Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Author Topic: West Coast Baja 2016  (Read 38441 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline markdiver

  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: BMW R1200GS Adventure
    Location: North West
  • Posts: 581
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • It's better to burn out, than fade away!
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #320 on: March 30, 2016, 08:19:17 pm »
That's my point as well.

But aside from that Mark, did the guy in front know you were trying to get past? Because the rule of rally is you let someone behind you go through. I have not read the rules but not doing so is considered unsporting in many other rallies and comes with a heavy penalty if someone makes a complaint.

Actually I am not entirely with this rule to be honest.  If you racing someone, and in my case we were racing each other, he should not have to give way to me.  You know how it goes even with regular riding buddies, one day you faster than your mate and the next he is faster than you.  A sentinel system on the bike to warn for heavy motor car or truck coming through is a good thing, but for another biker I am not so sure, keeping in mind that if he started behind you, there was a reason for it, either he is generally slower, or he was penalized the previous day.  So in that case, let him have to work hard to get past you.  I am not in favour of having to look over my shoulder for faster bikes.  I ride my line as best and steady as I can, and it is on you to get by me.  Of course there is plenty of times you know who could be there, or you have seen them coming from below the hill, then of course I am letting them through as soon as and as safely as I can.  
Mine - BMW 1200 ADV, KTM 450 RR; HUSABERG TE 300; Goes 320 Quad
Missus - BMW 650 GS.

>< ( ( ((º >`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸.•´¯`•...¸>< ( ( ((º >
 

Offline Rokie

  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: BMW F650GS / Dakar
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 1,621
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #321 on: March 30, 2016, 09:06:50 pm »
Loving this thread! Thanks all for the participation and info.
I'm keyboarding this Baja as long as the Dakar . . .  :ricky:
Previously owned:
3 x Suzuki DR 600 (1986-ish model)
2 x Honda XR 200 (1985-ish model)
 

Offline Kamanya

  • Global Moderator
  • Grey hound
  • ***
  • Bike: KTM 950 Adventure S
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 5,717
  • Thanked: 782 times
  • Andrew to everyone
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #322 on: March 30, 2016, 09:22:01 pm »
Steve I am totally with Mark D on this.

A set penalty against a penalty that can be tactically manipulated creates a completly different mindset to speed zones.

It swings the balance in favour of really fast guys who are navigationally not as strong as quick guy who are great at navigation.

Rally is about navigation primarily, otherwise it swings towards enduro.

I get that braking 200m later into a zone attracts your algorithm and that yes, it is not as serious as riding for a few k's into a zone at full speed. But being awake to the roadbook is a massive part of rally and should favour those who can read it.

« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 09:27:04 pm by Kamanya »
Somedays, life's like a middlemannetjie.
 

Offline SteveD

Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #323 on: March 30, 2016, 09:55:42 pm »
Difficult to please everyone, yes, but I never expected it to be this difficult.

We have been bitched at in multiple Amagezas for being too harsh on speeding, and for nailing everybody that goes over the limit regardless for how long they are over the limit. The algorithm was simple, but bliksem people moaned. Points that were raised include that we do not have a system to warn riders of impeding speeding penalties, like they have in Dakar.
So we tried a different algorithm, one that takes away the time advantage gained by speeding, plus some. It follows FIM pretty much exactly regarding slow down zones, speed up zones (there are four different combinations to consider) but differs only in how it computes the magnitude of the penalty. It took a lot of work to implement, and even longer to test.

Riders don't like it.
Fair enough, but I would then ask that you propose an alternate solution/algorithm. I am not saying this in a bitchy "Well see if you can do it better" way, it is a genuine request that you propose something that you consider fair.

The SRs for Baja were as they were, and we can't change them retrospectively, but let's improve before the next event.
 

