Sammy Miller Series 2017 - Proposed Changes

[davetom]

The HT was dangerous with me on it, I'm sure more skilful riders cope fine

[davetom]

I don't have a problem with fairness, no. I regularly ride against different bikes,there are blokes riding billet Bantams that I usually beat, and others on original big bikes that ride rings round me. Maybe I should have more of a competitive streak but I just go out most weeks and enjoy riding.

Yes that is my bike, it looks different now, and I don't live at that house anymore, I'd have given you a pic if you'd asked, I find it a bit creepy that you've gone through 8 yrs of posts to show me a pic of my own bike

[collyolly]

Hi TTSpud

I am getting bored now but what trials had entries of 450 ?

I wish you would stop throwing around questionable facts without backing them up, you admit to not being a competitor, not riding on the road, yet you still keep banging on about fairness in competition when you have an unfair advantage over other new riders to your class ( original ) when you have the use of an ex works bike ( ie modified over the standard otherwise it's not ex works is it ? ) that you have not had to pay for !

I wish I had your advantages.

[collyolly]

Are you sure that number relates to the trials entry at one event ?

As I read it, that is the number of riders who have competed in the requisite number of events of a series to be eligible for an award !

That is a lot different from the number of riders in an event !

Please advise the correct meaning of this post as it is very misleading to keep going on about falling entries when the start point is wrongly interpreted.

Perhaps the original author would care to enlighten us ?

[woody]

Still banging on about unfair competition as the reason for falling entries I see

 

NBB Championship 100+ entries

Manx classic 200+ entries with over 100 oversubscribed

Midlands BMCA championship  50 entries average

Scottish Pre65 180 entries with around 200 oversubscribed

 

All of the above have standard and modified machines competing together in the same class

 

You cite the Talmag as fair to standard machines and representative of how a Pre65 trial should be run. I'm willing to be corrected but there is no specials class which means modified bikes are competing against standard bikes in the same class? If so it has no detrimental effect on entries

 

Whatever the reason for falling entries in the Miller series it has nothing to do with your theory. The number of modified bikes has also decreased, as well as twinshocks. Tell me how that equates to your reasoning?

 

If you had been competing in these events over the last 10 - 15 years and were still in touch with riders who no longer support it and therefore aware of their views and feelings, you may find people give your theory some credibility. But you haven't and you're not so what exactlyhave you based your thinking on?

[woody]

Well you give is a laugh if nothing else Spud

 

You have never competed in any of the series whose rules you criticise - ever. You know nothing of the issues that may affect the Miller series from personal experience, or possible causes for reducing entries - although you overlook the fact that they have been pretty well supported until the last round. I doubt you've actually spoken to or even know anyone who has supported it.

 

You've stated yourself you've never ridden a Miller round, never ridden any of the other trials series whose eligibility criteria you criticise, you admit you've never considered entering a road trial, which means you never will enter a Miller round in the future either, whatever the rules may be.

 

You aren't prepared to actively do anything to rectify a situation that only you seem to think needs rectifying, you just pontificate on here and suggest others implement your ideas

 

You disregard again my points on other trials as they disprove your theory and didn't bother to respond directly to my point about the Talmag having modified and standard machines competing in the same class - a point I'm willing to be proven wrong on but if right has your theory spiraling earthbound in a ball of flame

 

You have no real purpose to involving yourself in these discussions as you'll never ride or assist in the running of an event yourself. Seems to me that as has been mentioned before in your previous topics on Pre65 eligibility, you are just trolling for fun and trying to wind people up.

[collyolly]

So this is what trolling is is it ? ( I am the ultimate Technophobe, don't even use a mobile )

Well I have been well and truly caught, I believe I gave TTSpud the perfect formula for resolving his issues with our system, he could easily have set up the process to check bikes eligibility for his imaginary trials series before the event and then had complete control of the TTSpud 'Originals Trials Series' results and championship table for all these hordes of reluctant competitors just waiting to drag out their unmolested bikes and drag them round the easy route. Not going to happen is it ?

