Colorado Guys: Need input on the rules

[Grizzly4x4]

Currently, in CO most people judge progress through a gate by using a centerline connecting the centers of the two markers. I have illustrated this in the picture "Example 1" below. The gate markers are the green circles and the red line connecting them is what many of us use to determine if a gate has been cleared (progress). Judging this way means a gate is cleared when the wheel goes past this line.

Would you guys be for or against a rule that would define a "gate" differently? Shown in "Example 2" is a diagram of how some clubs define a gate. They define it as the red shaded area between the gate markers.
Judging this way means a gate is cleared when the wheel goes completely past the cone.


The reason for this is to be sure that all clubs and all events do it the same way. Not that one way is right or wrong. I have to cast a vote for us on the 17th.

[666]

"1" is what makes sense to me and is the way I have always done it.

Super class rule needs work as well Griz......

[Grizzly4x4]

Originally Posted by 666

"1" is what makes sense to me and is the way I have always done it.

There is one benefit to example 2 as I see it.
Assume you were to judge using the area method in example 2, and you were to judge progress by the whole tire being past that area. Some clubs do it this way.

There would never be the judges call as to whether the gate was cleared (progress) before or after the gate was touched. In order to clear the gate, the tire would have to be fully past the gate marker. Therefore any touch of the gate marker as the tire is passing by would be a penalty before the progress happens. This would make it a bit easier for the judges to call.

The way we judge it now, a gate touch could happen before, at the same time, or after, the gate is cleared. Then sometimes the dreaded "Did I get the progress or the gate first?" question comes up.

[Sparky J]

I would say #1

[engineerjoe]

I ref soccer games and the way the boundaries work on the field is that the "whole ball has to pass over the whole line". This does make it very easy to call and leaves almost no room for interpretation.

I think number 2 is the better choice for fair judging.

Edit* does the rule go off of the centerline of the axles or the back edge of the tires?

[TURTLE]

I can see the same issues in a sense occuring with both examples though in regards to progess and not hitting a gate, but the whole going through it and backing up thing.
Im personally more drawn to the first way. However I can see the second example being ammended a tad to make it easier. So rather then the whole area (which can be confusing) in example two, why not just use the front of the ball, at least while explained in a diagram. That way it still gets the point across to what you want but is still easy to see.
If that makes sense.

[cato]

Originally Posted by TURTLE

I can see the same issues in a sense occuring with both examples though in regards to progess and not hitting a gate, but the whole going through it and backing up thing.
Im personally more drawn to the first way. However I can see the second example being ammended a tad to make it easier. So rather then the whole area (which can be confusing) in example two, why not just use the front of the ball, at least while explained in a diagram. That way it still gets the point across to what you want but is still easy to see.
If that makes sense.

Scary, agreeing with Turtle I like 1.

[TURTLE]

Originally Posted by cato

Scary, agreeing with Turtle I like 1.

Oh you all do it anyway, its just admiting it is the hard part.

[chrisjlittle]

I'm kinda torn, I like the foolproofness of 2, but I know it'll screw me someday if we go that way. Seeing as I can consistently count on my driving to screw me regardless of the rules, I'm going with #2.

[Grizzly4x4]

Originally Posted by engineerjoe

I ref soccer games and the way the boundaries work on the field is that the "whole ball has to pass over the whole line". This does make it very easy to call and leaves almost no room for interpretation.

I think number 2 is the better choice for fair judging.

Edit* does the rule go off of the centerline of the axles or the back edge of the tires?

The rule says "wheel"; some people in other clubs have been using the wheel nut like we do. Others have been using the whole tire.
I forsee another discussion on the wording in the rules with "wheel" and possibly changing it to "tire" and a discussion about using the wheel nut. That would make my example in post #3 more relevant. I would like opinions on the wheel nut v.s tire debate but I would like to only discuss one thing at a time in this thread.

Originally Posted by TURTLE

Im personally more drawn to the first way. However I can see the second example being ammended a tad to make it easier. So rather then the whole area (which can be confusing) in example two, why not just use the front of the ball, at least while explained in a diagram. That way it still gets the point across to what you want but is still easy to see.
If that makes sense.

