If anyone has some specific feed back on the Joe Lee electronic scoring then let me know as we will probably be using it on the next event.
Details can be found on his web sitehttp://www.joelee.co.uk/resindex.html
He is well aware of the problems on the KIMM and these have been rectified.
Big advantage is that the punches will hold 2 days worth of data which means that teams will get an instant result on the finish line.
Acknowlegment of a punch at the control box will be a bleep and LED flash, these were a bit quiet on the KIMM but have been improved.
We will also have clippers and control cards for back up on the first couple of events.
NB The electronic punch will be the master for safety checks.

Hi Graham, I've looked at the web site and
they look good. The contact problem is
potentialy an issue, but probably not worth
worrying about.

Presumably start times will be programmed in
or the system calculates riding time from a
master clock, regardless if there are problems
at the start? This could be offset automatically
in the software.

Will there be 3 or 4 punch boxes for the finish,
otherwise people may be queing at the end,
not good for those on a tight time budget! It is
a mass participation event and hence people
will be arriving in droves

Competotors should also be encouraged to
leave the finish area immediately and keep it
clear, this has always been easier when
marshals have actively monitored peoples
arrival.

Looking forward to the electronic age,

John H

I've not used the Joe Lee system, but have extensive experience of SI from orienteering (I even own a punch). Joe Lee does seem a bit more of a faff to punch than SI, and hence slower to use. I guess this isn't as much of a problem for you (or KIMM), as the distances between checkpoints are much larger, so it's a less significant proportion of time than with O where checkpoints can be 1 minute or less apart. However I'm still a bit more concerned about the possibility of missing a punch (always the biggest concern with E-punching). Presumably it's not a problem to punch twice if you're worried?

I'm aware SI does have it's limitations, but it will hold up to 30 timed punches, which is surely enough for a complete Polaris (apparently the new ones hold up to 64)? On the financial front, I presume you're aware that several orienteering clubs (including my own) have SI equipment available for hire, which may well be cheaper than going centrally.

I'm not suggesting you're wrong to go for the Joe Lee system, just hoping you're not ruling out SI for incorrect reasons, as I believe it's an easier to use system from a competitor's point of view.

Hi Chris, one of the problems at the moment
as I understand it is SI (Sport Ident) does not
handle score events in the software. Hence
practically the whole point of electronic
punching is lost for the organisers.

I do agree with you about the quality of SI as
I've used it lots. You can even keep cycling (not
stopping or dabbing ) if the punch is
positioned in the open or by the immediate
side of a track!

what cost to hire from your club?

john h

Hi Chris
We have had long discussions with SId and have not ruled them out but as Johnh has correctly pointed out their software does not handle score events.
Cost has to be considered and for POlaris we would need 36 control boxes, 2 clear boxes, 2 check boxes, 2 download boxes, 2 start and 2 finish and spares which is a total of nearly 50 boxes @�3 each plus batteries and �60 to replace if lost is a significant sum.
The main thing has to be reliability and there does seem to be a question mark over the reliability SId batteries and sometimes we put controls out 1 week before the event.
Whichever system we adopt will be an improvement with precise timings and no chance of a Wrong Box No Score mistake.

Hello to All

Wearing my SPORTident UK agent hat I thought I would reply to the various points made so far.

It is true that the specific software for score events is being written at the moment and not available as yet. However, in the meantime this certainly doesn't prevent SPORTident being used even now for a score event. As each card is downloaded at the end of a stage, the competitor can immediately be given a printout with a list of controls and the total time competing on the stage. The data for each competitor can instantly be made available to be processed by an additional program so that queries can be dealt with and results printed for competitors to see.

Stephan Kraemer who is the author of the SI software has like Joe Lee already produced a great deal of excellent software in the past. Stephan's software is used worldwide for various types of sporting event. He has already written multi-stage or multiday software for events as large as the Swedish 6 Day orienteering championships which each day processes 17,000 competitors over 6 hours. His score software will be flexible and configurable for any single or multi-stage score event. It will use much of the code already used to make his linear and relay software so successful. When this is used with SI hardware I think that as for linear events you will find it provides the best solution.

I think the question has to be asked as to whether the technology being used by Joe is fundamentally flawed for outdoor events. Most people I have spoken with found it a time consuming faff at the KIMM in terms of making an electrical contact between the competitor's key and the base unit. The boxes had to used on their sides to stop water pooling on the electrical contact and a number of them failed during the weekend due to problems such as ingression of moisture. I am sure that the reliability of the boxes can be improved but not so sure about the user friendliness of the kit. Ease of use means so much to the competitors and irrespective of the slick printout they receive when they finish each stage, if they have found the punching process as aggravating as most orienteers did on the KIMM, I believe the system will be considered unsuitable.

