[scorpa3]

Last year I posed a question concerning one of our events which we were planning to make 'No Inspection Allowed.'

The idea was to make the single lap road trial, simple and straight forward and suitable for riders to ride without needing to stop and look at the sections. I've ridden trials like this in the past and really enjoy this style of event.

However, at the time I did have concerns as to the safety implications of riding into a section blind; if the worst came to the worst and someone was injured.

With just a few days to go before the event, the ACU (John I believe it was yourself) contacted the club and advised us that we were to (must) allow inpsection.

I assume that this will still be the case for this years event, especially as the wording in the ACU handbook has changed from 'should' to 'shall' allow inspection.

But; what if the event dropped it's National status and ran as a closed to club/closed to centre event, would we then be able to make it 'no inspection allowed' again?

With around 120 riders entered, allowing inspection creates long queue's early on in the trial and will force us to use shorter sections.

Is there dispensation to make a club/centre trial 'no isnpection allowed' if we wish?

Before I get into trouble; I'm only asking

[spud]

scorpa3, on Feb 15 2008, 04:52 PM, said:

Last year I posed a question concerning one of our events which we were planning to make 'No Inspection Allowed.'

The idea was to make the single lap road trial, simple and straight forward and suitable for riders to ride without needing to stop and look at the sections. I've ridden trials like this in the past and really enjoy this style of event.

However, at the time I did have concerns as to the safety implications of riding into a section blind; if the worst came to the worst and someone was injured.

With just a few days to go before the event, the ACU (John I believe it was yourself) contacted the club and advised us that we were to (must) allow inpsection.

I assume that this will still be the case for this years event, especially as the wording in the ACU handbook has changed from 'should' to 'shall' allow inspection.

But; what if the event dropped it's National status and ran as a closed to club/closed to centre event, would we then be able to make it 'no inspection allowed' again?

With around 120 riders entered, allowing inspection creates long queue's early on in the trial and will force us to use shorter sections.

Is there dispensation to make a club/centre trial 'no isnpection allowed' if we wish?

Before I get into trouble; I'm only asking

I've rode the odd couple of long distance trials on a trail bike and i too wasn't allowed to view the sections. However there was queuing at each section and i did see the sections from afar before i rode them, but didn't walk them. Not sure is this answers John's point?

[rabie]

current advice/recommendation from John Collins is that we can't stop a rider from inspecting a section, because the rider doesn't then have the opportunity to say "i don't feel competent to attempt the section" and request a 5 for the section.

over in mx, we have a similar thing - ie the riders sign on to say they are competent to attempt the course ie offering them the chance to back if they are not. presumably road race and grass track do the same thing. however I'm unclear where one would stand with a rally, enduro, H&H, etc where its unrealistic to expect a rider to inspect the course (your lucky if they walk the special test)

Don't get me wrong, if we (the clubs), asked the ACU to ask the insurance company, i think the risk in insurable, it just might be there are issues re our "duty of care" as organisers

personally, one could set out simple sections, with starts (esp at LDTs) far away that discourage but don't prohibit riders from seeing much/inspecting the section

[Blocky]

Would there be any merit in having a roped off path or observation area next to the section where riders could either stand or ride into before attempting the section thereby allowing them to "see" the section without actually getting the chance to walk it

[scorpa3]

Blocky, on Feb 16 2008, 11:13 AM, said:

Would there be any merit in having a roped off path or observation area next to the section where riders could either stand or ride into before attempting the section thereby allowing them to "see" the section without actually getting the chance to walk it

Tha main advantage of 'no inspection' events is that it helps to reduce queuing as riders don't spend time walking the sections, so this wouldn't really help.

[John Collins]

OK – Let’s look at this question of to Inspect or not to Inspect.

I think it would be fair to state that it is usually, if not always the Trail Bike type trial which tend to raise this topic and I will therefore try to deal largely with this sort of event.

Also for once I think I can hopefully speak not just as an ACU man – but as a rider who for last couple of years has entered and ridden is such events as the ACU Trail Bike Championship which consisted of events like Fred Rist, Moor to Sea and Ivor Morkott. I appreciate I was not at the Stratford one – but 2 years at the three mentioned will hopefully give an inside view of the scene rather than just an ACU perspective.

Can we get rid of a few myths first of all -?

