What Would It Take?

[alan bechard]

Looks like I am in the minority, matter of fact I think alone in wanting to start at the bottom with the numbers, but I guess I see the problem just in the couple of posts above this.

Max wants to make Expert #1 and Mark has the class above expert (champ, Master) #1

Why do folks want to make the 1st class the top, are you climbing to be #1 or are you starting at the first step?

Just curious I guess as I seem to be the only one seeing it the way I do, but I see having a similar problem as soon as you cross clubs with 5 / 6 lines.

[mich lin]

Alan, world championship is called "World wide One". Not that it matters much but calling the top class ONE does bring much more standardization.

For example, with your number proposed start with ONE as beginner system. The STRA top class would be SIX but at the ATA it would be 10 since we have 10 classes. Would't that be confusing again? Ask yourself this question

Who would be better a better rider, an ATA 6 or an STRA 4?

By Making the top class ONE everywhere seems more consistant, our lowest class would be class 10 the beginner class and the top class would still be clas ONE. At the STRA your beginner class would be class SIX and your top class would still be ONE.

I may be dense and missing some point here but having the top class ONE then as many other classes donw the list seems much more standardized. Than having your top class SIX and our top class 10. What do you think Alan?

[sirhc]

For example, with your number proposed start with ONE as beginner system. The STRA top class would be SIX but at the ATA it would be 10 since we have 10 classes. Would't that be confusing again? Ask yourself this question

Who would be better a better rider, an ATA 6 or an STRA 4?

The ATA may have all those classes but we still only have 6 separate lines and that is all we are worried about. For the separate classes we could just do the same thing we do now for example.

1

2

3-a

3-b

4-a

4-b and so on.

As far as which way it should go 1 should be at the top and 6 at the bottom. This is the way vintage does it and the youth nationals and it just seems to make since.

Either way though I don't care we need to get it done.

[dabney footsmore]

Either way though I don't care we need to get it done.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, good point.....the name of the lines or classes are secondary, however the number of lines and their relative difficulty is what matters.

As an example, 5 lines, and wherever you are, it could have the number in parentheses after the local class name.

eg

Expert (1)

Advanced (2)

Intermediate, Senior Intermediate, Sportsman, Clubman etc (3)

Junior, Novice etc (4)

Beginner, Bleeder etc (5)

So wherever you ride, the number classification is what you would adhere to more than the name........a class name is secondary actually. The tough part is conformity on the 1-5 skill level requirement to ride without getting over your head.

Edited June 3, 2006 by Dabney Footsmore

[wayne thais]

Here is a link to the "USA Cycling" web page: http://www.usacycling.org/news/user/story.php?id=369

If you take a look at some of the rules you will see that they are VERY complete.

Their top class is CAT 1 and their lowest class is CAT 5, they however have Junior classes, Master classes, Womens classes etc.

I think we need to find someone who has done the ground work and use what they have done as an expample.

What do they do in England, Spain etc.

Wayne

[atomant]

What do they do in England.....

Wayne

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ours is in no better condition than yours mate so dont ask us!

[dabney footsmore]

I think we need to find someone who has done the ground work and use what they have done as an expample.What do they do in England, Spain etc.Wayne

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wayne, Alan, Florin et al:

Excuse my temporary memory loss as we have done concept this in the past, and a number of the top NATC riders were there.

My club (CPTA) hosted the inaugural NAMU event in North American, in 2000 at Ioco. It was where the AMA and the CMA had to come together via the FMI and meld two different sets of class categories. Kit Williams (trials marshall) and myself sat down and wrote out the lines required for both governing bodies in regards to a points competition, and it came down to only 3 lines. (there are no beginner or junior type of lines in a CMA or AMA/NATC points event)

Each rider, upon signing up, was shown how their respective class would pair up to either an A, B or C line. Then a corresponding sticker was put on their number plate for all to see. (A, B or C)

The checkers had an easy time, for as the rider was ready to ride each section, the checker nearest the entry card would shout out his line category, (again, A, B or C) and both checkers would know which line (with splits obviously) was to be ridden.

It worked so well that the eastern Canadian clubs used it for follow up events. It has also been used when a National (CMA) event and a club event were run at the same time, except you'd probably need a D line, as an example.

We used it with the system of only one start time, ie, not a morning and afternoon group. However I am sure you could use it with a morning and afternoon group of riders.

Your mileage may vary.

So really, this has been done, we kind of stumbled onto it with great success, but funny how things get away from you. I can provide more info if required, however this has been mastered, just forgotten.

Doug Williams

Edited June 3, 2006 by Dabney Footsmore

[mich lin]

There is no doubt that GOOD ideas go to the top in the arena of ideas! That's the reason I'm such a fan of the internet.

I remember Bell's old minder "his name slips my mind right now" proposing hammering out ideas for the NATC on the internet. Trying to solve these kinds of organizational issues.

That was on MC Trials email ring, the idea was never moved on. Today because of discussions here, we now know for the FIRST time that the NATC never did care or plan to move on these kinds of organizational problems. Without the discussions here on these boards we would still be waiting unaware that the NATC never intended to do anything.

Now that's progress.

[wayne thais]

Lane,

If I understand the "Charter" of the NATC their whole purpose is to oversee the US National trials series. They do not interface with the clubs nor do they have anything to do with setting up rules for local and regional events.

I think that the AMA is supposed to be doing that! But since many of the clubs are not AMA sanctioned and the AMA does not seem to have much interest in trials as they do in MotoX etc, we are kind of left on our own. Yes we do have a rep in the AMA and those clubs that are AMA can get decent insurance for a reasonable price.

