Mike Murray

Jeremy,

Your request for split times, although well intentioned I am sure and
reasonable, has been bit ham handed. Pretty much like walking into a
crowded restaurant and yelling “Where’s my dinner?” and then following it
up with “The food here sucks. Why can’t I get food faster like I can in any
other restaurant in the country? Don’t you guys even have ovens?”

Having said that, producing results with splits really is pretty easy to
do. It hasn’t been done before mostly because there hasn’t been a big
demand for them and it requires a bit more time and training for the Chief
Judge. We have all the technology to do it. For the most part the people
that have responded have been close regarding the details in the way of
getting this done but not entirely correct. This issue is not rocket
science. Even someone with my minimal Excel skill can work out those
details. I can provide the FinishLynx training to the officials that lack
that aspect.

For those that are interested in the really dry details about this subject
please e-mail me off list and I will go through those with you. Contact me
especially if you want to help.

Mike Murray

*From:* OBRA [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] *On Behalf Of *Jeremy
Russell via OBRA
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 22, 2017 10:10
*To:* obra@list.obra.org
*Subject:* [OBRA Chat] To those who want to criticize the fine work our
OBRA officials do

My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times (usually
within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially do a
great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's not the
issue.

The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker and
with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better result
technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no way that
they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free time.

The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that is
time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?

JerBear

Candi Murray

I think improving the process is always a good idea. I am not at all offended. But we will take the conversation off line. Thank you all.

Candi

From: OBRA [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf Of via OBRA
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 2:48 PM
To: obra@list.obra.org
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] To those who want to criticize the fine work our OBRA officials do

This is really getting ridiculous about complaining on how they get the results up. Its only local racing, get past it and quit filling up peoples email. Over 3/4 of my emails are about race results and nothing about how good it was or thanking the volunteers for there time so you could race. Its been 3 days get over it .

Sent from XFINITY Connect Mobile App

-----Original Message-----

From: obra@list.obra.org
To: jasonskelton@gmail.com
Cc: jeremydrussell@gmail.com,obra@list.obra.org
Sent: 2017-03-22 12:41:29 PM
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] To those who want to criticize the fine work our OBRA officials do

Part of the problem is the use of USAC. They don't put on events. To get the data you need to speak with individual race organizers. A big part, is like Stephen says, hiring an office independent timing company.

As an aside I offered splits on all the ccx races I judged and got very few takers.

Candi

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 22, 2017, at 12:11 PM, Jason S. via OBRA wrote:

Suggestions to Jeremy Russell. You can find the answers you seek yourself, but it involves some work. First, contact USAC and ask what they use and get information about cost. Next, talk to promoters that use that system and figure out how much more entry fees need to be. Third, report findings to OBRA persons directly; and maybe join the OBRA board to inform the discussion. OBRA does a lot of amazing stuff for how little we pay in membership fees. Many of us do not want race costs to increase, especially when races require long drives on top of race fees.

Finally, if you want the data you seek, pay a buddy to keep splits for you or whatever else data you need. Or program your watch to do it. But don't use the collective "we" as in have "we researched" the issue when you really mean other people doing the work for you.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA wrote:

I've brought this up to individuals within OBRA before however I thought it was worth having a discussion on OBRA chat. I thought maybe it would move the needle more. I do know too that this chat can be the start of a long rabbit hole and the USAC discussion in entirety doesn't below here BUT they seem inter-related.

USAC must subsides the cost of the 3rd party result companies otherwise everyone wouldn't be using them. And, if the cost was too expensive, organizers/promoters wouldn't be using them...which isn't the case. I think it's a weak case to always blame the promoters or racers for everything.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Steven Beardsley wrote:

Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race results formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at our board work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in more detail with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.

The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire an outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an OBRA race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well, but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire someone to do the programming and development to make new or better software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.

This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.

On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell" wrote:

Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a mystery to me most of the time.

Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a way to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley wrote:

At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.

These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.

Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA wrote:

My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's not the issue.

The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free time.

The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?

JerBear

_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

_______________________________________________ OBRA mailing list obra@list.obra.org http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

Jeremy Russell

Ha! This issue isn't speed of results, it's releasing the data associated
with the results to provide us a better idea of what happened. The amateur
comment could probably apply to all OBRA Chat threads that don't start with
"FS:".

