Jaguar Race Timing System?

[WoodytheWoodpecker]

i've been impressed by jaguar so far. they sent me this link. its impressive
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhvTNOVHpaY

[timingpro]

I know this thread has been around a while, but I just stumbled on it, so here goes.

So, everyone here talks about read rate, ease of use, etc. What about caring about the actual accuracy of the system? The great marketing chip companies (ChampionChip primarily) have done over the past decade or so has certainly made participants feel that times aren’t accurate without chips. Race Directors seem to only care about the finish order for the top whatever number of participants, and then having (mostly) complete results. Some sports, such as collegiate XC have adjusted their rules (one chip on each foot as opposed to chest) to meet the abilities of the timing companies to not being able to accurate identify the true order of finish.

BBokish said:
"ANY computer timing system is going to be more accurate than a human recording a stopwatch time or pressing a button to capture a stopwatch time. All computer timing systems are so accurate that there is no need to certify."

This simply isn't true. Some sports such as Skiing (DH and XC), Swimming and FEI do certify timing systems because all timing systems are NOT created equal.

Humans are accurate to roughly 1/10 of a second and fairly consistent. The rate of ID can easily be 100% with multiple shoots for large races. This is inexpensive and easy to do. Furthermore, humans can EASILY determine, at running speeds, or even cycling speeds, who finished first across a line, when a chip system can't (either because of the leading foot issue vs chest, OR even with the chip on the chest because the first mat missed a read (no passive system is 100% and the older style systems (Ipico, ChampionChip, Winning Time, etc) use multiple layers of mats to make sure everyone is read). If the first mat misses but the second gets the read, is that 100%? What if the chip is read at the leading edge of the mat vs later on the mat? We all know the time will be more than 1/10 later than if the second mat got the read. This is worse than human error. Do we tell athletes this? What happens if the age group results are reversed because the person who finished second just behind was read by the first mat or antenna pointed slightly at a different angle than the first finisher who wasn't picked up until the second mat or by the overhead antenna as early? How many timing companies go back and check which antenna picked up winners in each division or check video?

Jaguar claims (on their website) "our chips are so powerful they can be read from as far as 25 feet away!“ Great, so even if the antenna is pointed across the finish line, with RF bleed, what if some chips are read 1 foot before the finish, 2 feet? 4 feet? What if the antenna isn’t aligned just right? What if the overhead arch is moving back and forth a little in the wind? If a chip is being read SOMEWHERE in the field (from a mat, or even worse, antennas Jaguar uses on the side and top) how accurate can the time be? Was it read at the finish line or 25 feet away? These fields are "fuzzy". Only an antenna with a sharp field edge can be accurate and this is really not possible with ANY RFID solution, but certainly best achieved by active (battery powered) chips such as AMB (now MyLaps pro) or JChip. However, these systems are still subject to the problems of leading foot vs chest. They do provide a higher read rate than passive RFID but this higher read rate and accuracy come at great cost ($100+ chips).

Now for running races, and other mass participation events where everyone competing against each other starts at one time, most of the time this is ok (you won’t see any technology by active RFID used at the Olympics, Tour De France, World Cup of any sport, etc), but if you really want to actually TIME events with individual starts such as cycling time trials, ski racing, DH mtb or the like, you need to use a REAL timing systems, and the only systems with accurate input devices are photocells and photofinish cameras (tape switches are also ok for road/track cycling). A combination of photofinish to provide a time with the identification of the athlete by a chip would be the best solution where the identification becomes automated, but with the price of some photofinish cameras approaching 25k this is not an inexpensive solution.

As far as disposable chips go, Chronotracks DTag is marketed well, and was certainly first to have a widely available disposable solution. DAG was the first true disposable solution to market but had lots of problems and is not widely used. Chronotrack doesn't really have a great mutlisport (or any sport besides running) solution even if they say they do. Though they are working hard on B-Tag (their BibTag) it has and will have issues as has been stated previously, because the body with all its water will absorb RF. In the end, if the timing companies feel it is more reliable and race directors don’t have to deal with the education solution, bib mounted tags will be the way of the future. MyLaps BibTag and “RFIDs” solutions get around this with battery assistance. With the Championchip network behind MyLaps, I wouldn't be surprised to see them catch up to D-Tag quickly but they certainly have catch-up to do.

There are reasons why professionals aren't using Jaguar. First, they are selling to lots of companies who are "recreational timers" such as race organizers timing their own events as well as other local mom & pop events, sound companies, and others. These sales cut into the business of professional timing companies so why would a pro timing company buy what a recreational timer has? However, I think the main reason it won't catch on is that their hardware isn't open to connect to any software. There are three major timing software solutions for running and countless other custom options timing companies use for their events. There is no way one solution would work for every possible event nor would you want it to. If the event would work for a 60 lap criterium, would I want it to also work for a 5000 person running race?

