| Author |
 Topic  |
| |
Current Topic Rating:  | Join the Forum to Rate this Topic at: Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
 Posted - 16 Jul 2004 : 6:48:44 PM
|
The Philosophy of Historic Motorcycle racing in Australia Draft # 5 Aug 19th 2004
Personnel view from John Daley
SYNOPSIS
The Victorian Historic Management Committee believes that a more clearly defined overall philosophy of our vision for Historic Motorcycle racing will eliminate a lot of the misunderstandings about the GCR’s. It may reduce the number of attempts to change rules and promote greater adherence to the GCR’s overall.
PURPOSE
Our suggestion is to put in place a more explicit process that in 20 years time, when people have been documenting machines in the intervening period many of the current issues will be addressed. Maybe existing processed machines should be exempted from the full documentation on the grounds that they are log booked now and documentation may not readily be available.
In our opinion too many changes are put in place without reference to the original philosophy of what we are collectively trying to achieve with the resulting confusion and inconsistency. Another major issue is whether one machine is more “pure” than another with the resulting unnecessary conflict.
THE PROPOSAL
We propose the following statement be included within the GCR’s.
“ The philosophy of Historic Motorcycle racing in Australia is to generally reflect the style of racing machines as they were developed and raced in each period, whilst accepting that within Australia an active development scene through all periods existed, which resulted in many specials and actual “works
machines” competing together.”
DISCUSSION
To improve adherence to the philosophy and set things in place for the future it is proposed to establish a system of identifying the types of machines to differentiate each type from another and give a greater understanding to the public about the differences between “Historic Bikes”;
It is not proposed that any penalty or benefit will apply subsequent to the identification of a machine as being an Original, Replica or Silhouette other than clarifying reality for people outside the system.
In all cases the logbooks would identify which type the machine has been designated.
A technical committee should be established to verify any documentation presented to prove a machine is an original one or a replica. Such a committee may be the National Historic Management Committee. Any decision to accept such a claim should be publicly available along with the documentation.
A right of protest by anyone, under the GCR’s should remain in place.
MACHINE TYPES
- Original, actual racing machines from the period with verifiable documentation and engine numbers, where applicable. They must be the original machine with original style, material and dimensioned parts, [Visually and technically identical]
- Replicas of known machines can be produced providing details of the original machine can be produced and verified [Visually and technically identical] Internal modifications are permissible.
Replicas cannot be a combination of the best parts of a period. Minor components may be changed
- Silhouette defined as machines, which reflect the period but can include modifications to improve performance, reliability and reduces weight. Such machines might not be copies of particular machines from the period and might deviate from original designs providing the changes are consistent with the period depicted.
Internals may have modern improvements, but modern [exotic] materials must not be visible. Existing prohibitions would continue.
Such machines can be a combination of the best parts of a period.
DEVELOPMENT & EXPERIMENTATION
To reflect the development and experimentation work that was carried out during each period the philosophy will be to permit such changes providing the following criteria are met.
- The design is consistent with the period depicted.
- In the case of Original machines any remanufactured parts must weigh within 5% of the original weight, the external dimensions, shape and appearance must be indistinguishable from the original. Otherwise the machine will be defined as a Replica or Silhouette.
- Unless expressly permitted, the use of modern materials or technology will be banned, for Original or Replicas. I.e. ignition, belt drives, air shockers.
- If machines are produced from a mixture of the best parts from a given period, the year of the machine will be defined as the year of manufacture of the youngest part.
In cases where development has continued beyond the period, the machine will designated a silhouette.
CHAMPIONSHIPS
For championships any machine, which complies with the GCR’s, is eligible for championships, providing the machine is identified as an Original, a Replica or a Silhouette.
In the case where evidence has been openly presented to justify a particular matter with a machine’s eligibility it shall be documented for all to see in the future.
BANNED OPTIONS
There will be times when specific items will need to be banned to maintain the overall integrity of the sport. They may be internal or external items.
