ttspud

Hi Fanatic & Charlie & Laird, Finally some progress. Some real insight being expressed. I am only sorry that it could not have been that way from the start. Thanks Charlie, most appreciated. I do love your ideas, but I do see this as a class to include in existing trials as a first step. I hear you all, running clubs is hard. Though you must enjoy it enough to go on with it or at least get something out of the experience even if it is just putting back in what you took out during riding years. As with riders, none of us mind losing money on things we enjoy or get something out of. I think expecting to make money from either riding in or running trials is probably hoping for the impossible or at very best, improbable. What that has to do with ranting, with me or with this topic is not clear. I may well have helped run events and so on, and know exactly what you mean. But that is not at discussion here and those issues are neither my fault nor misunderstood by me. If you boys all have issues in that area, open up a topic to discuss it or find some other way to address it. For absolute, final, certain, perfect clarity; inclusion of the new originals class will not require extra work setting the routes up, nor new events, nor new clubs. And as such, there are no good enough excuses for not including such a class at existing events. The discussion here was closed because of the belief that a problem was not acknowledged nor contributors here seemingly willing to help with those rules. And closed for no other reason. Now that it is acknowledged, by the comments above, both that there are riders expressing the same issue and that effectively there is a problem, that has changed to the extent that I will look at the rules myself and make them available when they are ready. I am glad that there are many others, including other riders, with the same viewpoint as me, even if not commenting on this topic maybe, but they are there. All you have to do is to include the new class at appropriate trials and the riders that want to ride it, if any. Any extra effort will be minimized. Modified riders will go on as before. And it is fine that you do not want to either ride in such an originals class or help sort out the rules for such a class. I can and will do that. Laird, yes, wonderful picture. Is he lining up to take on the 6 foot rock step or just spotted the wife? Yes, I will. After that, there will be no excuses left not to include originals classes at pre-65 events. As club owners, I understand that you will embrace the class with the same love you show for the sport as a whole. Originals class rules to follow during the coming year. Good riding & Good Luck, TTSpud

Hi Suzuki, That does simplify things a little too much but it also does put it rather well. No-one has yet agreed with me that a problem exists. I see a huge problem but no-one else seems to. There is nowhere to go from there!! It would seem a little pointless discussing a solution to a problem that no-one seems to believe exists. I think that probably closes the topic for all intents and purposes. Mad dogs and Englishmen. You have to love them. Good riding and Good Luck, TTSpud

Hi Charlie, No, just a few rules on a piece of paper is what I thought, but please, go ahead and dream away anyway!! Regards

Hi Trials, Well, what do you think? To me, yes, folding footrests must be obligatory on safety grounds. I would have though no to plastic mudguards. And about the rear sprocket, I don't know. I would presume that that kind of thing would have certainly had a few options pre-65 so probably yes, but again, what is your view? Yes, thank you.

