Derbyshire Dales Farce

[d230]

Just had the results through for last weekends Derbyshire Dales Trial.

There appears to have been some manipulating of the results with regard to time penaltys.

I say manipulating because what can't speak can't lie !

How can someone who was nearly an hour late (as per the calculation taken from his punch card) have no penaltys in the published results ? Especially after time penaltys were initally entered on the score board and the words excluded also entered by the side of his name on the day ?

What is the point in people traveling from all over the UK & rushing round, when such blatant flouting of the rules occurs for certain "local" people ?

Then to be told that any dispute had to be logged within 30 mins of the results being published? There was no dispute when the last Pre65 rider's result was initally entered on the score board and the words excluded by his name.

This was obviously changed.

I would have hoped that after the Bemrose fiasco things would have been better.

If this is how the championship is now being run? Then I'm done with it.

Farce is all I can say

[chewy]

This is nothing new I recall 30 years ago rushing round at the front to finish a Brit champs round and getting in on time along with a handfull of others. The stars of the day simply roda at the back at thier own pace all were over the hour late, we were chuffed to have got some points but similar to your experience time allowance was extended due to "force majeure". Clearly I am completely unaware of the details of your Ire.

[old trials fanatic]

Just had the results through for last weekends Derbyshire Dales Trial.

There appears to have been some manipulating of the results with regard to time penaltys.

I say manipulating because what can't speak can't lie !

How can someone who was nearly an hour late (as per the calculation taken from his punch card) have no penaltys in the published results ? Especially after time penaltys were initally entered on the score board and the words excluded also entered by the side of his name on the day ?

What is the point in people traveling from all over the UK & rushing round, when such blatant flouting of the rules occurs for certain "local" people ?

Then to be told that any dispute had to be logged within 30 mins of the results being published? There was no dispute when the last Pre65 rider's result was initally entered on the score board and the words excluded by his name.

This was obviously changed.

I would have hoped that after the Bemrose fiasco things would have been better.

If this is how the championship is now being run? Then I'm done with it.

Farce is all I can say

Perhaps you could name names? Must admit i was surprised when we left Dudwood after clearing up after the Peak Classic event that was held there also that day that there were still riders i passed on the road. Thought they would all have finished ages before that.

[pete_scorpa3]

Then to be told that any dispute had to be logged within 30 mins of the results being published? There was no dispute when the last Pre65 rider's result was initally entered on the score board and the words excluded by his name.

Did you ask why the original score had been changed?

[asc]

I sometimes wonder why we even need time penalty's ,it's wrong that trials are won and lost on your ability to push in when there's big a long wait to get in a section.

There was quite a long wait on sunday section 3 we were waiting maybe 40 minutes + and even longer at ible,that and a puncture made time very tight for me .

there was also a small problem of road side markers being pulled or tampered with which has happened a few times on different events over the years.

i thought i'd lost 3 minutes and lost 8 according to the results and was quite suprised.8 time penalty's ruin an otherwise good ride.

[perce]

I sometimes wonder why we even need time penalty's ,it's wrong that trials are won and lost on your ability to push in when there's big a long wait to get in a section.

Because you know damn well that some will take the p*** & the Observers will be sat out until midnight. Snarl ups are usually the fault of the organisers, ill thought out hazard, un scrubbed hazard etc etc.

[pete_scorpa3]

There were some delays at section three. I don't see how you can blame the organisers for the delay there.

Take a look at the video and try to work out why! It wasn't a long section and it certainly wasn't a hard one, but you can see the queue in the back ground.

[asc]

the queue was longer later ,1 observer with punch cards was maybe the problem,much quicker with a board.queue's were a problem at a few sections during the day.as i said i did'nt mess about and was still late ,plenty i spoke to were in with a minute or two to spare at the most but i do realize that some will spend all day at a section waiting for a rock to move,i do hate having to rush down narrow lanes due to tight time limits,it's not the tt.

on a positive note, i had a good day ,land/sections were great could maybe be a little harder but i know that rider ability vary's a lot so i suppose they were about right.

[d230]

There were some delays at section three. I don't see how you can blame the organisers for the delay there.

