john collins

Guys As I think the original release stated that the wheelbases would be used as an "! indicator" and as a norm No way should a genuine trial bike like a DT shown above be excluded, in fact the exact opposite is the desire, it is to protesct and maintain the concept of true trail bikes that we are trying to do this. The only concern is that if it goes too far in the direction of the modern trail/ trial bikes. Once a few very good riders start using the trial type bikes, the sections inevitably become harder, and certainly tighter. For lesser riders there is not always a problem BUT once the top boys start to use them the tendancy is foir C/Course to make sections to get a result, and we are back down same old road. So XT's, DR's, XL,s DT;s no problems

That is actually a very good question Nigel, and I have to be honest and state that at this point in time I am not exactly sure, and it certainly will not be something that can provide a definitive answer However, I do think it will leave us in a better position than we were before For myself for example, I have always tried to keep an open mind on the subject, I still ride, and observe and act as Clerk of Course in trials under both sets of rules. I do not subscribe to the theory that one set is a magic answer and the other rubbish. Both have pro’s and con’s In past discussions however ( and I have been involved in a hell of a lot) it is often theoretical about one set or another and the examples we have are not always relevant. I doubt if there are many discussions about No-Stop that have not involved mention of SSDT and Scott as examples, and I have always always argued that these do not give a true reflection of situation as they are unique events . Equally, we have the S3Parts running very well under No-Stop and without many of problems that were feared BUT again there is a separate set of circumstance ie large lap that can take in suitable terrain and so forth We also have to admit that the S3Parts has never been a “ stepping stone” for our top riders on way to World rounds etc, and is very much aimed at lower order riders, therefore the same criteria cannot always be used for assessment At the end of 2012 however, I HOPE we will have a true assessment of the No-Stop rules that we can at least form an opinion of – when used at our highest level, which they have not been for may years. Then – the conversation can actually refer to what has actually happened in regard to course, sections, observing, popularity etc. This is why it is extremely important in my opinion for the riders – from Top to Bottom to give it a true attempt and not attempt a negative stance etc. I know they do not like it –or at least the top few BUT they really do need to get on with it If not , at the end of year the series has been problematic, those who strongly advocate No-Stop , will be able to say that it was not given a fair chance because the riders destroyed it – and they will be right Equally, if those who are totally against the No-Stop rules are able to show the pitfalls, this will have an influence on those not so sure We need to remember that while some are passionately for or against No-Stop, there are a hell of a lot of others who have an open mind and just want to see how it goes , and get on with more important things( I am in this camp) I have said before the whole topic has gone on far too long. At least at end of 2012 I believe we will have a better idea. Certainly not a magic one, but at least a better one. Then , I would hope we could certainly ask all those involved for a more educated opinion. Certainly riders can be asked , and we can try to establish a good way of doing so. Certainly organisers both past and potential can be consulted, and Yes – we will also be speaking to the Importers. At end of it all I hope T & E will be able to glean some better valid opinion than we have had before Do I think there will be a clear indication one way or the other – Honest answer no But I do think we can also say that the present T & E have at least made an attempt to try something that may at least make arguments either way more valid Finally, it may be that there is an acceptance that we are not at present able to cater for our top World runners in this series, and it may be that we look ( and this is where all the posts that have so much to say telling others what to do) at an alternative for this aim

