Pre 65 Future & Pre 65 Rules

[woody]

Do you just interpret what people write as you see fit to suit your own argument.

I'm not interested in the Talmag rules as they are for that trial only and I don't and never will ride it, I've no interest in it. Whatever rules are applied to the Talmag have no influence or relevance to what other clubs throughout the country run for their events.  And it's not the only event to bring riders from the continent, as you'd know if you rode classic events

If it upsets you so much that people are flouting Talmag rules with their bikes, go there and glue youself to the ground at the entrance to section 1 in protest until the organisers haul all bikes back to parc ferme, scrutineer them and put those you think should be there into a specials class.

If you believe in and want something, put the effort in and do something about it. You say how hard can it be to note down original bikes? Well go to the Talmag and try it as you're obviously unhappy with the way they do it, go and show them how it should be done and see how easy or hard it is examining almost 300 bikes for anything that might deem them a special

As for investing time on this, all you've done is spend 6 years rattling on about it on a forum which doesn't take much time or effort does it.  Obviously people are going to think you're trolling and doing it for a wind up when that's all you've done

 

[der_trials]

what is it you are looking to achieve ttspud?  It looks like your options are to ride your bike in events that are currently run and accept the rules those events but in which the majority of other competitors are cheats or as has been posted earlier organise your own events with the rules which you believe to be correct which you have stated you have no interest in.  How about just going out and riding your bike.  The trials shangri-la you seek may or may not exist but you'll never find out from the comfort of your keyboard.

[brian0304]

Yes you define ‘troll’ with your decision to go on a forum for a sport you have little contact with , and label the majority cheats and claim the rules are all wrong .

your responses , with all this multi-quoting and masses of text , are more like a 15 yr old girl than bloke who just wants to ride bikes.

definitely final post, troll 

[ttspud]

6 hours ago, woody said:

Whatever rules are applied to the Talmag have no influence or relevance to what other clubs throughout the country run for their events.

That is where we completely disagree. Riders do not stick to one club, so other clubs rules are very relevant.

I believe that having very different rules at different clubs can and has had a very serious impact on clubs and creates a big burden on clubs, and riders.  I believe that there must be sport-wide rules that allow both kinds of bike to compete and be included for very good reasons, you do not.  And you have no interest in how other clubs are run or their rules.  Let's look at that (and think of the burden that that attitude will have, which you are concerned with).

So club A uses normal Pre-65 rules as laid out by history, has lots of original bikes, very wide, easy course, hundreds of riders.

Club B has no original bikes, a handful of very tricked out bikes, so decides that that is fine, ride what you like.  As a note, these bikes are (except for rear suspension travel) as good as a modern bike, you can see a modern Bantam happily competing in the Southern Experts at the weekend, for example, 4ft steps, easy.  In other words, modern pre65 bikes are a world apart from original pre65 bikes.

So, as you say, you have no interest in the sport-wide rules as they have been (there a no others) or clubs that use rules based on them.  Well, what happens in that scenario?

Well, riders from club B will ride at club A, have your attitude that the rules do not matter, believe that they are not cheating when they categorically are, and that will all cause a lot of problems and a big burden on the club. 

Club A now has riders from club B on modern machines (which may as well be Vertigos) complaining that they are finding it far too easy, and riders from their own club (club A) finding it too hard already on proper pre65 bikes.  Rules are not enforced for the reasons given in an earlier post, for many reasons.  So, the club feels in a difficult position, and opens up a 'harder' route, with all the work involved there, more difficult to observe, problems losing riders from their own club that now cannot compete, more work on all aspects of the trial.  A much higher burden, with the future looking like becoming club B sooner or later because the originals riders will slowly lose out and walk away.  The Vertigo Ariels are being seen as exactly the same as the original bikes, which is ridiculous.  Then begins the inevitable decline, as in all club B scenarios, whereby even the riders of the trick machines have had enough of the next guy making his bike even more trick and costing even more money.

And that is the current scenario.

