Aussie titles. Protest. pre -/78 125's

[090]

Hi mate, thanks for posting as it is good to here from the people affected and credit to you for keeping it civil. My heart goes out to you for coming all that way with a bike you thought had been accepted as kosher.
 After the people who discussed the bikes that were deemed by them as not legal and as i was there listening in, there are a few things that i would like to comment on that you have posted. Yes you have had the same set up for years and one of the things is that at the Coffs Nats people were contemplating protesting your bike then. Just shows how hard it is to be the 'bad guy' so to speak. Fast forward a couple of years and the pre78 class has gotten worse with more and more bikes with incorrect parts as well as 78 model bikes also. The protester thought it was time to take a stand for what he thought was the right thing to do. Your bike was part of his decision.
 Second, as you well know, scrutineering is separate to eligibility . The racing would not have gotten underway if bikes were also checked for eligibility issues as well. Also then to be told to go into another class would cause turmoil with the lap scorers. The reality is onus is on you to have your bike right. Its the only way it can work.
The right way to protest? I think that the way you say to do it is a good way. Go and talk to the person that you feel has the wrong part/s on their bike. That would be a start. I actually came down to your tent on sunday morning due to what i heard on saturday night to ask you what your thoughts were on the subject. You were not there.If we had spoken, what could you have done to alter the bike? Would you have stopped racing? That is another issue in itself.
Last comment is that the system in place says that you protest at the end of the event. Thats why the bikes are impounded for a set time after the last race. Maybe that rule should be reviewed as well, i certainly don't have any suggestions.
I have put more than my two cents worth in on the subject as i was close to all of this when it went down and also it was a friend that did the protest. I backed him when maicostu came over and 'unloaded' (stu's word) on him and i still back him now.You dont win friends doing this but it will be for the benefit of the sport in the long run and that is why he did it.
Good luck to you mate, next year its in your back yard. Hope its your year.
Cheers, Brad

[bigk]

Good on you for backing your mate Brad, but if I were in your shoes, I would have told my mate to grow up, wake up to himself and try very hard to impress on him that what he was about to do could not be undone. If he proceeded I would have then called him a woose, or sook, or knob, or something similar. We would still be mates though, and I would continue to remind him of the incident and his right to protest, no matter how piss poor, forever. I would probably go as far as presenting him with his own 2nd place trophy at the start of each & every race meeting we went to from then on. I would also have a very loud ticking clock in earshot, just so he knew exactly how long 15 seconds was. That's just what I would have done if I were in your postion at the nationals. I guess thats why we're all different and the world is the way it is.
K

[Nathan S]

That his protest was successful, proves that he was right to protest.

If anyone doesn't like that, then I can only suggest that they do one or more of the following:
1. Avoid the Nationals in the future;
2. Get the rules changed so that the technical infringments are no longer infringements;
3. Deal with it and move on, as the riders in question seem to be doing.

I've detected quite a bit of tongue-in-cheek in bigk's last post, but it still annoys the hell out of me that the protester is being given a hard time for being right.
I haven't ridden an RM-B and an RM-C back to back, but I can confidantly state that I'd be more than 5 seconds/Conondale lap quicker on my 1978 YZ125 than I am on my 1977 model. Even if the protest had been simply about results, that 15 seconds is suddenly looking a lot smaller....

But that's assuming that the reason for the protest was about 'trophy hunting' which I don't believe to be the case at all. It was about reminding people about the line in the sand that they agreed not to cross when they entered the pre-78 class.
If there had been a '78 YZ entered as a '77 model, you can bet your boots that I'd have made sure that it wasn't included in the pre-78 results - as despite what a few of our Victorian friends may have convinced themselves into thinking, I know that more people would support me than vilify me for it.

And while I'm ranting, why the hell does anyone go to the Nationals if not to hunt trophies?! We can all do local club days or rec rides for a helluva lot less time and money, and yet plenty of people chose to 'put up with' the extra time, money, travel, etc to do the Nationals. The least that can be expected is a level playing field, which is what happened in the end.

Apologies for a lack of humour... something to do with the mother-in-law.

