To Stop, Or Not To Stop, That Is The Question.......

[shedracer]

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.

This seems like it could be a pretty fair compromise, although their allways the argument that someone just scrabbless out.

On another note, I would like to mention from a point of both a rider and observer, people have to remember, that most are volunteers and without observers, we don't have the same sense of enjoyment in our choosen sport. I have attended a few club trials, where you observe yourselves, it's not a great situation, but the clubs can't get the volunteers, then this is what it boils down to.

Hope our sport can sort something out, for all our sakes.

[fivebunny]

I dont really see why all these so called 'top' lad are so dead against No-stop. They will be able to adapt thier riding skills to the system much more easily. As for me, a mere clubman, struggling up streams and rock steps only to sump out and stop. A five, no complaints. The old stop rules favoured me as I could get a foot or more than likely 2 feet down and lump the bike over said obsruction with a loss of one or two. Where as the better rider floats over the rocks and holes that I hit.

As for observing I do think that if the observer is the same across the board with every rider then there is no issue. To me if a rider is asking what they got then they know themselves that they have made a mess of the section. If they argued the fact then they would be reported to the CofC to have them diqualified. Observers are far more valuable than any rider, no matter who they are.

Having said that, the rider has the right to post a complaint with the CofC at the way a section is being observed. Much better that than having a go at someone giving up thier time to stand in the cold to make our sport possible.

Edited December 2, 2011 by fivebunny

[grahamjayzee]

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

I reckon I could get this knocked out with my far eastern guys for a pretty low cost (

[b40rt]

Having said that, the rider has the right to post a complaint with the CofC at the way a section is being observed. Much better that than having a go at someone giving up thier time to stand in the cold to make our sport possible.

Only complaint thats valid is if the observer is not following the rules, you cannot complain if you dont like your score.

[revbeta]

I still don't see whats wrong with the old scoring system 1 for a dab, 2 for two dabs and so on, that was easy observing, as well as the time limit most club riders will not stand there all day balacing on the bike but they may stop and eye up the obstacle, and as far as the btc thats what the time limit was brought in for. To me i thought trials was about balance & bike control so why should you have a penalty for balancing for a few seconds, i ride club trials to have a bit of fun & meet others, my club lets you ride what you feel ( stop, no stop) & thats why there are different classes for those who can not hop & bounce if needed

[trialswarrior]

Non-stop is too subjective for my liking, it's too open to interpretation. At the last non-stop event I attended I got a five for compressing the suspension performing a double blip to go over a log. The checker claimed I stopped as I went over the log. I didn't argue, but thought it was ridiculous.

Since an early age I hated judged sports (like diving, gymnastics, etc). Scoring was always plagued with political motivations, I thought.

Loved racing MX. No room for interpretation. Cross the finish line first, you win.

Stop rules are simple, count the number of dabs.

Non-stop... is like competing under subjective rules again.....

[hoggyf]

Just my 2pennorth but....

I've only been trialing for a year and have done probalby 8 or 10 trials under both rules, and I understand both sides of the argument. For myself, having just ridden under no-stop rules at my last trial, it was very disheartening to see the observor marking the score board while I was still 1/2 way through the section when I'd had a wobble and dabbed to gain control (aka stopped) it then made the rest of the section pointless attempting to complete it.

Personally I think a time limit on the time stopped - say 5 secs - is the best way to go and as long as the observor is consistent througout it should suit everyone.

Like someone else said the top boys have no relevance to me as they are so far away from my ability, but i do think they would be better to watch on a no-stop basis as the obstacles are so big now its generally clear or a 5.

[grahamjayzee]

I probably need reminding as to the reasons why we are even considering no stop?

If it is to change the nature of the trials, for what reason? If it is a hark back to an earlier time, much though I'd like to go there, it ain't going to happen. We can't 'unknow' what we know and 'undevelop' tyres, bikes, etc. If it is to reduce queueing, surely the problem is time? I can't see 'time stopped' working because we are asking too much of the poor observer. But in the grand scheme of things, the only problem I see is the amount of time spent in the section. If a time limit were imposed and the sections plotted to align to this, who care if we stop?

If it wasn't for the queueing in my region (and that only usually is a problem during expert championship rounds, and I certainly don't begrudge the big boys), I couldn't care a tinker's cuss whichever rules we use!

Graham

[pete_scorpa3]

Looking at the Poll, a couple of things stand out.

More Over 40 riders voted and the majority of people already ride under both sets of rules.

This might just mean that there are more Over 40 riders reading this thread and that the majority of riders just get on with riding what ever rules they are presented with, even if they don't like one or the other.

Any other conclusions?

[nigel dabster]

over 40's are the majority anyway?

[b40rt]

The argument for keeping stop allowed seems be be to attract the younger element, after all they are the future of the sport.

Is this actually true.

An interesting question in the poll might have been, at what age did you take up trials.

Many riders start in their 30's on-wards, having come from road, moto x, racing, having ridden when younger etc.

Hopefully they will also have had a greater disposable income and also get their children involved.

As has been previously said, they also organise & lay out the trials.

So for the furure success of trials, lay them out to suit mature riders.

Or alternatively, all the young riders are out having fun competing, and have a life !

[old trials fanatic]

The argument for keeping stop allowed seems be be to attract the younger element, after all they are the future of the sport.

Is this actually true.

An interesting question in the poll might have been, at what age did you take up trials.

Many riders start in their 30's on-wards, having come from road, moto x, racing, having ridden when younger etc.

Hopefully they will also have had a greater disposable income and also get their children involved.

As has been previously said, they also organise & lay out the trials.

So for the furure success of trials, lay them out to suit mature riders.

All good points well made.

[pete_scorpa3]

over 40's are the majority anyway?

Yes, in this weeks Ralph Varden trial from the 53 riders entered, 36 are over 40!

http://www.stratford-upon-avonmcc.org.uk/page4.html

[ishy]

over 40's are the majority anyway?

To me it make sense to cater for the majority, even more so when past experience shows catering for the minority isn't working.

The economy has a lot more to do with this than is being mentioned but even then the group most likely to be able to afford the sport in tight times is the Majority.

[copemech]

I have heard the term "we don't want Hitler observers" used on a number of occasions.

Well, trust me, in the stricktest sense of no-stop, it can get nasty on a brief bounce back or a momentary plant of the front wheel to swing the rear, them spokes have stopped turning round, even if the rest of the bike is rotating round it.

Fact is it don't bother me a bit to bust butt on the top riders even, as I like handing out points! It is all this piddle stuff about that kills me! I'll hand every one of them a 5 foe hesitating to enter the section if that is the game of the day. Sorta like the "gate trials" where one dab is a bust!