• This topic has 47 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by mtbel.
Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 48 total)
  • The most sensible thing I've heard about BC and Gravity Enduro
  • grubbish
    Free Member

    Quote from interview with Si Paton organiser of the British Downhill series

    “There’s an interesting story there. In the UK, enduro was supported by British Cycling for 4 years, which meant that they sent commissaires and insured their events. There was another organizer, like myself, running the show there. I remember there being some discussion about points and being a part of a ranking system within that series. They were talking about the possibility of regional and national champions as well. That’s no longer supported by British Cycling. BC basically told those guys that they’re not going to continue to support them when they’re not taping the courses from top to bottom, they’re not enforcing two practice runs pre-race; the enduro series really was a massive risk for them. If there were any issues or injuries, their insurance company would have looked at it as a DH course, BC would have tried to explain the enduro concept, they would have gone back and forth and it would have been a gong show in court.The guys in enduro now have to insure themselves and the riders have to have their own liability insurance. I can only imagine it’s a massive headache for all involved, then add to the fact you don’t have the backing of the national federation, some credibility is lost. The moral of this story is that you have to bend over backwards to work with national federations if you want to play ball in their back garden.

    Everyone beats up the UCI, USAC and British Cycling. But the reality is, that their hands are tied in a legal sense with insurance companies. Don’t blame the federation, blame the riders who put the federation in that position. When things go wrong on course, they’re the ones taking the brunt of the ensuing litigation, not the organizer. Yes, if you’re a negligent organizer, they’re going to tell you off and sack you. But once that commissaire signs off on the course, it’s all set and let’s go racing that weekend. As an organizer, I will not lose my house, I will not go to court and I will not lose my liberty. If they say jump, I ask how high. I still need to ensure that certain safety protocols are met, but I’m happy to oblige. We can all stand here and knock them, but the federation gives you standing with the rest of the world. Well, people will say that British Cycling is all about the road scene. Well, who cares? Sure, I’d love for them to hand me a million pounds; we’d all be sitting in jacuzzis and getting lap dances at the end of each race run. But the likes of Sam Hill, Troy Brosnan, etc. still turn up to race with us in the middle of a muddy field, regardless of the attention the roadies are getting. We’ve created a desirable series that their sponsors want them to race. I say we just get on with it and make it better.”

    Scienceofficer
    Free Member

    Is there something new here or have you just realised how the world works?

    mikewsmith
    Free Member

    Well it is for once a very informed and reasoned statement on the issues, and a take on how something has got to the point that it is in now. If you want to race 5 DH style trails in a day then sooner or later somebody is going to call it as a DH race and ask that you provide the same level of cover as you would at a DH race.

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    teadrinker
    Free Member

    “Everyone beats up the UCI, USAC and British Cycling.”

    I don’t.

    rOcKeTdOg
    Full Member

    I’ve ridden with Si Paton, he has a great trail dog

    mikewsmith
    Free Member

    All I can think of now is Si on the mike at a Pearce race desperately trying to find whoever had his caravan keys as the dog was inside and shaping up to take a dump, happy days and a top bloke.

    scottfitz
    Free Member

    Quote from interview with Si Paton organiser of the British Downhill series based on second hand informotion

    “There’s an interesting story there. In the UK, enduro was supported by British Cycling at some levels for 4 years, which meant that they sometimes sent commissaires and insured their events. There was another organizer, like myself, running the show there. I remember there being some discussion about points and being a part of a ranking system within that series. They were talking about the possibility of regional and national champions as well. That’s no longer supported by British Cycling. BC basically told those guys that they’re not going to continue to support them when they’re not taping the courses from top to bottom, they’re not enforcing two practice runs pre-race; the enduro series really was a massive risk for them. If there were any issues or injuries, their insurance company would have looked at it as a DH course, BC would have tried to explain the enduro concept, they would have gone back and forth and it would have been a gong show in court.The guys in enduro now have to insure themselves and the riders have to have their own liability insurance. I can only imagine it’s a massive headache for all involved, then add to the fact you don’t have the backing of the national federation, some credibility is lost. The moral of this story is that you have to bend over backwards to work with national federations if you want to play ball in their back garden.[b]But even when you do they still wont support you or your event [/b]