Offline luckyloo

  • Puppy
  • *
  • Bike: Yamaha TW200
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 24
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #324 on: March 30, 2016, 10:35:59 pm »
No neutralised time for stage 2?  I specifically asked at riders briefing as we knew day 1 was only neutralised in Alexander bay not at DSP. THe answer from Alex was that day 2 the DSP was a neutralised zone. So I lost an hour to people whom I passed on the route. This wasn't stated in provisional results then I would've appealed. Sorry for bitching but this doesn't seem right?
 

Offline BlueBull2007

  • Caribbean
  • Global Moderator
  • Bachelor Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: AJS (all models)
    Location: Other
  • Posts: 10,569
  • Thanked: 543 times
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #325 on: March 30, 2016, 10:44:48 pm »
Steve, I think the problem is that you're just too nice ;D

I reckon you need to get hard-assed, like Etienne Lavigne hard-assed. Maybe even learn and start speaking only in French. Start wearing white shirts and simply dictate. Then we will see the whining really crank up a notch. :laughing7: But it would probably make the Amageza more popular. You know what they say, there is not such thing as bad publicity!

I have not looked at an Amageza roadbook recently, but surely the the speed control zones look something like this?



Surely this is enough?

IOW between 117.33 and 118.08 if your gps shows over 50kmhr, you will be penalized for speeding. So as a rider you need to make sure you have slowed down to 50 at least 50-100m before 117.33 to ensure the gps does not leave a high speed crumb in the DZ.

I dont know how your algorithm works exactly but it should approximate the penalties in the Dakar:

For 1-20km/hr over any limit you get 30" per minute you spend over the limit plus €100 fine
For 21-40km/hr over any limit you get 1' per minute you spend over the limit €200 fine
For 41km/hr+ over any limit you get 5' per minute you spend over the limit €500 fine

Fines being due at the end of the day in cash :eek: Failure to pay means you are not allowed to start the next day.

How does one get around the minutes using GPS crumbs? I don't know but it cant be that hard to work out the average speed of each rider through a zone, surely? Then take the average speed from the crumbs in the zone and work out the time they should have been in the DZ multiplied by the above penalties.

Oh, and maybe change the fine to Rand amounts ;)

There will always be the bitches and moaners and guys threatening to go race somewhere else.  
Good for them - they will be missing out, that's all.

Anyway that's racing: You take the good with the bad. We need to learn to suck it up. I'll default to whatever the organization decides.

Pissies will never be heroes. :paw:
« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 10:45:44 pm by BlueBull2007 »
Rally nut. What could possibly go wrong?
Living the Rally Dream - Ride Report
Current bike: KTM 350 EXC   Previous bikes:  2010 WR450F, 2006 KTM450EXC,KTM 450RR, BMW800GS, KTM450EXC, BMW650 GS, BMW650 Dakar, and Honda XR250
 

Offline Weedkiller - Adie

Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #326 on: March 30, 2016, 11:07:27 pm »
No neutralised time for stage 2?  I specifically asked at riders briefing as we knew day 1 was only neutralised in Alexander bay not at DSP. THe answer from Alex was that day 2 the DSP was a neutralised zone. So I lost an hour to people whom I passed on the route. This wasn't stated in provisional results then I would've appealed. Sorry for bitching but this doesn't seem right?

NO, Alexander specifically said at the briefing the DSP 'is your own race time'.  I was also unsure and asked him specifically before our rider arrived at the DSP.  Mike lost about 15 min and 3 to 4 places over and above refueling before the loop and about 10 minutes on return.  At the end of the day it would made no diff in his final position as he was more than that behind the nearest competitor.   

To be honest I think most 450's only needed to refuel once at the DSP if I looked at the level in the tanks when they arrived.

Adie
Laat ons Stof maak.
 

Offline Kamanya

  • Global Moderator
  • Grey hound
  • ***
  • Bike: KTM 950 Adventure S
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 5,717
  • Thanked: 782 times
  • Andrew to everyone
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #327 on: March 30, 2016, 11:15:21 pm »
Steve, I think the problem is that you're just too nice ;D ......
 but it should approximate the penalties in the Dakar:

For 1-20km/hr over any limit you get 30" per minute you spend over the limit plus €100 fine
For 21-40km/hr over any limit you get 1' per minute you spend over the limit €200 fine
For 41km/hr+ over any limit you get 5' per minute you spend over the limit €500 fine


Oh, and maybe change the fine to Rand amounts ;)


maybe not the rand fines but certainly the time penalties.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 11:15:56 pm by Kamanya »
Somedays, life's like a middlemannetjie.
 

Offline GraZer

  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: KTM 790 Adventure R Rally
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 1,022
  • Thanked: 26 times
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #328 on: March 31, 2016, 06:08:22 am »
There is constant reference to the speeding algorithm that is used to calculate time penalties. Publishing the details of the algorithm would help in better understanding how it works.
 

Offline Dwerg

  • Bachelor Dog
  • *****
  • Bike: Triumph 900 Scrambler
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 12,357
  • Thanked: 533 times
  • No vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #329 on: March 31, 2016, 06:57:50 am »
Ah the joys of racing..... Two days riding followed by two weeks of bitching
Previous: KTM 690R, 790ADV, 640ADV, 950ADV, 250XCW BMW F650GS Single, F650GS Twin, F800GS, G450X, R50/2 Honda CRF450X, CRF230 x 2, VFR400 NC30, Z50 Mini Trail Yamaha BWS100 x 2, LB80 Chappy
 

Offline Cracker

  • Grey hound
  • ****
  • Bike: KTM 950 Adventure S
    Location: Europe
  • Posts: 6,123
  • Thanked: 637 times
  • Top Biscuit!
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #330 on: March 31, 2016, 07:40:45 am »
Difficult to please everyone, yes, but I never expected it to be this difficult.

We have been bitched at in multiple Amagezas for being too harsh on speeding, and for nailing everybody that goes over the limit regardless for how long they are over the limit. The algorithm was simple, but bliksem people moaned. Points that were raised include that we do not have a system to warn riders of impeding speeding penalties, like they have in Dakar.
So we tried a different algorithm, one that takes away the time advantage gained by speeding, plus some. It follows FIM pretty much exactly regarding slow down zones, speed up zones (there are four different combinations to consider) but differs only in how it computes the magnitude of the penalty. It took a lot of work to implement, and even longer to test.

Riders don't like it.
Fair enough, but I would then ask that you propose an alternate solution/algorithm. I am not saying this in a bitchy "Well see if you can do it better" way, it is a genuine request that you propose something that you consider fair.

The SRs for Baja were as they were, and we can't change them retrospectively, but let's improve before the next event.

So you say your algorithm follows FIM regarding slow down zones - that's fine then, don't touch it.

Just multiply the resultant penalty by a decent factor to give you a bigger/harsher penalty - or am I missing something here
Don't let fear hold you back ..... take it with you!
 

Offline Rynet

Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #331 on: March 31, 2016, 08:06:53 am »
I guess rules are rules and talking about the other way around , can you explain how 2 riders that did the route the wrong way around are still in the results ?Funny that !!

Page 18 of the Regulations : Driving ( on the course) in the opposite direction to that of the official route carries a 10 minute penalty and at the discretion of the races stewards can be increased or lead to a disqualification .


It was taken into consideration that the cause of the mountain loop being ridden the wrong way was the the GPS lite system which did not show that the rider was riding the route the wrong way and no clear marker at the split .
 The real losers are the 4 guys that rode the route the wrong way  , not the other riders.

By the time they discovered it they were too far in and fuel would have been an issue if they turned back . The 4 riders were the ones who gave way and pulled right off the tracks when the other riders approached . Despite that , and despite going some distance extra, and riding the route the more difficult way , through no fault of their own , they were actually the ones who suffered more than the other riders. They carried the penalties and the heart ache of riding so well and being pushed down the list of finishers.

