National DH Championships - Results

[thunter1]

Stromlo track improvements

The Stromlo track will be getter some more improvements before the next major event. Hope you can come and help out with the improvements that you suggested.
They are also moving the start up the hill to add another 30m vert.

Despite what many are saying about the track the best still end up winning, or placing near the top!

I think the reason Sam didn't attend was so another rider would gain qualifying points for the world cup round.

 

[GTkonaHORSE]

The Stromlo track will be getter some more improvements before the next major event. Hope you can come and help out with the improvements that you suggested.
They are also moving the start up the hill to add another 30m vert.

Despite what many are saying about the track the best still end up winning, or placing near the top!

I think the reason Sam didn't attend was so another rider would gain qualifying points for the world cup round.

You are correct but the best allways win down hill is getting there thanks to you guys the 4x needs to actually become a 4x track not some dodgey half assed jumps and crapp corners that didnt work.

 

[Musgrove]

4X track to change

Don't worry about the 4X track. It is set for some big changes for both 08WC and 09W. If you remember Glen only had a small strip of land/dirt to work with for the 07 event. The track was changed for 08 but not to any great extent.
The UCI want the track changed (as do I), made bigger and more technical. The finish area for both DH and 4X will also be changed extensively.
We may race two more races (NSW state round and one Club round) on the current track before it is changed. Although the track as will be raced for the World events is not likely to be open to the public only official races.
Being open to the public will always be a limiting factor at Stromlo as it is open during daylight hours to anyone who wants to ride it. So a 1.5 m drop or a 12m double on a 4X track will be in place for races but at other times it will be covered in dirt.

Jeff not Max

 

[...jim]

the grandstands were really a hit... not sure if jim trail thinks so as we did give him a real hard time while he was trying to film..

C'mon - no one even tossed anything!! I nailed the second take, and from there on it was all about art! (note: distance to mic, 10cm - distance to grandstand 50m)

 

[...jim]

To be honest, the only thing that would keep me attending the Nats next year is the combination of split practice and the cost.

If it were a two group split, I could live with the cost. No issues there.

With a three group split, no matter what the price it just doesn't stack up for me to make the trip.

On that, I don't really know about the volumes and operational constraints, but I'm sure there's a tipping point beyond which you'd have to cap the numbers regardless of how many groups the field was split into. Perhaps not in XC, but you just can't put 2,000 downhillers on a hill and do them justice over 3/4 days.

Given that, how do you limit the numbers? Do you say first in best dressed? Perhaps not, given the elite habit of not pre-entering. Or do you bin the Expert and Sport classes? It wouldn't be popular, but there'd still be clear-cut nat. champs crowned... Or do you insist on qualifying through the National Rounds...?

Dunno, just thinking aloud.

 

[sammydog]

Given that, how do you limit the numbers? Do you say first in best dressed? Perhaps not, given the elite habit of not pre-entering. Or do you bin the Expert and Sport classes? It wouldn't be popular, but there'd still be clear-cut nat. champs crowned... Or do you insist on qualifying through the National Rounds...?

Dunno, just thinking aloud.

I've had that very discussion with MTBA, and NSWMTB has been forced to think through the same issue for the state rounds. Is there a simple solution (or one that will be taken to with open arms by the punters)?? I would tend to think not.

Like or not, every venue has a finite number of riders it can handle. Venues will all differ, and I suspect Stromlo would actually be at the higher end of the spectrum for its potential rider capacity.

The question is, what makes the nats more prestigious. Total numbers of riders, or a limited field that has been forced to qualify or progress into the nats.

Continuing the thinking out loud....if you only do one event a year, should it be the nats??

Personally I wonder if there should be a clearer line of progression from club events into state and then national. As it stands, for a lot of people (myself included) the state and nationals are in essence a glorified shuttle weekend.

Mind you setting up a line of progression would not be popular to begin with, so the higher end races will always be very crowded. But as you alluded to, at some point something has to give with numbers. As the sport grows you just can't keep packing people in.

I really think getting an emphasis on the grass roots club level racing before you run off to the big events is essential, but that will force the clubs to look at why individual club race day numbers are small.