I.e. Fuel injection units prior to 1972, Disc brakes prior to 1962, Kneeler sidecars prior to 1962. Rear exit sidecars 1972, integrated brakes prior to 1972, sidecar brakes prior to 1962.
IDENTIFICATION
To assist the viewing public as to what style of machine is on the track, all number plates would have an identifier as follows
Originals – current plate system
Replicas – 40mm “R” at the bottom right hand side of each number plate in the same colour as the number.
Silhouette – 40mm “S” at the bottom right hand side of each number plate in the same colour as the number.
And any programs published would be encouraged to include the same identifiers.
SUMMARY
Discussion points that have arisen.
We need to determine how we would categorise a machine which is a reproduction of an original machine, with original parts etc but has never actually raced.
We need to look at copies made of Chromemoly steel of original machines made from Mild steel
|
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
Edited by - john on 13 Sep 2004 09:54:45 AM |
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2004 : 2:55:14 PM
|
John, I suggest your classification system has a lot of merit.
Your comment about 'silhouette machines', I'd question the wording:
'Such machines may not be copies of particular machines from the period and may deviate from original designs providing the changes are consistent with the period depicted. Internals may have modern improvements.'
(The first use of the word 'may' in the above sentence - perhaps that should be 'might'?)
It seems that a lot of what is being raced at present falls into this class . |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
 |
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2004 : 3:06:11 PM
|
John, If the least your proposal does, is to get a little bit of orginality back into the bikes, it will have really achieved something.
There is an oldie living in Benalla, who used to be Treasurer for the ACUV in the fifties. He went to the Austin 7 meeting the other day. He commented that he wasn't really impressed with a lot of the bikes, and I know where he's coming from!
Some of the stuiff being brought to meeting is great e.g. the Show Shine winners at the A7 meeting, some are not so good!
Have a look at the cars, the idiots in the VHRR won't even let a really good replica run at Sandown. I don't believe we should ever get up ourselves to that extent, but when you see what gets to car historic meetings, it is a bit mind boggling! I know the car guys have probably got more money than us, but a lot of preparation hasn't got much to do with money. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2004 : 4:45:35 PM
|
Al, can we stick to the topic, let the cars do their thing.
What advantage would there be in changing the word, "may" to "might". Would the document be any clearer with your suggestion, is there a precedent for "might" over "may"?
My thoughts on a committee structure to oversea it are incomplete, I need help.
Also, I think some requirement to itemise decisions contary to the philosophy needs to be included.
By the way do others think the effort is worthwhile, is it a waste of time?
I intend presenting it to my club, the Vic HMC and then finally MA. If people dont think it improves things please let me know now and not later. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
Edited by - john on 18 Jul 2004 5:34:22 PM |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
120 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2004 : 7:54:58 PM
|
| With all the official rule change stuff thats going on at the moment that your urging people to comment on, wouldn't it be sensible to get that sorted before bunging up another new lot of rules. Remember that a lot of people pissed off with those who forever want to change things are saying leave the rules alone for a while which is probably why no one has really commented. |
Jayne |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2004 : 8:53:02 PM
|
John, I suggest there are enough interested parties to form a historic committee. There are the MA historic commissioners, and the Vic Historic Management Group.
I suggest that HMRAV in conjunction with MA should start up a special email list, so that the people involved with eligibility, the people interested in the philosophy of historic racing, the machinery builders (like Rex and Bob Martin Engineering)can talk to each other.
I suggest the lead for the group should come from either yourself or the MA historic commission.
Your work on the 'philosophy of historic racing' has direct influence on eligibility. It's no use HMRAV, MA historic commissioners(Ross Martin etc.) and everyone else going off in opposite directions. A coordinated effort is needed.
Also I suggest there is a need for a special web site to handle eligibility of historic bikes. At the Hartwell Club meeting at Winton today, some of the guys were a bit excited that the eligibility rules could 'become international' ( mention was made of International Post Classic), and I agree that should be taken into consideration.
