Section 12 Observer

[the artist formerly known as ish]

Another angle

http://www.trialscomp.com/images/Fuji_Sec3.jpg

It is amazing both pics look to be spot on the same time

[bigfoot]

Not so easy now Ishy. Looks more like a five from this angle. Where was the observer though?

[dgshannon]

Looks more like a five from this angle. Where was the observer though?

Another angle

http://www.trialscomp.com/images/Fuji_Sec3.jpg

I took this picture looking down on Fuji. The observer was directly to my right, also looking down. There was another observer at the exit of the section, which is behind Fuji and a little lower down, (You can see his yellow bib behind the tree.) but he did not really seem confident in scoring and was instead just parroting the number of fingers the observer next to me (or elsewhere in the section) was holding up.

From the viewpoint of where I took the photo, I would have easily scored it as a 5. It did happen fast, but if your experienced at judging, it was easy to pick up on. Regardless, I did not see inconsistancy on the observer's part when it came to calling this particular motion at this portion of the section (throughout lap 1). What Fuji did was about the only way to get through it, to that point.

However, once the front end was swung around to the left, and back onto the ground, the riders had to prepare to leap 3 to 4 feet up onto another rock ledge that would be to Fuji's left (where the minder is squatted down). I did see many riders roll back drastically, and repeatedly, in their attempts to make this next leap. I was even more dissappointed to see the observer not call a 5 for those.

Edited June 9, 2004 by DGShannon

[city trials]

These observers were paid well for working this event.

I took heat from one group of observers I knew who I felt were not in the best position to cover the section and all it's quarks.

They still are mad at me for the comment, I told them "it's like you guys are stealing the money."

If you have four observers at a section, it serves no purpose to have two standing at the beginning of the section and two standing at the end of the section.

[griffinjay]

I took that photo and Darrell Shannon of Trials Comp took another one at the exact same instant, only from above. Maybe he'll post it here for comparison. See the 900K version of my photo for a more detailed look:

http://worldroundusa.com/blogimages/IMG_2070.jpg

At the press conference on Sunday after the event, I think it was Lampkin who said something to the effect that the observers were 'generous' in their scoring but that it was consistently so across all the observer groups... that with the muddy conditions, they appreciated the leniency but consistency was the main thing.

[city trials]

Hey Griff,

You did a great job on the world round site again this year, "way to go", and another "way to go" in being Johnny on the spot along with Darrell to nab such a key part of the trials.

That's what I was talking about when I raised this tread about the section 12 call in Japan, this subject should have it's own thread titled Section 3 observer Duluth 04.

If Fugi were to have gotten a 5 instead of the 2 Dougie would have won by one dab.

And these were paid observers, making good money to observe an international event.

That's two events that observing cause Dougie a win.

Edited June 9, 2004 by City Trials

[ringo]

You guys all seem to think that this solitary 5 was the trial decider. What your not considering is the fact that [Like Dougie readily admitted in the press conference] all the observers were "generous"

I was directly behind Dougie at the section on Sat. that no one could get up and as he came to set up for the wall he had a one. At the point that he turned his bike to set up for the wall he placed both feet on the ground, the observer continued to hold up 1. Dougie then hoped slightly and again BOTH feet came off the pegs to balance and the observer still maintained a one. With both feet back on the pegs Dougie rolled slightly back to the tape at which point the observer changed the call to a five.

Of course in retrospect the "three" that Dougie had earned had no bearing on the 5 but this kind of observing happened throughout both days for all riders so you can not say that Fuji getting away with a five meant the difference.

[bigfoot]

Ringo

Are you saying that Dougie took his feet off the peg on the second occation or that he touched the ground with his feet? I know you're an experianced rider and just wondered if you guys mark differently from us. Taking your feet of the pegs is fine as long as you don't touch the ground or some other object.

[ringo]

Bigfoot,

Dougie had both feet on the ground at the same time twice and there was about 5 seconds in between the double dabs so it was clearly seperated. I recall looking up both times at the checker to see him change the mark and he didn't. It is possible that he couldn't even view Dougies feet from the angle the observer was standing above and back from the wall. If that were the case there should've been an oberver that could view this wall as it was so difficult.

Ishy,

There was so much time passed that it was clearly evident the observer missed the dabs but you are completely correct in that the 5 was justified. I agree with you 100% about the checking and the fact that these observers were paid $500 per day [split between 4 observers in a section] makes it even more disapointing that the checking wasn't better. There was a section that a rider argued a five call with the observer and the observer changed the call to a 1 or 2. I was in total shock with that one.

Who do you suppose would be ultimately responsible for watching over the course and keeping the observers and riders in check?

