Result Analysis for Rowbotham's Round Rotherham
Individual Event

Saturday, 16th October, 2010

Back to RRR page

Back to Results Summary page

Please let Henry Marston know if you find any errors 

Line 1: overall time in hour:min & (current position in event).
Line 2: time for current stage in hour:min & (change in position)
Line 3: Speed as min:sec/km & (ranking on current stage)

Note: if you were in a group, your position can fluctuate through the event.
Timing is to the nearest minute at intermediate checkpoints, so apparent different positions get a the same ranking.  If, at the finish, you want your 2 second advantage to be recognised, let me know as groups have usually been batched.  Timing to the second helps separate people on different start times. 

In HTML format (as used in the internet browser) this is a very large file that is almost unintelligible.  The information is provided in a .pdf file that can be printed on 6 pages. Click on the following link, either to view it or right click, Save Target As and then print it

Splits in a .pdf file

More sophisticated methods of analysing split times, sing WinSplits and SplitsBrowser:

Split times have been adjusted to remove anomalies, e.g. where someone reached Woodsetts before Harthill, or covered a stage at an amazing speed, e.g. fastest time for the stage despite finishing down the field.  Checks are required

Split times in WinSplits Online (Table)
A number of queries have arisen within the splits analysis, to be checked.  Current Best Guess is shown.

WinSplits is commercial software that helps analysis of split times from events

For each runner, position, name, club, finish time, time behind the winner and times and positions at each checkpoint are shown. There are two time rows. The upper row contains the split times, i.e. times between two subsequent checkpoints, and the lower row contains the total times, i e accumulated times from the start to a certain checkpoint. The positions are displayed within parentheses, on the upper row the ranking for the stage and on the second row the current race position.  The appearance of the split time list can be altered by changing the settings at the bottom of the page. Read more about this (and other) topics in the WinSplits Help pages.


Colours are used to make certain information in the table appear more distinctly.

red text colour Red text colour indicates best split time and total time, respectively.
blue text colour Blue text colour indicates that the split time or total time is among the three best.
grey, italic text colour Interpolated times (times were interpolated before uploading, so this was not used)
pink background colour Pink background colour means that time was lost on this stage, time taken was 25% longer than expected (taking overall time into account). See WinSplits Help for more information. 
light yellow background colour The light yellow hue of the background of the upper time row for each runner indicates that the times are split times.
darker yellow back colour The somewhat darker yellow hue of the background of the lower of the time rows for each runner indicates that the times are total times (or real times if that setting is active).


Graphical presentation of split times in SplitsBrowser (relay has in a separate link)
Select competitors (All or specific people, by clicking on them).  The graph shows how each competitor has lost time, compared to the fastest time for each stage.  WinSplits has split times for retirees, but not SplitsBrowser.
A straight declining line is ideal (you were consistently that bit slower than the fastest).  A step down shows (for example) a particularly slow stage or getting lost. 

As an example of splits analysis, look at the graphs and tables for Stage 1; see how quite a number of 7am starters were slow (low position for the stage, or presented a steeply falling line for this stage), caused by missing the turn towards Elsecar and instead continuing towards the centre of Barnsley; the recovery time depended on how long it took to realise that a mistake had been made.


Note: this is one case where distance measurement is more accurate than the time.  Time was only recorded to the nearest minute (at best) at intermediate checkpoints.  Times were recorded for race monitoring purposes rather than for the split times.  Time is recorded for the first of a group, and at the next convenient time at least after the next minute, but maybe several minutes later.  Thus, 12.2 km in 57 min could be 12.3 km in 56 min, presented as 12.84 or 13.18 km/h respectively (or a still greater difference)

Back to Results Summary page

Back to RRR page

Last Updated on 05 December, 2010 15:45:34
By Henry Marston
(include a Subject and Body text - unexplained attachments are treated as spam))