SI is used at all major MTBO events in Europe and will be used at the World Championships this year. We have now used the system at a test event in West Cumbria and as everything worked well, the feedback from the 60 competitors was one of unanimous approval. The cards were attached to each competitors wrist so that they could only be removed at the finish of the event. For events where you must stay with your bike they have been used on MTBO by attaching the card on a ski-pass extender.

CLEARING UP MISCONCEPTIONS
Instant Results on the Finish Line - There is nothing to prevent instant results being generated at the finish line. In the massive 6 day events in Sweden the card is used each day, downloaded, the data stored in a Borland database and regularly backed up. Once the data is stored, the card is cleared before use on the second day. On the finish line the data from both days can be combined to provide the competitor with instant results. It already happens. However, if the hardware is unreliable, your instant point scores will not be worth the paper they are written on!

2 Days Data on A Card - If you have good software and decent backup procedures it becomes irrelevant whether your card hold one or 10 days data - It will need clearing sooner or later. Remember that 17,000 Swedes use the SPORTident system at the 6 Day and clear their cards each day before they compete.

Batteries - These last 500 hours and are extremely reliable so it is unlikely that more a few will need to be changed prior to the event. At the LAMM we place the boxes on the hill up to 8 days before the first competitor visits the checkpoint. Not sure where this misinformation originated?

Cost and Security
We don't believe that the outlay of a few hundred pounds for kit hire at a major event like the Polaris should be significant. You would need a pool of SI cards to hire out to those who don't provide their own. With the overlap between orienteering and MTB, you will find that a significant number of competitors own their own card. As in orienteering, they can register this card when they enter which saves them hiring. At the local MTB event we secured the boxes by threading the standard 4mm wire through the cylindrical hole in the base unit. The wire was then attached to a gate post, tree etc.. None were damaged nore were any of the wires cut with bolt croppers but this is a potential issue in less rural areas.

Martin Stone

I shall ask my club about cost of hire. At our recent event we had almost 50 checkpoints, plus start / finish / check / clear / download, so your requirement certainly isn't excessive. Is �150 really that significant a sum for you? You could put all entry fees up by 50p and cover it without anybody noticing - anyway I find it hard to believe any similar system would be significantly cheaper.

Martin's said it so much better than I could, but it's really not that difficult to take the output from SI software and plug it into a different score software - I could probably knock something to do that up in an afternoon!

(I thought this may be of interest)---
This an email from Falk Schults-Motel - a German competitor who regularly competes in the PC and his first experience of the Sport Ident system;


This weekend we will be having our 10th anniversary, too. I am a bit nervous
due to two reasons. On the one hand, we seem to achieve only the number of
participants, we had last year (if we are lucky), on the other hand, we are
going to use Sport Ident, for the first time. We wanted to postpone this to
next year, but the company (founded and run by{east-}german orienteers)
wanted to push it for this year, already.

There is no complete software, anyways, so that we will not profit a 100 per
cent from all the advantages the system might have. This time, it is going to
be a friendly deal; next time we will benefit from the fact that the regional
orienteering-federation just recently bougt a whole set for local o-clubs. We
may hire then the hardware. More complicated is the fact that our normal
customers are probably not likely to buy a transponder-chip for one race a
year. I shall inform you on our first encounter with the new technology.

REPORT AFTER THE EVENT......(They had one stolen control & one failure due to batteries and another that did not switch itself on (I think))

yes, these are the main problems. Although theft is the bigger point in
comparison to battery failuere, I guess. The disadvantage of a stolen
checkpoint is not only the loss of money, but the fact of missing information
- the same problem you are faced in case of malfunction. But - we had little
sheets of paper printed (the size of a jigzaw-puzzle piece) with the code
written on it, so that we were able to "check" the attendance. This may
offend farmers in case of a pile of 400 pieces, I know...


Falk

After racking my brains to think of a "score" event that used SI, I've remembered the Salomon X-Adventure Wales last year - probably not a lot of crossover from that to this forum, as it clashed with Polaris. This was not strictly a score event, as you had to take the controls in a specific order, but you were allowed to miss out sections, so definitely not the standard use (when you have a set course you have to follow). They must have had non-standard software to cope with this - I presume Martin knows more, as he was there IIRC.