Myth One - In this type of event – the sections are so easy – that the riders have no need to inspect – there are no hazards that are likely to make them fall off – and there is going to be nothing untoward in a section that needs to be looked ate -- Total Rubbish.

There has been no trial – ever – where someone – possibly because of their ability – cannot fall off, go over the bars, loop the machine or more likely lose the front end sideways on a loose stone or tree root. It a’int happened yet – and it never will.

Let me give an example – in the Ivor Morkott – 2006 – about the 2nd or 3rd section – riders went up a hill – did a turn – and then on the descent had to make another turn back up the hill and to the ends card. Good section – certainly not too severe – well marked and well observed – no problems – and certainly 100% no criticism of the Clerk of Course for laying it out.

However – on the turn back up the bank – there were some exposed tree roots – nothing too severe – nothing stupid – all part of a section. But as we were in a queue at the bottom – it was certainly not easy to see these roots clearly.

While in the queue – I watched at least 4-6 riders of varying ability – most of who had not looked – on hitting the tree roots with front wheel – loosing the plot – and the front of bike sliding away from them. Easily done – part of riding trials – I am sure the same roots also took 2 – 3 off me – and I had looked! I repeat – it was not dangerous or over the top – but the nature of the land tended to make front wheel slide away from you.

NOW - At least one rider – probably two – actually went off the bike – sideways – slow speed – but nevertheless – off. There will be no reader of this post who has not done the same thing – part of trials. 99.999% of time – no problem rider just gets up, shrugs shoulders (may swear a bit) and moves on.

HOWEVER – In any fall – especially on a slightly down hill plane – it is possible, unfortunately to land on ones head/neck or just awkwardly. If you do not believe this can happen – even at low speed – there is no point reading any more – as frankly you are not living in the real world.

If God forbid (and there are certainly numerous examples of low speed injuries) the rider concerned suffered a neck/ back injury which resulted in paralysis or severe loss of movement/quality of life – there is a chance – that sooner of later the Insurers/Barristers/ Solicitors and various No Win No Claim parasites get involved.

We are all – including myself – often dull enough to believe that good old Joe – who gets injured in a Trial (or any other sporting event for that matter) - shrugs it off and accepts it as part of the game. This may have been the case 10 years ago – it is certainly not that now. If you believe that this could not happen – then again – read no further as you are not in the real world.

Often – it is not good ole Joe that is involved at a later stage. Faced with looking after old Joe – who perhaps cannot even make it to the toilet unaided - the dependants /relatives – faced with perhaps 40 years of constant caring and lots of soul searching have to look for some sort of recompense or support – it may be easy to castigate them – but without being in their circumstances we would not know – and lets hope we never have to. It may be a daughter/son, stepdaughter/stepson who 10 year down the line is at wits end – and in desperation decides to respond to one of the numerous adverts on TV/Press “have you had an accident etc”. Shortly afterwards – the appointed legal eagle – whose living remember is earnt from such cases – start to assemble his brief.

“I put to your honour – that if Joe had known there was a tree root/stone/ slight drop in the section – he would have been able to take a different approach and would have not been in this sorry sate today”

“I put it to your honour – that in 99.999% of MotorCycle Trials – the competitors are allowed – and indeed expected to inspect the sections before attempting them”

“I put it to your honour that in 99.99999% of British MotorCycle Trials – if a competitor thinks the section is too difficult for him – he has the option of just taking a 5 point penalty – Joe never had this option your honour”.


Of course the defence can claim that the sections throughout the whole Trials were very easy – and not one rider was likely to fall off - a swift perusal of the result sheet – or a few selected witnesses on high marks will soon disprove this. Is there a Motorcycle Trials held in UK of any status where a rider does not fall off? I must have missed that one?

Moving back to the actual Trial Bike Trials. I have witnessed dozens of times riders, – granted often on Enduro machine – fail on a climb – and loop the bike. Often a novice rider – true – but again those who believe it does not happen are not in the real world.

Now – why anyone should believe that a machine looping backwards in a Trail Bike Trial is less hazardous than in a Modern Trials absolutely astounds me – it does happen – riders do fall off in sections – and bikes do fall.

Just moving back to another example – in the Moor to Sea – a superb event - one of the early sections in 07 and latter sections in 06 is a climb – quite famous - and great fun – and enjoyed by all – but if anyone believes that a machine cannot “loop” out and land on top of a rider – then they are quite simple a fool.

Allowing a rider the OPTION to “inspect” gives to opportunity for those who do not fancy it to decline – and even those who do the chance to judge the best line etc – or as often happens on that climb – be a bit prudent with the throttle – and become a hero on another day.

Another example – seen in numerous – if not all trials – is where a rider goes up a bank – and down a descent on the other side - has there actually been a Trials – ever- where there is not a up and down?
Is it reasonable to imagine a case where a rider – possibly in their first event and of low ability - goes UP – and then on seeing the DOWN – panics slightly and grabs a handful of front brake – Please do not tell me this does not happen – it does – and it has happened to most of us.

It is not the severity of the section at fault – it is just the inexperience of a rider.

If the unfortunate result is a trip over the bars - the result can be an equally unfortunate injury. For absolute certainty – a low speed trip over the bars on sat a Beta Alp – is no safer than a low speed trip over the bars on a Beta Rev 3 in a modern trial – in fact I think I would prefer the latter falling on me. So – I will never accept that all the nonsense about Trail/ Pre 65 and other such events just being about a few old guys tootling about and there is no chance of anyone falling off or the unexpected happening – it has, - it does –and it always will – it is the nature of the sport.

To allow a rider to inspect the section – IF HE WISHES TO – allows him to make his her own judgment of the circumstances prevailing at that time.

A section marked out on Saturday in sunshine – can indeed appear very easy – torrential rain (Ivor .Morkott 07?) – and perhaps 70 riders through can make even a simple bank/climb a lot different – surely the rider should be allowed to at least see what is happening?

Myth 2: The trials will much smoother and will take less time and there can be more sections etc – if riders are not allowed to look? Really? Are we running a Trials here – or an Enduro or race?

The Clerk of the Course will (or at least should) have an idea about the number of sections that can be ridden in the allotted time. It has to be said that in this sort of Trial – riders do tend to just get on with things and ride. It is surely not a case of riders hanging around and kicking stones about – if the sections are sensibly marked – there is no need of this. It is not realistic to try to claim that the sections are so easy that there is no need to look at them – but then argue that the inspection of sections slows everything down – why? In reality – even the top riders who may be overly keen on winning – tend to have a quick glance – select their lines and return fairly quickly to the queue.

While they are looking – nothing prevents other riders riding through and this is certainly what happened in 99.999999% of the events in 2006/and 2007.

What actually slows things down are large queues. And these we have certainly seen – perhaps inevitable – but do not blame them on riders who choose to inspect doing so – they are not causing these queues.
Now back to reality - In numerous cases – it is actually the fact that some riders have not had even a glance at a section that is more of a reason for holds up.

I rode last year in one of the events just behind a chap on a Beta Alp - nice guy and enjoying his day out with no complaints – but without insulting him – the ability/experience level was very low and he was a true novice. No problem , but because he had got it into his head that it was better not to look at the sections ( probably told this by someone else) – on practically every section I saw him at – certainly more than 10 - the result was the same – a stop – and usually a sideways crash into the section. This was in no way the fault of the sections - and a he never really looked like getting hurt – but the main reason was that he really had no idea where he was going – or what he was going to try to do after he had passed the start cards. Yes – certainly he had seen those before him go through – but as he had no idea of what was on the ground in front of him – or how tight a turn was – he inevitably came to a stop and often to grief.

All this may be well and good – and some might find it acceptable – but I also wish to add – that on nearly every occasion he had sat in the queue waiting for his turn to ride for sometimes up to 10 mins or longer . I would argue that if he had used up just a few minutes of this time to look at the section he would not only have enjoyed the event far more – but would have got through many of those sections with a three – and hence kept going.

Now – the time in a World section is about 1 min 30. In many Trail bike trials – the actual riding time through a section will be a minute or much less.

The dozens and dozens of riders I have seen fall off/ stall/ fail on an easy bank or just crash – will take often more than a minute to pick themselves up, dust themselves down and clear the section.

Do not take my word for it – go and have a look at the next round, and take a watch. The Enduro guys in particular – often having a great day out – and being introduced to trials – which is certainly what we want (I know several who after a few tries at a Trail bike trials on their KTM etc have gone and additionally bought a trials bike) - will find that the height, lock and general engine characteristics of such a machine make it far harder for them on many sections. I know some are brilliant and will show is all the lead – but I am convinced the majority will have a better day and cause less holds up if they have a chance to inspect first.