Hi Fanatic, Yet these bikes, in the right hands, have beaten the top classic bike riders riding the lastest modified bike in events such as the Talmag riding the hardest route. Yes, with modern tyres and in the case of that bike non-original rear shocks. But all else standard. That does refute the point being made albeit allowing for modern tyres/shocks but all else original. These bikes are still capable of being ridden in existing events but it would be far better to have them ride on an equal basis in an originals class because most riders, probably as others here, will not accept such a large disadvantage. And that is great. Why not? But that should not mean that others with those bikes should be effectively disadvantaged and walk away when they do like riding these heavy, original bikes. Yes, that is why it is suggested to allow modern tyres in an originals class. Well yes, that is why they are so much of a disadvantage to modified bikes with high ground clearance, short frames, easy clutches, low weight and so on. Though some riders still win on them regardless, which is some feat considering many would not even attempt it let alone pull it off. I am sure that the same riders could win every year against the top modified riders but they choose to protect the bikes and ride at a large disadvantage. It would be better to support them. Yes, quite right. It must be because the bikes have changed so much and not just their tyres and shocks either. No, people have never laid down any rules, at least none that anyone can find for a proper original pre-65 class, because there is no will to do so, not because there are no riders. I think the evidence over the last few decades testifies to that. It is perhaps not that there are not the original bikes around, as Metise's uncle's bikes, just that there are no fair classes left for them. As so many things, the rules could be written quite easily, that is not really the problem. Instead, this topic will likely once again drift off into history with more effort spent in talking about it than actually doing anything constructive. It reminds me of the typical British approach of a group of blokes standing around a hole whilst one chap makes an effort to dig!! The sport has had every day since 1965 to draw up some rules, how many days is that? I don't know, but enough. It is perhaps not that the rules are not relatively easy to draw up; it is that there seems to be no will to see it done. I imagine that perhaps as the years have rolled by that the riders of the modified classes have risen to the top due to the advantage those bikes provide and other voices have been increasingly lost. Maybe not willing to give up the advantage that the modified bikes provides, the situation has become less and less important until arriving at the sport today where there are no original pre65 in the Scottish. There is no single central point to have a set of rules. That is not the best environment in which to attract new riders who might very well drag out a good, but original, AJS out of the shed and have a go. The sport simply does not cater for that any more as it does not cater for existing riders on original bikes either. And there are, though they are perhaps a rarer breed today, those who are willing to adhere to an original pre-65 class still and there are still the bikes around to make that happen. Perhaps the sport would be better with both modifieds and pre-65 bikes in it? But that requires voices to speak up and not be allowed to be drowned out by those who only seem to want to look the other way. Of course, the whole point is not to get bogged down in the above, not to look back, but to focus on introducing a solution if there are enough who still want to. That's maybe a very difficult ask given the circumstances. Perhaps better to try within existing events. I think that there is every point in supporting original pre-65 trials bikes in pre-65 trials for many reasons. Well, yes, that is a bit of an awkward position to be in. Not seeing the point in riding the bikes and not seeing the point in not riding the bikes. Anyway, thanks for the post, it was most revealing.

Hi Metise, Yes, thanks, that is a very appropriate anecdotal tale. Exactly the symptom that is being talked about, losing riders that have good machinary that is not being catered for. I bet that you would enjoy riding it if you tried and I promise you that such a bike as mine has won the Talmag Trophy proper beating people like Len Hutty who ride machines that truthfully have a huge advantage over it, more than once and recently. But, as I say, that is really with very talented riders who, sadly, do not get recognised as such because it is only those that ride or closely follow the sport who realise quite how much of a disadvantage such riders are being forced to accept. Though, as I, if you do not ride often or perhaps do not fancy that level of risk, then there is the easy route, which really is easy unless one is a lot older than I. No, the Talmag is quite easy, even for me. On wet days though, as it was this year, it is harder. Well, original bikes are very sought after because they are becoming so rare. Modified bikes are fine, but what are they? Some modified bikes that I have seen do not even have a proper make, they just don't have any integrity at all. Oh dear. Perhaps I should badge up my gasser with a fine Ariel stamp instead!! No, I have other bikes. But the AJS should be ridden otherwise it will just get left and end up rotting away. These older bikes are far better in the events being ridden than not. And the spectators do like seeing them even if some in the sport do not. Thanks for your post, you anecdotes exactly describe the issue in the sport. You are of the age that could ride but you think that the Talmag is too hard. Your uncle gave up years ago whilst others of his age continue onwards, maybe he was put off by the modified bikes a long time ago, who knows. But you should be riding it, only I can't tell you that there is a course for the bike to ride in!! Bit of an issue really. Unless you are happy to ride in a competitive event without competing, not too much fun. Probably not then!! And that is the problem with ignoring this issue in a nutshell!!

Hi Stan, I do hope so. I have been so busy, I just haven't had a chance to do so many things, Owls being one of them. I think I managed one trial only last year or perhaps 1 1/2! It is a complete aside but I do have a very very important job to finish (I almost wish it wasn't so) outside trials and time really is weighing on it. I do feel a little guilty even taking the time to do this over these two days, I probably should not have. But I do feel that the sport is making a mistake here in ignoring views such as mine, as the sport has done for so long, but things are perhaps easier in hindsight. And yes, thank you, I shall be back to Owls as soon as I can get time out to play. i should make more time I suppose! I also meant to go see james a few months back and have a practice, but of all things my car's head gasket failed, and so back to square one!! Ah, ok!! That answers that! Then, to Charlie, yes, my vote would be of course!! My AJS is beautiful. It was a works bike ridden my Mick Waller, I think relatively locally in Kent (Sidcup??), not sure. And it truthfully does sound incredible. Anyway, to me, there is more to the bike than a modified frame, clutch, hubs, tank, seat etc etc, it is a little piece of history that I am very happy to ride and let others enjoy, but am not happy to destroy by taking away its spirit through modification. My gain by winning by any means by modifying such a bike is by no means makes up for losing it to all future riders for ever more. It is just such a tragedy that the bike is effectively being pushed aside when it is genuinely a joy to ride. I have no issue with others wanting to ride modified bikes, and do not see why originals cannot also be catered for. But there we are.