[090]

I am reluctantly posting, but you were speaking to me personally Michael. I just wish you could see the bigger picture here. After all the pm's, emails and phone calls to me, chewing the fat due to this very subject, there are a lot of bikes that just aren't right legality wise that people haven't been happy with for quite a while.FFS my Maico isn't to the letter of the law! So first of all, it has put people on notice to get their bike up to scratch.
Secondly. For the life of me, i cant understand why is it okay to bolt a 78 front end into a pre 78 bike. It defies logic and the rules as they stand. At THE premier event.
How about this scenario. Tell me when i have gone too far, from sook to "hey mate , thats not legal".
An rm125 '77 model for pre 78 ( i have become an over night expert on this  ).
                                                                                                                           
 Put on a 78 front end. (thats ok, right?)
78 swing arm. (not much gain from that)
78 wheel with floating hub ( can you measure a gain from this?)
78 motor. Only 25% more fins and maybe a small porting change. That may be all the difference there is.
Frame? Well you can mount the original b tank straight to a c frame . Cant be too much difference either ( small steering angle change i here)
That doesn't leave much but as you can buy an aftermarket tank for other bikes, maybe throw a c tank on as it fits.
SO. Where is your line? You can see mine.
High horse? Yeah i can see that . Wrong? Well it looks like its the way you are personally looking at it.
I think i can nail the way we both feel as this.
I look at this subject in a matter of fact kind of way, and my post is written that way . But you are looking at this in an emotional way by taking the piss out of the guy. That seems to be the difference between our perspectives.
So where IS your line? It is not a rhetorical ( wow, a Nathan word!) question.
Another question. Would you protest a guy obviously cheating by putting a B tank on a C bike? Or just bitch about him to your mates every time it turns up?
 
I would like some feedback on my questions please.
Cheers, Brad.

[mx250]

Well then lets have a clear cut definite cut off; ALL bikes and ALL equipment only pre-whatever date are in and ALL bikes and ALL equipment post-whatever date are out. That way my 77 VB Monty can run as a pre 78 (as it should if King Makers hadn't bodged the rules in the name of competition ).

Here are the two Suzuki's in question.

 


Here are their spec's

http://www.suzukicycles.org/RM-RMX-series/index.html?RM125_1975-1980.shtml~isoraami

If these are the two bikes then in my opinion a 'blind eye' should have been turn by the competitors or sorted out between themselves before the race. There's less of a competitive advantage between these two bikes then between either of these and other pre 78 125's. If Monties and Husky's are expected to 'suck it up' in the name of fairness and the benefit of the sport, then if think others should be a little more sporting rather than pedantic.

If it not pedantism but rather pure Historical Representation than we better change the rules.

[AjayVMX]

Are we still banging on about this? 

BigK, with the greatest of respect, your expressed attitude is what leads people to blur the boundaries of class eligability in the first instance and frankly we don't need people doing that stuff.  How about the simple idea of sticking to the rules as they are written? 

And it logically follows that if someone rides a bike that doesn't fall within the rules, then they can fall foul of being exposed for that fact. 

There shouldn't be, nor is there ANY dishonour in protesting an illegal bike.  Simple as that.  The rider who has the illegal bike is the one who should feel bad about letting down his fellow VMX competitors.

And MX250, there was no doubt back in the day that an RM125C was a much better MX bike than an RM125B.  At the moment, the rules are clear - RM125Cs are not allowable in pre-78 classes.  If the rules are changed, well so be it, but until then, that's the way it is 

[dkupf]

Hope this issue dies soon. I'm starting to think about not going to the Qld titles because I don't want to get caught-up in this argument. At the end of the day the rules are in the book.Read them stick by them and all this wouldn't have happened. If in doubt about something ask someone who's in the knows like MQ or MA and they will put you onto the right people. Darcy #674

[mx250]

We are 'banging on' about it because it is controversial. Is now and always will be - 'racing' bikes from different periods, years etc is fundamentally unfair. Having rules to even things out will always be a compromise and disadvantage some, advantage others. 