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:50 PM, stevea.long
wrote:

> Really, is JerBear getting his race results more quickly this much of an
> issue? Isn't this still amateur racing?
>
>
> Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S®4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Steven Beardsley via OBRA
> Date:03/22/2017 11:13 AM (GMT-08:00)
> To: Jeremy Russell
> Cc: OBRA
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] To those who want to criticize the fine work our
> OBRA officials do
>
> Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race results
> formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at our board
> work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in more detail
> with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.
>
> The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire an
> outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an OBRA
> race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its
> officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well,
> but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire
> someone to do the programming and development to make new or better
> software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our
> community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.
>
> This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest
> reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our
> officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might
> need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.
>
>
> On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell"
> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are
> OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a
> mystery to me most of the time.
>
> Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a way
> to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a
> bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the
> root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always
> lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley
> wrote:
>
>> At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
>> Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
>> officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.
>>
>> These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
>> money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
>> every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
>> has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
>> community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
>> everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
>> OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.
>>
>> Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most
>> races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee
>> for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
>> willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
>> use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
>> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>>
>>> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
>>> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
>>> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
>>> not the issue.
>>>
>>> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker
>>> and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better
>>> result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no
>>> way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free
>>> time.
>>>
>>> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that
>>> is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>>>
>>> JerBear
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OBRA mailing list
>>> obra@list.obra.org
>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

stevea.long

Really, is JerBear getting his race results more quickly this much of an issue? Isn't this still amateur racing?

Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S®4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone

The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire an outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an OBRA race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well, but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire someone to do the programming and development to make new or better software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.

This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.

On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell" wrote:
Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a mystery to me most of the time.

Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a way to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley wrote:
At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.

These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.

Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA wrote:
My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's not the issue.

The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free time.

The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?

JerBear

_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

mighty4..@comcast.net

This is really getting ridiculous about complaining on how they get the results up. Its only local racing, get past it and quit filling up peoples email. Over 3/4 of my emails are about race results and nothing about how good it was or thanking the volunteers for there time so you could race. Its been 3 days get over it .


Sent from XFINITY Connect Mobile App


-----Original Message-----

From: obra@list.obra.org
To: jasonskelton@gmail.com
Cc: jeremydrussell@gmail.com,obra@list.obra.org
Sent: 2017-03-22 12:41:29 PM
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] To those who want to criticize the fine work our OBRA officials do

Suggestions to Jeremy Russell. You can find the answers you seek yourself, but it involves some work. First, contact USAC and ask what they use and get information about cost. Next, talk to promoters that use that system and figure out how much more entry fees need to be. Third, report findings to OBRA persons directly; and maybe join the OBRA board to inform the discussion. OBRA does a lot of amazing stuff for how little we pay in membership fees. Many of us do not want race costs to increase, especially when races require long drives on top of race fees.

Finally, if you want the data you seek, pay a buddy to keep splits for you or whatever else data you need. Or program your watch to do it. But don't use the collective "we" as in have "we researched" the issue when you really mean other people doing the work for you.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <obra@list.obra.org> wrote:

I've brought this up to individuals within OBRA before however I thought it was worth having a discussion on OBRA chat. I thought maybe it would move the needle more. I do know too that this chat can be the start of a long rabbit hole and the USAC discussion in entirety doesn't below here BUT they seem inter-related. 

USAC must subsides the cost of the 3rd party result companies otherwise everyone wouldn't be using them. And, if the cost was too expensive, organizers/promoters wouldn't be using them...which isn't the case. I think it's a weak case to always blame the promoters or racers for everything. 

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Steven Beardsley <srbeards@gmail.com> wrote:

Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race results formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at our board work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in more detail with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.

The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire an outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an OBRA race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well, but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire someone to do the programming and development to make new or better software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time. 

This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.

On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell" <jeremydrussell@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a mystery to me most of the time. 

Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a way to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC. 

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley <srbeards@gmail.com> wrote:

At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.

These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.

Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <obra@list.obra.org> wrote:

My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's not the issue.

The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free time. 

The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?