I'm not about to set up a new web site, but if we're ever to achieve compatibility with international groups, I suggest we need it. The rules from each country should all be on the one site, so we can get an overview.
P.S. About the 'may' and 'might' thing in your previous post - I don't believe it reads quite right, the way it was. (Using 'may' looks like you are giving permission, and I don't think that's what you meant). |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2004 : 9:04:34 PM
|
John, My comment about the cars was relevant to the discussion. VHRR in particular really can any car that's non-genuine. They seem to believe that the reason people come to historic races is to see the 'real thing'. In some ways I agree with them. The crowd at the Austin 7 meeting would be much smaller if the cars were not log-booked and very original.
Winton Motor Raceway takes a different tack in the October meeting. We cater for cars up to 1989. The intention is to have fun, but we still wouldn't dare run a replica in a race. The historic car guys would really perform.
I know that nobody in Australia has a MV3, a porcupine AJS, a Benelli 4, a F model Manx, or a Guzzi V8, why would you bother? But I suggest those things really pull a crowd.
The way we're going we're never likely to see the 'real thing' racing in Australia EVER.
I'm really excited about International Post Classic, at least that's a start in the right direction. One day we might even get a good crowd of spectators following the sport. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2004 : 9:23:13 PM
|
I'm not 'purist' by any means, but perhaps my 'values' are a bit different from most people. I'm not picking sh*t with what I'm about to say.
At the Austin 7 meeting there was a long stroke Manx which was fairly original except it had a MK2 Amal carby, and billet fork yokes. If that bike had been fitted with the original GP carby and original yokes, I would have had no hesitation in giving it the trophy for 'Best British'.
I know the rules allow the alterations, but they detract from the value of the bike. I hope the owner still has the bits he's taken off. It was a beautiful bike, a really good example, but the changes spoil it. (probably make it much better to ride!)
(I feel the same way about the Jap bits on my Seeley, they turn it into a sh*t heap) |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2004 : 10:44:47 PM
|
Jayne, The Philosphy proposal is not a rule change as such, but it would need to go before the commission eventually.
One issue is that there is not a lot of time betwwen last years minutes and ideas being commentted on and the closing date for the next years looming quickly.
I am trying to get as much time for discussion now so its not rushed at the other end of the calendar.
We have had 4 people put something in writing to the Vic committee for our meeting last Tuesday, and the majority of those went with the MA commissioners opinion. Do we assume the other 300 historic riders are happy with the committees opinion or just did not want to get involved? One issue that came out of the meeting is the fact that there is not clear definition of what we are all trying to achieve in Historic racing.
A glance through this web site shows that.
ie exact original bikes,
copies of bikes,
copies of what may have been,
copies of what we think existed,
copies of what could have existed if the blokes only made the time,
copies of something that may have been on the drawing board.
From our committee discusions we came to realize that if a document detailed more clearly what was the "vision" [and thats not the perfect word but I cant think of a better short word to use at the moment] a lot of the proposed rule changes would be either clearly out of order or an improvement on the situation that may lead to a reduction in the level of confusion about eligibility.
We may be wrong.
As an administrator I have come to realise that silence does not always mean agreement.
If it was agreed a better description of what historic racing is about would help remove confusion, why not try now and see if that works. I can guarantee if we dont look at it nothing will alter.
If we look at it and decide not to change, thats ok, providing it is discussed widely, because I am convinced the current situation is perptuating the confusion. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
Edited by - john on 18 Jul 2004 10:59:32 PM |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2004 : 10:48:34 PM
|
Alan, your comments about the carries are valid. But I belive we have already covered then well enough in other topics and I think everybody agrees with you.
I am trying to keep this topic specific to the proposal so it does not deviate around the issue.
Many topics get lost, muddled and confused and the original concept is lost in side issues.
