big john Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 I should point out that... er.... the committee of the Pre-65 Scottish don't view this website! Big John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted January 10, 2009 Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 "Please remember that this is a Trial for Pre65 bikes and not Pre65 Riders and that the ballot is done by category and not the first 180 out the hat." So - borrow or buy one of the bikes that has been used by one of the regulars and that's it - guaranteed entry as it is all about the bike, not the rider, and that bike will have been accepted year after year - who is actually entered on it should be irrelevant... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchie Posted January 10, 2009 Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 Perhaps ER of the committee should read this ...My ER..as indoors does sometimes , she finds it boring and irrelevant perhaps the two ER's would be in agreement....... People who ride every year are happy as it is , why change it, and others think it should be a fair for one and all, bar ex winners and a few exceptions. This is not a new problem with the increased numbers of riders trying to get in, some ten years ago after trying several times to gain an entry it became clear that you had pull strings to get in or have a recognisable surname. I do hope the club considers the views of the riders, some comments suggest they have nt the time or perhaps interest, disappointing if that is the case. It remains a very very good trial, one I would like to ride again some day........ Ballot gods permitting....... Frenchie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapshot 3 Posted January 10, 2009 Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 Perhaps ER of the committee should read this ...My ER..as indoors does sometimes , she finds it boring and irrelevant perhaps the two ER's would be in agreement.......People who ride every year are happy as it is , why change it, and others think it should be a fair for one and all, bar ex winners and a few exceptions. This is not a new problem with the increased numbers of riders trying to get in, some ten years ago after trying several times to gain an entry it became clear that you had pull strings to get in or have a recognisable surname. I do hope the club considers the views of the riders, some comments suggest they have nt the time or perhaps interest, disappointing if that is the case. It remains a very very good trial, one I would like to ride again some day........ Ballot gods permitting....... Frenchie I'll continue to disagree with some of your sentiments but they are your views so I'll respect that. Two friends of mine have submitted entries for year and generally been successful in gaining an entry, this year that didn't happen. One is in the other is on the reverve list. The latter accepts the situation and always expects the worst when the result of the ballot comes out each year this time he was unlucky. He's not a superstar or a hugely known name outside Scotland but he puts and immense amount of time and effort into all bike sport, if he can't "fiddle" an entry each year maybe its reasonably fair after all.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big john Posted January 10, 2009 Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 Perhaps ER of the committee should read this ...My ER..as indoors does sometimes , she finds it boring and irrelevant perhaps the two ER's would be in agreement.......People who ride every year are happy as it is , why change it, and others think it should be a fair for one and all, bar ex winners and a few exceptions. This is not a new problem with the increased numbers of riders trying to get in, some ten years ago after trying several times to gain an entry it became clear that you had pull strings to get in or have a recognisable surname. I do hope the club considers the views of the riders, some comments suggest they have nt the time or perhaps interest, disappointing if that is the case. It remains a very very good trial, one I would like to ride again some day........ Ballot gods permitting....... Frenchie In tandem with my learned friend Mr. Slapshot, I don't agree with all you write, but as it is your opinion, I too respect that and we may continue to differ. What I was humourously pointing out was that this discussion may indeed fall on deaf ears, not because of any desire not to listen, but the fact that many of the Pre65 and indeed the SSDT committee (save a few) do not have computers to view this website! The '....er...' was not intended to be 'female' but merely a humourous expression used fairly commonly in conversations similar to the smiley: meaning 'unsure' As to Woody's comments, the club have been criticised previously for allowing riders under 40 to compete and of course it is a requirement that the sport needs some young blood to ensure that Pre65 continues for some time to come, don't we? My own thought is this: why did the Pre65 movement leave the genuine bikes behind? Presumably the competitive streak that insists that we all must ride machines built on 31st December 1964 and then put Betor/Marzocchi/Ceriani internals into forks and so on and so on. It would have been much simpler just to have some fun on old bikes that had been dragged out of retirement wouldn't it? That's at the expense of being an old