38 replies to this topic

[ishy]

gasgasssser, on Oct 7 2007, 07:21 AM, said:

I personally dont think it should be counted as a dab.If you get in a situation where your foot is so close to touching the floor or a rock,the action of you manouvering the bike makes it impossible not to touch the floor.It would be hard for an observer to tell the difference between a dab,or touching ground accidently whilst manouvering etc,so for this reason i think it shouldnt count as a dab.

If the riders were consistently given a dab in this situation, you would find that they would soon stop doing it, that's how accidental it is!! and if they needed to dab to stop a rollback or get up a step, they would take a big safe dab and lift the bike up.

The reason you see them keeping the foot on the peg and trying to lever the bike up with their toe's, is most of the time they get away with it, it's their job to know what they can and can't get away with.

[gasgasssser]

I just think that sometimes,toes are going to touch,wether to gain advantage or accidental,its a hard one for an observer to call.
I can see your point.Its a tad difficult to explain my point,but in some situations like say the rider is on a sloped rock for instance at lets say 45degrees,he almost makes it,he tries to get the bike up by rocking it or whatever,because of the steepness of the slope,he`s toes are going to touch,unless he curls them up or stands on the peg with the balls of his feet,which is not really a good idea.
Its a tough one

[scorpa3]

If they use part of their body to gain an advantage then it's certainly a dab.

[Cubby]

Personally when riding a section I tend not to ride with the front half of my foot hanging over the front of the pegs, so that my toes don't touch down or get snapped off!

Ishy hit the nail on the head, they are the top boys pushing the rules to see how much they can get away with. Sometimes they will and sometimes they won't. It really is a different sport to what the rest of us ride.

Two other examples from last weekend:

1) Japanese team riders walking sections with drinking bottles, you would have thought to aid re-hydration. But sneaky little sprays of water on rocks were happening left, right and centre. This cleans the rock and can perversely aid grip. Apparently this is a practise that has been outlawed at WTC level as minders started following round with large water supplies mainly to be sprayed on rocks to get rid of the dust. What would you do?

2) Fancy french rider does fancy jump off last rock in pitlane section and waves leg across onto the other side of the bike (a la FMX). Doesn't get it back in time though and therefore lands and rides through section exit with both legs on same side of machine. He was fived as the rules state legs must be on both sides of bike.

Difficult job eh!?

[tombo46]

I had my first trial about a month back and entered the novice route to test the water. found it very easy however on one section which was just a uphill climb straight to the top My boot brushed a tree root. after completing the section i turned around and the observer told me I got a 2.

He said my peg had hit the tree root(1) and said I "gave a little dab"(2) aswell. even at novice level its annoying when you get stung for points. but you cant argue hehe.

Also after cleaning section 4 came back to it on my second lap and thought "that felt different, did I go the wrong way?" looked at the observer and they gave me a thumb up so I did the same for laps 3 and 4. Picked up 15 points lol, all that time thought i was cleaning it!

In Dougies case, at the end of the day, it could have been avoided if there was good communication between the observers and competitors.

However It looks like he loses grip and is sliding backwards to me, his toe seems to be the only thing stopping him losing it altogether, unless his rear wheel found traction at the same time by coincidence.

id say it was benificial but thats just me!

All the best

Tom

[PHB]

bikespace, on Oct 5 2007, 07:39 PM, said:

PHB, on Oct 5 2007, 07:55 AM, said:

Quote

Slightly separate note, I think it's dangerousd to say it's a brave decision. We develop observers on a bravery mission who love to catch out a rider any way they can - bit of bravado and the common sense goes out the window.
Was there a 5 at Hawkstone this year when a rider leaned on a rock and was given a 5 because if the rock wasn't there he would have fallen over??? Or is that one of these urban myths?

in reply to the above yes i gave a five to a rider who was lying on his side against a rock at hawkstone this year, and yes the rider wasn't very happy about it!!! infact i learn't some new names and swear words about myself and my mother for the privelige of giving my time and effort to help with the running of the trial, but the rider who i will not name did come and apologise on his second lap.

