Rules?

[woody]

I really, really hate to ask this but frount runners, no interest in riding/building specials, when did that appen !!!

I just mean the twinshock, class B guys, riders like Phil, Nick, Steve Monk are all of the opinion that modern hybrids shouldn't be allowed and to the best of my knowledge have no interest in riding one anyway.

I wasn't referring to British class

[woody]

Just a mention on rules, seeing as this is what the topic is about.

You can have all the rules you like as regards bike eligibility and they will still be flouted and still go unenforced.

The most simple rule of all is the no-stop rule in any of the classic series or one-off events such as the classic experts. Everyone knows they are no-stop.

Still, there are riders who will stop, hop the back, hop the front and make a straight line out of what should have been a testing turn over roots or whatever. The hazard is easy to clean this way whereas no-stop it requiers much more precision and a perfect line with no mistakes. They know it is no-stop but still they stop and hop. And they never ever get penalised for it.

So what makes anyone think that having rules for bike eligibility will stop modifications or that there will be anyone willing to throw the riders with ineligible bikes out of the event.

Same goes for Pre-72, Pre-77 classes. Are there any officials at events that could have these classes who would have the knowledge to differentiate between the models. Doubt it. It works in Spain as they appear to stay true to the class with the bikes they ride. Here, I just can't see it happening.

[paioli]

Do you think the observing issue is because the trad/classic series is diluted

with so many other classes, eg center exp/youth on modern rules and the

sidecars with their rules, then there is the route for the center exp/youth, the

2/3 sidecar routes per section, would you enjoy observing that lot !

oh and i nearly FORGOT,like the reports, the trad/classic non stop sections/rules!

And as for the red,blue,yellow,orange,green,white section markers,

As for the machine eligibility, how serious are we about the trad/classic series !

surely there is enough sales information/manuls around to enable the ACU/clubs,

to act on , and if someone has decided these hybrids are ok ,whats the point of

having the pre 75 class as 99.9% of these bikes were reconstructed from the

ground up using modern components post 2001 !

And another queston i have is, Normandale now supports the trad/classic series

are they also supporting the sidecar series when they are in the same event !

If we have learned anything so far this year, its one route, trad/classic classes only!

and please can we have one set of coloured markers for the series !

[feetupfun]

I'm not saying the Aussie rules are the ideal but they do suit the situation here where twinshock competition is quite a low key pastime.

I can well imagine that the twinshock competition situation in Spain is far more competitive hence the well defined and well enforced eligibility rules.

I would love to have the bike age classes they have in Spain. Not especially to put the bikes on an equal footing, but to encourage riders to ride some of the older bikes that never seem to get ridden here now (our twinshock class covers bikes made from 1965 to 1986). Unfortunately there are too few entries here to allow further splitting up of the twinshock field into bike age sub-groups.

One thing that does work well here for machine eligibilty is peer pressure. If a rider does something a bit dodgy regarding eligibility, it usually gets discussed and resolved before the bike gets to scrutineering at a trial. Here is an example:

A rider scratch-built a twinshock trials bike in about 1996 which was a visual and dimensional copy of a mid-1990s trials bike but with an air-cooled Yamaha trailbike motor, drum brake wheels and twin shocks. When the bike turned up at a trial, the rider was enlightened about the bike having to be made before 1984 (as was the rule then) and he quickly put the bike back on the ute.

As Woody has pointed out, the riders who win twinshock class are usually the best riders and invariably ride well-prepared, standard-looking bikes. There are also quite a few customised but era-sensitive bikes which are usually owned by people for whom the modifications are a big part of the fun of riding old bikes and where they place in an event is of secondary importance.

To put things in perspective, the most competitive twinshock bikes (the SWMs and the Fantics) are only rarely seen while bikes regarded as being also-rans in the performance stakes (Yamaha TYs, Honda TLs and TLRs, post-75 Sherpa Ts and Cotas) are the dominant bikes by number.

[majesty320]

Majestyman340 it seems to me that you are the pot thats calling the kettle black, as in the twinshock forum your banging on about altering the steering geometry of your majesty to make it steer more like a modern bike, but here your saying people shouldnt be allowed to alter thier twinshock. Call me old fashioned but Id call that double standards. Oh and bye the way the new Miller frame as you call it is a reproduction of the origional highboy frame for the TL125 which is a 30ish year old design, not some new trick frame, so I cant see anybody cleaning up on that can you . I know his because the frame was copied from Gez Canes origional which I have seen at first hand.

[old trials fanatic]

The crux of the rules debae is who is going to enforce it? The organisers wont so no matter what other riders, bystanders, bar room lawyers who ever thinks any rules are a waste of time and effort.

