Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Need help finding information or parts for that old machine in your shed? Someone in here will know!

Moderator: Moderators

TriCub
Expert participant
Expert participant
Posts: 273
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:38 am
Bike: Triumph
Club: Wester districs trials club

Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby TriCub » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:21 pm

I was just in contact with MA regarding the Queensland Australian Titles and the changing of the Classic rules for that event. I was informed that no changes to the rules have happened as yet only proposals but the oganisers can do what ever they like for that event.
Anyway I have included a link to the minutes of the last Trails Comissioners meeting where changes to the rules was put forward for next year. Please read these proposed rule changes and send your concerns to Ross Martin at MA on the Email address below and he will pass them on to the relevent people. We only have less than a Month before these changes are set in stone. Also it would be a good idea to get in touch with your local Trials sub committy, this is done through your club.

I for one will be opposing the move to English only carbs on English bikes as I feel that we should be able to use whatever design carb was available at the time. The push seems to be that Mk1 concentrics will look more period than a Jap carb!
I find this statment quite bizzar because the Mk1 Amal wasn't made until late 1966 which is outside the cut off period in any case. The small Jap Carbs that were made in the period were made under licence to Amal and look more period than do the Mk1 concentric do anyway. The pre 65 MX rules in Australia permit any round slide carb which is what I would propose the rule be altered to. All the round slide carbs that are avilable are all follow on designs of those early Amal under licence carbs. I personaly think that from a safety piont and envionmental piont of view all carbs with a tickler should be baned.
Also the move to ban Spanish bikes seems to be a Knee jerk reaction to a very good rider coming along on Bultaco and winning. Even if that machine is not deemed to be eligible that shouldn't stop other spanish machines that are genuine pre 65 machines from competing as they did in England and Australia in the early 60's. If it wasn't for Sammy Miller showing up the English 500 singles of the period then this issue wouldn't be with us today. The other piont about the class being about the English reason for starting a Pre 65 Class is to me a load of bull, we are in Australia and if we were not about doing our own thing we would still have God save the Queen as our anthem. I'm sure the records from the period would show that all make of machine were allowed to ride in the 1964 Australian Trials titles and not just Pommy bikes. Look out all you riders of anthing other than British bikes it's Spanish this year and if a CZ won it would be you next!!!!

Perhapes we should start an online petition and forward that on as well? Does anyone know how to do that?

http://www.ma.org.au/fileadmin/user_upl ... y%2010.pdf

ross@ma.org.au <ross@ma.org.au>



Twinshock
B grade participant
B grade participant
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:14 pm

Re: Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby Twinshock » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:03 pm

George
If you haven't noticed there has been a survey on this website for about 6 weeks now and the overwhelming vote is to exclude Spanish bikes from Pre 65 events, I think thats called public opinion.
Cheers
Twinshock



David Lahey
Champion
Champion
Posts: 3610
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Bike: Many Twinshocks
Club: CQTC Inc, RTC Inc
Location: Gladstone, Queensland

Re: Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby David Lahey » Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:43 pm

I think it might be worthwhile to point out that the website polling result on this subject appears a bit dodgy.

I suspected back at the time that multiple votes from individuals were happening, because there were way too many votes being cast for the likely number of interested parties, and in a very short space of time.

I then tried voting a second time myself and sure enough there was nothing to stop me voting again.

Maybe if anyone thinks that the result of the poll is a realistic representation of rider opinion, it might be possible using modern technology and the computor-savvy people who administer the website to report if there were significant examples of multiple votes from an individual?

David


relax, nothing is under control

TriCub
Expert participant
Expert participant
Posts: 273
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:38 am
Bike: Triumph
Club: Wester districs trials club

Re: Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby TriCub » Wed Jun 02, 2010 8:20 pm

Roger.
I have only in the last few day been aware of a survey as I have only just joined this forum. Please piont out to me were it is as I have not been able to find it?
I also don't think that this forum should be used as a true representation of the Classic riders wishes. As I noticed that one of the proposals has come from the Trials Sub committee in Queensland. Not once has anyone asked for my opinion as a Classic rider on the proposed changes and I only found out about it after downloading the Aussy title supregs.
This is also the case for a couple of other riders that I have spoken with in the last few days.
There are only about a dozen classic riders in Queensland, how hard would it be to forward a copy of the proposal to everyone for comment?
Even or dodgy electoral system in Australia makes voting compulsory.



David Lahey
Champion
Champion
Posts: 3610
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Bike: Many Twinshocks
Club: CQTC Inc, RTC Inc
Location: Gladstone, Queensland

Re: Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby David Lahey » Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:41 pm

I had a good laugh reading the proposed rule changes for the 2011 MOMs.

The proposal to include an air-cooled mono class on one hand is indeed a great way to entice riders out of the woodwork onto their beloved bikes from that era and good on the Victorians for proposing it. It is an idea whose time has surely come.

Then, in what seems almost comical contrast is the proposal to exclude Spanish bikes, no matter how old they are, from pre-65 trials.