Its not an easyjob observing at any level of trials and no matter how well you think you can do the job, a lot of riders always think they can do better than you. and for the record i would have given him a clean as well, but as long as the observer scored every rider the same then its harsh but fair

Ah see, by the time the rider got round to our section, I think he only leaned his knee on a rock so maybe an urban myth created in half a lap.
I wasn't judging you, just asking. I knew someone would recognise the description. Two sides to every story.
You should have yellow carded him, and he could have run through your whole family

well there is always two sides to every tale, the only thing that didn't come into contact with the rock was his head, the bike & rider was lying on a large rock at an angle of about 30 deg, so i think most observers would have done the same as me. on his next lap he cleaned the section and i have to admit it was a very good ride, also saw him this weekend at skyrakes thankfully for him i was marshalling and not observing for a change or he mite have had a couple more '5's

[joostio]

I agree with Ishhy too, the problem is not with the observer but instead with the rules.
is it a clean because his feet did not leave the pegs?
is it a 2 because he touched at least twice?
or is it a 5 because he slide back a bit?

one set of rules would really clear this up.

[Woody]

I don't see how the rules are to blame for the scenario that started this topic off. Rules are quite clear - you can't go backwards, it carries a penalty. You can't use your feet, it carries a penalty. The bike clearly moves backwards, that's a 5. Observer gives the benefit of any doubt on that one. Feet, as in the toes, are definitely used to assist getting the bike unwedged - more than once, therefore a penalty is incurred, could have been a 2 rather than a 1.

The problem is that of observers having to give marginal decisions in high profile events involving high profile riders. If the rider pulls off a skilfull maneouvre, albeit one that is outside of the rules, resulting in much applauding and airhorn blowing from an assembled crowd, then there is (unconscious) pressure on the observer. Because it is a difficult section and the rider has put in a lot of effort, chances are they'll not always get the correct penalty.

Trials riders, particularly at higher levels and because of who they are get away with a lot. If a tennis player puts in a super-human effort to return an impossible shot and it lands a millimetre outside of the line, they lose the point, no matter how hard they tried or how much effort they put in - they don't get awarded the point just because it was a difficult shot. Same with the golfer who nearly pulls off a 50 yard putt over an uneven green. If it rests right on the lip of the hole, they don't get the shot just because it was hard. The rules are applied. Why should rules at trials be bent just because a section is hard.

Don't see how the rules are the cause of the problem.

And I'm not criticising obrerving standards here either, it's a thankless task which I've done a fair share of.

[scorpa3]

Woody, on Oct 18 2007, 10:11 AM, said:

I don't see how the rules are to blame for the scenario that started this topic off. Rules are quite clear - you can't go backwards, it carries a penalty. You can't use your feet, it carries a penalty. The bike clearly moves backwards, that's a 5. Observer gives the benefit of any doubt on that one. Feet, as in the toes, are definitely used to assist getting the bike unwedged - more than once, therefore a penalty is incurred, could have been a 2 rather than a 1.

The problem is that of observers having to give marginal decisions in high profile events involving high profile riders. If the rider pulls off a skilfull maneouvre, albeit one that is outside of the rules, resulting in much applauding and airhorn blowing from an assembled crowd, then there is (unconscious) pressure on the observer. Because it is a difficult section and the rider has put in a lot of effort, chances are they'll not always get the correct penalty.

Trials riders, particularly at higher levels and because of who they are get away with a lot. If a tennis player puts in a super-human effort to return an impossible shot and it lands a millimetre outside of the line, they lose the point, no matter how hard they tried or how much effort they put in - they don't get awarded the point just because it was a difficult shot. Same with the golfer who nearly pulls off a 50 yard putt over an uneven green. If it rests right on the lip of the hole, they don't get the shot just because it was hard. The rules are applied. Why should rules at trials be bent just because a section is hard.

Don't see how the rules are the cause of the problem.

And I'm not criticising obrerving standards here either, it's a thankless task which I've done a fair share of.

well said Woody!

I was observing at the Manx Two Day a few years back and a certain rider argued that he'd had a clean in my section.
I felt under some pressure to give the clean as he got rather vocal with me. In the end I decided to be brave leave it as a one and he stormed off.
A bit later I was still wondering if I'd done the right thing.... you start to doubt your own eyes/memory, when a spectator came up to me and quietly said "watch this" he held out a small video camera and sure enough he'd captured the dab on film.
He said " I didn't want to show you that before because I didn't want to get any stick from the WORLD CHAMPION and his mates! But you were right!"
I have to say I had almost changed it to a clean and the episode spoilt the day for me. That mark cost the rider the win... I can see why he argued, if I'd changed the score he'd have gained a lot.
Observe at a World round???? Hats of to those who do.

Edited by scorpa3, 18 October 2007 - 11:47 AM.