Sense At Last

[bigfoot]

Maybe this could be a good idea, or it may just be my simple mind?

B Route - Stopping aloud for no more than 5 seconds at a time, got to move say 5 foot before being aloud to stop again.

A Route - Stopping aloud for no more than 5 seconds at a time, got to move say 10 foot before being aloud to stop again.

World level - Stopping aloud for no more than 5 or 10 seconds, three times in any one section.

Things like the SSDT and Scott use A route rules?

Instead of set distances, maybe got to move atleast two marker cards or something? Then it could vary depending on the section severity.

Maybe if its a Very large obstacle, or something very tricky, use a different coloured section marker, or have a spot on it to allow stopping in this zone.

Just my two cents.

Jamie

Jees Jamie, I think you're due quite a bit of change from your two cents.

Put yourself in the observers and course markers position. Can you just imagine the arguements that you were or were not through the next set of cards or over under the time by a millisecond.

[bilc0]

I wonder if this would of been decided if we was'nt in a credit crunch,i don't think so.

I still find it odd that we are still the only country talking about this,it can't be April allready.

[andat]

Says the man with the lightest production trials bike

What the hells that got to do with it. Have you seen me ride? I need a light bike 'cos I,m always falling off (see pic). On a serious note, I was at the A&B national at the weekend and there were plenty of natural 'mini scottish' gullies. It was a joke to see leading riders (who apparently aspire to great things at world level) stopping, propping themselves up against the nearest available boulder with their feet at 90 degrees to the footpegs, leaning on banks with their legs and arms and then getting cleans! Frankly its taking the p*** and is NOT A TEST OF SKILL!!!!!!! If the rule had been no stop, the leading riders scores would have been treble.

[telecat]

What the hells that got to do with it. Have you seen me ride? I need a light bike 'cos I,m always falling off (see pic). On a serious note, I was at the A&B national at the weekend and there were plenty of natural 'mini scottish' gullies. It was a joke to see leading riders (who apparently aspire to great things at world level) stopping, propping themselves up against the nearest available boulder with their feet at 90 degrees to the footpegs, leaning on banks with their legs and arms and then getting cleans! Frankly its taking the p*** and is NOT A TEST OF SKILL!!!!!!! If the rule had been no stop, the leading riders scores would have been treble.

Actually it is quite skilful. If you don't think it try it!!! The Trial was ruled that way so that's how they ride it!! One rider put it best at a Horsforth Trial after watching two riders through a section. One got the bike to a narrow rock ledge put out a foot and "swung" the bike round then rode off. The next got onto the ledge and feet up, stopped, bounced the bike into the air and turned it 90 degrees so the bike was in the right direction when it landed, then set off to complete the section for clean. Under the old 22A rules both would have got a one under 22B it would be a 1 and a 5. Which is more skilful and which is deserving of a clean ride??

[the addict]

I,m really going to miss stopping, spent this evening up the Dishes and most of our sections required stopping and hopping, I will miss lining up infront of a step or climb and going from nothing. I think I will ride better (results) non stop but I wont enjoy it nearly as much, I can hop whilst moving quite easily but those climbs/steps from no run up will gone next year if the ACU go this way. Non of the lads up there today liked the idea either

[jimmyl]

I love this old chestnut and it's always something that gets folks blood boiling....fantastic

Okay fatboy's tuppenceworth (edit....maybe 50p):

To stop or not to stop, that is the question, whether tis nobler to think that no-stop will bring riders back to the fold or to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous humiliation if the FIM/ACU etc etc don't do something to dig the sport out of its mess.

Seriously, someone, somewhere has to make a stand about this. How does a championship class of ten riders make sense? How does running 5 different routes at national level make sense?

Stop/No-Stop: I'm firmly in the No-Stop category and grew up in the sport as no-stop, through the start of the "stop" rules and all the buggering about there was with them. Crunch is we have a Stop rule now that is almost decipherable and workable however I still find it boring. A world trial is an amazing spectacle but the sections bore the hell out of me after the first few riders are through, it was like that few years back, Germany in 95 was the end for me, brilliant as it was 8 minutes to ride a section is a joke. Granted there was another "tweak" the following week but it killed wtc for me. What I do remember is the few worlds that I saw as a kid, big sections but ones you could have a big blast at, massive third and fourth gear climbs, amazing to watch, Vesty, Schrieber, Martin Lampkin moving into the next generation of Burgat, Michaud and Lejeune, then as the next generation of Tarres etc etc etc came in the rules really started going silly. It will always be no stop for me. I think that it might tease more riders out, I don't think that any solution will work overnight it has to be worked at, make the change and encourage riders and the size of entries will rise eventually.