The problem of having no enforced sport-wide rules that protect the proper pre65 bikes is obvious; cheating becomes rife to the detriment of the less competitive machines, leading to a complete loss of pre65 bikes from the sport, and ultimately a complete loss of the sport itself.  Of course, some will enjoy destroying the sport for original bikes in the belief that their way is the right way and everyone else can bugger off.  Well, it is actually that attitude that has caused the problem in the first place by not respecting the rules that exist, and cheating.  

11 hours ago, woody said:

I'm not interested in the Talmag rules as they are their own rules for that event only.

That is the crux of the whole thing. Riders not respecting the rules, being selfish, not caring about the effect of cheating on others.  And exporting the damage done by not respecting the rules that exist from one club to the next, slowly destroying each one in terms of pre65 bikes as it goes.  It is not right to come to another club, on a non-conforming bike, cheat, and believe that it is ok because their own club has a different set of rules, period.

I now understand why you are saying what you are saying.  You do not believe in rules because you want to ride a tricked out bike and are worried about the repercussions of having rules that allow both kinds of bike to compete fairly.  And you do not believe in club rules that mean that a tricked out bike is cheating.  That does not make that position right.  Anyway, very enlightening, and now I do understand what has happened and is happening.

Edited November 26, 2021 by ttspud

[ttspud]

30 minutes ago, brian0304 said:

a sport you have little contact with

Actually, I have been involved with trials for 40 years, and have ridden, observed and helped organise.  Not that that is relevant to a discussion on rules.

30 minutes ago, brian0304 said:

definitely final post, troll

Great, thanks for you contribution (signing off as a troll is accurate by the way).

Edited November 26, 2021 by ttspud

[ttspud]

39 minutes ago, der italian trials said:

what is it you are looking to achieve ttspud?  It looks like your options are to ride your bike in events that are currently run and accept the rules those events but in which the majority of other competitors are cheats or as has been posted earlier organise your own events with the rules which you believe to be correct which you have stated you have no interest in.  How about just going out and riding your bike.  The trials shangri-la you seek may or may not exist but you'll never find out from the comfort of your keyboard.

Thanks.  I guess I would like to see sport-wide rules in place to help clubs deal with the current situation, as explained throughout the thread and just above.  The impact of having vastly different club rules and bikes, with no sport-wide rules, is not good.  But, yes, I do wonder if I am wasting my time sometimes, why put this much effort into something that I am not personally going to see that much benefit from, but hopefully the sport will.  Yes, I do ride my bike(s), I just am not interested in getting into the 'trolling' that so many here indulge in (ie off-topic messages trying to evoke and emotional response) since this is not about me, it is about the sport.  When I see that the original thread is 6 years old, wow, that is amazing.  Anyway, good point.

Edited November 26, 2021 by ttspud

[der_trials]

Trials is further fragmented by the other contentious rules (stop vs. no stop) I think folk just need to get out and ride their bikes and remember what it is that attracted us to the sport in the first place.  I don't think anyone will change each others opinion in this setting but maybe a post trial beverage shared would get folk on the same page

[ttspud]

5 minutes ago, der italian trials said:

I think folk just need to get out and ride their bikes and remember what it is that attracted us to the sport in the first place.

Yes, that is great, a very noble sentiment.  Unfortunately though, there is an issue which has caused and is still causing the sport to lose so many riders of these bikes, and the bikes, the one being discussed here.  Possibly too many people have turned a blind eye to it in the past.  Anyway, of course, get out there and enjoy it, without damaging the sport for anyone else, that would be best.

8 minutes ago, der italian trials said:

a post trial beverage shared would get folk on the same page

I wish it were that simple.

[der_trials]

I can only speak from my own personal experience but an event relatively local to me ran for many years for p65 only bike and achieved an entry of around 40.  The trial ran 18 sections over two laps for 2 days so the number of observers required was almost equal to the riders. The organising club opened the event up to twinshock bikes and changed to two routes and the event grew in popularity to around 100 riders.  The event was further boosted by creating a theme and guest riders for each year and now entries are over subscribed.  It's pretty much the opposite to what your perceived issue is.  The demand for events for original p65 bikes may already be satisfied by what out there Talmag etc.?