Hi Woody, No, I really am not missing the point at all. And no, there a no trials that put these bikes on an equal footing because those rules do not exist. You have not come up with any because there are none. I can be no plainer. With regard to originals, it is perhaps not that the riders do not want to ride; it is perhaps more that the sport is not supporting those bikes fairly. Or do you really think that it is reasonable to ignore the difference in the performance of an original bike to a modified bike entirely? Of course not, and if the sport cannot deal with the issue then it has let the riders down. There has never been an original pre-65 class in any trial that you can come up with, past or present, and that should tell you all you need to know. When did the sport make sure it was catering for original pre-65 bikes and their riders? Why is it a surprise that there are fewer riders on original bikes today when the situation has been ignored for at least a decade? It is not riders that were leaving the sport, it is, if anything that the sport has failed to cater for those riders. Just saying now that look there are so few young riders but it is not our fault, is still missing the point. You don't seem able to see that. Winning at all costs is absolutely fine for those that think that way. Introducing a class for originals simply caters for other riders who do not and do wish to preserve the bikes. Again, you may disagree, but without pre-65 bikes, what sport do you really have? Why not just enter the modern trials where the modifications are amazing? But, again, it is fine to keep the modifieds going but not at the cost of all of the original bikes and possibly the sport too. If that is true, don't you want to see the sport support my viewpoint and include riders such as myself rather than losing them? I do find the idea that 'noting can be done' or 'nothing needs to be done' incredible when I read such things. It is like all walking off a cliff because everyone forgot to turn around. No, and I am sure many original riders feel the same way. Who would want to ride in a trial that effectively excludes the bike you ride? Young guys willing to take this on, and they are not catered for? Wow. That is a terrible strategy for a sport in professed decline. Perhaps it would be better to try to gain a wider perspective and see what can be done. If the sport has sat back for 30 years, made no attempt to tackle the issue of losing original bikes in the face of ignoring the vast advantage that modifieds now have and is now in decline, perhaps it might be time not to ignore it?

Hi Charlie, Thanks, no, I do not know an awful lot about how these trials are organized and so on. My family has been involved in trials for a long time and I just tend to go to whatever comes up, with not too much thought beyond that. That said, now I check how old I have become, I have ridden for 3 decades, and that has been a bit of a shock! Where did the years go??! Yes, quite. One of the reasons for allowing better suspension internals (or perhaps even better shocks if that were what was wanted) was to save on the knees. I am possibly half the age of some of my fellow competitors but even my knees are not ideal!! So I can quite imagine that others might prefer an originals class but allowing for slightly plusher shock internals or whatever. From what I gather, it is very common to make that modification and many of the 'originals' bikes may already be like that. This is for you to have your say. What do you think? Which way would you prefer it to be? This is not going to extend to allowing many modifications, but I can see that a few pragmatic ones might be a very good thing, but only if that was the majority view. For me, I would ride happily either way. That is true. But I have met a couple of thirty somethings who would like to get into the sport. That would help. I certainly have no idea which class because the modified bikes are so expensive and the original ones are hard to get hold of. Anyway, there is hope! Ok, do you mean 3 routes instead of two then? Taking the Talmag as an example, I see many bikes in exactly the trim we are talking about (including altered tyres and suspension) doing very well on both courses. And even in the last three years, one rider won on such a bike beating all of the best riders across the country riding very modified bikes. Of course that exceptional ride for that exceptional reason is never pointed out because everyone just assumes that top riders only ride highly modified bikes, but it is not true. Sorry, getting back to what you said. Do you think that the easy course for the Talmag could not accomodate riders pulling these bikes out of the shed? I did ride alongside a Dutch chap who had done exactly that, was in a pair of jeans and shoes, had entered the harder course on a truly original bike and obviously found it very difficult indeed!! I even read topics on this subject where those, I think from NZ, could see the way that the sport in the UK has developed, but this poor chap from Holland didn't know! Perhaps it is best to have a very very easy starter course then for people to get back into these bikes on. Perhaps it would suffice to be sections outside the main course, perhaps a few, just to get them ready to move onto the two main routes. Perhaps it need not be run with so many sections and could be run in a slightly easier way. Perhaps it could truly allow those riders to get back into the sport. It would require some extra observers, which is always cited as the big problem, but perhaps there are some ideas that might help with that being as the results for that course would only be very social indeed. Well yes, of course the ACU who deal with the annual insurance and such like. The AMCA, that also rings a bell, but I couldn't tell you much more. Do you mean that it would be best just to create the class, test it, and if it catches on, great? Well, there you go, what do you think? If you allow it, others will have that too. To me, yes, that is absolutely fine given that I think that shock internals would probably be an allowable alteration both given the elderly knee thing as well as the fact that those bits do suffer wear and tear as the years go on. The AJS is always a little dodgy both front and back, but so what, as long as it is no different to the other bikes within the same rules, no problem. Edit!: I just looked up what jampots were! I think mine might still be the 'jampots'. The spring is concealed, is that what you mean? Sorry, I don't mean to backtrack, I just thought that you were talking about internal parts, I don't know why. Do the Girling ones have the springs open as later bikes? For me, I would prefer the original externals to be used. But if it is the case that the majority believe otherwise, then so be it. Ah, damn, I remember all the nice things anyone ever said to me going back to when I was tiny. That may well be added to my memory's list. And I do return the compliment fully. Best regards too.

