Competition Formats

Roger on 30/06/2013

I was at Another World Adventure Centre this weekend to help out with the boarderx competition for their Away Day.

On Saturday we used the old system of three timed runs to qualify the riders into a list of fastest to slowest, and then sort them into races. This system works best with thirty two, or even sixteen riders, going into four man races, but it this case we had fourteen riders doing two man races. With a few tweeks such as not using the folding method to put the best against the worst but instead stacking them so rider 1 competed against rider 8 and rider 7 against rider 14 so the ability gap wasn’t quite so big at the opposite ends, the system worked adequately.

On Sunday, when we were running the whole thing again, I decided to experiment with a different system. It was based on the ‘Challenge Threes’ system I developed years ago for fun comps that don’t really want to use knockouts to find a winner. With a few adaptations for such small numbers we ended up with this:

Split the riders into two equal groups, the best in group one and the worst in group two. For the first race, the riders compete against riders in the same group, but the riders who come first in their race go into group one and those who come second go into group two. This happens for each race meaning half the riders from each group change groups each time so there is variety in who races who. Riders who win in group one get four points, second gets three points, first in group two gets two points and last gets one point. Then, once the riders have had enough races we add up all the points they’ve earned and announce the winner.

Its a really simple system that can be run on a couple of sheets of paper and gives the riders as many races as they want. It also made me think that the ATBA-UK should publish the different competition systems it uses to make it easier for centres to run competitions more easily.

Understanding rider progression

Roger on 02/06/2013

We know people learn by starting with being unconsciously incompetent (don’t know what they don’t know), then they become consciously incompetent (know what they don’t know), then as they practice the trick they become consciously competent (have to think about what they do in order to do it), and after having learned the trick and practiced enough they become unconsciously competent (they can do it without thinking about it).

If we plotted a riders progression as they learn a new trick on a graph with Ability on the y and Time on the x axis, I bet it would go up in steps. The ‘up’ bits are the rider going through the learning process to become consciously competent, and the ‘along’ bit is the rider performing the trick with unconscious competence.

Rider Progression Graph

I have absolutely no science to back any of this up, but I reckon the optimum progression rate would have an overall plot angle of 45 degrees. If the rider progresses at a steeper angle they aren’t giving themselves time to become unconsciously competent, and when it comes to doing complicated tricks in the air the rider doesn’t have much time to think about getting it right. Steep progression angles seem to have a higher risk of injury.

A rider can progress at a shallower angle, but they may become bored. Everyone learns at a different rate, and finding the right progression rate and setting yourself a timetable that says you aren’t going to try the next trick until you’ve done this trick a certain number of times, you may help get better without getting injured. And maybe part of the job of a good Instructor is to help riders progress in this way.