Should NATS be regional?

[MikeTheBike]

I'm just going to throw this out to see what kind of response there is. I've thought for a long time that it is unfair to have a points series that crosses the entire continent several times in such a small, dispersed community. It basically means the rider(s) with the most time and money win the series. I've always thought that a more regional-based system would evolve as pockets of riders developed. It seems that might be happening.

Thinking about this year's potential NATS schedule, so far we have opportunites in Maryland, California, Arizona, Oklahoma, West Virigina, Virginia, New York state, Tennessee, Minnesota, British Columbia and Texas. Also, there are some grassroots events being talked about in Wisconsin and North Carolina. Without trying too hard, one can easily imagine such potential regions as Northeast (MD/WV/NY), Southeast-ish (VA/NC/TN), North-central (MN/WI/Ontario?), Southwest-ish (OK/TX/AZ) and West Coast (CA/BC/other?).

What if NATS was redesigned to count a rider's best points from one regional event and then have just one "NATS Final" event at the end of the season? Obviously, that would give more people the oppotunity to earn points without having to travel so much. I think it would also encourage them to attend as many local events to improve the points they take to the Final. There is the chance that some riders might just attend two events (one local and the Final) but that's not much different from today with the majority of riders only attending one or two events. I also realize there is more likelihood for ties in points at the Final so I would have to come up with a way to deal with that.

Opinions?

[Pete Gossett]

Other amature sports I'm familiar with operate that way. They ususally also have a requirment to attend a minimum number of regional events before being allowed to go to the final national event.

[va_tick]

I totally support a reginal system!!

Some thoughts..............

I would'nt base who goes to a final on just one comp.....even Vincent and the Coust's have off days....its not representative of the riders true abilities.

I do feel that in order to place in the final, the region needs to have a certain number of events, say 5, and the total amount after those 5 will be the basis.

Now, depending on how small the regions are devided this could be a very good way to bring up the "grassroots" segment(which I feel is key at this point), b/c say there are five riders that live in bumf*&ck (Insert location here_______), maybe these riders may not have the means to travel to 5 comps spread out across the coast, but for all we know they could the best riders in the country. With a regional setup these riders could setup up 5 events in their own backyard (or at a local park for more exposure).

Now there is the issue of the event(comp) cordinator following the proper rules, setting the sections up in the correct way, sandbagging, getting the needed comp exposure and what have you. The trick would be to have some sort of guidelines and a way to enforce them relatively(sp?) speaking.

One way to eliminate those riders who were eligible for the final but who rode in inferior comps would be to hold a qualifying round at the final much like they do at many of the big UCI comps(I think?)........This would filter out those irregularities in the system and leave only those whom were the best of the best!

Also, you could do somthing for the sport its self by requesting that, say, one comp out of the five be one where the cordinator('S) must try to organize it in public space...i.e, park, mall, bike store front,etc....

There is really alot of promise to this idea.....in the long term you would want to visualize these small pockets of "backyard", "Grassroots" comps that spread into much larger pockets and those spread to even larger pockets......here is a visual representation.....lol

[mikeyr89]

Haha ryan, haha that was funny. Where's the Hiwaiian and Alaskan trials population? Ok JK

I agree with this, and it would be awesome if it works, but eventhough I'm for the regionals, I feel like the way its set up now is great if trials (HOPEFULLY) does become this popular again. I dunno just an idea?

[David Weyman]

Houston?

[echohi]

In my mind this is the only feasible (i.e. sustainable and growth oriented) system for a national trials series to exist under. I am relatively new to the sport and am very inexperienced in the competition segment of the sport, therefore I have until recently had little understanding of how the NATS system worked. To be honest I can't believe the series has been organized this way for so long...realistically trials (at least in North America) is not a sport that can provide riders with the financial support or incentive to sustain a national series such as this.

The only realistic way for the series to exist in my mind is as a "National" final with regional series existing as qualifiers and as effectively independant entities. This is a step in the right direction in my opinion. I also think that if this happens you will see (proportionally) much higher attendance to these competitions overall. Driving a few hours to compete with a bunch of riders you know from your area is a much more beginner condusive environment than flying halfway across the country and knowing no one.

[MikeTheBike]

Ryan, you are right on target. The only exception is that I didn't mean to suggest that only one regional event feed the Final. I meant that the rider's best score would go to the Final. This means that if there is only one event in the region, those riders will have to take that score to the Final. If there are more events, then it behooves the rider to attend more events to improve their score and take more points to the Final. This, in turn, will encourage the community to organize more events per region without the concern of putting the travel burden on riders from a region with fewer events than are required.

As for your point about the possibility of smaller events not meeting the rules and/or skill level requirements, that is very valid. I really like the idea of doing semi-finals before the Final to mitigate the issue. This also fits well with the UCI model, which seems to work well. I know the BIU has had some issues in the past with endangering riders who aren't ready for WBC-level sections.

So, what would your thoughts be on letting the regions run NATS, BIU or UCI rules, as they desire? This is somewhat difficult to enforce so it might happen whether we want it to or not. I could re-write the NATS rules to suggest "guidelines" for checking instead of making it hard and fast.

