Don't want these Ads? Why not sign up as a Trials Central Supporter.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
andy

Column No 201 - Pre 65 Scottish Ride Spiked

51 posts in this topic

rapley_header_media.png

Column 200 was meant to be my last, but I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't want these Ads? Why not sign up as a Trials Central Supporter.

God Mike we are soooooooooooo going to miss that poignant and razor sharp insight into the world of trials. You have just written a collumn that says everything i have been saying for ages. I think any future entry i may consider has been spiked as well so i'm in good company :icon_salut:

Well said that man :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rapley_header_media.png

Column 200 was meant to be my last, but....

I will try and produce some columns in the future, all I request is that I do them in my own good time and as frequently as I want, rather than the commitment of every week, every week, every week, every week.....................!

Can

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what does the club do? I have a personal view which I have aired previously – get the best known riders on whatever Pre 65 style machine they have, and give them a trial in line with their abilities. Whilst I have no idea who is in and who is out (I’m OUT by the way!), spectating to see a load of wobblers on old dogs of bikes on sections they can’t do is not my idea of two days of fun.

It's a good point really Mike - what is the trial intended to be, a demonstration of Pre65 bikes and how they were, with some invited riders riding sections from yesteryear - or, an 'open' competition in which people want to perform to their best and in some cases, win.

If the former, the elligibility criteria to enter a bike would be simple, genuine Pre65 spec. If say, more than 3 gears can be selected on a Bantam it's out, if a bike has forks that work properly, they're out. Very easy to scrutineer, if one person can push it up the starting ramp it's not genuine :D . Then watch how many machines are entered....

If the latter, accept the modified bikes without any fuss and let people fit Ossa forks or Grimeca hubs etc. as it enables a bike to be modified without the expense of all the trick stuff, a big help to people that can't afford that. None of these fiddle forks and billet yokes look anything like Pre65 anyway so what's the problem with budget bikes with Ossa or Yam forks etc.

The trial seems caught somewhere between the two and it is this eligiblity thing that causes the most discontent. When I last rode in 2007 I finished about 18th on a low spec bike that coughed, spluttered and plug fouled its way around. As a special first class award winner I should have been in the next year (I believe that's the policy) but was not given an entry again because of unacceptable components. I asked at the time of my 'reprimand' what about the components on all of the brand new spec bikes that mine was surrounded by. I was told 'something was going to be done about all this billet stuff'. This year, those same bikes that something was going to be done about, some of which bear no resemblence, sihouette or otherwise to their original form, are still accepted.

I have nothing against the billet components at all, and these comments are not out of sour grapes as I am no longer bothered about the trial or submit an entry. It is merely a point of general principle, I wish they would stick to theirs and apply consistency to the eligibility rules - or take a leaf out of Manx Classic book and be more pragmatic over the components of the bikes entered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Week gone, then the Hornets Nest! :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good point really Mike - what is the trial intended to be, a demonstration of Pre65 bikes and how they were, with some invited riders riding sections from yesteryear - or, an 'open' competition in which people want to perform to their best and in some cases, win.

If the former, the elligibility criteria to enter a bike would be simple, genuine Pre65 spec. If say, more than 3 gears can be selected on a Bantam it's out, if a bike has forks that work properly, they're out. Very easy to scrutineer, if one person can push it up the starting ramp it's not genuine :D . Then watch how many machines are entered....

If the latter, accept the modified bikes without any fuss and let people fit Ossa forks or Grimeca hubs etc. as it enables a bike to be modified without the expense of all the trick stuff, a big help to people that can't afford that. None of these fiddle forks and billet yokes look anything like Pre65 anyway so what's the problem with budget bikes with Ossa or Yam forks etc.

The trial seems caught somewhere between the two and it is this eligiblity thing that causes the most discontent. When I last rode in 2007 I finished about 18th on a low spec bike that coughed, spluttered and plug fouled its way around. As a special first class award winner I should have been in the next year (I believe that's the policy) but was not given an entry again because of unacceptable components. I asked at the time of my 'reprimand' what about the components on all of the brand new spec bikes that mine was surrounded by. I was told 'something was going to be done about all this billet stuff'. This year, those same bikes that something was going to be done about, some of which bear no resemblence, sihouette or otherwise to their original form, are still accepted.

I have nothing against the billet components at all, and these comments are not out of sour grapes as I am no longer bothered about the trial or submit an entry. It is merely a point of general principle, I wish they would stick to theirs and apply consistency to the eligibility rules - or take a leaf out of Manx Classic book and be more pragmatic over the components of the bikes entered.

