Controversy at The Great Race XXX 2009

This past weekend, what should have been a family fun-day of friendly competition, has turned into a controversy which is about to split the family into two unequal halves. There are two episodes of the race that under question which changed or could have changes the results of the race, the second race in a row that came down to seconds, in this case by 2.6 seconds. What both parties involved, well at least one of them, would like to do is to let you the readers get the facts involving both situations and then let you decide if the the results should stand or if the better team should have won.

First the teams.

Team A (the better team)
runner - Girard Yandow
cyclist - Pete Bowler (by coincidence, the author of this blog)

Team B (the other team)
runner - Spuds Allard
biker - Aaron Lewis

Before I begin with the explanation, one bit of interesting fact is that the combined age of team B is less than half of the combined age of team A. Please don't let that fact sway your vote.

Situation A - the bike line up
The runners start the race with a 5k, or 3.1 mi, out and back. While they are out running, the bikers are lined up side by side, starting with the smallest number nearest to where the runners finish, down the line to the highest number which is about 55 feet away. The way it is supposed to work is as the runner comes in and runs by the biker, that is the signal for the biker to take off. There is a sign at the bike rack with a list of rules, and at the bottom it states "These rules are to make the race safe and that everyone has a fair and equatable chance". But, already this runner/bike exchange is not fair. Team B with a number of 100 means their runner only has to run 10 feet after their finish, where as Team A's runner has to run an extra 45 feet or 55 ft, through and around previously finished and exhausted runners, to get to bike number 546. The first conflict occurred when Team A cyclist started when his runner was approximately 5 feet shy of reaching the bike. Team A's runner was 5 seconds ahead of team B's runner at the runner's finish line, yet the runner/bike exchange rule would have allowed team A's biker to actually leave before team A's runner was able to reach his cyclist. Therefore, cyclist A leaving just a bit early doesn't make up the huge lost gab made up by the hard running of cyclist A's runner.

Situation B - where is the finish line
This year was the first year that the participants were to wear an electronic device that would allow for more accurate timed results. For the biker, this actually causes a problem. Because the bracelet is worn around the ankle it may not register on the finish line if that particular ankle's pedal is up when crossing over the mat. So, their answer is for the bikers to get off of their bikes (this is when the spay painted a "dismount here" line across the road) about 15 feet before the finish line mat, and have them continue over to the mat. So, always wanting to fully understand the rules, team A's cyclist asked the official the following questions.

#1 The official finish line is the mat?
answer - Yes
#2 So, we get off of the bike at that dismount line, we must then run with our bike to the finish line mat?
answer - Yes

Cyclist A started off just ahead of biker B, A starting a bit too fast, B caught up to A on Kellogg Road. Switching back and forth a few times, B took the lead on Lower Newton Road. B's lead grew larger but withing 300 feet all the way down the road. Once on the Maquam Shore Road B's lead grew shorter until the last 1000 fit, when A was just behind B by about 10 to 20 feet as they approached the slow down area. Once B and A were 15 feet from the dismount line, the race officials were slowing the bikers down. B reached the line and proceeded to get off of his bike, but wasn't moving very fast towards to finish line. A got off of his bike, and seeing the opportunity passed B and began running towards the finish line mat. Half way there, though, A was stopped and told not to change the order of who reached the dismount line first. This goes against what was asked of the official before the race (see #1 and 2 above). Team A could have won, but because he was held back from passing biker B, team B won by 2.6 seconds.

What better way to solve this controversy then by asking the readers of this blog to decide what the fair and equatable outcome of the race should be. After reading the facts of this race, comment with which team should be declared the winner and why. Any comments without a "why" will not count and only one vote per person per IPI address. For example, Joe and Ang could respond using the same computer but there can only be two votes coming from, lets say, the Lewis' household, unborns don't count, yet.

To better help your decision, I've included pictures taken of the race that day.

Team A



























Team B (extra person for kayak)





Team A's Gerard (#546) followed by
Team B's Spuds (#100, in white shirt, blue sleeves)



Team B's biker is just ahead of Team A's cyclist, officials already starting the slow down.



Team A's cyclist just behind team B's biker.



The two bikers already are debating the controversy, officials had to step in and separate them.

Okay, now that you have the facts, it's up to you the readers to decide the real winner of the race.

Get ready, get set, go ... (tally will be indicated below)


Number of votes declaring Team A as the winning team - 2 (I've given my reason)

Number of votes declaring Team B as the winning team - 1



1993