The major issue prompting my proposal to split the Nat was the increasing number of classes causing organisers to increase days ,drop classes [Narrogin ,Coffs , Tas.,Broadford ], reduce laps towards the end of the programm [Connondale] ,late presentations etc.
Other benefits that follow this --intro of Pre90 ,age groups in newer bike classes ,longer races ,tracks tailored to the differing 30yrs 0f developement in our bikes etc etc. are bonuses.
My initial thought was to split at Pre75,partly influenced by the example of the proven success of the WAVMX format.
I proposed Pre78 on purely practical issues.The post split fields have a natural source of increase as the years roll on ,whereas the pre split can only increase by making it an attractive product to retain existing riders and machines ,and attacting new ones.
I felt including Pre 78 made it more viable longer.There are very valid arguments on both sides ,as expressed on this forum.
Continued back and forth on this runs the risk of becoming counter-productive.It is overwhelmingly clear that the vast majority agree a split is the way to go ,and the Commision has recommended this[together with some further progressive moves].
The topic of where the split is made now must be left to due process.We have a sound Commission who wil guide this through and whatever the decision on where the split is made ,we need to get behind it 100%. If it needs some tweaking later after a couple of years,that's another matter.
Poll