With the result nobody gets involved. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2004 : 1:16:39 PM
|
John,
I suggest that where you are going, when you develop a 'vision' for historic racing, is a move towards 'performance based legislation' (what we have now is 'prescriptive').
In short you might come up with 'what we are trying to achieve' with historic racing. That would be a very good thing!
Incidently I mentioned you to a guy the other day. He said 'yes, I know him - he's good'. So you must be doing something right. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2004 : 4:21:05 PM
|
| Thanks. I have taken up your comment about the use of 'may ' and 'might'. On the third reading it does read as if the replication of an earlier design would be banned with the use of the word "may". I have change the word to 'might'. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 12 Sep 2004 : 08:58:22 AM
|
Well, from Keiths topic about his Logbook being under possible review I ask that people think about this idea. PERSONNAL COMMENT HERE
I'm on a downer. People has said my proposal is just another set of rules so "Piss off".
What they do not realise is that whilst they are getting their jollies off with abuse and "head in the sand" ideals, others are going around implementing rules without any comment from the riders. If you dont believe me look around for the evidence that is out there. How many things have happenned and nobody knows where they came from. This "Philosophy" from MA that Keith mentions has never been discussed by anybody. I have not even heard the word mentioned in corridors until I published this discussion paper. Maybe some people may highjack the concept, ban all bikes that were not racing and blame the whole thing on this original discussion paper that even blokes on this site have ignored.
MARK MY WORDS IF YOU RUBBISH THIS IDEA YOU MAY FIND SOMEBODY ELSE CHANGES THE RULES BEHIND OUR BACKS.
So I implore you to think about making comments and talking to people about it. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
Edited by - john on 12 Sep 2004 3:33:37 PM |
|
|
|
keith campbell
Level 3 Member
Victoria
248 Posts |
Posted - 12 Sep 2004 : 09:37:07 AM
|
John what you are saying here is fine for a beginning and should be discussed.
My separate topic on same subject is because I want M.A. to open up for discussion as to where they are coming from.
The bikes i race are all "specials" as you know and all qualify for period 3 racing.
Log Book definition Special or Make can all be defined by descriptions in each program for the greater interest of spectators etc . As you said number plates could reflect variants of the same types of bike in the same race.Gotta go now but will be back.
|
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2004 : 9:01:51 PM
|
| Keith, I don't have a problem with anyone racing a 'special', what tends to upset mne is when I see an immaculate mk8KTT engine in a totally wrong frame. If the bike was ridden 'back then' in that format by a 'name rider', that would be OK. I 've also seen a really good AJS7R in a good Manx frame, it was obviously a hotrod, but the parts were the 'hens teeth' kind of unobtanium. Those bits I would give my leftie for, if I wanted to build a good P3 racer. I've seen your bikes, and they are good competitive racers, and they haven't got any of the hard to find bits like Manx Tachos, manx hubs. I'd support their ongoing participation in historic racing. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
keith campbell
Level 3 Member
Victoria
248 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2004 : 10:10:43 AM
|
| Alan whether you get upset or not has no relevance.The bloke who owns the ktt is at the track participating with like minded enthusiasts.That is all. |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2004 : 12:33:19 PM
|
Can we stick to the topic. Divided we fall, united we stand.
People are being put off discussions because of the side tracking. Please in this topic only stick to the point.
I have been advised that MA will be discussing and maybe approving a Philosophy of Historic Racing on 15 Sept. 2004. Thus far only the National COmmisioners and MA are aware of what the details are. The National Commisioners are not permitted by confidentiality agreements to discuss the matter.
This comes about because some at MA believe they have this "Power" to make these decisions.
I have been advised that copies of Minutes will be available once they are approved, possibly within 2 weeks. So I suggest we wait and see.
|
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
Edited by - john on 14 Sep 2004 12:42:12 PM |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2004 : 4:39:39 PM
|
I don't believe a 'philosophy of historic racing' could ever be created by MA without a reasonable level of consensus. It just wouldn't be accepted by the guys, and when it was quoted it would always cause resentment.