Had never put much thought into the culling of classes (sport or expert), but I guess that is another way of skinning the cat.

As you said, whatever is done in the future is unlikely to be popular, but if the sport keeps growing as we all want it to, something will need to give at some point. You can't keep splitting the practice groups.

 

[...jim]

One thing the big races do is attract media, audience and sponsorship - hence promote and grow the sport. I (for obvious reasons) think that's really important - and perhaps at the pointy end it's going to be more important that general participation one day. It's certainly the case with World Cup events. Dunno bout eg: Switzerland or France's national champs..? Anyone?

 

[scratchy]

OK, continuing with the thinking out loud policy.

Looking forward with growth maybe a way forward is to run 2 downhill coarses at the same time. Lots of hills have the capacity (more than 1 line) and it would allow twice as many people down the hill. The more entry levels (sports etc). Could have the easier track with the other track tweaked for the harder classes.

Yeah it would be crazy but for the Nats. there obviously needs to be a way to cope with volume while retaining quality.

 

[Daver]

At least we can allways get a pro opinion from you.Next time you get off your ass and help .You are a dead set oxygen thief.Both 4x and downhill tracks were fun but not up to nats standards at any level this is why numbers were down.
CORC in my opinion will and have run these races like a well oiled machine and i think got the nod from UCI for the world cup + 09 worlds based on there profesional performance and not on the tracks (as i really think they are way too easy for any level above club) and so does uci who have listed changes to be made .
P.s sam please post any working bees as we would love to help .

Funny. For the record I helped build Awaba, as well as many of the Sydney downhill tracks. Any other bold claims from you that I need to reject? The door's always open... Perhaps you could come to the next track building day up here, with a limited budget and a lot of gradient?

 

[GTkonaHORSE]

Funny. For the record I helped build Awaba, as well as many of the Sydney downhill tracks. Any other bold claims from you that I need to reject? The door's always open... Perhaps you could come to the next track building day up here, with a limited budget and a lot of gradient?

Funny that AWABA is not even in sydney .I thought you were criticising the event .
I am sorry that you cant read the post correctely as i said the tracks were the issue .You obviously run the events in sydney so it would be nice to get your profesional opinion next time.
P.S idid not even see you on the week end maybe it was the sausage sizzle that broke your heart through its disorganisation .

 

[sammydog]

One thing the big races do is attract media, audience and sponsorship - hence promote and grow the sport. I (for obvious reasons) think that's really important - and perhaps at the pointy end it's going to be more important that general participation one day. It's certainly the case with World Cup events. Dunno bout eg: Switzerland or France's national champs..? Anyone?

So what would be better for the media. A National Championships with a high rider turnout, or something more condensed with the cream of each category and people who have earned the right to be there?

Its obvious with the three group practice that the event is already stacked toward the elite classes, so the next progression may well be the people earning the right to attend.

OK, continuing with the thinking out loud policy.

Looking forward with growth maybe a way forward is to run 2 downhill coarses at the same time. Lots of hills have the capacity (more than 1 line) and it would allow twice as many people down the hill. The more entry levels (sports etc). Could have the easier track with the other track tweaked for the harder classes.

Yeah it would be crazy but for the Nats. there obviously needs to be a way to cope with volume while retaining quality.

I guess that all hinges on the capacity of the hill to get riders up. Buller with International and Abom would be awesome (although lift capacity may be an issue, catch a chairlift out the back to a shuttle??). Stromlo could surely cater for it trail wise, transport could be a logistical nightmare but achievable.

I think this idea is certainly a valid solution though.

 

[thunter1]

OK, continuing with the thinking out loud policy.

Looking forward with growth maybe a way forward is to run 2 downhill coarses at the same time. Lots of hills have the capacity (more than 1 line) and it would allow twice as many people down the hill. The more entry levels (sports etc). Could have the easier track with the other track tweaked for the harder classes.

Yeah it would be crazy but for the Nats. there obviously needs to be a way to cope with volume while retaining quality.

