big john Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 It Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b40rt Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 I agree with BF - the problem is inconsistent marking. Why should an observer give anyone the benefit of the doubt because theyve just ridden 110 sections. Maybe Tom Watson should have been given a few extra shots at the open golf, he's old you know and he'd just played 71 holes......... Sorry - Pro Golf and encoraging a new rider, not usually discussed in he same breath. Defination of Benefit of the Doubt - A favorable judgement given in the absence of full evidence. The principle employed by umpires in cases of uncertainty concerning a batsman possibly being out, in which the decision must be in the batsman's favour. So not inconsistent, just humane ie compassionate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wri5hty Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 I was a first time entrant this year and have to say it was a top notch weekend. fantastic trial, amazing routes, spectacular scenery and a very friendly atmosphere about the place. and will definitely return next year (ballot permitting) regardless of what rules it is run under. i was never going to challenge for a win, so my goal was to finish and hopefully not last (which i managed) so i was happy. as for the costs i live fairly close to the event so not a lot of travel, camped in the field so that was cheep as chips. the bike ran perfect all weekend and did really well on fuel so not much spent there thankfully. and like perce said 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totalshell Posted July 28, 2009 Report Share Posted July 28, 2009 i ride and observe and i was amazed watching the observers at the ssdt this year as to how strictly they interpreted the rules. that wheel stops going forward you get five even if you were heaving the thing sucsesfully over a step or out of a hole. it also stops the hop skip and jumpers which means sections are kept open and rideable. having observed myself at the jeffries a couple of weeks ago to sto 'stop allowed' i actually read the rule book the night before to clarify in my own mind what was allowed. the nature of the sections meant that tight turns were eliminated but it didnt harshy punish Katy Sunter for example as she took a massive 'works' dab as she fought to clear my ends cards. abalanc ehas to struck between the two so as a suggestion how about a three instead of five if you 'stop' there by giving the hard workers less than five and the hoppers a penalty to avoid.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigfoot Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 A balance has to struck between the two so as a suggestion how about a three instead of five if you 'stop' there by giving the hard workers less than five and the hoppers a penalty to avoid.. What a great idea. Why has this never been suggested before or has it? On your SSDT comment I'm sure a lot will come back on that one. I've been travelling to the SSDT for many years and ever tried it once. On the whole the observers are very soft and reward a good fight with a 3. Once in a while you do see one being very tough but this is not the norm and could be under instruction to make sure only the best are rewarded eg. its very tight at the top and they need to try and seperate it. I say could, because I have no evidence of this its just that I've only really seen in from Thursday onward when thing are tight at the top and its the same observers all week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewy Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 If you change the rules to give a three for stopping there will be arguments (Niggles) about that so it still won't go away. I have been a regular observer at ssdt since I stopped riding it and have been kind to all and sundry generally speaking. For those who don't understand the reason for no stop from an observers perspective it is time.. just do the arithmatic ...get to the section (average of 1 hour) + 270 riders X minumum of 2 minutes @ no stop rate plus arrive at section 1 hour before first man due plus clear up the litter after back marker has given ok to leave and occasionally have a chat with a local or the landowner goodwill costs time more than money (they don't need your money!) get books back to office fettle/refuel your bike put used section markers and assorted litter away.....I can assure you 10 hous is an average day at one rider every 2 minutes. I have had disputed kind marking (on the basis of being fair to all competitors) from two riders during the last 10 years both who were leading the trial both professionals both instances would have certainly been a five if one of the stricter observers was in my seat at the time or I had marked to the book just for them ... both instances have upset me. The only consolation to these instances is that the other 270 riders 6 days a week one week a year have been pleased to say good morning and thanks. In summary you'r dammned if you do and you'r damned if you do'nt seems to be the conclusion observers have to make. No doubt these "revalations" will invite another load of criticism from cynics who think that trials are organised and run by a bunch of *unts. It is a niggling problem and it won't go away. However it could be a lot less of a problem if we realise we are a minority sport in world dominated by self interest and greed........we are very lucky thanks to loads of hard work by unpaid volunteers to be in a position to niggle in the first place. As I said in an earlier contribution to this topic there are methods available to competitors to minimise this problem even though you have agreed to abide by all the rules which goodness knows are many and open