same number of laps.
2.2 As a time-based event, in which all riders ride one more lap after a set time and then everyone finishes the race.
Comment
What does the rest of you think about the proposal?
Should we integrate the current rules 3D.7.1 and 3D.7.2 into rule 3B.2.3 as subsections? I think the subsections contain interesting information about the Criterium itself and I have the feeling that splitting them into sections 3B and 3D scatters the information too much, although they actually belong together somehow.