Hello Vital MTB Visitor,
We’re conducting a survey and would appreciate your input. Your answers will help Vital and the MTB industry better understand what riders like you want. Survey results will be used to recognize top brands. Make your voice heard!
Five lucky people will be selected at random to win a Vital MTB t-shirt.
Thanks in advance,
The Vital MTB Crew
Let all riders take their first run without receiving scores. Then take an intermission and let the judges rank them all together and release the scores once all the first runs are completed. The judges could compare all the runs on video, and get them stacked correctly. Give the riders 30 minutes after the scores are released to plan their second run. And then run the rest of the comp giving scores as they go. This would eliminate the need to "leave room" for higher scores. It doesnt seem so hard. Yes it would leave a larger time gap for shenanigans but it would be much more fair, and I doubt riders would disagree.
Let all riders take their first run without receiving scores. Then take an intermission and let the judges rank them all together and release the scores once all the first runs are completed. The judges could compare all the runs on video, and get them stacked correctly. Give the riders 30 minutes after the scores are released to plan their second run. And then run the rest of the comp giving scores as they go. This would eliminate the need to "leave room" for higher scores. It doesnt seem so hard. Yes it would leave a larger time gap for shenanigans but it would be much more fair, and I doubt riders would disagree.
That said, I'm glad that no one died, or appeared to get seriously hurt. Honestly, I feel guilty watching this event every year.
Someone commented above, that maybe the solution is to hold the scores until all of the first runs are completed. That's kind of strange to think about, in terms of the drama of the event, but might actually be a more fair approach.
Brendan Fairclough: you deserve way more than you got for your score, but I'm glad you got that McGazza award, at least.
*****I would caution that with all the “arm chair” demands for format changes, judging transparency, less tricks, more raw lines, and everything else- >>>that Red Bull -will one day just “pull the plug” on the whole contest itself - and says “f-this , it’s gotten to be more trouble than it’s worth”. Then in 2020 A.D. it ends up being: RAMPAGE sponsored by Lipton Ice Tea.....where everyone is on 29ers, wearing spandex, and the head judge is Richard Cunningham
Lacondeguy’s was my favourite but I do agree it was close between him and Reeder.
But if you want bias, look at the people’s choice winners. I think it was last year that Brendon was winning before he had even done his first run....
with the event being more of an all day jam than a contest
maybe in some years when the tech exists for live helmet cam VR tech beamed into our homes!
Judges need change how they view the process of doing their job. Currently they look at "Difficulty of Line, Air Amplitude, Control and Fluidity and Tricks and Style." But they cannot accurately judge those criteria if they are basing it off of what might happen. So they need to get together and create standards for as many of those criteria as possible, and for the criteria that rely solely on opinion, each judge will need to base what they witness a rider do and compare it to how close it came to what they think is "perfect execution."
I think that Criteria like Average Steepness of the line, Average Technicality of the line, Average Lip to Landing Distance of Jumps on the line, Dangers of the Line, Trick Execution and Trick Difficulty can all have one standard that is determined by the judges before the event, and is shared by them. Criteria such as How High a rider sent it, How Controlled the rider was, How Fluid they were, How Difficult the Trick is to execute on that feature, and How Stylish they were are all based on opinion, leaving each individual judge to compare how the rider did in those criteria compared to what the judge thinks is possible or is expecting.
I think that this approach would eliminate the need to "leave room for future scores" and would make the judging more consistent and accurate for all riders, regardless of when they drop, or what is their particular style (racer, huck fest guy, or slope style guy.) Because in reality, free ride is all about being free to ride down the mountain your way, not being forced to adopt some other rider's style in order to score well.
I like the 4 categories but it they need weighted differently.
Air and Amplitude 25 now, adjust to 35%
Style/Tricks 25 now, adjust to 10%
Line Difficulty -25 now, adjust to 35%
Fluidity - 25 now, adjust to 20%
Air and amplitude is easy
Style/Tricks - Rampage should be about where you're tricking, not what tricks. Low points for folks only tricking their dirt jumps at the bottom (and yes, Bizet did NOT get robbed in 2017)
Line Difficulty - Should be about the features, size, and steepness of the line, should also be set in stone before they drop in.
Fluidity - Shouldn't compare other riders to one another but more about how they ride their own line. are they charging, or is it noticeable that they being tentative before dropping into a section, obviously separating where they have to go slow, like right before DJ Brandt's chute etc.
Post a reply to: Rampage 2018