    Everyone beats up the UCI, USAC and British Cycling. But If BC supported enduro like the other European Federation have and work with organisers to help shape the sport/discipline in to a safe and successful future we wouldn’t need to have that conversation. the reality is, that their hands are tied in a legal sense with insurance companies. Don’t blame the federation, blame the riders who put the federation in that position. When things go wrong on course, they’re the ones taking the brunt of the ensuing litigation, not the organizer. Yes, if you’re a negligent organizer, they’re going to tell you off and sack you. But once that commissaire signs off on the course, it’s all set and let’s go racing that weekend. As an organizer, I will not lose my house, I will not go to court and I will not lose my liberty. If they say jump, I ask how high. I still need to ensure that certain safety protocols are met, but I’m happy to oblige. We can all stand here and knock them, but the federation gives you standing with the rest of the world. Well, people will say that British Cycling is all about the road scene. Well, who cares? Sure, I’d love for them to hand me a million pounds; we’d all be sitting in jacuzzis and getting lap dances at the end of each race run. But the likes of Sam Hill, Troy Brosnan, etc. still turn up to race with us in the middle of a muddy field, regardless of the attention the roadies are getting. We’ve created a desirable series that their sponsors want them to race. I say we just get on with it and make it better.”

    northerntom
    Free Member

    Whilst I respect Si, and everything he has done for DH, I have to agree with the above from Scott. It very much seems the attitude from BC is, ‘our hands are tied, and there is nothing we can do’, rather than, ‘let’s try and find a solution to fix this’. In the long run, they are an organisation that is in place to support all avenues of cycling in the UK. And whilst I understand that Roadies may get more support due to the perceived popularity of the sport, Enduro, considering it’s rapid rise in participation, should be supported by the appropriate governing body.

    We have to take into account, Si was never going to right anything other than relatively positive comments about BC, he would be out of a job otherwise. The point of the article was to raise more awareness to generate more sponsorship for the BDS events, so I do take the majority of what was said with a pinch of salt.

    strike
    Free Member

    I like Scottfitz’s edited version!

    steveh
    Full Member

    It wasn’t that BC didn’t want to support enduro, far from it in fact they’d have loved to be able to, but at this time they feel that stepping away will be better for enduro as if they were to be involved the requirements they’d have had to place on it would have been so onerous as to stifle the sport. It’s definitely not a permanent thing and they will keep reviewing things but at the moment that is there position.
    The issues are that enduro is a gravity sport in BC terms and anyone who thinks it’s nearer xc than dh is kidding themselves. That requires a number of things including taping, commissaires, full face helmets and many more that BC felt didn’t fit with the sport.

    This was a conversation I had during a meeting at BC a few weeks ago so right from the horses mouth as it were.

    BoardinBob
    Full Member

    they’re not going to continue to support them when they’re not taping the courses from top to bottom

    That must be some amazing wonder tape. Does it stop crashes and stop racers ploughing into spectators?

    kimbers
    Full Member

    BC basically told those guys that they’re not going to continue to support them when they’re not taping the courses from top to bottom, they’re not enforcing two practice runs pre-race;

    as bob says im not sure of the benefit of the magic tape but it would be doable

    but the 2nd requirement, -2 practice runs, pre-race would be impossible over a 30k+ course

    is insurance in France any different? the Megavalanche requires neither of those stipulations and is on waaay tougher terrain than even the uk EWS round

    I think it just shows that BC were looking to make it impossible for enduro organisers to work with them

    t this time they feel that stepping away will be better for enduro

    so rather than try and change their own (silly) rules they just dumped am massively popular part of MTB

    scruff
    Free Member

    The tragic death of the spectator at Llangollen would surely mean that the DH rules would have to be used for the Enduro rules, so BC cant be seen as negligent if anyone (rider or spectator) got hurt or worse at an Enduro.

    BoardinBob
    Full Member

    The tragic death of the spectator at Llangollen would surely mean that the DH rules would have to be used for the Enduro rules, so BC cant be seen as negligent if anyone (rider or spectator) got hurt or worse at an Enduro

    But the supposed stringent safety measures at the DH race didn’t prevent a death, so what use are they in enduro.

    You can have all the course taping, practice runs, commissaires etc under the sun, you can’t escape the fact that accidents will happen and the measures they’re talking about won’t stop them. If anything it’s just a box ticking facade.

    munrobiker
    Free Member

    riders have to have their own liability insurance.

    They don’t have to, one organiser chooses to not allow entries without it but it’s not necessary.

    dragon
    Free Member

    Tape of course doesn’t stop anything, but what it does do is clearly define the course and that would feed into the risk assessment. You can’t do a proper risk assessment if you can’t define what it applies to.

    legend
    Free Member

    Si Paton once disagreed with GWs tyre choice – it was great to watch 🙂

    kimbers
    Full Member

    dragon – Member
    Tape of course doesn’t stop anything, but what it does do is clearly define the course and that would feed into the risk assessment. You can’t do a proper risk assessment if you can’t define what it applies to.

