Proposed Ama Sports Rules For Club Trials

[dabs alot]

Under "Machine Requirements"

"Motorcycle"

"The Motorcycle must rear wheel drive only..."

Should that be:"The motorcycle must be rear wheel driven only..."?

Is the 4 foot gate width meant for all gates or just the entry gate?

I really like the class definiton and lettering system and the tie-in to the NATC class structure.

That is awesome!

[axulsuv]

I can live with the rules basically as written , Great job Dan !!!!

Now just get all sanctioned events on the same page !

Glenn

And Dabsalot I think that means NO rokons !!!!

Edited July 18, 2006 by axulsuv

[trialsurfer]

Do those rules eliminate floating 1 wheel over the ribbon (as in a corner) and are they the "gate" system of marking?

[dbrown]

All the gates are supposed to be 4', is that not clear? It would be acceptable to float a wheel over a marker same as it is to float over the ribbon, but one wheel must track through the gate. And yes, the markers are used as gates, as is the system for both FIM and AMA championship trials. Since this system has been adopted for all the major competitions, I think it is appropriate to use as the standard for AMA trials. I realize some clubs still think of markers as "splits" but perhaps everyone will eventually come around since the top riders in the club need to think in this way at the nationals. There is room for differences, i.e., no-stop vintage or indoor trials, but it is otherwise confusing to have many differents sets of rules.

I think the Peters gate trials are fun as an alternative way to do a trial, just for an occasional "something different"

As regards championship points, how many to count, etc., that is totally up to each individual club! I thought it would be useful to have a general guideline on these kinds of issues, kind of like a guide specification, that a club could use as a starting point. We should try to get the scoring rules standardized and consistent with the nationals, but the club organization and series points and work rules, etc., should be pretty open to whatever the local club decides to do.

Thanks for all the positive feedback, I am correcting typos and things as you point them out.

dan

[copemech]

One thing to keep in mind as Dan stated is the fact that these are general guidelines ONLY for the clubs referance and standardization which is consistant with(not mandatory) the NATC and FIM!

I do not think anyone is going to spend weeks drilling holes in granite to set little holders to keep ribbon off the ground for a club trial, it just is not gonna happen, and if it does then someone is WAY TOO ANAL for sure!

I have not had anyone "push" a ribbon on the ground yet! Yet I have seen many stretch the "proper " boundries!

Gates vs Splits: My current understanding, which some(myself included) may need defined. A "GATE" consists of TWO markers! A "SPLIT" may be just ONE, pointing a riders class in a direction, bounded by whatever natural terrain or section marking is there.

Once again I may find this a laborious task in trying to set a club event, possibly even doubling the marking requirements in a section.

Once again, flexability prevails in a practicle sense!

3ft or 4ft?- If you are NOT setting a National, it is up to WHO?

All I am trying to say here is that I do not believe anyone is BOUND by these guidelines, and nobody should be too upset, am I correct Dan?

[dabs alot]

All the gates are supposed to be 4', is that not clear?

No the wording is quite clear, I had always thought of it in terms of entry/exit gates only, but this makes it clear.

[alan bechard]

For me, it is very relavant that it spells out that you cannot pass through another classes gates.

Different clubs and people have different views on this.

With these rules and a defined "gate" it can ease some problems that we have experienced in the past, although it does create some new ones. You can use a gate of a different class to keep a class from going in a certain area, or doing something you don't want them too.

We have seen in the STRA, where marking out 6 different "lines" with two markers to form a "gate" can lead to a proliferation of markers in a section.

As we adjust to the system, and the Trialsmasters get used to it, things should improve.

The only other problem I have with this though is that it makes for "imaginary" (or not plainly visible) lines that are not supposed to be crossed in a section. I personally do not like that as I see it leading to disagreements with the observors (kind of like the backing up thing) and anything of that nature I do not like. I personally like anything that eliminates "calls" being made by the observor.

[dgshannon]

We have seen in the STRA, where marking out 6 different "lines" with two markers to form a "gate" can lead to a proliferation of markers in a section.

The only other problem I have with this though is that it makes for "imaginary" (or not plainly visible) lines that are not supposed to be crossed in a section.

As our local club works through the different marking rules, the concept of a "gate" being two seperate markers (a left & a right) versus a marker and the ribbon have come up. Is the wording in this document clarifying this issue, one way or another? Is a "gate" made of of two (one left & one right) marker? Or, can the ribbon continue to count as one of the two sides of the gate?