Multiple routes works no matter what rules people want to use, if it's done properly. We had the whinging this year after the changes in the Scottish Champs, but by god it worked over 100 entries for the first round and from what I've been told entries are still better. BUT what is shown is that two other factors play a big role in entries, where the trial is and how many are willing to travel to it and whether the riders know the trial will be sensible. Stevenston round this weekend, be interesting to see what happens as a comparison to the Bon Accord round.

Observing at any level is simple as long the observer knows and understands the rules and applies them consistently. After that it's up to CoC's and clubs to support the observers if something goes pearshaped.

The SSDT: It is the best barometer of our sport, every change has been reflected in the six days in some way. As the rules and sections changed towards stop format to suit the worlds best riders who rode year in year out then the numbers started to fall as the multitude of everyday riders fell away because they couldn't handle it anymore. SSDT changes format, HL has nightmares and her postie a heart attack every December as the entries flood in. The recovery of the SSDT is down to no stop I think everyone agrees with that, the rest of the sport would follow eventually.

Use it as a world round, fantastic, bring the big riders back but change practically nothing. Think about this year, Doug and Wiggy, 1 mark in the end and lets be honest how many marks does it take to create a separation, winner on 1, next guy on 2, next guy on 3 etc etc etc.

I'm all for the big trials in the nations being world rounds, I think it would be a proper test, none of the same old predictable big steps, dry rocks and more and more man made hazards every year. The worlds best rider is the man who can adapt to whats thrown at him best they can all adapt to something when it the same thing every round. The Scottish and the Scott are two perfect examples of a test, what do the other countries have to offer?

Well done to the ACU for changing the Novogar, I sincerely hope it's successful, I sincerely hope the rest of the sport follows suit.......soon!!

I don't think no stop in the SSDT was the saving grace but the realisation that the sections do not need to be killers. The no stop rule levelel the playing field between the top boys nd the rest of us. Being able to hop and re-align things makes good sections for us mere mortls too easy for the top boys.

As a side not Michel Brown lost the St Davids BTC on a section that was slippy and loose and required a no stop approach - not on a massive step that was un surmountble for the lesser lights.

[jordi]

As a side not Michel Brown lost the St Davids BTC on a section that was slippy and loose and required a no stop approach - not on a massive step that was un surmountble for the lesser lights.

And that is a persuasive argument FOR no stop.

[telecat]

And that is a persuasive argument FOR no stop.

One section on one trial? Like I have said BOTH rules work well and the rider has to choose the approach to a section. Again it comes down to C of C, Observers and Riders. The riders skilled in hopping hate 22B those who can't want 22B. In all cases I hear complaints where a course is either too easy or too hard. Most of those come from 22B trials where a section is near impossible to do without some sort of hesitation. Where a "hopper" does turn out for a 22B trial they pretty much still finish high up in the results. As for "front wheel turning" that approach will never work. It's a bit of a urban legend that the FIM tried a device that measured forward motion on the front wheel and Dougie "fived a section" by riding it clean on the back wheel with the front locked the brake.

[ishy]

This topic could go on for another 6 pages if it's about who prefers what rules, isn't the real issue about falling numbers across the board ?.

Yes! in the past 25 years, the riders, bikes and section have all got more spectacular, but for some reason over that same 25 years the participation in every aspect has dropped off.

If the number of bikes sold is down and the cost of running a world team is way up, at some point the focus has to change from the sharp end and get back to the grass roots,

I would like to know who the major player is that has supposedly pulled the plug, it will also be interesting to see what reason they give, probably summat along the lines of WOFTAM.

The poor man's motor sport was at it's best when machines were cheap, and the sections were sensible.

[copemech]

This topic could go on for another 6 pages if it's about who prefers what rules, isn't the real issue about falling numbers across the board ?.

Yes! in the past 25 years, the riders, bikes and section have all got more spectacular, but for some reason over that same 25 years the participation in every aspect has dropped off.