It is unfortunate, but the issue had to be sorted before prize giving . I think it was a good call by Alex taking all the factors in consideration and giving a 30 minute penalty .
 

Offline Rynet

Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #332 on: March 31, 2016, 08:16:57 am »
Steve, I think the problem is that you're just too nice ;D

I reckon you need to get hard-assed, like Etienne Lavigne hard-assed. Maybe even learn and start speaking only in French. Start wearing white shirts and simply dictate. Then we will see the whining really crank up a notch. :laughing7: But it would probably make the Amageza more popular. You know what they say, there is not such thing as bad publicity!


......

Oh, and maybe change the fine to Rand amounts ;)

There will always be the bitches and moaners and guys threatening to go race somewhere else.  
Good for them - they will be missing out, that's all.

Anyway that's racing: You take the good with the bad. We need to learn to suck it up. I'll default to whatever the organization decides.

Pissies will never be heroes. :paw:

Regarding your comments about making the race control tougher and that the riders are bitches and moaners, well that gets my back up. These guys were the ones who paid their dues , they were the ones who put in the hard work to build up their bikes and to practice , and they took of work and pitched up at the start line and more importantly rode the event . They have every right to debate here .

 More often than not it is simply a matter of not enough information haven been given . Amageza is also still in it's infancy and growing so there is still lots to improve . Alex does listen to input and criticisms and Amageza does improve every year .

I thought the input here on this thread was most creative and interesting from riders and tech boffins , all of it valuable . It is a great way to improve on timing and results and create other technical assistance , brilliant !

 As for the riders moaning , it is a good barometer to see what they issues were and in some cases their complaints are real, in some cases it was simply not having the information or a misunderstanding  .

I enjoy this thread , and all the input .   :thumleft: Please don't squash the potential for creativity and growth .
 

Offline Geel Kat

Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #333 on: March 31, 2016, 09:08:06 am »
If nobody "moans and bitches" or like I would much rather put it "provide input as well as question and debate" no event will ever grow in the right way - Like Rynet I find it rather silly and counter productive to lash out at people who question things.

Telling the competitors to "grow a pair" actually goes both ways ;)

Having said that...

The guys who went the wrong way:
This was dealt with at the event within the rules of the event, with opportunity for other competitors to lodge complaints.

The speeding issue:
This (in my mind) should be really simple (not the math, the principle) in that no competitor should be able to benefit by speeding in controlled zones in any way, from the very first few meters to the very last meters (GPS accuracy taken into consideration).
In addition to that anyone who speeds in controlled zones should be penalised for increased danger.

This to me means that, should two guys ride exactly the same pace in the race areas but one speeds in the controlled zones in any way, the rider who was speeding should end up behind the rider who did not once penalties are calculated.

The introduction of a fine on top of this is something I do not agree with, I am a stingy bastard  :biggrin:

To repeat, the organisation and competitors jointly make an event like this, without one or the other there will be no event.
Collaboration is key to the growth of an event like this, even though it often leads to rather robust discussions.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2016, 09:28:49 am by Geel Kat »
 

Offline Airtime

  • Pack Dog
  • **
  • Bike: AJS (all models)
    Location: Western Cape
  • Posts: 53
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #334 on: March 31, 2016, 11:16:05 am »
Adie I think Martin is right as I also recall Alex saying that the DSP on day 2 was a neutral zone I also lost time due to this as I split my road book in 3 and wasted time. :xxbah:
 

Offline markdiver

  • Race Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: BMW R1200GS Adventure
    Location: North West
  • Posts: 581
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • It's better to burn out, than fade away!
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #335 on: March 31, 2016, 11:45:47 am »
I agree with you also Rynet, all points made are valid, no matter what, as it is a good barometer for what is being talked about in the pits and the general feeling.
For me the following is important and with some of my reasons.