It has just occurred to me with this event that it was really pushing the limits of the "racing on bridleways" laws, as discussed recently on BM I think. Not only did it have this fixed route format, but the top 9 teams visited all the controls, so were all but racing head to head with each other.

Cost of the boxes is not the problem it is the punches that raise the cost.
Teams using their own are no help as we do not have a reference to the BOF database.
We also have to consider safety and need to have a physical check that teams have finished as well as a software confirmation.
6 figure numbers on Icards are difficult to manage.
Yes we can suck off data into our system and that is what we are planning to do as our software manages our competition and to get specific results from any system will need many hours development.
Both systems give Teams an instant print out on the finish line both days of:-

Team Number
Names
Control visited
Start Time
Time of arrival at the control
Split times
Finish Time
Event elapsed time

Joe Lee's will give day's total points less penalties, and on day 2 the overall points score, not sure if SportID will.

It is not possible to get a result at this stage as we have to wait until all teams are finished.
However, at the finish teams will be able to check their score and and submit queries.

Handling queries and sorting results will be quicker in our database.

I agree that the JL punches need to make a physical contact but it is not difficult and they use less battery power than SI. (They are used in most pubs to log onto tills)

The JL system also has a a nice touch with a download programme that lets you plot your route and compare it with others using our web site.

Bottom line is commercial cost to us so if SI can compete with JL then we will make a commercial decision as both systems achieve the same end result.


Yes Chris
If you have sequential CP's on BW's on a cycle competition then this becomes a trial of speed and hence contravenes the Law. This is why the Polaris is always based upon a score event as the winner is the team with the highest number of points and not the fastest event time. This has been challenged by landowners in the past but is accepted by the Police as a legal cycling event using PROW's.
If you want to do a linear type event then the section on BW's has to be neutralised.

I presume you know cost of SI-card hire. For those here that don't, standard is 50p to �1 for an event - I don't know if Polaris would have to pay more for 2 days use (it doesn't really make any difference to the hirer - they're away for a weekend either way). Still doesn't seem prohibitively expensive to me (and can't be much more than Joe Lee).

It's standard when entering events to give the number of your card if you have one, which can then be entered into your database - I don't see the need for access to a central database. Obviously a bit late for this year, but it's commonly done at registration also.

Safety at our recent event was carried out successfully by interrogation of the start and finish boxes. I can understand wanting physical confirmation, but are you expecting people to hand in their cards after day 1 to hang on your board? Surely easier to give teams a separate tag, which would work with either system.

Chris
Cost quoted to us in 2000 was
ecards 75p per day
control boxes �3 per day
Total cost to us would be circa �1200, Joe's is less than half for a system that produces the same result (pardon the pun).
We don't want to get into cross referencing ecards against team numbers thank you.
We don't do a safety check on the Saturday, it is a 2 day self sufficient event and if you are missing on Saturday night we assume you have bedded down for the night. Why use a separate tag when we can collect the Icard

I didn't really expect you to want to handle competitors' own cards, from experience of other events - just testing!

500 * 2 * .75 = �750
50 * �3 = �150
Total: �900

Presumably safety check can be done exactly the same way with SI as with JL. AFAIK they come in indexed boxes, so it's just a case of checking for gaps when you've put them back.

Sounds distinctly like you've already made your mind up, but the refreshing thing about Polaris is the ability to come on here and question the organisor's decisions, and actually get explanations.

Not very good at maths Chris

600*2*.75 =�900
50*3*2= �300
Total �1200 + batteries

BTW you never came up with acost from your club for the SI kit.

Yes, we are probably going down the JL route and are working with him to develop his system and make the improvements. After all competition is good for the customer and if we can develop a cheaper reliable system then more events will be able to afford and implement electronic scoring which will benefit organisers and competitors.

If you want a chat email me direct with your number and I will give you a bell

Dear All,

As the competitor uses the dibber and box only, and is less interested in the behind the scenes workings, then it is only the Sport Ident that will satisfy them. The JL system just does not compare - it is tricky to use, and the prime concern of the competitor is that there is no 'mispunching'. Why not trial JL in the Autumn and SI in the Summer and ask the competitors what they think? The printout is OK, but the competitors can work out for themselves what their score is (as we always have done) and the cost is of less interest unless it is reflected in the entry fee greatly.

I meant to say JL in Spring