Brian Mack

Perhaps it really is impossible to shrink the numbers at all without
rendering them completely unintelligible. But let's not pretend that
it's a ridiculous request that a number fit well for its intended
application:

I accept that a rider, whose racing is primarily limited to short events
like PIR, Tabor, TTs, or the track probably won't see any substance to
the issue here. He doesn't even really need pockets for those races.
But a rider who participates in longer races, where more food is
required, on hot days, when an extra water bottle may be needed, or who
likes to be prepared with a vest or jacket in case the weather on top of
the mountain is different than it was in the valley, may in fact want to
use all of the pockets that his jersey was designed with.

I have observed riders having trouble getting their numbers on straight,
and I suspect that it was not because that particular event lacked a
rule to punish them with a time penalty.

Relatedly, citing current rules about folding and snipping is a nice way
to resolve debates, but I think this question was brought up in view of
the upcoming meeting, where, as I understand, some rules may be modified.

Now, I personally want the officials to be able to read numbers as
easily as possible. Clearly, the current size of numbers was thought to
be a good compromise between a strap-on-billboard and camouflage.
Nevertheless, the length of my number is 10 inches. The distance
between the arm pit of my Mens size M jersey and the top of the back
pockets is 8 inches. It seems that removing about one inch, less than
half the white space on only two of the sides, would open up all of the
pockets, make the numbers easier to pin on straight, and probably do
little to render them unreadable.

If we want still more signal and less distortion, how about one or two
River City logos instead of four? (All due respect RCB.)

Other possible solutions: 1) Pin the number on the pocket, in which
case it is only 1 inch too long. 2) Turn the number 90 degrees, so it
reads vertically while seated. (Cameramen: Is this also hard to read?)
3) Rewrite the rule so that the numbers can be cut on any jersey, the
design of which allows for a given minimum amount of white space around
the numbers. 4) Get a jersey with a single, centralized zipper across
the back, like I've noticed many of the Italian brands coming out with
recently. 5) Give the numbers more vertical white space, to help make
up for less horizontal. 6) Let riders have the option of folding or
snipping, as long as it doesn't get shorter than 8", or the distance
from the arm pit to the pocket. There will be relatively few riders
that are so short in a given field.

OBRA is magnificent indeed. Let us be open minded about ways to make
her more so.

Brian

someone wrote:

My first big race as a USCF official was the 1992 (or 1991?) Casper Classic
in Wyoming. I was an assistant ref and Dave Leahy was the Chief Ref. I
clearly remember Dave instructing us to note all riders with poorly placed
numbers. If a number could not be read from our position in the race
caravan due to poor placement or obstruction (e.g., covered by a vest),
then
the infraction was on the order of a 5 to 10 second time penalty for the
stage. The penalties were effective and number placement was impeccable by
the end of the week.

Now, as an OBRA official, not being to resolve numbers from the field or
finish is one of my greatest frustrations. Evan, Sal, Mike, and others are
all correct. Size does matter. And all of that white space around the
number provides contrast and improves the signal to noise ratio.

Many post-race hours are logged by Candi, Terri, and other Judges to scan
video and finish line camera stills for recognizable faces and/or team
jerseys because numbers are absent or illegible. Their efforts to compile
the race results, with as few errors or gaps as possible, are remarkable.

~Ted Turner