Vote First (scroll up) - Read this after !

To stop, or not to stop, that is the question:

Whether 'tis Nobler in the mind to suffer

The Signs and Arrows of outrageous sections,

Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles,

And by opposing end them: to die, to sleep........

Much as I'd love to continue in rewriting Willy Shakespeares fine works I shall digress no further

OK, it's THE hottest topic this year and if you haven't been reading all the other threads and articles regarding this subject then I suggest you follow THIS LINK as your're probably not of sound mind? There are many opinions out there so hopefully this poll may help give some indication of the general consensus throughout the Trials Central community?

By all means this is far from the best way to sway the opinion of any governing body but it may give good indication as to what the majority of competing trials riders prefer? (Competing meaning ANYONE that partakes in club trials and upwards). If you don't compete, why the hell not?

Remember, this is just a poll. Feel free to air your views on the subject on any of the other threads already started. The concept of having one section 'stop' and the next 'no stop' hasn't yet been discussed / debated (that I can see) so perhaps this thread could be used for that purpose?

Let the rampage begin.......

GJ

P.S. If you have taken the time to read this please take the time to vote - thank you

Edited June 29, 201313 yr by gjbiker

Well, there you go again Gav! This is a hot topic it seems.

As a relative newcomer to trials(but not bikes) spanning only the last decade or so, I must admit I have been a bit miffed by the rules as well as the standards that are applied. I have come to mostly understand them all, and it varies a lot it seems, depending upon the clubs and such.

Seems it has varied a lot over the years, and I have ridden no-stop here for a while as well for a period of time.

As there seems no absolute standard other that what the WTC uses on the day, things vary a lot, not only with scoring, but markings! Tape, flags, colors, gates, splits, cards, punching, observers, then the rules of the day!

If a club wants to do whatever on the day, so be it! It may vary! Keeps things interisting! Yes , some consistancy within whatever rules on the day is needed, even in no-stop where leinancy is often given.

All said, my personnal opinions remains that in no-stop a slight hesitation stop for 5 is just too harsh for clubmen in the stricktest sense. Should be a 1 at best, take 2 for a related dab(or more), and if one is stalled for more than 3-5 seconds, they are done!

Flowing sectiions be damned! I am indeed getting old, and sometimes I really need a momentary balance ck before attempting a big nasty decline, or a big up! If nothing but to prevent killing myself!

Now what they do in WTC or BTC, I could care less. Slap points on them any way you can and try not to kill them in the process, at it seems a fine line, as few want to go there. They are rather out of the normal world of trials!

Currently we have both sets of rules, and the club/championship can choose which to use. Maybe that is a sensible compromise?

Pete

The best all round rule was "stop for a 1". Not perfect but it was a good compromise. The observers liked it and most riders did. It worked for many years till the ACU followed the FIM to the present set of rules.

I don't think non stop will work because a fair few riders are determined to not let it work.

Edited December 2, 201114 yr by Timp

Have to agree with timp, one for a stop seemed to make perfect sense for me, gave the incentive to keep forward motion, so in effect no stop but without the penalty of a five which can make it a mockery, as for being able to stop and sit there with your foot down for ten minutes and incur a one, the less said about that the better (don't want to get banned from site for swearing !)

Is it not possible to come up with a compromise that suits both parties. The problem with no-stop is that you can get a 5 when you momentarily stop after hitting some slippy roots or a rock. You then regain traction and forward momentum and get out the section. Then observer kindly tells you " it was a 5 because you stopped"

If we allow a momentarily stop of a couple of a seconds unpenalised then it would still allow the top riders to hone their skills and quickly bounce and take advantage of this quick stop and go if you like. Stop more than a couple of seconds and you still get a five.

Like wise the clerks of the courses can ease the sections slightly because in reality they will be no-stop sections.

Don't shoot me if it's already been suggested!

Real question in this thread is which two other muppets voted for Gav as PM???? Where's your manifesto Mr Lewis!!!