[trialsin usa]

Hey Mike,

I think that is what Robin Coope, myself and a number of others were thinking waaaaaaaaaaaay back in '99/'00. That a person (or group) in any given region were responsible for their own thing. From there each area would pick one event that would represent them in a national points series.

Having said that, I have to agree that maybe returning to a format where there is a single day title might be good. I think the reasoning for having the points series was to give riders opportunity to not just be judged on one event (if they could make it to more).

There are ups and downs to each. However, I think you are right in trying to encourage the people that actually live in area A or B to put together their own event that would be representative is great. At the end of the day I think it is all about finding a way to get more riders.........but to do that, better events....and to do that, more voluteers. Its a chicken and egg scenario........

[trialsin usa]

Houston?

No, bring back Lajitas in February! Dave, what happened to that place??

[vaughn]

Nats to me is just a points system. Each of the NATS events would happen whether they were part of a national points series or not..I think it's cool that they are and it encourages riders to travel to get national points. It is expensive, but I'm not sure I understand why removing it to save a national title seeker money is going to grow local trials competitions?

[vaughn]

Ha...14 to 1...I suck.

[Bryan]

is each regional comp/series responsible for figuring out insurance on their own?

[MikeTheBike]

is each regional comp/series responsible for figuring out insurance on their own?

They don't have to be, unless they want to. I've registered "NATS" as a club with American Bicycle Racing. This entitles us to use their insurance, which is VERY, VERY affordable. Also, they are willing to let our riders all use one-day licenses, regardless of how many events they attend and the class they ride.

[johnglazer]

I voted yes for regional. I think this will increase the number of competitions in each region, and increase the exposure.

If it does not go regional, the number of NATS competitions needs to increase dramatically.

[MikeTheBike]

... It is expensive, but I'm not sure I understand why removing it to save a national title seeker money is going to grow local trials competitions?

Vaughn,

As with most things, there is no guarantee. Nonetheless, my thinking is that, with time, the regional system will drive competitiveness between regions. Consider this scenario: Rider A is the best in the northeast region. Rider B is the best in southeast region. All of the other riders in the northeast want Rider A to win the Final. All of the other riders in the southeast want Rider B to win. This drums up excitement throughout both regions and encourages more people to organize regional comps so their local hero can get better than the other region's local hero.

Sure, there are a ton of holes in this theory but consider how many other sports feel an effect like this. How often has a local High School football star gone on to State Championships and fans cheered him on for years through his college and professional careers? All the time. I know this and I hate football.

Today's national Pro/Elite riders are relatively unknown. What ratio of people on this forum know Brian Yezierski, Cam Kowall, Dave Young, Neil Willey or James Barton? Sure, some of us do but wouldn't you think EVERYONE should know our top riders? If they don't know the top riders, where is their inspriation?

Think about when you and I were riding Expert. JJ, Marc and Shaun were the top riders. Almost everyone in NEPS knew who they were. Hell, a huge number of people on here know who JJ and Shaun are. We need to get that recognition back.

[RyanMcVicker]

iam glad this thread was started. and i voted yes.. it doesn't hurt to try something new, it's not going to hurt anything but might make it better?

I would without a doubt host a comp or two if it all was more clear to me on what steps i have to take to set one up.. with the city and insurance and nats rules etc.. plus i don't think any riders would travel to petoskey haha.

[MIKE1968]

America is so fucking gay with all its insurance bullshit. The more rules and stuffed nose shit you throw at the rider the less they are interested in dealing with it, same with prospects who are interested in throwing a competition.

Mike you seem to want this to be like rally car drivers or something in terms of being excited for different people...as opposed to it being an individual sport. I don't know if I agree, but lots of people are talking lots of things- and some are doing some things, a lot more than in the past....something good will happen.


In terms of california, was super excited for the upcoming keyesville comp...BIU rules and 9 am start time almost kill every interest I have. If it was a NATS or wasn't a NATS i could care less, just want to ride.

[rush]

I havent read the thread Mike, but our points system takes your two best results at a comp, plus the Final round (Nat champs). To qualify, you must attend at least one interstate comp.

In Aus, I choose at the start of the year which interstate comp im going to (because we usually have a calendar by now), and prepare/save for that.

[brian_E]

i don't think i really like the idea.. but nothing has really worked yet.. so something new is always a good thing..

what happens when someone goes to a different region..

i don't think it should be so many regions.. it turns out to a bunch of locals checking themselves.. it just seems too backyardish..

i don't know..

[echohi]

What's with the skepticism regarding regional competition? You're dwelling on minute details regarding how the system will work as opposed to offering any real arguments against it.

Realistically, speaking as a Canadian, the only comp that I can attend for the entire summer is RR. Lame...increasing the number of comps around can only increase interest in the sport, raise the morale of the community and subsequently motivate our promotion of the sport. Tell me why this is bad.

Backyardish? No offense man, it's trials...twenty people at a regional comp as opposed to forty or sixty at a current NATS event, both are equally backyardish to the rest world.

[KeepRollin]

i don't think i really like the idea.. but nothing has really worked yet.. so something new is always a good thing..

what happens when someone goes to a different region..

i don't think it should be so many regions.. it turns out to a bunch of locals checking themselves.. it just seems too backyardish..

i don't know..

