2010 Rules alteration: 9.2 Starting Ramp

[Gary Fluitt]

Just reading the rules and I think the ramp specification has become obsolete. We have seen the advancement of mega ramps at all sorts of events from Johnny Miller's Thunderdome starts to the newly created Dixie Byrd-ramp-on-steroids.

Problem I'm trying to solve: Avoiding someone having a problem with a large (or small) ramp which then becomes a violation of the sanction for the race. A racer could claim the Dixie ramp doesn't meet the current criteria and therefore, it's unallowable. Unless it was approved somewhere else in the sanction, in which case, why have the rule?

Imagine someone claiming thunderdome doesn't meet the specs and therefore the race results are nullified.

I do think the race organizer has the responsibility to describe the start ramp idea with a fair amount of accuracy, (we're going to have an 8' start ramp that attaches to the top of my minivan) but I don't think ANY specifications should be placed on the ramps anymore. The racer should know what they are going to be expected to be able to ride down so they can decide if this is a race for them or not, but we don't need the specs.

CURRENT
Start platforms shall:
• Be a minimum of 0.75m tall.
• Be a maximum of 2m tall
• Be a maximum angle of 45 degrees from horizontal
• Contain transitions of minimum radius 1m
• Be placed no closer than 4m from the 1st cone in the course.
• Provide hand-holds for the racer to pull on for propulsion from the start
• Have a signaling device placed such that the timing equipment can be signaled when the racer starts from the ramp.

PROPOSED
Start platforms shall:
• Be placed no closer than 4m from the 1st cone in the course.
• Provide hand-holds for the racer to pull on for propulsion from the start
• Have a signaling device placed such that the timing equipment can be signaled when the racer starts from the ramp.

[Pat Chewning]

My opinion is that the majority of races still adhere to the ramp rules, and the rules should probably not be altered -- so the "standard" ramp is still fairly narrowly defined.

The "big-ass ramps" are an execption that is easily covered when the race organizer describes this exception in the race sanction and race description.


My other opinion is that the HUGE, steep ramps are a disaster waiting to happen. (Too unsafe).

[Gary Fluitt]

Huge Ass Ramps (HARs) could be dangerous for sure, but they do open up options for hills that are not that steep, and they have great camera appeal. Mostly they are a huge pain in the ass to build and move around.
The one that kenny built for buckeye had caster wheels on the side. Tip it over and roll it around. Didn't help with getting it across town or into a storage room.
Bungies are another thing, but I'm thinking those are too variable for a big race. And its a bigger pain to "load" the bungie with a racer. Bungies don't work that well for dual races. Great for single lane as long as there is a start box.
But I digress.
As long as the exception process can be used to make HARs valid in big races, I'm good with that.

[Rick Floyd]

The Dixie Big Ramps and the Thunderdome are the most fun races I have ever done. In so many aspects of skateboarding, "safe" and "fun" are diametrically opposed...it's precisely WHY we do it.

Can you imagine if they made ski/snowboard races safe enough so that ANYONE could do it? POOF - there goes your sport.

-RF

[Rick Floyd]

The Dixie Big Ramps and the Thunderdome are the most fun races I have ever done. In so many aspects of skateboarding, "safe" and "fun" are diametrically opposed...it's precisely WHY we do it.

Can you imagine if they made ski/snowboard races safe enough so that ANYONE could do it? POOF - there goes your sport.

-RF

[Donald Campbell]

i would like to know where the term"unsafe "comes into play.
we used the highest starting ramps made yet in the modern days,the biggest one being 10 foot.
fact is:each course gets harder to skate or is way more fun to skate.semi-steep hills become steep hills for a few seconds.
spectators love the ramps
and hey gary:tight courses with enough entry speed can be a blast!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Cat Young]

I haven't gone down a HAR yet, let alone the GOG BAFR! (Big Ass F'ing Ramp)
Either you have a huge smile on your face or a look of sheer terror as you fly down the big ramp, but everyone always has a great time when the big ramp is there!
I have a new goal..... the big ramp!! Don't take them away!!!!

[Gary Fluitt]

My suggestion to change the rule is based on the belief that some of the ISSA rules are extraneous. I don't think it's necessary to put limitations on the size and shape of the ramp. Especially given that ramps are not required. You could have a push start in some races (though that might effect the sanction status?)

I would like to see fewer rules, not more. And so, when we can get rid a of a rule, it's a big win to me.

[Donald Campbell]

i absolutely support gary's words

on the ramp issue:the sport is evolving,so why limit progress with restrictive rules?