1.   Speeding in any marked or controlled zone, should carry a significant penalty & possibly a fine. The fine is debatable here as you do not want to start losing riders who incur a couple grands fines, this is not going to be proactive or good for Amageza in the long run, considering our (SA) economic situation and affordability to SA competitors.  
2.   BUT, I still maintain there must a significant penalty to deter those who think that they can speed through these zones.   A 3sec penalty is not a penalty at all IMHO.  There should be a minimum amount for even the shortest and slowest contravention.  
3.   If you download the 2015 Dakar Regs and see pages 30-33 under section 23P Traffic-Speed, this is how it should be IMHO.
4.   This also aligns the Amageza with Dakar’s rules and since Amageza has this affiliation to Dakar with the “Dakar Challenge”, then why not afford the riders the chance to learn something during this race of what it will be like when and if they get to the Dakar.
5.   Again I should say, this is what this format of racing is all about.  I as a middle of the pack rider has the chance to gain significant placings in the race order if I am disciplined in all aspects, from speeding, arriving on time for my allotted start, looking after my bike, adhering to parc ferme rules, ensuring that I have all required equipment on my bike, etc.  This format of racing has never been about flat out speed, there are GOC’s and local enduro’s for that.  
6.   As important I think for Amageza, is the local impact.  If those of you who took part in the Namaqua 2015 rally will remember, that the beginning of the downfall in that race, was when those front runners were speeding through a controlled speed zone, passed the farmers house, some apparently even on the back wheel, which then spelt the end of that race.  The gate was immediately closed by the farmer and the race for that day was over.  And you all know how that turned out at the end and how pissed off the local community were.
 
YOU SPEED, YOU PAY THE PENALTY  ;D :thumleft:
« Last Edit: March 31, 2016, 11:50:44 am by markdiver »
Mine - BMW 1200 ADV, KTM 450 RR; HUSABERG TE 300; Goes 320 Quad
Missus - BMW 650 GS.

>< ( ( ((º >`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸.•´¯`•...¸>< ( ( ((º >
 

Offline BlueBull2007

  • Caribbean
  • Global Moderator
  • Bachelor Dog
  • ***
  • Bike: AJS (all models)
    Location: Other
  • Posts: 10,569
  • Thanked: 543 times
Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #336 on: March 31, 2016, 12:30:59 pm »
I enjoy this thread , and all the input .   :thumleft: Please don't squash the potential for creativity and growth .

:thumleft:

....Again I should say, this is what this format of racing is all about.[/b][/i]  I as a middle of the pack rider has the chance to gain significant placings in the race order if I am disciplined in all aspects, from speeding, arriving on time for my allotted start, looking after my bike, adhering to parc ferme rules, ensuring that I have all required equipment on my bike, etc.  This format of racing has never been about flat out speed, there are GOC’s and local enduro’s for that. 

As important I think for Amageza, is the local impact. ....


Spot on Mark!
Rally nut. What could possibly go wrong?
Living the Rally Dream - Ride Report
Current bike: KTM 350 EXC   Previous bikes:  2010 WR450F, 2006 KTM450EXC,KTM 450RR, BMW800GS, KTM450EXC, BMW650 GS, BMW650 Dakar, and Honda XR250
 

Offline Weedkiller - Adie

Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #337 on: March 31, 2016, 12:45:04 pm »
Adie I think Martin is right as I also recall Alex saying that the DSP on day 2 was a neutral zone I also lost time due to this as I split my road book in 3 and wasted time. :xxbah:

You should have used a Rockfox holder.  It could take the WHOLE 400 tulip roadbook one shot and the drives managed the extra load without an issue.  :pot:

I know the way Alex did talk about 'Wasting daylight' or some other 'bantering' and that was why I asked again at the DSP.

PROPOSAL for the ORG.
Add a comment at the DSP tulip to indicate if it is NEUTRALized.  This will address all issues in the future.

A
Laat ons Stof maak.
 