As far as the "imaginary" lines, you lost me on that one! There are rules about crossing your own line, but all others (imaginary or real) are up for grabs, as long as you don't pass through another class' gate. Yes? No? Maybe?

PS - I think that it is problematic that these online AMA discussions are being spread across multiple forums, and multiple continents.

[alan bechard]

As our local club works through the different marking rules, the concept of a "gate" being two seperate markers (a left & a right) versus a marker and the ribbon have come up. Is the wording in this document clarifying this issue, one way or another? Is a "gate" made of of two (one left & one right) marker? Or, can the ribbon continue to count as one of the two sides of the gate?

As far as the "imaginary" lines, you lost me on that one! There are rules about crossing your own line, but all others (imaginary or real) are up for grabs, as long as you don't pass through another class' gate. Yes? No? Maybe?

PS - I think that it is problematic that these online AMA discussions are being spread across multiple forums, and multiple continents.

My definition of a gate is two clear markers, usually arrows pointing at each other inside the ribbons. Maybe that is something that needs worded out more, but normally when it is just one marker, it is referred to as a "split". There can be disagreements when using the outer ribbon as a side of a "gate" with no defined marker as to where exactly the "line" is. (and yes, that happened to me as Trialmaster at my last event)

Edit add, re-reading your post, I think the relevant part of the Imaginary line is this line from the rules.

2D "If a rider passes, in either direction, between the gates of another class it will be consider as a failure."

There can be some discussion there as to what "passing through a gate" means, but it was described at our meeting to treat these gates as though they are like a yellow ribbon inside the section, dividing where the riders are to go.

To clarify my imaginary line statement. Picture if you will that a gate is between two trees for a class you are not riding. This "gate" because it is not for your class would be treated like a ribbon, ie, you could not go through there. Technically, if I drove my front wheel through between those "gate markers" I would be out of bounds and incur a 5. For those that have been around a bit, it used to be referred to as a "straight line or line of intent rule when we did not ribbon off the entire section, there was an imaginary straight line between the marks that you were not supposed to cross. However, that ended up with more heated discussions then it was worth, so folks slowly went over to ribboning anything in question, the ribbon acts as a clear visual indication as to if you are in or out of bounds. (much like the comments between myself and dabnabit) It is also one of the reasons that you had split ribbons in the middle of a section, to clearly and visibly define where you could and could not go.

With the "gates" and not being able to ride between other classes "gates" there is again an "imaginary" (as in not tangible, something you can touch) line between those two markers that you are not supposed to cross. Anytime you are dealing with a "line" that cannot be clearly seen, it can lead to a differece of opinion between a rider and the observor.

Hope that makes it clearer and not muddy it up more.

As to it being spread across several forums, it is unfortunate, but it is the best way to get the widest view I think.

Fortunately the Euro folks are leaving this one alone for us Americans that have to deal with it to hash out, and the discussion here seems to be the dominant discussion of all the boards. I am glad for one that it is up for discussion and getting as much dispersion as possible.

Edited July 19, 2006 by Alan Bechard

[gaby]

U.

2.

a. "There must be no riding backwards on the loop."

[sting32]

I liked what I read...

I hesitate to ask this, because it seems to be "ANAL" (the rule not the question).

4 e Missed section... I got to say, I have been to many many trial's (I hate to dog any clubs that I have visited there is NOT a one, where this cant and doesnt easily happen at, especially if you dont know the area) However the Northern Texas club, last year for the 2 day regionals, had it remarkably well marked...

If missing a section is going to be imposed a seeminlgy hard luck no arguement penalty, 10 points (I assume by reading if you missed it all 3 loops you would incur 30 points, instead of the 15 for failure to navigate the section, in my mind I gave up the chance to get better than a 5, let alone clean it.

then:

To prevent "missed sections" IMHO, there need to be a guideline that course marking should leave no doubt of the course or path of the loop, the loop markers must be laid out in such a way that standing at one marker, you can see the marker ahead of you, and behind you, wether it pieplate or ribbons (prefered) "unless the path has no alternate choices, or crossing paths. Example, if you mark a deer trail through a heavily wooded area, and off path navigation is tedious, then it can be assumed the competitiors, wont go off track for fear of getting lost, will not get off the path, then fewer markers are needed in a given path. in these cases, however, I still like to see the loop markers (sometimes just ribbondangling from a tree branch) along the trail up to every 60 seconds down the trail (at reasonable rate loop speeds not full on harescramble speeds the pro's might do) so that riders can HAVE assurances they are on the right path... I rode down a loop once for seemingly 15 minutes between sections, on the second loop that is, I got lost the 1st loop, it was 20 minutes before I knew I was off loop, because of some marking... I was NOT the only one.