How could this possibly be in the interests of increasing participation in the pre-65 class? Surely it will mean that some people (like me and my 1963 Bultaco) will lose interest if they can't ride their favourite bike brand. What is next? Those lovely French Motobecane pre-65 bikes? or just as lovely Italian pre-65 bikes? or even Hondas? and what about my other love (Jawa/Manet/CZ)? It makes me think that as soon as a rider of the calibre of Alan Phillipson comes along on anything non-British (and wins again due to rider skill), the next year a rule will be introduced excluding bikes from that country as well??? How motivating is it for people who were thinking of riding pre-65 trials to know that they might spend thousands of $$ getting a bike ready to ride in pre-65 trials, only to have it become ineligible before they have a chance to ride it in competition - of course that will mean people just don't take the risk, or they decide to fix up an old road bike or an old MX bike instead of an old trials bike, because they know they will be welcome to compete on it no matter what country made it originally.

Please remember we live and ride in Australia - the rules should reflect Australian attitudes, not attitudes imported from elsewhere

To sustain or increase the participation rate in pre-65 trials we need to be inclusive, not exclusive


relax, nothing is under control

sharvie
Expert participant
Expert participant
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 4:38 am
Location: Maitland NSW

Re: Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby sharvie » Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:24 am

Hi David,

I have been entertaining the thought of purchasing a classic recently, mostly because I really like the look of bikes like Col Philipsons BSA and a few others I have seen on UK web sites. Your most recent comments describe my feeling about buying a classic exactly. At first I thought how great it would be to ride a pre 65 that was in top condition, then I saw all the issues with eligibility and thought what If I buy a bike & find out later I can't ride it.
Given all the recent comments I would have no idea what to buy and what about the possibility of paying good money for a bike that later becomes excluded, its value will dive.
I am lost which means I probably won’t buy one.

Steven Harvie


Sharvie ~ Maitland NSW

Steve Holzhauser
B grade participant
B grade participant
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 8:48 pm
Location: Casino .

Re: Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby Steve Holzhauser » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:00 am

David Lahey wrote:I had a good laugh reading the proposed rule changes for the 2011 MOMs.

The proposal to include an air-cooled mono class on one hand is indeed a great way to entice riders out of the woodwork onto their beloved bikes from that era and good on the Victorians for proposing it. It is an idea whose time has surely come.

Then, in what seems almost comical contrast is the proposal to exclude Spanish bikes, no matter how old they are, from pre-65 trials.

How could this possibly be in the interests of increasing participation in the pre-65 class? Surely it will mean that some people (like me and my 1963 Bultaco) will lose interest if they can't ride their favourite bike brand. What is next? Those lovely French Motobecane pre-65 bikes? or just as lovely Italian pre-65 bikes? or even Hondas? and what about my other love (Jawa/Manet/CZ)? It makes me think that as soon as a rider of the calibre of Alan Phillipson comes along on anything non-British (and wins again due to rider skill), the next year a rule will be introduced excluding bikes from that country as well??? How motivating is it for people who were thinking of riding pre-65 trials to know that they might spend thousands of $$ getting a bike ready to ride in pre-65 trials, only to have it become ineligible before they have a chance to ride it in competition - of course that will mean people just don't take the risk, or they decide to fix up an old road bike or an old MX bike instead of an old trials bike, because they know they will be welcome to compete on it no matter what country made it originally.

Please remember we live and ride in Australia - the rules should reflect Australian attitudes, not attitudes imported from elsewhere

To sustain or increase the participation rate in pre-65 trials we need to be inclusive, not exclusive





Well said David. I'm very concerned as to where this may all be heading and not only for the Australian Classic riders.

I can only hope that they will not bring in eligibility restrictions next on artificial knees or hips in the veterans class.

Where has common sense gone.



PA
2IC
2IC
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 9:55 am
Bike: Beta EVO
Club: AJS Moto Trial Club of SA Inc.
Location: South Australia

Re: Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby PA » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:21 am

After checking the default for the poll was to allow one vote per day.

There is a new poll to gauge reaction to an Air Cooled Monoshock class as I think the old poll had run it's course.

The new poll has a 3 month time frame before a person could vote again.



User avatar
Starky
A grade participant
A grade participant
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 7:11 pm
Bike: TY175, TY250
Location: Maryborough

Re: Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby Starky » Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:30 pm

David, as you know I have a keen interest in Pre 65 Trials and got very close to buying one but thoughtfully had a colleague talk me out of it. :roll:

Until we can have a firm decision of what is in and what is out I won't be looking at Pre 65 again, I will stick to twinshocks.

I did however go and buy myself a DRZ400 last weekend to go trail riding again. At least I got buying a bike out of my system for a while!!!!! :D

I voted in the survey and found you could vote twice so I didn't take anymore notice of the result. But I would like all pre 65 bikes included not matter who makes them.


Starky
When competing in a trial, I don't suffer from nerves, I get way too excited for that stuff!!!!

David Lahey
Champion
Champion
Posts: 3610
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Bike: Many Twinshocks
Club: CQTC Inc, RTC Inc
Location: Gladstone, Queensland

Re: Proposed Rule changes for 2011.

Postby David Lahey » Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:00 pm

Starky wrote:David, as you know I have a keen interest in Pre 65 Trials and got very close to buying one but thoughtfully had a colleague talk me out of it. :roll:

Until we can have a firm decision of what is in and what is out I won't be looking at Pre 65 again, I will stick to twinshocks.

I did however go and buy myself a DRZ400 last weekend to go trail riding again. At least I got buying a bike out of my system for a while!!!!! :D

I voted in the survey and found you could vote twice so I didn't take anymore notice of the result. But I would like all pre 65 bikes included not matter who makes them.

Is it Peter and Tammy's DRZ?


relax, nothing is under control


Return to “Twinshock & Classic Trials”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests