Published on behalf of Graham Brasier. This is a copy of the letter Graham has sent to the MCC in response to Alan Fosters letter in the last Triple. Graham would like it published here but as he isn't one of us computer nerds he has asked me to do it for him - Michael
Class Awards:- who needs them? We need them for the same reason we need all our awards, as an incentive to do well against the club or against each other and for no other reason.
Without class awards the incentive to win would be significantly reduced and was the reasoning for them being introduced in 1958. It is not a compromise to take away half the awards we have, only a step backwards to losing our way completely or the lowering of standards for which the club is becoming renowned by many.
Alans complelling argument for the removal of class awards seems to revolve around Andrew Brwon's website article, a limited debate that has appeared on Michael Leete's Classical Gas Website and letters he has received. Could it not have been something to do with the debacle at Torquay after The Exeter Trial when the MCC Committee failed to produce the awards everyone was expecting? Having no future class awards seems to be an easy way out of organising their presentation.
As April 1st has been and gone please tell me this is all a scam!
Graham Brasier
When I read the last Triple I was as surprised as Graham that this 'suggestion' seemed to have become a 'fait accompli' without further reference to the membership. However, as one of the instigators of the debate, I'd better defend my position. My main point is that the vast majority of MCC Class Awards are decided on special test times, not on the hills, and they are therefore the 'icing-on-the-cake' for those who've already 'beaten the Club' to get their Gold. OK, I know that there is always the possibility of failing a special test when trying too hard, but this is hardly a major incentive to competition. I really cannot accept Graham's argument that "Without class awards the incentive to win would be significantly reduced". This may be true for the supermen who've already walked-off with their Triple(s) but not for the rest of us who are still struggling to put together three Golds in one year. Things are very different in ACTC Championship events where every place in your class counts and class positions are rarely decided on special test times. To win your class in an ACTC event is an achievement and certainly an "incentive to win", but this is (or should be) one of the many characteristics that separate MCC events from ACTC events. Class Awards are certainly at least as worthy of debate as One-Up/Two-Up so what are everyone else's views? Andrew
ReplyDeleteMy personal view of class awards is somewhat ambivalent. I can agree to a certain extent with both Grahams and Andrew's arguments above. Winning a class award on speed test times never seems particularly special although, winning a class award by being the only one to clean everything in the class I would argue is. My main question however would be "Why the change"? Class awards have been given now for over forty years (I think), why suddenly stop them? I dont see any problem in giving someone in the class a higher award because they have done everything correctly and performed better on the speed tests. Adding a little bit of competition on these tests seems to add a bit to the camaradarie of the event. If we are doing away with class wins are the overall awards going next? The argument of competing against the club is valid, but I dont understand why people have a problem in someone receiving an award for winning the class or the outright win on a trial. I suppose if I climb off the fence then I would say if someone has done everything right and set a faster time then pat them on the back and say well done. It's not as if by giving them a class award we are taking something away from someone elses achievements. At the end of the day if someone has got a Gold they have got a Gold. If they want to go for the class win on the speed tests then let them, and if they get it wrong they'll get a Silver, if they get it right they may get the class. It all adds to the fun, and doesn't detract from anyone elses achievements in winning their Gold.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Andrew, until I get a Triple (wishful thinking) I will always be careful on special tests, so a class award on an MCC trial seems to be an almost impossible achievement. Class awards do not bother me, but only because I am unlikley to achieve one. How about an Award for the passenger as well as the driver. For the car and sidecar classes MCC trials are very much a team effort. Without a good passenger, the chance of an award is significantly lessened. A Gold, Silver or Bronze medal for the passenger would encourage passengers, by recognition of their input. There is a cost implication, so any driver winning an award could be asked to contribute an additional £5-£10 (or whatever a medal costs) for a passengers medal if that is required. I think the term navigator might be more suitable than passenger on the medal. As an illustration, my navigator/mechanic/passenger put his shoulder out on Bluehills 1 by shaking the car into gripping and getting us off the restart, if I get an award it will be because of his beyond-the-call-of-duty contribution, but all he gets is a finisher's certificate.
