Pre 65 Future & Pre 65 Rules

[ttspud]

9 hours ago, Stomp said:

As a very casual pre 65 rider I really don't know  the rules

Well, no-one really does, it changes from club to club, event to event.  There really are no rules these days.  You can, if you have an ACU handbook of the right kind, find them I think (and they did put modified bikes into a Specials class, which the rules here avoid), but it won't matter because clubs don't enforce them anyway. And that all started a long time ago (the non-enforcement) with the switch to the Miller series, for various reasons.  So, don't worry, you are not alone, and really it does not matter for the modified bikes anyway, but it would be nice to try to help and keep those riding your dad's type 'proper' bikes in events both for riders and for others to see/hear/enjoy.  That is what I would like to see.

9 hours ago, Stomp said:

He would laugh at us ,he called Spanish bikes plastic and cubs and bantams no better than pushbikes ,   

Yes, he would.  It is funny watching the old footage of blokes fighting the big old bikes through mud and hills and rocks, falling off, getting back on, fighting, fighting.  Then you watch the typical modern classic trial, and it is often much more gentle (rider ages a little different often!), easy bikes, easy courses, a little dab, avoiding a pebble that you had chosen to miss during your section analysis, still good fun but totally different.  I think that is probably why the Talmag is still so popular, because it still retains the old-style type of course, big, wide, long sections, set out specifically for the big bikes.  I am glad you are enjoying classic trials, that is what it is for, and always was.  I would like to see your fathers bikes remain relevant and being able to still enjoy competing, which is what this discussion is for, so many have been lost.  Anyway, good post indeed.

Edited November 24, 2021 by ttspud

[b40rt]

I've just flipped through all 6 pages to see if the spudmobile is pictured, did I miss it ?

 

Stomp, the artist formally known as ? 

Edited November 24, 2021 by b40rt

[davetom]

So you have 10 classes, plus their sub classes for original/modified, plus possible age handicaps as well . We’ll have a class each , at least there’s more chance of a trophy !
What class do I ride my B40 in, if I don’t want to ride the easy route ?

[davetom]

Can Spud post a pic of him on his bike just to prove this isn’t all some elaborate wind-up, because that’s what it looks like 👍 

[on it]

12 hours ago, ttspud said:

Very good point.  Part of the reason for starting the discussion in the first place (albeit it was years ago now) was to find out what sort of issues there might be in actually having a working set of rules so that others could move it forward

so   YOUR opening a can of worms  and  cause clubs/ volunteers a nightmare at trials (that are running ok at the moment ) and YOU just walk away from it and let others  sort it all out and take the aggro . YOU" have little time to start a club " other people have to make the time  to run the sport  ,Well sorry the sport of trials dose not need your sort ! so get used to go looking at your bike in the garage and dream  ,,,,,while others go out and trial 

[ttspud]

@trialsrfun @on it @davetom

This will be the last response to personal questions.  This is not about me and it is inappropriate to make it so or to imply that it is.  It is about having a set of rules that can be used to allow both original and modified bikes to compete alongside each other without further burden on clubs.  If any more points come in that might help the development of some rules, great.  If not, no problem.  If no-one ever wishes to try to keep some original bikes in there, no problem.  However, if someone, or an event, or a club, does try to do that, then the ideas may help and the rules are here to help.  Thanks for all your contributions, it has been a much better discussion that then previous ones.  Well done and thank you to those that have helped.

Edited November 24, 2021 by ttspud

[davetom]

So what class for Unit bikes that don’t want to ride the easy route ? Are we allowed in ?

[davetom]

The thing you don’t get spud , is that if you were to ride your bike more than an hour or two a year, you’d see it get gradually trashed , tank dented, maybe cases cracked, struggle with 70 yr old suspension etc and you’d realise why we alter our bikes to ride regularly and safely. 
Can you not see how it gets peoples backs up when someone who doesn’t compete in a sport decides that the majority who do compete are cheats that are only in it to win and fiddle ? You haven’t exactly had a rush of like minds, and you said that you can’t be bothered to do any organising yourself ?
This thread is crazy and doesn’t represent Classic Trials at all, in my opinion. 

[metisse]

On 11/18/2021 at 2:47 PM, greevesrob said:

Would this be original enough? Don't think the handicapping of younger rides would work though to think it would kill of interest for people my age. I think I made it harder for myself actually riding an original framing greeves

Why would it kill interest in the younger riders... It would level up a very uneven playing field or trials section. I ride in classes  and trials that on occasions are littered with younger riders. The sections are now catering for the new breed of rider, many of which have honed there skills riding trick riding, and to take marks the trials are increasing in severity.  Having recently returned from the recent two day trial in Spain I am amazed at how the modern rider coupled with the modern Pre 65 are able to tackle sections which would have frightened world round runners in the 80's. Its an across the board issue in not only pre 65, as classic trials not only at the very top end but filering down are becoming increasing more and more difficult.. not what was intended, and for many , not what is wanted. 

[greevesrob]

I think having a system based on solely on age wouldn't work. I know plenty of 50+ year old rides that give me a run for my money each week. Also i know it was said as a joke but the idea of riding in period gear sounds like a laugh abit like the Goodwood revival

[on it]

ttspud if people dont agree with you take it as a personal attack  ! so lets try it this way.... lets go back to 1960s  was Sammy Miller  a visionary  or a cheat ? were works bikes trick or cheat?  or was it just a case of  development to make bikes more competitive in competitive sport ? fast forward to today ( 60 yrs)  to a set of rules which work  allowing people to ride, and clubs get entrys.  Your very keen to point to cheats or cheat bikes well are these rides riding bikes  to the rules  ? well they must be or they would not be allowed !! So how can they be cheats ?  So tell us all ttspud  has any club organization told you that your bike is NOT eligible to be used ? 

Edited November 25, 2021 by on it
add

[ttspud]

1 hour ago, on it said:

are these rides riding to the rules  ?

Ok, let's look at the facts.  These are the Talmag rules (actually they are very similar to the real ACU rules, as they are, though the ACU rules puts Specials (I understand that to be bikes with pre65 bits but from different make/models) into a Specials class, the Talmag acknowledges that they are enterable, but does not separate them out):

Frame, forks, hubs, engine, gearbox, ignition and carburettor must be pre65, forks can be from a different machine but still must be pre65 ("manufactured or fitted before December 31st 1965" as stated on the entry form).  There is an allowance for the Amal Concentric mk2 carb.

Now, also on the entry form is engine serial number, frame serial number and the year of manufacture (taken as the latest date of any major component (those listed above)).  What does someone with all modern parts answer there?  Do they make something up (lie), or do they put 2020, or 2021?

Ok, now you tell me, "are these bikes riding to the rules?".  As Jon has already confirmed, 80% of bikes have electronic ignition, just as a starting point.  Not yet getting to frame, engine, forks, gearbox, hubs, carburettor and so on.  So, the answer to that is no.  In other words no, these bikes are not riding to the rules. 

Put another way, if you want the easier or colloquial expression, "they are cheating".  Attacking me constantly for others cheating, is wrong.  Accept it, many bikes do not conform to the rules, at all.  That is a fact.

1 hour ago, on it said:

well they must be or they would not be allowed !!

So, presuming you do realise and accept the facts above, that riders are effectively cheating because their bikes do not conform to the rules, and this has begun (not with Sammy Miller competing back then because that was the up to date competing, just as it is today with your Vertigos etc) probably in the 80s and 90s, little by little, until it is what we have today, some bikes without any original parts on them all, then when were clubs going to intervene and confront those not conforming to the rules? 

As has also been mentioned, Len Hutty had a bike that did not conform to the rules, even Len (God rest his soul), so who was going to confront him?  And if they did, what was going to happen? Probably a lot of abuse, maybe others would disagree, maybe losing entries, and so on.  And that is the way it continued for a long time, then the tank, then the frame, then the forks, then the hubs, then the brakes, and so on.  Now, it is even harder to confront the 'cheating', so blatant that it is it can hardly be denied but there are so many of them, that some clubs have just 'non-conforming' (would not be conforming with either the Talmag rules or the ACU rules that do exist if you can find them) bikes (so no rules really required because they have no original bikes anyway), then they enter the event (with rules as above), and the riders ignore that their bike does not conform, what then does the club do?  It is an even worse position, it is a huge financial outlay, they just want a happy day, riders enjoying the day, as we all want to do (though clearly many originals riders have had enough of the cheating and voted with their feet by leaving), and now that most bikes do not conform, the risk of putting riders off is too much given the outlay.  So, the club, on its own, can do little to nothing about it without taking a risk, even though everyone knows the situation, and every year a few more original bikes disappear, just as they have disappeared from other clubs/events, even the Scottish, and losing those bikes is considered, presumably, the lesser risk.  

From here, the only way to solve this, and to allow everyone to enjoy it, is to have a sport-wide set of rules so that there can be no condemnation at any one club and all clubs accept the responsibility and risk for the situation, where no rider can be condemned for having a bike that does not conform to the rules and said to be 'cheating', and everyone knows who they are actually competing against, and those on an original bike can feel that they are included in the competition by being able to see who they are competing against (because it isnt really possible against a modern pre65), as well as removing the risk for the club that modified riders will leave if they are confronted and remove the risk for the club that original riders will leave if nothing is done about the 'cheating' and its effect on enjoying the competition.  In other words, there is good reason why bikes that do not conform to the rules are allowed.  And actually, there is an even better reason why I have been fighting to get a good set of rules in place, accepting the abuse that comes my way, because it is the only way forward from here to have your "well they must be or they would not be allowed" become true for the good of the future of the sport. 

1 hour ago, on it said:

if people dont agree with you take it as a personal attack

A personal attack is where the subject of your attack is an individual.  For example, "on it" is not the type of person we want in our sport.  Or "on it" is an idiot for not understanding the rules that exist and that bikes do not conform to the rules.  Or "on it" is a dimwit for not understanding that "not conforming to the rules" is also known as "cheating".  Or why doesnt "on it" show "us" a picture of him riding his bike so that "we" can judge whether "he" is worthy of being called a "cheat".  No-one should be using personal abuse.   But it gets worse here, people actually try to use the "we do not want "on it" here because he is an idiot", that is trying to bully with a group.  It is quite usual for anger and denial to characterise discussion surrounding this, but it should not result in personal attacks and personal abuse.  There is a big difference between using an individual as the subject and talking about the subject at hand, the rules.  

I take a personal attack as a personal attack.  I have no problem with discussion and difference of opinion.  

Edited November 25, 2021 by ttspud

[brian0304]

If only you put as much effort into riding as typing 🥱

[ttspud]

15 minutes ago, brian0304 said:

If only you put as much effort into riding as typing 🥱

Thanks Brian! I think (and I am not confirming whether I do put as much effort into riding or not!).

[ttspud]

I am not going to post on here for the foreseeable, I have too much work to do and it is taking too much time and too distracting.  So, apologies if serious posts are missed and thanks again for the contributions that helped.  Enjoy your riding.  Good luck.