50 replies to this topic

[Andy]

Column 200 was meant to be my last, but I’ve just read the many replies about the Pre 65 Scottish, so here comes another!

What comes first, the cart or the horse? I ask this as I have ridden the Pre 65 trial on 11 occasions, though it wasn’t until I saw Tommy Sandham’s book last year that I was aware I had ridden that number.

Anyway, back to cart and horse. The problems as I see them, (though I could be wrong), is that there are no longer enough “genuine” Pre 65 bikes to fill the trial. If there are enough and all the owners got a ride, the vast majority of those owners would not be able to get round the trial as it now stands, as the bikes would be unmanageable much of the time.

I don’t envy the club the job of selecting who is in and who is out, but I do know many of the machines are in fact modern components disguised to look something like a Pre 65 machine, therefore making them considerably better than the versions they are emulating. If we wish to get back to how bikes were when ridden 20 years ago, the trial itself needs to change.

Back when I rode Reg May’s 350 AJS twice in the trial (early ‘nineties??) the trial was very much easier than it is these days, and to successfully negotiate such a machine round today’s trial would be a major effort. I may be getting older, but I can still ride a bit. No doubt I could finish on such a machine, but it would be a significant challenge and the current sections are not really aimed at bikes like the machine Reg lent me.

As the bikes have improved, so the sections have become harder, so whose fault is that? The club’s for making the trial more difficult, or the riders for turning up with ever more competitive machinery, thereby forcing the club to come up with sections to challenge them.
I rather guess that asking for pictures this year will have given the selection committee the chance to eliminate those machines that APPEAR too modern, but then we come to the point that many of the entrants expecting a ride are also riders who regularly ride with clubs orientated towards classic trials, therefore the machines they own have been produced to contend with classic trials as they have developed around the country.

I’m by no means a regular at classic trials, but I have been to a small number this year and whilst many of the machines outwardly appear to be “in the spirit”, look more closely and even to my untutored eye they have been developed way beyond the state of development reached in 1965.

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.

I would far rather watch 180 riders that I know or at least have heard of, on the latest machine they have created, than watch far less able riders, whose regular experience is four laps round a field on a bike that is a heap of junk who are faced with a challenging trial that is way beyond their abilities.
I suppose that I have now REALLY spiked all chance of a Pre 65 ride! – though we are told nobody from the Pre 65 organisers reads this website. I wonder. However, the classic Manx Two Day beckons in September and that is a great trial.

Since announcing last week that I was finishing my column, many riders and respondents have expressed their dismay, and at Sheffield on Saturday night I was really touched to hear from so many folks that my column would be missed, for which I thank them – hence this week’s column which has come as a result of reading about the Pre 65 trial.

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’t say fairer than that!

[Old trials fanatic]

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

Well said that man

[Pete_Scorpa3]

Andy, on 09 January 2011 - 09:05 PM, said:

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’t say fairer than that!

Nice one Mike, quality rather than quantity

[Woody]

Andy, on 09 January 2011 - 09:05 PM, said:

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 . 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.

[copemech]

Week gone, then the Hornets Nest!

[Old trials fanatic]

Woody, on 09 January 2011 - 10:47 PM, said:

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 . 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, 10 January 2011 - 06:09 PM.

[charlie prescott]

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.

[B40RT]

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.

[Old trials fanatic]

B40RT, on 10 January 2011 - 06:51 PM, said:

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, 10 January 2011 - 07:30 PM.

[petejohn]

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

[Woody]

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...

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.

[Hillary]

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

[B40RT]

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, 10 January 2011 - 10:17 PM.

[Old trials fanatic]

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, 10 January 2011 - 10:57 PM.

[PHB]

Woody, on 10 January 2011 - 08:53 PM, said:

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 !!!