I am absolutely certain that many delays occur when someone is stuck in a section for a few minutes – and I am equally convinced that a quick glance would often result in a 3 and keep things moving.

If organisers are saying that riders are just hanging about and not getting on with things – and the observer is just standing there doing nowt ( as in many modern events) – this may be a valid argument – but I do not believe this is the case. I think that most of the time – the inspection takes place while there are others waiting to enter then section – and therefore this should not have any affect on the overall time schedule.

The nature of these events – and the ground covered definitely encourages riders to just get on with it – and they do.

So finally – the T & E believe that the best protection we can give Riders and Officials is to allow the OPTION for them to inspect a section for all the reasons stated.

I personally as a rider in no way believe that in the events I have ridden this has caused any time scale problems whatsoever – and would strongly contend that the opposite is the case.

[scorpa3]

Thank you for the reply.

Just to calrify the ACU's official standing on this matter.
If I've got this right; unless the Championship conditions (such as in the Trail Bike Championship) actually insist on allowing inspection, then organisers are allowed to run an event on a 'no ispection allowed' basis.

[spud]

John, you make so very good points, but you didn't say (unless i missed it) what happens if a rider falls between sections?..... Last Sunday I rode a trial and came off on some black ice on a 25 foot bank in a section. i did walk the section but missed the black ice.

Scorpa 3, I don't know if this can be worded into your regs by a solictor or someone....i'm thinking of a clause in the regs saying something like "riders are not permitted to view the course or sections and ride at there own risk knowing this".....not forgetting your seeking an ACU permit with insurance so might you need to run the event under a different governing body perhaps.

[scorpa3]

If the ACU say that we CAN'T run 'no sinpection allowed' then we won't do it. But is that what the ACU are saying?

[John Collins]

I hope through my rather long reply that I have explained out thinking and theory on the matter of section inspection. On many matters we are more than a little reticent to put everything in print and one can always try to circumnavigate a rule – or ask but what if this happens or what if that happens – or this rule is not clear – so we thought we could do this or that.

Firstly – to answer the last post – yes you can get riders to sign that they accept this or that – we do – and if you read the latest declaration form it is quite stringent in explaining risks involved when you enter etc – but I am afraid it can only ever go partly toward a solution. You cannot get a person to sign away their “ rights” – so the entry declaration – while going someway toward a defence etc will never get any organiser off the hook.

Now to return to the matter in hand – in so many cases – it is not just a rule book that is waved around – but also a determination of what is custom and practice – and the calling of witnesses
( often made to attend) and they would be quizzed as to what is the norm – and what was expected.

I can make it no more clear than this - In the rules for the particular Championship concerned – it states that riders should be given the opportunity to inspect the sections. I have stated the reasons.

If an organiser decides that because it does not categorically state at present that all trials must adhere to this – they can make their own decision on if they wish to ignore the reasoning I have presented – but please make no mistake that if ever I am called to give advice or evidence or opinion if things should unfortunately go wrong – my words will categorically be in the vein which I have already described – I sincerely believe that riders should be given the opportunity to inspect a section. Do I believe any Organiser who decides not too is mistaken – Yes I do.

[bdmc]

If I walk the section before riding what marks will I lose??

[scorpa3]

bdmc, on Feb 25 2008, 09:18 PM, said:

If I walk the section before riding what marks will I lose??

I believe that organisers who run events on this basis (for example the Wyegate LDT) deem you to have failed if you walk past the begins cards. This incurs a five mark penalty.

[TRICKYMICKY]

The biggest disadvantage is that no inspection sections are not fair. By that i mean they favour some riders and not others. A rider who has ridden a no inspection section at an event the previous year will know what to expect whereas a first time rider wont. A good example of this is the Weighbridge section in the Cotswold Cups trial. Its no inspection but regular riders know to look out for a sharp deviation towards the top of an otherwise traditional section. Newcomers invariable ride straight up it and five it.
Hollinsclough in the Reliance is another- regulars and locals know it like the back of their hand (and can quite legally ride up it the week before if they wish). Of course section plotters have an advantage as well if they happen to mark it out and ride, or if the landowner where these no inspection sections are happens to ride too....