Pre 65 Future & Pre 65 Rules

[jon v8]

TT Spud, I think you need to be more realistic about your dreams or ideas of what Pre65 trials is or should be like. I'd like to point out a couple of things to you;

1,  Nothing good lasts forever.

2, Many of the riders who have original Pre65 trials bikes are simply too old to ride them or are scared of hurting themselves.( Or their partners have forbidden them )

3, The Talmag as a trial is a great spectacle,a lovely collection of bikes and well known faces in the trials world. But many of those bikes will go back in the shed and not be ridden until the next Talmag. I have almost begged riders there to come and ride our Ashwicke Classic trials which are set out to cater for rigids and with older riders in mind. None will come and join us, they are happy to ride one trial a year. And its not distance, look in the Talmag entry list and people drive from all over the country to it.

4, You make a big point about cheating with trick bikes, ANY rider who is honest will admit it is the rider, not the bike that wins the trial. Study the results of any trial where you know the individuals and you will see this is true. An alloy tank full of fuel can easily weigh more than a steel one with just enough fuel to finish the trial...

5, If you make the "rules" of entry too rigid then someone needs to ensure they are enforced - Who is going to do this ? And what qualification would they need and be able to prove ?  I don't mind my bike having looked at as per the Talmag,checking if the brakes might work etc. But every time I have ridden it, no mention was made of it having a modern BTH electronic mag on it. Point is 80% or more of the bikes would have failed scrutineering for this reason. The late Len Hutty was using exactly the same mag as me each time he won - Was he cheating ? He would have won with a Lucas racing mag anyway.

6, A few years back there seemed to be a big argument / discussion on the Trials Australia forum about using square barrels on Tiger Cubs, I think the Aussy rules banned them. This and similar issues, (From what I was told by a friend living there) has contributed to Classic trials of almost any kind being dead  in Australia. Be too fussy and people simply won't bother.

7, Over here in the West Country I ride most weekends, the trials usually have A and B routes plus a Gentlefolk route where you go in the start cards and take any path you choose to the ends cards. It works. Entry is usually between 50 and 100 riders. Few of the events have prizes and those that do are good natured fun. We run a couple of charity trials a year to put back into the sport, and it seems well received. 

8, If you are confident that there are people who would like to ride in events with entry requirements as you suggest, why not set up a club like I did. It cost me about £700 in kit and we pay the AMCA an annual fee. Its a bit of work, but well worth it. (Especially if you donate all the proceeds to charity)

[brian0304]

1 hour ago, ttspud said:

If someone believes that all riders that ride at the weekend week in/week out, and all those that set out the trials, are cheats and trophy hunters, then attack that position and that argument by all means.  They are not being personally abusive.  However, do not get personally abusive by seeking to attack the person.  The fact that your accusation is not even my position, and never was, and that you are being personally abusive with off-discussion abuse as well and then trying to bring others in to support your bullying and abuse, none of that is appropriate.  I would also say that those accusing others of cheating where they are cheating is justified, it might hurt those accused, but it is true and fair discussion.  There are others that have been abusive as you have been, and they are staying mostly away if still seeking to support your abusive behaviour in more minor ways.  Anyway, as I say, enough of that, if you want to contribute to the discussion, try to do so without being personally abusive about anyone. 

Would you like a tissue?

[ttspud]

44 minutes ago, brian0304 said:

Would you like a tissue?

What for?  You are an abusive person, nothing more.  You will go on and on trying to be abusive, hoping to get an abusive response, but you will not get one.  This is a discussion, nothing more.  If you want to get abusive, carry on.

[ttspud]

@jonv8

All good points, but most have been discussed a lot, so I won't go through them all now.  I picked up on a couple though: 

1 hour ago, jon v8 said:

ANY rider who is honest will admit it is the rider, not the bike that wins the trial.

That is not true anymore if you are talking about one rider on a tricked out bike and one on a pre65, the difference is too great now.  The tricked out machinery now is vastly superior in every way to the original pre65 bikes even as they were modified then.  Obviously the odd genius rider on a genuine pre65 will still beat an average rider on a tricked out bike, but that is only true for less than 1% of riders.  The other 99% do not have a chance on a real pre65 bike against a tricked out modified bike.  No-one, including me, expects the clock to be turned back and the modifications to suddenly disappear, but just to draw a line, distinguish the orginals from the tricked out bikes, and have that noted in the results, would be a great addition to the sport and would adversely affect precisely no-one.  If you saw the last Talmag, you will have seen bikes that were capable of modern day tricks, air turns, bunny-hops at will, endos, pivot turns, jumps, all sorts of aerobatic-type move that no way are possible on an original bike with original forks, frame, engine, weight, etc etc.  Even the absolute best riders out there, even the previous year's winner, called time on trying to compete against that machinery, because it has become impossible even for them.  And that is the problem, and that is why these rules are needed, so that, just in the results, a rider can see who he is really competing against regardless of the routes.  And it is not much to do, not much to ask.  It would be a good thing for the sport to make the distinction, even if it is only at the biggest events that still have the original bikes.  Has it ever been tried?  I do not think it has.

