Would You Like a Rule That Eliminated Some Lapped Riders?

Motoxdoc
Posts
2613
Joined
11/8/2009
Location
Steamboat Springs, CO US
11/18/2013 6:24pm
TripleFive wrote:
This is obviously just bench racing, but the question came to me last night: In the interest of safety, does SX need a rule that would...
This is obviously just bench racing, but the question came to me last night:

In the interest of safety, does SX need a rule that would systematically black flag riders that are essentially out of the race?
There comes a point in every SX race where the leaders are forced to negotiate a track filled with moving chicanes. At that point, these backmarkers are nothing more than a dangerous interference. Sure, they do add some excitement, but I hate seing a third party effect the outcome of a fierce battle.



The rule could read something like this:

Riders are eliminated when:
1. They are lapped twice by the leader, or
2. They are the last active rider on the track one lap down, after ten laps have been completed.
That depends on if I'm leading or chasing...or, if the racer I'm cheering for is leading or chasing. Leading; get those friggin lappers outta there! Chasing; throw in all the lappers you can find! Actually, for real....I think if someone qualifies for a national or SX, let them race till the checkers fly!
Tarz483
Posts
6352
Joined
2/25/2009
Location
Mankato, MN US
Fantasy
379th
11/18/2013 6:54pm
TripleFive wrote:
This is obviously just bench racing, but the question came to me last night: In the interest of safety, does SX need a rule that would...
This is obviously just bench racing, but the question came to me last night:

In the interest of safety, does SX need a rule that would systematically black flag riders that are essentially out of the race?
There comes a point in every SX race where the leaders are forced to negotiate a track filled with moving chicanes. At that point, these backmarkers are nothing more than a dangerous interference. Sure, they do add some excitement, but I hate seing a third party effect the outcome of a fierce battle.



The rule could read something like this:

Riders are eliminated when:
1. They are lapped twice by the leader, or
2. They are the last active rider on the track one lap down, after ten laps have been completed.
I guess Im in the minority but I'd like to see it. Get lapped once, get off the track. Too many guys just going thru the...
I guess Im in the minority but I'd like to see it.

Get lapped once, get off the track.

Too many guys just going thru the motions out there. I'd like the rule because it would force them to go all out all the time.
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off the track too . ???
11/18/2013 7:31pm
Tarz483 wrote:
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off...
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off the track too . ???
That rule doesn't discriminate and the riders would understand the consequences of losing a lap.

But as I had originally set out, the riders wouldn't be removed until after the halfway point and would start with the riders that are in last. If RV is in dead last after the halfway point in the race chances are his night is already over.
11/19/2013 9:59pm
Mxdnusa wrote:
They may not be racing the leaders but they are racing none the less.
"Racing" and "Riding" are two different things.

Just because youre going around the track doesnt mean you are "racing".
I give credit to every rider that makes it in the final field. MX is not Nascar. Nascar would not allow one team to have a...
I give credit to every rider that makes it in the final field. MX is not Nascar. Nascar would not allow one team to have a tire advantage. Nascar will provide the fuel. Nascar will not pull up banners that block spectator viewing. Nascar has roll bars. I see guys in 30th place haul'n ass and racing in MX. The factory riders are naturally faster, are riding factory suspension, have factory EFI module settings and one off tire compounds. With all these advantages, there will be some extremely talented riders who will get lapped.
Im not trying to discredit anyone's talent or the inherent risks of riding SX. Both are high.

Nor do I overlook the difference between the "haves" and the "have nots".

I know how much factory tires and factory suspension can make a difference. But the truth is, you could put EVERY single rider on a factory bike and the order or gaps wouldnt change much. Some guys only race on Saturdays. Races are won Monday-Friday IMO. And very few in this sport maximize the talent and gifts they have. Which is a different topic. But it's relevant when you start to bring up the disparities between bikes. Until I see a 17th place backmarker put in a Dungey type effort during the week, he doesnt have a right to complain about the gap in equipment.

Currently, there are more "quality" rides out there than has ever been. In the last few years we've seen more teams with factory bikes leased than ever before and not enough A-listers to fill the seats cause of this sports penchant for producing burnouts like JLaw & others.