I think you have to start by deciding what the maximun number of entrants is, say 500.
Then allocate a minimum number to each category, which may vary. Apercentage of these would require some form of prequalification - perhaps gaining points from local & state and internalional races.
Whats left is first in best dressed!

Could be a headache to organise though.

 

[...jim]

So what would be better for the media. A National Championships with a high rider turnout, or something more condensed with the cream of each category and people who have earned the right to be there?

Mostly the latter (assuming mainstream media goals)... For media you're really only talking the elite and the senior jrs - and you would be less likely to end up in a position where eg: the trials is on at the same time as the elite XC and you don't have enough camerabodies to do justice to both. Neither would you need to dedicate three/four days to it
(4xcameradoods@$ x 4days=$$$$,$$$$,$$$$,$$$$).

Of course it's a sliding scale. In the current situation an all-elite Nats would mean minimal spectators, as the tracks are still mostly lined by entrants, and that doesn't exactly impart the image of a growing sport.

There are two ends of the scale - what we have now (which is about the riders and trying to encourage media) and invitation-only showcase events (like the Redbull Ride, which is ALL about media). Who knows what time will deliver.

 

[T-Rex]

08 Better

Just out of curiosity (and I ain't trying to inflame anyone), does reading some of the comments in this thread from people who attended (and organised) the 08 Nationals make you think that the 08 nationals were better than the 07 nationals?

Yep. I raced in both, and I really appreciated practice being split into three groups. In 07 we were waiting in the sun for 45 minutes or more to get on a shuttle, this year the buses were waiting for the riders. The split practice also provides the opportunity to watch other riders (my son was in group C, I was in B).

There were stacks of little improvements this year, from the spectators walking track (dodgey, but at least it's a start) to the extra shade tents in the pits, to the grandstands.

I was happy with it, will be going back, and will look forward to more improvements.

 

[thecat]

One thing the big races do is attract media, audience and sponsorship - hence promote and grow the sport.

Only 2 teams are granted access to the NRL grandfinal yet it still attracts a crowd and they still attract sponsorship billing it as the premiere event featuring the best of the best rather that the one with the most teams.

Fair comparison? I don't know.

Scratchies idea of 2 track set up is something I've been tossing around NSWMTB. I think the first couple of years may see whinging as bumblies will still want to race the same track as the elites.

So more thinking out loud

Stromlo has two tracks, would it not be possible to run the Champs (Featuring riders who qualify through being top 20 in their category at a state champs or a National round) on the main trail. And every one else at a glorified club/open race on the beginners trail.

The champ categories could race for prestige and maybe a pay check. The open categories race for a ribbon or medal

Then on the Monday those that wanted to hang around could switch with timed runs down the other trail so they could compare times, no podium, no prizes? (maybe something for best combined time?)

Massive undertaking with reguards to marshals and organising but we proved a 2 track race could work timingwise last year at the Lithgow Short course event.

Separating those who we know can ride, as they have qualified, from the bumblies by putting them on separate tracks may mean you have the numbers with out over crowding the trails and still giving people longer practice times. Even if the open track had 2 practice sessions (and cheaper entry)

Just my 2 cents

 

[ajay]

Only 2 teams are granted access to the NRL grandfinal yet it still attracts a crowd and they still attract sponsorship billing it as the premiere event featuring the best of the best rather that the one with the most teams.

Fair comparison? I don't know.

Scratchies idea of 2 track set up is something I've been tossing around NSWMTB. I think the first couple of years may see whinging as bumblies will still want to race the same track as the elites.

So more thinking out loud

Stromlo has two tracks, would it not be possible to run the Champs (Featuring riders who qualify through being top 20 in their category at a state champs or a National round) on the main trail. And every one else at a glorified club/open race on the beginners trail.

The champ categories could race for prestige and maybe a pay check. The open categories race for a ribbon or medal

Then on the Monday those that wanted to hang around could switch with timed runs down the other trail so they could compare times, no podium, no prizes? (maybe something for best combined time?)

Massive undertaking with reguards to marshals and organising but we proved a 2 track race could work timingwise last year at the Lithgow Short course event.