Well, based on the opinions presented it seems that the centerline and the area are the only ways people are looking at it so those were the only two suggestions. I see what you are saying but really there would be no difference as far as how a judge calls it if it were the area method (example 2) or a line at the far end of the cone like you suggest. You have to get past that edge of the cones to get your progress.

Originally Posted by TURTLE

I can see the same issues in a sense occuring with both examples though in regards to progess and not hitting a gate, but the whole going through it and backing up thing.

If you are referring to the examples that Stew brought up, that's what we are working on. Making it so that everyone calls things the same.
As far as the 2 tires (or 3 tires) through and getting progress. Sure you can clear a gate (get progress) by just sticking one front tire and one rear tire through the gate. But when you back up and drive around the gate Rule 1.5 kicks in and it will be a 10 point penalty for not having 4 tires travel through the gate, even if you don't straddle or touch a gate. This discussion will not change any of that.

[THnCS]

I know we judge currently by example one, but I know that #2 would definately take some of the guess work out of it like Joe said. The only thing that needs to be very clearly written is what point of Gate does progress occur and what has to cross it. Any way we go, in a close situation it will always be a judgement call in those situations. We can't make everyone happy all the time and life is never cut and dry sometimes. I think it should be worded simply and clearly. The Pictures help too

[Ralphy]

I personally don't see how it matters. I don't consider myself getting progress unless I drive all 4 wheel's through the gate....what's the real difference? Is it either your axles or your wheels go thru? Either way I pesonally don't care cause if my axles go thru chances are my wheels will be short to follow. Just not sure what that real question is I guess.

[70duncan]

This is a hard one. In order to help with how the judge sees it, I am voting on #2. Just because that way the judge and driver should have the same veiw at that point. Of course this will not always happen. I think it should be worded so that both axle nuts should pass entirely through the far side of the gate. I think the axle nuts is a easier plane to see than the round part of the tire and round part of the gate. Just my oppinion..

[skid plate]

Example one works for me.

Don't really need to change what has been workin.

Need to fix the judge's not payin attention and getting the rules we already have straight.

JMO


JC

[slowrockr]

Either way would still be hard to call sometimes, happens fast at times. I like 1 but could see the advantage to #2. 2 would need some defining as to just the wheel or whole tire through. But I don't really think either is a big deal, it's what a matter of an inch difference? Just cause it's the way we've always done it, here or at Nats, I'd say numero uno.

[Rogue]

I like the 1st one, mostly because it is the way we have been doing it. I know Joe used the soccer analogy, but in football you just have to break the plain to score, not that either one really matter for what we are doing though.

For me, I think that it is easier to see the center line of the gates to the center line of the axle then it is to see the trailing edge of the tire/wheel/nut to the edge of the gates. I do think that there should be a standard, and either way I think it is a good idea to get everyone on the same standard.

Just a thought:
If it really were to be an issue, we do use chalk to make the gates locations why not draw a line between the gates, weather it be the center line or edge of the gates and then determine if the center of the axle or entire tire has to pass that line. That way there is little to guess at, and is a pretty easy visual for the judge and driver to see progress.

[gordieb]

I'm partial to number 1, but it also needs some clarifying on what part of the rig is counted.
Such as the centerline of the axle, read as the nut/axle or the tire itself.

The official rules refer only to the "wheel" but if your running rovers vs claws you can see where some clarification needs to be done.

Personally I prefer the centerline of the axle passing the centerline of the gate.

Anyhow that's my 2cp

Gordie

[TwistedXT]

same here - 1 is how i always judged. honestly - i cant remember if someone had made example 1 but was unable to make example 2... its like 1 inch of difference. I can totally see the confusion though.

[Agama]

I like #1 as well. Seems to be working.

[STEW<CO>]

I think example 2 would be better, it just makes it easier to call for the judge.

I think it may be tougher to call a tire edge than an axle center line, but we should get used to it, because I think it will be in the rules by next year.