'Bang on' about it now and get it out in the open, people might then understand not just the rule by why things are as they are. Then they might be a little more philosophical. As I said, I think the protester in the above case should have been more philosophical - he should have 'sucked it up'. There was no major advantage, intended or otherwise, in the above example. This has been acknowledged several times by various people.

I'm disadvantaged by the current situation. My VB would probably double in value as The 'class racer to have' because of it's suspension travel. Ditto BigK and his Husky.  We are expected to 'suck it up' for the sake of the rules, why can't others.

The rules are right, the referee was right, the system was right - we riders have to sort ourselves out and live with the 'compromise' - either change the rules or ride, race, 'suck it up', drink piss and enjoy .

[Sun Prarie Jimmy]

For what I see in NSW, there are a lot of non compliant bikes running around in Heaven, admittedly it gets bikes on the track, but half of them are in my opinion are not compiling to the rules. Guys are getting away with too much as a result of this attitude and it has now flowed over into the Nats arena 
                                         

[All Things 414]

Are we still banging on about this? 

What would you like us to be 'banging' on about? Someone's birthday?, Chilli cook-offs? How much a copy of VMX magazine sold for (I bet you like that one)?
What's being discussed here is about racing. Now I know that you dont race. But for the people that do this is an extremely emotional subjuct and they want to put their point of veiw across. I would have thought that a public forum would be the place to do that and I'm amazed that yourself (a person of the press) would try to discourage such an activity. 
It's the age old answer to what's being shown on the telivision. If you dont like what's on, change channell or switch off......

BigK, with the greatest of respect,

I've watched "Yes Minister". I know exactly what that term means.....

[AjayVMX]

Are we still banging on about this? 

What would you like us to be 'banging' on about? Someone's birthday?, Chilli cook-offs? How much a copy of VMX magazine sold for (I bet you like that one)?
What's being discussed here is about racing. Now I know that you dont race. But for the people that do this is an extremely emotional subjuct and they want to put their point of veiw across. I would have thought that a public forum would be the place to do that and I'm amazed that yourself (a person of the press) would try to discourage such an activity. 
It's the age old answer to what's being shown on the telivision. If you dont like what's on, change channell or switch off......

BigK, with the greatest of respect,

I've watched "Yes Minister". I know exactly what that term means.....

Ah, 414 your usual completely relevant response...    No sign of your bias here...    Why not just deal with the subject at hand huh? 

And by the way, just because I don't race doesn't mean that I don't have just as strong passions as anyone for this sport.

And no, you're wrong about my attitude to BigK, I DO respect his opinions, just not this particular one.

Back to the subject at hand:

I don't have any problem with people discussing eligibility of certain bikes and if something positive is to come of the discussion, then people can represent their views to the Vintage motocross commission and maybe get the rulebook altered in the future to resolve this issue (if indeed it needs altering in the opinon of the majority of competitiors).

The point I am making however is that deriding a person who protests as performing some kind of "low act" is just wrong.  That's why the protest system exists, to ensure fair racing under the rules.

Sure there are bikes that appear the be disadvantaged by the rules (MX250s VB is being offered as an example) but that is the case for quite a few bikes that in thier day had design innovations, like longer suspension travel, which were ahead of their competitors.  Why didn't they dominate their classes back in the day then?  Probably because the extra suspension they had was pretty crap due to the shocks they used.  The problem that this creates however when you allow more modern shocks to be installed on these bikes is that a distortion of history occurs - suddenly you are able to make a bike that wasn't competitive much more so in today's racing.  So this, as I understand it, is why some general rules about suspension travel were adopted, to just level the pre-78 playing field a little more.

So at the end of the day, there will always be contention about eligibility of particular bikes and there's no problem at all discussing that until the cows come home.  But keep the personal attacks out of the equation, because disrespect for our fellow competitors (and indeed forum members) is not good for anyone.

[Wombat]

...there are a lot of non compliant bikes running around... not compiling to the rules. Guys are getting away with too much as a result of this attitude and it has now flowed over into the Nats arena                                       

I agree with SPJ on this one - and Nats seem to be the only time the eligibility rules are (strictly) enforced.
But are Riders trying to get away with too much or are they simply 'no big deal' improvements?
Remember the old adage 'it's all about fun and not about sheep Stations'?
I reckon the Nats is pretty much the exception to that. And that's certainly when the rules must come into play.
There's a few good forum ideas on this subject (hidden somewhere in the three or four threads on this exact same topic ) and maybe that's what the rules need.

Again; if you think the rules are too anal or pedantic please submit some proposed changes/updates.
But it has to be sent to the rule makers, not just simmering away on this forum.

Unfortunately the motives for why the mods were done and why the protester took the plunge has again resulted in mud slinging on a personal basis.
And that's no way for a 'community' to survive.   
 

[Lozza]

Frame numbers and parts books are NOT considered as eligability complience in road racing. Again it is very simple, components such as frame, swing arm, forks,triple clamps, wheels, brakes, crankcases, cylinder and cylinder head are all major components.These must be from the era or EXACT copies of the original or items that can be proved to have raced within the period.End of story. All other components are deemed minor and be replaced with what ever the entrant deems fit and complies with the rules for the era.
This way there is no checking , cross referencing etc etc on the day, your bike is deemed compliant a long time BEFORE the big race.
So you want to use rubber mounted bar clamps, fine you go and find evidence of rubber mounted bar clamps being used  before the end of the cut off date.
Any one who follows road racing would know the kerfuffle over floating discs in P5, there was a big saga, but it boiled down to could the entrant prove there was floating discs raced prior to Dec31 1980.As it was the entrant had a big pile of pics showing 1979/80 model RGB 500's with floating discs. Now if you wish to run floating discs you either get some original RGB discs or use Manta eng copies of.

[bigk]

Not too much emotion from me here Brad other than that the system seems to have been applied in this situation, which is possibly, probably correct. However those same rules seem to have been forgotten or pushed aside as to other much more clearly illegal bikes, Glen Bells bike stands out like the proverbial dogs balls for one. Everyone knows it, but hell lets not protest that bike, Glen Bell is riding it. It looks like a case of "different rules for different schools" to me. The other main issue for me is that if you're coming 5th or 6th and by a margin of around 15 seconds, you were well and truly beaten and not by a set of rubber mounted handlebars or 9 1/4" of suspension! If you were bangin' bars with the 3 bikes in question, and there were a few seconds in it, then MAYBE exercise your right to protest. By the way I don't know the protester and he's a decent guy by all accounts, however I still feel he has made a very poor decision, probably influenced by others opinions at the time, given the particular circumstances. Nathan there ain't too much toungue in cheek in my post, it's pretty much how I feel, and anyone who knows me, knows in fact I would have done my best to talk him out of protesting and continue along the lines of my post if the protest continued. Even the best of my mates would not live it down. It's just my opinion, and it really doesn't matter for nought in the big picture.
Cheers,
K

[maicomc490t]

This is all a result of what I believe are an over regulation for a sport which is meant to be accessible to all comers where all a cheque book should determine is the type of bike, it's level of presentation and whether the rider camps or stays five star. FFS lets get back to basics and stop banging on.

I for one only want to finish a Sunday with a smile on my face! Who gives a shit about a shelf of plastic when you are sitting back in Sunny Days Nursing Home? I just want good memories of hassle free times doing whatever that brings enjoyment and feel most guys are the same.

What is to stop MA having a master list of all bikes sold for any given age category eg pre '78 (with supporting photos if need be) which clearly state the MANUFACTURERS ORIGINAL SALES DATA. If a bike came out with 200mm travel then that's what you run, likewise if it had 235mm travel. There can also be a twist in the tale - If in the pre '78 era or whatever, an aftermarket or front end swap, fitting of a kit etc could be achieved to improve a bike then so long as support can be provided for the modification as being PERIOD SPECIFIC then bring it on. That's what the guys ran when the bikes were new and that is how the evolution of motocross bikes has taken place.

I do acknowledge that having this simple data would piss off guys who want to swap suspension etc but there has to be a cut off with the onus of the rider to PROVE things are halal (that's just for the muslims reading this thread, lol).

MA (ACU) NSW should bring back square race plates while they are at it, lol !

Dave Mac