JerBear

_______________________________________________

OBRA mailing list

obra@list.obra.org

http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra

Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

_______________________________________________

OBRA mailing list

obra@list.obra.org

http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra

Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

Adam Angert

Side Note - FinishLynx provides two day on-site training sessions for $2,795. Expensive, but maybe worth it to make sure we're using our system to its highest capabilities and relieving some of the workload on officials.

Adam Kennedy

Is there a web accessible location where OBRA can export a sample raw ascii
file from the Lynx camera?

Adam

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
obra@list.obra.org> wrote:

> Thanks Jason. Unfortunately I don't work for OBRA however I do pay dues to
> support their work. We all do and that's why I'm allowed to voice my
> opinion about it. AND why this forum exist.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Jason S. wrote:
>
>> Suggestions to Jeremy Russell. You can find the answers you seek
>> yourself, but it involves some work. First, contact USAC and ask what they
>> use and get information about cost. Next, talk to promoters that use that
>> system and figure out how much more entry fees need to be. Third, report
>> findings to OBRA persons directly; and maybe join the OBRA board to inform
>> the discussion. OBRA does a lot of amazing stuff for how little we pay in
>> membership fees. Many of us do not want race costs to increase, especially
>> when races require long drives on top of race fees.
>>
>> Finally, if you want the data you seek, pay a buddy to keep splits for
>> you or whatever else data you need. Or program your watch to do it. But
>> don't use the collective "we" as in have "we researched" the issue when you
>> really mean other people doing the work for you.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
>> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I've brought this up to individuals within OBRA before however I thought
>>> it was worth having a discussion on OBRA chat. I thought maybe it would
>>> move the needle more. I do know too that this chat can be the start of a
>>> long rabbit hole and the USAC discussion in entirety doesn't below here BUT
>>> they seem inter-related.
>>>
>>> USAC must subsides the cost of the 3rd party result companies otherwise
>>> everyone wouldn't be using them. And, if the cost was too expensive,
>>> organizers/promoters wouldn't be using them...which isn't the case. I think
>>> it's a weak case to always blame the promoters or racers for everything.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Steven Beardsley
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race
>>>> results formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at
>>>> our board work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in
>>>> more detail with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.
>>>>
>>>> The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire
>>>> an outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an
>>>> OBRA race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its
>>>> officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well,
>>>> but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire
>>>> someone to do the programming and development to make new or better
>>>> software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our
>>>> community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.
>>>>
>>>> This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might
>>>> suggest reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our
>>>> officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might
>>>> need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell"
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we
>>>> are OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is
>>>> sometimes a mystery to me most of the time.
>>>>
>>>> Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a
>>>> way to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a
>>>> bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the
>>>> root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always
>>>> lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
>>>>> Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
>>>>> officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.
>>>>>
>>>>> These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
>>>>> money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
>>>>> every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
>>>>> has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
>>>>> community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
>>>>> everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
>>>>> OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for
>>>>> most races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry
>>>>> fee for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
>>>>> willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
>>>>> use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
>>>>> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
>>>>>> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
>>>>>> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
>>>>>> not the issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results
>>>>>> quicker and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have
>>>>>> better result technology? Are they investing more in their officials?
>>>>>> There's no way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering
>>>>>> their free time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way
>>>>>> that is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JerBear
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> OBRA mailing list
>>>>>> obra@list.obra.org
>>>>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>>>>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OBRA mailing list
>>> obra@list.obra.org
>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>

T. Kenji Sugahara

Hi Jeremy,

OBRA officials produce results times usually within a few hours after
the finish. In fact, in some instances, a short time after the races
end. Depending on equipment, location, and other factors we can post
them within minutes. We can include times - and do if the finishlynx
camera is out there. Our results far surpass most of what's out there
in the US. There are times when results do get delayed but those tend
to be far and few between.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA
wrote:
> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times (usually
> within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially do a
> great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's not the
> issue.
>
> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker and
> with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better result
> technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no way that
> they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free time.
>
> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that is
> time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>
> JerBear
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org

Jeremy Russell

Cross and road racers are two different animals for the most part.