I would like to see the new group (I keep forgetting their name) interface with the AMA and get some real organization in the sport.

Here is what I would like to see:

1. Common classes - Nation wide

2. Common rules - Nation wide

3. A defined method of how to move up in a class - Nation wide

4. A offical AMA rep present at ALL trials events in order to develop consistent lines, classes etc. (At all of the USCF bicycle races that I promoted the USCF would send at least 3 reps to "run" the race. On race day I raced)

5. District, State, Regional and National Championship Trials. (For all classes, including)

Wayne

[perce]

You lot have probably got States bigger than the UK but items 1 2 & 3 simply do not exist in this country at all. There's totally different systems in each & every Centre (Governing area) & it can even vary from Club to Club in one Centre.

Won't comment on item 4 but who would stump up all the brass?

We do have National Championships but they vary just like 1 2 & 3.

[mich lin]

Perce, what you must realize is that one ACU centre probley has more riders than the whole of the United States. One centre might also have more trials organized per year than the whole of the US as well.

Edited June 5, 2006 by Mich Lin

[onestophop]

Al, Has the number system been decided yet? Is there a difference between 1-5 system vs. Expert, Advanced, Intermediate, Novice & Beginner. A systematic approach used by the majority of local clubs I undertand, but aren't the majority of clubs using the name of a class vs. the number designating a class?

Why aren't we naming classes similar to what our US National Name Classes are even if the majority of club riders aren't riding the US Nationals?

Terry

[dabney footsmore]

The numbers should be standardized, however the class names can be whatever, as long as you have the number in parentheses.

Your club may have Expert (1) Intermediate (3)

A rival club may have Expert (1) Sportsman (3)

The class names are not as important as a skill level number, as the number could be fairly close on a North American scale.

[alan bechard]

Al, Has the number system been decided yet? Is there a difference between 1-5 system vs. Expert, Advanced, Intermediate, Novice & Beginner.  A systematic approach used by the majority of local clubs I undertand, but aren't the majority of clubs using the name of a class vs. the number designating a class?

Why aren't we naming classes similar to what our US National Name Classes are even if the majority of club riders aren't riding the US Nationals?

Terry

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think it is decided yet, I was just commenting that you could read someone's post where they said they agreed with the poster above, then laid out a different system then what the person above them had said.

The 1-5 or 6 which seems to be a hang, is an attempt to get some standardization. While I doubt clubs will change the names of their classes (sportsman / Intermediate seem to be the hang) if they could just assign a number to their class relative to the difficulty, that would serve the same purpose. Ie, go back to my original post, had they said to Dean, what class do you ride, and he would have replied, Intermediate, Line 2, then they could of went, oh, line 2, we call that Sportsman. Unfortunately, everyone seems intent on naming from the top class, yet cannot seem to agree on what the top class is (Expert / pro / champ) so when you start from a differing grid coordinate, you end up in a different place.

As to naming the same as the NATC lines.

The NATC uses different class levels then most clubs. And percentage wise they usually represent a small minority of a clubs riders.

The NATC uses, Sportsman, then call's it a Support line. (then further breaks it down by age and gender) then they have Expert Support (or maybe it is Sportsman) ES either way, that rides some Expert lines and some Support lines, then they have Expert which is their next to the top class riding E lines, then they have the Pro as their top line. (I know you probably know all this, but there will be some reading who will not)

Anyway as to using their names. I tried to get STRA year before last I think to use their naming convention on Pro. It got shot down flat. The basic argument was our guys are not "Pro's" as in paid to do it. I think you will find a similar response in most clubs.

Expert and ES these guys are normally riding Expert in their local clubs. If you divvied them up at local events, I doubt there would be enough people to make a class.

Sportsman or support. These guys are normally what many clubs call Advanced. Could we call that class Sportsman? Sure, but there does not seem to be popular support for it here in this discussion.

When it comes to Womens most clubs that run a Womens class that I am aware of use it as an incentive to get women to start competing. Often run on the Novice line.

HS this is more of an age defined class (and now I guess actually age and skill as there are 2 now) and I think most HS riders just ride an appropriately challenging class in their club. Again, one of those deals, if the average club split these riders out, there would not be enough in a particular club to make a class.

So, where are we at?

What I see is that we are stuck. Seems that everyone but I wants the #1 class to be the top. Unfortunately, we cannot agree on what the top is. Some clubs are running a 5 line system, some a 6, not to mention that there really would be a level 7 if you will if you want to say WR type stuff.

(although I doubt the person riding WR stuff will be involved much in Local Club level events)

This is exactly the Morass that helps to keep trials stuck where it is IMHO.

Had a long talk with friend looking in from the outside Saturday night, and came back to the same conclusion.

The rallying cry for Trials Riders should be,

Individualists of the world UNITE!

I think someone (USMTA) is just going to have to sit down and write some stuff and put it out there. Then clubs can follow along or not. I doubt seriously at this point that we can come to an agreement in an open committee like what we have here.

This may somewhat explain why the NATC is as "closed" as it is.

[onestophop]

As far as the sequence of numbers indicating the riders ability goes. I guess I'm still not understanding it. What does it matter if everyone adopts the number system or the name system? We don't expect clubs to conform to the same 5 or 6 names, but we would like them to at least assign a number to there existing name? If one means one nationwide, why doesn't Expert mean Expert nationwide? Doesn't desert racing or trophy trucks use a number system like 1 for stock trucks and 5 for unlimited? At one your just learning to walk and by 5 you've got it all figured out, right? ha ha.

Terry