Acu Rule Tsr22a, Stop Is A 1 Etc

[stuartc]

A good few years ago the ACU brought in rule TSR22a

ie: Stop and you get a 1

This was brought about to keep in line with the

(at the time )FIM world rules.

I now think that it is time the ACU updated the rules

in line with the FIM.

It is like asking our footballers to play with 2M wide

goals and 11 men but when they go to Europe/Worldwide play with

3m wide goals and 21 men.

In which other regulated worldwide sport do you see the massive difference in

rules?

The ACU are under the FIM umbrella so to speak.

Let the SSDT, Scott etc run under what ever rules are needed

for that type of event, but lets get the grass roots of the sport

settled into 1 set of rules.

It is no wonder trials does net get any publicity when not even the

competitors / observers know what rules they are riding under from 1 trial to another!!!!

And that is a fact, ask any observer how many times he/she has been

asked "what rules are we on today? "

But then trials riders NEVER read their regs / entry form.

DO YOU ?

Trials is not a "new spectator" friendly sport anyway due to the

fact you cannot see who is winning, but having one set of rules just

might help to educate the occasional onlooker.

He/She may go to XXXX club trial on 1 Sunday,

then another the next Sunday, can't understand what is happening so forgets it all together.

So the sport has lost a spectator (which means sponsors) + a potential rider.

This is not bull as I see a LOT of folk that have bought a bike but do not wish to compete as they are confused by the rules/red tape, so just go playing.

The same folk are the ones that may get the sport of motorcycling as a whole a bad name.

[grouse]

I totally agree with your comments, there should be one set of rules for all trials with the exception of the Scottish/Scott and so much the better if they are all non stop.

[scorpa3]

I agree Stuart.

Full non stop is the answer. If the front wheel ceases moving in a forward direction then you have failed.

Simple to understand for both riders observers and spectators.

Don't blame the ACU though, they adopted FIM rules then the FIM changed them again.

Now even the FIM are talking about non stop again. They are the ones messing us about.

[scorpaf]

I watched the 2005 World Outdoor review yesterday on DVD and, since I hadn't swotted up on the 'World' rules, I found it quite boring. Every section looked like it had been fived to me. So as you say, we have too many sets of rules!

As far as the no-stop being easy for everyone to understand.....lets just say I no longer observe in my own centre (hooray say the riders). Sections need to be able to be ridden no stop and riders need to accept the five they get when they have stopped - otherwise its a waste of time. Personally I prefer a 1 for a stop as I hate to five a rider (contrary to local belief) for what has sometimes been an otherwise faultless ride.

[scorpa3]

Riders (including me) hate to get a five for stopping in non stop trials, that is true. A 1 for stopping is far preferable.

However, under the stop = 1 rule, a stationary sideways bounce is a five. How many observers (also including me) have ever given a five for this? And be honest, we see it all the time don't we?

What ever rule is applied, we are going to have disagrements, it's the nature of the sport. We have to loose marks otherwise there is no element of competition.

In my opinion, the simplest rule to employ is non stop. The best riders will still be the best riders.

[adsy]

I also agree that there should only one set of rules.

But only for certain types of events.

The current FIM rules are not viable in local events,

as its hard enough getting one observer per section, never

mind a time keeper as well! Plus it would mean trying to re-educate

observers again to another set of rules.

Full No stop is the simplest answer, but this is then dragging

the talented youths down I feel. Take my nephew Jack, he rides no stop

at most (not all) of his local events, old FIM rules (obselete) at A & B

nationals,then when we ride the Euro champs the new stop & hop allowed

FIM rules, there is no consistancy for him at all.

This is incredibly frustrating.

Another possible option would be to run all trials below British Championship

status under full no stop & the British Adult & Youth Championships under

the Full FIM ruling, as at the end of the day it will be these riders that

will be going on compete in FIM & EUM events which run under these rules.

If we had done this originally, maybe we would still be able to see

Dougie riding in this country, as opposed to forcing him to ride the Spanish Championship.

If we carry on like we are we will not be able to watch the

wealth of young talent we have coming through the ranks at the moment, the likes of

Alexz Wigg, Ross Danby and Jack Challoner etc, unless we go to Hawkstone or fly to Spain etc.

At least this way the good lads will only have to ride to only 2 sets of rules, instead of

having to ride to a completely obselete set of rules,these being

the old FIM rules.

Anyway thats my point of view, does anyone else have any ideas??????????

[momo]

unfortunatly what everbody has said makes sense

the problem is that if the rules are different to the F I M then we are not helping the better riders compete at the top level,

so all the brit champ and nationals should go to fim. sum trials can opt out but this should be stated before entries are taken so riders know what the rules are.

also when you watch the montesa vid on the web site and dougie says he won't ride in brittan cus the rules are different,he must be our biggest draw at a trial and he rides in europe, if we changed the rules would that bring him back and maybee sum of the other top men which would then make brit championship top again.this would also give top youths the chance to ride against and see what is going on at the top level and would increase spectators with more advertising

[scorpa3]

I am a huge admirer of Doug and he should be given the praise and encouragement which he deserves, especially from forums such as this, however please allow me to play devils advocate here for a minute;

As a mere club rider, occasional observer and regular organiser, I don't give a squat about Doug riding in this country. Perhaps he is forced to ride in Spain, so what?

Like so many hundreds (maybe thousands) of riders across the country every weekend, although I admire the World Championship riders, I know I will never be able to ride like them.