I am sure the ACU would have given him permission to use their results just to shut him up.

Why not post the pictures ? Perhaps some rivet counter would notice that the flinge bracket had an extra hole in it making it super light, can't possibly have any advantage can we except of course the imaginary ex-works bike. By the way all bikes came out of a workshop originally so perhaps we all have got one.

[charlie prescott]

Hi Guy's.

 

I am only just back from the Golden Isle Of Man, and still suffering the midge bites that I got standing out in pouring rain for four hours on Saturday along with the un-prasied  observers, just to take some photos.

 

Then I get back thinking stay out of this pointless discussion, while trying to down load a seventeen minuet video on Youtube that has taken twenty four hours only to be

 

told that it is two minutes over the fifteen that I am allowed , but it has done me a favour because in the last day the  constant going around in circles has told me that the

 

few posting on here discourages, any sensible debate on the future, or not on the British Bike Based trials scene.

 

I have done my bit in the past, and would do in the future if only we got help and encouragement to what you the few posting on here want? and you know you are only

 

the minority, most riders don't give a dam what is published on TC or BSA Otter.com and just get on trying to find a local trial to ride in next week end.

 

The AC-U have left it to late, and are only panicking now that Sam has said enough, and are trying to make it right by giving you the chance to help them out of the moire.

 

Have they contacted Deryk? who could easily give them pointers to, what might work in the future, or anyone else that has put there club and themselves on the line to run

 

trials that will encourage some of the dusty old bikes propping up the shed walls, back out to see daylight, or will they just rot in peace.

 

Unless someone willing to take a chance on losing £10,000 plus trying to organise an event or series for the bikes stated, the best thing is to shut up and let Allegory take its course.

 

Charlie.~Oo>

[rusty ken]

I am a novice who has only recently returned trials after 30+ years away form the sport, and have been riding a heavyweight 350 Matchless in local club events, so I probably fall into one of the categories of rider you are trying to encourage back out. 

 

My local club trials also attract a number of twin shock entries.  The Matchless has a Bamford frame, alloy rims, and modern rear shocks, so would fall into the proposed "modified" class.  Whilst I agree with previous comments that a modified cub, C15, etc is more than capable of  tackling the same obstacles as a twin shocker, to suggest that I would ride the same sections on my heavyweight is laughable.  I'm sure there are some experienced riders who could pilot a pre unit around the sections set for the twin shockers, but I for one don't think that it would be much fun, and would be leaving my pre-unit in the garage and either looking for a more modern bike or just abandoning the sport. 

 

Similar to mentions in some of the earlier posts, I look for events that I will enjoy and that will provide a bit of a challenge but that won't kill me. I agree with the earlier suggestion that sections should be set to allow almost every rider to paddle through for a 3, but understand that sections will be set to take marks off the top riders.  If these riders are on twin shocks and modified lightweights (2 stroke or 4 stroke) my hopes of an enjoyable day on my heavy weight pretty much disappear.  Given the apparent fall in entries from riders on pre unit bikes I may not be alone in this opinion. I share the view mentioned earlier that I'm not particularly interested in the scores of the top riders, rather how I compare to friends at a similar level, and in having a good day's sport.  If it was only about being competitive than I'd buy a modern bike and go and compete!

 

If we want to see pre unit British bikes at classic trials, then there needs to be a class for them, with suitable sections (the easy route?).  Otherwise the future is twin shock classes which can include heavily modified "Britshocks".

 

As a final thought, as the twin shock class develops and these bikes are developed and modified, and the sections become more challenging, will Britshocks still be competitive or are they on their way to becoming the pre-unit heavyweights of tomorrow?

[charlie prescott]

Hi Guys.

 

Thanks Deryk, on both counts.

 

Perhaps now everyone on here reading your statement  will realise how much hard work has to go into achieving a goal, and it is possible again if a young man or woman  would step up and take on that mantle?