The Shop

11/19/2013 10:05pm
TripleFive wrote:
This is obviously just bench racing, but the question came to me last night: In the interest of safety, does SX need a rule that would...
This is obviously just bench racing, but the question came to me last night:

In the interest of safety, does SX need a rule that would systematically black flag riders that are essentially out of the race?
There comes a point in every SX race where the leaders are forced to negotiate a track filled with moving chicanes. At that point, these backmarkers are nothing more than a dangerous interference. Sure, they do add some excitement, but I hate seing a third party effect the outcome of a fierce battle.



The rule could read something like this:

Riders are eliminated when:
1. They are lapped twice by the leader, or
2. They are the last active rider on the track one lap down, after ten laps have been completed.
I guess Im in the minority but I'd like to see it. Get lapped once, get off the track. Too many guys just going thru the...
I guess Im in the minority but I'd like to see it.

Get lapped once, get off the track.

Too many guys just going thru the motions out there. I'd like the rule because it would force them to go all out all the time.
Tarz483 wrote:
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off...
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off the track too . ???
Dungey has electric start. So kinda unlikely he doesnt get it started.

But that wasnt your question....

Was your question, should we keep the rules as is in order to cater to the stars? In principle, the anti-lapper rule is meant to cater to the stars by getting the rest of the "show" off the track so the real race can go on.

I guess I just dont understand your question. The "stars" of this sport are already allowed to go off track and skip portions of the track to make up ground & regularly make passes during cautions. So lets not act like favortism doesnt go on. Hell, the title sponsor of the entire series also is the title sponsor of the top rider.... conflict of interest much?


Whatever. No rule like this would ever go through. It's just fun to discuss. It doesnt really matter.
GuyB
Posts
35693
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA US
Fantasy
1274th
11/19/2013 10:51pm
You guys are doing an awesome job arguing about a hypothetical rule change. Keep up the good work.
gotwings
Posts
850
Joined
7/11/2010
Location
Nor Cal, CA US
11/20/2013 10:31am
Its long overdue.
Lefty Right
Posts
733
Joined
5/20/2009
Location
Carmichael, CA US
12/3/2013 5:27pm
I guess Im in the minority but I'd like to see it. Get lapped once, get off the track. Too many guys just going thru the...
I guess Im in the minority but I'd like to see it.

Get lapped once, get off the track.

Too many guys just going thru the motions out there. I'd like the rule because it would force them to go all out all the time.
Tarz483 wrote:
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off...
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off the track too . ???
Dungey has electric start. So kinda unlikely he doesnt get it started. But that wasnt your question.... Was your question, should we keep the rules as...
Dungey has electric start. So kinda unlikely he doesnt get it started.

But that wasnt your question....

Was your question, should we keep the rules as is in order to cater to the stars? In principle, the anti-lapper rule is meant to cater to the stars by getting the rest of the "show" off the track so the real race can go on.

I guess I just dont understand your question. The "stars" of this sport are already allowed to go off track and skip portions of the track to make up ground & regularly make passes during cautions. So lets not act like favortism doesnt go on. Hell, the title sponsor of the entire series also is the title sponsor of the top rider.... conflict of interest much?


Whatever. No rule like this would ever go through. It's just fun to discuss. It doesnt really matter.
ShockedDizzy
Outsider
Posts
10637
Joined
1/29/2009
Location
Huntington Beach, CA US
12/3/2013 5:32pm
Tarz483 wrote:
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off...
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off the track too . ???
Dungey has electric start. So kinda unlikely he doesnt get it started. But that wasnt your question.... Was your question, should we keep the rules as...
Dungey has electric start. So kinda unlikely he doesnt get it started.

But that wasnt your question....

Was your question, should we keep the rules as is in order to cater to the stars? In principle, the anti-lapper rule is meant to cater to the stars by getting the rest of the "show" off the track so the real race can go on.

I guess I just dont understand your question. The "stars" of this sport are already allowed to go off track and skip portions of the track to make up ground & regularly make passes during cautions. So lets not act like favortism doesnt go on. Hell, the title sponsor of the entire series also is the title sponsor of the top rider.... conflict of interest much?