Well said Woody. Thats also what i was getting at when i commented is it supposed to be a pagent like the Goodwood Festival of Speed but i got lambasted for daring to question the holy event.

Just noticed as well, see thread on Sprites in Pre65 section, that four Sprites are entered. Wonder how many of the Bantams will be three speed and how will or even will they check?

Edited by Old trials fanatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guy's,

I will not repeat myself for there is no point? You all know what I think anyway? much the same as Mike,OTF,and Woody.

I was looking down the list! and thought Sprite! 1966. Bantam D7 Barrel, THREE,speed, and really D3 frame.

Now here's a question? how may of the BSA unit bikes have a "Otter" frame? Mk three Faber that is! Or are there any Mk Two's????? Think there maybe. And I should not think Jock's Bantam has one?

Regards Charlie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been a lot of criticism of the Pre-65 Scottish organizers, do any of you actually know them ?

Various comment like "that's my entry spiked" probably says more about you and your behavior.

Many are quick to criticize the ballot, however would you turn Mick Andrews away if entered on a trick James ?

My B40 is fairy original,and hasn't really changed in 15 years, and to prove it my results have drifted downwards

as many others have "progressed".

I don't accept the argument that it's ok to progress and to use latest technology, that called a Gas Gas, Beta etc.

Nostalgia is all about how they were, not how it might/should/could have been.

And no, I haven't got an entry either.

Ross

Que - what tires, shocks, ignition, rims, lever's etc are you using.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been a lot of criticism of the Pre-65 Scottish organizers, do any of you actually know them ?

Various comment like "that's my entry spiked" probably says more about you and your behavior.

Many are quick to criticize the ballot, however would you turn Mick Andrews away if entered on a trick James ?

My B40 is fairy original,and hasn't really changed in 15 years, and to prove it my results have drifted downwards

as many others have "progressed".

I don't accept the argument that it's ok to progress and to use latest technology, that called a Gas Gas, Beta etc.

Nostalgia is all about how they were, not how it might/should/could have been.

And no, I haven't got an entry either.

Ross

Que - what tires, shocks, ignition, rims, lever's etc are you using.

As far as i am aware this is a forum and forums are places where people discuss things. I have never been aware that you had to "know" somebody before applying a critique? anyway as far as i am aware any criticism has been about the event and certain inconsistencies not criticism of persons specifically. I was under the impression that contributors were voicing their opinions which i understand they are entitled to with the intention of highlighting said inconsistencies and hopefully improving the situation for future events. Are you therefore saying some organisations and events are above criticism ??? How then do you suggest they improve ??? what makes them above critique ?

Regarding Mikes column the term "spiked" i am sure was not intended to cause offence. Mike has been around a long time and is a well respected member of the trials community. Are you insinuating his behaviour has been anything but exemplary ?

Would i turn Mick Andrews away if he turned up on a "trick" James ? If his bike contraviened the elegability rules then YES and that would apply to ANYBODY ! Saying that Micks bike is far less trick than most and i know that bike intimately as i have ridden it many times and seen it in bits many times also.

The originality of your B40 is your concern and i respect your choice to build / keep it as you see fit.

Nostalga is about how you think it used to be. See my previous comments about should the event be run as a pagent?

Answer Tires i assume you mean tyres? Michelin front IRC rear, shocks Betor Pro, ignition PVL, rims morad, levers Domino all as when i last rode the Pre65 two day and were as declaired on the entry form.

Edited by Old trials fanatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My friend has got a ride. Good luck to him. Iwill not comment on his bike as it will be a borrowed , but he has entered and is nowhere near fit enough.I suppose its a personal challange, but he will be in no fit state to ride the sctions after any sort of moor crossing. To enter and be in a position to maybe finish struggling through sections and takeing fives in either of the events denies others a ride. Personal challange yes selfish definatly, in the spirit of the event dont know. So Steve dont you dare take any fives. Am I jealous, you bet

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ross, you're statement that you don't accept that it's progress to use the latest technology etc surely means that you disagree with the organiser's policy of allowing those machines in... ?? which is a criticism isn't it... :D

I'm not having a personal go at you here, just don't understand what you're getting at in your post.