Hi Woody, I am so pleased that you replied, I was hoping that you would since your post was pivotal in this topic being started. Let's get this out of the way first. That is a natural reaction due to my approach and you not knowing me. But yes, to answer your concern, I am very serious about it. And no, I do not find this stuff fun. In truth, I find it a little bit sad that the sport has arrived at this point where the mantra seems to be bending non-existent rules to win at any cost. Surely there is room for keeping original bikes alive in a competitive sense. My guess is that there is room and the riders to go with it, if a class catering for originals were to exist. No, I am not an incredibly serious trials rider but I do enjoy the sport and I do enjoy the sound and feel of the original bikes. More modern bikes are great too, but different, and to my mind no better. I have ridden for 30 years or more but I have never taken it particularly seriously. That said, things could be a lot more enjoyable, and the gap between modified bikes and originals has got to levels, as is universally acknowledged, where expecting riders to compete on equal terms with either bike is possibly causing riders to move away from the sport. And that is bad for the sport. I may of course be wrong and no-one would ride original bikes. But they do now and i cannot see how catering for them is going to make them less attracted to the sport. In my mind, the integrity of the sport is important. Actually more important than anything else in maintaining interest in it. I may of course be wrong, but that is what I would suggest. On the other hand, the issue could be dealt with, as always, given the will to do so. Obviously some may have a vested interest in not wanting to see that change. But others will want change. And that is what is up for discussion, whether an originals class is the right approach, whether it is possible, how would it realistically be introduced and so on. Well, no, I have never known that for certain and that was the point, to find out for certain. You have filled in that gap, so thank you. I suspect though allowing non-original frames, hubs, ignition and so on, or would I be wrong in saying that? Do you have any links to their rules? Again, this is to be discussed. We had basically arrived at two votes for no change in anything including tyres and suspension, though those may not be riders wishing to ride in an originals class, so how genuine those answers are is difficult to gauge. I am sure a line can be drawn. Certainly the class requires the original frame, engine, hubs, brakes, clutch, ignition, seat, tank, kickstart, mudguards as a starting point. Unless there are objections on pragmatic rather than performance grounds. As for tyres/suspension, those things are up for discussion, again on pragmatic grounds. I would have thought that the idea would be to keep the bikes to the spec they left the factory in including the original works bikes. That would be in the spirit of the original bikes. Of course modifications would be made, as long as they were original pre-65 modifications, then fine. As already discussed, there will be a few pragmatic (and a few safety) alterations to be potentially allowed. I would have thought that even if a few things slip through, that that is a far less significant problem than that of ignoring the gulf in performance between that original and the highly modified bikes of today. Perhaps an originals class is the lesser of two evils. Yes, this is something that has been brought up and acknowledge from the start. I just don't know. To my eye it is very easy to sport a highly modified bike and that gets ever harder as the bike gets more original. Do you know anyone that might be able to shed some light on that issue? Again, this is another question for discussion. If the original GOV132 turns up from pre-65, great, it is eligible. If replicas built last year do, then that is a question for debate. Possibly. Yes, of course. I will always enjoy it but I would enjoy it more if I were able to compete on equal terms and not have to hugely modify an original bike in order to do it. You are the first person to get to this. And this may well be the most difficult thing. Do you award modifieds and not standard bikes if you have two classes? Should it be the pre-65 bikes that are awarded? Or do you simply award both? That, to me, is likely to be one of the big issues for those riding modified bikes when contemplating a class riding the same route, with the same size engine, make and model, only in original pre-65 spec. As you say, it is the human nature of some to focus on gaining an advantage at all costs. I tend to think a little wider than that and consider the impact that such an attitude might be having on the sport itself. In so many warps of life, i see the same exact difference in attitude, and it is no surprise to me to find it with pre-65 trials in just the same way. For me, there are more important things than winning. I enjoy competing. I am very happy when I win. But winning is not more important than the sport itself, at least that is how I would see it. If the sport can include more riders and preserve the bike and so sport for future riders, then I cannot see that as a bad thing to attempt to introduce. Thanks for you post though. I do hope you will help more.