ReplyDeleteSurely, there would not be a 'Testing Trial' if we did not enjoy the special tests. I always 'have a go', may have resulted in a few class awards(19) and blow the risk. The class award is much fought for as far as I can see, or is it the 'overall'. Gives the marshals a bit of entertainment but we must do it in more than 10 secs!
ReplyDeleteLike the vast majority of MCC trial competitors I feel that the class awards are an irrelevance. On the rare occasions where I have a chance of gold I treat the special tests with the utmost caution. So for the very small number who are trying for a class award I don't much mind whether its awarded for the best time on 3 at the most rather simple tests of for who wears the silliest hat. What concerns me is the blurring of the distinction between MCC and ACTC championship events as Andrew has pointed out. Giles says that it would be great if an MCC class award was decided by one individual alone climbing all the hills, I feel precisely the opposite. I am concerned that there is a move to change MCC events into ACTC type trials only bigger. While I enjoy ACTC events I don't feel able to give the time to trail my car down to the the south-west for them. If the Exeter and Lands End became simply a matter of turning up in the morning somewhere down there for a days sport I don't think I would bother to enter and I doubt if half the other competitors would either. So I guess the suspension of class awards may be putting a marker down about the difference between MCC and ACTC events. However I do think a referendum would be appropriate. As for people enjoying having a blast on the special tests, I do too and compete in production car autotests to satisfy that need. Some people enjoy a round of golf but I won't go there. Anyway it's great to have a debate. Tony
ReplyDeleteI think maybe Tony has miss understood what I was saying and therefore maybe my point wasnt as clear as I thought. I couldnt agree more with Tony when he says it would be a shame to see the MCC events become undistinguishable from the ACTC events. Hence why the loss of the night run which as been suggested previously would be so sad. There is a place for both types of event although I dont see why so many MCC members seem to regard the ACTC events with such disdain. If you dont want to do them then don't. Where I dont understand Tonys point and maybe he could explain further, is why he would be so against giving a class award to a comeptitor if he has climbed all the hills and no-one else in his class has. What's wrong with that? It comes back to the attitude that if one does well its not fair to everyone else which to me is just ridiculous political correctness within trials. If someone prepares a car, drives well and has a bit of luck then well done to them. To me that's what sport is about whether you are competing against the club or other competitor. Whats the alternative? Make it so everyone can clean all the hills so that they feel good about what they have done? Why is it that MCC members feel that because they haven't or don't believe they can win the class on an MCC event, that therefore no-one else should be allowed to win it either? I dont always attack special tests because its easy to make a mistake and drop a class of award, but because that's my attitude I wouldn't suggest that they stop class awards for others who want to try for them. Maybe the way in which class awards are given isn't the best method and completely in keeping with the rest of the nature of classic trials but then why not look at an alternative instead of getting rid of them. To repeat myself from before I have to say that honestly I am not that fussed about class awards it just irks me when the arguments seem based upon "I can't win one so lets get rid of them". If someone can convince me that they are harming the event then I look forward to hearing the argument. Otherwise I will continue of the view that if someone wants to go for them, then good luck to them.
