Pre-90 for HEAVEN?

[Nathan S]

Please note the date that this thread was started, and the almost three year gap between posts!

This idea was floated at the meeting before today's racing.
There was a fair bit of discussion about it, some of it rational, some of it less so (from both sides of the fence).

There's going to be a vote among members relating to this, but I thought it would (should) be productive to have some discussion about it, beyond the simple yes/no of the vote.

Rule #1. Everyone has an opinion on this - fair enough - but only the opinions of current (or realisiticaly prospective) HEAVEN members really matter for the purposes of this discussion.

Rule #2. Don't get all worked up and personal about this. I saw a surprising amount of emotion without rational though (from both sides of the fence) when it was discussed. We're supposed to be grown-ups - don't get bent out of shape if someone has a different opinion to you.

Rule #3. I'd be more than happy for the webmaster to moderate anyobdy who goes on an anti-HEAVEN rant (ref Rule #1).

A brief summary of the discussions at the meeting (and my apologies if I've missed any of the more significant points - I have my own views, but am trying to leave them out of this post!). The inital suggestion was to run pre-90 as a non-pointscoring, demonstration class for 2008. The alternative was to run a "20 years or older" class:

1. It won't really add to the number of riders - almost everyone who would turn up on a pre-90 bike already has a pre-85 or older bike.
2. The sessions are currently split so that 'old bike only guys' can flag for the 'newer bike only' guys (and visa versa). Adding another class will further add to the number of people who are both new and old bike guys.
3. Pre 90 is very strong in Viper, and there are plenty of people with this era bikes.
4. Pre-90 could run with the pre-85s (scored seperately).
5. Pre-90 is too new - too similar to current model bikes.
6. HEAVEN should continue to accomodate the older classes.
7. What is "vintage" anyhow?
8. Pre-90 will attract younger guys, ensuring the survival of "VMX" in the longer term.
9. Pre-90 will attract younger guys who will want more modern-style tracks (less suitable for older bikes/people).
10. Pre-85 isn't attracting the largest fields.
11. The lesser populated classes aren't the later classes.

Remember: Adult discussion! You're entitled to your opinion, just like the people who disagree with you are!

[Lozza]

Probably be inevidable that it will happen just takes numbers.The interesting thing to watch will be if it does take off the price of a pre-90 bike which for the moment an unloved example can be had very cheap.Pre-95 has been running in road racing with good success, nothing to be afraid of or fear.

[Gerard De Ruyter (Twistandshout)]

Good intro to the topic Nathan.  I asked Kel for the OK to put the proposal for a pre-90 or pre-88 demo class to members at the GM yesterday at Fairbairn - and then couldn't be there due to unforeseen wedding anniversary (!!!) [so many thanks to VMXMAN for doing so on my behalf, including for having to cop a bit of splutter].

I did it as I now have a pre-90 bike (1986 CR250) and its my only bike, so that's why I'm pushing for HEAVEN to encompass this era bike.  I bought it because its a pure blast to ride and gives me a great deal more pleasure than my 1983 CR250 - I love it.  And that's thanks to the technological developments occuring in between the two models. 

But I have to say, it wasn't done and dusted by '86.  All the makers kept experimenting throughout the late eighties, with power valve/exhausts, suspension, handling, braking, styling.  That means there's plenty of variety in these bikes to keep it all interesting.  And that to me is a big part of what we're about - being around bikes that were still evolving and experimenting, all for that one goal of getting us along quick as possible.

I suspect members won't vote to give it a go for next year, so I'll just have to be patient and get my kicks from local club and amcross grasstrack events.  But its time should and will come, and we'll enjoy the extra diversity and numbers these bikes will bring the HEAVEN community.

PS I can vouch that the price spike for pre-90 bikes has not yet occurred, so get in quick.

[Graeme M]

Yep, she turned out to be a contentious one, and right before a race was supposed to get underway probably wasn't the most appropriate time for discussion. The end result of a poll of all members as to whether or not HEAVEN should, in the medium term at least, remain a Pre 85 only club, is not a bad outcome.

I suspect it won't fly either, and personally I am OK with that because for me vintage is pretty much Pre 80-ish. Disk brakes are just getting too modern.

