A Scott Trial Analysis
Last Saturday it was the annual Scott Trial, known as the hardest one-day trial in the world and which this year, certainly lived up to its reputation.
The time and observation classic was won for the fourth consecutive time by Jack Price with the loss of 19 marks through the 76 sections and three on time, with standard time set once again by Jonathan Richardson in exactly 5 hours and 26 seconds, but with 73 marks in the sections, he finished seventh overall.
Second place was shared by Billy Green and Richard Sadler, both losing a combined total of 36 marks with the final position verdict going to Green who lost one more mark on observation but one less on time, the decision going on the time element as he was 26 seconds faster than Sadler over the lengthened course of 80 miles..
Thirteen riders resident in the Northern Centre took part with three completing the course within the time limit (+2.5 hours slower than standard time) and a further two completing the course but over the time allowance. Tom Swindlehurst was best of the three in 28th place on 201 marks combined total, with Jack Dixon in 42nd and Wilf Shuttleworth 43rd, both losing the same combined total of 266 marks.
Jonny Robinson and Ben Croasdale both completed the course but were over time. In the final analysis there were 163 starters; 69 finished within time, seven finished but were over time and 87 riders retired. In many recent years there has been a full house entry of 200.
Listed here in start number order are the results of the 13 Northern Centre riders:
7 – Mark Wilkinson, retired section 40
16 – Jonny Robinson, finished over time
19 – Joel Hazlett, retired section 35
23 – Jackson Edwards, retired section 14
25 – Matthew Edmondson, retired section 9
28 – Ben Croasdale, finished over time
47 – Lewis Gaskell, retired section 32
73 – Wilf Shuttleworth, finished 43rd
85 – Jack Dixon, finished 42nd
119 – Will Brockbank, retired section 47
121 – Patrick Wardle, retired section 47
129 – Cameron Brice, retired section 65
136 – Tom Swindlehurst, finished 28th
A PERSONAL VIEW – POSSIBLY A STEP CHANGE?
I’ve been to every Scott Trial since 1977 and twice prior to then, and whilst little has changed in the nature of what the trial is all about, I do question the direction it has taken in recent years, but most certainly this year, when, from comments made, it was a lot more difficult with many sections now featuring some massive rock steps that have not occurred naturally.
This year, as has been the case for the past 20 years, I’ve been both a spectator and have been the observer at more than seven different individual or groups of sections, all of which are rocky streams. All have featured natural rock steps which generally have been within the abilities of riders competent to ride the Scott, but at last Saturday’s section 59 (Slack Wife Gill – don’t ask!!), the manufactured rock step was greater than the ability of all bar a few riders to accomplish. And it was in a deep gully with no other way of getting out other than to man-handle the bike in the best way possible.
The excellent result system the Richmond Club employ offers a completed section by section analysis and of the 89 riders who went through my section, there were 13 cleans, 6 ones, 2 twos, ten threes and 58 failures.
I was perched on the bankside at the top of the step where many riders said it was likely to be their last Scott, the exhaustion at that point combined with everybody battling the artic winds and driving rain, may well have made everything more difficult than if it had been a pleasant mild day.
A finally, another bone of contention was the entry fee. Accepting that it is a huge trial to organise and all profits go to local Scott Trial charities, £80 to take part is a significant sum to pay for many who can only ever hope to get about half way round. Sure, it’s a challenge that everybody accepts, but cost/reward analysis, has arguably become unbalanced.
So will I return? But of course, it’s still one of the great motorcycling spectacles and one that I hope to enjoy for many more years, but I suggest that the section severity be eased a few per cent, though of course, that’s only my personal view.