Observer Advice Please

[micm]

I would appreciate a bit of guidance on marking riders attempts at sections in an event like the recent Brian Fowler Memorial Trial.

If a rider slides backwards, let us say half a metre or a couple of feet to be clear, in control and feet up, on for example one of those big sloping rock sections

what should the observer score? Is it a failure, a 1 mark penalty or nothing? The riders certainly expected no penalty at that trial for example.

Secondly if a rider has a clear failure in the middle of the section should they then immediately leave the section without trying to complete it as they are no longer being 'observed.'

I am generally referring to the elite riders and I am not asking about a rider caught on a log and rocking about a bit or indeed a section with the ends cards close to the point of failure.

If you can point me to the relevant rule refernce I would also appreciate it. Thanks.

[bdmc]

1st part of the question a five See ACU handbbok page 202 DEFINIATIONS Failure (a)

2nd part If there is a time for each section he is allowed his allocated time. If not the observer should polity ask the competitor to leave. If he/she ignores you suugest that if he/she dont get his/her a*** out of the section you will refuse to mark him/her next time. or report him/her to Clerk of Course to take action under NSC 6.04 no 4 page 464

[timp]

No rules allow you to go backwards. Not 1 inch. Nothing.

But saying that a lot of observers allow a bit of rocking back and forth.

Not penalising a rider according to the rules is basically unfair on the riders who ride correctly.

[pete_scorpa3]

No rules allow you to go backwards. Not 1 inch. Nothing.

But saying that a lot of observers allow a bit of rocking back and forth.

Not penalising a rider according to the rules is basically unfair on the riders who ride correctly.

Yep.

Each observer has their own level of tollerance for such things, but I would suggest that two feet is well outside any tollerance.

Pete

[steveo]

Not penalising a rider according to the rules is basically unfair on the riders who ride correctly.

I fully agree with you on this this.

Many markers say they give a little leeway if riders have a moment where they slide back just a little. They are in effect rewarding a poor ride, at the end of the day his score will not reflect this rider error. If it happens on a harder part of a section each lap by a few lenient markers it really can give an inaccurate picture of a riders performance over the whole days event. Four attempts where a five should have been applied puts a very big dent in a score were a kind hearted clean was given.

Failing a section at any point in the section should see the rider exit the section. To continue the marked path of his graded ride gives him an unfair advantage for his next attempt the following lap. His early failure, even if timing is being used negates his right to use that time to continue his marked route.

[totalshell]

i had ocasion to observe a couple of modern trials this year the alan jefferies for one, and took time to read the rules and check the detail for each one.

this way i did my honest best, i try to mark each rider to the same std. so if i allowed riders to slide an inch or two if climbing a slab etc they were all judged to the same std.

one instance sprang to mind on a stop allowed trial of a rider hung up half way up a 6 foot water fall and with footdown this rider lifetd and replaced the foot half a dozen times whilst the bike stood virtually still as balance and position were sought before aiming for the ends. eventually they got there for a 3 which i believe reflected the skill and effort taken to get through a section that had very few scores of 3 or less

[micm]

Thanks for your advice everyone. I will remember the advice and tell my friend (non computer) who is a regular observer in Southern Centre and National trials.

[garyc]

I would have to disagree with the rider not being aloud to carry on. I've always known it that the rider is allowed to finish the section, after all they've paid their entry and should be entitled to ride the full course laid out. It's not an unfair advantage provided they only try each bit once. Obviously if there is a queue and time is short the rider should not take the mickey, but I'm sure they are entitled to finish the course.

I think rocking backward slightly should be down to the observer to decide how to mark it for the particular section in question, but going backward significantly should always be a five. Sections are there to grade ability. So if it is a really hard section and nearly everyone fives it hopelessly, but one or two make a very skilled attempt and, except for a slight rock backward, clean it or dab it, then most would argue they deserve better than a five and definiely rode the section better than most of the others. An easy section on the other hand should be marked harder so a clean rewards a faultless ride and any small mishap is marked to the book.

[bigfoot]

So if it is a really hard section and nearly everyone fives it hopelessly, but one or two make a very skilled attempt and, except for a slight rock backward, clean it or dab it, then most would argue they deserve better than a five and definiely rode the section better than most of the others. An easy section on the other hand should be marked harder so a clean rewards a faultless ride and any small mishap is marked to the book.

Surely this is not consistant and consistancy is most important. I can't see why a easy section should be marked differently to a very hard one. And backward is always a 5 no matter how small.

[garyc]

The most important thing is the observer is consitent and fair over the entire marking of a particular section. The marking will vary from observer to observer and there's no reason why it can't vary from event to event with the same observer. The point is that a section that sees nothing but fives, despite some extremly good rides, because the observer does not use his/her discretion appropriately achieves nothing and is frustrating for the riders, the organisers and the spectators.

and yes backward is a five, but we're talking about the real marginal cases here, for example, when a rider sets off from a standstill, the bike make rock back a cm or so as he transfers his weight over the rear wheel and engages the clutch, would you honestly mark that as a five?

Edited December 17, 2009 by Garyc

[steveo]

The most important thing is the observer is consitent and fair over the entire marking of a particular section. The marking will vary from observer to observer and there's no reason why it can't vary from event to event with the same observer. The point is that a section that sees nothing but fives, despite some extremly good rides, because the observer does not use his/her discretion appropriately achieves nothing and is frustrating for the riders, the organisers and the spectators.

and yes backward is a five, but we're talking about the real marginal cases here, for example, when a rider sets off from a standstill, the bike make rock back a cm or so as he transfers his weight over the rear wheel and engages the clutch, would you honestly mark that as a five?

Being an observer and being consistant in your assessment of riders attempts is what everyone agrees on. If a section is so difficult that all riders are incuring a five does not give the observer the right to use his discresion on rewarding what he thinks is a better attempt than most others when a failure has occured. A more skilled five is still a five. If at the end of the day if all riders have received a five that is not the fault of the observer. If the section set has proved too tough he should not feel obliged to get lenient as the day wears on because it is frustrating.

The cm roll back is still back and this is where it gets challenging on the observers and riders and some of the gamesmanship starts.

[garyc]

Trials marking it not always black and white. An obvious five should always be marked a five no matter how good the attempt is. Observers have the right, however, to make their own interpretation of the rules and also of the events that occur in the section, they then have the right to use their discretion and make a judgment on the mark the rider deserves. I'm only suggesting that it might help to take a more rider-friendly judgement on hard sections and a harsher judgement on easier sections, but ultimately it's completely their choice and riders have to accept that. I'm in no way suggesting the observer gets more lenient throughout the day, this really musn't happen and ideally observers shouldn't be switched mid-event either so that consistency is not lost.

[timp]

Trials marking it not always black and white. An obvious five should always be marked a five no matter how good the attempt is. Observers have the right, however, to make their own interpretation of the rules and also of the events that occur in the section, they then have the right to use their discretion and make a judgment on the mark the rider deserves. I'm only suggesting that it might help to take a more rider-friendly judgement on hard sections and a harsher judgement on easier sections, but ultimately it's completely their choice and riders have to accept that. I'm in no way suggesting the observer gets more lenient throughout the day, this really musn't happen and ideally observers shouldn't be switched mid-event either so that consistency is not lost.

This is where the clerk of the course ends up with the wrong information at the end of the day. He sees on the results that a lot of riders got through for threes when really they fived it. He might of laid it out a bit easier next time if he had known the true story.