2 guys at Rockport with a stop watch is too backyardish? :momaru:

I think traveling between regions is fine. You get the bragging rights for winning but your points don't factor in to the regional rankings.

I think making it regional encourages regional comps to happen. If a regional event occurs at the same time as a national series event, the top riders with the funds to travel will most likely travel to the national event. With this system, the regional events can be "part of NATS" and have more weight giving riders more incentive to go.

[muddyfox]

i think its a fantastic idea! Maybe 4 or 5 regions, 5 events each?
Finals in Vegas...:bigthumb:

[va_tick]

i don't think i really like the idea.. but nothing has really worked yet.. so something new is always a good thing..

what happens when someone goes to a different region..

i don't think it should be so many regions.. it turns out to a bunch of locals checking themselves.. it just seems too backyardish..

i don't know..

It will not matter at the final b/c the qualifying will eliminate those riders who were poorly competeing......

If a rider wanted to compete in a different region it wouldnt matter as long as the region was honored by NATS......or what Tom said, with some carefull thought this could be managed correctly.

Oh, and it must be UCI rules....the object in my opinion is to develope not just the # of riders but the quality of riders....we have to play by the best's rule if we are going to compete with them....

I really like the feedback from this thread!!!!!

Trials in the U.S right now is backyardish in terms of exposure....we have to start with the basics.....psychologist call it "shaping":bigthumb:

[justtysen]

So the proposed change is to lower the required number of events attended from three to one and the removal of the following regulations?

It has been found desirable to keep the number
of events at five to seven each year. Two main factors determine whether an event should be included in
the schedule. First is an even regional distribution of the events. The other factor is the quality of the
venue and reputation of the organizer. NATS events are generally not assigned to first-time organizers,
but only to those who have already shown an ability to manage events with substantial efficiency.

If that's right then I don't see what the creation of regional zones does.

Would regional events no longer be nationally sanctioned? That seems like it would complicate things more than simplify them. Regions would have to create their own sanctioning bodies and things would be too small scale to maintain any standardization. How would people decide on what counted as a regional event? There could be disputes as to how many riders were needed to actually hold an event, or people holding "events" solely for themselves to accumulate points etc...

I think we should keep the event sanctioning to the Nats and forget about top-down division of the community into subcategories. Yes, I think part of the reason that riders aren't more involved in the national scene is because things are so spread out but allowing more events to become part of the national series regardless of region would make it easier for any group looking to become involved in the series create their own event, without presuming to designate areas where riders may or may not be interested in putting on future events.

Grassroots, non-sanctioned competitions will occur wherever there are enough riders who are interested in putting them on. Trying to put on comps where nobody is interested is not going to do any good. I fail to see how designating an area as a Nats region is really going to improve the motivation to put on events where there were none before. It will however cause a divide among regions that could potentially split riders. Trials is so small that I think all riders should be given equal standing in Nats events regardless of the area of the country they come from. Lowering the required number of events attended and allowing more events to qualify as National events could help good riders without much means to travel get to the finals, but at a point the question is are these riders really not able to make it to these events, or is it that they just aren't motivated to get to these small events.

I too see the appeal of having regional areas and lot of clubs with lots of riders but I don't think the volume of riders and the interest is high enough to make this vision work. Instead I just see things becoming more spread out and disparate. If people want a bigger local scene they need to work on advocacy and putting on local events, then worry about the national level. Designating a region doesn't add legitimacy (to entice new riders with) unless there are already actual people and events going on in that region. It makes no sense to me to try to construct a bureaucratic national system when people can't even get enough people to put local events on.

[brian_E]

so something new is always a good thing..

next time i'll type in canadian so you can read it gooder..

anywho.. i don't like the idea for trials right now.. but i think it's great because it will turn trials into something huge in the US 5 years from now..

i think it takes a cue from what USAC is doing.. only problem is we have no $ behind us and lets face it.. when the people throwing these comps graduate college.. there is no more comp.. aka pete wilk..

most of you fools haven't seen this shit go full circle 3 times so embrace the fact that i shoot holes in everything.. botom line is i'm with the idea.. long live efta.. robin coope.. and mickey's trials championship..

oh and a couple midgets with a stopwatch at rockport..

[Ross W.]

Seems like a good idea to me.

I vote UCI for everything, but that's just cause I think BIU is ugly.

+1 for finals in Vegas, haha.

As for Ryan's maps, I like the optimism, but I must point out that there will always be huuuuge gaps in the west. Half of it is just desert with no people at all, let alone trials riders. There just aren't enough people out here, only a few isolated pockets here and there. If you're looking for roughly equal populations(trials or not) in each region, the entire west might as well just be one region. I do think the regions are a good idea for the east, but I honestly believe there are not enough people and there never will be in the west, at least in the mountain states to really get much going. Not to say there aren't comps here, just everyone has to drive rediculous distances to get to them, which is expensive. My opinion of course.

[rush]

So the proposed change is to lower the required number of events attended from three to one and the removal of the following regulations?

If that's right then I don't see what the creation of regional zones does.

Would regional events no longer be nationally sanctioned? That seems like it would complicate things more than simplify them. Regions would have to create their own sanctioning bodies and things would be too small scale to maintain any standardization. How would people decide on what counted as a regional event? There could be disputes as to how many riders were needed to actually hold an event, or people holding "events" solely for themselves to accumulate points etc...