Offline Striggs

Re: West Coast Baja 2016 Updates
« Reply #338 on: March 31, 2016, 07:56:19 pm »
I guess rules are rules and talking about the other way around , can you explain how 2 riders that did the route the wrong way around are still in the results ?Funny that !!

Page 18 of the Regulations : Driving ( on the course) in the opposite direction to that of the official route carries a 10 minute penalty and at the discretion of the races stewards can be increased or lead to a disqualification .


It was taken into consideration that the cause of the mountain loop being ridden the wrong way was the the GPS lite system which did not show that the rider was riding the route the wrong way and no clear marker at the split .
 The real losers are the 4 guys that rode the route the wrong way  , not the other riders.

By the time they discovered it they were too far in and fuel would have been an issue if they turned back . The 4 riders were the ones who gave way and pulled right off the tracks when the other riders approached . Despite that , and despite going some distance extra, and riding the route the more difficult way , through no fault of their own , they were actually the ones who suffered more than the other riders. They carried the penalties and the heart ache of riding so well and being pushed down the list of finishers.

It is unfortunate, but the issue had to be sorted before prize giving . I think it was a good call by Alex taking all the factors in consideration and giving a 30 minute penalty .

My 10c worth....

these guys DID NOT pull over and get off the track as mentioned above.  That's from 3 of us that did the loop the correct way....there is also a video that has been uploaded elsewhere on this forum(not by me) that also clearly shows no effort to move aside.. Go find it and judge for yourself...  Law of averages dictate whether the route was accurately marked/plotted or not, how come the majority did not make this obvious error?

To say that the gps track didn't indicate the direction of travel is bollocks. When I stopped at the DSP, I saw that the routes shared a common road, so I did the obvious and logical thing...stop, zoomed in and checked the numbering of the waypoints, yes they were CLEARLY numbered, i.e. 93 94 95 etc.  so I followed the obvious, correct and safe route.  Why would I go from point 93 to 284 and proceed backwards to 283, 282 etc.  If, and only if, some serious mishap had happened, i.e. A head on collision, then all of this debate would become a more serious issue and we would not be bantering on about 30 mins here and there. We can go on about whether it was more difficult or not, the point is that they did a 90km section of the route incorrectly.  I don't believe that the 10 minute penalty is designed for a 90km error, but rather a minor deviation.  To suggest that the guys doing the route the wrong way around are the losers is ludicrous?  They simply did not follow the route. The essence of rally riding in my opinion is the ability to go fast and safe while navigating ACCURATELY. So would your argument be that if the route was easier the other way around they should get a bigger penalty?  What about the rest of the riders who suddenly felt the anxiety of potentially coming across more competitors racing in the wrong direction, thus slowing down to potentially avoid a life threatening situation? Shouldn't we be given some time to compensate for easing off?

I have had my fair share of protests and decision making being an organizer and MSA Steward/COC in the past, it is a thankless task.  My money would have been on disqualification. I think Alex took the soft decision. If it was me having gone the wrong way, I would have expected nothing less than a disqualification.  First rule of Motorsport is safety of ALL competitors and spectators.  Bottom line is that it was downright dangerous, caused by an error of navigation, NOT the organizers fault.

My overall experience of the event was great, I would do it again in a flash.... The privilege of riding in that area is priceless... But next time I see somebody going in wrong direction, I will make damn sure that my protest money is ready....
Apologies, that 10c turned into 50c...
GSA 1250, Vespa 300 6 Day, KTM 250 TPi, Vespa 946, KTM 790 Rally, BMW R9T Scrambler
 

Offline Striggs

Re: West Coast Baja 2016
« Reply #339 on: March 31, 2016, 08:13:19 pm »
https://youtu.be/KDLa7ctPaec

Watch at 2:10... Shows just how easily something can go wrong... No attempt to get off the track as 2 bikes approach....
GSA 1250, Vespa 300 6 Day, KTM 250 TPi, Vespa 946, KTM 790 Rally, BMW R9T Scrambler