PROTRACK

A forum devoted to track events from 60m to the 2 mile. Mainly pro but also news from local, national and international sprint & middle distance competitions.

Log in

I forgot my password



Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

October 2017
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Calendar Calendar


You are not connected. Please login or register

PROTRACK » GENERAL » Was Ringwood non-penalty????

Was Ringwood non-penalty????

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 Was Ringwood non-penalty???? on Sat Feb 13, 2016 2:50 pm

cantrun


Does anyone know if any of the events at Ringwood were non penalty? Winner of women's 100mt hasn't been pulled the minimum .50Mt for Stonington. Surely can't be right can it?

2 Re: Was Ringwood non-penalty???? on Sat Feb 13, 2016 4:12 pm

Mex

avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Hello Cantrun. While I understand your frustration of this mark, it is within the guidelines to give an athlete a lift for a classic race or Stawell as a one off lift. It means that athletes are rewarded in some instances for attending and trying at a smaller race. The debate could last a long time whether this is right or wrong, but the guidelines cover this one (see below page 18 of handicap guidelines)

"Discretionary Lift for Classic Races & Stawell Carnival
The VAL Handicappers with the approval of the HRP, can provide a discretionary lift of up to 4 minimum graduations to athletes for Classic races and all Stawell events that are not a part of the athlete’s normal handicap. The purpose of this discretionary lift is to reward athletes who have recorded wins in lower graded events over the same distance earlier in the season and received a handicap penalty as a result of those wins, and to provide more competitive racing in our major events and at Stawell.
It can also be applied to new and interstate athletes with a strong racing history in other competitions, such as state & national level amateur athletes whose handicap is behind novice, in order to place them above the starting time in Classic races and for Stawell events, without the discretionary lift being a part of their normal handicap.
Athletes who have won a Classic or Group 1 event in the event category and distance or similar distance, over the last 2 seasons, are not eligible for this discretionary lift.
All discretionary lifts in this category, require the approval of the HRP.
Inallcases,afterthediscretionarylift,theathlete’shandicapmusttoremainonorinside theirceiling handicap for that distance.
Thisdiscretionaryliftisnotapartofanathlete’sallocatedfinishinghandicap andwillnotbecarried forward into the start mark for the following season."

3 Re: Was Ringwood non-penalty???? on Sat Feb 13, 2016 4:35 pm

cantrun


OK, thanks Mex... that will see her run a couple inside of last year's time. Kinda frustrating though that she can come into the pros and win one and feature in the big ones too. Almost better off running amo's and walking in with a winning mark instead off having to earn your mark like the pro girls do.

4 Re: Was Ringwood non-penalty???? on Sat Feb 13, 2016 4:49 pm

Toolman


Absolute disgrace if that is the case Mex. She was smack on the Ceiling time that day in the heat at Ringwood wins with a leg in the air and keeps that mark. I agree with Cantrun will be very demoralizing for the girls who toil away week in week out. They don't reward the girls who drive all over the state to run but reward someone who wins a race and money probably in her own backyard in her first season. If she has got a discretionary lift it is absolute rubbish.

5 Re: Was Ringwood non-penalty???? on Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:45 pm

Mex

avatar
Moderator
Moderator
For what it is worth I do not agree with this rule being enforced in this instance if it has been, I was merely pointing out it was possible. Another explanation could be that the handicapper for this race has forgotten to take off a penalty and it will be corrected on the night. Let's hope this is the case, but for now my focus is on the scratchings for tomorrow.

6 Re: Was Ringwood non-penalty???? on Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:31 pm

cantrun


Certainly with you Mex on this one. Hopefully a misprint....

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum