Section 1

[stuhrc]

Anyone see Andy's vid's from Spain WTC and notice how top guys took the total p*ss negotiating the red markers?? Whatever happened to the "theoretical straight line between markers"??

[gizza5]

I thought that when I looked at it, don't know what the rules say at WTC level, somone will?........ but yes it is taking the p**s a little.

But hey ho we have all extended the boundries and asked the observor how far we allowed to go out in a section, trip round the car park at the next trial before re-entering the section

Maybe at tape would have been better between the two markers or did they do that for the second lap?

Edited April 4, 2007 by GIZZA5

[woody]

Anyone see Andy's vid's from Spain WTC and notice how top guys took the total p*ss negotiating the red markers?? Whatever happened to the "theoretical straight line between markers"??

What happened to adherence to rules of any kind in WTC - for the last 20 years....

Edited April 4, 2007 by Woody

[cota kid]

As Doug cleaned section 1 on both laps and was the only rider to do so, I'm not complaining.

[scorpa3]

As Doug cleaned section 1 on both laps and was the only rider to do so, I'm not complaining.

We were talking about this on the other thread....

I personally think it sets a very bad example and is a trend I wouldn't like to see in the UK. What do other Observers think?

I rely on the 'imaginary straight line' rule when setting out a section. Without this, we would not be able to have three routes as boundary tape would need to be used between every marker.

The skill is exceptional, I don't blame the riders for doing it, but the officials should have fived the first person who went between those two reds on the climb. This is only my thoughts on it.

Once again, thanks Andy for getting this footage.

[motofire]

I dont mean to sound like a total dummy but can someone explain what we are talking about here. I watched all the vids and I must say I really dont know how the section was suppose to go because it seemed that riders were all over the map on this one. Go easy...i am pretty new to trials, especially the World events.

Also..I must agree the vids were great!

Edited April 5, 2007 by motofire

[scorpa3]

The final climb was marked on the right by two reds, one half way up the bank and one almost at the top.

I suspect the climb was fairly tough as the later riders, looking for a better line, only went up to the first red then turned right and came back down the bank.

Now in my opinion that's a failure, however on this occasion the riders then rode way over to the right, up through the trees and came backalong the top of the section. Then, very skilfullly, just edged their front wheels back inside the top red and flicked their bikes around and rode out of the section.

There are two schools of thought on this, firstly; crossing an imaginary straight line between two reds is classed as a failure, and; if the Clerk of the Course had wanted the riders to go up the climb then he'd have taped it right to the top and not left a gap on the way up, so it's ok.

I hope this explains what we are talking about.

[motofire]

I hope this explains what we are talking about.

Thats what I suspected you guys were reffering to. Thanks.

I was thinking. Is there any chance the trials master..or clerk of the course did it this way on purpose to make some riders think out of the box? The again...if its a rule that a straight line is suppose to be used why would someone even ask riders to do that?

Edited April 5, 2007 by motofire

[scorpa3]

I hope this explains what we are talking about.

Thats what I suspected you guys were reffering to. Thanks.

I was thinking. Is there any chance the trials master..or clerk of the course did it this way on purpose to make some riders think out of the box? The again...if its a rule that a straight line is suppose to be used why would someone even ask riders to do that?

You can never blame the riders for trying to gain an advantage.

[bikespace]

In my view they haven't actually broken the rules in any way (from what I can see in the video).

The difference with the FIM rules is the way the gates are used. There is no imaginary line between gates, you're just not allowed to go through anybody elses gates, and you have to stay within the outer boundary (the tape). This can be quite wide if they try to cater for the junior route on the same section.

We had a similar situation on our section at Hawkestone 2 years ago. The riders rode up through their gate, to get up one step, then dropped back down and took a run at the second step higher up. As long as they don't go through the gate of another route and don't cross their tracks with both wheels, then they're fine.

It's unfortunate that the riders were able to find a 'cheat route' but that's their job, and it's the job of the clerk of the course to make sure that these cheat routes don't exist. Ideally if the top red flag was a foot lower drilled in to the rock, they couldn't have gone round the long way.

Have a look at the picture. It looks like it's been drawn by a kid as I'm using a laptop touchpad in paint, but it shows what I mean. The black lines are the tape boundary. The red rider hasn't done anything wrong here.

[barcota]

Where can I view the videos?

Many, many more videos are available when you sign up for TC Supporter status. This is an example of what you are missing for the relatively low cost of the offering.

[atomant]

The difference with the FIM rules is the way the gates are used. There is no imaginary line between gates...

Well that's an interesting comment as at the same trial last year that you refer to, Cabestany was giving a 5 (on section 15 I think? and which was very much discussed on here) for going outside 'an imaginary line'

Where can I view the videos?

Trialscentral Supporter Details Here

[scorpa3]

An imaginary straight line is a difficult thing to guage unless you are stood perfectly in line with the two markers. Just look at the rows every year at Wimbledon, and there's a real line painted on a tennis court.

However, take a look at my interpretation of the line taken and draw your own conclusions.

[bikespace]

The difference with the FIM rules is the way the gates are used. There is no imaginary line between gates...

Well that's an interesting comment as at the same trial last year that you refer to, Cabestany was giving a 5 (on section 15 I think? and which was very much discussed on here) for going outside 'an imaginary line'

Where can I view the videos?

Trialscentral Supporter Details Here

I think I'm talking about the same one as you, it was one of the rock sections down the bottom near the motocross track I think, but the line that Cabestany crossed was the line between two gates from the junior course. His front wheel in the view of the observer crossed the line between two of the blue gates. I can't be a***d to do another picture but if you can imagine on the previous one that the rider comes a little lower before attacking the second step and goes in between the blue gates (crosses the imaginary line between the blue gates) then that's a 5.

[bikespace]

Someone with the same artistic skills as me Scorpa3 but it looks like it shows exactly what happened. The riders have done nothing wrong. I don't really see this as taking the mickey out of the rules. It's the riders job to find these lines - I think it's a fairly simple mistake from the clerk of the course - Martin Lampkin would be gutted if he'd left that hole there. They spend hours looking at where almost every gate needs to go. The Spanish Clerk of the Course will be just as gutted i'd imagine.