There is little to be gained by going back over the same old ground, but neither is there a lot to be gained by people just jumping once more on a bandwagon and trying to give the impression that they have some sort of inside knowledge about every problem this series has ever encountered. Of course there are people posting that have a vast knowledge of the British Championship, both past and present, but equally as I have said before I am not convinced that some of the posts have actually ever been to a round , looked at the facts and figures of past rounds, or even understand how it has all worked. I realise before I start that this will be long – very long , but I cannot start to cover over 7 pages of posts in just a few lines – sorry, but if I have to take the time to write it all, some may have to take time to read it Be that as it may , it is probably worth laying a few myths to rest. There is always a lot of talk about how riders should be consulted, how people on these posts should have views taken seriously and so on. So let us start with a fact On 26th Nov 2011, a meeting was called to discuss matters relating to the British Championship in any forthcoming year. Someone told me they did not know this was on – else they would have been there and expressed their views – strongly. - Rollocks How was it announced? – well I have just checked and it was announced in October of that year. Notice was sent to Trials Central, TMX and of course ACU Web site and Newsletters Additionally , all Centres as far as I can establish were also informed, and it is through the Centres that Clubs obviously get informed etc ( I would pose question here of how many posters/experts actually attend clubs?) All fine and dandy I hear you cry , but what as that got to do with anything. Well quite simply, at least in my view, if you feel passionately about the Championship , but also feel strongly enough to decry everyone who works at it and often hurl insults our way, my message is simple: Given that such a meeting was called and advertised, get off your arses and go along and have your say. Ah – but what about the riders I have read? Fair point, but, as always ALL Championship riders were invited and indeed I am fairly sure all the Expert riders, and by number of emails it looks as if the entire riders who had registered that year and provided an email address were also invited, certainly in total over 50 riders. At that point, it is not always established who actual organisers will be for following year, those who apply are all invited as well as potential organisers. Also the Importers are always invited ( more on this later) So – what was the outcome after all this? A total of 11 people confirmed attendance , in some cases of this 11, there were perhaps 2 from one organiser. I think there were 2 organisers – but others were still considering There were 4 Importers who confirmed they would attend. Tim Reynolds also confirmed NO RIDERS CONFIRMED ATENDANCE AS FAR AS I CAN ESTABLISH However – Apologies were sent from Michael Brown, Josh & Ian Brain ( IOM – long trip) AND Ben Wibberley - ( more on this later as in my view it gives him a lot more right to criticise) Result was that this meeting was cancelled. Certainly it does appear that many who are posting on this site could not be a***d to attend Next – I wish I had a pint for every time someone inferred “ I would have gone if I had known – or if I had known XYZ was up for discussion etc” - I will waste no more space on this – again my answer is simple – Rollocks One point that is constantly made is why are riders not asked about any change ? It is a fair point. In actual fact they were , and while I would not claim it to have been an extensive survey etc , the results were about 50/50 for Stop or No –Stop - and as anyone can probably work out , the top few riders especially those chasing World honours were certainly in favour of Stop allowed, and certainly those further down pecking order were for No – Stop. To be honest such a survey is often as much use as an ashtray on a motorbike. Why ? Well here is the problem: When you ask riders Do you want Stop or No –Stop for BC, the answer almost always has a qualifying remark ie Yes - Stop allowed: “ As long as the sections are not too severe , or dangerous or out of my ability range” OR Yes - No-Stop : “As long as they are Observed properly and fairly and consistently and as long as venue / sections lend themselves to No-Stop” This is the crux of the matter – it is always XYZ as long as …… or IF . I am afraid that is life I would vote for Politician in a funny hat regardless of party – as long as he solved the economic crisis, the NHS, Crime on the streets and cut my income tax etc. No-One, I repeat No-One can expect 100% from sport run by volunteers . I stated in last post that no-one actually knew how it would all go, and this fact remains Since Adam was a boy, there have been good trials and bad trials, and a hell of a lot in between. This will not alter just because we use a particular set of rules. It will always still come down to the guy putting the sticks in the ground – end of. However there was certainly an opinion over may years that the gap between the top few riders and the rest was growing far too big . What evidence is there for this? Well it is probably worth looking back a bit . Riders such as Dan Clark, Sam Connor, Ian Austermuhle, Gary MacDonald, Dan Thorpe, Michael Phillipson , Ben and Dan Hemingway, Martin Crosswaite, etc and here are a lot of others, drooped out of Championship class. Anyone who thinks these are not top riders is a fool – end of BUT, in recent years these riders either found they were just not enjoying the series, found the sections too severe and possibly dangerous for their current ability ( and many worry about going to work on a Monday) , I realise I do not have the trials knowledge of many of the people who post, but I do know that to be able to ride at the top level in British Championship, and to be able to do so safely, riders will need to practice, and certainly one of the problems found in recent years was to be able to devote enough time to do so for level required, and importantly to be able to find a Minder/catcher who was able to attend the practice sections as well as events Is this in any way the fault of then top few riders ? Of course not, they have worked hard and made such arrangements , and spent hours and hours perfecting the skill needed. BUT many other good capable riders, have just dropped out – fact Some dropped down to Expert ( there was only Expert A originally) but this in itself caused some controversy I recall What we really do have to ask is do we want to see these riders i.e other than the top 3 – 5 in the Championship class? Possibly not. Possibly everyone is quite content with just a very small select entry , over challenging World type sections , this certainly provided spectacular viewing, provided our World runners with a stepping stone and then the entry can be made up of another 50 riders or so competing on an easier course? I have no problem with this really. But wait a minute, is this not exactly what we have had over last few years? Was it good? Was everyone happy? I have searched and searched the past posts and also Press and I am struggling to find rider comments or others who stated how good this Championship was. I am struggling in fact to find anyone who was really satisfied with it. How come many of you did not express some support when we did this? Yes for sure, I can find lots of comments of how it should be ie good venues with proper car parking, Promotion, Publicity, get it on the 10.00clock news and so on. All these suggestions are great, but all have something in common – they all expect someone else to do it. Like magic, it all needs to be done , but by others When I talk to some who are really vociferous in telling others how the events should be run, it is usually about 15 min’s into the conversation when it transpires they would do it, if they could make a good living out of it, or they are “ too busy” ( making money) and just want to talk about it. Great We have been over all this before , it is going off subject. Those who have ideas , yes certainly put them forward BUT, in a realistic way, with some definitive suggestions of how it should be paid for. Next, and part of same topic really, I have stated before that all the posts on TC etc can say what they like , but we still have to have 6 or 8 organisers to run the events. Are you prepared to put on events that may only have a few in the Championship class? My Club has been, but how about the rest of you – just talk is no good. I have noted, and stated before that some who are most vociferous in saying how it should all be run , never apply to do so. Why not? Fantastic if you are concerned ( as all T & E are) that we must cater for our top 3 or 4 – but how? Equally, let is look at the number/entry topic, as again there is a lot of nonsense talked Fact : Under the previous system the entry was always limited – 50 and then 55. So it is ridiculous to say that the new format ( 2012) is fantastic because there are perhaps 70 riders. It is not really relevant as there could not have been 70 riders before. I do not believe statistics can always be a true reflection of things, but for those who enjoy this sort of thing: In 2012 10 riders contested the Championship class – Only 5 entered all rounds Devon had Championship riders = 6, Mackenzie = 7 , Mitchell = 6 18 were in Expert A class, Only 4 took points in all rounds Entries – Rd 1 = 53 Rd 2 = 55 , Rd 3 = 43, Rd 4 = 51 Rd 5 = 50 Rd 6 = 54, Rd 7 =42 Rd 8 =50 ( figures done in a rush but correct or very near) Except for a couple of rounds the entry was not far from max. It must be stated however that I know from my own clubs efforts that if in a particular year the entry drops to about 40, as a club we lose about £500. This is made up from then week in week out normal events ( and we do not have big entries down here) In other words we “ subsidise” the BC. This does not normally bother us too much as we do not run the BC to make money – we run it because we believe that Clubs need to maintain Championships. Some others who are not involved may feel like looking at this principle ? All except one round are run by Clubs or Centre ( Mitchell). It is not a money spinner. They do it to put something back, because they wish to se a BC, and because they are true enthusiasts like all those who week in week out put on events Before you post on TC – perhaps you could ask yourselves “ What have I done in last 12 months” For many of you I know the answer is a lot , and even if you are the most ardent critic of BC, Stop or No -Stop or the Trials and Enduro Committee , I have time and respect for you. For the others who have done sod all in any given 12 months – except tell us all how it should be done, I am afraid my patience is wearing thin. Fact: Too many used the statistic of a smaller entry in past to decry the series , this was not fair and should not have been used to such extend. A Championship cannot always be judged by the number of participants – look at other sports However: What was apparent, as I have alluded to before, was that the Championship class had tended to shrink, and in all honesty it did not look that there would be a great number of riders coming in future years, so there was a danger we could arrive at a Championship class with a number of riders one could count on one hand. If this looked like being the case( and it was) then it was time to at least look for a new approach, whatever it was. Now to the rounds held so far, and as someone has already posted we are TWO jobs into the task It is absolutely absurd to have 7 pages of posts trying to form a valid conclusion after just two rounds Also , these were certainly two very different rounds It is totally wrong to throw hand up in air after Westwood and rant that it is just not working It is also totally wrong to try to convince everyone how wonderful it all is because it worked well in Scotland. We have only had two rounds, it is not enough for sound opinion. That is part of exercise. I was not unfortunately at Westwood , and it is not fair to make too many comments, but it does look as if many regarded it as unsatisfactory. It is not correct to point fingers at people, especially if one was not there or not aware ( as is obvious when reading about theories about who was Clerk of Course) The event will be looked at in more detail by T & E in due course I was in Scotland , and I can only say that personally, I enjoyed the atmosphere , and I also thoroughly enjoyed seeing a whole host of riders who I would not normally see competing in the Championship class. I have always thought Ian Austemuhle one of the neatest riders I have seen, and I was glad to see him back in mix. Last year along with many others he was just not in the Championship class, and I think this devalued it. I walked every inch of the course and sections on my own on the Friday ( which was miles ) and also got lost deep in Forest! but it was obvious from the first 100yards that a huge effort had been made , and for sure the Clerk of Course had set out to embrace the new rules.( even if he liked them or not) Everyone however is well aware that the venue and experience of personnel in Scotland regarding No-Stop events will be a big advantage On the Saturday, the course was walked again , with myself, the importers and Clerk of Course and some small changes made – WITH FULL APPROVAL AND AGREEMENT of C/Course. As Big John has already stated , there was a rider briefing ( and I am pleased to say the riders were excellent and took it all on board) On Sunday morning we did an Observer briefing About the day, everyone will have their own opinion. I am a bit perturbed by one of the early posts that state that most of the riders told him that they did not enjoy it – this was certainly not the impression I got to the many I spoke to ( although the top riders were clear they did not – but to their credit in this round they got on with it and gave it a good go) If a lot of riders were telling the person who posted that they did not like it , and then telling me ( as they did) that they did – we have a problem, or as the Indians you to say “ Riders speak with forked tongue” I do not know, if the same procedure was followed at Westwood, it does appear not, and this needs to be looked at Now a few more facts: The Clerk of Course ( and I mean the guy with the licence) is totally responsible for the event – end of. It is however often practice to have the Clerk of Course as sort of “ foreman” and have someone else to actually mark sections etc. Nothing wrong with this, as long as C/Course has faith in it , is consulted and accepts that he still has overall responsibility – end of Importers: This will always be a thorny subject, and it perhaps needs a little light thrown on subject The Importers did not make the decision to go No-Stop – end of Yes, for many years most of them, and now all, believe that something needed to change, and Yes they have been very vociferous in these views. Yes they have mostly advocated a return to No-Stop rules. However, everyone is entitled to opinion – and I am willing to put mine on record. I do not for one second believe that the main reason for their influence was just about selling bikes. I know others may, but I do not. Many of you know them personally and they will confirm that for many years many have attended the BC Trials Meeting , and asked for a return to No –Stop. This has always , until know been declined, much to their frustration it must be said. However, for many of the reasons already stated , they and many others felt strongly it was time at least try something. After the cancelled meeting I referred to at start , the Importers requested a meeting with T & E , which was held, and AFTER this, the T &E ( after a lot of deliberation already having taken place) made decision to try No-Stop for 2012. There was another BC meeting held to discuss the final details etc, and certainly at this meeting the top riders had an input, but it must be admitted that the die was cast and we would be trying No-Stop for BC in 2012 – end of You may not agree with me( not that many do) but I do not tell lies, I tell it like it is, as do most from my neck of woods. I can honestly and categorically say that in Scotland , when the Importers walked the sections I saw absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the intention was to cater for their own riders. The exact opposite was true and in one case in particular, a section would have been excellent for the riders of each Importer, but their concern was absolutely for the riders lower down the order and their safety, and with Clerk of Course fully involved, the step was taken out There is obviously an opinion that Messrs Rathmell, Lampkin, Shirt, Saunders, Birkett have an influence I am certainly not in awe of these names, as they will quickly tell you , but if anyone thinks the experience and ability of these past riders should be totally ignored just because they know Import bikes, I am sorry , I just cannot agree The original intention was that the Importers would arrive at an event and offer advice and help. The Clerk of Course would be involved. As I have already said, it may have gone differently in Westwood, we will have to investigate Moving on: I am actually ( I may be alone) not that totally devastated that Rd 2 was not regarded as a huge success by all. Surely this is part of the whole exercise? Not all venues will be perfect for a particular set of rules, Not all Clerk of Course will think same way? This must all be part of the process I was the Steward at Westwood last year, and if those who are now telling us all how wonderful it was , this is not the actual case. I know the complaints I received , including from some top riders, I know the concerns that were expressed by a few about safety in one section. Like I said earlier , no two events will be the same regardless of rules Finally a few important facts The series will run until the end of season under No –Stop – end of It is not valid to keep stating that riding 6 separate days of the BC under No – Stop is a huge disadvantage to WC riders , but riding 6 Days at SSDT and other S3parts and others is not Equally, there is no doubt we have to consider in future exactly what we want form BC. Certainly in past it has always been intention to make it a stepping stone to European and World rounds. The T & E have supported that principle for many years ( and been severely criticised for doing so) However, things they are a changing, and the number of UK riders contesting WC and UEM has shrunk ( although some posts have taken a blind disregard of this and just jumped on bandwagon without actually looking at numbers) Should the main aim of BC be to cater for the World runners? – possibly, this needs debate – but sensible debate We would still need someone to organise the events, and I have to tell you that many past organisers have just got more and more disillusioned by being told by so many ( including top riders) that the series was crap I have stated before, but will again, that before any rule changes were made for 2012, it was far from clear if we would have enough of the WC riders in the BC to fill a phone box - fact I have no problem with the post that Ben Wibberley initially sent in . I may not agree with it, but he had the balls to put his name on it and I will study every word For me, what riders now need to do is to get on with it, and then at end of year, express a view that is honest and sincere. I fully expect many to say “ Well we have tried it – and we think it is crap” I fully expect others to say “ Well it has brought us back into the Championship and we have enjoyed most of it” I have no idea how it will all pan out , and as I have said before, neither do any of you Any rider who is just deliberately determined to just harp on and on about it at present is not giving it a fair chance. Finally Finally, and important. There has been great analysis about the Observing. At the end of it all the guy is making a judgment as he/she sees it. The Clerk of Course should try to help of course in the plotting of the sections and not make it too difficult for them to do this. This again is an important part of the experiment – can No-Stop section at Championship level be observed fairly and consistently - over a season – not just one trial? HOWEVER HOWEVER HOWEVER - There is no excuse of arguing or abusing Officials and Observers I wish to make my feelings quite clear. We have clear regulations regarding this - riders and entourage need to read TSR27 I have stated I was not at Westwood, so hearsay is not appropriate, but I wish to send a clear warning – abuse to Officials will not be tolerated , regardless of Stop or No –Stop, and those who do so are taking a big risk Please do not think that disciplinary action may only apply to a particular event – this is not necessarily so , and there is a very real possibility of Disciplinary action being taken , and again the regulation will allow for action to be taken against riders if their helpers/ followers or others associated with that rider somehow feel they have the right to shout and rant at Observers/Officials. We just ain’t having it. That is not a threat – it is a promise. Enough is enough Can we please just now see how the season pans out and THEN, we will all be able to contribute a more educated opinion Unfortunately each day we see more threats to our sport heading our way, and much of this may appear insignificant in the future – please let is just get on with it while we still can