What I do know is, that I enjoy riding in club trials in my area. With this in mind, we need to make it as simple as possible for the people who organise, run and ride in these events week in, week out.

It will do the vast majority of riders no good what so ever to be allowed to hop skip and loop the loop with yet more complicated rules, it is likely to make the organisers job far harder.

Like many of you reading this, I regularly have to try and find 10 (or more) willing volunteers to observe at one of our events.

Finding observers is the only job worse than actually observing.

I feel that straight forward no stop rules would make observing easier and perhaps (I say perhaps) make observers easier to find. This is worth far more to me than the prospect of Doug riding in one of our events because we have the same rules as the world championship.

Now I'm in trouble I guess....

[dabmeister]

What's the penalty for heresy again?

[stuartc]

a footpeg in the side of the head, repeat offenders get one either side :-)

[neonsurge]

Regardless of what rules are adopted by the FIM for world level competition, the ACU rules to be applied at national level should mirror them exactly. That's the only way that up and coming British riders won't be artificially handicapped when stepping into the world arena (however slight that handicap may be). The FIM says all sections must be ridden on one wheel, that's what should happen in the British championship rounds.

Have a different, optional set of rules for club use, sure, but at the highest national level riders should be getting experience of what they should expect to deal with if and when they take that next step. Of course, this raises the issue of observing difficulties again but since the same problems seem to affect world rounds just as much as national and even centre/club events, until either techology improves (and is affordable) or "professional observers" appear you're always going to have controversial decisions being made in exactly the same way as happens in football. People make mistakes.

Just my tuppen'worth.

Edited November 28, 2005 by neonsurge

[bikespace]

I think I've said this before, but I still think we would enjoy things just as much if we went back to the older rules of the 70's 80's.

You could go backwards/sideways, whatever you want, but you can only put your foot down whilst going forwards. Put a foot down whilst stationary and it's a 5.

Never used to be a problem for observers.

As much as old farts like myself try to move away from the trick riding, it's part of trials.

Being able to hop sideways/backwards on a bike is much more part of trials than being able to sit down in the middle of a section with your feet down and not get a 5!

I think that is the least impressive thing about trials these days - you can sit and get your breath back in the section, have a chat, paddle through and get the same as the bloke who has three dabs. Not good to watch, and usually not very pleasing to ride that way.

And it doesn't automatically make the trials tight, the clerk of the course decides how tight a trial is - just as easy to mark out as todays trials are.

[woody]

Peronally, I just can't buy it that riding to the two different styles (or rule sets - whichever term you prefer) can be such a hinderance to a riders development or progression. Watch the WTC events and the BTC and there is very little difference in the way they ride anyway. In BTC the bikes are still hopped around sideways and maneouvered backwards relative to the direction of the section, as they are in the Novogar or non-championship nationals such as the Lakes and even the SSDT which is proper no-stop.

If there is a line of thought which says riders can't cope with two rule sets, then should riders like Dougie enter the odd event on an enduro/motocross bike or use one for recreation, as the different technique in riding one will harm or dull their trials skills. I think not. Riders who are good enough and have the ability will always adapt, that is why they are that good.

To play Devil's advocate again, remember the dark days of the early 90s when trials was suffering badly from excessively hard sections and the sport was dying on its knees. We rode the same rules as FIM then - the stop, hop, do whatever you like nonsense etc. No two sets of rules to worry about then, so why did we not have British riders filling the top ten of WTC when they weren't disadvantaged by different rules...?? Same reason as now, there were better riders elsewhere unfortunately.

Don't misunderstand, I would love to see British World Champions in Trials, Enduro, Motocross etc. but if we don't have them it isn't going to affect my enjoyment of trials or enduros one jot. Bringing back full on trick riding however most certainly will. Aligning rules to the FIM in the hope that it will produce a champion isn't the answer to the sport in general. The vast majority of riders can't perform like that and those rules encourage section layout that they can't handle, so they'll give up - just like they did back in the 90s until a return to no-stop rekindled things.

Do what you like with the proper BTC rules and the handful of riders who contest it, but leave the rest as they are, otherwise things may well go full circle.

[telecat]

The problem is twofold.

1). For club trials FIM is unworkable. Getting two sets of observers one to watch and one to time would not be impossible at all trials but for the majority would not be feasible. The timing equipment would have to be bought by clubs as well.

2). The FIM are still changing the rules. Any club or rider want to buy the new equipment to indicate a "rollback" or stop if that is taken up?? All you could do is as now rely on observers.

All Motor Sports run different rules for different classes Motorcycle sport does have greater consistancy on the rules. However in Car racing Formula 1 runs grooved tyres and refueling. Formula 3 does not. It's a Junior formula and if a driver proceeds to F1 then He/She has to adapt. The principles are the same. We have much more accessible "grass roots" sport where anybody can compete in most events againest the best, excepting the big National and International events.

[elvis]

Something that is brought up again and again amongst riders I practise with is, should there be a more expansive score card i.e.1,2,3, 4 and a 5? or a 10 for not attempting a section as often these guys score the same as the battler who risked it all in the hope they may come out of the section with something other than a 5? I mean there is no limit really for scoring, some people have 3 good dabs and the next guy paddles through with endless dabs so where do you stop. Not an easy thing to sort out it would appear but I definately agree a more uniform set of rules would benefit all.