But I also respect that for an increasing number of guys the Pre 90 period is very attractive. Guys who raced during the 80s are now in or approaching their early 40s, the perfect time to want to get into a form of racing that is a little less intense and has a great social aspect. But they want to do it on the bikes they used to race. So for all the reasons Gerard said, I can see merit in the idea.

There are two other aspects to this question. One is the need to not let the older classes die away completely, and the other is whether such a race could be fitted into the race schedule.

I haven't been to many HEAVEN events this year, but in recent times I have observed that the Pre75 classes are not that strong. There are all sorts of reasons for that, and it's possible the Pre75 faction need their own club. However, that's a whole different topic. In this discussion, my point is that maybe it's time to change the class structure for HEAVEN. I know that's been done to death before, but just because it's done one way now doesn't mean it has to be done that way always.

A different structure could combine the excessive number of classes as at present and leave room for a Pre90 class. My basic premise is that in most cases, this is SOCIAL racing. Most of us couldn't care less who wins, or whether we ourselves win. Yes it's nice to do that, but it isn't the reason why we do it. And clearly the bike isn't the critical ingredient, watching Noel holeshot and win his race against open class four-strokes shows that.

So, here's my thought for 2008.

1. HEAVEN is not a purely Pre 85 club, it is a vintage dirtbike club and the definition of 'vintage' is whatever the members agree that it is, although +20 years isn't bad for a working period.

2. Allow a Pre 90 demo class, to be run in conjunction with the Pre 85 class, for 2 years after which it be reviewed for value as a bonafide vintage class (ie it is then, in 2010, a dinkum 20 year old class). Pre 90s are gridded with or after the Pre 85s at raceday, depending on the feelings of the Pre 85 riders.

3. Change HEAVEN's race structure as follows:

Dinosaurs (all in Pre 70)
Vintage Clubman (all in Pre 75, social fun racing - ride up in Classics)
Vintage Expert (all in Pre 75, where's my sheep station - ride up in Classics)
Classic Clubman (all in Pre 78, social fun racing - ride up in Evo)
Classic Expert  (all in Pre 78, where's my sheep station - ride up in Evo)
Evo 250 (up to 250 Evo, I'm still young enough to go fast - ride up in Pre 85 Open)
Evo Open (Open Class Evo, I'm still young enough to go fast - ride up in Pre 85 Open)
Pre 85 Open (All in, we are young pricks who can flog youse all including nancy boy Evo riders)
Pre 85 Only (All in, we are young pricks who can flog youse all)
Four Stroke (all in, gentleman's racing)
Ladies
Pre 90 Demo
Juniors

[firko]

As I've said all along, it achieves nothing to introduce new year cut off classes when the current classes aren't being used to their full potential yet. Evolution is barely running at even half capacity, pre 85 is only just now starting to attract racers and now they want to introduce pre 90. It seems everyone wants a class to suit their own personal interest. What ever happened to the concept of building a bike to suit a class? If this comes off it'll be a case of building a class to suit someones bike. What's next, pre 2000? ..............

A mate of mine is restoring an ex Guy Cooper '92 RM Suzuki "works' bike. I went over to have a look at it the other night and was amazed at how modern it looked, even when parked next to his current DRZ Suzuki. To the casual observer, both bikes appear to be from the same era. If we keep allowing newer and newer cutoffs into our sport we run the risk of blurring and eventually obliterating the line of difference that seperates "vintage" bikes from their modern counterparts.When the time comes when the only difference between a "vintage" bike and a modern is the number of strokes in the engine our sport will wither on the vine and rot away. Get what we've got running properly before we change anything.
 

[oz555ktm]

OK hears my view

pre 85 needs to go 125cc 250cc 500cc  before moving on to pre 90s

I think that USD forks are out .
I think that rear Disc are out .

By the way KTM came out with USD forks in 1984 and Rear Disc brakes in 1986 so I am cutting my own throat hear!!!!!

So may be Stop at 1988   not 1990?

Why because once you go to rear disc and USD forks it look like a 2007 bike and you can spend
$$$$$ on it Eg Gold valves ETC.

Next year Canberra Will be looking at this .
Why New riders are looking at the sport who are in there late 30s and the bike they want where
Late 1980 bikes .

Like most thing in life you will not  PLEASE EVERY ONE .

P.S   STOP blaming HEAVEN VMX for every thing

[Graeme M]

I have to disagree Mark (well, sort of...). The proposal I put forward is not changing the year cutoffs, it's just getting rid of the excessive capacity classes that seem pointless at most HEAVEN events, and doing so to cater for a Pre 90 demo class. I can't comment on how the classes work in say WA, all I am talking about is a proposal for HEAVEN. HEAVEN uses an arbitrary Classic/Post Classic distinction for the 125s which embraces Pre 75, Pre 78 and Evo. That buggers me riding both my 74 TM125 and 75 RM125 because both Pre75 and Pre78 125 end up in Classic 125. I have to choose one or the other. It exists because there are so few entries in those classes, and last weekend we had maybe 2 riders in each 125 class.  With what I have suggested, we retain the recognised year cutoffs but move away from capacity classes in the thinner older classes. I would rather race with a full grid of different capacity bikes than fight it out with maybe 6 other same size bikes. That's pretty dull I am afraid.

With this structure, HEAVEN could run the same number of races with fuller grids, less confusion, more fun, and still cater for a Pre 90 class. And it still reflects the Aussie vintage MX structure.

As for whether HEAVEN should go to Pre 90, that's not my call. I agree with you guys, vintage is not Pre 90 bikes. But I guess one day it will be, and we can't pretend that VMX can only ever be Pre75 bikes no matter what the purists might say. I think...

But the argument on the table isn't so much about what vintage is, it's about whether HEAVEN should allow Pre 90s. And I have suggested an approach that could cater for that IF the membership says it's interested in going that way. Any other HEAVEN members got a view?

Oh yeah, and this thread is not about blaming HEAVEN for anything, it's about discussing a proposed change to the HEAVEN constitution. Blaming HEAVEN for everything is in the "Blame Your Club" board...

[Snowy 76]

Yes! I blame Heaven for being sore as shit at the moment, about a 1000 laps on Saturday, on 7 or 8 different club members bikes. Full days racing on Sunday, 4 different classes, and the chance too be around some of the nicest guys and girls you`ll ever meet. Allot to answer for?

[oz555ktm]

Yes That what I like to hear.

Positive Feed back and a hole lot of fun fun fun .

[Yamaboy]

I may have missed something but I can't for the life of me find any criticisms of HEAVEN in this thread. I know they've copped a lot over the years, some deserved and some not deserved but in this case everyone seems quite courteous.

On the Pre 90 thing, I also think that we may be moving ahead way too fast. Like some of the previous posters have mentioned, pre 85 and Evo are far from fully developed at the moment. Any effort should be towards building those classes into stronger divisions. Evo didn't come onto the scene until  pre 75 started to wane so it was a well recieved natural progression. Pre 85s existence is a little more tenuous as it came into the sport before Evo had reached its developmental peak and has been slow developing as a result. By introducing another division on top of what we already have we run the risk of taking some of the life out of Evo and Pre 85 before they have had a chance to grow and prosper. In other words, let's fix what we've got first. That's my 2c worth.

[AjayVMX]

The pre-90 discussion is very interesting however I have to ask the question, why is there a desire to run pre-90 as well as all the other classes that are run at the present?  The implication is that it will bring more riders to the race meetings and I'm not sure adding pre-90 will do that.

I understand that overall rider numbers at Heaven events have been declining and adding pre-90, while it may appear to be a quick fix for that issue, may also make it worse by driving away more riders in the older divisions.  Maybe a more important issue is to halt the decline in participation in the existing classes first.

From my perspective, running pre-90 races as well as the Vintage and EVOs all at the same race meeting is probably a big ask from the purely logistical perspective.  This is without even discussing the potential conflicts in track design that arise between Vintage and EVO/Pre-90.

One suggestion I would have is for Heaven to consider a completely different strategy in terms of their race scheduling and organisation.  Why not consider having completely separate pre-75 and post 75 race days? 

From my point of view, it would be better to have 4 Vintage race days AND 4 Post Vintage race days in the year, rather than 8 races where you try to run so many classes that no-one gets much riding and the tracks may or may not be suitable for either type of bike.  By having two seperate race days, you can also tailor the track used to suit the bikes.  Lastly, if the members want to run pre-90, there is more room on the racing programme to do so.

This approach is used worldwide in the Vintage/Classic MX scene and appears to keep most people happy.  There is no reason why both Vintage disciplines can't exist in the one club though.

This could be easily done by having 2 sub-committees within the club - one for Vintage and one for post-Vintage.  Each could then organise their respective events to suit the interests of THEIR respective sub-group of members.  Also, the two groups of people within the club could then provide support for the other group, in the form of racing officials, flag marshalls etc... when they are not racing themselves.

Thoughts anyone?

[Nathan S]

Hopefully this makes sense, am rushed for time:

Pre-75 bikes were 14 years old when VMX kicked off in 1988. The newest pre-90 bike is now 17 years old.

89 bikes might look more like 08 models than 79 bikes do, but we are talking about the equivilant of an XF Falcon compared to a BF to an XD....

If all other classes must be full before we consider new classes, then maybe should we be ditching the poorly attended pre-70, pre-65, four-stroke, etc classes instead? (NB: I would go mental if this happened, but it is the logical conclusion to the argument about full classes).

Pre-90 as a demo class, possibly run combined with the pre-85s, has no real draw-backs. If the support isn't there, then it can be dropped in 2009. If the support is there, then we'll all stand around wondering what the debate was about.
A lot of the arguments against pre-90 sounded a LOT like the arguments I heard against Evo, before it was introduced. History has shown that Evo didn't cause a tear in the space-time continum, the apocolypse, etc.

Live and let live.

[Rossvickicampbell]

Beat me to it Ajay - well said.  Remember gents Pre 90 may put off some of us old farts and you do need different tracks as we are finding here in WA trying to get Evo off the ground while riding on the same tracks as Moderns. 

Lets get Evo and Pre 85 going first?

cheers

Rossco

[Noel]

Hi Just a clarification,
It is not Heaven that are proposing this, (although if you read their constitution Pre 90 are already allowed,
just that at the moment they are not being catered for on a race program)
it has been put forward by a member for the consideration of the club,
therefore the committee then puts it to the other members for consideration,
the future direction would them be decided by a vote ,
this is how democracy is supposed to work.

suggestions on how to fix what we have already , like Graeme's / Ajays re jigging of classes is good,
but working out how you run race days needs to be factored in  to the classes you run
as club days are not like a one off event where a club that caters for lots of bikes, and has a lot of members
eg Moderns and juniors, all put there resources behind vintage bikes for one day or weekend.
age old problem ,who wants to be a marshal on the day?
people who don't get to ride on the day tend not to go to the meeting at all,

cheers
Noel

[AjayVMX]

Well of course, if everyone decides they only want to ride and not help in any way at all, then there will be no race meetings and this whole discussion is indeed pointless.

Certainly the lack of helpers is a common problem in most clubs I've been in, although when a club manages to engender a community spirit across interest groups within its membership, it is possible to get non-participants to turn up and help.  I have seen and participated in some very successful race meetings where people who don't participate in a particular type of event turned up and helped run the event and had fun doing so 

One key to unlocking this untapped pool of help is not to ask for that help too often.  Hence the suggestion to keep the respective number of pre and post vintage race events low, making the events themselves more valued (e.g. Club Championship status) and also then having half a chance at getting helpers for those events.

Finally, club days should be the easiest events to run and the key to running a good club day IMHO is about the organisation of such days being flexible enough to cater for the punters that show up (and I am assuming that entering on the day is OK for a club day). 

An example of this is that classes should be combined into single races when the numbers in a particular class are insufficient to justify a race for that class alone.  As a general rule, a race shouldn't line up at the starting gate unless there are at least 8-10 riders in the race.  If this is done, you can still lapscore the classes separately, but have more efficient track time utilisation.  The possible catch would be that someone might want to ride and score points in both classes.  In that instance, they will have to decide which class is their priority and ride the bike which is in that class and forego scoring points in the other class.  That's not ideal, but from my point of view, it's better overall if everyone gets four rounds of races on the day instead of two or three.