From Now On Let's Just Call World Rounds "observed Endurocross"

[funtrials]

Stop & Hop was brought to us by the Bicycle Trials kids (like Bou, Raga and many before them) starting in the eighties. Trials bicycles have to stop & hop, it's impossible to peddle one of those bikes up anything. In spite of the fact that trials motorcycles have engines, the officials created sections that accommodated the bicycle trials riders, as you said were able to "hijack traditional no stop trials".

I'm afraid that's wrong. Stop/hop brought trials to a higher plane. To a higher level of accomplishment in our quest of man against nature.....on my tank-like-piece-of-you-know-what Honda TL125 the 5 foot rock wall was like the moon to me....now with modern stop/hop/clutch techniques (and better equipment of course) I can land on the moon, so to speak. We have these ridiculous minimum-weight restrictions in the FIM rules, so why don't we just force Raga to ride a TL125 instead, as it will accomplish the same thing of bringing our sport back to the stone age like the FIM appears to indirectly want to do.

Ah, the golden age of trials (the 1970's), when the manufacturers sold a ton of bike$, but we looked pretty foolish in the sections by the 2012 standards of high-tech 21st century stop/hop trick riding. Sorry, FIM, I don't pine for those days (when just before Saint Bernie showed us the light) that Martin Lampkin used to actually advise AGAINST usiing the clutch in a section.

[b40rt]

Agreed. Many people are thinking the same thing.

The people who are pushing this ridiculous "no-talent", er, uh, I mean "no-stop" trials are driven by greed to increase corporate profit$ at the expense of the purity and tradition of our beautiful sport.

So in the end, the battle boils down to this: its basically the corporate greed of the manufacturer$/importer$ versus those of us who want to maintain the purity of the sport.

Pure trials allows stop/hop/rollbacks/bouncing-on-back-wheel-while-stationary, etc. This is ADMIRED in pure trials, not PENALIZED WITH THE MAXIMUM PENALTY! Pure trials is an art. They are, effectively, trying to soil that art in favor of the almighty dollar.

While I'm glad we have trials bike manufacturers, my main concern is NOT whether we have, say, 7 trials manufacturers, or only 5 trials manufacturers, etc. Whether a corporate executive of a trials bike manufacturer/importer can afford to buy a new Jag every 2 years (or not) is not my concern. The "art" is my concern!

I don't not enjoy watching Bou and Raga performing their art while wearing handcuffs. That's what the FIM has created by converting our beloved sport to Observed Endurocross. I don't CARE if Endurocro$$ makes more money than "real" trial$ does! Have them take their corporate agenda and get off our backs.

The FIM has sold out to corporate greed. You see that with, for example, people who oversee the military (like the FIM oversees trials) who get in bed with the military equipment manufacturers, like the FIM is doing with the trial$ manufacturers.

They already tried this "no-fun" route around 1998, and then they had to change it back a few years later. They never learn.

No stop was tried in 1998, possibly the least informed comment I have seen on TC.

Edited June 12, 2013 by b40rt

[funtrials]

I am sure that if you looked at the scores a little closer, you would see that the sections were not so easy. Perhaps for the top 3, but, I looked at the winners scores versus Jack Challoner and Pat Smage who were 10th and 11th....big gap there from them to 1st! Not so easy me thinks!

Smage, because our sane USA trials leaders have thankfully decided to NOT step back in time, was at a clear *disadvantage* because the main events that he would train for (the US domestic Nationals) are NOT no-stop this year! He might as well trian for, say, motocross for most of the year, and then practice (no-stop) trials for a couple weeks right before the US world round...the same thing almost. No way could he compete fairly, unless he was to severely hurt his chances in the US domestic National series with its stop-allowed rules. Yet another casualty of this ridiculous new rule.

[funtrials]

No stop was tried in 1998, possibly the least informed comment I have seen on TC.

Ok, what year was it (it might have been 1997, I can't remember) that they changed to no-fun rules, and then a few years later (I was at the no-stop world round in 2001 for example) they realized that was a failure and then changed it back to fun-allowed rules. What years were those?

[b40rt]

"No Fun" started in the early 1900's !!

[funtrials]

Rules maybe the issue ,it's the overdevelopment of the bikes that's caused this situation.

Too light,too much grip,too much power,too much suspension and useless for anything other than short circuit trials.

Only since the advent of modern trials tyres have riders been able to stop and pull away.

Before that stopping wasn't really an option even if the rules allowed it.

We can't stop progress of course. Otherwise we'd want to do things like stop this horrific "overdevelopment" of things like, say, smartphones. Let's go back to the days when my smartphone was the size of a bread-basket! (Kidding.)

[funtrials]

"No Fun" started in the early 1900's !!

I see your point, but my point was that I think the first Nazi-like attempt to say "Nein, nein, nien" to the stop-allowed RULES at the FIM level was around 1998. Yes, before 1998 I think stop was always allowed (at least in America), until the reactionary forces at the FIM rose to power, then were defeated, then rose to power again for the 2013 season.

No-stop RULES were first FORCED upon us in 1998, is what I was trying to say.

Edited June 12, 2013 by funtrials

[twinshocked]

From now on let's just call FUNTRIALS = STING32

Edited June 12, 2013 by twinshocked

[funtrials]

FUNTRIALS = STING32

I've never had a different username than I do now, and I've certainly never been "STING32", if that's what you implying (I don't know.) If you're implying that I have a similar POINT OF VIEW as that person, then I'd love to see his reasoning for hating the no-fun rules ilke I do.

Edited June 12, 2013 by funtrials

[funtrials]

From now on let's just call FUNTRIALS = STING32

With a username like "twinshocked" can I assume that you pine for the glory days of bulky, inefficent bikes, with comfortable seats for trail riding between the sections, where stop/hop was almost impossible?.....whereas I pine for the glorious FUTURE of 100 pound, two-wheel drive, titanium swathed, 60 horsepower, automatic-clutch (with a reverse gear, too), gravity-defying, battery-powered art-forms that will allow many of us to put even Mr. Bou's current skills to shame. My grandchildren's generation will see that, but not me, sadly. Someday.....unless of course the FIM continues to want to bring us back in time.

[kramit]

Smage, because our sane USA trials leaders have thankfully decided to NOT step back in time, was at a clear *disadvantage* because the main events that he would train for (the US domestic Nationals) are NOT no-stop this year! He might as well trian for, say, motocross for most of the year, and then practice (no-stop) trials for a couple weeks right before the US world round...the same thing almost. No way could he compete fairly, unless he was to severely hurt his chances in the US domestic National series with its stop-allowed rules. Yet another casualty of this ridiculous new rule.

Personally, I was surprised at the gap in scores between Pat and the top 5 or 6 riders. Wonder what the difference in scores might have been under the old rule.

With most of the trick riding gone from the WC for now, will the lower half of the Red Line riders be able to close the gap in scores sooner rather than later? (or at all?)

[twinshocked]

Heck, if I REALLY want to get their attention, then I might even roll BACKWARDS(!) on said table, hopefully hitting Michaud's mocha and spilling it all over him, and yell at him "remember when we could do that, Theirry!?"

(Interestingly, I actually rode against the dude in multiple world rounds - and I never beat him (probably because we was better at rolling backwards than me on my Fantic), so now's my chance to finally get even.)

When and where did you compete against Michaud?

Edited June 13, 2013 by twinshocked

[twinshocked]

The only American to compete against Michaud in "multiple World Rounds" on a Fantic was Dave Pyle. Once in 1984 and 0nce 1985. And you are not Dave Pyle.

You are a LAIR

http://www.hark.com/...l****-story-sir

Edited June 13, 2013 by twinshocked

[funtrials]

1982 was a Bultaco Sherpa T 350 (a tank), 1983 was a Fantic 240 (a godsend!). US Champ Class, which also rode the Wagner Cups along side the FIM-entered riders those years. So no, I'm not a liar. But of course some of my rant was embellished, such as having a "dream" (I didn't really "dream" about it, just made that up to prove a point.) But I do believe all the other stuff about the new no-fun rules hurting our sport. Much of my post was meant to be humerous, as well. Michaud was on an SWM I mostly remember (now Michaud seems to be on, well, drugs, if he actually supports this no-fun non-sense.) Dave was on a "Swim", as he used to call it, at first, IIRC. Those twinshock bikes were fine for no-fun type of riding, but the new hotness (I drool over getting a new Factory Replica Gasser, when I can afford it!) demands rules that don't tame it, and put it back 30 years in time. Allow us to achieve our full potential, of both man and machine, by not handcuffing us, I argue.

In 1982 I remember, IIRC, that Michaud was only like 18 years old, but the dude could RIDE! I remember Ron Jenkins and I watching him in practice at Donner and thinking "daaaaam!". Apparently the rules of gravity don't apply to Michael Jordan, or to Mr. Michaud. The new rules handcuff incredible talent like that.

Edited June 13, 2013 by funtrials

[funtrials]

Personally, I was surprised at the gap in scores between Pat and the top 5 or 6 riders. Wonder what the difference in scores might have been under the old rule.

With most of the trick riding gone from the WC for now, will the lower half of the Red Line riders be able to close the gap in scores sooner rather than later? (or at all?)

When Smage rode in the world rounds in Europe, he was virtually tied with Challoner....and he was real close to Jack in Tennessee....so I have to admit that from that particular point of view (but hey, who knows) he might NOT have done way better had he also practiced the now no-fun rules from the start of the year like the regular world riders (like Challoner of course) did. I'm still very proud of Patrick. Highest Pro class ride by an American in a bazillion years. Thanks Patrick.

But after he CLEANED the entire trial in the Junior (or was it Youth?) class that one world trial in Europe a few years back (have you ever seen that before!?), winning the class of course, and then abandoning oversees riding, I'll always wonder "what could have been". What. Could. Have. Been.