Anyway, if you have something constructive to help with the rules, great, that would be helpful. 

1 hour ago, jon v8 said:

5, If you make the "rules" of entry too rigid then someone needs to ensure they are enforced - Who is going to do this ? And what qualification would they need and be able to prove ?  I don't mind my bike having looked at as per the Talmag,checking if the brakes might work etc. But every time I have ridden it, no mention was made of it having a modern BTH electronic mag on it. Point is 80% or more of the bikes would have failed scrutineering for this reason. The late Len Hutty was using exactly the same mag as me each time he won - Was he cheating ? He would have won with a Lucas racing mag anyway.

Yes, this is quite so.  The Talmag rules are fairly specific, and yes, many, even most, of the bikes at the Talmag do not comply with the rules on the entry form.  The usual name for that would be 'cheating', though it has become so widespread now that there is little point in saying 'cheating' because so many would fall under that banner.  It is now a smaller task to find those that are not cheating (as it were)!.  When it first began, roughly around late 80s, early 90s (if my memory serves me correctly), the 'cheats' were very much hidden.  Shock internals, engine internals and so on.  Yes, Len Hutty's bike had a trick clutch from very early on, trick ignition, among other things, so yes, technically it was modified and did not comply with the rules.  As you say, he was a good rider and would have done well anyway though would he have been as successful, probably not, especially not in the Talmag timed section which increasingly favours better machinery.  The Talmag will tell you why they do not confront riders that do not comply with the rules, I cannot tell you what they would say, and that is similar, for a lot of decades, as many other clubs.  One of the reasons will be that it is not a very easy or nice thing to have to confront a rider who is cheating and probably have to put up with a lot of abuse for their trouble (ironically as I find here with baseless accusations about many non-related things coming mostly from riders of 'tricked up' or if you like 'cheat' bikes).  Maybe nothing will every happen to address this, but I do not see there being much difficulty in addressing it, at least at the bigger events which already have competent scrutineering (let's face it, it is not hard now to spot a bike with modifications, it is almost harder to spot an original part!), and so I am simply trying to help that occur.  It is difficult discussing this stuff, but that is fine, I also get increasing support as the years have gone by.  I understand those that feel under attack because of what has happened.  This has been the most constructive discussion on the subject yet, so that is great.

 

Edited November 23, 2021 by ttspud

[brian0304]

Simple fact is, you , by your own admission, rarely ever ride . 
 Just get out on your bike and stop getting your knickers in a twist about rules and regs . 
As I said previously, this is all ridiculous.

I’ll leave you to it . X

[on it]

ttspud Has any club  (acu/amca ) showed any interest  in this or willing to take  on your rules ?   if NO what is the point  of you pursuing it ?  

[turbofurball]

It's hard to adapt to a changing world, and harder still to accept something loved is moving along with it, when the driving force behind those changes is a community you're a member of.

Maybe what TTSpud needs, more than a rule book, is to form a historic trials recreation society - like battle reenactment, only with less pikes and more bikes.

[b40rt]

35 minutes ago, turbofurball said:

It's hard to adapt to a changing world, and harder still to accept something loved is moving along with it, when the driving force behind those changes is a community you're a member of.

Maybe what TTSpud needs, more than a rule book, is to form a historic trials recreation society - like battle reenactment, only with less pikes and more bikes.

This is actually a pretty good idea ! Style marks for authentic clothing (-10 if your belstaff stands on its own)   .....

[turbofurball]

26 minutes ago, b40rt said:

This is actually a pretty good idea ! Style marks for authentic clothing (-10 if your belstaff stands on its own)   .....

Exactly, and you need a guy in tweed with a big mustache to record the marking.  Seriously, it would be a lot of fun to dress up in early '60s clothes and go watch, get some hipsters to break out their super 8s to film it, and TTSpud could get competitive if he wanted to be - win-win

 

[jon v8]

TT Spud, I think you would soon put an end to many events if you put your rules in place. Firstly as I asked before who is going to do the scrutineering, and more importantly what would qualify them to do it ? They are not going to be popular are they ? And if the riders were forced to ride in a specials class they would still be there on the same bike. And the reson a large proportion of those "cheat" bikes like Drayton Bantams are being ridden every weekend is because the riders can no longer manage a big pre unit bike. I would rather see all of the more senior riders out on a lightweight or cheat bike than not at all - Which is what would happen with your rules. I can think of plenty of West Country riders in their seventies and eighties who are out most weekends riding, I would hate to see them excluded by forcing them back onto bikes they are no longer comfortable or confident to ride.

