LIKE CLOCKWORK
With seconds proving crucial at this year’s Tour de France, official timekeeper Tissot had its work cutout...
When Marcel Kittel took stage seven of the 2017 Tour de France into Nuits-Saint-Georges from Edvald Boasson Hagen by 3/10,000ths of a second, a new light was cast on the methods of the race’s timekeepers. How could anyone deliver a result so precise within seconds of two riders crossing the line side by side after 200km of racing? Images were shown on TV that still proved nothing to the naked eye, the riders themselves, who often seem to ‘know’, were clueless until the announcement came. So what level of technology was confirming that such a seemingly imperceptible time difference did, in fact, exist.
Tissot works with Swiss Timing at the Tour, and its Head of Time, Pascal Rossier, began to give us some clarity during stage 10 just four days later..
“Since Tissot was last on the race [its previous stint as timekeeper ended in 1992, it returned last year] the photo finish technology has improved a lot,” he explains, “and the capacity of the photo finish to capture what is happening has expanded. In the past we were using technology that could capture 2000 frames per second, whereas now we’re able to capture 10,000, which is what enabled us to demonstrate a time difference between Marcel Kittel and Edvald Boasson Hagen.
“That technology has only existed since 2014. It’s difficult to say whether the stage into Nuits-Saint-Georges would have been called a dead heat before this technology: the commissaires decide the result, not Tissot, so they would have had to work with the image they had and zoom in to try to differentiate between the riders. One thing we can say is that it was a lot easier and much quicker to call the result with today’s technology.”
Inside the race’s cramped timekeeping room, where four technicians are at work alongside the stage 10 finish line in Bergerac, the finish line image from stage seven is called up. It’s a dead heat. The image is blown up for us. It’s still a dead heat. The image is blown up some more, and yes, Kittel has it by a pixel. No image we saw before coming here clearly demonstrated that fact, but this one does.
A KIND OF MAGIC
“What we use for the photo finish is what we call a ‘magic eye’,” explains Rossier. “It’s a timing device, but also a photographic device. Imagine if you look through a tiny gap in a pair of shutters on your window and a cyclist rides by. At no point will you see the whole bike, you will just see each individual strip of bike as it passes through that slit, and the mind will piece it together into a cyclist. That’s what we do to compose the photo finish image: it is up to 10,000 frames per second of what is taking place on the strip of the finish line, pieced together to create an image along the horizontal axis that we can then move around and zoom in on. It looks like one photo, but is actually a series of ‘slices’.”
There’s much more to timing the Tour de France than photo finishes, of course, but Pascal is keen to stress that nothing else is as important.
“The challenge in a mass race, however long, is the magic moment that everyone crosses the line,” he tells us, “so measuring that correctly is the key. We also need the expertise and ability to use the
“IN THE PAST WE WERE USING TECHNOLOGY THAT COULD CAPTURE 2000 FRAMES PER SECOND, NOW IT' S 10,000”
“THE CHALLENGE IN AM ASS RACE IS THE MAGIC MOMENT THAT EVERYONE CROSSES THE LINE”
technology, because we have a commitment to being able to give the top three in any stage within five seconds of them crossing the line, the top 10 within 10 seconds and a provisional General Classification within 30 seconds.”
For this purpose the travelling Tissot technicians can set the finish line cameras to take anything from 4000 frames to 10,000 every second. But why the difference? Surely a mountain-top finish could, in theory, produce as close a result as a sprint along the Champs-Élysées.
“The reason we can adjust the speed is to do with the speed of the riders crossing the line rather than the predicted ‘closeness’ of the stage,” explains Rossier. “If we set the camera at 10,000 for a summit finish, the resultant image would be too stretched out and the riders far too long. It’s about getting the best quality picture. The riders in the first positions are the most important, so if someone at the back freewheels over the line on a 10,000-frames-a-second stage, it doesn’t matter that they’re elongated, but if the first on a mountain stage looked like that it wouldn’t make for a good image – and later riders would look even worse.”
