In effect for 2012:
Touching a marker is a 5.
Toe dabs are a 5.
Install kill switch anywhere.

I don't like any of the new rules. Our local club adopted these rules but I doubt they will be enforced. Checkers don't want confrontation, so they will turn a blind eye. It is easy to argue your way out of a 5.

At the Nationals it will be enforced. I had several incorrect scores riding my last National and when I told the checker I only dabbed twice instead of three, they wouldn't budge even though I know I was correct. I doubt many riders take the time to file a protest.

At local and Nationals it is very common to checkers to miss a dab and the rider doesn't acknowledge it. I once told a checker I dabbed but he insisted I get a clean. The rationale is that checker is consistently missing dabs so it evens out except at our local events with rotating checkers.

How about making Trials a Gentlemen's sport like tennis and golf? In most cases, the rider knows best what his score was so they should have a say in the score. Honesty should be emphasized and the golden rule should be the core of scoring. If your toe dab didn't help you over the log, you shouldn't get a 5. The new rules are vague and can have a negative effect at the nationals. I think the National checkers are instructed to not take any input from the rider to what the score was.

What if a ribbon blows in the wind and touches you? Brush up against a card? A 5 is harsh. At least with the old rules there is physical evidence with broken ribbon and dislodged cards and stakes.

I'm not sure how I feel about them.

-The new rule on toe dabs does not give you a 5. Simply, a toe dab is now just the same as a regular dab.

-My understanding is that the new rules allow you to touch the tape, but you will receive a 5 for touching split markers.

-The kill switch rule is obviously due to the new kill switch location on the 2012 Betas. I've already removed mine and installed a more reliable unit on the handlebars.

I've received plenty of bad calls from judges at the nationals. It seems certain regions are much worse than others.

To put it simple, the NATC just followed the FIM rules, as they should.

In our club the genral feeling on the new rules is very good. It makes it plain and simple, touch a split, get a five. It takes the guess work out of "how much did he run over the split"? Or one guy pushes the split stake over a little and loosens it up, but not enough to get a 5, the next guy barely brushes it and it falls over, is that fair? Who should get a 5? Now it's easy and shouldn't be questioned, touch it, get a five. Just stay away from the markers, that's what I'm telling my kid!

As stated toe dabs count as single dabs, not a five.

We all get bad calls, we all get some calls in our favor. Bottom line is, the checker is always right and don't argue with them.

I never liked that riders could use there feet to push the bike over an obstacle as long as the foot remained in contact with the peg. To me, its easier to see if there obviously pushing with there toes and give them a point like a dab vs trying to see if they lift there foot off the peg and there is an air gap. The new rule is really more consistent with the intent of trials IMO - you need to ride the bike - not push it, for a clean. As long as the checker is consistent with there interpretation of a "obvious" push off, it's really no different than say a brush with a tree that aids the riders balance.

FWIW: I was checking the RI national and a rider clearly lifted his foot off the peg as he was "toeing". I had a real good look at it as i was behind and below him. The checker in front of him saw it as well. I was surprised he (the ft checker) picked it up as he had a bad angle - but had a good set of eyes! The rider argued with all of us he didn't lift his foot. He lost the argument but still managed to make everyone feel bad for doing our job. He did the same thing the next loop - but took the point w/o arguing with us as his riding buddy told him that he did lift his foot. He still didnt feel he took the point but didnt make a scene, but his buddy told him (in a blunt manner that only a buddy can get away with) he needed to work on his technique because he was picking up heel. I gave the buddy a thumbs up for that and he reminded me that just about all trials riders are pretty good folk.