Hi Micky, I am sorry, perhaps I did not explain them very well. I will try again. You are the first person that has said 'I don't object to a class in principle', that is great. It is a start. A first step. I have asked that question to others and yours was the first answer and a good answer at that. Brilliant. I am not at all worried that you have no interest in riding in an original pre-65 class, that is your choice. I mean as F1 has the FIA to regulate the rules. As the FA regulates the Premier League. As the LTA regulates tennis. These organizations regulate the rules in a central way so that all entrants are clear on what the rules are. That might be a good thing for pre-65 as well, I just do not know whether it does exist or not, hence my questions. If it does exist, then please let me know who that organization is or better where those existing rules can be found. If not, then that is a whole different issue. Yes, it could be left to each club to have their own rules, as might be the way now. But that might not be ideal. If the same idea were applied in football, you might turn up at an away game only to find out that the club you were visiting had chosen 100 players a side and you only had 11. You would not win that match and they would not much enjoy winning on such advantaged terms. Better for all that everyone uses the same rules. As you say, people might have to travel a fair way to ride in such events and it would be quite unfair if they have to adjust their bike for a different set of rules at each trial. And that is possibly why the rules are so lenient at such events for the modified bikes, because organizers do not want to turn people away but have no central rules to guide what is acceptable at all pre-65 trials. So, the question remains and as you are so involved in the sport, I considered that you would know that answer. Is there a corresponding association or organization that regulates pre-65 trials or are the rules simply down to each club to decide?

Hi Micky, Fantastic, I am very pleased. You are the first person that has said that or come close to saying it, and that is great. Do you know who regulates or has any power over the rules of pre-65? Is there such an organization in existence?

Hi Micky, That is funny, my bike is a 1960, so right in the middle. I do not have the knowledge to know how different a 1955 AJS is to a 1964 AJS, but to me it does not matter. They will both have steel frames, wide seats, heavy this and that, and so on. I doubt the difference in those particular two bikes matters that much. I certainly would not worry about the 64 bike being a little better than my 60. You could also say that a 500 is more competent than a 350 and yes, it is. But again, they are original pre-65 bikes so that is fine. Or you could say that an Ariel HT5 is easier to ride than some of the other bikes, but they are both original pre-65, so that is fine. The idea here is not to go to the other extreme and have a class for one make, one model in one year. The idea is to introduce a class so that original pre-65 bikes may compete on equal terms without having (as Charlie described so well) to deal with the gulf that now exists between original and modified bikes. That is not to say that it needs any new routes or easier routes. Just that the vast difference should be acknowledged and catered for so that all riders can enjoy the machinery that they enjoy maintaining. And that is the point. A new originals class might encourage people to compete on these bikes rather than being putting them off for the little extra scrutineering effort that it might take to run. If you look at modern trials, there are large differences in the design of bikes, but very little in the weight, turning circle, power and so on. I am sure that the same differences inside a class will always exist given a little common sense on how a class is defined. If a class is not defined, or so loosely designed to be irrelevant, and that sport is based on bikes from a long gone era, of course you will get people who try to gain an advantage. As is happening every year. This year it might be clutches, next year the frame, then the engine, then the brakes.. and so on. And what are you left with? A very easy bike to ride. Is that better? That is a debatable point. There will be others who would prefer to ride originals. If there are no objections, where is the issue? If no riders wish to ride as an original, fair enough. I certainly would and i am certain that I am not alone. Perhaps give them the chance. I understand that you are very into the modified bikes. Would you consider riding in an originals class at all? Even if not, do you have any objection to there being an originals pre-65 class in principle accepting that you will never get all bikes the same but that a set of originals rules could be created in order to have that class exist?

Hi Suzuki, Do you own an original bike? I do and I can say that it is beautiful to ride and I have also ridden many others. Much comes down to how they are maintained. And I think it is very much on the contrary, there may well be enough riders who would like to ride an original bike, given the rules being in place, rather than having to modify them to keep up or for a number of other reasons. Right now no-one knows because that class has never existed. You may be right, it may be relatively few, but it may also be enough or perhaps even a lot. Who knows.

Hi Charlie, Well, they possibly spend a minute or two per bike. They check the spokes, the general condition, the brakes, the wheel bearings and so on. You'd have to ask them exactly what they check. How much extra effort would it be to pick out a modified bike running in the originals class? that would be interesting to know to. Well, perhaps not unmodified in any way, that is up for debate. The tyres and suspension are up for debate as possible alterations. But yes, original frame, engine, clutch, seat, ignition, tank and so on, so you would have a properly heavy, proper pre-65 bike. No, that is absolutely untrue for the trials that I have attended. There are original bikes as described in both routes already. And as I said earlier, some of those originals riders would prefer a course harder than the hard course is now. The routes would not need altering, at least in the trials that I have ridden in. No, there would be no change in the amount of routes. Now you are beginning to grasp where my bike is. It gives away 40kg, 4 inches in ground clearance, length, turning circle, clutch action, clutch weight, clutch usage, delay in ignition, lack of suspension travel, lack of speed.. and so on. To believe that an original can compete on equal terms with the latest modified bikes is unrealistic, and will cause riders either not to ride, to ride just for fun (which is how it has been for a long time, and is unfair) or to modify their bike. A better solution would be to simply have two classes. If I blindfolded you, you would likely be able to pick out a highly modified bike just by sitting on it for 20 seconds, feeling the weight, suspension, clutch and so on. Without a blindfold, it is even easier. So, yes, I am well aware of how much of a disadvantage an original bike is compared to a modified one of today!! As are you!! In fact, it is now no big thing to win on a modified bike over an original bike, it is very easy and so there really is little point in mixing the two. To win on an original bike against a modified one is near impossible nowadays, but has happened but only by the absolute top originals riders. However, it is not something that you ought to ask any rider to have to cope with. Better to let both classes ride in classes of their own. So, no you do not need to add a route or to change the routes. Hard and easy will cater for all as it does now. As long as you don't need a new route, and not much scrutineering overhead, I don't see the problem. Again, no. There will be no extra routes. No extra observers. If only ten bikes qualify for that class out of 200+, so be it. But I think there would be more. If there were no extra routes, no change in the severity of the existing routes, no extra observers, little scrutineering overhead, and let's say 25 riders in the class, would you accept the introduction of an original pre-65 class in principle? Or is there another issue as to why not?

Hi TrialsRFun, I accept that running a trial can be tough, of course, but your point is only relevant if there is to be significant extra overhead from having an original pre-65 class. So far, there might be some extra competence needed during scrutineering, but not too much. Other than that, what extra overhead do you foresee? For context, would you personally enter an original pre-65 class, or would you enter the modified class? Perhaps the issue here is that many people are worried about the effects on the modified class? To me, that is no problem. No-one is suggesting that modified bikes should be affected. On the contrary, modified bikes can continue on the course they are on without change. Or do you simply believe that it is too difficult to specify what the rules for an original pre-65 class should be? Do you have any objection to an original pre-65 class in principle, given acceptable overhead?

Hi Charlie, Yes, agreed. it is likely that this is applicable to 4-stroke clubs only, at least in the beginning. Yes, that is a problem but possibly unrelated to this. Perhaps improving the rules might help engage new riders and improve that situation also. But it would need the creation of new rules as well as finding out who the appropriate regulatory body to make them official is. Is there such an official regulatory body for pre-65 trials? Or is it left to each club to decide individually? Well, it seems that it is harder to create a totally new event than to support an existing one, made harder still if it is for a new class. It is possible that you are right, but I do not know who would wish to tackle such a thing and that would would not solve the original issue in the existing trials any case. I don't think that that is true because all of the 'chaff' can still compete in its own class under existing rules. The original bikes can then compete happily, be preserved for new riders and future riders. It is surely best to cater for both types of bike. The overhead at existing events, given a set of rules, may not be much at all. And if that brings in new riders over the following years, then that is a good thing. I have never been of the mind that things cannot be done. However, if something has been given a good chance and has not been successful, fair enough. I do not believe that an original class has ever been attempted before. If you know of an event that has run an original pre-65 class, can you direct me to it? It might be interesting to see how it was approached and how successful it was.

Hi Charlie, Yes, it looks like you had a very successful event on your hands. The idea here is to address current events more than creating any new events. The issue is with existing trials and how that can be addressed within those events rather than solving the issue by creating new events, which, as you say, are very difficult to make succeed. Do you have any objections to the introduction of an original pre-65 class?

Hi TrialsRFun, Yes, I see your point. I can only express what I have found at very highly supported 4-stroke pre-65 trials in which I have ridden. And it is really that type of event that I was talking about. In those events, only 4 stroke bikes are allowed to enter which removes the issue of where to place the 2 strokes and there is no problem with numbers entering. In fact, it is possible that with an original pre-65 class that numbers may even improve. That is beyond my knowledge and so I leave that to more informed minds than mine. However, that issue does not seem to have an effect on the classes, which is the issue at hand, just whether a bike is eligible to ride in a pre-unit event or not. Again, I suspect that at highly supported events that these riders will either be contacted or simply have their entries returned for correction. Well, no, of course, and that is not being suggested. I believe that in the most recent events that there have been between 60 and 100 riders in my class across the two types of bike, original and modified. If there were to be an original class, then perhaps 30 of those riders would fall into the class from the start with more to follow as the idea settles. A similar effect would be had in other classes where the same issue exists. I do not know of any classes at those events with only 3 or 4 riders in them, so whilst it will of course reduce numbers in certain classes, it would not make it in any way so few so as to be ridiculous. There may also be benefits of having an original class in terms of attracting riders by allowing them to increase their enjoyment by competing on level terms. That may bring more riders in.

Hi TrialsRFun, Thanks for your comment. I see your point, though I think it does not tackle the issue. Yes, it is true that a hard and easy route can cater for all types of bikes and riders, though that is a different issue. The issue is not the routes themselves, some of the best riders will ride the hardest courses and will want much harder courses still, even on the original bikes. The issue is allowing original bikes to compete on an equal footing to bikes in the same class, regardless of the route chosen, rather than being effectively excluded from the competition by having to compete against vastly modified and so vastly easier bikes. It might be how the sport is handled currently, but it would be much more enjoyable to separate the two types of bike into two classes in order to solve the issue. To my mind, ignoring the fact that the highly modified bikes are far easier to ride does not help encourage riders to participate because it does not allow them to compete on an equal basis. That would be true of any sport. You are perhaps more or less describing the situation that exists now where events do cater for all by having an easy and hard course. Though that does not address the issue being discussed which really is the problem of original bikes being placed against ever-increasingly modified bikes in the same class. Perhaps the most workable solution would be the creation of an original pre-65 class and the existing modified class. The idea here is to try and discover what the rules for an original pre-65 class should be. If you were to think of rules for an original pre-65 class, where would you begin?