to interpretation. For the obsevers I note that those who have contributed have said that they mark in a certain way.. they're doing thier bit to help you all you need to do if it's that important to you is get to know who is marking you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big john Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 (edited) What a great idea. Why has this never been suggested before or has it? Sorry, I can't agree with that one BF...its either three marks lost for touching ground with any part of the body or five marks lost for stopping in a no-stop event! A three and a five score are two entirely different things, a 5 mark penalty represents "failing" a section, a three shouldn't be awarded for partially stopping, it's for riders who keep it moving with the feet i.e. slogging! Mark the riders fairly for what they achieved in the section, splitting hairs just causes more niggles! You can hear it now: . *!*? you've given my mate a three but I got a five, what's all that about? Big John Edited July 29, 2009 by Big John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldilocks Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 It depends very much on the observer of course. Many are sensible and tolerant and see that effort to keep going is rewarded, equally there are others who give no leeway at all. Simple as that. They do not consider that you have just ridden 110 sections and struggled your way up extremely trying ravines, and it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timp Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 It depends very much on the observer of course. Many are sensible and tolerant and see that effort to keep going is rewarded, equally there are others who give no leeway at all. Simple as that. They do not consider that you have just ridden 110 sections and struggled your way up extremely trying ravines, and it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapshot 3 Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 So now you see Rappers, the old chestnuts always drag the responses.... I think this is really simple, you enter a trial for which you are given a set of rules, clarified in the regs, that's what you ride to. The observing side is just as simple, if the rules say No-Stop, the rider stops it's a 5 simple. It doesn't matter who is riding the section, superstars like Dougie Lampkin and Toni Bou or old plonkers plodders like Big John, Bigfoot and B40RT, if they ride the same section you score them exactly the same every time. Used to take great pleasure in giving certain individuals 5's, easiest way to keep my old man quiet till Wednesday was to nail him for 5 a couple of times in a trial... I don't know if some bigger trials like the Scott and Six Days advise the observers to be lenient but as long as they are consistent that's what matters. As Baldilocks has said, it's a test of man and machine and every test needs control elements. In a driving test that's the highway code in a trial that's the scoring systems TSR22a/b/c what ever and the observing, it must be consistent, it must be fair, it's the only way you get a fair result at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rowly Posted July 30, 2009 Report Share Posted July 30, 2009 If everybody observed the rules to the letter, either stop or no stop, trials would be a better sport at all levels. Having your arch rival watch you have a five is no where near as bad as seeing him have a big five and getting away with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 If everybody observed the rules to the letter, either stop or no stop, trials would be a better sport at all levels. Having your arch rival watch you have a five is no where near as bad as seeing him have a big five and getting away with it Or seeing someone push in at a queue when you have been waiting 20 mins, that annoys me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boydw Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Rules are Rules, its simple you ride to them and you simply deal with the score you are given. Dan Thorpe is probably thinking about the cruel five a certain observer gave him on Sunday at Reeth, the observer in question is known for not messing about - you stop you get a five! Dan stopped for an absolute milli second and got a five. Harsh but fair. However earlier in the trial Dan had a close moment where he dabbed with his hand, and did not get a five, perhaps the observer didn't see it, perhaps the observer did, but there you go, one day he got away with it, and another he didn't. As long as the observer is consistent, and marks to there own set of criteria within the rules ( stop or non stop ) i see no problem. Every observer is different and thats what makes the sport fair. No one will be happy about a 5 that should be a 0, but hey **** happens. The posts that are put up by people that have never even ridden the Reeth 3D make me chuckle, how can they seriously comment on an event when they have no experience of it. Its certainly no bike wrecker, the entry is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perce Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Ok you pay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perce Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 plus an evening meal As well as those involved with the Trial the Club invite Landowners, Tennants & Gamekeepers to freely attend the meal. We also invited Councillor John Blakie & his partner, without his help our Planning Permission from the National Parks to run in the SSSI would have been in jeopardy. The event runs at a fairly high budget & a considerable amount of are costs are pumped back into the local community, RMC do not look to profit from the event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts