Discussion: passport... how important is it

Passports to me are more than a mandatory piece of equipment for an adventure race. Recently, at the GRML, a ARWS qualifier, two teams lost a passport. I will describe the situations below, offer my opinion, but am keenly interested to hear the AR communities’ perspective on this.

The first team was paddling in 95 degree heat and lost their passport in the water. When they arrived at a checkpoint they did not have it, they then returned to find their passport and found it in the hands of another team that promptly returned it to them. Luck was on their side first that the other team found it, and second that the other team returned it to them instead of pointing them in the right direction. This is completely within the rules of adventure racing, and my personal opinion is that the team that lost their passport got luck and should not have been penalized for this.

The second instance was a team that after 2 days of brutal hikes and treks, lost their passport… or rather forgot it at a TA. The next CP that was after the TA was down at the bottom of a valley nearly 1500 or more feet from where they had just came. This team, probably not knowing what happened to their passport, decided to proceed on without their passport at their own risk. The team, to my knowledge did not go back and look for their passport, but rather decided to make punches on their map to indicate that they had passed through the CP. To me, this signals that the team has lost their passport, does not know where it is, and has given up and accepts the ruling per the race direcetor whatever it may be. They continue on as so, marking what I guess to be 3 or 4 CPs on their map. The passport was returned to them at the next TA by event staff and they continued on.

My question to people out there is how have they seen this situation dealt with in the past as far as rankings go, and what is your take on losing a passport? Do you eliminate yourself from the rankings, and is it really discretionary whether the race director has the ability to say it is ok that they lost their passport. Should CPs be allowed that were punched on the map. Below I have posted the rule in the Race Rules handed out at the race. Please comment because my take is that this team should have gone unranked unless they returned to get their passport from the TA they left it at and then repunched each CP. This team that lost their passport was awarded 2nd place and a bid to the ARWSC above teams that did noot lose their passport and followed the rules.

Race Rule: Teams will be required to visit checkpoints (CP’s) and Transistion Area check points (TA’s) at the location defined by the instructions and in the order defined by the instructions. A team has visited a CP only when all team members reach the CP and when the passport card has been correctly marked. CP’s may be mandatory or optional and will be clearly defined in the instructions. Penalty up to and including disqualification for missing TA’s or mandatory CP’s.

I have been DQ'ed at the finish line for losing a passport. Well, technically, we didn't lose it. It wasn't printed on waterproof paper and it disintegrated on a rainy day inside a ziploc bag. I was disappointed but I appreciated that we had no way to prove we'd completed the course.

Ideally at the GRML, there would have been something in the rules to discuss the impact of losing a passport. Is there a penalty? Does a lost passport mean that the team should just drop out? (The odds of finding a passport dropped in the woods are low, and the team had no way of knowing it was at the last TA.)

Although I have done races where the loss of a passport or SI timing card means immediate disqualification, I think it has always been explicitly highlighted to me beforehand since that is really, really important to know. Most events seem to have some form of backup or work-around to enable their racers (aka paying customers) to continue.

Given that nothing was in the rules in this case, I'd expect that the decision would depend on the style of the race director. Some RDs would DQ the team. Other RDs are more concerned about operating within the spirit of the sport. I don't think either approach is right or wrong, and I respect that the person who manages the event (or a jury) has the discretion to make a decision.

Based on the rules you've copied above, the primary aim of the race was for teams to visit TAs and mandatory CPs in the correct order as quickly as possible. The purpose of the passport was to prove where they went. If the team could prove where they went by punching their map, and if the race course was not designed in such a way that they could gain benefit by taking CPs out of order (or if GPS tracking confirmed what they did), then I would be one of those RDs who would not DQ them. I would assign a "lost passport" penalty of (say) 1-2 hours and I would publish a clear rule on the subject for the following year.

No question, it's tough when big awards are on the line though; it's much better if rules like this are clear in advance.

I have been on a team that punched on a map instead of the passport and despite gaining no advantage we were not given credit for any of them. In the RD's defense he did have a rule stating such actions would be the result. It is somewhat unfortunate that we were never given the passport by the TA staff and didn't realize it until the first o course punch...
I would agree with Bash above in this instance however. The rule stated in the original post left some wiggle room for the RD. I think a penalty does need to be given out, at least as long as it would have taken them to go down and get the passport at the TA.

I've seen both a DQ for a lost passport and no action so long as you can show your punches on a map or something, but no credit for anything with no proof which early in a race can be catastrophic if that means you're on a short course.

Losing a passport is careless, so it should be penalized one way or another. A DQ is harsh, but it probably depends on the style of race and the race director as Bash mentioned. A time penalty is fine, but RDs should have a schedule prepared for such a penalty before hand so they don't have to decide how much time to add while teams are waiting at the finish line to see who won!

One really neat idea that NSAR has for their races is that in the event where some ambiguous situation comes up that the rules don't clearly address, a jury is formed from third party teams to make a ruling. The system was actually used at least once too!

Interesting thoughts, my take was that the sticking point "only" would make you unranked. The intangibles I guess were in the pre-race briefings when they highlighted that you must punch your passport and that anything illegible or indistinct... if it was wet and wrinkled... would not be count.

Hard decision for the RD, but I think we can all respect the difficult spot they are put in here. Goes to show that this should be clarified pre-race no matter what and iff it is lost and you don't get a dnr.. then penalties should be clearly laid out ahead of time.

the gray zone...always the fun part of AR

I agree with Bash, Jay, and O9. No DNF but an appropriate penalty. I like the jury idea for undefined penalties.

Was the passport on the mandatory gear list? If so was there a penalty for missing mandatory gear?

I do not agree with DART.

I love the grey zone. Knowing the rules, knowing how to work around the rules and evaluating risk versus reward is a blast!

There is no lower feeling in AR than being the guy who loses the passport. It has happened to me more than once, but there has always been someone who found it and returned it to our team. Just one more reason to love the sport.

I often wish they would do away with passports as it seems like just a potential risk (of losing it, it becoming damaged, etc.). I realize we need a way to prove if people got to unmanned checkpoints and SPOT tracking isn't 100 percent reliable, but issues of lost passports, penalties, etc seem to just get in the way of the simple reality of who got to the finish line first. I'm a big fan of races where every checkpoint is mandatory (I.e. you can't choose to not do things and then strategize re: whether the penalty is a better option). Ideally, if it were possible to staff every checkpoint, then there would not be a need for passports. Are the Sport-ident systems (the electronic finger sticks) reliable enough?....
Or if you didn't have checkpoints between TAs, and just had TAs. You'd obviously have to visit every TA in order to get your bike, boat, whatever. But I'm guessing that race directors prefer to have more frequent checks on where teams are (for safety), or sometimes wish to guide you through in a certain direction.

Those sport-ident things are even easier to lose I think! For smaller races, that would be a huge $ outlay to get those going. And you never know who is going to see them in the woods and steal it, for absolutely no reason.

I'd prefer having the races with the unmanned flag in the woods. If it were just TA's, it's just a triathalon, and what fun is that? (mind you, I can't swim)

Falltl4: all good points. Yes, those finger sticks would be super easy to lose. I was surprised to see a photo of a racer at Wilderness Traverse climbing out of a river-crossing swim with one on his finger. And I'm guessing that bush whacking with them would be even riskier. They seem to do okay during orienteering events, but they could probably suffer the same issues as the lost passports in an adventure race.

Yeah, the CPs in the woods do provide an interesting goal along the way, rather than just one really long span between TAs.

Hmmm.... I'm not sure what to do (I'm just sure that I'm not going for triathlon either... ;)
(just teasing those who also do triathlon :). It's all good... Now get more of those triathletes to sign up for adventure racing to get the AR participation up!)

One popular Ontario AR series uses SI timing (rented from Orienteering Ontario) combined with a passport that you can punch. The passport is optional if you punch every SI control and return to the finish with your SI card. However, it is a useful back-up, and if you lose your SI card or fail to punch an SI control, the passport is the only accepted back-up method to demonstrate that you visited an unstaffed control.

When they first started using SI timing without paper passport, there was an event where a top team didn't record an SI control on their card but assured the RD that they'd visited all controls. He took them at their word and they won their category. A later review of the splits demonstrated that they couldn't have visited the control in the time available, and the top team (very nice people) were mortified when they looked more closely at the map and realized their error. The team wrote a very nice apology note to the 2nd place team, awards were shuffled, and the RD (also mortified) implemented a strictly enforced policy that racers must have proof of visiting the control on their SI card, on a paper passport or on a volunteer's check-in list. Nothing else will be accepted to avoid any possibility of a similar incident in future. I think that's fair - it gives racers lots of chances.

In an AR this weekend, we had a tough call to make. One top team passed very close to a staffed CP without visiting it. They were at a trail junction nearby and forgot to turn down the trail to visit the volunteer and the SI punch. We believed them 100% even though their SPOT track didn't show them during that period of time. We had to decide whether the race was only about following an (approximate) route or whether it was essential that teams know exactly where they are and visit all mandatory CPs. We might face the same situation in future with an unknown or less trustworthy team, and we wanted to make the same decision that we would make if we didn't know the people involved. In the end, we decided that visiting each CP was a crucial part of the race and with knots in our stomachs, we DQ'ed them with an honourable mention.

Although we didn't have a lot of CPs in the race - 10 CPs and 5 TAs - they were all there for a reason. Safety is one reason for intermediate CPs between TAs (when they're staffed) but we also include them to make route choice more interesting, to test teams' navigation skills or to avoid areas that we don't have permission to use. Sometimes we have to show our race course to cottage associations, provincial biologists or town councils, and an intermediate CP may demonstrate to them that we're doing our best to avoid some problem.

P.S. In AR, I always wear my SI stick on a long elastic cord around my neck, tucked into my shirt.

I use the two dollar tether with my SI punch that goes around your wrist. Has anyone lost one with that redundancy? http://home.comcast.net/~galeso/Go_Lifeline.jpg

I'm hoping not, as if I did my tears would be unflattering.