I'm sure MA will be using a fair and democratic process in its development. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2004 : 4:50:41 PM
|
Alan I have it in writing from MA that they have created a Philosophy and it has not been circulated.
They do not believe they need to be democratic.{ just realised , Are you pulling my leg, you solo rider it nearly worked. I had better go and smell some Castrol R to clear the head}
Anyway the only way it will not be adopted is if the ground swell of opposition over this week will have an effect. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2004 : 5:14:26 PM
|
Today David White advised the following;
The MA Board has decided to seek consultation with the States over the MA Phiolosophy of Historic Racing, which is different from the above discussion paper. He expects the details to be available within 7 days.
In the case of Victoria the State Historic Management Commission, is planning how to quickly take this opportunity. Initially the proposal will be published here, on wwwhmrav.org and to HMRAV members. Details will also be avialable at the Southern Classic Festival. Written submissions will be sought for compilation and consideration, and may be sent to myself as Secretary to 184 Through Rd Camberwell, 3124, preferabbly in MS word form via a disc or via email privately through this site.
We have a great opportunity to try and put our case,it is important for any racer to participate otherwise they shall need to hold their tongues for the rest of their lives. Steps will be taken to work with the other States to see if a united stance is possible.
Currenty SA and QLD do not seem to have Historic Management Commissions so you blokes had better get something happenning. If I am wrong please send details, if I am right still send me any new details. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
Edited by - john on 15 Sep 2004 5:19:55 PM |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2004 : 6:43:23 PM
|
Sounds good John. Although some of the guys might feel like tearing their hair out, I believe the development of a philosophy of historic racing is of key importance. It is not only relevant to eligibility issues, it should determine where our sport is going.
My only regret is that those of us who were still racing the old sh*t heaps in 1973, didn't take the Velocette Owners Club to task back then, when they ran the first historic demo at Winton.
I'm amazed how good historic motorcycle racing has been even without a guiding document, however the 'Philosophy of Historic Racing' might just make the whole scene a lot better. We might develop it into something that draws a good spectator crowd and reduce the costs to competitors. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2004 : 6:53:57 PM
|
| John, Sorry for the 'democracy' dig, however we do live in a democracy. The procedures for meetings (Rules of Etiquette) and articles of incorporation of clubs are designed to ensure democratic process. Even though organisations such as MA and CAMS identify themselves as 'controlling bodies' and 'governing bodies' I believe their authority isn't statutory, it is based on the democratic input of their members. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2004 : 9:34:57 PM
|
I dont think we should read into any Philosophy anything about lowering the cost of racing. By this I am not saying it is not important. But if we have 10 different Philosophies we will never get agreement.
My understanding of the issue is that any Philosophy acceppted by MA will revolve around what are acceptable machines.
I would encourage everybody who gets involved to ensure all other considerations are kept out of it until this single issue is dealt with.
There is already a great divergence of ideas lets try and find common ground and work from there. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
120 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2004 : 10:35:02 PM
|
| Lets face some real facts here MA are forcing thru there new rules and dont give a crap what anyone says. ****ers who believe in MA democracy are just as guilty. if you read between the lines it becomes pretty clear that Ross Martin and co are intent on banning anthing that is a special. We're trying to work out how to prove a posty sidecar that is built to the rules can stay on the track. over the last year or so people who were right into classics have been stressed out and worried if what they own is worth anything. Rather than MA changing rules as it suits them maybe they should start changing staff so we can people back on track. |
Jayne |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
174 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 01:38:01 AM
|
New staff,new views and historic motorcycling will benefit!!!
