Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but Premium users receive great benefits. Premium benefits include:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2026 SX, MX, and SMX series.
Yes I’ve flagged for ama this year and also the Feld flag crew in years past.
Ana pays their flaggers and Feld pays their flaggers.
2 separate crews.
AMA runs the reds, gets no training.
Feld runs the yellows, gets training.
Feld gives a freaking class that goes on for hours before you go on track.
AMA hands you a wad of flags and a deal to operate the reds. Tells you how to call a code on the radio but no other training. 5 minutes tops.
I know more than a few of the ama flaggers who are pissed at this whole thing. They know it should be better.
Unfortunately they are not the decision makers.
Jo got the raw end of this.
The 450 one, it’s always been a shit go losing points when it would be so hard to react perfectly to the red flags at the speed and intensity they’re doing.
Surely no one wants to win a championship that way any way.
If they passed Hunter because of yeah dock them.
But they didn’t. Bring the helmet communication and be done with this crap.
In addition to the communications that many are talking about. It makes sense not only for safety, for crashes. But it also would get people out of the way as far as lappers. "Friese, move to the inside, you are about to be lapped." Have a team of viewers that, are on comms, only for safety reasons. Not coms, for passing your competition. Or, the other option is, add a light on front fender that goes red, just like the 1s place rider has. You have a blue light for being lapped, and red for no jumping. It seems pretty simple.
Can't believe this has gotten this complicated.
If it isn't in the rule book and nobody knows it exists, then there is no lead in light rule. AMA may have intended for it to exist, but it does not exist.
Yet there were lights on the track and there is a rule in the rule book about red lights on jump faces and everyone knows what it means. There's nothing in the rule book that says this light means something different than this one, so any rider who knows the rule book doesn't jump if they see those lights.
Pierce Brown made it very clear after the race that he jumped because he didn't see any lights. He didn't say "well those are lead in lights and it's OK to jump if there isn't a flag following them."
Nobody knew about lead in lights and AMA has nothing to reference to say that they should have.
So they got the 250 ruling wrong.
As for 450, again, there is no rule about lead in lights. There is a rule about jumping on the red cross flag. That's it. It's that simple. Enforce the rule just like you always have.
If you're going to not enforce that rule and state that it's because the lead in lights are so closely tied to the red cross flag that the rule can't be enforced without them, that's effectively saying the lead in lights are a warning about an upcoming red cross flag........... and if that's the case, you can't in the same press release say Jo should have just jumped the jump despite the red lights.
Both rulings are wrong and the AMA logic for one makes the other doubly wrong.
I have no dog in this fight but it's a real problem that the AMA can't follow their own rule book and apply some basic logic.
The Shop
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
Free shipping: VITALMX
Like I had posted on other post. This is the real question for the future.
"So the real question is. If the light isn't on, because some flag guy forgot to trip the switch but has red cross flag out, and riders jump into another downed rider, and someone gets seriously injured or killed. Is AMA responsible for said? I mean, it's their PR now. They stated it plainly and clearly as a matter of fact. Let's hope it doesn't happen, but it is now a legal fact written for all to see.
Quot
Pretty sure it was…..”I’ll fuck you till you love me”
I believe the red lights were on the landing of the double not the face which adds another layer.
It's no difference from what happen on Saturday, right? They didn't see the red cross so they jumped. If it was a decision to jump or not by the rider doesn't matter for liability. It can happen already today also that they forget to put out a flag.
As with yellow flag, you have to decide as a rider if you see the red cross without lights, is I worth it. If you don't see it, it's not a question.
Lars asking for 5 extra points after Hunter winning the Main is crazy.
It's not crazy when that's what the penalty calls for.
So if a rider is down in the whoops and they wave the cross flag no one has to slow down since there is no lead in lights?
No, if there is lead in lights, which AMA (claim they) will brief about during riders meeting, lead in lights apply. Since this is track design dependent.
I'm guessing here also: briefing may have fallen between chairs since after 30 rounds or so (excl outdoors), it's been taken for granted that finish line always have lead in due to steep jump face. Or lights before jumps always has lead in function (single light).
They have made a difference in communication, between light and lights indicating lead in is single and normal with red cross is dual/triple/all.
Wouldnt be surprised if operator error occurs also as part of the mix. But again, just guessing from what has been said.
We just haven't had any altercation until now.
I am positive it was operator error, I'm just playing devils advocate. Since the answers they gave contradict each other and the rules say it black and white, without lead in lights and a flag just go for it. I always try to give the AMA the benefit of the doubt but the mucked this up bad and their answers look worse than the incidents.
Anyone else more confused about the newest term "lead in lights" than the ruling for both incidents? WTF is a lead in light? Were the riders even told about this in the riders meeting? I've been watching this sport since I was 7 back in '96. I've never once heard the term "lead in lights" going up to an obstacle. There's always just been lights on the supercross triples and finish line jumps for the longest time. And if you jump when the lights are on, you get penalized. Now that's changed, and then the red cross thing... This whole thing has to be a cover up of AMA not telling anyone what those lights mean, AND why tf are those lights on the landing of that jump?
No, not the same. In one case, it was known by rules and not seen by riders. Thus, legally covered possibly. In another it was said it doesn't matter unless both lit. Thus, statement makes a difference. Jmho
"...you have to decide as a rider if you see the red cross without lights, is I worth it...
Are you out of your mind?
The point of a rule such such as "don't jump on the Red Cross flag" is to relieve the riders from having to decide for themselves whether or not it's safe to jump/race through a section at a particular time. The riders are operating at the very edge of human reaction times - at levels beyond the abilities of 99.9% of humans - so there's not really any time to deliberate about what the flag means in this particular case. It needs to be automatic that the flag means one very definite thing (e.g. wheels on the ground) every time you see it. You can add lights to draw more attention to the Red Cross flag, and stipulate - as the rulebook currently does - that the lights mean the same as the flag. But to do anything less - to make the flag optional in some cases - pretty much guarantees that riders will be less likely to obey the flag. If they err on the side of rolling a section and their competition is not so cautious and the lack of caution is not penalized, then that's a huge disincentive for caution.
You are defending the AMA's stance on this about as well as it can be defended, but I don't see their stance as defensible. I see it as dangerous and as taking something that has been clearly understood and typically works and unnecessarily muddying the waters. There are instances where riders haven't seen the flag so adding extra lights in some places to enhance awareness of the flag could surely be done without making the flag optional in some situations.
I have never said the system is great, keep it as is and make no changes, have I?
I am however defending that they made the right call, from the information that is known and based on that the rider has received the information about lead in lights.
You already today, have to decide for every yellow flag, if you are to jump or not. It's no difference with a red cross flag, but you know the stakes will be higher.
And I have said it in another thread, no pro rider will willingly jump a jump with a hidden landing if they see a red cross flag. That is potentially evening, season, and/or career ending. The red cross protects them as much as rider or staff on the ground.
Do you think anyone of the 3 450 riders would have jumped, if they saw the flag?
And again, not saying it should stay like this.
That's fair. I apologize if I mischaracterized what you're doing.. You're explaining the AMA's position very well. In my view, the more clear it becomes the more clearly wrong it seems.
Pit Row
Your gimmick isn’t funny or really working like you think it is. Go back to posting about Magoo and how Yamaha in the 1970s and 80s was the coolest thing ever.
"Pierce Brown made it very clear after the race that he jumped because he didn't see any lights. He didn't say "well those are lead in lights and it's OK to jump if there isn't a flag following them."
This part right here. On the Monday night Pulp show, Brown said something to the effect of "Sunday morning I saw a screenshot of me jumping on red lights, and I thought 'oh shit'". He had no clue about the lead in lights. Otherwise his response would have been what you said and not "oh shit". Seems that nobody knew about these lead in lights except the AMA. It was nice hearing Steve go hard on the AMA for the 450 situation, but I think made up "rules" about new lights with piss poor (at best) communication to the riders and teams is almost as bad.
I would think the riders are now going to err on the side of taking chances instead of caution like Jo did. So we likely see this again. If they penalize Honda for jumping on a red light people are going to wig out.
You think they would take a chance to end the night, season or career, if it isn't last corner championship on the line? If they see the flag and jumping blind, i doubt anyone jump.
All they have to do is say they didn't see the flag or they were already committed, precedent has been set
What I haven’t seen anyone mention about this incident so far is this: when you rely on a lead-in light (an electronic system) and a red cross flag (held by a human), and both are only considered valid when they are shown together, the system is already made to fail by design.
If you really want to go down that road, then at least install red lights both before and on top of the finish-line jump. That way, they can be triggered at exactly the same time, or even with a slight programmed delay, activating the lead-in light first and then the one on the jump face a second later, depending on the distance between them.
This would prevent the situation where a rider has already passed the lead-in light when it turns on and only sees the one on the jump face. At the very least, that would make this stupid idea function properly.
Yes, but do you think anyone will take the chance? I don't see it.
They are already jumping and missing red cross because there is no warning. Net net, the effect must be better because i doubt the system will fail more often than they would miss the flag and jump anyway, as Saturday.
This is only on 2 maybe 3 (?) sections on the track. Finish line + triples (now large doubles). It's not every red cross.
Mike Peltier (sp?), the AMA and Feld all painted themselves into a corner on this one. No matter what, they can't defend their position.
That's why it's best to never lie. That way, you don't have to remember to whom you told which lies.
The rulebook is what it is. Defend that.
Would have been easier to just levy penalties all around, then point to the rulebook and say "This is what you signed up for". It's case closed at that point
Post a reply to: No Flag or Red Cross Violations at Texas: Kellen Brauer