No Stop Demonstration By Albert

[nigel dabster]

Also looking at the scores I seriously wonder if Ferrer challoner and Oliveras are given the same lienency?

[b40rt]

Its very easy to see in the examples of these two clips of Cab and Fugi how the result is determined by the observer not by the skill of the rider. How can Cab not feel cheated when viewing his competitors non compliance with the new rules and receive a clean when it obviously was not. Why is this margin of error deemed OK by markers , when it clearly is negating the prowess of the more skilled riders. Its not a slack dab there missing its a failure. If Michiad thinks all is well, he is fooling himself and making the new format more unpalatable for all.

Top riders getting the "benefit" of the doubt happens in many events, did the observers not understand the rules, choose to ignore them or were they instructed to be lenient ?

[nigel dabster]

yes. It happens alot in Italy and to a less extent in Spain and France, but rarely in the uk.

[gizza5]

I remember Ignacio Bulto saying that despite his success ,he didnt like riding trials mainly because his score was left to an amateur.

And gentlemen how right he was, I am sure when he said that he wasn't being derogatory to the observers, but stating a fact!

How one observer allows riders to flaunt with the rules another will be as strict as hell, this is how it is and it don't matter what rules are in place. There has been a lot of media about the No Stop rules and some observers will be marking to the letter of the law?

The rules prior to No Stop said you could stop but not roll back, if the observers marked as they should then there too would have been a good tally of 5's?

Does make you wonder what rules would work, maybe do what the hell you like in the section and just count dabs?

[borus]

Does make you wonder what rules would work, maybe do what the hell you like in the section and just count dabs?

indoor rules would work

[woody]

The indoor rules barely differ from last year's outdoor rules, so the FIM would have achieved nothing by using them though?

There is nothing wrong, difficult, contentious, confusing or whatever else about no-stop rules, it's about as basic as they get and caused no issues with observers being "confused" during a period that stretched over decades before stop and hop became allowed.

There are videos from Motegi of riders who are blatantly stopping, hopping front and rear wheels to line up for the next part of the section. There are several issues here:

The riders know damn well they shouldn't do it but did

Are they doing it to make a point

The observers allowed them to do it

Some sections were (or appeared from the video) totally unsuitable for no-stop. Section 3 for one.

The commentators could easily say 'oh dear that's a five' (interpret as you like) at a point where a rider blatantly stops. Instead they whoop up the crowd with oohs and aahs and encourage the rider on

The crowd whoop with delight as they encourage the rider through a section and never ever acknowledge the fact that they are breaking the rules

As a result of the last point, the observer probably feels pressured into giving the clean (or not penalising the stops)

From what I've seen of Motegi, there seems potential for some pretty big and challenging no-stop sections but the organisers seem to have merely served up the stereotypical man made obstacles on most with large rocks placed a bike length apart which suits stop and hop and splat.

I don't know if no-stop is an answer to whatever troubles WTC may have, but if Michaud is satisfied with that then the bloke needs sacking from his post. From what I've seen from videos of other sections only Cabestany comes away from that with any credibility. On section 5 Fuji and Raga are a joke, as is Raga on 3.

If you're going to try no-stop (or anything) ffs do it properly. Some riders, the organisers, Michaud, the FIM, the commentators and most of the crowd all need a good shoe-ing after that debacle. The FIM should haul all riders and officials from that event together, play the section videos back and point out what was wrong on each one.

Maybe then, at the next trial, we'd at least see a bona-fide attempt at no-stop. How can you say something works if it isn't tried properly.

[nigel dabster]

Good points.i did suggest that the BTC adopt a similar approach a sample section if you like so that everyone observers and riders alike know what is and isnt allowed. The only problem as far as I can see is that we are starting from stop allowed so riders want to stop as thats what there used to.

Also on the cabes section the jumble of rocks towards the end look nothing but are obviously very difficult to ride n s, it may backfire insomuch as no stop could make the wtc appear not anything special?

[funtrials]

Its confusing me. One minute I think no stop has got a chance then I see these videos from Caby and Fuji. Such a difference and yes Fuji was stopping. So why wasn't he fived? Did he not stop for long enough?

The answer is that obviously, OBVIOUSLY, the rules need to go back to stop-ok.

[funtrials]

Its very easy to see in the examples of these two clips of Cab and Fugi how the result is determined by the observer not by the skill of the rider. How can Cab not feel cheated when viewing his competitors non compliance with the new rules and receive a clean when it obviously was not. Why is this margin of error deemed OK by markers , when it clearly is negating the prowess of the more skilled riders. Its not a slack dab there missing its a failure. If Michiad thinks all is well, he is fooling himself and making the new format more unpalatable for all.

Just LOOK at what this one new rule has reduced this once-proud sport to.

[idmcc_sec]

The answer is that obviously, OBVIOUSLY, the rules need to go back to stop-ok.

NO, all that needs to happen is the observers do the job properly. Like I said earlier, a couple of fives will soon stop the riders fannying about in the sections.

At their level, these riders are quite capable of riding no stop.

[woody]

Just LOOK at what this one new rule has reduced this once-proud sport to.

Try and be objective rather than hysterical.

Do you honestly think that for the last 30 years the rules have been applied correctly under stop and hop rules?

We've seen riders going backwards. We've seen them stuck on an obstacle using their toes to push themselves off (that = footing) We've seen them stuck on something with a foot down with the bike rocking back and forth as they try to push themselves free. We've seen them hop and bounce the bike outside the boundary of a section to get a better line. We've seen them virtually off the bike with a knee and elbow on the floor.

Everyone of those instances has gone unpenalised and all but one should have been 5 marks.

The no-stop rule isn't responsible for controversy any more than the rule it replaces

[nigel dabster]

.but the no stop rule has solved nothing, has made no difference to participation particularily on the top route, it looks less spectacular and the success of fuji seems to be through lack of rule enforcement. in fact it seems a case of riders not trying to ride to the rules but more like riding to the observers lienency?

[idmcc_sec]

and the success of fuji seems to be through lack of rule enforcement. in fact it seems a case of riders not trying to ride to the rules but more like riding to the observers lienency?

Precisely my point,

Doesn't matter what rules are currently in fashion (my preference is no stop btw), but if the observer can't/won't apply them correctly the whole thing ends up a farce..

[nigel dabster]

only difference is that stop allowed can be lax with no observer judgement but as soon as no stop is lax its stop allowed, which is where the spanish 3 came from and the whole thing went no stop allowed?

(Ihave no preference for either rules)