Week 151 - Riders Revolt Hits Indoor Series

[Andy]

The remaining rounds of the World Indoor Trials Championship could be at risk if the threat of a riders

[hrc2002]

Promotor Neil Crosswaite was concerned at one stage that the audience had lost interest, and he felt that if they went away disillusioned they might not return another year.

Agreed completely. The crowd seemed to die down towards the end which was a huge shame for the riders and organisers. Although I think the final section of the waterfall woke a lot of them up.

I was disappointed to see most of the crowd leaving when Toni made it out of the waterfall - again I though some acknowledgment and appriciation for the event organisers was in order.

[andat]

A prominent member of the organisers said words to the effect, what was wrong with everybody doing a lap in one direction followed by a lap in the opposite direction with the lowest score the winner?

[jcam]

i think the changes to the rules at sheffield were stupid. Instead of making it interesting for the crowd it made it complicated to follow.nothing wrong with the old rules,ride sections one way,then in reverse.overall good night though,well done Dabill!!

[hrc2002]

The rules are set by the FIM, nobody else...unfortunately.

Almost makes you wish that Sheffield wasn't part of the World Indoor Trials Champsionship then I guess then they could have had a lot more fun with the whole thing.

Still, although the format of the competition was somewhat complicated to explain, I think the majority had a good night - afterall, I'd have thought most of the people in there would come to see the riders, maybe for the first time, so aren't too concerned with the competition side of things.

[nigel dabster]

Promotor Neil Crosswaite was concerned at one stage that the audience had lost interest, and he felt that if they went away disillusioned they might not return another year.

Nothing to do with no scoreboard then?

[woody]

Perhaps no scoreboard as with the new scoring system no-one knew how to update it correctly....

[nigel dabster]

Perhaps no scoreboard as with the new scoring system no-one knew how to update it correctly....

Well apart from the races the scores were observation only so I imagine they could score that, just as they always have done.

In fact the scoring was fine the problems arose a; because of riders low scores tiebreaks were needed b; the scoring system was never explained simply by the commentators who understandably had no idea how it worked in practice and c; no scoreboard.

The initial race carried far too much importance and had it been at the end of tx1 it could have been used as a tie decider if needed. We all know why the races have been increased in importance, but this was a tweek too far by the fim.

It was in fact pretty much two laps of observation and two races, with elimination along the way added in.

Edited January 13, 2010 by Nigel Dabster

[hillary]

There is no scoreboard at Sheffield because it no longer works!

The Sheffield Arena is owned by the local authority and apparently "there is no budget to get it repaired".

That also explains why the concourse surrounding the arena was cleared of snow (for health and safety reasons) but not the car park, and why no cars were allowed onto the car park.

[Andy]

There is no scoreboard at Sheffield because it no longer works!

The Sheffield Arena is owned by the local authority and apparently "there is no budget to get it repaired".

I seem to recall the scoreboard didn't work last year either (or might have been the year before).

Getting budget is simple. You sell advertising space on bloody great banners hanging from the scoreboard and use that revenue to make sure it works - it's dead space anyway below it. The local authority will be too busy checking peoples wheelie bins don't have the lid raised by more than 1mm, ensuring 'elf and safety regulations are adhered to and catering for immigrants to think of that kind of thing though... </daily mail>

I wasn't there last weekend because of crappy weather and lousy train service - wrong type of snow on the line or something, but it sounds as though things were confusing enough as it is without people not actually being able to keep track of the scores

[neils on wheels]

http://www.albertcabestany.com/

Albert Cabestany has a blog on his site which pretty much explains his view. Namely that a trial should not be decided on speed.

He does state that the FIM have contacted the riders this week, so maybe they will make some changes before the next round.

[nigel dabster]

It was only decided on speed in tx1 because all riders cleaned the section. Maybe ditto tx2.

[pete_scorpa3]

Can you imagine the pressure on an organiser to get the sections right?

I watched the TV coverage of Sheffield last night and there were so many cleans. It must be so difficult to design a section which will take marks without making everyone fail. Those undercut steps look impossible, unless you'd seen a bike go up there, you'd never think it could be done, then they make it look so easy.

In other words, there has to be a tie breaker and realistically that has to be timed. But the first race was a farce, from where the camera was positioned, it was impossible to work out who landed first, for a paying spectator it would have been even worse.

All credit to the organisers for staging the trial and for making it a FIM round at such short notice, but even watching on the TV with the benefit of a clear comentary, the format was very confusing

[nigel dabster]

Can you imagine the pressure on an organiser to get the sections right?

I watched the TV coverage of Sheffield last night and there were so many cleans. It must be so difficult to design a section which will take marks without making everyone fail. Those undercut steps look impossible, unless you'd seen a bike go up there, you'd never think it could be done, then they make it look so easy.

In other words, there has to be a tie breaker and realistically that has to be timed. But the first race was a farce, from where the camera was positioned, it was impossible to work out who landed first, for a paying spectator it would have been even worse.

All credit to the organisers for staging the trial and for making it a FIM round at such short notice, but even watching on the TV with the benefit of a clear comentary, the format was very confusing

Thats right it was confusing but I'm not sure why that should be as its simple in essence, 10 to 8 to 6 to 4 to podium.

[toeneybow]

Read this thread last week and didn