Whatever. No rule like this would ever go through. It's just fun to discuss. It doesnt really matter.
ShockedDizzy
Way to bump a thread from two weeks ago just add another "homoticon"...
12/3/2013 9:43pm
For sure they should find away to get rid of some lappers.
I don't know how they would go about it but there is lots of races were a guy is just riding around and not racing. 12th and 13th are battling and they get lapped, no they shouldn't get clipped but we have all seen the guy who is doing sweet fuck all coasting around the track. That's the guy they need to figure out how to get rid of.
12/3/2013 10:13pm
Wouldn't it make the battle for last on the track much more interesting?
Radical
Posts
2250
Joined
10/20/2012
Location
San Diego, CA US
Fantasy
2321st
12/3/2013 10:27pm
Let 'em race. It makes the racing interesting. They are the fastest racers in the world. They have a right to finish.
They've earned it.
12/3/2013 10:36pm
Radical wrote:
Let 'em race. It makes the racing interesting. They are the fastest racers in the world. They have a right to finish.
They've earned it.
What about the guy who finished third in the LCQ?
Radical
Posts
2250
Joined
10/20/2012
Location
San Diego, CA US
Fantasy
2321st
12/4/2013 1:27am
Radical wrote:
Let 'em race. It makes the racing interesting. They are the fastest racers in the world. They have a right to finish.
They've earned it.
TripleFive wrote:
What about the guy who finished third in the LCQ?
Qualifying for the evening event puts a racer into that elite category, even the last place guy in the LCQ. If a racer is rolling everything there's most likely a reason other than just getting tired.

They've paid their entry fees, they've paid their dues, let them race.
flower87
Posts
49
Joined
12/3/2013
Location
AU
12/4/2013 3:26am
Interesting disussion. The purists will say no way it's racing, but there are occasions backmarkers get in the way in a bad way. My answer would be:
5 years ago, yes, today, No. 5 years ago, the guys coming 18, 19, 20 are the likes of Jeff Alessi, Matt Boni etc. today the field is deep and they would be lucky to make the night show. Next year, 18, 19, 20 will be (and no offence to them) Chisholm, M.Alessi and Albertson. My point is; These guys may get lapped but will be riding flat out, and would only ever go 1 lap down.
lumpy790
Posts
9145
Joined
9/18/2007
Location
York, SC US
12/4/2013 8:35pm
GuyB wrote:
You guys are doing an awesome job arguing about a hypothetical rule change. Keep up the good work.
Laughing
they qualified....they earned the right to race to the checkers.
lumpy790
Posts
9145
Joined
9/18/2007
Location
York, SC US
12/4/2013 8:36pm
I guess Im in the minority but I'd like to see it. Get lapped once, get off the track. Too many guys just going thru the...
I guess Im in the minority but I'd like to see it.

Get lapped once, get off the track.

Too many guys just going thru the motions out there. I'd like the rule because it would force them to go all out all the time.
Tarz483 wrote:
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off...
So if villopoto or dungey tip over and can't get there bike started right away and go a lap down . Do u kick them off the track too . ???
Dungey has electric start. So kinda unlikely he doesnt get it started. But that wasnt your question.... Was your question, should we keep the rules as...
Dungey has electric start. So kinda unlikely he doesnt get it started.

But that wasnt your question....

Was your question, should we keep the rules as is in order to cater to the stars? In principle, the anti-lapper rule is meant to cater to the stars by getting the rest of the "show" off the track so the real race can go on.

I guess I just dont understand your question. The "stars" of this sport are already allowed to go off track and skip portions of the track to make up ground & regularly make passes during cautions. So lets not act like favortism doesnt go on. Hell, the title sponsor of the entire series also is the title sponsor of the top rider.... conflict of interest much?


Whatever. No rule like this would ever go through. It's just fun to discuss. It doesnt really matter.
Dungey stalled it in front of me at Red Bud..... it started back in the pits.

Post a reply to: Would You Like a Rule That Eliminated Some Lapped Riders?

The Latest