After such a long response I obviously do not wish to tie up the TC site with another one! But just to answer the few queries above Is the intention to get more riders into the Championship class – well yes this would be ideal of course, but more importantly it is not to have a Championship that prevents them from competing and makes the top end so elitist that only 2 or 3 are able to contest it The Championship class will never probably be for every man and his dog, but there have been some very good riders who have dropped out of it , not necessarily through a lack of ability, but because it was just getting too much, they are not always able to devote the degree of practice, not able to always find a minder ( especially when going out to practice) and of course many have to go to work on a Monday, and far too often if you are not up there and on it at previous level – there was a risk of injury etc As I have stated – there is a very good case for suggesting that a small number of very specialist events – possibly also trying to get some riders from outside UK ( like Jonty Edmunds has done with his Enduro Sprint series) may be worth considering – but possibly this would not be the British Championship , but a very specialised British Open or such – but very very limited participation – under FIM rules obviously. We will see. Yes the idea of two day events is a possibility and we have looked at it seriously ( as we have combining Youth A & B on same day) , but again easier said than done. Many organisers need the Friday for final preparation of course etc and then finish a lot off on Saturday when more club members are available ( I know this is the morning when results/ toilets / road marking gets done, caravans put in place, often farmer moves stock from field on Friday evening and many do not want hassle of having to put them somewhere else for extra day etc etc etc) It is never easy getting Observers and for one day is not so bad – for two days ?Not always so easy. Travel – maybe an over simplification but many riders, especially lower order finish work on Friday teatime and then have Friday evening/Saturday morning to travel to event. I know to my cost ( almost got sack) that when I contested British Enduro Championship for many years it was the having to travel and pinch time from work on the Friday that caused me problems. Some areas where the British Championship run are more sensitive than we may think, and locals/village etc now are really affected for about 1.5 days. A two day event can cause a few more problems. It is not a bad idea – and we have looked at it, and will probably do so again, but as always the devil is in the actual detail- and we are working with hard working Clubs who can only do so much and take so much time off work. Practice – yes this was a very debatable one for No-Stop that is true. BUT it is early days and it may be that Clerk of Course will find it useful to evaluate the section severity etc – and as stated is gives us a chance to get all the riders together at end of it and at least ask their opinion which I think is a step forward I will end now – it is early days. For sure not everywhere will be as suitable as Scotland – but I still think let us just watch and form valid opinions a little later down line