If the number of bikes sold is down and the cost of running a world team is way up, at some point the focus has to change from the sharp end and get back to the grass roots,

I would like to know who the major player is that has supposedly pulled the plug, it will also be interesting to see what reason they give, probably summat along the lines of WOFTAM.

The poor man's motor sport was at it's best when machines were cheap, and the sections were sensible.

I agree with Ish, on the grass roots end especially! Making an event rideable, fun, yet with a challenge is always key in club events. I can typally lay out a 3 line event that can satisfy most all riders. Easily!

[nigel dabster]

This topic could go on for another 6 pages if it's about who prefers what rules, isn't the real issue about falling numbers across the board ?.

Yes! in the past 25 years, the riders, bikes and section have all got more spectacular, but for some reason over that same 25 years the participation in every aspect has dropped off.

If the number of bikes sold is down and the cost of running a world team is way up, at some point the focus has to change from the sharp end and get back to the grass roots,

I would like to know who the major player is that has supposedly pulled the plug, it will also be interesting to see what reason they give, probably summat along the lines of WOFTAM.

The poor man's motor sport was at it's best when machines were cheap, and the sections were sensible.

The real issue is about falling numbers. Participation has dropped of and rule changes may affect numbers but with clearly differing views there are pros and cons of both scoring methods. 22a or b will not improve numbers or destroy attendance the rules are much more event specific.

Involving the WTC in the argument is clouding the issue, the amounts spent by the top teams is not making a great difference to the cost of bikes else one manufacturer would drop the team and the price and sell loads, wouldn't they?

The volume of sales (or lack of) of the cheap Sherco bitsa a year or so back, and the complete lack of xispa sales indicate that cheap bikes don't hold the answer so what is it?

There are millions sloshing around in clubs accounts that could be put to much better use.

[dixie]

Actually it is quite skilful. If you don't think it try it!!! The Trial was ruled that way so that's how they ride it!! One rider put it best at a Horsforth Trial after watching two riders through a section. One got the bike to a narrow rock ledge put out a foot and "swung" the bike round then rode off. The next got onto the ledge and feet up, stopped, bounced the bike into the air and turned it 90 degrees so the bike was in the right direction when it landed, then set off to complete the section for clean. Under the old 22A rules both would have got a one under 22B it would be a 1 and a 5. Which is more skilful and which is deserving of a clean ride??

But said same rider probably does use his elbows and feet aswel, No one is saying its not a skill they are saying its not trials ,its power pogo stick ,good but not trials..

[dixie]

I wonder if this would of been decided if we was'nt in a credit crunch,i don't think so.

I still find it odd that we are still the only country talking about this,it can't be April allready.

We did invent trials after all ,i dont think they have a problem at club level in europe,they just let the big boys get on with it and have there own massively popular traditional trials with lunch stop and all.

[dixie]

I,m really going to miss stopping, spent this evening up the Dishes and most of our sections required stopping and hopping, I will miss lining up infront of a step or climb and going from nothing. I think I will ride better (results) non stop but I wont enjoy it nearly as much, I can hop whilst moving quite easily but those climbs/steps from no run up will gone next year if the ACU go this way. Non of the lads up there today liked the idea either

If you can still hop when you are 45 you will be doing well ,most people cant,I could tab 25 miles with 120lbs on my back when i was 21, couldnt make the end of my road now.

[dixie]

The real issue is about falling numbers. Participation has dropped of and rule changes may affect numbers but with clearly differing views there are pros and cons of both scoring methods. 22a or b will not improve numbers or destroy attendance the rules are much more event specific.

Involving the WTC in the argument is clouding the issue, the amounts spent by the top teams is not making a great difference to the cost of bikes else one manufacturer would drop the team and the price and sell loads, wouldn't they?

The volume of sales (or lack of) of the cheap Sherco bitsa a year or so back, and the complete lack of xispa sales indicate that cheap bikes don't hold the answer so what is it?

There are millions sloshing around in clubs accounts that could be put to much better use.

Now that is a point,Imagine if the centres each had a permanent off road trials training area so everone could practice,and new comers could mingle and learn,the politicians allwasys tell us as a nation we are getting un fit but dont let you do anything about it,

I know when the european champs started you could have works riders from different teams sharing a lift to a trial ,bikes in bits in the back of ordinary cars ,In my oppinion all adding to the fun,when people try to run sport as a buisness it goes tits up..