Edited June 11, 2004 by ringo

[sca]

Observers are hard to come by. Even paid observers. It is the worst job to fill on a trial. Observers have to make tough calls, face down intimidation and stand outside in the pouring rain for 6 hours. Have any of you been an observer at a world championship event? Do you know how many people offer to help with an event but refuse to observe?

A judgment call is deamed a state of fact. End of the story.

You can not fully understand what happens in each section either. The call where the rider was given a five and the the observer changed his mind to a three. How do you know that one observer didn't have a better angle than the other and was ammending the score based on the better vantage point. This is most often the case when scores in a section change. One obserevr has a better vantage point. That's why there are 4-5 in each section.

I think the observers in Duluth did a good job. They were consistent. You can argue that a strike should have been a ball but it's the umpire with the final say.

[ringo]

SCA,

I think you need to reallize that the tone of these postings are not to disgruntle the observers. We all realize what an incredibly hard task it is to round up enough people to check sections. Even more credit for standing in the rain and dealing with intimidating riders.

The fact that terrible calls were made 'consistantly' is, like mentioned prior, is not blaming the checkers rather showing lack of training, knowledge etc.

I personally thank all the observers for their work and dedication to helping make the event because without them there would be nothing.

Ishy is correct in that the observing should be dealt with training month prior to a world round event.

As for the changed call, it was pure intimidation and no other observer offered any other view.

This is where the clerk of course comes into play and his ability to handle intimidation.

[the artist formerly known as ish]

I wasn't there and just going on other posts and what people are saying, so I called the correct man and asked.

His reply was there was some missed calls but no more than other world-rounds in any other part of the world.

Another point was in the US observers don't get to deal with the top riders as much, the WR events are often two years apart so are a little more vulnerable when put under pressure by them on a call.

By all accounts the event was excellent and the location was appreciated by all, don't take this the wrong way SCA, I do think with a bit of effort on peoples part we can improve on the scoring of a ride at WR events in the US, if the verdict is as good as any other world round, then the goal should be we can do better than any other WR, I will volunteer to observe at the next round in the US whichever club puts the next one on, for no payment other than a place to park.

[mike od]

Ringo, Ishy, and all others who feel that the checking at the World Round was "generous", "pathetic", or any other nonflattering adjective you can think of:

Get off your high horse and see if you can do any better. This is the second World Round that I have worked as a checker, the first being in 2002. It's not an easy job -- you've got things happening very quickly, minders walking in your way, spectators asking you questions, etc -- all going on simultaneously. Moreover, to imply that a better job should have been done because observers were paid is insulting. Not all observers were paid and some that were donated their funds.

Our section had experienced riders/checkers each day, and we all tried to work together to do the best job possible. Did we miss some things -- quite possibly. We're not infallible. Were we lenient because it was pouring rain, or because we were observing the best riders in the world? Hell, no and to insinuate such p#ss*s me off. Again, if you think you can do a more competent and professional job, show up at the next WR and volunteer to check. Just don't sit on the sidelines and criticize those who are partly responsible for your privilege to see a WR. Keep in mind -- no checkers, no event.

From one checker to the rest who volunteered their time -- thanks for your effort and I hope we have the opportunity to do it again in the near future.

Mike OD

[29r]

I agree that scoring these guy's would be a daunting task .

However ...

I was at #3 Sun. lap 2 and as Fuji entered the section , bobbled in the rocks , went down , CLANKED the left bar on the rocks , picked it up , only to drag a good size rock on the way back down which rolled into a most inopportune position , which the minder without hesitation removed , and he continued on with a 1!!????!!

Trials TV was right next to me . I said to him , " Did you get That ! ? "

He smiled and pointed at his camera .

Not that it matters now .....

[subira]

World round observers have the same un-enviable task as all the 'amateur' officials that referee professional sports.

I'm not saying that they don't know what they are doing - far from it. But its a difficult position to be in, I'd certainly want a really thorough briefing before I took a section on.

I'm sure they call what they are confident they saw, any element of doubt means you have to back off or risk a dispute.

Its like the Tennis situation, the observing becomes harder as the game speeds up at the top level, and the significance of the call is increased by the sponsorships/bonuses in the game. The umpire/linesman is still the same guy, same pair of eyes - but with a lot more pressure.

The 'Hawkeye' system help iron out calls on 130-150mph serving. Perhaps a bit of similar technology could help ? (Cloud Cuckow Land: Sensor in riders boot, beeping for every dab, counter and speaker on front number plate) Maybe just video each rider and review it in cases of disputes ?

Just think that there different objectives involved for the Observer and WTC Rider.

Observer: He's there because he's supporting his Club/Country, might be paid but just enough to cover expenses etc. Has a full time job, etc. How significant is each point he calls to him ?

Rider: He's there to win, get best points he can. Please/maintain sponsors, get bonuses, this is his full time job / means of income. Every point is significant to him.