[Wesley Tucker]

CURRENT
Start platforms shall:
• Be a minimum of 0.75m tall.
• Be a maximum of 2m tall
• Be a maximum angle of 45 degrees from horizontal
• Contain transitions of minimum radius 1m
• Be placed no closer than 4m from the 1st cone in the course.
• Provide hand-holds for the racer to pull on for propulsion from the start
• Have a signaling device placed such that the timing equipment can be signaled when the racer starts from the ramp.

PROPOSED
Start platforms shall:
• Be placed no closer than 4m from the 1st cone in the course.
• Provide hand-holds for the racer to pull on for propulsion from the start
• Have a signaling device placed such that the timing equipment can be signaled when the racer starts from the ramp.

Gary,

what
you
need
to
do
is

take this to the BOARD FORUM and open a thread and get THREE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS TO AGREE WITH YOU. Probably sending out an e-mail with a heads up would be a good idea.

Then I'll make it part of the elections coming up the first of December. (The BOD nomination open next week. Two weeks later is the election. We'll vote on rules changes at the same time.)

[Steve Pederson]

[Rick Floyd]

I just got back from racing at the Dixie Cup and part of the reason I wanted to race there was the BIG RAMPS. It was a blast. I wish the big ramps had been used for more than just the GS --- tight and hybrid with big ramps would be fun. The Dixie Big Ramps are very solid and wide. They felt safe to me. Bring on the big ramps!

Steve - first of all BIG congrats again on last weekend's performance!

I'll make a deal with you - let's both JOIN the ISSA so we can VOTE on things like this. Wesley's point is well-taken. In my USASA snowboard racing, they won't even acknowledge a new idea or change unless it is brought formally before the board. Internet discussions are fine, but the don't ultimately DO anything. Let's DO it!!

I have been posting far too long to not have done this already, and I'm not alone!

-RF

[Pat Chewning]

UNDER EXISTING RULES:
Ramps are limited to 2m and gentle radii
Ramps outside of this limit must be fully described as an exception so that people know that "special" (Big-ass) ramps will be used for an event.


UNDER THE PROPOSED RULE CHANGE:
Ramps are not limited in radii and height.
Contestants going to events will have no idea how big the ramps are or if they are unusually sharp. (Because virtually all ramps fit inside the specifications).

I would vote not to change the existing rule because it does not limit any particular event, and it requires the contest organizer to describe "unusual" ramps for the contestants.

If nearly all events were run with BIG-ASS RAMPS, then the rule should probably change (to describe a bigger-ass ramp).

Don't forget the opposite: Events with wimpy small-ass ramps. They too would be OK under the proposed rule -- without notification to the contestants.

IN OTHER WORDS: The purpose of a more limiting rule is so that exceptions are clearly defined in the contest sanction so that contestants (and ISSA officials) know exactly what the exceptions are.

[Robert Gaisek]

[Steve Pederson]

[Donald Campbell]

rules need to be changed,too restrictive.

no organizer wants the spectators to fall asleep.

if we want the sport to stay alive we got to add excitement to it.

[Guillaume Saint-Criq]

existing rule does not forbid big ramps
organizers just have to describe them if they don't fit the standard

isn't there other priorities?
why change?

[Jani Soderhall]

I've always thought of rules being a guideline to those who are not completely familiar with our sport. Good, clear rules will help organizers do the right thing in an event and avoid some of the first-time errors that we've seen here and there. This provides for a much more appreciated event by all.

It would be good if this aspect could be taken into consideration as a secondary objective as rules are rewritten.

/Jani

[Michael Stride]

• Be placed no closer than 4m from the 1st cone in the course.

I feel it can be closer in many cases.

• Provide hand-holds for the racer to pull on for propulsion from the start

We thought long and hard about that aspect of the Octane ramps. And decided on a straight pole that is easily grasped, as it is 1" x 2" stainless box section, thin end forward. I guess it doesnt have 'hand holds' as such....

• Have a signaling device placed such that the timing equipment can be signaled when the racer starts from the ramp.

Not needed. When we do dual qualifying we start the clocks from a tapeswitch at the bottom of the ramp, or approx 2ft from base of ramp. We are measuring comprable times so the actual location of the tape, so long as its the same on both courses doesnt need to be specified.

When actual racing is done we start both lanes at the same time on the 'Go'...

Dont get me started (no pun intended) on the dumb dumb dumb different starting windows systems. Start on Go. So that whover corsses the line first is ALWAYS the winner, if the same number of cones, or none have been hit. Otherwise you NEVER know whos won when racers cross the line and that really does confuse spectators...