I used to think that construction rules and regs were essential until i got involved in actually helping to organise events then you realise you cant afford to turn riders and income away. Sad but true.

In racing it's a whole different ball game but dont fool yourself there are more Manx Nortons, DBD34 Goldies and G50 Machies racing than the factories ever made and none of them are to manufacturers spec.

Motor Sport is Motor Sport. The first thing we always did was read the blue book and push the interpretation of it as far as possible then a bit more. Thats the way it always has been and always will be. Learn to live with it.

The only rule that will ever work as Woodie has said is the no stop rule but you cant get observers to enforce it and probably never will.

So what do we do?

Pratically nothing as nothing will work but what the organisers can do is lay out the sections so that there is no advantage at all in hop skipping or any other kind of prating about. This and only this negates the "advantage" of a modified bike, whatever that is. This is the only way you will ever see some of the bikes that allegedly according to many on this site, although i meet precious few riders who express the same views, are languishing in sheds awaiting the demise of the "modern" Pre65 machines.

Downsides?? you will have to accept there will be quite a few riders finishing on 0 marks but experience has taught me that you cant have it both ways. You honestly cant. Make the sections tighter and more technical and the "std" bikes cant compete, the hoppers and jumpers dominate and the whole thing falls apart.

So debate the "rules" about machine construction all you want but without enforcement, which aint gonna happen, it's just all hot air. Sorry guys.

Edited March 25, 2008 by Old trials fanatic

[swooshdave]

Michael,

The question of post 79 twinshocks has been asked on several occasions and so far has been rejected on the statement "It will mean another class"...... I'm sure the question will continue to be asked as owners of machines in the "banned group" grow. It can also be argued that the 1 line, currently only used by Modern Classic Experts would get a lot more use. We still have a Girder class and to be quite frank there can only be a handfull of riders who own these machines compared to all the post 79 bikes that are currently just sitting around waiting for some fun competitions.

Tony

I think there is a pretty good chance to get a 79-86 twinshock class in AHRMA. Just a matter of trying.

[Guest majestyman340]

Majestyman340 it seems to me that you are the pot thats calling the kettle black, as in the twinshock forum your banging on about altering the steering geometry of your majesty to make it steer more like a modern bike, but here your saying people shouldnt be allowed to alter thier twinshock. Call me old fashioned but Id call that double standards. Oh and bye the way the new Miller frame as you call it is a reproduction of the origional highboy frame for the TL125 which is a 30ish year old design, not some new trick frame, so I cant see anybody cleaning up on that can you . I know his because the frame was copied from Gez Canes origional which I have seen at first hand.

The reason I wanted to change the head angle of my bike has to do with the fact that I am looking for similiar improvements to steering as you get from fitting the modern forks, without any non original monoshock parts on the bike, and for quite a lot less money.

In regard to the Miller frame kit, I heard from someone who has helped with making the prototype, that they have tried different steering angle, altered footrest position, and a longer swinging arm for the 250cc version.................maybe this is wrong though, and I am sure the editor of CDB probably knows a lot more about the project than I do.

[Guest majestyman340]

The crux of the rules debae is who is going to enforce it? The organisers wont so no matter what other riders, bystanders, bar room lawyers who ever thinks any rules are a waste of time and effort.

I used to think that construction rules and regs were essential until i got involved in actually helping to organise events then you realise you cant afford to turn riders and income away. Sad but true.

In racing it's a whole different ball game but dont fool yourself there are more Manx Nortons, DBD34 Goldies and G50 Machies racing than the factories ever made and none of them are to manufacturers spec.

Motor Sport is Motor Sport. The first thing we always did was read the blue book and push the interpretation of it as far as possible then a bit more. Thats the way it always has been and always will be. Learn to live with it.

The only rule that will ever work as Woodie has said is the no stop rule but you cant get observers to enforce it and probably never will.

So what do we do?

Pratically nothing as nothing will work but what the organisers can do is lay out the sections so that there is no advantage at all in hop skipping or any other kind of prating about. This and only this negates the "advantage" of a modified bike, whatever that is. This is the only way you will ever see some of the bikes that allegedly according to many on this site, although i meet precious few riders who express the same views, are languishing in sheds awaiting the demise of the "modern" Pre65 machines.

Downsides?? you will have to accept there will be quite a few riders finishing on 0 marks but experience has taught me that you cant have it both ways. You honestly cant. Make the sections tighter and more technical and the "std" bikes cant compete, the hoppers and jumpers dominate and the whole thing falls apart.

So debate the "rules" about machine construction all you want but without enforcement, which aint gonna happen, it's just all hot air. Sorry guys.