Separating those who we know can ride, as they have qualified, from the bumblies by putting them on separate tracks may mean you have the numbers with out over crowding the trails and still giving people longer practice times. Even if the open track had 2 practice sessions (and cheaper entry)

Just my 2 cents

Interesting point...

It has sort of bothered me that the "National Championships" is just as official as a club day, being that anyone who fronts up with cash can enter, in my opinion it detracts from the events prestige. In most other sports, the National Champs is a main event held that people have to quailfy to enter. Going back to when I used to compete in athletics (at national level), we had to come top 2 or 3 in the state just to qualify for the champs. Seriously cuts the numbers, but also a competition that is of "national champs" quality is maintained. Entry numbers are already known, start times can be held to a tee, practice, qualifying and presentations are also orchestrated like clock work. The National Series is fine how it is, but champs should be held with more prestige. I know it doesnt really allow for the financial issues risen by serverely cutting numbers as we struggle for cash enough as it is... Just thinking out loud...

 

[...jim]

Only 2 teams are granted access to the NRL grandfinal yet it still attracts a crowd and they still attract sponsorship billing it as the premiere event featuring the best of the best rather that the one with the most teams.

Fair comparison? I don't know.

The main difference there is that the NRL is a product, and the grand final the jewel in the crown. More correctly, boradcast of the NRL is a product - hence it costs a butload for the media rights - but that's ok, because, though years of marketing and history, the product that Ch9 pays for generates big-arse returns through advertising revenue. Same for the cricket, AFL and Olympics, etc.

MTB is a loooooong way from there, but continues to take baby-steps in that direction. Triathlon got quite a long way down that road for a while, with the St George (?) series on the telly - hence packaged...but I don't think they reached a stage where they were selling the rights - more likely providing the program as a vehicle for their sponsors - who in turn paid for it.

 

[thecat]

The main difference there is that the NRL is a product, and the grand final the jewel in the crown.

But would they have ever have got to that position if the Grand Final was open to any team able to pay and went for quantity over quality?


Sooner or later we are going to have to introduce a rider cap. The only fair way to do that is to qualify. The 2 track option allows this to happen without necessarily turning away the punters who provide the majority of the money that pays for the event.

Just an option to put out there and consider

 

[GT. so-cal for crack]

Ok, the NRL grand final is not a useful comparison, it's a totally different situation. DH is more similar for Formula 1, which allows anyone with a team and enough money to buy an entry (limited to 12 teams of 2 cars) from the FIA and not much else matters.

Rider caps are going to have to be established, this may not be popular as we in Australia don't like to pre-enter for some reason. The NPS rounds in the UK are rider limited and sell out very soon after entries open (usually months in advance)

Qualifying to ride would suck, but might need to be an option (though I think there are many other options that need to be exhausted first). I congratulate thecat for being the first so far to state that it's the lower categories ie. sport that actually pay for everyone else either directly or indirectly, if it weren't for all of those people who pay full price for their stuff how exactly would the rest get their sponsorships. So my question is why don't the concerns of these guys get more attention, and really all they want is to ride.

I think many people in the mtb world have forgotten the money and sposorship that was floating around in the good old days, anyone remember the Reebok Eliminator? Grundig WC? Volvo Cannondale? VW Trek? There was an arse load of money going around and TV to boot, the Reebok Eliminator was on LIVE in the US. To get back to this we need there to be professional events for professional riders run by private promoters who know how to make a profit, but these events shouldn't be the nationals which should be for everyone, they should be stand alone like the QashQai Challenge, Red Bull Ride etc.

I dunno if I made much sense but we all need to hear everyone's view to make things progress better.

 

[frdlvr]

Qualify for the Nationals

Wouldn't it be better if each state had a qualifying series, so top 5 or 10 of each state class made the main event. Then having the next five best riders able to slot in if riders were unable to attend.

I think this would attract coverage, sponsors and the best closest racing.

Off the topic a little is there a reason why Thredbo, Perisher Valley, Mt Buller could have a UCI approved world cup downhill track.