The inconsistency around machine eligibility is the single biggest cause of discontent amongst riders - indisputable fact and it will never go away. It's the principle of the matter. What is ok for one is not for another and that's what wrankles people. That happens and someone allows it to happen and that can only be someone on the committee. They don't need to be known personally by anyone.

No-one is under any illusions about the hard work involved in organising the trial etc. No-one is bothered about a certain number of 'well known' or 'top flight' riders getting an automatic place each year, it's been happening for years and everyone accepts it, no arguments. Of course you want to see the likes of Andrews, Thorpe and co battling it out for the win.

But there are riders who compete on British bikes week in week out, year after year, who cannot get an entry, for whatever reason. Understandably, it must wrankle with these riders that whereas they can't get a ride even once, other less able riders who aren't 'top flight' or 'well known' still appear on the entry list year after year after year. Or some who have ridden a Pre65 bike less times in their entire lives than the aforementioned riders ride in a few weeks.

As I said in my previous post, I have no interest in riding it any more so this isn't a personal gripe. But I am entitled to a viewpoint on any discussion, whether on a forum, in a pub or parc ferme. As a person of principle and fairness, I, like many, just find the application, or maybe interpretation is a better word, of the machine eligibility rules inconsistent and unfair. That's it.

Like it or not, if you ride Pre65 regularly in English events, you know that this subject rages in Pre65 circles all year long, it just finds its way onto this forum at this time of year. It will always be so I guess.

So as I said Ross, nothing persoanl against you. If I make it to the Highland classic this year and I have my C15 there, you can try it and see the absurdity of it all, how a bike like that can be ineligible but a brand new 2011 James/Cub/whatever is ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looked at the entry list, it's really great to see an 18 year old rider having been given an entry!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thank both OTF & Woody for their reply's (genuinely)

Its sometimes difficult to differentiate between criticizing the rules, and the organisers. These people have the task

of pleasing the majority of the applicants (irrespective of their ability)on one hand, and the continuing success of the

event on the other.

Woody, I accept your first point, but I suspect there would very few (none) that would qualify if originality was strictly adheard to.

OFT - I think my main point/confusion arises from the constant critisism of this one event. I cannot think of another that attracts any volume here on TC. I am happy to be corrected.

I agree regarding the inconsistency, and hope that the governing bodies will act. It shouldnt be left to any one club to make a stand.

Just to clarify - I am not involved in the running of the event, nor a member of EDMCC

OTF - I quote "Regarding Mikes column the term "spiked" i am sure was not intended to cause offence. Mike has been around a long time and is a well respected member of the trials community. Are you insinuating his behaviour has been anything but exemplary ?

I have obviously misunderstood the "spiked" comment, perhaps you, or Mr Rapley could clarify ? I thought in this context ie "to spike"

refered to "thwart someone's purpose" ?

Note - my spelling may be poor, but I do know that when refering to onesself, it is customery to use a capital I.

Edited by B40RT
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ross i think in this case "spiked" just meant not accepted.

There nust be some reason that this event attracts so may posts. For my part i think it's a fantastic event with a coulourful history set in some of the most stunning scenery i have been lucky to ride in but and heres the rub as Woody stated earlier all that is forgotten when the same old eligibility issues crop up year on year. Other events dont suffer the same amount of vitriol because they dont have the same turn a blind eye instances.

All most people want is transparancy and the rules applied to all irrespective of who they are or what bike they are riding.

At least we now know what we have surmised for a long time that 180 places are and never were "balloted".

Edited by Old trials fanatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No-one is under any illusions about the hard work involved in organising the trial etc. No-one is bothered about a certain number of 'well known' or 'top flight' riders getting an automatic place each year, it's been happening for years and everyone accepts it, no arguments. Of course you want to see the likes of Andrews, Thorpe and co battling it out for the win.

I have absolutley no interest in every doing the pre 65, but cannot agree with the above comment, why should a certain number of well known or top flight riders get a automatic ride each year ??? i didnt even need to look at the entry to guess that certain riders have a ride, they would get a ride even if its the only trial they rode in all year , and its supposed to be a ballot !!!!

now how is that fair on all the other riders who turn out week in week out in all conditions to support there clubs and sport, why should the likes of the Guants, Thorpe, Andrews, ETC be given guarnteed rides , and of all the well known top flighters, how many of there bikes are really 100% within the rules and the ethos of the trial, probably none, ie modern internals hidden away inside pre65 looking forks etc, but who's going to tell these top riders that they cannot enter as the bikes are not to the rules !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0