For me as a clubbie, I'm not too bothered what I ride. What does cause problems is queueing. No-stop does at least prevent riders standing still for 2 minutes waiting for goodness knows what.

ALL ideas have workability issues, but if we had a time limit (as a product producer I'm already developing in my mind a 'trials clock'!) where loud ping occured at, say, 1min 10 seconds and then a louder one at 1:30 we could ride whatever we wanted. The 1:30 means "Sorry son, that's a five, get out of the section because I'm waving the next man in!"

I understand the issues involved, so this is in the planet of Graham, but it would mean we don't need to adjudicate on 'did he or didn't he stop?' issues. A rider can stop if he wants as long as he's out before the pinger pings...

Simples..

I voted for him...I see him as a British Burlusconi....party time

I voted for him...I see him as a British Burlusconi....party time

Good Point mate....Bunga Bunga parties at Gav's

Edited December 2, 201114 yr by Slapshot 3

For me as a clubbie, I'm not too bothered what I ride. What does cause problems is queueing. No-stop does at least prevent riders standing still for 2 minutes waiting for goodness knows what.

ALL ideas have workability issues, but if we had a time limit (as a product producer I'm already developing in my mind a 'trials clock'!) where loud ping occured at, say, 1min 10 seconds and then a louder one at 1:30 we could ride whatever we wanted. The 1:30 means "Sorry son, that's a five, get out of the section because I'm waving the next man in!"

I understand the issues involved, so this is in the planet of Graham, but it would mean we don't need to adjudicate on 'did he or didn't he stop?' issues. A rider can stop if he wants as long as he's out before the pinger pings...

Simples..

That's a neat idea - a bit like they have at World Enduro Championships to ensure people don't baulk the start. Effectively they have a clock with a continually recurring 20 second countdown. The rider can enter the test at any point within those 20 seconds I believe, and when they do so they break a beam which resets the 20 second countdown.

Now what would work for trials is a clock with a continual say 2 minute countdown (internal). The rider has 1min 30 to complete the section, allowing a 30 second buffer for riders/observers to ready themselves.

As you say, a ping at 1:10 to warn, another at 1:20 and then loud gong at 1:30. Again, simple beam at the start would allow riders to start 'early' and trip the 1:30 countdown.

The problem comes in manufacturing for a reasonable cost for a club to afford say 15 of these items.

Good idea though

Real question in this thread is which two other muppets voted for Gav as PM???? Where's your manifesto Mr Lewis!!!

C'mon now Donald, I have feelings you know

A favourite extract from my manifesto:

Have all the dossers, fakers and scroungers sort out all our rubbish for recycling to 'earn' their benefits giro.

GJ

Have to agree with timp, one for a stop seemed to make perfect sense for me, gave the incentive to keep forward motion, so in effect no stop but without the penalty of a five which can make it a mockery, as for being able to stop and sit there with your foot down for ten minutes and incur a one, the less said about that the better (don't want to get banned from site for swearing !)

Personally I think the stop-for-a-one system did not work at all, it was a nightmare to explain to observers and hardly anyone ever got docked a two for stopping with a foot down.

And remember, under stop-for-a-one, you could stop with your foot down for ten minutes and loose two! One for footing and one for stopping!

'STOP...wiggle-wiggle wiggle-wiggle

suppose a lot of it is down to observer, most riders dont want to lose two at one hit i.e. stopping and putting a foot down, one more dab and its a three (yes my maths is that good !) you don't want to be threeing everything, I observed when it was one for a stop and found it best compromise as you could only record a clean by doing section non stop, I have seen and heard the debate rolling on about which system to use and have come to the conclusion that the biggest problem is ............... THE RIDERS ! trouble is there are too many riders that will intimidate observers when given a mark that they don't want even though they know it has been a five, too many pot chasers I think, thats why observers will be lenient with some and not others, the whole thing would be much easier to apply if observers could mark honestly without fear of a gob full from some riders, that should be a bigger debate how to instill a sense of respect in riders, also be thankful for the time put in by any official at a trial.