I have been concerned for some time about the problem around restarts that has been grumbling along. A conversation with a fellow competitor at the weekend has led me to this suggestion for changing the regulations.
The problem seems to have arisen with a number of marshals interpreting the rules with more rigour than had previously been the case. They can’t be blamed for this, it’s there in black and white. Furthermore the slightly inconsistent reaction of the club to the disquiet about Slippery Sam in 2003 – to disallow the restart but then reiterate the rules - has not made the problem any better.
As I see it if we are to use restarts the competitor should approach them with trepidation and leave them with elation. At present it is becoming the case that the trepidation continues until the results arrive to be replaced by irritation on seeing the dreaded RB against your name. I don’t feel that the sport is enhanced by penalising competitors for a small rearward movement perceptible from outside the vehicle but not from within. I am also concerned by whispers that marshals have been discussing with a certain amount of relish how they have failed people under these circumstances. This is not healthy for our sport.
My suggestion for the change is that after the drop of the flag and the competitor pulls away, rearward movement should not be cause for failure provided the driven wheels are rotating forwards and any wheels in the restart box do not cross the downhill limit of it. This should avoid people backing down the box to get a second bite of the cherry, which I have seen allowed on occasions. It might also be appropriate to have some form of time limit as sometimes seems to be the case now to avoid competitors trying to dig their way to Australia.
I’m not suggesting that restarts should necessarily be easier, merely that competitors would leave the section in little doubt as to whether they had failed or not I wonder what anyone else thinks.
Tony
Personally I think that the 'Run Back Issue' has caused more member ill-will towards the MCC Committee than all the other issues put together and Tony's trepidation/elation/irritation comments describe the situation perfectly. My own idea was to carry out some tests to determine just how much backward rear wheel rotation is obviously discernable by the driver and make this the criteria - thereby eliminating the "Did I or didn't I?" that accompanies every MCC restart. I guess it will be somewhere around an eighth of a revolution or 45 degrees of rotation. Comments? Andrew
ReplyDeleteI guess Restarts and their monitoring are always going to provide a source of debate from competitors and as a mere passenger I can see the merits of the suggestions put forward in the previous two messages. There is another circumstance on Restarts which may need looking into. We were recently given an 'RB' (not on Slippery Sam this time) where the car went down the hill a foot or so with the rear wheels locked but with the fronts rotating. The front wheels stayed within the Restart box at all times. The fact that we made a complete hash of getting away from the Restart made the RB academic! I wonder whether the Restart marshals are always given sufficient briefing about what constitutes a failure on a Restart?
ReplyDeleteAs someone who has marshalled a fair few restarts over the last year or ten and been chief official many times ( not as grand as it sounds i can assure you) I personally think to do a restart using the" matchbox flattening " system on a muddy hill is well nigh impossible. I feel the restart marshal (who should be the same person for all competitors, something that does not always happen) has to be able to make a value judgement on what is a acceptable on that restart on that day. Then if the first car rocks back an inch or so but otherwise takes of clean I would allow that then that would be my criteria for the rest of the trial, consistancy being all important.So much for my opinion see you on the hills, or in the case of Easter in the control.
ReplyDeleteHaving marshalled or helped on restarts a few times I should have thought that there should be a bit of an allowance for roll back but surely this depends on how easy the restart area is? For instance if the surface is very steep, uneven and rocky might not more difficulty be expected than if the surface is even and not particularly steep? If 45 degrees of wheel rotation were allowed then this would be about 8-9 inches on most cars, which sounds rather a lot to me and certainly would be noticed by the crew. Is restarting a desirable skill to be tested per se? or is the point of a restart just to stop cars carrying momentum into a tricky bit of the section? If the latter then should marshalls be pretty easy going provided that the car does not roll out of the box? If the former, is it a valuable tool to confound the competitor and keep him (her) on his mettle? Is a good restarter happy to see tough marking as a way to eliminate his rivals? On Wooston quite a few competitors "failed" the restart but most of those then went on to fail the hill anyway. On Sam the restart caused a greater proportion of failures. Was the Sam restart stricter than that at Wooston? I'm sure that many potential restart marshalls will be reading this discussion with some interest since all those I have come across seek to be "fair" as well as consistent.
ReplyDeleteI hope nobody feels I was trying to suggest that any marshals were acting unfairly, quite the reverse. I agree that restarts do have 2 often distinct functions, one as a test in itself the other as a secondary start line. How much of a rotation of the wheel would be permitted is difficult as apart from anything else the diameter would make a difference. That's why I havn't suggested a specific amount of rearward movement to be considered, merely that the competitors driven wheels should be rotating forwards. I believe that if the vehicle moved backwards any significant amount under these conditions it wouldn't get going at all and thereby fail. I would dispute the fact that 8 - 9 inches rear movement is easy to detect within the car what with bouncing and the fact that most of us look forwards rather that sideways. However I'm glad that this has attracted varied opinions Cheers Tony
ReplyDeleteCould I, as a virtual beginner at trialling, put in my sixpennyworth about restarts. I would propose that rolling back within a restart box is not penalised before forward motion is achieved. However with a large restart box this would allow competitors to reposition their car in a possibly better position prior to gaining forward motion. To cut down on this likelihood the restart box could be restricted to between 0.7 and 1 metre (28 to 39 inches) overall (as on the Northern this year) thereby allowing little possibility for repositioning. This may well take away the "did I, didnt I roll back" question as if you can position yourself in a restart box correctly you are also more inclined to know if you have totally rolled back out of it. Apologies if anyone else has already suggested this and I wonder if I would be proposing this after experiencing a few more restart myself! Myke Pocock
ReplyDelete