I would though propose that if ramps are over 'X' height they must have a width of 'X'. This is because I consider the German mega ramp to be too narrow.

[Rick Floyd]

I believe barge gates with a delay on the second run equal to the TD, like in WC snowboard dual-course racing, are the ticket. Prob only for big race because of the equipment and cost, but we ARE talking about making the sport grow, so thought I'd throw it out there.

The format we used for the 2008 US Nationals in Morro Bay also solves the problem Michael is addressing.

-RF

[Michael Stride]

I believe barge gates with a delay on the second run equal to the TD, like in WC snowboard dual-course racing, are the ticket. Prob only for big race because of the equipment and cost, but we ARE talking about making the sport grow, so thought I'd throw it out there.

That would be nice. I enjoyed the gates at Morro when they had them at the worlds.

[Marion Karr]

I appreciate this discussion but the idea that the DHB Big Ramps are somehow unfair or unsafe makes me laugh. Yes, I crashed off the ramp at this last year's Dixie but it was NOT the ramps fault. I had the wrong set up and I didn't lean forward enough coming off. My 47 year self climbed back up the ramp and did it again.

We had an alternative race for those skaters who didn't come off the big ramps. The big ramps were for the Pro Class and the A Class. If someone is not comfortable that is cool and they can race in the other classes. (edited for clarity. mk).

What is the difference from having big ramps for the top classes or making the course harder for the top classes?

This is skateboard racing. It's dangerous.

I do think Race Organizers should build ramps that are generally safe and are not shoddy built and inherently dangerous because they are too narrow, the transitions are wrong, etc.

I appreciate the hard work that the ISSA is doing to streamline this sport but race organizers need some latitude in what they can do or this sport will not progress, not attract new talent, and will end up being stale.

The ISSA Board is working hard to make this all work out and I respect the work that they are doing. I completely understand the position they are placed in to try to improve this sport.
I did read that there is the race exception clause where an organization but my concern here is that some racers

If we are not able to use our big ramps in my opinion the DHB will no longer have ISSA sanction races. This is just my opinion and I am not speaking for the DHB on this matter.
We have always offered other brackets and options for people who choose not to ride the big ramps.

We have worked very hard to put one the best events we possibly can. All of the Dixie Cups have been well received and even our "inbred" hillbilly selves pulled off what I think was an excellent Worlds in 2007. At no time did we ever attempt to get anyone hurt. Bluegill was dangerous fast. Hobby Park is dangerous fast. The Big ramps make Gordon Street a great deal faster and worked great on Center Street. We have always tried to offe something new and exciting to bring racers back.

If you came to the Dixie Cups because it was a big points race then good for you but if you came to the Dixie Cups because it has the most stoke, a cool vibe, and great racing, then better on you.

I apologize for the randomness of this post but it was written over a bit of time so if I repeated myself forgive the repeats.

(DISCLAIMER: Its an opinion ..that is all. This is not a beauty pageant.)

[Marion Karr]

My suggestion to change the rule is based on the belief that some of the ISSA rules are extraneous. I don't think it's necessary to put limitations on the size and shape of the ramp. Especially given that ramps are not required. You could have a push start in some races (though that might effect the sanction status?)

I would like to see fewer rules, not more. And so, when we can get rid a of a rule, it's a big win to me.

Thank you GARY...I ranted before I read this...Fewer rules the better. Thank you.

(DISCLAIMER: This post does not apply to anyone other than my own opinion.)

[Greg Stubbs]

There will be a BAR (BIG ASS RAMP) at this years Sizzler G.S. / DOWNHILL event. Lou Statman is building it and with a big enough radius a downhill board will easily drop in on it with no chance of bottoming out. I believe he said "A little over 9 feet tall."

[Wesley Tucker]

How's that going to work? Is the Sizzler having two ramps and two different classes of GS?

[Greg Stubbs]

How's that going to work? Is the Sizzler having two ramps and two different classes of GS?

I have no idea, good sir. I'm sure that is quite possible. All I know is I don't want to have to haul it because I think it's 3 pieces. We're talkin' Roll-in-zilla!

[Joe Iacovelli]

Speaking as a BOD member, I would like to see any race have the ability to step up the game with a bigger ramp! That being said I agree with Wesley if racers are offer a choice, then we need to understand if said racer selects an A or B group and A is big ramp, B is traditional, or is everyone in one group and its an individual choice on which ramp to mount.

Now speaking as an indicidual and racers, understanding with some clarity the organizer's intent helps me make choices in which race to attend and support. So cool that you are having the big ramps, it will be fun to watch, but what does it mean to us old slow guys that were happy with the older ramps?

[Steve Hinzen]

As the last GoG-Mega-Ramp is over now we tend to built a new one. It´s a GoG-mission to push the limits.
2 weeks ago we were thinking about building a new big starting ramp with vertical transition.
The posts above encourage us to do so.

Who needs rules if speed is in need?

btw.:
Security is not an issue of ramp-size. Experience shows that big starting ramps are safe if they are built correctly.
Small starting ramps can be disastrous for every skateboarder if they are not built correctly.

[Greg Stubbs]

Ours, including the new B.A.R., are all very well constructed.

FYI, I talked to Lou and he said the B.A.R. for the Sizzler is 9' tall with a 6' radius on the drop; very mellow.

[Marion Karr]

Speaking as a BOD member, I would like to see any race have the ability to step up the game with a bigger ramp! That being said I agree with Wesley if racers are offer a choice, then we need to understand if said racer selects an A or B group and A is big ramp, B is traditional, or is everyone in one group and its an individual choice on which ramp to mount.

Thanks for the clarification. I should have read the entire thread before writing so much.

As for the DHB Events, what we have done is made it clear that on the day of the event we use the bigger ramps that it is the ramp that differentiates the group. Basically you self-declare which bracket you choose to participate in based on the ramp you ride. Unlike at previous Buckeyes where you had two ramps side by side with racers choosing at the time of skating which one to launch from we seperate the field, run the standard ramp first and then move to big ramp racing following.

(Disclaimer: I am not speaking on behalf of the DHB. Any comments posted are those of the writer and does not necessarily reflect the policies, positions, and/or political affiliations of this station. Prices may vary based on participation. Not valid in Rhode Island.)

[Marion Karr]

As the last GoG-Mega-Ramp is over now we tend to built a new one. It´s a GoG-mission to push the limits.
2 weeks ago we were thinking about building a new big starting ramp with vertical transition.
The posts above encourage us to do so.

Who needs rules if speed is in need?

btw.:
Security is not an issue of ramp-size. Experience shows that big starting ramps are safe if they are built correctly.
Small starting ramps can be disastrous for every skateboarder if they are not built correctly.

Security is not an issue if the ramps are built correctly. That correct build should include adequate width. Running the "skinny" might look gnarly but why risk the racers health just to look gnar? Speed is gnarly in its own right.

(Disclaimer: The previous comment does not reflect necessarily this station or any station like it nor was directed at one particular group, club, organization, city, country, state, nationality, race, religion, left handedness/right handedness, protected class, sex, age, mongo, regular, goofy, or any other thing you can think of...IT WAS AN OPINION...thats ALL).

[Steve Pederson]

[Lou Statman]

Setting the new BAR. I've always been of the mindset that we can and should try to make those things that are good better. I rode the Thunder-dome at the Nationals in 2008 and The Big ramp at Dixie this past year. Two of my favorite races. and both very fun start ramps, but we are racers, we just can't settle for what we've got. I've been building and designing skate parks and ramps for most of the 35 years I've been skating. Change is good. Bigger = Better... That's debatable but Better is always welcome.

The (BAR) I'm building for the Sizzler will either be Fast, Fun, and "Safe", or I'll scrap the thing and go back to the drawing board. This ramp will be 9 feet tall with a 6 foot radius on the top and a 9 foot radius at the bottom. with a flat bank connecting the top and bottom sections creating a fast smooth ramp with the ability to be modified for each race.

If you can make it to the race you will enjoy it. If not you will miss it.

[Lou Statman]

Genghis Khan didn't need no giant rollin to conquer China, but than again Genghis Khan was no Danny Way!

[willy demis]

My personal experience is that the current rules were very helpful in helping me define how a start ramp should be made. I copied off of Eric Brassard's design:
http://www.slalomskateboarder.com/phpBB ... php?t=3613

But having the rules specifically define the ramp (especially specifying the minimum radius) really helped me to ensure that my ramp was up to par- even though I had never even been to a slalom skateboarding event.

And this is why I comment on a thread that by all rights, I really don't belong in. The current rule spec defines a ramp that anyone with a decent know-how can build and ensure that the ramp will be well received at the event. Mine was...

My $0.02. Take it for what its worth.

[willy demis]

I've always thought of rules being a guideline to those who are not completely familiar with our sport. Good, clear rules will help organizers do the right thing in an event and avoid some of the first-time errors that we've seen here and there. This provides for a much more appreciated event by all.

It would be good if this aspect could be taken into consideration as a secondary objective as rules are rewritten.

/Jani

I didn't see this before posting. This was exactly my point.