I certainly did not have any intention of getting involved in this debate, particularly after just one round has been held. Anyone with an iota of common sense should know that it is far too early to make judgements as there sure as hell will be lessons to be learned by the end of the year, and then , people will have a more valid opinion to express I wrote a lengthy piece about the whole scenario of the 2012 Championship some weeks ago, it is evident that many did not read it, as they now take a delight in expounding views which I clearly covered and explained, and that tends me wonder if it is worth even trying to take the time to expand further on the topic. However, like Big John I feel I should, not to try to convert people to the philosophy of No-Stop, or to condemn it, nor equally to defend it. I said some time ago that I really do not know, and I also said that none of you do either. Some of you think you know, pretend you know , or are just to plain ignorant and self obsessed to give the subject realistic debate. What in annoying me most , are people who are jumping on a bandwagon . If you are not involved in the actual organisation of an event or riding in such events just how valid are some of these opinions? I keep seeing words like “ what do we want from our BC” ? Or “ it should be a showcase etc” – all fine and fair and no arguments, but have the people making such comments, and more importantly a wider majority actually been taking that much interest or attending? Everyone needs to answer for oneself. Did the BC rounds of say 2010 and 2011 actually help the top riders in their in their quest? Have you asked them? How enthusiastic have they been for series for last few years? How enthusiastic have series sponsors been about coverage, comments? Has our mailbox about past series ( and this one for that matter) had more praise or more complaints about series? There is nothing wrong with admiring top riders , nothing wrong with hero worship or sympathy with their cause. What cannot be correct however is to set ones self up as an expert on all things British or FIM Championship because you have a particular empathy with a particular rider. Top riders can , do and have, all had their say on this matter. Absolutely nothing wrong with that , this is as it should be, but some of you are tending to think you are their “representatives” for want of a better word. For those of you who believe that riders are never consulted or spoken to, you are just plain wrong. Even worse for me is that some posts are clearly meant to insult, much of the content is inaccurate or plain untruthful and is quoted from the rear end rather than from actual knowledge or accuracy Frustratingly however ,some of the posts have a mixture of very good constructive comment , but this is often mixed in with some inaccurate or over simplistic stuff. One of the things that really gets to me is that all posts except mine and I think Mick Wren, and one or two others where it is obvious , are always from persons using a nom de plume . I would personally like some of the more critical and insulting ones to have the balls to put an actual name to the comments, then we could actually assess the validity and of the person to comment. I am starting to suspect that many comments are from people who actually never actually do sod all, and even worse reading between the lines I am not even convinced they actually ride that much at any level. Perhaps even if you do not use your name you could humour me and just add your riding or organisational experience of BC? I would like to try to sort the wheat out from some chaff. Anyone , I repeat anyone who believes that the Stop or No Stop debate is likely to just go away is deluded. It will not . It has been about for many years, and in my opinion has been, and still is ( these posts prove that) a canker in the side of Trials. This is an attempt to lance that boil one why or another, or at the very least get people to put up or shut up. Sorry, that also applies to many of you. Some speak with great authority on what C/Course and organisers should do, even more about how everything should be done. Well again , carry on and show us. Before anyone starts to tell me that I am some sort of old fart convinced about No-Stop rules , let me assure you I may be old but I am not convinced that they will work for the British Championship, but I am totally convinced it is time to at least give it a try , and many sensible, open minded people feel the same. And , this is important, they are not all No –Stop fanatics, not old codgers. Many are young and in fact are far far better riders than many who have decided they have some superior knowledge of the subject I keep hearing about what the riders want – how do you know? How can anyone actually know at present ? Certainly you MAY know from some you have spoken to, but in reality as there was a very small Championship sector in first place, this may not show a representative view of riders who are “ likely or able” to contest the series in the Championship class. I have never actually believed that the whole criteria should be judged by the actual number of riders in top class, and all other members T& E have felt same. It should not be a deciding factor ( else there would be no World Championship in many other sporting events where only a handful can compete at top level) BUT it is a factor and cannot be ignored. Someone has to put on the events, and if you have not spent hours and hours doing so ( although I know some contributors have) it is very difficult to understand how organisers can feel. Some sensible posts have mentioned how we moved away from No-Stop rules in the first place? That is well worth debate, and in simple terms it probably was largely because of the difficulty in Observing when the machine stopped. So there you have it, a possible problem However, as time as moved on , certainly SSDT , S3 Parts, Traditional, Trail and Sammy Miller etc have all used the No-Stop rules and it appears that the Observers do not have that many problems and these events seem to be much enjoyed. However , it also has to be acknowledged that the British Championship is at a higher level – and a five , perhaps wrongly awarded would have far more consequence? Possibly ? Actually more debateable than first thoughts. Is it not arrogant to believe that the top riders in the S3 Parts or others ( and I cannot help notice that many of the top 3 Brit Champ riders often ride them even when not contracted to do so?) could be awarded a five , but for some reason it is not fair or equitable to award one for the same offence to riders in the Brit Championship ? This probably leads us back to a more important point , what exactly do we want from our British Championship? Unlike probably all others posting replies I was very instrumental in insisting that the British Championship should follow the FIM rules. Until 2012 I probably believed passionately that we should not disadvantage our top riders. I think I still do : how much plainer can I make it ? HOWEVER , sometimes things have to be re-assed in view of reality rather than philosophy. When many of you speak about these “ top UK riders in World rounds” who exactly are you talking about? Have you actually looked at the entry list of UK riders in the World series at present? I talk about the adult Championship class , as Youth and Women rules have not changed in UK Do not let the UK round influence your thinking , we must look at the whole series. Realistically , and yes, unfortunately our participation has dwindled. We cannot blame No-Stop rules for this. Despite some of your ludicrous comments, I will confirm that before we even thought of changing the rules to No-Stop , I was unable to confirm 100% more than ONE top name who would be contesting the Brit Champ & World series in 2012. This was in Oct / November. We were told some might if they could, we were told some had no intention of competing in BC series, we were told some would not even get a bike to ride them on. This may be water under the bridge. It is however fact. It is commendable to try to have concern for our top riders but it is also a fact that for lots of reasons their participation is limited. Have a look at the adult entries in the recent UEM round in Italy and you may get the point. Please please do not bother to reply and state if the Federation gave them sheds of money/ support a big lorry and everything else they would flock there – dream on. If you really believe that , simples , make a proposal via your Club and Centre that the ACU licence/registration fee is increased to that of other countries such as Spain/Italy/France etc , but have the balls to put your name to the actual proposal. Next , if we deduce that it is desirable to have a Brit Championship to assist these top riders toward FIM honours , that is the exact deduction the ACU Trials and Enduro C/tee have made for years. Please also realise that this desire to not disadvantage the British World riders causes huge problems with the calendar in both Trials and Enduro. We have always tried to insist that the British Championship rounds take priority over others date wise .This is difficult. The FIM dates are not confirmed until Autumn, and this often ballses up the UK calendar. One would THINK that it would have no effect on Centre and other Championship events , but it does. Some clubs find it hard to organise a British Championship on a particular date ( set on influence from Word and UEM rounds – including World Indoor where some years we only have one rider) We try not to disadvantage our riders and often the British Championship dates have an unexpected influence on other events. Some British Trials Championship organisers have Clerks of Course, Officials and Observers who wish to ride in other Championships such as Sammy Miller etc and some parents want to be at Youth events. In summary for many years the ACU , T & E have worked very hard to ensure the BC had priority – and frankly a lot of Clubs and Centres in both Trials and Enduro are a bit fed up of it, and will state that we have been too concerned with the riders competing in World events and we should leave them get on with it and not over influence the BC and the British calendar. We have not agreed with this sentiment and had constantly tried to support our riders in quest for International honours, so it is absurd to imply that we take no heed of such things. Of all the things I get involved in ACU wise, the formation of the calendar is the hardest and think I enjoy least, and this is primarily because in both Trial and Enduro we as a C/tee have always tried not to disadvantage our International riders. I accept that this may be going off on tangent, but I use it to show that it is ridiculous to try to imply that we have no thought for riders as they move up the ladder or compete in FIM events . Again I ask some of the people who infer this to answer me a simple question : “ What have you done to help our riders” Have you put on events for them ? Supported them? Tried at least to ensure that they have at least some ACU funding, even if small to help the younger ones dip a toe in the water at European level ( probably about £ ¼ million for Trials & Enduro combined since I have been Chairman) On a personal note, I am not sure how someone like myself who has been Clerk of Course for last two outdoor World Championship trials plus last two Indoor World trials can always be accused of wanting to back to the old days and have no concept of modern trials etc ? It is just not logical. This applies equally to other T & E members. It is absurd to think somehow a few of you are experts on FIM matters and we know nothing. Several members of present T & E Committee have worked their socks off to bring World Trials to our shores. There was a period when UK had no World trials for a few years. Who resurrected it and put it on at Hawkstone , who marked it, cleaned the toilets, sold the programmes etc ? The present T & E Committee or those who were there at time, and who put it on the next year , and a European the year after that? The Midland Centre under guidance of