    BC coms already walked and risk assessed each stage before a UKGE (and other enduros?) suggesting any alterations to the trail they thought necessary, they only previously required tape where the course had a wide section with a possibly dodgy line, most of the stages were singletrack with 1 or 2 lines anyway
    as said i dont think taping is that unreasonable

    its the 2 mandatory practise runs that really highlights how they dont understand enduro

    BoardinBob
    Full Member

    its the 2 mandatory practise runs that really highlights how they dont understand enduro

    Yes, and I’ve been in races where the race day course & conditions had changed massively, rendering practice pretty much irrelevant.

    scottfitz
    Free Member

    The tragic death of the spectator at Llangollen would surely mean that the DH rules would have to be used for all BC events!!!! the Enduro rules, so BC cant be seen as negligent if anyone (rider or spectator) got hurt or worse at an Enduro.

    Why single out enduro? what about all the other events they STILL support?

    hels
    Free Member

    The taping thing is a bit of a red herring – BC comms wanted that because of all the blatant ahem “professionalism” that was going on with line choices.

    XC rules just say “follow the marked course” DH rules say “ride between the tape” (something along those lines) another argument for putting Enduro closer to DH.

    Double-taping is the spectator safety aspect, keeping the punters well away from any possible overshooting.

    kimbers
    Full Member

    So lets say UCI get behind enduro, as I understand it they were about to do it with the EWS but bailed on it at the last minute so Chris Ball went it alone

    Im assuming BC would want to jump back in, as they are threatening to anyway, how would that work for EWS tweedlove etc ?

    Is enduro at EWS level and nationally big enough to go without UCI/ BC

    what im trying to say is, if EWS can go it alone and UKGE and all the other uk enduro series survive without interference, whats the point of a national federation?

    scruff
    Free Member

    If EWS can go it alone then you could argue DH doesn’t need the UCI and could go back to the DH1 proposal. Aren’t they not running the Italian Enduros this year though? Enduro courses and logistics must be really hard compared to XC and DH.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    grubbish – Member

    they’re not enforcing two practice runs pre-race;

    I’d not heard this before… If it’s true, it really highlights how little BC understand the sport, which is really what underpins their whole failure to support it. Because it’s not like this is purely impractical for enduro; it’s not enforced for downhill either (it may be for some races, but I’ve never seen it)

    The conversations I had with Roger at BC always showed them to be well intentioned but basically clueless- there was a bizarre moment when I discovered he thought that most riders already wear fullface helmets for instance (this was in 2013 maybe? Can’t remember), and when I asked him why he thought that he said he’d been told so by a race organiser- the only organiser he’d spoken to on the subject. He’d never spoken to a rider, and he’d not approached any other race organiser about it or apparently even asked comms who’d been at events. So basically one person was setting the entire BC helmet agenda, with false information. And that was the standard of the factfinding and subsequent decision making.

    I always came away from it thinking “this is a dude that really would like to make this work, but will never be able to” A damn shame.

    hels
    Free Member

    The writing was on the wall when UCI ditched Enduro. There is much less funding for non-Olympic disciplines, getting medals is what BC is all about, at the end of the day. I imagine they would drop DH too, if they could get away with it.

    northerntom
    Free Member

    And if I was running BC as a business, I would probably drop DH too. This i where the issue lies, it’s not a business, it’s an organisation in place to suppot and govern all ccling in Britain, something which is fails to do.

    Like I said before, they seem to very much give up, rather than look for solution.

    scottfitz
    Free Member

    This was the question to Si
    How important is it to your success to cultivate a favorable relationship with your governing body?

    Why even mention enduro? why not talk about your success to cultivate a favorable relationship with your governing body?

    scottfitz
    Free Member

    northerntom – Member

    And if I was running BC as a business, I would probably drop DH too. This i where the issue lies, it’s not a business, it’s an organisation in place to suppot and govern all ccling in Britain, something which is fails to do.

    Like I said before, they seem to very much give up, rather than look for solution.
    Agree and the only nation federation to do this.

    steveh
    Full Member

    I’d not heard this before… If it’s true, it really highlights how little BC understand the sport, which is really what underpins their whole failure to support it. Because it’s not like this is purely impractical for enduro; it’s not enforced for downhill either (it may be for some races, but I’ve never seen it)

    Northwind it happens at every dh race I’ve been to, which is about 15-20 every year and should happen at all races.
    BC do understand the sport and that’s why they chose to step back from enduro at this time. With their insurance the gravity rules would have to be in place for enduro and do not fit, they understand that hence stepping back. They cannot change insurers at short notice and after the accident at Llangollen it would have been more difficult. That has pushed them to review all of what they do and there are a number of new rules coming in to place across all they disciplines they are part of in light of it.