_____________________________________________________________

Side note... about scorecards and DNF's and missed sections. I guess dont get it, how this even became an issue?

You see, I dont know about your thoughts (everyone in here) but a scorecard to me is handed out with all 5's already implied, no not marked, but if the judge didnt mark the 3,2,1 clean then it is assumed to be a failure to navigate...

I as a rider, go out and get proof from the scoring person that I in fact did better than a 5, or did not as the case may be, lol he punches the 5 (technically so I know I tried it the specified # of loops).

when I turn my card in, I am handing in my proof of accomplishment. so technically as I look at it, if someone doesnt want to ride section #4, they do not need to, they should just drive to section #5. when scorecards are turned in, all sections ridden that day need to be checked for a punch or mark, if no punch or mark, then either mark the 5's for each loop, or punch the 5 for any missed score marks. if there are a only 3 sections attempted out of 15 then DNF, I dunno.

I know someone will be able to tell me why this is a rule with a penalty, was added (not just to Dbrowns draft, I know it is from FIM or somewhere already...) and I mean more than the penalty inherntly was...

Thanks!

Edited July 20, 2006 by Sting32

[the artist formerly known as ish]

You can save a lot of time by not going and waiting in line at a section, by passing a section you fived the first two loops, and saving ten minutes by doing so, get in on your minute, you have in fact saved five penalty points by missing a section.

The rider who waited in line, rides the section and fives it, plus gets ten time penalty points you now have a ten point advantage over that rider all because you missed the section, sound fair to you ?

50 points for missing a section in the Scottish.

[bagger]

ish,i was in the same predictament.i rode the section and 5 it badly the first loop.i knew i was going to five it every loop so i punched through it the last 2 loops.at that time it was ok as long as you reported to the checker at THAT section each loop.not sure what the rules are now.

[mwtajimbo]

rolling your tire into a section and asking for a 5 is legal. blowing past it and not checking in with the observer is not and will get you the penalty.

[dgshannon]

To clarify my imaginary line statement. Picture if you will that a gate is between two trees for a class you are not riding. This "gate" because it is not for your class would be treated like a ribbon, ie, you could not go through there. Technically, if I drove my front wheel through between those "gate markers" I would be out of bounds and incur a 5. For those that have been around a bit, it used to be referred to as a "straight line or line of intent rule when we did not ribbon off the entire section, there was an imaginary straight line between the marks that you were not supposed to cross. However, that ended up with more heated discussions then it was worth, so folks slowly went over to ribboning anything in question, the ribbon acts as a clear visual indication as to if you are in or out of bounds. (much like the comments between myself and dabnabit) It is also one of the reasons that you had split ribbons in the middle of a section, to clearly and visibly define where you could and could not go.

With the "gates" and not being able to ride between other classes "gates" there is again an "imaginary" (as in not tangible, something you can touch) line between those two markers that you are not supposed to cross. Anytime you are dealing with a "line" that cannot be clearly seen, it can lead to a differece of opinion between a rider and the observor.

Fortunately the Euro folks are leaving this one alone for us Americans that have to deal with it to hash out, and the discussion here seems to be the dominant discussion of all the boards. I am glad for one that it is up for discussion and getting as much dispersion as possible.

After reading carefully, I understand what you are saying. I was envisioning the narrow 4 foot gates, but when the gates happen to be far apart, then there is an imaginary (un-ribboned) boundary between the gates, which is not supposed to be crossed.

I could see argument surrounding this "crossing" of the line. The same with crossing your own line. We would always judge it that if any part of either wheel crossed your line, it was a 5. Then, almost from nowhere, it was OK to cross your line with "just" the front wheel. Or was that "just" the back wheel, when hopping? Or maybe it was "either" wheel, as long as it wasn't both? You get the picture.

Edited July 21, 2006 by DGShannon