Eligibility query

[mboddy]

You could fit the seat and tank of an 09 YZ450F, and it would still meet the criteria.

No it wouldn't.

[E74]

SRUITINAZI!!!!

[Nathan S]

If the bike is entered as a Teddles490, you have to accept it - and any arguments about how "it is just a bastardised 82 YZ490" won't hold water, as many manufacturers use parts from other manufacturers...

Similarly, the word "later" is totally meaningless when there's no age limit on the class.

With "major components" left undefined, the seat and tank swap is merely in bad taste, not unacceptable.


Yes, I am playing the loop-hole game, but the point is that the loop-holes are there.

[mboddy]

If the bike is entered as a Teddles490, you have to accept it ...

No I don't. If there is any dispute:
12.2.1.4 The onus of proving that a competitor, and the competitor's machine and clothing, are eligible to compete, is on the person seeking to prove it.
So he would have to prove that it is a Teddles. What documentation do you think he could find to prove that?

With "major components" left undefined, the seat and tank swap is merely in bad taste, not unacceptable.

Tank and seat are not major components. But the Evo rule doesn't say major components it just says components.
 

Yes, I am playing the loop-hole game, but the point is that the loop-holes are there.

And there is also precedence.
As well as rule:
12.1.0.3 Everything that is not authorised and prescribed in this chapter, or in the discipline specific chapters, is strictly prohibited.

But the main thing is the intent of the rules.

Philosophy of GCR'S
The General Competition Rules
The philosophy and structure of the General Competition Rules

No set of Rules can anticipate every issue which may
arise in the conduct of a sport, especially one with as wide
a variety of disciplines and competing interests as exist in
motorcycling. The philosophy of these Rules is that good
sense, cooperation and a fair and reasonable interpretation
of reasonable Rules should be more important than "Rule
Book Racing".

In Rule Book Racing, if a situation arises, the answer is
to be found by looking up the book, not by the exercise of
independent judgement. If there's no answer in the book,
a new rule has to be devised to "plug the hole". Rule Book
Racing assumes that Controlling Bodies have little or no
interest in working effectively with competitors, with each
other, or with Promoters to benefit the sport and those
who participate in it. It also assumes that officials have
no common sense or understanding of the sport. None of
these ideas is true or fair.

These rules confer on the Controlling Bodies and their
representatives and officials discretion in the application
and interpretation of the Rules. It is intended that discretion
will be exercised, as stated in the very first rule in this book
to ensure that competition is safe, free and fair.

...

1.2 PURPOSE OF RULES
1.2.0.1 The purpose of these Rules is to regulate
and control motorcycle competition.
a) The Rules are to be interpreted with
the intent that competition will be
safe, free and fair and conducted
applying the principles of natural
justice.

 
 

[Nathan S]

No I don't. If there is any dispute:
12.2.1.4 The onus of proving that a competitor, and the competitor's machine and clothing, are eligible to compete, is on the person seeking to prove it.
So he would have to prove that it is a Teddles. What documentation do you think he could find to prove that?

If you build the bike, you can build the documentation.
You're still assuming that you're looking for a historical precedent and/or proof that something was built before a certain date.

Tank and seat are not major components. But the Evo rule doesn't say major components it just says components.

Fair call - I was wrong. I am also wrong to have modern rims, grips, tyres and handlebars on my Evo bikes...
 
 

And there is also precedence.
As well as rule:
12.1.0.3 Everything that is not authorised and prescribed in this chapter, or in the discipline specific chapters, is strictly prohibited.

But the main thing is the intent of the rules.

Philosophy of GCR'S
The General Competition Rules
The philosophy and structure of the General Competition Rules

No set of Rules can anticipate every issue which may
arise in the conduct of a sport, especially one with as wide
a variety of disciplines and competing interests as exist in
motorcycling. The philosophy of these Rules is that good
sense, cooperation and a fair and reasonable interpretation
of reasonable Rules should be more important than "Rule
Book Racing".

In Rule Book Racing, if a situation arises, the answer is
to be found by looking up the book, not by the exercise of
independent judgement. If there's no answer in the book,
a new rule has to be devised to "plug the hole". Rule Book
Racing assumes that Controlling Bodies have little or no
interest in working effectively with competitors, with each
other, or with Promoters to benefit the sport and those
who participate in it. It also assumes that officials have
no common sense or understanding of the sport. None of
these ideas is true or fair.

These rules confer on the Controlling Bodies and their
representatives and officials discretion in the application
and interpretation of the Rules. It is intended that discretion
will be exercised, as stated in the very first rule in this book
to ensure that competition is safe, free and fair.

...

1.2 PURPOSE OF RULES
1.2.0.1 The purpose of these Rules is to regulate
and control motorcycle competition.
a) The Rules are to be interpreted with
the intent that competition will be
safe, free and fair and conducted
applying the principles of natural
justice.

 

Now that's really interesting. Why hasn't it been quoted ad nauseum in previous rule book threads?!

It is no excuse for having crappy, poorly defined rules, though.
I have zero interest in pushing any of the points that I've made - and my own sense of right and wrong would mean that I never will.
But the namby-pamby stuff about "safe, free and fair and conducted applying the principles of natural justice" is just inviting someone to play games, while leaving those of us who try to build our bikes right open to being jumped on by an over-zealous scrutineer or steward.

[mboddy]

It is better for us all if we do not promote "Rule Book Racing" or breaking the rules.

History shows that if MA think that eligibility is getting out of control then they will act on it.
MA thought that Unlimited Period 5 Historic Road Racing was getting out of control and cracked down a few years ago.
The next year the grids were way down and many left the sport.
But it was a good thing in the long term because it reduced the cost of the class and these days look how many turn up at the Island Classic and Barry Sheene.

The option that they have to sort out Evo would be to implement Historic Log Books.
Then we would all have to apply to MA to be allowed to race our bikes.
They could use it to enforce their idea of OEM if they wanted to.
Wouldn't that be sad if you had paid $2000 for a set of trick forks and then had to fit the original Yamaha ones!   

[Lozza]

I've said before log books would be a good thing and reduce eligabilty dramas very quickly.

[colmoody]

Nathan may or may not be right about loop holes being their but how about it if all the wood ducks whom look to exploit the loop holes (if any) for there own advantage go away and annoy another sport.

It's not a hard game, we can make it easy or hard for the volunteers that do there best to control/administer this great sport.