heffergm Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 I don't get how this can even be a question of legal or not... I mean, if it's not clear in the existing rules you run by, why not just clarify them and avoid the problem entirely? It's pretty easy! RIDING SECTIONS: (see: SCORING for penalties due to non-compliance of this section) 1) Riders may choose to start at the section of his/her choice, unless designated by the Trials Master. All sections shall be strictly ridden in numerical sequence (i.e. 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8); or the last section shall be followed by the first section (i.e. 2-3-4-5-6-7-8-1). (see: XI, A, 5) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2stroke4stroke Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 (edited) Apart from what's been said, if you don't do the full distance then you are not exposing your bike to the full chance of something happening and not finishing. While they may no longer be formally called reliability trials my feeling is that it's cheating on those grounds, in that all machines should cover the same distance. Let alone missing out on some riding, trials are short enough as it is these days. Edited October 16, 2017 by 2stroke4stroke 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabby Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 Putting the state of the sections aside, the rider condition deteriorates also through the course of a trial, 4 laps of tough terrain fair takes it's toll physically and mentally, which in turn means the rider often isn't as alert/fresh as he was in the first lap of so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakennstirred Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, 2stroke4stroke said: Apart from what's been said, if you don't do the full distance then you are not exposing your bike to the full chance of something happening and not finishing. While they may no longer be formally called reliability trials my feeling is that it's cheating on those grounds, in that all machines should cover the same distance. Let alone missing out on some riding, trials are short enough as it is these days. You not wrong, Its meant to be an event to enjoy etc etc. Some of the trials I have been too, some people race around and finish it as fast as possible then leave straight away. most like to have a walk around the paddock, look at the bikes and have a chat, I know I do. Edited October 16, 2017 by shakennstirred 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 (edited) 18 hours ago, cleanorbust said: I've known it to be argued that a competitor riding section 1 three times, then section 2 three times, then 3,4,5 etc in a three lap trial is indeed riding the sections in the correct sequence. This isn't what the rules mean, of course, perhaps they need to state each section to be ridden once per lap. A squence or in this case in sequence, means and would be defined as 1 2 3. 111 is not in sequence. If people dont know what in sequence means then they cant count.The next time someone argues this ask them what comes after 1, 2 or 1? Most importantly it refers back to my original statement insomuch that it is to sort out ties therefore an advantage can be gained by repeating sections not in sequece, or sequencially. Say your cheating and that might be clearer? Edited October 17, 2017 by nigel dabster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 (edited) 13 hours ago, heffergm said: I don't get how this can even be a question of legal or not... I mean, if it's not clear in the existing rules you run by, why not just clarify them and avoid the problem entirely? It's pretty easy! RIDING SECTIONS: (see: SCORING for penalties due to non-compliance of this section) 1) Riders may choose to start at the section of his/her choice, unless designated by the Trials Master. All sections shall be strictly ridden in numerical sequence (i.e. 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8); or the last section shall be followed by the first section (i.e. 2-3-4-5-6-7-8-1). (see: XI, A, 5) USA rules not UK, and not thought through. Edited October 17, 2017 by nigel dabster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heffergm Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Yeah, I know, that's my point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabie Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 So the answer is for the CofC / Trials Master (that is a good Americanism!) to have a nice chat (NSC Verbal warning) with the rider (and parents) that this is not on. The wisdom of Solomon bit is to maybe have an exemption for electric bike classes. The real hard bit is how to get the message to the riders who are missing out queue in trials and then doing the queue section several times at the end. One could get draconian and put the time a rider does the section down next to their mark, ie showing how they rode them out of sequence. One could go further and amend TSR18 to give the organiser more scope for leniency. Around here (the soft south with no rocks) some local clubs like to do start where you like of start at the section number of your last number (ie rider 67 to section 7, etc) - works well in field venues with the sections arranged around the edge in a circular fashion. i think you can stretch the end bit of TSR18 to make this legal but its not in the same spirit of the rules... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleanorbust Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 So the problem is large queues putting people off from waiting, and ignoring the rules (doubt they're aware of them anyway) by nipping off to do another section in the meantime. Yet we're told that the sport needs to be marketed to pull in as many additional riders as possible. Longer queues, anybody? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heffergm Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 This is why we almost always run split starts. You have groups A,B,C (i.e. whatever classes) start at section 6, everyone else starts at section 1. Or you just assume people aren't morons and allow them to start at any section of their choosing, which also typically works well. I don't think I've waited in a line longer than 3 or 4 people all season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venturi Posted October 18, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2017 Thanks for your comments this matter is to be discussed at next committee meeting thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.