fuddy-duddy or purist (a la Deryk Wylde!) Whereas now we have bikes costing three times the price of a brand new Gasser. Maybe we should copy the Americans in that the winning bike is up for sale at a maximum of say Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 As to Woody's comments, the club have been criticised previously for allowing riders under 40 to compete and of course it is a requirement that the sport needs some young blood to ensure that Pre65 continues for some time to come, don't we?My own thought is this: why did the Pre65 movement leave the genuine bikes behind? Presumably the competitive streak that insists that we all must ride machines built on 31st December 1964 and then put Betor/Marzocchi/Ceriani internals into forks and so on and so on. It would have been much simpler just to have some fun on old bikes that had been dragged out of retirement wouldn't it? That's at the expense of being an old fuddy-duddy or purist (a la Deryk Wylde!) Whereas now we have bikes costing three times the price of a brand new Gasser. Not sure what comments you're responding to there as I've never criticised the age of riders in the event. In a previous post in this thread someone stated that it was a trial catering primarily for older gentlemen on old bikes and I responded by pointing out that it wasn't. The age of riders in the event is of no interest to me young or old, therefore I've no feelings to express on that subject. As for Mr Wylde I know someone who went to buy a Pre65 trials bike from him once. He was looking for an original example and given the man's well voiced opinion on originality, thought that the bike would be what he was looking for. Imagine his surprise to find that it had been modified by the owner to make it 'more rideable'. Another case of double standards. There's a simple enough reason as to why riders began to leave the genuine specification of Pre65 bikes behind and that was to gain any mechanical advantage they could over their fellow competitors. It began long ago and has eventually spawned today's cottage industry that provides 'lookalike' (that's a laugh in itself) Pre65 type components to 2009 specification. People these days seem to have been sucked into believing that all of these brand new components are 'must haves' in order to create a rideable machine. That in itself isn't true, a nice rideable bike can be created for a fraction of the cost of what is being spent. Unfortunately, regulations governing some of the Pre65 scene, not just the Pre65 Scottish, prohibit anyone doing it on a modest budget because of the 'eligibility' rules. And that is the biggest grievance that a lot of people have as it is an absolute farce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big john Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 Sorry Woody, I should have written 'quote' and not 'comment' in my previous post! I wasn't having a go at you, but I do know that some people have made accusations in the past! I totally agree, there is no need to spend such an amount of money on a 2009 Cub, buy a Gas Gas it's half the price. Big John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatbikedude Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 (edited) I've said this before but what about making it a pre'60 trial? - or even better a pre'60 Pre-Unit construction trial. I bet a lot of the riders on cub/B40tacos have real bikes lying tucked up at the back of their garages. It would make the spectators life more interesting. Edited January 11, 2009 by fatbikedude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big john Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 I'd have to go back to the Matchless then! Big John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 I've said this before but what about making it a pre'60 trial? - or even better a pre'60 Pre-Unit construction trial.I bet a lot of the riders on cub/B40tacos have real bikes lying tucked up at the back of their garages. It would make the spectators life more interesting. Err so what about GOV 132 or are we supposed to turn a "blind eye" to replicas of GOV too ? Still dont see why anybody would want to ride a std spec bike c/w steel everything and bakalite tyres. Dont have any problem with the bikes but as for the farce that portends to be a "ballot" well that makes the US system seem almost transparent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapshot 3 Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 (edited) Err so what about GOV 132 or are we supposed to turn a "blind eye" to replicas of GOV too ? Paul...how you doin?? Hypothetical. So would you say that GOV132 was the start of it all??? What do you class as a replica, something built 30 years ago or something that's a constant work in progress? Lets not stop at Ariels? Lets go onto James', Cubs? We won't even bother going down the road of BSA's. Still dont see why anybody would want to ride a std spec bike c/w steel everything and bakalite tyres. ...because there are some that do want to ride original bike and they have to be catered for, you can't just throw them out because they are ancient. My favourite bikes over the last few years? Those amazing rigid 500 Nortons, Arthur Lamkin's ORIGINAL C15 that Chris Sutton rode a couple of years back and a certain Matchless....that's never changed, not as long as I can remember. The Ariels, jimmy's cubs and big Triumph twins are pretty to look