Richmond Btc

[dadof2]

I thought I would give it a day or two to see if anyone else posted on this. Firstly I would like to make it clear that in NO WAY is this post intended as a criticism of observers.

During the day I probably saw about 300 rides through sections. On 4 of those occasions I would have awarded different marks to those given by the observer and had my marks counted there would have been a change of order within the top 5. 4/300 is 1.3% ie even if I was right on those 4 occasions the observer(s) were right 98.7% of the time - not bad for UNPAID VOLUNTEERS.

Despite this high level of accuracy I saw 4 instances (not the same 4 as above) of observers being sworn at (F and B words) when the rider or their "minder" did not agree with the score given. Even if the observer had not seen exactly what the rider did there is no way they should be spoken to in that manner and the offenders should be ashamed of themselves. Remember this is primarily a sport for fun (even at BTC level) run almost exclusively by unpaid volunteers. A riders mark is what the OBSERVER SEES, Perhaps the unhappy riders will be willing to pay £1000 pound entry fees then all the sections can be videoed, goal line technology employed and the result announced several days later after a review of the tapes.

On a more positive note it was good to see that riders were adapting to no stop and were able to hop sideways whist maintaining forward motion. No stop certainly won't put me off Nord Vue.

As was noted on the WTC endurocross post the present marking system does not differentiate between a rider that makes a complete hash of the section and one that only stops for the briefest moment, possibly still feet up. I hesitate to propose a suggestion to alleviate this as no doubt some riders would still push the boundaries.

Cheers

[nigel dabster]

I'm not sure what you are saying, they were too lienent or harsh on the 4 or you think 1.3% is ok?

[johnnyboxer]

Of the 4 sections I watched, I thought the Observers were brilliant

Fair, professional & very well trained

Richmond Club did a great job & I saw no dissent from riders to Observers, only at themselves if they made a silly soft mistake

Edited June 12, 2013 by johnnyboxer

[dadof2]

What was I trying to say? Firstly I hope some of the errant riders will read the post and moderate their behaviour. Secondly I wondered if there were others who had seen what I had seen and maybe would comment. I know of a number of observers who have become reluctant to observe due to rider abuse and thought air would air the issue.

Regarding the 4 occasions when I would have given a different mark:-

A rider moved back twice about 6 inches with a foot down and was given a 1. The observer had a poor view from some distance directly behind. Others who had same view as me agreed it was a 5. The observer was awarding 5s for a similar or less backward movement when they happened where he had a good view.

2 other cases were where the riders hit steps, bounced (not intentionally) sideways or sort of upwards and may or may not stopped. I would have given a 0 and a 1, The observer gave 5s. I had a slightly better view than the observer but not much. The 4th case was where the rider crested a step and both feet came off the footrests and the rider was sat on the saddle. I had a slightly more distant view than the observer but from the same angle. I would have given a 3 as I felt both feet were down and dragged. The observer (at least initially) gave a 2.

As I said previously it is what the observer sees that counts. I have ridden at Richmond trials for near on 40 years and never had cause to disagree with the scores given to me.

Cheers

[wri5hty]

Observer's view of a section is always going to be a problem in trials. The longer the sections or more riders/spectator's the worse it will be. You have to give benefit of the doubt to the riders. Which leads neatly on to your second point swearing and shouting whilst dropping marks is just plain daft, 1st kids are at most trials they shouldn't be hearing some of the stuff that gets said. 2nd the observer may be unsure if it was a dab or not when you let your gob go you just grass yourself up. That has happened to me loads of times while observing.

[johnnyboxer]

There is no easy solution to Trials observing

It's supposed to be objective but ends up being subjective

The severity of the sections in modern Trials (because the modern bikes are so bloody competent) trying to be ridden no stop makes them difficult to be ridden no stop

I watched Bigfoot's excellent Highland Classic video last night & in comparison watching the sections & the riders you could see how no stop sections should be ridden on a Twinshock bike

However reluctant I am to admit, I think it is hard to ride modern bikes no stop, especially on championship type sections