[ttspud]

1 hour ago, jon v8 said:

I would hate to see them excluded by forcing them back onto bikes they are no longer comfortable or confident to ride.

No-one would have to change anything, apart from noting down whether the bike is original or one of the modified bikes, that is it.  Only scrutineer at events that have competent scrutineers.  Other events probably wont have either the original bikes or the scrutineers anyway, so why worry.  Not difficult.  It would not exclude anyone or cause anyone to change bikes (being just a sub-class or a side-node it that is how you are more comfortable seeing it), you keep missing that point. The Talmag is fairly unique, and as you say there are lots of riders that just do that one trial each year (almost as me, plus maybe a tiny few other trials), come a very long way including the continent to be there and long may the original bikes be ridden there and I do hope that it does not follow the same path as almost all the other events/clubs because then the only place to see these bikes will be in the museum.  

[ttspud]

4 hours ago, on it said:

Has any club  (acu/amca ) showed any interest  in this or willing to take  on your rules ?   if NO what is the point  of you pursuing it ?

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.  I still do not really know what all the real issues are because it usually gets so bogged down in the misunderstandings.  Anyway, there is progress this time, a few good ideas.  It may be all too late for 95% of clubs/events but maybe not too late to save a few bikes/riders who have not yet been put off riding an original bike.  Anyway, yes, is the short answer otherwise I would not bother. None of this is easy, and it still may be a total waste of time, as everyone keeps saying, and on top of that, I should be working not going round in circles on a daft page about very old bikes but there it is, mad dogs and englishmen! 

[Stomp]

As a very casual pre 65 rider I really don't know  the rules , in fact I've never looked at them. As I really only ride club stuff on a friends Trifield I ride the route that I can manage. Thing is I don't even know the modern observing rules and I'm trials convener so make sense of that. I'm just glad to ride and if I feel on form it's bonus.

Just think how easy we've got it my father rode in the 60s riding an old rigid Matchless from home in all weathers to some desperate part of Scotland. He would laugh at us ,he called Spanish bikes plastic and cubs and bantams no better than pushbikes ,   

[jon v8]

TT Spud, twice I have asked you who is going to do this scrutineering and how should they be qualified ?  It is hard enough trying to get enough observers, without trying to find extra staff. many clubs offer money to observers, but they still struggle to find enough, or in some cases apparently people have taken the money and disappeared.

So who is going to be the scrutineer ?  I for one would not want to stand in a field on a Sunday morning trying to tell a rider that this petrol tank or front hub is not acceptable - So you need to go in a specials class. 

You need to start your own club and see how many riders you get.

[ttspud]

49 minutes ago, jon v8 said:

So who is going to be the scrutineer ?  I for one would not want to stand in a field on a Sunday morning trying to tell a rider that this petrol tank or front hub is not acceptable - So you need to go in a specials class. 

Just read the rules, it is laid out there.  If an event does not have the capacity to scrutineer, then don't.  Who is going to scrutineer?  Whoever did it previously.  Let riders self-certify at the club level if the club does not believe it can make the distinction between a modified bike and an original one.  It is only to find out for the results so that riders will know who they are riding against, and it is not nearly as difficult as you think because most modified bikes have masses of modifications.  How many modified bikes, for example, will have an original frame, engine, seat, tank (given new additional allowance), forks, ignition?  How many modified bikes do you have with an original seat?  I am guessing none, so not too hard then.  What about frames?  Same thing, pretty obvious stuff really.  Forks? Same thing. Hubs? Same thing.  You only need to find one of those, and you will probably easily find all of them. 

As for the worry about moving a rider to a Specials class, that is impossible, because there is no Specials (or Modified) class.  The term sub-class was added for this purpose, it is really just a note, so there is no Specials or Modified class to worry about.  In the proper ACU rules, as they are, yes, bike/rider would be moved to a Specials class, and that is why these rules are designed this way, just as a note so that nothing else changes, and there is no confrontation or other change.   If you mean worrying about noting down a bike as modified when the rider says it is original, no problem, it does not change a rider's route, nor his class, nor anything else about his day's ride, at all.  It is just noting it down in the results so no issue at all.  Have you actually read the rules because it is all laid out there in the very first post?  If not, go read them, and you will realise that both the scrutineering and Specials issues are explained there.  No, I have too little time to start a club, and that is not the point.

Edited November 24, 2021 by ttspud