What would you do?

Tom Dunlap

Here from the beginning
Administrator
Here's a scenario, what would you do if you were involved? There are three positions that you might find yourself in. If you could, answer from each position.

Judge/technician
Competitor
Spectator


The TCC site is setup for competition.
All of the contestants were walked through it earlier and the rules were reviewed.
As you leave the site you find a registered competitor practicing in one of the in a competition tree. Could be throwline, checking out the work climb tree, etc.

Any takers?
 
Hey Tom. My vote would be that after the walk around and run through of the rules, no contestant can walk inside the tape.
That's a tough one though. If the person was actually climbing, or throwing into a tree with tape and bells in it...c'mon, that's just cheating, and I say they knew better, or should have known better. Try again next year. I vote DQ for that event at least. If the person was just inside the tape looking around that would be different.
 

sarumono

New Member
As a Judge I'd say dq

As a competitor dq. it's not fair to the rest of the competitors unless they all get an equal practice run (perhaps after they see their score)

As a spectator who cares I'm here to see people do stuff and that's what's happining
 

Mark Chisholm

Administrator
Administrator
It should be a common rule to all that it would be un-cool to try an event before it's your time. I'd say that John is right- DQ that event - especially a throwline event!

Now, if the climber was new and thought that it was the designated practice area or something... then maybe a second try?
 

RogerM

Active Member
there should definately be a penalty. In the walk through, the judges should make it clear that those areas are off limits.
Here's another senario, SHould a work climb or masters challenge be judged by a competitors employer? Its a common occurence around here.
 

Jesse

Member
I would say DQ for that event from all three points of view.

** Roger, Dave will be out of town for the comp this year.
 

RogerM

Active Member
just to clear things up. No one person is being singled out here. I just feel that in any of the "subjective" events, it would be hard for me(If I were an employer and had someone competing)to not be subconsciously bias. Also,in our chapter, at one time or another, Every competitor has had an employer, supervisor, friend, relative judge an event, myself included. Volunteers are hard to come by and we know how much work it is. So whoever does it I always appreciate it. catch 22
 

Norm_Hall

Well-Known Member
The trees are off limits to everyone during the walk thru. If a judge did it, I'd ask them to leave and have someone escort them out. They should know better. If a contestant did it, DQ. They do know better. If a spectator was climbing in one of the event trees, they would kindly be asked to come down and questioned.
 

Tom Dunlap

Here from the beginning
Administrator
Thanks for the thoughts.

I would have DQ'd the climber from the event at a minimum, possibly the whole TCC.

It would be close to impossible to have enough judges/techs that didn't have some personal connection to the competitors.

When I've gotten volunteers I always make sure that they know that the company t-shirts stay at home. At the competitor breifing there is a mention of the same.

Hirschel Hale used to review all of the score sheets for the ITCC to make sure that the scores were consistent. If one judge was always low but one score was higher than the other judges, there had to be a good reason.
 

allmark

Well-Known Member
As to the pre evevt climbing DQ.
As to the judgeing by employer... we have a hard time getting judges. I have been beaten before in a masters when the winner had an employer judgeing. The thought of fowl play didnt enter my mind. Maybe im optomistic that this is for education and either way a lesson could be learned. I would hate to win unfairly.
 

Mangoes

Well-Known Member
It would be far to the short side of ethical for a competitor to steal such an advantage from his/her co-competitors. I would make a spectacle of them and request a show of hands from the co-competitors, in or out. Let the people decide, and let the weasel suffer the consequences. Maybe a little harsh, but there was a time when a person wouldn't bat an eye to shoot someone for cheatin'.

That being said, I can't say that from the calibre of people I've met at the ITCC that there would be many with the character low enough to do such a thing.

Were we discussing the possibility of Judges and spectators climbing the trees after hours as well? I can't see the judges wanting to climb the trees many of them were climbing all day Thurs and Fri, again. Right Tod? Mr. 14- runs-through-the-work-climb.
 

tod_k

Well-Known Member
Setting up a work climb at that level is defenetly a ton of work. Four of us pruned the tree, it was covered in vines also. I think it was around 12 man hours to prune and de-vine the tree. That was after we went up the big elm to find out there was too much decay. Now set up the route, I would run it for time and then we changed it maybe 4 or 5 times.I probably did run it 10 times in the one day. Plus all of the rigging Mike and Mangoes did to secure the tree and put up the traverse. Keep in mind we had to run 54 people through it in one day. We wanted to make it fun and still be challenging and not just a straight decent.
 
Come on people let's speak as though we want to communicate around the world!

I'm guessing by "DQ" you mean "disqualify"--it's not that many more letters and a forum like this IS read internationally.

Let's try and make it genuinely friendly to everyone regardless of whether English is your first language or not.

It seems to me that we've got far too much jargon and too many unexplained acronyms (and none of us have put together a list of acronyms yet for those that might need it)
Pete
 

Mark Chisholm

Administrator
Administrator
[ QUOTE ]
a forum like this IS read internationally.


[/ QUOTE ]

You are absolutely right there! We get hits from over thirty countries. And you are also right that it is "disqualify". Thanks for pointing that out Pete. /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Top