I think we should keep the event sanctioning to the Nats and forget about top-down division of the community into subcategories. Yes, I think part of the reason that riders aren't more involved in the national scene is because things are so spread out but allowing more events to become part of the national series regardless of region would make it easier for any group looking to become involved in the series create their own event, without presuming to designate areas where riders may or may not be interested in putting on future events.

Grassroots, non-sanctioned competitions will occur wherever there are enough riders who are interested in putting them on. Trying to put on comps where nobody is interested is not going to do any good. I fail to see how designating an area as a Nats region is really going to improve the motivation to put on events where there were none before. It will however cause a divide among regions that could potentially split riders. Trials is so small that I think all riders should be given equal standing in Nats events regardless of the area of the country they come from. Lowering the required number of events attended and allowing more events to qualify as National events could help good riders without much means to travel get to the finals, but at a point the question is are these riders really not able to make it to these events, or is it that they just aren't motivated to get to these small events.

I too see the appeal of having regional areas and lot of clubs with lots of riders but I don't think the volume of riders and the interest is high enough to make this vision work. Instead I just see things becoming more spread out and disparate. If people want a bigger local scene they need to work on advocacy and putting on local events, then worry about the national level. Designating a region doesn't add legitimacy (to entice new riders with) unless there are already actual people and events going on in that region. It makes no sense to me to try to construct a bureaucratic national system when people can't even get enough people to put local events on.


Well, it hasnt worked so far, why not try something different?

[justtysen]

I just gave my reason for not trying this particular thing!

Again:
1:Current Organization isn't the cause of poor Nationals turnout.
2:Low riding population and lack of riding groups causes low turnout.
3:Proposed system doesn't offer a convincing method of increasing riding populations or groups.
4:Proposed system potentially adds complication, wasted effort, and segregates the riding population.
5:A better alternative is a hybrid option (Revised Nationals sanctioning guidelines provides more support for small events and regional groups without adding undo complications etc...)
6: The real solution is to get a critical mass of people riding, fiddling with systems can't do that.


That said (again), I'm totally fine with people trying whatever they want.

[johnglazer]

I just gave my reason for not trying this particular thing!

Again:
1:Current Organization isn't the cause of poor Nationals turnout.
2:Low riding population and lack of riding groups causes low turnout.
3:Proposed system doesn't offer a convincing method of increasing riding populations or groups.
4:Proposed system potentially adds complication, wasted effort, and segregates the riding population.
5:A better alternative is a hybrid option (Revised Nationals sanctioning guidelines provides more support for small events and regional groups without adding undo complications etc...)
6: The real solution is to get a critical mass of people riding, fiddling with systems can't do that.


That said (again), I'm totally fine with people trying whatever they want.

2,3. The new system will improve this by making more local competitions to expose trials more and to keep newcomers more interested by being able to compete, ride, and talk with other trials riders.

4. the riding population isn't already segregated?

6. How do you propose that we get a critical mass of people started without more local competitions and rides, along with more exposure? If you get them started, how are you going to get them to keep riding if they don't have competitions and group rides they can go to within reasonable driving distance?

All I see are positive effects of the change.

[justtysen]

The new system will improve this by making more local competitions
Where do these local competitions come from? It's my view that if people aren't organizing comps now they aren't going to be significantly motivated by being listed as part of a region.

the riding population isn't already segregated?
Which is why I think limiting the riders eligible for the finals based on geography is undesirable.

How do you propose that we get a critical mass of people started without more local competitions and rides, along with more exposure? If you get them started, how are you going to get them to keep riding if they don't have competitions and group rides they can go to within reasonable driving distance?
There is nothing preventing riders from creating local events now, and yet not many are. I agree with everything you are saying but I don't see how calling things regional actually makes any difference. Are people really going to feel inspired to create competitions because they are part of a region instead of part of the country as they are now?


Maybe it's worth a try. I just see a lot of people getting excited at the idea of a multitude of regional comps and I don't see where these comps are coming from.

[johnglazer]

If its regional, then that will push riders to organize local comps, so that they have the chance of going to nationals and so that they can go to a comp without making it a 3 day trip.

Yes, regardless of if it is regional or national, people need to step up and take on the responsibility of organizing a competition. I think people have been hesitant before because they have to get insurance and all that, but now that Mike has set it up the insurance thing, it should make it easier and less stressful.

[RyanMcVicker]

yea i will admit the only reason i haven't attempted to host a comp is because i don't know how. There is me and 2 other riders in my city and i doubt anyone else would travel to come here. Maybe i should put on a little one just the 3 of us just for some exposure? Where would i get permission from the city to put on a comp that will be exposed to the public? How do i approach all of this? just go to the city hall and be like hey can we put on a biking competition downtown?

i kind of agree with jusstten.. but i also think trying something different wouldn't hurt either would it?

[va_tick]

justtyesen, I think your missing the idea here, John pretty much summed it up. If it still doesnt make sense then you may never get it which is ok b/c I think this thread as shown thus far that most people can see what the benifits are to this idea.

Ryan, you would be surprised at ho easy it is to hold a comp. I would also recomend a section of the NATS site that has contacts and info forthose looking for help or information in regards to setting up their comps....I believe the NATS site has a small section regrding these things already!!

Note: my maps wer just a 1minute project to give a general visual aid as to what the idea may encourage....

RT

[MikeTheBike]

While I appreciate you offereing your thoughts on this matter, you seem to have gotten several points mixed up. I'll note below:

Would regional events no longer be nationally sanctioned? That seems like it would complicate things more than simplify them. Regions would have to create their own sanctioning bodies and things would be too small scale to maintain any standardization. How would people decide on what counted as a regional event? There could be disputes as to how many riders were needed to actually hold an event, or people holding "events" solely for themselves to accumulate points etc...

I think you misunderstand the influence of NATS. We are not a sanctioning body. We are merely a bunch of organizers who, ostensibly, agree upon a set of rules. As such, any event can be counted in the NATS points if the organizer desires. All they need to do is ask. This will not change. Also, I asked in another comment how people would feel about allowing the regional events to use whichever rules they want. This is still a possibility, though it would require some more discussion. As for people holding "events" just to earn points, that is a valid concern. However, I think most trials riders honestly want to improve themselves so I'm willing to wait to see if this does happen and deal with it then.

I think we should keep the event sanctioning to the Nats and forget about top-down division of the community into subcategories. Yes, I think part of the reason that riders aren't more involved in the national scene is because things are so spread out but allowing more events to become part of the national series regardless of region would make it easier for any group looking to become involved in the series create their own event, without presuming to designate areas where riders may or may not be interested in putting on future events.

First, just to make sure everyone is clear, NATS stands for North American Trials Series. It is not short for "Nationals." We are not crowning a National Championship title here. Also, I really want to get more Canadian events in the series as they are nuturing some very talented riders. I hope the regional-based system will help this.

Second, there will not be a change from today as to what events are "allowed" to be NATS events. As I see, all of the events in a given region should be included. Otherwise, we'll have the problems you suggest.

Grassroots, non-sanctioned competitions will occur wherever there are enough riders who are interested in putting them on.

I have no intention to inhibit that. If anything, I'm hoping the regional system will encourage this.

Trying to put on comps where nobody is interested is not going to do any good. I fail to see how designating an area as a Nats region is really going to improve the motivation to put on events where there were none before.

You are very right and this is exactly the problem we have today. Consider the Duluth event that Shawn did last year. There were only nine riders. Only one of them went to any other NATS events. That means means most didn't earn NATS points. Now consider how that might have been different if the points they earned could be carried to the NATS Final and that they would be competing against other riders in their region (e.g. Ontario). Don't you think that would cause some of them to attend more regional events the next year to size up their competition? And, knowing that their best points from all regional events they attend would affect their Final placing would also cause them to attend more regionals?

It will however cause a divide among regions that could potentially split riders.Trials is so small that I think all riders should be given equal standing in Nats events regardless of the area of the country they come from.

I don't understand why it would cause a divide. Any rider could go to any regional, even outside their own region. We would still only count their best finish for the Final and they would still have to get through the semi-final.

Lowering the required number of events attended and allowing more events to qualify as National events could help good riders without much means to travel get to the finals, but at a point the question is are these riders really not able to make it to these events, or is it that they just aren't motivated to get to these small events.

We have tried for years to figure out rider's motivations, to no avail. I make no pretenses in this regard.

I too see the appeal of having regional areas and lot of clubs with lots of riders but I don't think the volume of riders and the interest is high enough to make this vision work. Instead I just see things becoming more spread out and disparate.

More spread out and disparate than it is today? When you think about the distance from the indoor in Baltimore in Feb. to the Keyesville event in CA in March, I think you see my point. However, pitting the riders at the indoor against riders at WV, RR and VA makes a lot more sense to me. Then, their best and the best from the west (heh) meet up at the Final.

If people want a bigger local scene they need to work on advocacy and putting on local events, then worry about the national level.

Yes, you are right. This is needed, too.

Designating a region doesn't add legitimacy (to entice new riders with) unless there are already actual people and events going on in that region.

Again, you are right. That's is exactly why the regions I'm proposing (i.e. northeast, southeast, north-central, southwest and west) each already contain several events, today.

It makes no sense to me to try to construct a bureaucratic national system when people can't even get enough people to put local events on.

I am not proposing any more bureacracy. There will not be any more requirement for an event to be a "regional" event than there is today. The organizer need only ask to be included. Heck, and once you are included you'll be hard pressed to get out. :hahano:

[MikeTheBike]

yea i will admit the only reason i haven't attempted to host a comp is because i don't know how. There is me and 2 other riders in my city and i doubt anyone else would travel to come here. Maybe i should put on a little one just the 3 of us just for some exposure? Where would i get permission from the city to put on a comp that will be exposed to the public? How do i approach all of this? just go to the city hall and be like hey can we put on a biking competition downtown?

i kind of agree with jusstten.. but i also think trying something different wouldn't hurt either would it?

There is a sticky at the top of this section of the forum entitled "Hosting Competitions..." It has one of my discertations in it. Enjoy.

However, please don't feel that you should put on a comp just for the sake of putting on a comp. Comps should be intended to spur the competitive nature amongst a community of riders. There are much better and more fun ways to spur just three riders - play H.O.R.S.E. (thanx Vaughn), group rides, followtheleader, etc. Also, as I said in the General Discussion, put together some trials clinics at local MTB events and get more riders. Then you'll have a reason for a comp.