I personally like all of the rule changes.. Consistency is the key. CCullins made a great point about hitting the gate and the next guy brushes it and earns a 5 ...and the" monkey toes",,, this has always seemed like cheating to me... I think its all for the good.
Chad

It's a difficult job trying to be an "Observer" and not a "Judge" In the 2005 World Round at Duluth, MN I was helping Ian Smith video cover the event for one of his TrialsTV.com DVDs when Taddy Blazusiak rode the section I was covering. It was in the creek with a tight downhill turn to a square 4 foot high rock that requred a tight exit turn back into the creek. Taddy bobbled and had a bad approach at the rock. He got messed up and had to put a foot down as the bike got hung up and in the struggle to get forward motion going again, he lowered the front tire which moved his rear tire back almost 2 feet before he could make a successful attack.

The Observer gave him a 5 for which Taddy got off his bike to come back to argue the call. I backed the tape up to get another view myself but kept out of the argument. The 5 was very clear in the video but I still kept quiet until the Observer stood his ground. At that point, I pulled Taddy aside and showed him what we saw, but still did not show the Observer... He was still not a happy rider.

I felt bad for both people but felt showing Taddy the ride might help prevent some bad feelings toward the Observer or a later protest. There is no way I would use the video in a protest and I believe they would never allow it anyway..

During the video coverage of these Duluth events, we captured a number of mistakes for both Observers and Riders. And in one of them, Dougie Lampkin protested a "Monkey Toe" call where he insisted that he did NOT lift his heel but in the Final DVD video that included a slow motion review of the shot, it was clear that he DID lift his heel, and by about 3 inches! This was the event where Montesa Team Mate Takahisa Fujinama was declared the winner but then it was overturned when Dougie's challenge was accepted. I believe "Fuji-gas" won the second day by a clear margin.

I also caught a 5 on video by Dougie where his handle bar clearly touched the ground and was missed by the Observer in the excitement. In the video, you can even hear one of the spectators near me talk to his buddy about the error. Dougie rode away with a one. This is also in the DVD video.

Being a volunteer Observer in a National or World Round is a thankless and difficult job. I remember when the No-Stop rule was explained with all of the variables and all I could think of was what a horrible rule for the already over-burdened Observer!!

ccullins, on 08 February 2012 - 08:15 PM, said:

And remember that for every unjust point that we're charged we've likely gotten away with two or three that observers have missed.

The only points I can ever remember questioning an observer on have been dabs with the front axle out of the end gate. It's surprising how often observers make that mistake, and it's usually easy to verify since it's at the end of the section.

moto vita, on 12 February 2012 - 07:26 AM, said:

As an observer, I'm sensitive to that end gate scoring so I've made it a habit to hold my fist up high with the count and then drop it like a flag when I confirm the axle passing the end gate. It's helps me to remember to watch for that if the section is difficult at the exit.

If I can't position myself to see the end gate imaginary line clearly, I sometimes draw a line on the ground with the heel of my boot to make it more visible. Also, if the section is long and I'm the only observer, I pick a point where I can see the most difficult parts and still see the exit. In this case, I'm aware that I will miss some dabs but then I don't change my position so that my calls will be consistant.

There have been times when the section prevents me from seeing one side of the bike. There have been times where I can see the leg move as if the rider is taking a dab, but if I can't see the foot actually make contact, it's not a point in my book. If the rider insists, I'll mark it for him, but I'll also inform him that if I didn't see it or could not see it due to the layout, then as far as I'm concerned, it's no point. Another point I tried to make to the observers when I was the Trials marshall is that if they catch themselves thinking or saying that it looked like a dab because of some indicators like a dropping knee but without actually seeing the foot, it doesn't count... Since we are "Observers" and not "Judges".

When I lay out sections, I look for where the observers can stand to cover the section and still punch the cards without running 50 feet as part of my section design. I also break the section in by knocking over rocks or other items so that the first riders will not have the disadvantage of section that is going to change drastically with the first few riders. I also look for any branches or items like blackberry vines that can threaten eyes. The rider should not have to duck and weave their head to avoid aerial objects or personal injury from items not on the ground.

Every Trials Marshall is different as are most observers.. Over time, as a rider, you learn which Trials Events are going to be fun or not by who is laying out the course.