So far, only 50 people have responded to my survey BUT 80% yes they want
it. Most thru a facebook post. If we had it on the news letter, more people
might respond.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Candi Murray wrote:

> Part of the problem is the use of USAC. They don't put on events. To get
> the data you need to speak with individual race organizers. A big part, is
> like Stephen says, hiring an office independent timing company.
> As an aside I offered splits on all the ccx races I judged and got very
> few takers.
> Candi
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 22, 2017, at 12:11 PM, Jason S. via OBRA
> wrote:
>
> Suggestions to Jeremy Russell. You can find the answers you seek yourself,
> but it involves some work. First, contact USAC and ask what they use and
> get information about cost. Next, talk to promoters that use that system
> and figure out how much more entry fees need to be. Third, report findings
> to OBRA persons directly; and maybe join the OBRA board to inform the
> discussion. OBRA does a lot of amazing stuff for how little we pay in
> membership fees. Many of us do not want race costs to increase, especially
> when races require long drives on top of race fees.
>
> Finally, if you want the data you seek, pay a buddy to keep splits for you
> or whatever else data you need. Or program your watch to do it. But don't
> use the collective "we" as in have "we researched" the issue when you
> really mean other people doing the work for you.
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>
>> I've brought this up to individuals within OBRA before however I thought
>> it was worth having a discussion on OBRA chat. I thought maybe it would
>> move the needle more. I do know too that this chat can be the start of a
>> long rabbit hole and the USAC discussion in entirety doesn't below here BUT
>> they seem inter-related.
>>
>> USAC must subsides the cost of the 3rd party result companies otherwise
>> everyone wouldn't be using them. And, if the cost was too expensive,
>> organizers/promoters wouldn't be using them...which isn't the case. I think
>> it's a weak case to always blame the promoters or racers for everything.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Steven Beardsley
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race results
>>> formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at our board
>>> work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in more detail
>>> with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.
>>>
>>> The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire
>>> an outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an
>>> OBRA race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its
>>> officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well,
>>> but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire
>>> someone to do the programming and development to make new or better
>>> software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our
>>> community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.
>>>
>>> This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest
>>> reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our
>>> officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might
>>> need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are
>>> OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a
>>> mystery to me most of the time.
>>>
>>> Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a
>>> way to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a
>>> bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the
>>> root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always
>>> lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
>>>> Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
>>>> officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.
>>>>
>>>> These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
>>>> money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
>>>> every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
>>>> has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
>>>> community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
>>>> everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
>>>> OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.
>>>>
>>>> Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for
>>>> most races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry
>>>> fee for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
>>>> willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
>>>> use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
>>>> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
>>>>> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
>>>>> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
>>>>> not the issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker
>>>>> and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better
>>>>> result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no
>>>>> way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free
>>>>> time.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way
>>>>> that is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> JerBear
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OBRA mailing list
>>>>> obra@list.obra.org
>>>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>>>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>

Candi Murray

Part of the problem is the use of USAC. They don't put on events. To get
the data you need to speak with individual race organizers. A big part, is
like Stephen says, hiring an office independent timing company.
As an aside I offered splits on all the ccx races I judged and got very few
takers.
Candi

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 22, 2017, at 12:11 PM, Jason S. via OBRA wrote:

Suggestions to Jeremy Russell. You can find the answers you seek yourself,
but it involves some work. First, contact USAC and ask what they use and
get information about cost. Next, talk to promoters that use that system
and figure out how much more entry fees need to be. Third, report findings
to OBRA persons directly; and maybe join the OBRA board to inform the
discussion. OBRA does a lot of amazing stuff for how little we pay in
membership fees. Many of us do not want race costs to increase, especially
when races require long drives on top of race fees.