at but they don't do it as much for me as some other. Dont have any problem with the bikes but as for the farce that portends to be a "ballot" well that makes the US system seem almost transparent Your view. The Ballot: it's the rule, it won't change, I do not believe it's as farcical as most seem to be under the impression, the individuals involved that I know are too honest to be "on the fiddle" and I'll stand by that. Just my views Edited January 11, 2009 by Slapshot 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazer Posted January 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 thanks big john for putting me intouch with clive, he has given me some good tips, so iam now just started to lower the gearing etc, mum remembers you from the shop days, and she is comming up to scotland as well so hopefully she will bump into you somwere. It sounds like iam in for a tough ride, but all i want to do is finnish, most of my mates think i need a medel just getting it of the trailer, cheers Gary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big john Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 thanks big john for putting me intouch with clive, he has given me some good tips, so iam now just started to lower the gearing etc, mum remembers you from the shop days, and she is comming up to scotland as well so hopefully she will bump into you somwere. It sounds like iam in for a tough ride, but all i want to do is finnish, most of my mates think i need a medel just getting it of the trailer, cheers Gary Now that's the spirit of the Pre65 Scottish! That is what it's all about, friendship and good honest to goodness fun!!! Big John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted January 12, 2009 Report Share Posted January 12, 2009 Hi Slapper sorry i'm not to good with confusers so please bear with me. In response. Paul...how you doin?? Doing fine mate just sorry i wont be up to see you and your dad this year. Hypothetical. So would you say that GOV132 was the start of it all??? Start of "it" all ? "it" started with the very first bike that was ever trialed and continued with every trials bike ever since it's the nature of trials " improving the breed " What do you class as a replica, something built 30 years ago or something that's a constant work in progress? Not really bothered theyre all bikes. Lets not stop at Ariels? Lets go onto James', Cubs? We won't even bother going down the road of BSA's. Every bike entered in this years event is "modified" in some way however small from the day it left the factory. ...because there are some that do want to ride original bike and they have to be catered for, you can't just throw them out because they are ancient. My favourite bikes over the last few years? Those amazing rigid 500 Nortons, Arthur Lamkin's ORIGINAL C15 that Chris Sutton rode a couple of years back and a certain Matchless....that's never changed, not as long as I can remember. The Ariels, jimmy's cubs and big Triumph twins are pretty to look at but they don't do it as much for me as some other. But nobody has ever said if someone wans to ride an "original" bike they cant. They wont win but thats not always the point for some nay most of the entry. Your view. The Ballot: it's the rule, it won't change, I do not believe it's as farcical as most seem to be under the impression, the individuals involved that I know are too honest to be "on the fiddle" and I'll stand by that. I dont believe anybody "fiddles" the ballot. I just don believe it's a true ballot as most people understand a ballot. FWIW i dont see why any previous winners should get an automatic entry but that just my humble. Little bits are finally coming out that the "ballot" is "organised" which is fine if only that was openly admited to. The pre65 Scottish is mostly effectively a "invitation" event with a "ballot" of sorts for the remaining places. I'm ok with that also but please be open about what happens and dont insult my and others intellegence by trying to make out otherwise. Just be open and honest or even better hand over ALL the entries to a 3rd party who has no connection with the Trials community who would hold a totally accountable and open to inspection draw for places with no and i mean no pre allocated rides wether the person supports the trial financially or has a sibling riding or any other good cause. If "original", i've never seen one outside a museum, bikes "need" to be seen and are so popular to the spectators, since when has a trial been organised for spectators?, why not have a concours competition in the car park? Just my views Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapshot 3 Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Two most recent posts deleted, I believe a very inappropriate and potentially threatening twist to the discussion regarding the Scottish Pre65 Trial. I believe we all want this trial to continue despite the differences of opinion people have regarding the ballot and it's outcome, bike eligibility etc therefore moving the discussion to where it was going I feel is underming the work the organisers do and the work of the SSDT as that was mention also. If either of the relevant forum members wish to discuss the reasons for deleting the posts further then please contact me by PM. All subsequent posts of a similar nature will be deleted on sight Slapshot 3 Forum Moderator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.