ReplyDeleteI am a fairly new to Classic Trials and the MCC but I must agree with Giles. If there have been class awards for 40+ years why dump them now? I have once managed to win class 8 and was very pleased to get the award. I have also this year thrown away a bronze on the Exeter and Gold on the Lands End by messing up a special test on both events by too much enthusiasm. So its up to me to treat tests a bit more carfully on MCC events but still try for the class award. Stuart Harrold
ReplyDeleteI'd have to agreed with Giles & Stuart. I can see what the Class award adds and don't see what it takes away. Personally I think that Special Testes shouldn't count as a failed section but treated exactly as what they are - a special test. Incourage everyone to have a go without the cost of an award. Certainly more amusing for the marshalls and competitor. It was done on the LE a few years ago (99 & 00 at least). Having said that they definately do not want to get more complicated such as the silly Bude test as few years ago. One year I had a fail for going clockwise 360 rather an anti-clockwise 360 round one of 1000 cones. The next year I was careful and the marshall said well done and mentioned a time but the results showed a time equal to slowest. Happyily neither counted against me although several sections did. Why was that changed? Or was it just an experiment on the LE? Maybe someone could fill that in. It does appear that having a competitive streak is somehow viewed as a bad thing in an MCC event. Quite why after a 100 years of competition is a little beyond me. Maybe in the future using new tyres will be a no no and a penatly will be given equal to one fail. I think Peter's navigator medal option is a good one or even a card similar to the finisher's cert with an MCC embossed stamp and award won. Mark
ReplyDeleteOnce again I hear of awards or certificates now being given to
ReplyDeletenavigators. Come on guy's if we do that give one to the marshell's as
well, after all who in there right mind will stand on Litton slack in cold
miserable weather to welcome competitors and navigators and wish them good
luck. Get you out of the muck and mud when your stuck. Nobody even
say's thank you to these people these days but winge about awards instead.
How about a point's system like other motor sport's and tally them up at the end
of the year then give out meddles come prizes. I believe its time for all
to stop moaning and get down to the real thing of competing in the spirit of the
competition. Without each other we wouldn't have a trial, so I suggest the
ones who moan the loudest should do a trial as a driver then the next one as a
marshall to appreciate what they do. ALAN
Marshalling can't be compared with competing as a passenger. I've done it over the past few years and it is a rewarding and enjoyable job in itself. No-one who regularly competes would do anything but thank the marshalls for their input; and in fact most competetors do talk to and express their thanks to the marshalls. Mine is a simple suggestion, most certainly not a whinge, just consider giving awards to sucessful passengers.
ReplyDeleteTo clarify my views (if I can) I’m not against class awards so much as not for them. By wishing to maintain the difference between MCC and ACTC events I do not wish to imply a lesser value for the latter. If I had more available time I would love to compete in more ACTC trials. I am not anti-competition. Ideally every entrant would find in each event the same degree of competition but that’s not the real world. At face value I can’t disagree with Giles’s view that if someone gets up all the hills and goes faster in the tests why not give them an extra prize. So what’s all the fuss about? For ACTC events the objectives are fairly simple (although achieving them may be hard). The organisers have to set hills which will ultimately reward the best driver with the lowest score and spread the rest of the field out over a reasonable range. This needs to done with sections that are challenging without breaking too many of the entrants’ cars. Some organisers do better than others and at the end of the year the best gets a prize. For the entrant the competition is also simple - how to do better than as many of the others as possible. Now for MCC events the whole thing is more complex. The struggle as I see should be considered for 4 groups. Those who struggle for a finish, those for a bronze, those for a silver and those for a gold. Clearly if you are always getting golds you may yearn for an additional challenge, a gold with knobs on and I suppose that is where the class and overall awards come in. However why should those in the other groups be deprived? Why shouldn’t we subdivide the silvers and bronzes and give them class awards based on the special test times? Ridiculous you may say and I agree, but you may see why I suggest that class awards might be seen as reducing the difference between MCC and ACTC. In my view there is something quirkily egalitarian about MCC events where the winners of each level of medal are not considered as any different from the rest at that level. I wouldn’t suggest that this would benefit all types of sport but I value it in the MCC. For those who want a challenge above gold there is the Triple and I for one would strongly oppose making this easier by allowing 3 consecutive golds rather than 3 in the year. If you will excuse a rather weak analogy. MCC events are like 5 day cricket matches, ACTC ones like one day, limited over matches, different but both competitive. MCC classes awards are a bit like having a penalty shoot out at the end of a drawn test match. So I’m not bothered by the removal of class awards, however if the majority wish their retention I do think that failure of the special test should not contribute to the loss of a medal so that everyone is trying and the tests should be made much more challenging so that the winner really was the best in class.
ReplyDelete