Finally, if you want the data you seek, pay a buddy to keep splits for you
or whatever else data you need. Or program your watch to do it. But don't
use the collective "we" as in have "we researched" the issue when you
really mean other people doing the work for you.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
obra@list.obra.org> wrote:

> I've brought this up to individuals within OBRA before however I thought
> it was worth having a discussion on OBRA chat. I thought maybe it would
> move the needle more. I do know too that this chat can be the start of a
> long rabbit hole and the USAC discussion in entirety doesn't below here BUT
> they seem inter-related.
>
> USAC must subsides the cost of the 3rd party result companies otherwise
> everyone wouldn't be using them. And, if the cost was too expensive,
> organizers/promoters wouldn't be using them...which isn't the case. I think
> it's a weak case to always blame the promoters or racers for everything.
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Steven Beardsley
> wrote:
>
>> Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race results
>> formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at our board
>> work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in more detail
>> with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.
>>
>> The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire
>> an outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an
>> OBRA race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its
>> officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well,
>> but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire
>> someone to do the programming and development to make new or better
>> software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our
>> community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.
>>
>> This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest
>> reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our
>> officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might
>> need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.
>>
>>
>> On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell"
>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are
>> OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a
>> mystery to me most of the time.
>>
>> Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a
>> way to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a
>> bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the
>> root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always
>> lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley
>> wrote:
>>
>>> At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
>>> Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
>>> officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.
>>>
>>> These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
>>> money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
>>> every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
>>> has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
>>> community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
>>> everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
>>> OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.
>>>
>>> Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most
>>> races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee
>>> for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
>>> willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
>>> use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
>>> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
>>>> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
>>>> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
>>>> not the issue.
>>>>
>>>> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker
>>>> and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better
>>>> result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no
>>>> way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free
>>>> time.
>>>>
>>>> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way
>>>> that is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>>>>
>>>> JerBear
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OBRA mailing list
>>>> obra@list.obra.org
>>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

Jeremy Russell

Thanks Jason. Unfortunately I don't work for OBRA however I do pay dues to
support their work. We all do and that's why I'm allowed to voice my
opinion about it. AND why this forum exist.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Jason S. wrote:

> Suggestions to Jeremy Russell. You can find the answers you seek yourself,
> but it involves some work. First, contact USAC and ask what they use and
> get information about cost. Next, talk to promoters that use that system
> and figure out how much more entry fees need to be. Third, report findings
> to OBRA persons directly; and maybe join the OBRA board to inform the
> discussion. OBRA does a lot of amazing stuff for how little we pay in
> membership fees. Many of us do not want race costs to increase, especially
> when races require long drives on top of race fees.
>
> Finally, if you want the data you seek, pay a buddy to keep splits for you
> or whatever else data you need. Or program your watch to do it. But don't
> use the collective "we" as in have "we researched" the issue when you
> really mean other people doing the work for you.
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>
>> I've brought this up to individuals within OBRA before however I thought
>> it was worth having a discussion on OBRA chat. I thought maybe it would
>> move the needle more. I do know too that this chat can be the start of a
>> long rabbit hole and the USAC discussion in entirety doesn't below here BUT
>> they seem inter-related.
>>
>> USAC must subsides the cost of the 3rd party result companies otherwise
>> everyone wouldn't be using them. And, if the cost was too expensive,
>> organizers/promoters wouldn't be using them...which isn't the case. I think
>> it's a weak case to always blame the promoters or racers for everything.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Steven Beardsley
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race results
>>> formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at our board
>>> work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in more detail
>>> with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.
>>>
>>> The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire
>>> an outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an
>>> OBRA race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its
>>> officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well,
>>> but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire
>>> someone to do the programming and development to make new or better
>>> software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our
>>> community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.
>>>
>>> This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest
>>> reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our
>>> officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might
>>> need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are
>>> OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a
>>> mystery to me most of the time.
>>>
>>> Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a
>>> way to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a
>>> bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the
>>> root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always
>>> lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
>>>> Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
>>>> officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.
>>>>
>>>> These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
>>>> money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
>>>> every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
>>>> has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
>>>> community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
>>>> everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
>>>> OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.
>>>>
>>>> Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for
>>>> most races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry
>>>> fee for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
>>>> willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
>>>> use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
>>>> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
>>>>> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
>>>>> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
>>>>> not the issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker
>>>>> and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better
>>>>> result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no
>>>>> way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free
>>>>> time.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way
>>>>> that is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> JerBear
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OBRA mailing list
>>>>> obra@list.obra.org
>>>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>>>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>
>>
>

Jason S.