[Wesley Tucker]

Willy,

Where are you?

[willy demis]

Willy,

Where are you?

Indianapolis, IN. Why?

Edit- or perhaps you meant what event? It was the Epic International Skate Fest last fall. It was a Prime event...

[Wesley Tucker]

just wondering. It's not in your profile and I was wondering where these ramps are. I do remember the race in Indianapolis.

[willy demis]

just wondering. It's not in your profile and I was wondering where these ramps are. I do remember the race in Indianapolis.

Profile updated. The race was actually in Mishawaka, but that's off topic...

There was only one ramp built. It is now owned by Peter Metzger, who I believe is a member on here as well (he was the race organizer- I sold the ramp to him after the race.)

[Wesley Tucker]

Yeah. I meant Indiana. Typed too many letters. Best as i recall it's up near South Bend, right?

[willy demis]

Yeah. I meant Indiana. Typed too many letters. Best as i recall it's up near South Bend, right?

Sister cities, yep! Notre Dame is on the north side of SB, and Mishawaka is on the east side of SB.

[Cat Young]

Peter Metzger ROCKS!!!!!

[Peter Metzger]

I posit that Cat Young rocks harder, but I don't want this whole thread to turn into a battle of high fives.

ANYWAY, I have a few thoughts rolling around in my head on this topic (the start ramps, not how rockin' Cat is):

1) It might be beneficial to retain the requirements for open or amateur class racing, as it will make sure that first-time racers are aware of what oversized ramps might be at the event. (That is, BAR's could still be used in these classes, but it would require mentioning on the sanctioning app and notifying racers). At the same time, this might introduce some unnecessary complication or someone calling technicalities if things aren't followed to the letter. Just a passing thought.

2) As Willy mentioned, having specs in the rulebook was useful in defining what a start ramp should generally look like. Perhaps they could be left in, but turned into suggestions rather than requirements?

3) Perhaps a minimum drop radius (or max angle if it's not a roll-in style) could still be useful in making sure nobody builds a ramp that's going to cause a normal slalom board to bottom out.

4) I can be a pansy when it comes to big ramps. There, I said it. :P

5) I do think that some modification of the existing rule set could be useful in aiding the progression of the sport.

[Wesley Tucker]

I just wonder how long it's going to be before someone sets cones ON the ramps?

[Lou Statman]

Already been done... Remember the 60's and 70's

[Rick Floyd]

Big ramps are great - I love 'em all.

A note for racers interested in world ranking though - at least before this year, if a racer chooses not to go off the big ramp in a single race, then the highest they can finish "points wise" is the next position after the last big-ramp finisher.

-R

[Chad Hegerty]

Rick, I think that is a good position. As someone who has ridden the DHB ramps the last two years, I can tell you that they are built so well that there is no feeling of out of control on them. As long as the ramps are posted before and are built solidly, as determined by the racers, they should be allowed. I do think that those that choose not to go off of the larger ramps should be placed below those that did.

If the majority of racers from the pro/A class would deem a ramp "unsafe" then that is where the line would be drawn. If the majority are not willing to risk themselves then the foolish should not be rewarded. If the majority or Pro/A class say it is good then run it or move down a class.

my 2 cents.

I am so ready for Texas. The snow just melted and now it is raining.

[Greg Stubbs]

65 and sunny here in BIG D today, gang. Gonna be a beautiful time.

Let me assure everyone that anything built for any race in Texas will be sound, pragmatic and fun. The BAR Lou is building has a very gentle, sloping drop. 6' radius from 9' with a very comfortable roll-out to flat/racing surface. The construction of this BAR with a radius as such will allow all boards, including downhill boards, to roll in without fear of bottoming out. IMO, it does not matter to me what ramp you use, however you can get down the hill faster should be up to the individual. Does someone using a BAR have an advantage over someone not using a BAR? Maybe. I think it all depends on the rider. I think it's quite possible to have someone that did not use the BAR have a faster time than someone that did. Just my opinion...what ever rule is laid down I will abide.

[Rick Floyd]

Yeah Stubbs, you can also do it that way if everyone agrees that your time is your time no matter which ramp you go off (at least for single lane - in H2H you can't mix ramps)...and of course the ramps would have to be right next to each other. If I remember (no jokes please) the GS "B" class ramp start was further down the hill last year?

It would be tough to time with two different rams next to each other and no separate classes. Can you you have two start strips wired to the same finish? I have no idea on that one. You can run one ramp start class after the other is finished, but that could bring in variable like wind/temp that could skew results. Studd to consider anyway.

-R