/ NEWS: IFSC Lead World Cup Inzai 2019: Report
I really liked the route setting this time, and your hosts were great. In the post, you mistakenly put up the link to the Xiamen final rather than the Inzai one, maybe you want to rectify that?
On a technical note, it seemed to me that Nathaniel Coleman stepped on a bolt in the semis (37:52 on the stream), and Stefano Ghisolfi was awfully close to doing the same in the final (2:10:48 on the stream and then visible again at 2:11:20). These were bolts that were not in use for the route. Shouldn't at least the hangers be removed from bolts that are not used for the route but are very close? This could avoid unnecessary appeals.
I think this lead season was awesome. Great to see newcomers doing well and old faces going back on podiums
>"On a technical note, it seemed to me that Nathaniel Coleman stepped on a bolt in the semis (37:52 on the stream)"
I concluded he hadn't actually stood on the bolt but the way that particular bolt was hidden behind an edge the climbers might want to hook was a recipy for disaster...
> I really liked the route setting this time, and your hosts were great. In the post, you mistakenly put up the link to the Xiamen final rather than the Inzai one, maybe you want to rectify that?
Thanks, fixed that
From the live stream I would say that Nathaniel was no where near the bolt. Stefano was obviously very close and may have touched it but he did not use it. (And I have a bit of experience at deciding these matters!)
Removing spare bolts from walls, and just as importantly replacing them, is not very easy especially on permanent walls. In Hachioji (World Championships) the setters were able to remove lots of spare bolts that they knew they wouldn't use during the whole event but any that they might use could not be removed as replacing them would take too long.
The short term fix is to create a hold that can act as a bolt cover. Zero texture. There are already a couple of hold manufacturers looking into designing such holds.
The long term fix is to have recessed bolt hangers.
Since you're here Graeme: is it true that Japan have nominated Miho Nonaka & Kai Harada for their host country spots, instead of deciding after Nationals next year as previously rumoured? And does this mean no Japanese climbers will be in Toulouse?
I read it on 8a.nu but Jens isn't always correct ;-)
But they are not using their host country spots, those spots disappeared as soon as Akiyo and Tomoa were confirmed (Jens is defo wrong in this one), they are just filling the maximum national quota that is available to all federations.
I have no idea whether the JMSCA will send any of their eligible athletes to Toulouse. My reading of the Rules is that they are allowed to send up to 2+2
> I read it on 8a.nu but Jens isn't always correct
Really? I'm shocked.
That's why I asked somebody who I thought might actually know. But I'm more confused now - if the host country spots "disappeared", then why aren't 2+2 Japanese already qualified/nominated from the WC?
The host country spots could only have existed if no Japanese qualified by any other route.
After Hachioji those who were qualified were invited and had to reply within a set time period. the JMSCA confirmed Akiyo and Tomoa. They were leaving the decision about whether to confirm a second man and second woman until later as it was assumed that they could see if anyone qualified from Toulouse and from the Asian Championships, and then choose. Apparently there is a JMSCA published document that details this was what they were thinking but I haven't seen it.
If it is true that JMSCA have confirmed Kai and Miho then obviously something has changed but I don't know what!
>"After Hachioji those who were qualified were invited and had to reply within a set time period. the JMSCA confirmed Akiyo and Tomoa. They were leaving the decision about whether to confirm a second man and second woman until later as it was assumed that they could see if anyone qualified from Toulouse and from the Asian Championships, and then choose."
This confused me. Did it mean that once JMSCA had ONLY confirmed Akiyo and Tomoa "within the set time period" the other Japanese climbers that had finished in the WC top7 had lost their right to a place and would need to go again in Tolouse? It seems like to pick at a later date, the JMSCA were relying on there 1+1 host spots. Could it be that it was pointed out to JMSCA that Akiyo and Tomoa effectively had the host spots and they had better pick another two from the WC if they wanted to guarantee 2+2?
Really interesting, thanks. Good to have someone who knows about the matters explaining things clearly.
If this is the case and the Japanese have filled their 2+2 quota at Hachioji then Sean McColl and Jessy Pilz had better be booking their tickets to Toulouse.
>"Sean McColl and Jessy Pilz had better be booking their tickets to Toulouse."
I expect they already have. The WC results where such that they were always going to get a place. All that remained was the route through the qualification rule book semantics once Japan decided how they were going to play thier slection cards.
Immediately after Hachioji I don't think either of them had plans for Toulouse as it was believed they had qualified for the Olympics due to the Japanese only selecting 1+1.
Sean had even posted on Instagram that his dream of competing in the Olympics had been realised even though he had only come 10th.
Sorry, i mis-read you post. I read tickets to Tokyo not Toulouse.
Japan either got 2+2 on merit at the Hachioji and "returned" the host spots to the pool which then landed on Sean and Jessy as the next best at Hachioji...
Japan took 1+1 on merit from the Hachioji meaning the places Japan had elected not to take (Kai & Mhio) moved down to Sean and Jessy. This is where I think Japan might have been relying on their 1+1 host spots to pick the other 1+1 at a later date but it's not clear if this was some sort of misinterpretation of the rules or it was just wrongly reported as their intention.
The first scenario doesn't apply as Japan only has 2+2 like every other country, the host spot is only a guarantee of a place if they couldn't get athletes selected on merit, so nothing to put back in the pot.
Scenario two is how most people understood things to stand immediately after Hachioji.
If Japan can't use their host spot to select their second athletes and after forced to select 2+2 from Hachioji then Jessy and Sean get bumped as there are not enough selection spots for them down in 10th place.
A big disappointment for them if so.
No, you still seem to be thinking it’s 7+7 from Hachioji, but as Japan haven’t used their host spots they go back into the pot and get reassigned to Hachioji which now qualifies 8+8 so Sean and Jesse are back in!
Seems I was correct in my inclination that there was a difference of interpretation of the rules between IFSC thinking and JMSCA thinking.
What’s really weird is that the JMSCA selection plan was widely reported, why didn’t the IFSC put them right sooner and before we’ve got to this point?
I’m guessing Graeme Alderson, our usual inside source, won’t be able to say very much, if its all gone legal...
Wow, this is a hot mess, and it looks like IFSC is to blame. Alienating team Japan and jerking around Pilz and McColl is truly awful and will not come across well to the Olympic committees regarding climbing going forward. I sure hope IFSC can sort this out in a clear, clean, and equitable manner swiftly.
Yip, something has gone badly wrong somewhere. Though, you’d think that the arbitration court will be able to sort it out quickly if everything is down in writing.
Well, they have until the 27th to decide who's taking part at Toulouse & who isn't. Which is going to be tight if they do go to arbitration hearings.