    BoardinBob
    Full Member

    UCI, BC, FIFA, R&A etc

    A bunch of self serving, crusty old farts that are totally out of touch with the sport they govern

    scottfitz
    Free Member

    Northwind it happens at every dh race I’ve been to, which is about 15-20 every year and should happen at all races.

    I agree it happens at most* BC DH races.

    *Not the last one the commissaire was a BMX one and we (the racers) had to help him out with some rules, to be fir to him he did look in the rule book and not just take our work for it.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    How widely enforced it is I don’t know, and tbh it doesn’t matter- but it’s not in the SDA rules (or competitor notes as far as I can recall) and certainly wasn’t enforced at the BC/SC affiliated events I’ve raced and marshalled.

    Mate of mine is a comm, I’ll ask him if I remember, see what he thinks.

    scruff
    Free Member

    Boardin Bob, you forgot the FIS.

    Snowboarding for example has the FIS to rule them, but the recent world champs there was a big lack of top riders as they were all at the X Games instead apart from the stiff boot snowboard-slalom ex skiers. Similarly the TTR events are huge deals and attracts all the top snowboarders but has nothing to do with the FIS, if anything its anti-FIS.

    Freeride MTB has many big contests not officially sanctioned. They can even get insurance for Rampage which is stupidly dangerous.

    So you don’t really need the Olympic drive to be successful and ‘big’ as long as you can get high profile sponsorship / TV coverage.

    However, with Enduro you have Joe Public riding the same course as the Pro’s which I assume makes a huge difference to liability. Or does it?

    t-p26
    Free Member

    Here`s my tuppence worth….:
    The taping farce was due to a race organiser trying to exclude some riders for course cutting at a point where there were NO course markings, and at the same time allowing others(his friends) artistic licence…It was about defining a line and trying to lay down some consistent rules which he wouldnt do
    7 days apart the same track was used for DH then Endooro. It was compulsory to wear a fullface helmet one week, then a xc open face helmet was “safe” enough the following week….

    scottfitz
    Free Member

    Not sure who ‘he’ is but why would ‘he’ make a difference.

    There are 50+ enduro races this year in the UK. Wouldn’t it be good if there was a governing body to work with the 15+ organisers to help shape the sport/discipline in to a safe and successful future.

    hels
    Free Member

    “Safety” isn’t just the track and full facers tho.

    At a DH race there is the expectation of line of site marshalling, paramedics a radio call away, body armor and bikes capable of higher speeds. You ride according to the conditions.

    So yes, with all those additional variables, one day the same track may justify a full facer and the next be perfectly “safe” (which is a subjective term) with an open face helmet.

    Which to a certain extent was why I was out when I heard somebody say “if I decide it is a DH track then I want full line of site marshalling” Hels: “so where is this list of which tracks are DH tracks, can I have a copy ?” “I know which are DH tracks” etc etc.

    Tracks is tracks. The majority of the timed stages in Enduro are downhill. I can’t live with folk who make it us as they go along, not when I am responsible for rider safety !

    Northwind
    Full Member

    Heh. Talking to one of the comms at an inners race, naming no names, I heard “It’ll be full face helmets for the stages that are on downhill trails, and open face for everything else”. So that’s fullface for the easy stages then open face for the hard stuff, nice one 😆

    scottfitz
    Free Member

    Which to a certain extent was why I was out when I heard somebody say “if I decide it is a DH track then I want full line of site marshalling” Hels: “so where is this list of which tracks are DH tracks, can I have a copy ?” “I know which are DH tracks” etc etc.

    Yes hels this is stupid what do BC do when XC races use DH tracks? You they have to apply DH rule to the XC race?

    steveh
    Full Member

    Northwind 2 practice runs minimum at a dh race is a requirement – it can be missed but it certainly has been done at the SDA’s I have done before.
    Steve – Racer, BC dh/4x commissaire and organiser.

    To be honest in downhill it is a redundant rule – everyone does far more practice runs than that – if not how do you have a chance of going as fast as you can?

    The bigger issues for bc were line of sight marshalling, commissaire cover (when there are already not enough to go around) and some others that would have been prohibitive to the running of events.

    As I’ve said from the direct conversations I had with BC it wasn’t that they didn’t want to be part of enduro by any means but that they felt give the rules they’d have to apply enduro was better off without them.

    dragon
    Free Member

    Thing is BC are not happy with the running of events then it makes sense they walk away, and leave Enduro find it’s own feet. We already have very successful organisation that runs races on the road not under BC without any problems (CTT), so it can be done without BC support.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 48 total)

The topic ‘The most sensible thing I've heard about BC and Gravity Enduro’ is closed to new replies.

New deal added to Members Discounts