Hi Charlie, I am so glad that you posted a message. You sound as though you absolutely support the idea of an original pre-65 class and know far more about it than I do!! Do I have this right that there are 350x19 tyres and 400x19 tyres, which would have been used on the original pre-65 bikes? And can you get rims for either? Was that recently? Is there any chance of perhaps approaching this subject with them again? I might be able to add a few to the list. Do you know who governs or has the power to introduce rules for the sport as a whole, on whatever basis that might be? Yes, I know exactly what you mean with regard to the Talmag. There are a lot of people there who agree with your point of view and talk about the need to deal with the two types of bike such as with the introduction of an original pre-65 class. Perhaps it might be possible to draw up a starting point for rules for this new class and ask them to vote/comment on it? The organizers of the Talmag are under an awful lot of pressure already. I have no knowledge of the possibility of setting up a separate event. I was more thinking of introducing the class into an existing event though after such rules were solid, had enough people interested and finding events which that class would happily be introduced to. It may be that the Talmag organizers might like the idea but would only do it on a limited basis so as not to risk affecting the current atmosphere too much too quickly. Perhaps initially, the class could simply be introduced for the easier route to see how it would function. As things progress, perhaps it could be introduced also into the harder route as well. That is obviously thinking a long way ahead, but perhaps something like that might be possible. Well, you can add myself as one supporter of such a thing and there are others. Yes, quite. Is it the case that it does need to be officially sanctioned by whoever is responsible for governing such rules to be accepted? Is there such an organization? That would take the burden away from the clubs. Or is it simply that there are not the riders out there who want to ride original bikes or perhaps because there has never been an official set of rules for an original pre-65 class? Yes, again, many will think that is quite right. The normal modern trials might be the best place for ever-increasing modifications rather than pre-65 which was, I presume, based on not having or not wanting to have the latest and greatest bikes coming out of Japan or Spain or wherever. Though none of that really matters too much now, the sport is where it is. So it is perhaps best to just support and cater for both viewpoints rather than disadvantaging either. I am glad that you posted that message, it is the most hopeful one yet even if so far that has not got us very far!

Hi Big_e I do and have always done so! Though I would enjoy a proper original pre-65 class with the opportunity to compete fairly even more. I am sure that there must be others that feel that way and probably increasingly since the gap between the two types of bike is ever widening. If it is possible to do, it would not just preserve the bikes, but the sport too and that must be important. Yes, and that is partly why seeing if thrashing out the basics here and maybe even some details of the rules first, and seeing if whichever regulatory body would take some responsibility, might at least remove the burden and responsibility from local clubs for coming up with their own sets of rules. of course it might take some work, but perhaps that is something that we, as riders or interested parties, could do. You are right, there will perhaps be the extra overhead of extra competence needed in order to conduct the scrutineering, though at the events I have been too it is very likely that knowledgeable scrutineers are already at hand. Certainly much more knowledgeable than I am, and I am relatively sure that I could be shown how to pick out the modified bikes that might try to enter the originals class. Other than that, the routes will be no different, hard and easy and so there is no extra work in setting up or dismantling the course itself. There would just be new class or classes on entry but even that is not too difficult to deal with. On the upside, it may bring in more riders. It may protect the sport for everyone. And in sorting out the rules, it may remove the niggle of complaints about bikes going a little bit too far. Original bikes will not have to deal with modified bikes. And modified bikes can continue to modify as much as they like. That should keep everyone happy.

Hi Total, I am sorry, I was so focussed on tyres and trying to catch up, that I accidentally overlooked the rest of your post. I am so glad that you support standard bikes and perhaps the bird hasn't flown quite yet. I know that this discussion has been on-going for a long time without being resolved and that is sad for the riders and the sport alike. With the tyre size issue, as long as both are practical options, I am quite willing to accept either way. Which one would you choose given the perspective of wishing to ride in such a class focussing on originality not performance but respecting that some alterations may be pragmatic? Yes, you are right, it is unfair to expect someone on an original bike to compete against the highly modified ones, even if they should want to. I still enjoy my bike even though it is relatively standard and on a dry day it is still possible to roughly compete given a course that I can manage. Only very very special riders are able to win, though it has happened, on a hard course on a bike like mine against the highly modified ones. And no, I am not one of those! Yes, quite right. And for those riders, that is great. But it should not come at the detriment of those wishing to ride and enjoy original bikes. Surely it is possible and better to cater for both. Do you think that in principle it would be best to have two separate classes to cater for both classes? Do you know of any riders that might like to ride in such an original class?

Hi Suzuki, (and Fanatic) Got it!! Two votes for no alteration to tyres or suspension. But only if that is practical and possible, which it is looking like it might be! And, you both might like to say whether you would be riding in such a class, or perhaps if not then the modified class, that would help to gauge your views! And I should add, would you want to ride the bikes with the 19" tyres or the 18" tyres given that both might be acceptable to those wishing to ride in an original pre-65 class?

Hi Alan, What are the differences between the 4 round Big Bike series and the normal one? Does the normal series have more than one route? Does the 4 round series clash with other events? Does the 4 round series have differing rules to the normal one? Is it just that the 4 round series differs by offering an easy route, and an easy route only?