Suggestions to Jeremy Russell. You can find the answers you seek yourself,
but it involves some work. First, contact USAC and ask what they use and
get information about cost. Next, talk to promoters that use that system
and figure out how much more entry fees need to be. Third, report findings
to OBRA persons directly; and maybe join the OBRA board to inform the
discussion. OBRA does a lot of amazing stuff for how little we pay in
membership fees. Many of us do not want race costs to increase, especially
when races require long drives on top of race fees.

Finally, if you want the data you seek, pay a buddy to keep splits for you
or whatever else data you need. Or program your watch to do it. But don't
use the collective "we" as in have "we researched" the issue when you
really mean other people doing the work for you.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
obra@list.obra.org> wrote:

> I've brought this up to individuals within OBRA before however I thought
> it was worth having a discussion on OBRA chat. I thought maybe it would
> move the needle more. I do know too that this chat can be the start of a
> long rabbit hole and the USAC discussion in entirety doesn't below here BUT
> they seem inter-related.
>
> USAC must subsides the cost of the 3rd party result companies otherwise
> everyone wouldn't be using them. And, if the cost was too expensive,
> organizers/promoters wouldn't be using them...which isn't the case. I think
> it's a weak case to always blame the promoters or racers for everything.
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Steven Beardsley
> wrote:
>
>> Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race results
>> formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at our board
>> work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in more detail
>> with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.
>>
>> The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire
>> an outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an
>> OBRA race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its
>> officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well,
>> but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire
>> someone to do the programming and development to make new or better
>> software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our
>> community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.
>>
>> This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest
>> reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our
>> officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might
>> need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.
>>
>>
>> On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell"
>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are
>> OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a
>> mystery to me most of the time.
>>
>> Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a
>> way to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a
>> bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the
>> root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always
>> lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley
>> wrote:
>>
>>> At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
>>> Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
>>> officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.
>>>
>>> These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
>>> money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
>>> every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
>>> has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
>>> community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
>>> everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
>>> OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.
>>>
>>> Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most
>>> races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee
>>> for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
>>> willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
>>> use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
>>> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
>>>> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
>>>> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
>>>> not the issue.
>>>>
>>>> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker
>>>> and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better
>>>> result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no
>>>> way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free
>>>> time.
>>>>
>>>> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way
>>>> that is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>>>>
>>>> JerBear
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OBRA mailing list
>>>> obra@list.obra.org
>>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>

rond..@spiritone.com

you guys rock! listening and talking to each other is good. you continue to amaze me and make me feel we have a positive future!
ron

From: Jeremy Russell via OBRA
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 10:59 AM
To: Steven Beardsley
Cc: OBRA
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] To those who want to criticize the fine work our OBRA officials do

Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a mystery to me most of the time.

Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a way to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley wrote:

At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.

These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.

Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA wrote:

My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's not the issue.

The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free time.

The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?

JerBear

_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

Jeremy Russell

I've brought this up to individuals within OBRA before however I thought it
was worth having a discussion on OBRA chat. I thought maybe it would move
the needle more. I do know too that this chat can be the start of a long
rabbit hole and the USAC discussion in entirety doesn't below here BUT they
seem inter-related.

USAC must subsides the cost of the 3rd party result companies otherwise
everyone wouldn't be using them. And, if the cost was too expensive,
organizers/promoters wouldn't be using them...which isn't the case. I think
it's a weak case to always blame the promoters or racers for everything.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Steven Beardsley
wrote:

> Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race results
> formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at our board
> work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in more detail
> with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.
>
> The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire an
> outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an OBRA
> race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its
> officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well,
> but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire
> someone to do the programming and development to make new or better
> software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our
> community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.
>
> This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest
> reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our
> officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might
> need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.
>
>
> On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell"
> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are
> OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a
> mystery to me most of the time.
>
> Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a way
> to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a
> bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the
> root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always
> lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley
> wrote:
>
>> At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
>> Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
>> officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.
>>
>> These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
>> money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
>> every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
>> has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
>> community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
>> everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
>> OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.
>>
>> Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most
>> races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee
>> for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
>> willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
>> use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
>> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>>
>>> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
>>> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
>>> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
>>> not the issue.
>>>
>>> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker
>>> and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better
>>> result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no
>>> way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free
>>> time.
>>>
>>> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that
>>> is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>>>
>>> JerBear
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OBRA mailing list
>>> obra@list.obra.org
>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Steven Beardsley

Jeremy, the USAC discussion is a lot bigger discussion than race results
formats. It is actually something we talked about for a while at our board
work session the other weekend. I am happy to discuss this in more detail
with you (or any OBRA members) offline if you want to meet up.

The results issue is completely separate from USAC. A promoter can hire an
outside timing company to do results and work with the officials at an OBRA
race. But OBRA provides results services and equipment as part of its
officials "package". As you, and Candi, pointed out, the package does well,
but could be better. To make it better, OBRA would either need to hire
someone to do the programming and development to make new or better
software, purchase a pre-built software package or find someone in our
community that can do it and would like to volunteer their time.

This feedback is important, thanks for providing it. But I might suggest
reaching out to Kenji, Candi or a board member before blasting our
officials on the OBRA chat. There is no hidden info in OBRA, you just might
need to do a little bit of asking around to find it.

On Mar 22, 2017 10:59 AM, "Jeremy Russell" wrote:

Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are
OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a
mystery to me most of the time.

Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a way
to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a
bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the
root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always
lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley
wrote:

> At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
> Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
> officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.
>
> These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
> money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
> every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
> has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
> community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
> everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
> OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.
>
> Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most
> races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee
> for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
> willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
> use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>
>> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
>> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
>> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
>> not the issue.
>>
>> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker
>> and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better
>> result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no
>> way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free
>> time.
>>
>> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that
>> is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>>
>> JerBear
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>
>>
>

Jeremy Russell

Thanks for the insight Steven, seriously. The transparency of why we are
OBRA (and not included in USAC) and why we do certain things is sometimes a
mystery to me most of the time.

Have we explored what the actual extra cost would be? Would there be a way
to pair with USAC to spread out the cost among parties? I know that's a
bigger discussion (ie integrating with USAC completely) but it might be the
root of the problem. I love the community I belong too however I'm always
lost for good reasons on why we have to be isolated from big brother USAC.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Steven Beardsley
wrote:

> At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
> Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
> officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.
>
> These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
> money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
> every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
> has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
> community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
> everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
> OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.
>
> Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most
> races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee
> for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
> willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
> use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
> obra@list.obra.org> wrote:
>
>> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
>> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
>> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
>> not the issue.
>>
>> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker
>> and with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better
>> result technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no
>> way that they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free
>> time.
>>
>> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that
>> is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>>
>> JerBear
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>
>>
>

Adam Angert

Is there a local FinishLynx product/training rep who can help with this?

Steven Beardsley

At most USCA races, they hire an outside company to do the timing (GC
Racing LLC in Washington). These outside companies are separate from the
officiating staff, and cost the promoters additional money.

These companies, since they are for profit, have invested the time and
money to make splits an easy add to the results, probably at the expense of
every racer attending. The core technology they use is the same that OBRA
has, but perhaps a bit more refined. As Candi has said, if someone from the
community wants to spend the time to make our time system better, I am sure
everyone would appreciate it. But, I don't see this being a priority for
OBRA at the expense of its membership right now.

Jeremy, I agree it is a great idea, but probably not a priority for most
races, or something they would be willing to pay an extra $5 in entry fee
for at this point. But if someone (someone like you Jeremy) would be
willing to volunteer their time to build the system for our officials to
use, then we could have these amazing results without any extra cost.

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Jeremy Russell via OBRA <
obra@list.obra.org> wrote:

> My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times
> (usually within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially
> do a great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's
> not the issue.
>
> The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker and
> with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better result
> technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no way that
> they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free time.
>
> The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that
> is time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?
>
> JerBear
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>

Jeremy Russell

My point is that IF the whole country is able to post result times (usually
within a few hrs after finish), then why can't we? OBRA officially do a
great job as ALL officials try and do across the country but that's not the
issue.

The issue is - why are USAC officials able to tabulate results quicker and
with times? It can't be because they try harder. Do they have better result
technology? Are they investing more in their officials? There's no way that
they have better officials that are okay volunteering their free time.

The only thing I can think of is that we're using an antiquated way that is
time consuming as it's all manually entered. Am I wrong?