present T & E Committee man Tim Fairbrother. Who is Clerk of Course and presently working hard to ensure World round in Penrith this year : Mick Wren, member of present T & E. How many of you have written to the organiser volunteered to help out if needed? So please debate the BC till the cows come home but some of you need stop the B*****ks about how you know all about World events and we know and do nothing, I am afraid the reverse is very much true. It is equally absurd to imply that all the riders would contest BC if it were the sole qualification for TDN . That would certainly have ruled out a young lad called Douglas Lampkin for a few years let alone Jack Challinor. Simple fact – if you are the best riders in any sport you will get selected for teams – if you are not you will not – end of. Top riders will ride where the Manufacturers and Importers influence them and where they feel they can progress best regardless of discipline. Paul Edmondson, Dougie Lampkin, Jack Challoner , David Knight, as well as some of our current top stars are just some who have had to up sticks and ride abroad in quest for World honours - little criticism from us for doing so , it needed to be done So has our philosophy of making British Championship a stepping stone to World and showcase for our top riders worked in recent years? Probably not Let us not waste a lot of time on the normal platitudes rolled out – IF the British Championship had better organisers, better venues with good large parking facilities, better Clerk of Course and better weather, all on TV etc it would attract more entries and everything would be wonderful. Correct. But IF my Auntie had balls she would be my Uncle. We have what we have. Everyone including my dog would accept the sort of things listed above. But most expect someone else to do it all. We have what we have. There has been no long list of new Organisers rushing forward to organise a round, regardless of calibre. True , we reduced the rounds from 8 to 6 this year and two organisers ( including my own) were omitted , but this was nothing to do with rules, it was done before that, it was more to do with the economies of travel etc. All those to say that the British Championship should have XYZ – I applaud you. BUT then I ask why you or your club have not bothered to try to do so ? Why not? Is it a case of the old adage : “ Do as I say not as I do”? There is another important point to be made. While some of you constantly criticise older people for their Non Stop views , I would ask that you actually look at who is putting on the events most of you ( I am convinced some of you never actually ride) enjoy every week, and many of these are Stop allowed. In my own Club and Centre, lots of people believe passionately about No-Stop BUT our Club and Centre currently run Stop allowed. These enthusiasts still have the decency to work, observe, be Clerk of Course and so on – these are my heroes. They do not harp on and let personal views detract them from putting on events regardless of rules. These are the people I want to associate with – stuff the rules The fact is that it is many of the people who you roundly condemn for having a view that does not agree with yours. Why? Can they not have a view? If they believe the current Championship has lost its way, they have every right to say so. They put in more effort to our sport than many of you. If they feel they have no voice or influence, but some of you think you have , we are in for a dire future. Equally, if you believe that without actually trying the No-Stop system for BC that those who are convinced about it are going to concede that it should always stay Stop allowed, you probably also believe in Father Xmas , and no-one has the right to expound that everyone else is wrong. The No-Stop enthusiasts may be correct, they may be wrong, but I do know that many put a hell of a lot into the sport, often running Stop Allowed events, and their views are as important as anyone else – actually more so than the dolts who do sod all, of which there are many So why are the organisers not rushing forward to run BC ? It is difficult to explain and the reasons will vary, especially to those who have not tried to be involved ( the majority) I can say that Clubs and their members who have spend days or weeks , given up their riding time and family time to put on an event are always going to be disappointed when they find they are catering for perhaps only 6 riders in the Championship class. We are well aware that there are another 50 in the Expert Class A ( this actually started to shrink dramatically) and Expert B classes – BUT in reality it is about “ perception” and like it or not many pundits have perceived that only the Championship class show a true picture of a Championship. I do not actually agree with that, but do see how people arrive at such a conclusion. One only has to go back through old TC posts to see that. Unfortunately you may also see that some posts take on a hypocritical aspect and heavily criticised the small Championship entries , but are now critical of a system that for now at least has increased this class, like I said, some are jumping on the bandwagon. So what is the answer. betabeta actually stated it . We have to accept that for many of the potential riders probably those outside the top 3 or 4 , the sections have been far too difficult. Many others have expressed this view . All are 100% correct. But then go on to say that the Organisers or Clerk of Course should have been made to ease them and think of majority. Wonderful, What a revelation ! I would never have thought of that ! But also what short memories you have. Each and every year the Organisers/Clerks of Course are assembled , and guess what ? It has been accepted that this should happen. So then what happens , well I am afraid things have not always or even often gone as planned. I wish I had a pint for every time we arrived at a solution ie One third of sections hard for top 3or 4, One third medium to cater for about 50% of class and One third easier to cater for 100% of class,,. Fantastic – but does/did it happen? Unfortunately not. Why ? Not so easy to work out. Some facts – which I have witnessed not guessed Many times over many years when the Clerk of Course has tried to do this , he has been criticised by some of top riders for doing so – fact. Why , well perhaps understandable. These riders obviously want harder sections to hone skills and prepare for World rounds , and of course as with top riders in any series from BC to Sammy Miller, they are aware that if they do lose a five in a predominantly easy trials they cannot recover it . This has always been case regardless of any rules. It is a fact that the very few top riders are often more vociferous with their views and they and entourage do tend to influence things unduly. Equally us mere mortals and Clerks of Course tend to look up to them and are more inclined to listen to them than the lesser lights – fact In every Championship round I have been to in last couple of years ( most) I have assembled all the riders at end of practice and gone through each class section by section and asked for riders views in presence of Clerk of Course , with the intention of the lower Championship riders being able to state that certain sections were too hard. They have rarely done so ( the big step in then Westwood trials last year a very good example) Possibly they do not like to show in front of the top 3 or 4 that they are less able ? I do not know, but again it is fact. I am not blaming the top 3 or 4 for this, they obviously want it as hard as possible, but have been supportive in the above effort and prepared to listen to others – but it just ain’t happened . The lesser Championship riders have had it too hard, and this in turn has had the effect of others moving down , giving up and certainly not encouraged new riders into top class. It can be used as an excuse I know, but we have to accept that British weather has over the years had a fair old influence. In last years St Davids at end of Saturday practice, changes were made and should have been good for Sunday. You had to actually be there to see what the weather was like and the effect it had. Equally Scarborough two years ago was hit by a very heavy frost which made a huge difference it is not an exact science, but too many times it has gone wrong – fact Many, especially betabeta have commented about what a Clerk of Course should do , fair enough I can honestly and sincerely say that I have never yet met a Clerk of Course ( and that is all of them for BC for many years) who has set out to make it far too hard. Yes it has often happened for many reasons, some listed above. It is not an exact science. Years ago the Clerk of Course could assess sections better because he may have been a useful rider and tried them ? Who the hell can do that know? As I said it is not an exact science How many of you have actually tried it? I have – I can tell you it ain’t easy How about this for a novel idea – the organisers decide where the sections go, clean them out etc - and place a large bag of markers there on Friday afternoon, or even Saturday morning and the riders turn up and place them ? Could be divided up into : Top 3 mark 4 sections , middle lot mark 4 and lesser Championship riders mark 4 sections. Let me just pause and close my window as there is a pig flying past If for any reason – the Clerk of Course does get it wrong, and they certainly have, and have made them too difficult what do we do – Shoot him ? Tell him not to do it again? Take his licence off him? I know quite a few Clerks of Course who had enough and would welcome all but the first one. They have tried and tried and worked their butts off, with little thanks Read the TC posts over last few years. Read reports and letters in papers , would you feel like marking out the sections? This is not just about rules. Should we have tried other systems without changing the rules ? Well we did Some have short memories , a few years ago we had the 50/50 system . Championship riders did 6 Championship sections and 6 Expert A ones . Experts did same 6 Expert ones and 6 easier ones We also tried a variety of other formulae to try to cater for more riders in Championship class - many Centres attempt similar type of systems Did it work ? Well not really. The top Championship riders complained they only had 6 Championship sections , so it was not worth effort. Logically then this must be the case if we had easier Championship sections for more riders. The World contenders ( whoever they are) will always want it has hard as possible. They are probably correct Some of you have commented that the top riders are now disadvantaged at FIM level. Again I think you may be correct James, Michael, Alex will confirm that I have announced to them that I think they are – fact. Yes they are Guinea pigs this year, BUT I am afraid the time has arrived to look at the wider spectrum Also the Championship last year was not exactly pleasing them either. It was time for change – it was time to try something. I am not convinced that riding 6 days under present No Stop will particularly harm the top 3 riders – else why would 6 days riding at SSDT be considered It may well be that we have to make a British Championship more fit for purpose for a majority , and then introduce a Championship , like a European Open over 6 rounds , limited to only the very best and those going to contest World and European honours with possibly only 10 riders allowed? Obviously under FIM rules. In conclusion we will wait and see. Debate is good, but bandwagon jumping is not . I give an example of a post which stated “ Dibs cleaned every section except one – I believe he “ felt” he had cleaned “ I think the photo made that clear ? and Dibs to his credit never ever claimed he had cleaned it – he was first to admit he had fived it . It is early days – can we just watch and learn ? and for the prat who stated that if it did not work the ACU would not admit it and go back – you clearly do not know me or rest of C/tee. Equally if it does work we will also say so. I suspect it will be a bit of both