[johnpanther1]

Sounds a little like BMX, NBL.
We weren't able to participate in any events all year, but they allowed us to participate in the Grands. What a great experience! Saw the best BMX riders, met some and got to participate too!

Even if you don't get to ride any regionals for whatever reason, to have a chance participate in one national would be cool.

[trialsin usa]

Changing point system, to just needing to obtain a regional points standing before going to finals might help out.

However, as stated in various ways above...... without finding a way to reinvigorate a sense of volunteerism its all a bit moot.

[brian_E]

i just can't read all of this stuff.. but i keep seeing the word local.. there's a difference between regional and local..

i don't want to see all the VA locals getting points towards a national title cuz they all have the day off tuesday the 25th and decide they want to have a comp..

and that's an arbitrary example.. don't go reading into it VA boys..

[RyanMcVicker]

i think everyone should just use uci rules for comps and nothing else.

you know how france and germany have their own national championship? do we even have one.. this is probobly a dumb question but something that i never hear about... iam more familiar with uci worlds, uci world cup, european championship, euro cups, and the german nationals and aus nationals than iam with my own countries simply because i never hear about one. i just hear about comps spread out everywhere..

[rush]

i think everyone should just use uci rules for comps and nothing else.


.

[justtysen]

Thanks for setting me straight on those points Mike.

When I start thinking about NATS like you suggested, as a loose series that attempts to connect existing competitions and riding groups, the new plan seems very sensible.

Sorry for the confusion.
I'd change my vote if I could.

[Noel]

to add my brokeass 2cents but i wasnt with the regional idea until it was explained to my retarted ass more clearly. but with these new ideas there sounding really good and good for the sport. the regionals could bring back the comps in R.I. (dont remember the name of it).

[va_tick]

i just can't read all of this stuff.. but i keep seeing the word local.. there's a difference between regional and local..

i don't want to see all the VA locals getting points towards a national title cuz they all have the day off tuesday the 25th and decide they want to have a comp..

and that's an arbitrary example.. don't go reading into it VA boys..

Again, there are ways to filter this.......the sport right now is too small and to localized not to shift toward more localized events, either way I feel it can work.....

But as Tim said if there is no volunteerism(sp?) to put on comps in a region thats somewhat local to you than you maybe forced to drive to other events furthur from you......

Mike, where do we go from here?

[RyanMcVicker]

i think all the trials riders in the usa should just move to the same area and ride together putting on demos and comps and we would push each other to ride better and get more attention because there are more riders.. trials would explode (haha maybe)... not very realistic but i just had a dream and wanted to share.

and yes, what happens next?

[rush]

Mike, where do we go from here?

First off, I would close the thread.

Then:

The only way to organise something like this is with a conference call or a face to face meeting.

You appoint a speaker, a minute taker, and have a clear meeting agenda. No bullshitting, no jokes, no tangents.

Next step would be to organise a Trials committee for the US. Anyone that wants to be involved can be, as long as they participate. If they dont, appoint someone else straight away.

Appoint a president, secretary, treasurer, comp coordinator, demo coordinator/hunter etc. Then stick to your roles.

Organise concrete meeting dates/times and stick to them. It is the only way you will get things organised properly.

Get Mike to moderate a thread to organise the call in the competitions forum. Get him to moderate it so that anything not directly pertaining to the meeting gets deleted.

[MikeTheBike]

I already set the poll to expire after seven days. I will close the thread at the same time.

This has actually been a very useful discussion. The contradictions and opposing viewpoints have helped us to see more of the pros and cons than we might have been able to see on our own. I thank you all. Also, thank you all for keeping the discussion on topic.

As for next steps, my two biggest goals for 2009 are to (1) make NATS into a non-profit association with officers and supported by membership dues and (2) rewrite the rulebook to establish a regional system. I'm still not sure whether to allow individual events and/or regions to choose their own rules or impose the NATS rule on them. We'll work on that. As for the officers, so far I know of a willingness to serve from Edge and Ryan. Anyone else?

[va_tick]

I'm willing and I imagine some of the other guys her in VA would be wiling to sit in on any discussion and give whatever assistance they can provide...

I def think at some point we should do as Rush suggested and have some sort of confrence call....I think most everyones cell phones have this ability??

Anyways, great thread and mike let me know if you need any help with the reformation process.

Ryan

[MikeTheBike]

Most cell phones only support 3-way calling. However, I have free access to a conference bridge through my work. I'll set this up a bit later in the year, once I make some progress on the first goal.

[va_tick]

Most cell phones only support 3-way calling. However, I have free access to a conference bridge through my work. I'll set this up a bit later in the year, once I make some progress on the first goal.


Thats perfect!!:bigthumb: :bigthumb:

Random side question: If each person makes a three way call ,then would that mean there are an infinite nuber of people that can be confrenced by using a cell phone?? Things that make ya say hum.....anyways........