JerBear

Adam Angert

The delivery of the request was definitely lacking. However, it is a reasonable request and within the capability of the FinishLynx system. My understanding from Candi's response is that we just need someone to design a new Excel spreadsheet to handle the data. I'm sure there's someone out there in OBRAland who is able to do this.
I would love to see finish splits.

Drew Coleman

What Bryan said.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 21, 2017, at 7:32 PM, Bryan Smith via OBRA wrote:
>
> If you have never been an official, I would ask that you avoid using this wide open forum to "share" your thoughts on what does or does not SUUUUUUUUCK regarding race results.
>
> If you have not been an official, let me just share with you that you are probably completely unaware of the hours and hours spent by officials before, during, and after races to make sure that those of us who like to race around in circles get results that are a n accurate reflection of reality.
>
> Mr. Kelly, it is unfortunate that you were listed as DNF, can I ask how far behind the main field you were? If you got a checkered flag, your race is over, the Chief referee likely mentioned it in the pre-race briefing.
>
> Mr. Benenate, I do not know you, but you your recent post in support of Mr. Kelley was passive aggressive bullshit and I am calling you on it. There was no need to send your rude message to all of OBRA when a simple reply to Mr. Kelly or the CJ in question could have served his purpose.
>
> Mr. Jeremy Russell, I think that your intention to survey the membership of OBRA regarding finishing times was admirable. However, your delivery was not. If you want a blow by blow, ask someone who was racing, it is not the race officials job to provide you with entertainment.
>
> Mike and Candi Murray, Melanie Rathe, Kelli Schauer, Terri Camp, Jordan Staples, Dan Grabski, and a devoted cadre of others including myself work very hard to finish every single rider in every single race. In some cases, the lap length or other variables make this difficult. If you have not yet participated in that endeavor in Oregon I would ask you to seriously consider becoming an official and working a few races. There is a significant amount of unpaid work that goes into getting your results out to you all and the seemingly cavalier attitude that many racers take regarding the results is, at times, downright insulting. It is very easy to fire off an email to this statewide, very public forum, about results. However it has been posted on every Race Result that questions be directed to the Chief Judge and there is a link provided on the results page to do so.
>
> There are no results without the officials to record them. There is a shortage of officials, I can assure you messages like these spread over a widely read forum are part of the reason.
>
> Rant over,
> Bryan Smith
> Occasional FinishLynx Camera Operator
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

Bryan Smith

If you have never been an official, I would ask that you avoid using this wide open forum to "share" your thoughts on what does or does not SUUUUUUUUCK regarding race results.

If you have not been an official, let me just share with you that you are probably completely unaware of the hours and hours spent by officials before, during, and after races to make sure that those of us who like to race around in circles get results that are a n accurate reflection of reality.

Mr. Kelly, it is unfortunate that you were listed as DNF, can I ask how far behind the main field you were? If you got a checkered flag, your race is over, the Chief referee likely mentioned it in the pre-race briefing.

Mr. Benenate, I do not know you, but you your recent post in support of Mr. Kelley was passive aggressive bullshit and I am calling you on it. There was no need to send your rude message to all of OBRA when a simple reply to Mr. Kelly or the CJ in question could have served his purpose.

Mr. Jeremy Russell, I think that your intention to survey the membership of OBRA regarding finishing times was admirable. However, your delivery was not. If you want a blow by blow, ask someone who was racing, it is not the race officials job to provide you with entertainment.

Mike and Candi Murray, Melanie Rathe, Kelli Schauer, Terri Camp, Jordan Staples, Dan Grabski, and a devoted cadre of others including myself work very hard to finish every single rider in every single race. In some cases, the lap length or other variables make this difficult. If you have not yet participated in that endeavor in Oregon I would ask you to seriously consider becoming an official and working a few races. There is a significant amount of unpaid work that goes into getting your results out to you all and the seemingly cavalier attitude that many racers take regarding the results is, at times, downright insulting. It is very easy to fire off an email to this statewide, very public forum, about results. However it has been posted on every Race Result that questions be directed to the Chief Judge and there is a link provided on the results page to do so.

There are no results without the officials to record them. There is a shortage of officials, I can assure you messages like these spread over a widely read forum are part of the reason.

Rant over,
Bryan Smith
Occasional FinishLynx Camera Operator