cota kid Posted April 7, 2007 Report Share Posted April 7, 2007 I'm a litle confused about the new minder rule and what is it supposed to achieve. This ruling was brought in at the request of the factories to cut costs, yet at Mancha Real the factories still appeared to have the same number of minders, albeit only one would actually be in the section the rest would be shouting out the time, looking after bikes etc. The severity of the sections has not been reduced to account for the fact the riders only had one minder and there were certainly plenty of scary sections were more than one minder was needed. It just appears that if anyone has lost out from this ruling then it is the riders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapshot 3 Posted April 7, 2007 Report Share Posted April 7, 2007 I'm a litle confused about the new minder rule and what is it supposed to achieve. This ruling was brought in at the request of the factories to cut costs, yet at Mancha Real the factories still appeared to have the same number of minders, albeit only one would actually be in the section the rest would be shouting out the time, looking after bikes etc. The severity of the sections has not been reduced to account for the fact the riders only had one minder and there were certainly plenty of scary sections were more than one minder was needed. It just appears that if anyone has lost out from this ruling then it is the riders. See now you've blown it Dom, you are actually trying to understand it as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cota kid Posted April 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 7, 2007 (edited) I think minders should be banned and sections eased. Guys like Lampkin etc inj the past with a big squad of dicks intimadating observers etc. Do you know what Eddie you do not appear to voice your views without, somehow, criticising Doug or the Lampkins or anything to do with them. Your point about no minders and eased sections is valid, your point about Dougs minders abusive. (I'm that nice person I've censored my own post). Edited April 8, 2007 by Cota Kid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turner5spot Posted April 7, 2007 Report Share Posted April 7, 2007 this eddie has a chip on his shoulder , life is short , tomorrow morning when you first wake up. try as hard as you can to smile. Life really is great if you belive . Try watching a new movie out it is called the Secret . i think it will help you . Being bitter is no way to live Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapshot 3 Posted April 7, 2007 Report Share Posted April 7, 2007 (edited) Boys get this on topic sensibly, otherwise I'll delete it before it turns into a slagging match Forum Mod Edited April 7, 2007 by Slapshot 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spud Posted April 7, 2007 Report Share Posted April 7, 2007 (edited) The topic: In a sense i actually agree with EL on no minders, but fail to understand why there is a need to express a view in his way. Take for example F1 car racing, the team with the most money normally wins. Trials, take for example a rider who has 6 individuals aiding his every ride/move will have a go at almost everything and anything compared to a rider who has no help. So the bigger the team, the larger number of minders,catchers etc.. the better the performance sounds a little unfair but if everyone is doing it then its evens. However when there are up and coming riders with out this support its not what i'd call a fair game of cricket, as EL said no minders. Edited April 7, 2007 by spud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottt Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 Take for example F1 car racing, the team with the most money normally wins. Honda normaly spend the most money in F1, with Toyota also throwing a lot at it as well, seen any F1 results recently? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulthistle Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 Money Rules, After you get the #1 plate no one remembers how you did it. Maybe a standard observer training, could prevent them being swayed by a well meaning fan club. And previously good rider anger management class. Or currently good rider. A champion will use all means availible to win. Some things are distastefull but at the end of the year holding the #1 plate only a few EL's will cry foul. And unless regulations with some tooth are written in, next years winner may have to do the same. A champion does what it takes, first loser whines about how unfair it is. We all want to be champions, it's just that not all of us have the stomach for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilco Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 It just appears that if anyone has lost out from this ruling then it is the riders. Your right there cota. The Rider's are losing out Big Time,The fact that top level Trial's rider's ain't ridding Trial's in it's true form anyway,it's just a big showroom circus that help's them sale there bike's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 My own 2 cents Minders are great for morale of the rider, keeps them up beat and ready to go. They carry tools and beverages for the rider. They also catch the bike when necessary. I think this can be done with just one individual. A rider at the world level does not get that far in the sport and not know where his back tire is. Example "Half tire right!!" etc.. These riders should not need to be toldwhere they are. I also believe that only having one minder will cut down on the amount of "gardening" and rock washing. I imagine it is difficult for volunteer observers and such to watch every person's movement. Easing up the sections may not be a bad idea, but I don't know. As far as the team with the most money usually wins........well it's like that in every sport like it or not, if you can afford the best talent than you will have the best team. Or so the logic goes. If a more level playing field is desired, put a cap on how much can be spent on minder, rider, bike, development, etc..... I think that would do more harm to the sport than good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulthistle Posted April 22, 2007 Report Share Posted April 22, 2007 (edited) I didn't say "money rules" as a bad thing. A top rider would be foolish to turn down more money during the years he is the most valuable. they may only have a few years to make maximum dollars. They should make the most of it. A business is trying to make money for it's stockholders (owners), so promoting effectively with winning faces, works toward that end. Honda has many sides. They may not make money on trials but trials may keep their image high in powersports circles. It would be cheaper to buy A trials championship than a formula one. If you limited the amount of money a team could spend, you would create..........college football? At the current level of difficulty how would minders be detrimental? A top rider should insist on many for safety, a company would be wise to protect their investment. And if they could heckel their way to a championship........... Edited April 22, 2007 by paul_thistle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy Posted April 22, 2007 Report Share Posted April 22, 2007 paul_thistle Posted Yesterday, 11:09 PM I didn't say "money rules" as a bad thing. A top rider would be foolish to turn down more money during the years he is the most valuable. they may only have a few years to make maximum dollars. They should make the most of it. A business is trying to make money for it's stockholders (owners), so promoting effectively with winning faces, works toward that end. Honda has many sides. They may not make money on trials but trials may keep their image high in powersports circles. It would be cheaper to buy A trials championship than a formula one. If you limited the amount of money a team could spend, you would create..........college football? ZIPPY Posted Yesterday, 12:37 AM As far as the team with the most money usually wins........well it's like that in every sport like it or not, if you can afford the best talent than you will have the best team. Or so the logic goes. If a more level playing field is desired, put a cap on how much can be spent on minder, rider, bike, development, etc..... I think that would do more harm to the sport than good. Paul, I think we agree here on the money thing, or pretty close to agreeing. paul_thistle Posted Yesterday, 11:09 PM At the current level of difficulty how would minders be detrimental? A top rider should insist on many for safety, a company would be wise to protect their investment. And if they could heckel their way to a championship........... Very good point about current level of difficulty. I just personally think that limiting the number of minders, whether it be total or in the section, would cut down on some of the "cheating" type of activity. Don't the minders only catch the bike and the rider has to figure out where to land. I also just got to thinking that here I am sitting on my behind in front of a computer and I also have difficulty with a 4 ft step and I am trying to criticize a world round level rider's number of minders. I guess that is kinda silly. But we all have our opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
327 mag Posted April 24, 2007 Report Share Posted April 24, 2007 Very good point about current level of difficulty. I just personally think that limiting the number of minders, whether it be total or in the section, would cut down on some of the "cheating" type of activity. Don't the minders only catch the bike and the rider has to figure out where to land. I agree with you Zippy. Too bad cheating is part of the game at the outdoor world level. Wouldn't it be great if they stopped moving rocks, building ramps, etc. More minders can help a rider's safety, but can also lower the score... legally and illegally. Sad really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulthistle Posted April 24, 2007 Report Share Posted April 24, 2007 (edited) Zippy, I totally agree! Maybe a no minder rule! I guess that isn't gonna happen. I think it amusing the ability to see through the rules, come up with that "thing " they didn't think of when making the rule. Whats that called? Oh yeah, The law of unintended consequences. It's racing business as usual. We would all push the edge of one rule or another, if we were in that position. I would..... of course not officially. Luckily we all have the correct opinion. And it isn't cheating until it's ruled cheating, and a rule is changed or clarified. Edited April 24, 2007 by paul_thistle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hubmed Posted April 25, 2007 Report Share Posted April 25, 2007 I attended an FIM License seminar last weekent at the AMA in Ohio. FIM V.P. stated that the one minder rule was for enviromental reasons/concerns. ? how this relates. My concern is that it puts rider safety at risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.