Take a look at the video and try to work out why! It wasn't a long section and it certainly wasn't a hard one, but you can see the queue in the back ground.

There was issues at section three for the first riders to arrive.

But that doesn't explain the Results.

If riders wait too long they get time penalty's.

Thats what rules are for ?

Not to be changed when local riders "moan" and make up fantacies for being late.

There is nothing to gain from naming names - its the officials who are at fault for not enforcing the rules to benifit selected people.

I know of at least two other people who witnessed what happened on Sunday and who were told the same as me.

[pete_scorpa3]

There is nothing to gain from naming names - its the officials who are at fault for not enforcing the rules to benifit selected people.

I know of at least two other people who witnessed what happened on Sunday and who were told the same as me.

I agree there is no point in naming names and there is also no point in protesting against the results now, but obviously you have a feeling of injustice about what happened to have mentioned it in this forum.

What did the organisers say when you questioned the removal of the Excl from the results? They may well have a perfectly acceptable answer?

[totalshell]

''could maybe be a little harder'' ??? looked plenty hard enough to me and the number of stay away names adn the fact that the rider who finished 2nd on the pre 65 rode a modern bike might suggest it was a little 'tough'

back to an old chestnut.. in the clip featured above is it a clean or a five?

[old trials fanatic]

''could maybe be a little harder'' ??? looked plenty hard enough to me and the number of stay away names adn the fact that the rider who finished 2nd on the pre 65 rode a modern bike might suggest it was a little 'tough'

back to an old chestnut.. in the clip featured above is it a clean or a five?

Just watched the vid. Guy on a Fantic. Dont see why that would be anything but a clean. Well i would have given him a clean if i was observing. Also you say "the rider who finished 2nd on the pre 65 rode a modern bike" If he rode a modern bike how could that allow a score in the pre 65 class? Sorry you've lost me.

[totalshell]

sorry OTf looks like a grand trial but hardly typical pre65 going, granted the p65 winner only dropped a couple of marks but he is good very good, and was thus street ahead of the rest .

the low entry (p65) speaks volumes. when TOP class pre 65 riders choose to ride a modern bike or compete in thier local club event instead it speaks volumes especially as p65 trials and especially twinshocks seem to be having a recession proof boom at the mo.

Edited May 27, 2011 by totalshell

[woody]

That isn't a low British Pre75 entry for the Normandale series (it's not Pre65 in this series), it's about normal for most rounds. It's the premier national championship for classic riders and the sections offer a challenge in keeping with that, so they are harder than the average club twinshock/pre65 trial, hence the lower number of entries. However, there is nothing silly and they are in truth nowhere near as hard as nationals that we rode in the actual twinshock era.

The person you are referring to has contested all Normandale rounds on a modern bike this year and I believe has opted to no longer ride Pre65 regularly. I also heard his Pre65 bike is for sale.

Getting back to the original topic though, having time penalties scrubbed is nothing new and I've ridden plenty of nationals over the years when this has happened (as well as many more where it most definitely has not) It's particularly frustrating when riders who hang about to gain an advantage in sections that benefit later numbers then come in late and somehow manage to get the time limit removed. Riders who have not hung around can rightly feel aggrieved at having lost marks in sections that they have not waited to become 'scrubbed in'. They have no recourse or means of having marks removed that they probably wouldn't have lost had they waited another 30 minutes - and then been over the time limit. I didn't ride this event so have no idea of the reasons for scrubbing the time limit, but I can certainly understand the frustration.

Punch cards can certainly be a contributory factor in causing delays. Ideally, two observers are needed, one to observe, one to punch. Obviously this is difficult to resource, but with only one it can take a long time to get a card punched in comparison to writing the score on a board.

[pete_scorpa3]

There can be reasons for an individual riders time penalties being removed, for example if a rider stops to help a genuinely injured rider who needs assistance and this delay is confirmed by the organisers.

So we shouldn't jump to any conclusions unless we know the whole story.

I was at the finish when the results were announced and I can confirm that the rider (I believe to be) in question was NOT excluded on time WHEN the results were read out.