TRIAL OF TIMING
This year’s edition of the Tour de France saw the top three of Chris Froome, Romain Bardet and Rigoberto Uran enter the penultimate time trial stage separated by less than 30 seconds. As a demonstration of the fact that every second counts in this race, it was pretty emphatic. With the race set to be decided by a time trial stage, extra demands are placed on the timekeepers.
“Such stages provide a different challenge,” confirms Rossier, “as they are a different type of
race with several riders out on the course at one time, all needing to be individually timed.
“On one level it is straightforward – we take a time on the start ramp and a time on the finish line – but you have to have a system to show a graphic representation of the riders and where they are on the course, plus we need to gather timings at the intermediate split points. The challenge is to bring all that information from the course into the timing room at the finish. There can be issues with bandwidth and 4G coverage, so we work with the telecoms teams ahead of time and everything is tested in advance.
“On the day of the race we have to deploy all our teams out onto the course in the morning and ensure that everything is in place and working two hours before the first rider rolls down the ramp. Two hours gives us a bit of room to manoeuvre should there be any issues, because there can be complications in deploying people and equipment to different locations day after day.”
Ultimately Bardet would keep his place on the podium by a solitary second from Froome’s Team Sky teammate Mikel Landa, so every second truly did count.
HOME TIME
One other area where the role of the timekeeper is crucial is in calculating which riders even get to make it to Paris, and which are forced to head home early. At the Tour de France, every rider must finish every stage within a cut-off time, which is calculated based on the time of the stage winner and the difficulty of the stage. On stage nine this year seven riders, including four from home squad FDJ, one being French champion Arnaud Demare, were eliminated after a tough day in the Jura Mountains that also saw pre-race favourite Richie Porte crash out.
How does Tissot work out who doesn’t get the chance to continue? Who holds the calculator?
“The UCI sets the cut-off time calculation formula,” says Rossier, “although the race commissaire has some leeway with that. Behind the scenes we have a software program customised for cycling that calculates these things as it provides the results.
“That program is evolving all the time, and if the rules change we have a duty to react and maintain accuracy. Before the Tour we will talk to ASO about their rules and requirements and adjust the software accordingly.”
TALKING TO THE WORLD
As well as the race organisers, the timekeepers also have a demanding media and watching world with whom they need to communicate constantly.
“ON ONE LEVEL IT IS STRAIGHTFORWARD WE TAKE A TIME ON THE START RAM PANDA TIME ON THE FINISH LINE”
“THE EXPECTATION AROUND THIS RACE IS ON ANOTHER LEVEL FROM ANYTHING ELSE WE DO IT'S IN ANOTHER DIMENSION”
“As the media environment has changed the demands on the race timekeeper have increased,” adds Rossier. “What I realised coming back to the Tour last year is that the expectation around this race is on another level from anything else we do – the world championships, ASO’s other big races – it’s in another dimension. People want instant access to results, people are getting push messages seconds after the finish.
“So again it all comes down to the finish: it is a huge moment of concentration for everyone involved in the timekeeping and we have to do everything we can to mediate the risk of anything breaking in the chain, so we’ll have back up generators and things like that.
“The riders each have a timing chip on the fork of their bikes, which can be used as a back up, but it is the photo finish that decides the race, because in cycling the crucial moment is when the front edge of the wheel crosses the line, not the fork.
“We have a camera on each side of the finish line, which is the black strip in the middle of the broad white line, so we can view the image from both sides. We also position a third camera lower down to provide a different angle on things should that be necessary.
“That said, the chip is a useful tool in getting results out quickly, and if all the riders arrive at the finish together it helps with rider identification, so it’s an additional tool.
“We do push our on-course data to TV companies for their graphics, but they also take information from those devices you see under the riders’ saddles these days. That information is provided at the Tour by Dimension Data, although Tissot does the same thing at other races such as the worlds.
“Ultimately, Tissot remains the official timekeeper and it is our times that decide the results.”