Why do CRASH-B's require you to complete all events entered?

[kick-send]

I asked this on /r/rowing but thought I'd ask here too.

According to http://www.crash-b.org/web/competitors/ ... gulations/

Competitors who choose to compete in more than one event at the C.R.A.S.H.-B. Sprints do so at their own peril. All events entered by a single athlete must be completed for any result to count. If an entrant does not show (or complete said event) for the first event s/he entered, s/he will be scratched from all subsequent events. An entrant who does not show (or complete) for a subsequent event having completed a prior event, will have her/his prior result nullified.

Does anyone know the rationale behind that rule? Granted, it's probably a rare scenario where someone would even be entered in two different events much less do one then miss one that they've paid for. But removing the time that they did post seems like an oddly punitive measure for missing a different event. Someone could conceivably set a new indoor record then have it later vacated due to this rule. Again, highly unlikely but still. Anyone have insight to why this rule is in place?

[Cyclingman1]

One can see some practical reasons for having such a rule, primarily to prevent abuse of the system. That is reserving a seat on the possibility of wanting to row. The Crash-B is already a day-long, tightly scripted affair. Extra seats here and there would add to the length. It is no harsher than disqualification for the first false start in the Olympics. It makes people pause before they try to game the system.

Asking a slightly different question, are there any impressions or tidbits of information anyone would like to share about Crash-B 2013? I was struck by how few tightly contested races there were. I think I counted four decided by less than one second out of 56 2K races, the closest being by 0.1 second in men's 55-59 LWT. Many had large margins between first and second.

[Dickie]

I was struck by how few tightly contested races there were. I think I counted four decided by less than one second out of 56 2K races, the closest being by 0.1 second in men's 55-59 LWT. Many had large margins between first and second.

In the 2002 Mens Masters Race there was a 3 way tie for first between, Tony Larkman, Chris Rushton and Nik Fleming, all with the identical time of 5:57.60.

A tenth of a second, that's not close.

[Cyclingman1]

are there any impressions or tidbits of information anyone would like to share about Crash-B 2013?

[Ergmeister]

One can see some practical reasons for having such a rule, primarily to prevent abuse of the system. T
Asking a slightly different question, are there any impressions or tidbits of information anyone would like to share about Crash-B 2013? I was struck by how few tightly contested races there were.

We had a pretty good snowstorm that knocked out a lot of competitors I think due to travel challenges.

I raced 55-59 heavyweight and we had 42 or so last year and only 22 this year, but, there were 32 pre-registered a month ago but only 22 competitors saddled up. I think the very slick driving and snow put the kibosh on travel for competitors who were 2-3 hours away and planned to drive in so that had to have an effect on the results and races.

For me one of the most fun races was watching Christine Covallo from Orlando, FL on a 1:45 split from the start break her own world record. She was unassuming in size and stature, but she was on an incredibly smooth and long stroke for a not-so-tall body and got the lead from the start and continued to build it to the last meter. I think she was nearly twenty seconds in front of the 2nd place finisher but I may be mistaken on that. It was a monster win by all counts and she was a lot of fun to watch because she made it look so easy.