![[BMF]Andy](/d3/avatars/m/0/158.jpg?1507996854){kind=avatar}
Joined
·
609 Posts
I am surprised no one has brought this up yet, although I understand their are already some pretty set opinions on this subject.
The NATS Series MUST be run under UCI rules.
Yes, people will complain, infact lots of people will probably complain. It will also make a number of riders happy though. The problem is that happy people have nothing to complain about so you never here how many people like the idea. You only here who doesnt like it.
Obviously when the idea of UCI(no bashguard) is initially presented to a trials rider it can be intimidating. I know that the first time I heard about it, it seemed like a strange idea and one that I honestly did not like. I would judge my skill level by the magnitude of each move that I could do, eg. how high of a wall can I up, or how high can I sidehop? Taking away the bashring instantly lowers the magnitude of each move that a rider can do.
The point is this, most people do not understand that sections set for BIU and sections set for UCI will be designed with the respective rules in mind. For example, if a Pro BIU section requires a 5 foot up and then a similiar section is set under UCI rules, that up should drop to perhaps 4 feet. Another example that more people can relate to is a sport class section. A sport class rider will expect the same style sections with the same average height of obstacles regardless of which set of rules they are riding under. This assumption is incorrect though and is the basis for many peoples resistance towards UCI.
Another reason to go UCI is the level of riders in the US. At the moment the level of most riders in the US is pitifully far behind that of the rest of the world. I understand that we are not born onto trials bikes as they are in some countries and cycling is not nearly as large a part of our culture as it is in almost all of Europe. This, however, is no excuse to not strive to be as good the rest of the world. The NATS series is the premier series in our country, and in fact in all of North America. If we want our countries riders to be on the level of the rest of the world we can not do them the disservice of having them ride, in our premier series, under a different set of rules.
Also, riding UCI style is much easier on the terrain than BIU. When everyday people watch a competition they will notice the damage that is done to the obstacles. Even if they see Jeremy V. jap tap a 5 foot wall to bashring and in the process take of a peice of concrete the fact that he defaced the wall will make as much of an impression on them as the incredible move he did. If we want trials to continue to grow as a sport we must impress the people with the money. Businness will be very reluctant to sponsor comps if they think they will be linked to the destruction of property. Many people say, "It does not matter if trials grows, I like the size that it is". This is certainly a valid opinion but does nothing to decrease the validity of this arguement. If a person is to say I am going to continue riding BIU and bashing stuff up because I dont want Trials to grow that is just like saying to an opponent I am going to break your leg because I dont want you to beat me. This is a somewhat extreme example but it gets the point across. Riding BIU, and hence being rougher on the terrain will not help our sport in anyway. Riding UCI and going easier on the terrain can have numerous benefits.
While the transition to UCI can be a bit abrupt for a rider, It must be done. This years NATS may be a little controversial because of it but within a year it will be accepted as the way trials comps are run. For the reasons mentioned above UCI is certainly the way to go, it will increase the level of riding in the US, and make the sport of Bike Trials more appealing to sponsors.
The decision to run under UCI rules must be made quickly and advertised well though. This way all the riders will know well in advance what rules they will be riding under and will have the time to prepare for them if the choose to. This will prevent riders from complaining that they did not know about the rule changes or did not have enough fair warning. It must also be well advertised that UCI sections are set with the respective rules in mind. A sport class rider will still be riding against riders of the same caliber and therefore they will all have to deal with the same stuff. Additionally course designers must be told that there sections need to result in the same average number of dabs per comp as a set of BIU sections would.
If the decision is made quickly and is well executed then the transition to UCI can be relatively smooth. In return the quality of the sport of Bike Trials in North America will improve
Post on the www.natrials.com forum in support of this, it NEEDS to happen.
The NATS Series MUST be run under UCI rules.
Yes, people will complain, infact lots of people will probably complain. It will also make a number of riders happy though. The problem is that happy people have nothing to complain about so you never here how many people like the idea. You only here who doesnt like it.
Obviously when the idea of UCI(no bashguard) is initially presented to a trials rider it can be intimidating. I know that the first time I heard about it, it seemed like a strange idea and one that I honestly did not like. I would judge my skill level by the magnitude of each move that I could do, eg. how high of a wall can I up, or how high can I sidehop? Taking away the bashring instantly lowers the magnitude of each move that a rider can do.
The point is this, most people do not understand that sections set for BIU and sections set for UCI will be designed with the respective rules in mind. For example, if a Pro BIU section requires a 5 foot up and then a similiar section is set under UCI rules, that up should drop to perhaps 4 feet. Another example that more people can relate to is a sport class section. A sport class rider will expect the same style sections with the same average height of obstacles regardless of which set of rules they are riding under. This assumption is incorrect though and is the basis for many peoples resistance towards UCI.
Another reason to go UCI is the level of riders in the US. At the moment the level of most riders in the US is pitifully far behind that of the rest of the world. I understand that we are not born onto trials bikes as they are in some countries and cycling is not nearly as large a part of our culture as it is in almost all of Europe. This, however, is no excuse to not strive to be as good the rest of the world. The NATS series is the premier series in our country, and in fact in all of North America. If we want our countries riders to be on the level of the rest of the world we can not do them the disservice of having them ride, in our premier series, under a different set of rules.
Also, riding UCI style is much easier on the terrain than BIU. When everyday people watch a competition they will notice the damage that is done to the obstacles. Even if they see Jeremy V. jap tap a 5 foot wall to bashring and in the process take of a peice of concrete the fact that he defaced the wall will make as much of an impression on them as the incredible move he did. If we want trials to continue to grow as a sport we must impress the people with the money. Businness will be very reluctant to sponsor comps if they think they will be linked to the destruction of property. Many people say, "It does not matter if trials grows, I like the size that it is". This is certainly a valid opinion but does nothing to decrease the validity of this arguement. If a person is to say I am going to continue riding BIU and bashing stuff up because I dont want Trials to grow that is just like saying to an opponent I am going to break your leg because I dont want you to beat me. This is a somewhat extreme example but it gets the point across. Riding BIU, and hence being rougher on the terrain will not help our sport in anyway. Riding UCI and going easier on the terrain can have numerous benefits.
While the transition to UCI can be a bit abrupt for a rider, It must be done. This years NATS may be a little controversial because of it but within a year it will be accepted as the way trials comps are run. For the reasons mentioned above UCI is certainly the way to go, it will increase the level of riding in the US, and make the sport of Bike Trials more appealing to sponsors.
The decision to run under UCI rules must be made quickly and advertised well though. This way all the riders will know well in advance what rules they will be riding under and will have the time to prepare for them if the choose to. This will prevent riders from complaining that they did not know about the rule changes or did not have enough fair warning. It must also be well advertised that UCI sections are set with the respective rules in mind. A sport class rider will still be riding against riders of the same caliber and therefore they will all have to deal with the same stuff. Additionally course designers must be told that there sections need to result in the same average number of dabs per comp as a set of BIU sections would.
If the decision is made quickly and is well executed then the transition to UCI can be relatively smooth. In return the quality of the sport of Bike Trials in North America will improve
Post on the www.natrials.com forum in support of this, it NEEDS to happen.
