Any trial you go to there are going to be those times where your going to have a make a call on those dodgey ones....... whether its a 5 or a 3 or whether its a clean or not and so on. There always will be the odd 'grey' one.
My answer to this is to always be consistant and apply the same judgement to all your section scoring.
Im assuming we are not talking about a State or National Championship here Mants. If that's the case then use this as motivation to train harder and go out and whip your competitions butt good an properly the next time
gasgasman wrote:A couple of thoughts on this one...
Any trial you go to there are going to be those times where your going to have a make a call on those dodgey ones....... whether its a 5 or a 3 or whether its a clean or not and so on. There always will be the odd 'grey' one.
My answer to this is to always be consistant and apply the same judgement to all your section scoring.
Im assuming we are not talking about a State or National Championship here Mants. If that's the case then use this as motivation to train harder and go out and whip your competitions butt good an properly the next time
Yeah consistency is where it needs to be, this was just a small trial, but the problem with it is some sections were self observed, and there was floating observers. So very hard to have any consistency with the scoring.
gasgasman wrote:Next time you see that observer at a trial, just make sure you nail him good and properly with a bit of whisky throttle
While written with intent to razz, it is not the best of ways to look after the observers - particularly a club member and still riding after 50years with the club. Observers can only apply the rules and try to be consistent and watch for every twitch of a marker (caused by the rider or bike touching it and not the marker moving due to its placement between rocks or logs etc), and if leniency is suggested then what is the purpose of the rule. A difficult rule that arose from interpretation of the 2012 Rules after which the word touch got added. Perhaps the next suggestion might be that it is a one mark penalty per touch unless the maker requires replacement or is actually ridden on or wheel lifted over (5 given) which would bring things closer to the ACU rules and FIM words.
Observers can only apply the rules and try to be consistent and watch for every twitch of a marker (caused by the rider or bike touching it and not the marker moving due to its placement between rocks or logs etc), and if leniency is suggested then what is the purpose of the rule. A difficult rule that arose from interpretation of the 2012 Rules after which the word touch got added. Perhaps the next suggestion might be that it is a one mark penalty per touch unless the maker requires replacement or is actually ridden on or wheel lifted over (5 given) which would bring things closer to the ACU rules and FIM words.