This is very very simple: any bike that doesnt comply with the rules, has to compete in the specials class, so no question of anyone being refused a ride, just that someone on a pretty original 1968 Bultaco doesnt have to compete against someone on a thinly disguised 1990s monoshock..................seems to me that unless you ride a thinly disguised 1990s mono, and are hoping to ace it up against proper TS bikes, that there shouldnt be any problems with this?

[old trials fanatic]

OK but who is going to force the rider to enter the bike in that cllass? Who is oing to enforce the rules ? When the club goes under financially due to small entries where will we all ride?

Seriously apart from on here i dont come across this massive movement for "bikes as they were" and if that was indeed the case then youd just have a field full of Fantics anyway Q.E.D. or Majestys with "modified" steering angles ?

[michaelmoore]

The only rule that will ever work as Woodie has said is the no stop rule but you cant get observers to enforce it and probably never will.

What's the problem there? It seems like the organizers will have an observers' meeting before the event starts, and they will tell everyone "this is a no-stop trials so a stop gets a 5" and then stops get a 5.

If you are going to have the observer in Section 3 giving out 5s while the observer in Section 7 is turning a blind eye, I'd think you'd have a lot of justifiably unhappy riders making it clear to the promoters that they are falling down on the job.

If every observer is an independent contractor, you may as well not have any observers at all, and just let everyone write down their own score on an "honor" system. And I'd think that events where the rules enforcement is a joke will see a drop off in attendance because there's no sense competing on an uneven and variable playing field.

I have no problem protesting people who aren't following the rules. It seeems to me that anyone who turns a blind eye to cheating is not much better than the person doing the cheating. Either the rules are good enough for everyone to ride by, or they aren't good enough for anyone. All or nothing.

Or is this a case of "he's the famous Joe Blow, so we always let him cheat?" There's nothing like obvious favoritism in the rules enforcement to leave a bad taste in everyone's mouth.

I think a case can at times be made for enforcing the spirit of the rules instead of the letter of the rules, but if that is going to be a regular occurance than the rule needs to be rewritten before the next event so that it actually says what it was meant to say.

Trials seems like a pretty simple sport to make rules for. It isn't something like cricket or baseball where you can spend months learning all the ins and outs of the rules of play.

Rules is rules. "No stopping" seems like a very simple rule that shouldn't be a problem to enforce. It certainly didn't seem hard to enforce back in the early 1970s.

cheers,

Michael

[swooshdave]

I think the problem that was brought up in a previous conversation is that, especially over the pond, the observers are use to stopping and that no-stop seems to be an exception. So observers (who are more familiar with "modern trials") at no-stop events have a higher tendency to make a mistake and not catch the stops.

At least that's my interpretation of the conversation.

Or what the little voices in my head tell me.

[old trials fanatic]

Lets just say Swooshdave that you are more in the real world than Micheal.

If you really want to see a "missinterpretation" of the no stop rule just go and ride in Spain.

In Robregordo last year Big John not only took the wrong route but when he found out performed a feet down reverse and three point turn and still got a three. You learn quickly "when in Spain do as the Spaniards"

Back to reality. We are so grateful to actually have any observers over here that if they wanted you to blow them a kiss in order to get a clean then so be it as long as they apply the same rules to all the riders through their section

Perhaps it's because we have comparatively a lot more Trials in a smaller area each weekend it dilutes the entry and available observer pool ?

[jon v8]

Lots of interesting views here,but unless I miss something massive in the theory of observed trials,the only person you can fool is yourself.Everyone starts at the bottom and works their way,(hopefully) up through the results table.So riding a twinshock or pre 65 bike to a spec that YOU know is not in the spirit of the class you entered in means YOU are a pratt for trying it on.Come the Christmas P-ss up and trophy presentation wouldnt YOU rather accept the jug knowing YOU won it fair and square ?

There are riders in the Bath club who compete on bikes who we all know are nowhere near what is in the spirit of the rules however they are written.But they turn up on the day and ride,but when the results are posted I tend to ignore them and look at who really had the best score.

[Guest majestyman340]

OK but who is going to force the rider to enter the bike in that cllass? Who is oing to enforce the rules ? When the club goes under financially due to small entries where will we all ride?

Seriously apart from on here i dont come across this massive movement for "bikes as they were" and if that was indeed the case then youd just have a field full of Fantics anyway Q.E.D. or Majestys with "modified" steering angles ?

Riders would be free to compete in any class they wanted, but obvious specials or bikes fitted with later parts taking part in std twinshock class, could have extra penalty marks added to their scores before starting. Altering the head angle of a Majesty is really not the same thing as fitting modern forks, and is something that anyone could have done when the bikes were new, and doesnt cost a lot to do.