In the end, if you are going to buy any timing system, it will be a compromise of features and you need to decide what fits your needs best, based on how you will use it.

[JackSlade]

What Timing Pro said, well put.

Although we have developed our own (passive) system that we feel is superior to most of the other passive systems out there we also realize the limitations of any RFID system.

The only way to get 100% accuracy for timing is through video/photo finish and/or photo cells as TimingPro said.

Any chip timing company that claims otherwise.... well be careful.

If someone knows a few of the things that tune and de-tunes a passive chip thay can possibly mount their chip in a fashion that will read better (sooner) than the other guy.

Also, especially passive chips, are not created equal, even amongst the same exact chip. Then there are the chips that die for no apparent reason... fine upon check in, dead on the finish line.

We ALWAYS run a video back up... no matter what you spend on a "chip" system, be well advised to do the same.

[elfscore]

So, what are some good video cameras to use at a finish?

[timingpro]

Originally Posted by elfscore

So, what are some good video cameras to use at a finish?

Good:
http://finishlynx.com/products/finis...sion/index.htm
Better is above combined with this:
http://finishlynx.com/products/finis...ilynx/body.htm

[raceman]

Timing pro et al,

Please keep those views and stay the course!

I have a steady stream of Race Directors seeking out my company's Jaguar disposable bib-chip timing and real-time results. I prefer NOT to have a bunch more timers switching to Jaguar because I love competing with those older technologies!

[timingpro]

Originally Posted by raceman

Timing pro et al,

Please keep those views and stay the course!

I have a steady stream of Race Directors seeking out my company's Jaguar disposable bib-chip timing and real-time results. I prefer NOT to have a bunch more timers switching to Jaguar because I love competing with those older technologies!

There is no difference in the shortfalls of Jaguar, D-Tag, the original championchip when it comes to a close finish, new technology or old chip timing has the same shortfalls.

Real Time results is possible from lots of systems, that is certainly not unique to Jaguar.

As I stated before, Jaguar is actually worse in some respects because of the issue with the direction of the antennas. A mat on the ground will always point up, while a busy race director may mis-align and antenna on an overhead structure, which can actually MOVE during the race. Moving parts of ANY timing system can mean changed times. It is impossible to dispute this doesn't impact precision. It's fine if race directors want cheap chips, and only cares about identification that matters in a lot of mass start running races, but if you actually want to TIME and event, there is a whole other level of expertise needed.

I have no problem with any of this and think your product has a place in the market, just like there are lots of choices of cars. You still don't see them all on the race track. You just need to be clear what you are selling. To say you actually provide 1/100 of a second precision is bunk. You can't even really provided 1/10 of a second precision. Anyone timer should only be publishing results to one level of precision LESS than the weakest point of the timing system is capable of producing. If you want results to 1/10 of a second, EVERY part of the timing system must be capable of 1/100 second precision. Sure, the results can spit out as much precision as you want, but it doesn't mean it is actually accurate. I can start giving you distances traveled by a runner over this time but if your antennas move at all, or one is not aligned to another, or a chip is read before another (you claim the read distance, not me), you can't be precise enough to publish results at 1/10, let alone 1/100 of a second.

You want to prove me wrong? Provide synchronized photofinish camera proof of chip times with actually times of runners and bikers going across a straight finish line. This is how we ACTUALLY test systems for accuracy and determine REAL precision at various speeds.

Good luck!

[timingpro]

Here is a perfect example.

Look at the angles of the antennas. Especially the one on the right, but they are all different.



This is taken right from this website:
http://www.precisionrace.com/

They taught a great experience, but thankfully, not accurate times!

[WoodytheWoodpecker]

maybe i'm missing something, but they all look the same angle to me...
i've seen their demo before and they do have something to prove a finishlynx system and theirs had the same time.

isn't the chest the preferred method for scoring a race?
you could have a second place body with the right leg outstretched win a race if the first place guy has his wrong foot forward. the shoe times just dont seem accurate.

[timingpro]

Originally Posted by WoodytheWoodpecker

maybe i'm missing something, but they all look the same angle to me...
i've seen their demo before and they do have something to prove a finishlynx system and theirs had the same time.

Look at the furthest right antenna on the closest truss, it's clearly a different angle.

Originally Posted by WoodytheWoodpecker

isn't the chest the preferred method for scoring a race?
you could have a second place body with the right leg outstretched win a race if the first place guy has his wrong foot forward. the shoe times just dont seem accurate.

Of course, this on of my points. See this:
http://www.innovativetimingsystems.c...mingChips.html

They don't actually list a bibchip for running. They list BibChip for biking when the chip is not on the body. Maybe you stick S and SF chips on the bib, but it still leaves lots of the obvious problems I have outlined above.