I use that tether for orienteering but not for AR where I'm using my hands constantly to squeeze bike brakes, propel a paddle, scramble up rocky slopes, etc. When the CPs are more than an hour apart, I'd rather have the SI card in a safe place out of the way.

Btw for people who can't find the $2 tether locally, our orienteering club uses a pair of colourful hair elastics to accomplish the same thing.

Ah, point taken on the AR time-to-CP thing. I am skewed because our local races are usually CP fests at old school o course rates.

you guys seem to be making heavy weather of this. SI cards on all team members using tyrek straps (10c each) if long event change every two or three days. Software available here in the UK www.autodownload.co.uk to manage most formats of events with teams of 4. These were our rules for the TERREX

If one member of a team forgets to punch a control on the route:
- 1st time (1hr added as a penalty unless the control has a penalty which is less)
- 2nd time (2hr added as a penalty unless the control has a penalty which is less)
- 3rd and any subsequent controls (team loses control and if ranked full course
relegated)

I would ask why DQ a team? Whats the point of AR is it an exercise in punching bits of paper or a journey through amazing landscapes. If they punched the map instead of a control card then you got them to the location and they achieved the experience.

For me the only way to prevent teams splitting up is to tyrek SI cards to each team members wrist. In the TERREX we lost no cards in 5 days, a few damaged but none lost.

James Thurlow

SI cards and controls are a significant investment for smaller scale and grassroots races (non-ARWS). I think for those big events with large entry fees (National Champs, ARWS) SI cards should be standard.

I think SI cards are great and provide great post race information. I would welcome them in any event that can get a hold of the equipment. That is one of the things I appreciate most about orienteering meets.

It still comes down to how the RD can best confirm that each team visits each control with his resources. If he determines that he needs everyone to punch a passport and tells them not to lose it or they will be assessed a penalty then those are the rules. I can imagine if every team lost their pasport and the RD had to collect all these maps and random papers it could get annoying. A huge penalty isn't necessary but a small time penalty is reasonable (which is commonly the penalty for missing mandatory gear).

In the latter part of the 2002 Frontier Adventure Racing season, we decided to do away with passports (eg. Salomon Adventure Challenge, Raid the North, Raid the North Extreme). We realized that it seemed like a silly game within the race..."see if you can keep this piece of paper dry for 8 hours / 36 hours / 6 days". Given that our philosophy of racecourse design was such that a CP should only exist if absolutely necessary (eg. safety) and that we mandated that every CP be staffed, dropping passports all together was easy; just have the Team Captain sign in at each CP and TA. It was the TEAM'S responsibility to ensure that the correct time was recorded.

SI has certainly changed the game since then but I get that it requires some level of expertise on the programming side and isn't super accessible to small-scale events. However, I encourage all racecourse designers to critically evaluate CP usage and placements. Less is more. The challenge should be between CPs, not finding one once you're within 250m.

Doing some of this stuff could eliminate a bit of the controversy raised in my opinion.

Yep perhaps I was wrong in my assertion that all events should use SI. I set out right from the beginning to use it and to a large degree designed events around its limitations which have in effect kept its use simple.

I do heartily concur that if you are not using SI then you do really need to make sure each CP is on the route and if not you need a marshal there. Where I have seen it work is where the CP strip is a set of boxes on the map. People don't tend to loose the map.

I just have a big caution with using marshals in this role, they get lost, need a pee, they get cold and wet - and it can be dull as dishwater water.. and its tough if you put them out on their own. Some horror stories here in the UK where in poor weather marshals have been used. I value mine far too much hence why I prefer to use an SI box wired to a fence post.

Although on another point - it bemuses me why in AR teams only get one set of maps. When I did my Mountain Leader Assessment I'd have failed for having one map with me (in case it blows away). Its as much part of the mandatory kit as a first aid kit and the likelyhood of it getting washed down a river or blown out of someones hand is high. Hence why on our events - pairs and teams always are given two sets of maps and for the TERREX part of the mandatory kit was to carry the spare map.

Anyway digress from the point.. get back to first principles why do we race? To experience great landscape with great company. For me checkpoints are a means to an end not the end in themselves. Don't hide CP's and no point in putting 2 if everyone is going to get both - may as well stick one in.

My two penneth..
James

While I agree that less points can be better I disagree that they should all be manned. I think finding points in the middle of the woods without a big fire or light guiding the way is ESSENTIAL to AR. That is orienteering. Yes, you need to be able to orienteer to get from place but true orienteering is finding points/flags in the woods. I will agree that they don't need to be super hidden. You should see it when you are standing where it is plotted on the map and the clue should be clear. Points need to be on distinct features and not "hillsides." (Can I get a hell yea Gratuitous?)

You may want to limit these types of points to one section of the race determined an orienteering course but you need these points in the race!

Overall I agree that eliminating passports would be great. Maybe the answer is asking specific questions about the location like some RDs use.

I do kinda like the idea of two sets of maps. They are very important but I guess that might be why a race requires a cell phone or other devices as safety equipment. Sometimes even a map won't help somebody who is truly lost.

Maybe the answer is asking specific questions about the location like some RDs use.

I've seen teams work together to share information in races where this has been done. SI, passports and staffed CPs are all more reliable.