Hi OTF A non starter I am afraid - but do not be too worried - in many ways the 198 is a better bike - although not many admit it !! John

A few things we have tried in our small Centre – would probably say Jury is still out on how successful they have been. Like others we now contribute ( not pay) £10 to an Observers expenses ie travelling there. Also – and this would work better in larger Centres – each Club puts in £xxxxx amount e,g £50 –or could be more. I would actually suggest £100 each year – they can calculate entry fees to take account of this Every time an Observer does job – a small slip is filled in ( can be done after event off signing on sheet) - this could also include other Officials eg C/Course and Sec of Meeting if that is though appropriate. Each club sends all the slips in at end of year – or at interval decided. Draw takes place for number of prizes decided. Someone who Observers once would have 1 ticket in draw - someone who Observed 10 times has 10 tickets in draw, and therefore more chance/reward. If 10 Clubs have taken up the scheme the prize fund is £1k – and if Centre also chip in – it can be much more The prize can be substantial eg holiday, or cash etc You get the idea. It has worked reasonably well – but our prizes tend to me a lot lower as we have a small number of clubs. In some Centres it would be very good.

Without looking at actual classes etc - which may or may not be a good thing ( we sure as hell have messed about a fair bit with them in past) - this could be another post topic - can I return to my post asking if we could have some suggestions on what could/should be checked? OTF seems to be the only person who has actually has come up with a list , which I think would be very similar to my own - and I would like to look at it in a bit more detail I am afraid however that as I think most of us are aware we come back to actual checking. I am not sure that Totalshell's idea a would actually work , although I understand the principle - and actually the point of making the check at a section is a very good one and one that I have not heard a lot before ( it is done in FIM Enduro for example where marked parts are checked and also happens to marked parts in FIM trials) , this prevents the rider turning up for machine examination and passing and then swiftly changing a few things back at van? I am afraid if we arrive at a definitive list , it still needs someone with a fair amount of knowledge to be able to check and therefore enforce it. I think I have a fair Technical knowledge of motorcycles , and probably a lot more than many of the volunteers we manage to attract and are extremely grateful for to do the machine examining – but using myself as an example if I were to be a machine examiner, and looking at OTF points Pt 1 - Yes good – I do not see a great deal of problem with this one 2 - No big problem as long as machine examiner had a Vernier or other calliper of better still just a simple gauge we could easily have made ie a 35mm slot in a piece of metal. We could insert a rule that fork stanchion must be exposed ie not hidden 3. I could not do. Perhaps in past I could have – but now I would not have enough knowledge to justify throwing someone out. Yes for sure some are obvious others are not . I would not be comfortable excluding someone for not having say a swan neck headstock , but allowing someone else with extensive frame mods( but not so obvious) to still ride in class. The examination of frames and particularly frame dimensions and geometry is far too complicated – for many of us at least. If you have a particular interest and are up to date with it all great – but many would not be – including me. 4. I agree totally 5. I totally agree 6 - A real debate !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So – a fair bit if this is possible – but surely not that extensive a list. I do not think the present Sammy Miller criteria is that far out is it? BUT – the problem remains – someone has to be able to check it. Finally just let me play devils advocate I have never played golf – so may be wrong, but to my limited knowledge, some guys go around 18 holes , sometimes in pairs – and write on a piece of paper how many shots took to get the ball in each hole? It does seem to me that if they actually took 4 shots – nothing prevents them writing down 3 as long as both think this is acceptable? I think the whole scoring think is more or less self policed? So, rather than us all talking about specialised machine examiners with fairly extensive knowledge about all the technical points we have talked about – and perhaps travelling all over to the events could we accept the following: · Machine examining more or less as is with the hard working Officials doing basic checks as they now do · ACU draw up some eligibility criteria and write it down in the handbook – as they do now. Next – it must surely be acknowledged that there is a huge and extensive knowledge of all these things by those who ride the actual machines – many build them etc and many would be around shows, read books and magazines etc . So I conclude that in any Classic event there will be lots and lots of riders with the knowledge required - they would all have the regulations for that event – and they would all have a current handbook or CD and would be able to be easily aware of any criteria/classes etc So - if there are riders circumnavigating the rules - another rider puts in a Protest against eligibility Now – I know the nonsense about other riders not wishing to rock the boat, snitch, grass, call it what you like – but if it became the “NORM” that it was acknowledged that riders would police it themselves with no criticism or repercussions etc , would it not work? I may be a very radical thought – but could it not be possible that those enjoying the sport take some responsibility for identifying the cheats – rather than expecting those working hard to put the events on do this task because riders have ignored the set down regulations ( despite signing to say they are abiding by them) Or am I being very naive in my old age?

An interesting post chaps, but unfortunately one which everyone thinks everyone else should be sorting it out. We have a saying in Wales that everyone complains about the rain , but no sod does anything about it Let us actually look at doing something about it – and as someone suggests, why do the ACU not do something? Well perhaps we should try – but also perhaps we already have? Over the years in the Sammy Miller series for example we have stipulated many rules regarding eligibility for various classes, and the actual results have been fairly obvious – as soon as a regulation is formed – some people seem to take an obtuse delight in trying to circumnavigate it. What actually annoys me the most is that I have noticed that some who have shouted loudest for strict uniform rules , are often then the ones I see at an event who have deviated from said rules. Often of course their answer is that well I think it is OK to have this – but not OK to have that ie never mind the rules, I will enforce the ones I like? In simple terms, dress it up any way you like, but if there are eligibility rules in place, and someone deviates from them – pure and simple they are cheating So what can be done ? It is possible ( just) to arrive at some eligibility criteria – and we do ( more on that later) BUT – now they have to be enforced and this is where the big problem comes Someone stated that the Sec of meeting should have a “ glance” at the machine and decide if it was correct? If we look in the Regs available, I am fairly sure we will see that often than not, the poor old Sec of Meeting is the wife, girlfriend, daughter etc of someone in the Club who has been press ganged into service. I can assure you it is hard enough to find someone to do this ( and I do know as I do it several times a year myself) - now we would be looking for someone to not only carry out administration on the day – but nip out and have a glance at the machines – I pose the question how these people would have the knowledge to see if the carb was wrong, the forks were really Gas Gas turned down and inserted into British outer cases, or the frame manufactured to modern dimensions and geometry etc etc etc In fact, even if we look to machine examiners, once again they are exactly that. They will examine a machine for the normal requirements. They to are doing a voluntary job , how many would have the extensive knowledge to be able to identify each and every fiddle? How many wish to actually throw riders out or be involved in the inevitable arguments ( if you believe there will not be any you also believe in Father Xmas) I suppose, it may be possible to find a few with real specialist knowledge – and if riders were prepared to pay these could be sent to events from various areas within the UK? What events would they go to? All of them ie every Pre 65 event ? Would they get paid ? Would travel be paid? If so why pay them and let all the other volunteers do it for sod all? I quite liked the post that someone suggested that at end of a Trial the machine could be " bought" for £xxxx pounds. This actual happens in horse racing where they have a " seller race" , but unfortunately I do not see us being to keen to be able to purcase someones pride and joy even if it is not an expensive fiddle - good idea to get a few cheap bikes however!! Finally just for some light relief – let us conduct an experiment Can we have suggestions for the things that should be checked ? And things that are not regarded as having to be original –in other words – can we establish some eligibility rules for a Pre 65 machine – THAT CAN BE CHECKED WITHOUT TOO MUCH HASSLE I challenge 10 posts to agree?

One of the problems with engine numbers is that they can often not always tell you if anything other than the crankcase has been changed or messed about with As someone has already stated

Very sad news A great rider and a great guy , spent a lot of time with him at Scotland WC last year and although he was a famous rider, he was just so easy to talk to and was just one of the guys doing his best for Trials

Hi Chuck All the advice and photo

In simple terms - forget it, just not worth the hassle and expense, let alone the difficulty of getting piston etc

Hi Insultaco Everyone has given you correct advice re sleeve and seals etc

Please note As someone else has already stated - while there is no Championship class for Trailbikes - All Sammy Miller rounds can if they wish include a class for Trail machines and also Aircooled Monos - but this will not be a Championship class. For Trail bike riders who wish to contest a Championship - there is the Trail Bike Championship - and excellent events they are too - try one

You will notice that I have not commented on much of this debate

I am afraid at least one of these posts saddens me a bit lads This online licensing has been needed for years. Many, including posts on TC have asked us to get on with it, as they should There was a lot of consultation with Clubs via Centres and although there were some obvious snags ( again oft debated) in maintaining the link between club and rider, at end of it all the idea of issuing Clubs with dedicated numbers etc is being put into place. Hopefully it will work well, if not can be tuned and altered. As with all thinks new , there will be teething troubles for sure, we may even get other problems along the way, but surely this is moving in right direction? Many posts acknowledge this and seem to confirm this is how we move forward . No one has to do it on line, you can still do it the old paper way if you wish. Most posts seem positive, thank you for that Some will have teething troubles, please be patient The dedicated numbers have been sent out to Centre Clubs in the order the Centres appear in handbook ie Alphabetical So

It is certainly intended that the registering

The problem with any debate that involves licences, registrations, insurances, permits and so on, will always at the end of day come down to money ,and why is it needed, and what do I get for it, and why should I pay it etc. Additionally it is also difficult ( and always has been) to debate such matters when some contributions seem to somehow revolve very much around people talking out of their rear end, or even worse just making wild and inaccurate assumptions in order to strengthen any argument. Logic and reason seems to go out of the window, and contributors who normally make sensible and valid points , and yes, often offer constructive criticism, seem to shoot off on some path of righteous indignation – because they see the collection of any money as a force of evil Perhaps we can move back to the real world At the end of all this – what we are actually talking about is the sum of £10. It is not a licence. We call it a Registration. It has a £10 charge In ALL the other disciplines we have a “ licence” which at present costs £43. All this has been said many times before Now to move to some of OTF rather dubious points , and here lies a very good example of someone who regularly makes very interesting and intelligent points ( even if I do not always agree with them) but now suddenly because some money is involved he seems very eager to cast aspersions in each or any direction First OTF , I take great exception in being called or regarded as a “ suit” . This is a derogatory remark, usually made by those who have either no idea of how things work or who cannot be bothered to find out I together with T & E Mick Wren, are the only people on TC who uses correct names ,therefore my actions, workload and enthusiasm can be judged accurately. I do own a suit , but rarely wear it except unfortunately these days for more and more funerals. If the implication is of course that because I, and others like me , spend time and produce initiatives and decisions that you do not like , then we are “suits” living or working in some ivory tower in Rugby out of touch with the real world , then I am afraid the shoe is on the other foot – and perhaps you need to look at your own shortcomings? Your “ ooooh so out of touch” comment applies far more to you than it does to me or others You mention that your concern is regarding a Club Trial ,which is “ALL” you are concerned with Personally I would be embarrassed to make such a statement. Even if I were only to be involved in running/ being involved local level trials ( and I probably run as may or probably more than you) I would still wish to at least have an opinion or interest in all other aspects of Trials , else why else do you take time to even read or contribute to this site? Me thinks the £10 has got you in a bit of a tiz? Refer to me as a “ Don” again, and you and I will certainly be on a collision course I work just has hard as you each day, AND and , in addition to that work totally unpaid and put in a huge amount of time and effort for the ACU ,as do all other Committee Directors and Committee members If you can prove that in any week of the 52 week year you put in even 50% of the unpaid time I put in , I will personally buy you a high quality “ suit” which you can wear with pride instead of your sackcloth and ashes. By all means have your view about how things are done, by all means criticise, but to just insult because you have no inclination or desire to take the time to think things through is just plain ignorant Now, for those with some common sense: Instead of a licence we pay £10 for Registration . Why? Well that actually is a debatable point ,but such debates usually get sidetracked by prats insinuating that there is some ulterior motive or some great scheme of financial wizadry by those who have been elected to look after such things. Trying to look at it is simple terms We need a register or list of our participants for lots of various reasons. It helps when the ACU send people ( at a cost) to various bodies such as Gov’s local authorities, DEFRA and so on to be able to accurately quote ( and prove) that we have xxxxxx number of Trials participants. Our Insurers ( and I am not interested in the miss information given by some with dubious comparison) - like to work on the basis – even if only for calculation and statistics and knowing who they are insuring – of having a data base ( probably wrong words) of the riders they are insuring. The legal advice we have received ( and paid with all our money for) over may years has definitely been that our rider in all disciplines and our Officials are better served and better protected if they are supplied with a set of Regulations and so on, I am aware we have debated this before ,and various people have various views, and as you know we are moving swiftly to the CD disc etc , but without getting bogged down and making this even longer , at the present time ,and for foreseeable future we will be supplying riders with a handbook or CD. This we are told at present offers them best protection, and until we are told otherwise we will continue. Equally , the demand came, not from the “ dons or suits” but from the membership/clubs and Centres that communication needed to be VASTLY improved , and the production of a magazine , to be posted out several times a year followed. Not everyone cup of tea perhaps – but asked for. It is totally futile and absurd and try to debate the sense or not of this with a limited number of posts on a Web site. Ones view will vary, especially if you begrudge the £10. However there is probably very little in life to do with money /fees paid that we could not argue or debate? As an example I offer the hot topic of Student fee’s. If you have no kids going to University , the increase in fee’s probably does not bother you ,if you do have kids in further education, it does. Your view will always vary ,and so we all in such matters have to leave the decisions to others. Criticise such decisions , certainly , but we have to accept that someone somewhere has to make the initial decisions. So , with handbook, magazines, and very importantly the postage , and also the important fact that as someone else has correctly spotted ,even to issue the registration cards, produce and post out the forms and so on there is a production and staff costs. Now if anyone believes this can be done in its entirety for much less than £10 – then they also believe in Father Xmas. Certainly , as I have tried to point out, we may or may not agree with the way this £10 is spent , but that is life, we have what we have. It is all subject to debate and review, and this happens – this is where we are. Moving on , I have tried in a very rough fashion ,to explain how this Registration works. The other disciplines spend £43 on a licence ( and in very simple terms one could surmise that £10 of this is used in the same way as above, leaving approx £33 into ACU account) So , it does not take brain of Britain to deduce that if everyone else is paying £43 and we as Trials pay £10 – there is a shortfall. Rather than charge everyone a £43 licence fee , we choose for Trials only at present to charge £10 and then collect the remainder by means of a levy. The SACU prefer a One off licence fee’s, There are always pro’s and con’s This means that each time we ride, we pay part of that entry fee to the ACU coffers. At present that amounts to £1.50 Obviously there are winners and losers. If you ride a lot ,you pay more . If you ride occasionally it is better value. I would have though OTF in his quest to make things inexpensive for first timers etc could have worked this out We could debate this for ever ( and have in past, but again there will be lots views ,all obviously curried by ones own experience. I know I have paid £43 for my Enduro licence which I rarely use ,so would be better with a levy. I know my son who rides trials most weeks would be better with a £43 licence Incidentally, this “ don” paid £43 for a licence ,and although severely hampered by ACU work , still manages about 12 – 15 Trials rides a year which means I pay about £65.50 in total. I should I think move next to the next complication , or information used to make a point ,which may be accurate, but not necessarily clear. OTF - states that we writes out £300 to ACU after each trial – and asks for what ? Well many people including myself organise events in my club ,young and old , and while you would expect me to have knowledge in such matters , I assure you all the others do to ,they have taken the trouble to read the form and find out ,and have asked any questions they are unsure of In any trial , it is true that the Sec at the end of the event will send a cheque to the ACU , at one time , when I was a Centre Sec ( for about 20 years) my Club and the Centres were sending out cheques here there and everywhere , eg one check to Insurer’s, one cheque for ACU levies, one cheque to Ben Fund and so on. This costs clubs ( and therefore ultimately the riders) money. We made a conscious effort to make things simpler for the Clubs ( I think it may be called trying to remove Red tape?), so now usually all the various monies are sent to the ACU , where then they are divided up . Although it takes time and space, I will attempt a simple analysis. As already stated :£1.50 is the ACU levy , all this debated. Believe it or not – but we need to pay for Insurance. We need and have in each and every ACU trial a £30 million Public Liability cover. We have in each and every trial cover for Observers and Officials obviously – and various other cover for riders and so on. It will be a very brave ( or stupid) man indeed who thinks we can do without such cover. Each time you ride – you pay £2.70p for this cover. Here everyone must realise that there is a huge variation between events, numbers, severity , claims, etc – it is all a complicated issue – and the “ dons” have to sit down with insurers and take a joint approach etc ( I just looked in my diary and so far this year have had 4 full day meetings on the insurance topic with insurers)If OTF can achieve this for less than £2.70p a time – show me? If riders think £2.70 a ride is too much to pay for this cover – I fear you are in wrong sport I will tell you all categorically and offer my resignation if not true that in 2011 the ACU will not have made 1p profit on the insurance – in fact quite the opposite – this year it will probably be subsidised out of general funds which was an attempt to keep the cost down for riders. I am going to make no apolgy for this – it was correct thing to do. So, when the " cheque" goes off to the ACU, it is a total of the levies plus insurance Each event has a Permit, which is complicated but is more or less a legal requirement. For most local events the Centre have a charge for this, it varies ,but on average I suppose costs around £25 for the event. Some Centres do not charge ,and collect some funds via another levy. Centres of course also have costs , they usually have a volunteer Secretary , but surely even the most money conscious trials rider should not expect him to pay for postage stamps ( can be considerable) phone calls, photo-copying, printer consumables and so on. The Centre has costs for room hire, admin etc, just think about the cost of sending teams to Inter Centre? And so on. The Centre therefore often also levies a charge which comes out of your entry fee. All other monies , will go to the individual club/organiser. In rough terms, the ACU levy, insurance and so on will amount to about £5 of your entry We cannot possibly leave the subject however without everyone shouting, well you have explained how it all works – but why do the ACU need money in first place ? ( I mean the levy or licence fee now – not the £10 registration which I have explained) Well , it would need about 10 times this post to even scratch the surface – AND – this is very important, as soon as some facts/ explanations are given they will often be twisted and miss-interpreted , which is the reason I started this post in first place. I have already stated ( and done so many times before) ACU Directors do not get paid. ACU Committee people do not get paid , but obviously there are staff such as secretaries who do. Obviously when people travel to meetings or events, their fuel has to paid for I know we could have a small office somewhere else, and run the whole thing from a shoe box, but we have what we have , and again there are administration charges. Yes these can be big , are they looked at ? Constantly, but as with any large company , it is a complicated and often frustrating exercise I have said before, I object very strongly to paying to much Council tax I am sure if I were a Councillor, I would cut XYZ , but I am not a Councillor ,as I could not be bothered ,and probably would have been no good or not elected, so however I may disagree with the Mr Mayor down the road, he is doing the job , and I am not. I am actually prepared if people so wish to go into a lot more detail on where the actual money goes – but what I will never be prepared to do is give detailed figures for prats to analyse and dissect putting their own slant on it I read in a recent post about how ACU should not be doing XYX – but should be giving some money to help up and coming young riders I read somewhere else some time ago that ACU should not be subsidising young riders out of ordinary riders levies? This year the ACU will give £21k in total to selected young Trials & Enduro riders ( 50% to each discipline) – in order to try to assist them competing at International level. It gave £21k last year and £21 k the year before etc. Some will agree, some think it should be more, some think it should be less – it depends on you view OTF is only interested in Club events. I am interested in the wider spectrum. I WANT to see a British team, both Men and Women in TDN each year. Since I have been involved this has cost over £100k over the years I want to see representation to Government to try to fight the various and constant threats to our sport. The ACU – together with the AMCA , and together with Industry ,pay for this in a joint approach. I wanted staff to be employed and paid for to fight the last DEFRA threat, which we did. There are numerous and many things that all cost money ,it is absolutely impossible for us all to ever agree on what should or should not be spent on this or that. Want your say - want to be part of thgis decision making process ? Fill in the form via your Centre to be Committee or Director ,these forms are there each year. There may usually be a fair few people standing for Sport Commitees - but financial decisions such as licence fee's, insurnace and so on ar taken by ACU Directors , and recently there have been times when there have been no volunteers, otr at least very few. Perhaps OTF should apply? Perhaps he would not be so eager to talk of " suits and dons" if he held the legal and financial responsibility that everty compant Director in UK holds? There is however a very good litmus test when it comes to assessing the real criteria about what riders actually pay for their sport a) Does any Governing body collect in monies ,which after all the expenditure is deducted, leaves it with a large profit which it can bank and sit on , in other accumulate wealth to enhance that body and make it ever so important Try to regulate its expenditure, but set licence fee’s and levies as well as insurance costs to cover all the costs , but leave some small surplus to pay for future projects and cover rainy days. Yearly increase in licence/ insurance and levies must follow even if only to counteract inflation. c) Try in difficult times to look at expenditure, try to keep costs to rider as stable as possible, but not reduce the activities it thinks are important, even if it means suffering short term loss , paid for from any surplus as described in ( I think, the best option is ( but I have to tell you we are currently working with © (a) To me is a non starter , although other may tend to think this is what is happening , probably because it is easier to make inaccurate and silly comments rather than engage brain. This is what I mean , there will ALWAYS be differing opinion. You cannot possibly have thousands or even hundreds of individuals making such decisions ,so what you have to do is select or actually elect some people to do it - AND - if this is not satisfactory ,de-select or de elect them, simples . But you do not achieve this by thinking there are a bunch of “ suits or dons” making such decisions What there are – are some people who are trying to put something back in via their time and effort ,and it is a fact that the vast majority do not wish, or cannot be bothered to do so. To sum it all up – as a Trials rider , I pay £10 ( the price of 3 pints ) and at present about £15 every time I ride I have to say , and everyone calls me tight , I ain’t too bothered about this ,and if you have mates who ride Enduro, MX, R/Race or Grass Track – explain to them if you think it is too much

Take care with the nuts 7 & 3 in dia - and also 3 & 4 for that matter While the other nuts fit to the steel studs running through to crankase , the ones above are threaded directly into barrel, and and as this is in reality a helicoil ( or such) threaded into alloy, it is easy to strip Personally I think you will have no trouble if you just tighten these without the torque wrench - I just use a normal 1/2 inch socket on a normal T bar. Do not swing on the end of thing with all you might - but you can tighten more or less as you would any other bolt on engine etc - and just nip it up a little at end I know this may not sound correct in pure engineering practice - but it has worked for me for 40 yrs now - and probably hundreds if not thousands of motors , and gives no problem. A bit of a tribute to Bultaco I think that the heads rarely if ever give any leakage/trouble

I have a rucksack ( very wet) which was left at St Davids - it says fitness first on it I think it belongs to a minder - if so if they phone or email me ( address under T & E in ACU handbook) and describe what is in it - we will try to get back to you asap John Collins

Someone has asked for some clarification on Protest and Appeals etc There is a danger that it turns into a long drawn out debate about times and how they should or should not be, or how sensible they are or are not and so on. Nothing wrong with such debate of course , but it can be coloured by a particular incident or event , and obviously at this stage it is not my place to in any shape of form to be involved in a particular event . I will therefore restrict my comments to the actual Disciplinary and Arbitration Regulations in general This however must be enhanced by the Championship Regulations if this applies i.e. if an event is a round of any particular Championship All our Championship Regulations state: In handbook- Protests in this Championship must be submitted within 30 mins of the announcement of results provided the results are displayed within 30 mins of the last rider finishing. If this does not come into play for any reason e.g. it took longer than expected to collect cards/work thing out , problems etc

I think that is one of the points on offer on the consultation paper ( cannot find mine at moment!) For road tax - You( if in trade) or your insurer place your vehicles details etc on database and without this you would not be able to tax it Equally the MOT station records that vehicle is MOT'd and both these need to be in place before you can tax So - easy option is that as long as your name shows upon database as belonging to a club - bobs your auntie Only real problem ( there is always one) it relies soley on the poor old Club Sec having to email in the names when they join the Club - and on a very regular basis some would have no problem with this at all - may even fire off on a laptop on a Club night or whenever/ however received - but for some others it may be a chore - ot they may be away for a week ot two etc Still it is certainly one option to consider I think

Some good points

Yes