[MIKE1968]

Exactly what is the advantage of a CC over all of the people being online at the same time? This shit is heading towards being like a dog show in terms of unnecessary and ridiculous seriousness, "best in show" . That and all the heavy handed blah blah rules , 'I wonder if I'll "allow" grassroots to have their own comp rules or if I'll make them use NATS' blah blah....great way to alienate anyone interesting who rides trials and keeping it a bunch of social defects who couldn't talk their way into an interesting situation without a step by step manual.


Viewed as the red headed stepchild by all forms of USA cycling because the majority of riders are red headed stepchildren. Doofuses and nerds. My favorite thing about the UK scene is they are more akin to the US bmx scene in terms of style. "cool kids" i guess you could say- something you could market. Kid with fashionable clothes, decent hair cut and rides his bike vs chubby guy with glasses wearing a pearl izumi jacket who's been practicing 2 foot sidehops for the last 6 years, but he can tell you what tension his front rims spokes are at. We're 6 years behind, not only in skill but in mentality. They had the trials kings, we had stephen maeder. JJ, mcmaster- those were some people who someone could cheer for. I'm rambling at this point. Maybe something makes sense...but it probably won't and will just look like an attack, so fix that posture in your chair and adjust your glasses get back to that exell spreadsheet.



All the talk is still good, means at least lots of people want something to happen. I remember when colorado had 8-10 regional events in a summer. 2-3 comps a month, sometimes one a weekend. Those were good times...but once you do have these comps you have to remember that people are eventually going to be bored with spending $300 in gas/time/hotel/reg fee to go ride their bike somewhere and the novelty might wear off.

[RyanMcVicker]

^ agreed.

[justtysen]

Riding, riding, riding. The clothes and hair don't matter if you can ride. Sometimes unfortunately, riding can take a backseat in people's lives as they get older. Young riders tend to have a more progressive attitude, which is good for the sport. Attracting impressionable youth comes with responsibility. I'd rather not try to sell trials as a fashion, but for better or worse fashion is psychologically powerful.

I wonder if I don't take trials seriously enough because I no longer use it to define myself?

[MikeTheBike]

Everyone that is maybe feeling a bit provoked by Moment's comments, please do not turn this thread into a flame war. His opinions are as valid as anyone's.

[justtysen]

His opinions are as valid as anyone's.
That's why I was trying to come to terms with them. I think there is a lot of truth to what he said but I'm also one of those people who's never been self-confident or socially comfortable enough to accept it so I try to rationalize an alternative.

It's not a flame war it's a culture war. :)
And I'm trying to adapt?

[va_tick]

Is this thread really still going?

[DangerousDave]

Would getting points actually motivate someone to compete if they weren't going to do it in the first place?

Does anyone in North America really care about points and nationals? It always seems like a joke because you can't really tell who the 'best' rider is because most of them dont' show up because it costs too much to travel.

I think you should just designate one comp a year as the 'north american trials championships'. There are so few ppl who will travel to more than one major comp that requires long distance travel. I don't think that just because you're regional champion, you're going to put the money into going to another event. You're going to put the money into going because it's a bad ass event. Put the names of all the major comps in NA in a hat and draw one.

I don't want to seem negative. Competitions are the only thing I really find interesting anymore just because its fun to ride new lines and see new people. But I think we need to focus having a few large scale events that are big enough to draw riders. Not to take anything away from current events but we need old school motorama or Squamish style events that could draw riders from all over NA.

[trialsin usa]

Would getting points actually motivate someone to compete if they weren't going to do it in the first place?

Does anyone in North America really care about points and nationals? It always seems like a joke because you can't really tell who the 'best' rider is because most of them dont' show up because it costs too much to travel.

I think you should just designate one comp a year as the 'north american trials championships'. There are so few ppl who will travel to more than one major comp that requires long distance travel. I don't think that just because you're regional champion, you're going to put the money into going to another event. You're going to put the money into going because it's a bad ass event. Put the names of all the major comps in NA in a hat and draw one.

I don't want to seem negative. Competitions are the only thing I really find interesting anymore just because its fun to ride new lines and see new people. But I think we need to focus having a few large scale events that are big enough to draw riders. Not to take anything away from current events but we need old school motorama or Squamish style events that could draw riders from all over NA.

That is one perspective.

The other is:
If you create only one day title event, it might play more to one riders style than another. Spreading the points over a number of events lessens the possibility that any one rider has an advantage. Not so many years ago many people travelled all over the country to attend....... its not the money for most.......its the motivation. A couple less PS3 games, one less can of bees muffler and hold the fast food to a couple times a month and your there.

Yes, the points series has meant something to some over the years. Aside from personal acheivment, it is about getting stuff. EVERYTHING counts when approaching sponsors. Not many people bother to hone the writing and communication skills anymore....for those possessing motivation beyond pondering next ringtone on their phone... there are companies out there with stuff, and having a national title combined with showy vid will help.

I understand your points from a personal standpoint. The items above are not relevent to you. I just want to make sure that all people feel it irrelevent....it might not be to them.

At the end of the day you go to competitions to be challenged and have fun. I got into this as a spectator because of the shear skill and spectacle and the coolness of the people.

Having said all of that, maybe we are at a point where one-day (or weekend) championship would be the best. That way a number of people who put on events and go and make set up and running event alot less stressful (4 or 5 people vrs 1 or 2 makes a HUGE difference).

[RyanMcVicker]

Would getting points actually motivate someone to compete if they weren't going to do it in the first place?

Does anyone in North America really care about points and nationals? It always seems like a joke because you can't really tell who the 'best' rider is because most of them dont' show up because it costs too much to travel.

I think you should just designate one comp a year as the 'north american trials championships'. There are so few ppl who will travel to more than one major comp that requires long distance travel. I don't think that just because you're regional champion, you're going to put the money into going to another event. You're going to put the money into going because it's a bad ass event. Put the names of all the major comps in NA in a hat and draw one.

I don't want to seem negative. Competitions are the only thing I really find interesting anymore just because its fun to ride new lines and see new people. But I think we need to focus having a few large scale events that are big enough to draw riders. Not to take anything away from current events but we need old school motorama or Squamish style events that could draw riders from all over NA.

he is sooooooooooo right.

[RyanMcVicker]

maybe we are at a point where one-day (or weekend) championship would be the best. That way a number of people who put on events and go and make set up and running event alot less stressful (4 or 5 people vrs 1 or 2 makes a HUGE difference).

I think it is a better idea instead of having multiple events towards the national champ there is one big one... I was thinking if everyone saved their time and effort and not put on a bunch of little mediocre comps, instead put everyones resources into one big comp in a very populated area, that way more spectators and more riders will come seeing how it would be worth coming to.. Kindof like the UCI worlds but the North american champtionship. instead we're trying to make it like world cup where the riders have to travel to all these different comps to make it. Is it just me or do you see alot more riders attending and coverage of Worlds than the WC?

i hope i make some sense at all, iam not the best with explaining my ideas sometimes

[Edge]

I think it is a better idea instead of having multiple events towards the national champ there is one big one... I was thinking if everyone saved their time and effort and not put on a bunch of little mediocre comps, instead put everyones resources into one big comp in a very populated area, that way more spectators and more riders will come seeing how it would be worth coming to.. Kindof like the UCI worlds but the North american champtionship. instead we're trying to make it like world cup where the riders have to travel to all these different comps to make it. Is it just me or do you see alot more riders attending and coverage of Worlds than the WC?

i hope i make some sense at all, iam not the best with explaining my ideas sometimes Not sure if I would want to give up 5 events in the Southwest just to attend 1 major event further north. I think we need local comps to get more people interested in the sport. I think we need to grow the sprot in each region before expecting everyone to travel across the country for 1 comp.

I'm really not sure what its going to take to grow the sport into what we really want to see. All I know is that it will take some time. I think its growing but at a snails pace. We had our first series here in Texas last year and it turn out alright. I'm curious to see if our rider turn out increases this year. I have noticed that we have around 7 or so new riders in the area since last season. Don't know if the comps brought them in or if they just happened to find our sport. I'm curious to compare our turn out from last year to this year. If we increase turn out by 2 or 3 per comp I'll feel like we accomplished something. It just depends on us. I'm rambling now, got to get some coffee.

[RyanMcVicker]

yea good point.. but if every comp is half assed.. kinda cool but kinda lame then people are just going to be turned away from trials... and go watch bmx and the xgames...

basically the only way trials will be big here i think is if everyone actually trains like youre supposed to and get good instead of just hoping on 2 foot ledges all day.. and then our generation has to get younger kids into it so they grow up into it.. but who knows.. sponsors play a huge part.. we need big sponsored events at a mountainbike race or soemthing like big bear and mammoth was with JJ and lenosky and santos you see in old biketrials.com videos.. not some bumfuck little town in the woods hopping on logs...wtf happend...

[Edge]

I guess I see it a little differently. 3 of 5 events I put on are with mtb races. Our average crowd turnout is at least 100 spectators at those 3. Eureka Springs had over 200 spectators last year. Its just a matter of time and patience.

I see 4 regions with 4 regional directors running events. Once we get that going we can move into having 1 end of year championship rotating to each region each year making it fair for everyone travel wise.

Its more like a 10 year investment.

[RyanMcVicker]

thats sweet.

4 regions sounds good.

[trialsin usa]

I guess I see it a little differently. 3 of 5 events I put on are with mtb races. Our average crowd turnout is at least 100 spectators at those 3. Eureka Springs had over 200 spectators last year. Its just a matter of time and patience.

I see 4 regions with 4 regional directors running events. Once we get that going we can move into having 1 end of year championship rotating to each region each year making it fair for everyone travel wise.

Its more like a 10 year investment.

Reducing number of regional events, and once again getting a little geogrphical balance might be a good thing. NW/Canada (Whistler), SW, NE, SE and mid (Texas, OK etc..). Well, that is 5........chop one and away we go.........

[Dang!]

Mike,
I support your idea 100%

Ryan I am on board to help in anyway possible, as you know.
Honestly, I think our region is going to kick ass this year!


now if we just had a magazine...

[Edge]

Reducing number of regional events, and once again getting a little geogrphical balance might be a good thing. NW/Canada (Whistler), SW, NE, SE and mid (Texas, OK etc..). Well, that is 5........chop one and away we go.........
we can have as many regions as needed but 4 would be a good start.

[trialsin usa]

we can have as many regions as needed but 4 would be a good start.

Whistler
Fontana
Tennessee
Raccoon Rally
Tishomingo (sp?)