 

However he or she would have to be totally dedicated to the history of British Pre unit trials bikes and know there limitations, so can it happen? time will tell.

 

Deryk i hope you and I are still about to see it!

 

And Yes next time I am straight down Boots>

 

Regards Charlie ~Oo>

[davetom]

What was the queuing like back then ? If you had 20-30 starting each section surely you'd spend a lot of time hanging about ? Sections would change a lot after being ridden 1000 times too ?

[davetom]

That explains it then, thanks. Are multi lap off road trials a modern invention ?

[on it]

  I have rode SM rounds and KIA  on a twin shock  so feel I can add something . What I can see is trials for these bikes are getting harder so catch 22 mod a bike or leave ? . It seems the people that have spent 1000s on a bike want harder sections more of a advantage ?,ANS ....Well start from scratch make the sections  for standard bikes ie easy ! yes modified  bikes will find it easy but they will not have that much of a advantage, how many times on these forums has someone put ive just got a bike what mods to do ?, It might also make people think whats the point of (spending 1000s )modifying my bike , As for loads of cleans ? well the oldest rider wins or a special test .  What I have found over the years it is harder to ride a easy trial than a hard trial . AS for the bikes  waist of time  trying to sort the bikes now  as it has BEEN let to get out of hand,  so make sections so there is NO advantage to a modified bike ,and please remember  to all these people that keep saying  "standard " back in the day it was 1 course suits all ! plus the sections were a lot harder then than now just not as tight !

[2stroke4stroke]

The multilap thing came in with a vengeance when the ACU barred events using more than one piece of ground during the foot and mouth epidemic of 1967. The remaining road events were, if I recall correctly, pretty well killed off by the oil crisis of the early 70s when road use for motorsport was effectively barred by the government.

Once they discovered that they didn't have to tax their bikes for these pocket handkerchief trials, as they were referred to, after the ACU relaxed the requirement to do so then trials riders were happy not to register them at all which destroyed entry levels for the few road trials left.

[woody]

Now that some form of tranquility has returned, maybe we can have some thoughts from riders who have participated in the series, what we think is actually wrong with the Miller series and why entries have dropped a little at some rounds,

 

Or is the current format acceptable and it may be just a certain amount of apathy that has seen riders drift in and out. I know quite a few riders who have taken part but have dropped out again, but they have also dropped out of other trials they competed in, including modern, so in those cases, occassional interest in trials in general can't be blamed on the Miller format. I know of other riders who get fed up with the maintenance of older bikes, British or twinshock, and just park them up and go back to their modern bikes until they find the enthusiasm to set to with the spanners again. No matter how thorough you are in preparation, 40 plus year old components and castings can give trouble at any point. The modern bike can be used without the same level of upkeep (generally)

 

It's possible also that some riders have lost interest in riding the same trials/sections since the series dropped to 7 rounds as they have been the same clubs who run events year in year out. This isn't a criticism of mine but I daresay it could be true of some other riders who feel it has gone a bit stale.

 

For me the format is pretty close to being right. Road based and a mix of twinshocks and British bikes. I'd be very disappointed if a decision was made to exclude twinshocks from a future format as these bikes have no other national series that offers the opportunity to ride traditional one lap road events. There is now the KIA yes, but it's offroad and also includes British and Monoshocks, so it isn't a twinshock series as some keep stating. Some riders travel together and one may have twinshock, the other British, so exclude one and you possible lose both. Personally I like the variety of bikes we have at the moment although it would be nice to see some older models of twinshocks out there, which brings me onto the next point.

 

Classes.

 

I'd like to see the big pre-units have their own class back as I don't think it appropriate that they are grouped in the same class as the smaller and modified bikes - Bantams, James, Cubs, C15 etc. So I'r run along the lines of:

 

Sidecar

Rigid

Pre-unit 4-stroke over 350cc  (did they do any under 350 as I'm no expert on Pre-units

Unit 4-stroke over 350cc

Unit 4-stroke and 2-stroke up to 350cc

 

And for twinshocks I'd like to see a Pre and Post 1976 class. I don't like the idea of Spanish and non-Spanish classes as I don't think it achieves anything. With this split you give riders of earlier bikes the chance to compete in a class against each other as I'm reasonably sure that at the moment they won't take part as they think that the sections are set for Fantics etc. This isn't true at all but people believe what is written on forums etc by others who don't even take part... I've ridden my 1970 Sherpa on the hard route there have been no sections too hard for the bike. There have been some, but they are an exception in a couple of trials, where some sections have been too tight, requiring clutch/brake inching around turns - which I hate, The bike will still do them but it's a struggle and a clean very hard to achieve whereas on a more modern of modified Pre65 they are a no challenge.

 

The 1976 break is a natural as that was the year that longer travel suspension started as well as complete redesigns of current models. Montesa 348, 349, Ossa MAR MK3 with angled dampers, Green MAR, Yamaha Majesty, Beamish, Fantic,SWM etc all go in Post 76 leaving the older Spanish models, RL Suzuki, KT, TY175 and 250, TL Honda etc all in the earlier class.  Yes some models cross over such as the Montesa 247 and the TY175 and 250 but they barely changed so a later model is technically the same as the earlier model, so I'd put them as pre-76

 

Components for the twinshocks should be limited to only allowing what was available at that time which means nothing later than 1986, so if someone has Yam mono forks it doesn't matter, they could have done that then as they came out in '83 - plus they won't turn a bike into a 'cheating winner'. Their better action would be barely noticeable. Also, a lot of bikes also have them fitted and it isn't right to make people retro fit parts now. Frames and engines should be from the appropriate period, so if you have a combination of an early / late frame or engine, you enter the later class. Wheels I wouldn't worry about as many bridge the two periods. Minimalists rules which are hopefully easy to police. Tubeless rims allowed and carburettors free.

 

I think the modification of twinshocks is a lot less of an issue than is written about. Yes there are some but most of the bikes I see competing are close to standard, ie: they haven't had frames chopped, may have had footrests altered but still run most of the original components. As bars are a lot lower now than they were in the 70s some (me included being tall) fit bar risers or have the yoke modified to allow bar risers as they are difficult to fit to swept back mounts such as Bultaco / Yamaha. Yes, a small few go berserk and think you need head angles altering, big volume airboxes (what's that all about when a trials bike spends most of it's time on quarter throttle...) modern forks, special exhausts etc etc but for what purpose. Today's classic trials are nowhere near the severity of an old centre trial. People telling you that you need this mod and that mod to make your twinshock competitive for today's 'modern' classic sections talk hogwash. I well remember what Mark Hicken could do on a 240 Fantic back then without any of these mods on sections that would have a classic trial entry from today pack up and go home without unloading their bikes...

 

For routes I'd keep the current format which allows the option of a third easy route where needed for rigids and sidecars, so that's route 1 - hard, route 2 - easy and route 3 - rigid/sidecar.  All other classes other than sidecar/rigid have the option of entering route 1 or route 2. Rigid/sidecar do route 2 when no route 3

 

That's how I'd like to see it go forward, hopefully the reintroduction of the pre-unit class would bring more of those bikes back and the twinshock split might see more older twinshocks competing

 

From what I've seen over the years, section severity across all routes is suitable for all, obviously there are exceptions due to weather or when organisers just get things wrong (we all make mistakes) but I would like to see some sightly more challenging sections on the harder route from time to time. That doesn't mean dangerous of tight, just a bit more challenging as some rounds can be very easy and if you have a chain derail for example it's the end of any chance of a top place as there is no opportunity to pull marks back

 

My thoughts anyway - any more?

 

EDIT:  And no specials class  for twinshock. There is no need and standard-ish bikes are more than adequate. Giving a class to specials just encourages people to construct them. If they don't comly with the rules, let them ride on a no points basis but don't have a seperate championship class for them

Edited September 8, 2016 by woody