[davetom]

In all these years of complaining on here, Spud hasn’t ridden in any Taverners events that are pretty much how he wants things . If the whole sport changes tomorrow to his way of thinking, who’s to say he’ll bother riding anyway ?

You’d think the Taverners events would be as popular as the Talmag, but we know that riders just bring a bike out for what is more a celebration than a competition.

Its the same with the Banbury vintage run, lots of bikes have their only outing for one Sunday afternoon .

He could’ve organised a trial with all the effort wasted on here ?

[ttspud]

18 minutes ago, der italian trials said:

The organising club opened the event up to twinshock bikes and changed to two routes and the event grew in popularity to around 100 riders

Yes, that is really common I think.  If you look at many classic clubs, that is the case, lots of twinshocks, a few lightweights (Bantams etc), a very few big bikes which are very likely trick ones, and then none or a couple of originals if you are very lucky.  That is the way things have gone in many clubs, no doubt about it. a new breed of classic (the Fantics etc) are really popular, reliving a childhood and so on.  I do not think that that is in any way the cause of the decline of the Pre65s, rather the beginning of a new area of the sport.  Nor do I think it has a bearing on the reasons for the decline in pre65.

The reasons why Pre65 has lost popularity will be many, no doubt.  But the rules one is one of those, and can be fixed, so that clubs that still do have original bikes can protect the entry.  Otherwise, all clubs will go down that route and there will be only the twinshock (Fantic etc) and modern pre65s out there.  That is the point of this, to try to do something.  It is always possible to enlarge the entry criteria to enlarge the entry, allow 2-strokes, allow pre-70s, allow twinshocks or whatever.  But that is not really dealing with the issue at hand for pre65 bikes, which isn't "opposite" but a totally separate issue.  It is very likely that no-one will be able to increase the pre65 entry much, and certainly not quickly, and no way will the pre65 entry match the twinshock entry, but it would be nice to try to support the existing entry, and maybe hope for a few re-entrants in the years ahead.

[davetom]

Why don’t you ride Taverners, and why aren’t they more popular, if there’s lots of riders wanting that sort of event ?

[der_trials]

At this event there are still original p65 bikes in the entry, however for the p65 original entry by itself the trial was barely viable.  As we say in Scotland ttspud you are havering!  Does the work of King Canute interest you at all?

[ttspud]

8 minutes ago, der italian trials said:

for the p65 original entry by itself the trial was barely viable

Yes, that has been the same for many clubs.  Not for the Talmag though, which has had hundreds of originals with only a 4-stroke entry.  So it is not the same everywhere.  The Talmag still does have lots of entries, hundreds, but it now has a lot of modified bikes that do not conform to the rules, and is losing the originals.  Havering, never heard of that one, it obviously wasn't popular down south, mad scots and all!  King Canute, nope!  None of this matters that much, so what will be will be.

[woody]

1 hour ago, ttspud said:

 

I now understand why you are saying what you are saying.  You do not believe in rules because you want to ride a tricked out bike and are worried about the repercussions of having rules that allow both kinds of bike to compete fairly.  And you do not believe in club rules that mean that a tricked out bike is cheating.  That does not make that position right.  Anyway, very enlightening, and now I do understand what has happened and is happening.

And that one statement pretty well sums you up. You deliberately isolate an extract from a sentence to comment on, twist it and use it out of context for your own agenda which ultimately leads to repeated accusations of cheating. Repeatedly you say what you want but write as though you're writing on behalf of these ''hundreds of owners of original bikes'' who no longer use them because of the cheating. Prove that. Prove that is why they no longer use them.

You actually uinderstand nothing. It's been pointed out several times by people who are out there riding week in week out, why the original bikes are disappearing. AGE. There are several riders in a local club who rode original big bikes, rigids or otherwise, alongside riders on modernised bikes. All mates, week after week, year after year. They stopped in the end because of age and went to lightweight bikes but one or two are now struggling even with those. AGE is the issue but although you know none of these people you'll tell me they put their originals away because of the others cheating

AGE is the issue. It's like vintage cars, interest in pre-war and immediate post-war vehicles is dying off along with the generations that had an affinity for them, Later generations have little interest