Now were talking...
|
Its not what you ride,Its how fast you ride it!!! |
|
|
|
Allan
Site Moderator
National
599 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 07:24:09 AM
|
 Ok can somebody clear up the term "SPECIAL" Does this mean the special that i built in 1958 is not legal! in this new class 'cause it is a SPECIAL!!In the 50's most riders raced special's "Hunter, Spillar, Egan, Welsh, Armstrong, Curley, And more So Q is WHAT IS A SPECIAL   As of yesteryear or built TODAY!! will be legal ..like our modern RETO's Crapp!! Don't be one eyed about Special;s |
Allan Greening |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 10:43:25 AM
|
From Snoozer "Lets face some real facts here MA are forcing thru there new rules and dont give a crap what anyone says. ****ers who believe in MA democracy are just as guilty."
It is unfortunate that you think people like myself can be described in this fashion. Nobody denies that MA have tried to force a proposal through, but now they have agreed to consultation. You can take advantage of that chance or you can sit back and stick it up those who are trying to help.
Which camp are you in Snoozer? The camp that wants a result or the camp that wants to ridicule and not take the chance.
I do believe that even in the worse sense that good governance will reach the top. It may not be overnight which I would prefer, but it will happen. One thing for certain is that as people abuse others, the greater chance that the wheels will fall off in the battle and in this case MA will prevail.
So if you get your jollies off by abuse and ridicule I cant help, but if you get them off because you have contributed to and achieved a good result, no matter how long it takes I am interested to help.
As for changing staff at MA. Get real what can we do about it? We are stuck with the staff we have, we need to negotiate with integrity.
I am aware you may wish to ridicule this concept but think about it, will ridicule get a result we want.
So I strongly advise that wait for the proposal, write to your State Historic Commission and make your comments. I can say if your letters are full of abuse they dont get impact because often they go in the bin. Write a reasoned case, deal with each point in the proposal and pray enough others have the same view.
|
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 6:18:44 PM
|
I don't believe this issue is anything to get wound up over. There may be an element in MA with its own agenda, however in the end what the members say, goes. I've spoken to a few of the historic commissioners at different times - Al Kidd, Dave Morgan and Rob Hinton, and I found them to be quite sensible. One of the common aspects of motorcycle racing politics has always been to push one's own barrow even if it means changing the rules to help yourself. I don't believe this is the situation with this effort, and I'm certain the historic commisioners have more concern for the sport than to go down this path. I believe a major objective should be 'how can we make the sport better, and where are we going with historic racing?'
I suggest it's worth the effort to get consensus on these issues - we might really achieve something good, and move on to a much better sport.
As far as 'specials' are concerned, they are actually part of our history, however when every bike racing is a 'special', we come to a sad situation, where we never see the genuine article at a meeting. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
David
Site Administrator
Australia
999 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 6:47:06 PM
|
Please find attached the official response from Brian-R Payne (General Manager - MA):quote:
From: Brian Payne
Sent: Thursday, 16 September 2004 4:06 PM
To: Webmaster @ Classic Motorcycling Australia
Subject: RE: Philosophy of Historic racing
Dear David, thank you for the invitation to place something formally on your website.
The attached file indicates the origin and process that has been followed and we would appreciate this document be included in your website.
Regards
Brian-R
 Download Attachment: You must be logged in to see this link.
30.35 KB
The only change of the file is from a Microsoft Word document to a Adobe PDF file so it can not be changed and distributed.
Now is the time to get things happening and from what I have read, it sounds like it could be good what is listed in the document as a personal opinion.
I would also like to thank MA for supplying the document to be given out publicly.
|
Regards,
David
Webmaster & Owner of Classic Motorcycling Australia
Quote: I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted to be paid. |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
120 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 7:27:52 PM
|
| John.. I wasn't talking about you. If you took the time to relise that I doubt you would have got so defensive. anyway consider this, the MA philosophy didn't come about by active riders and license holders bashing down the doors at MA to get the rules changed it came about thru non riding offical types at MA doing whatever they want. if you've wondered how we came to that conclusion you just have look at the last minutes of the commish meeting, there is nothing about a philosophy there at all. so now its getting rammed thru at the last minute. you can call it ridicule but believe me a lot of people call it applying pressure where its most needed. just 6 months ago most people thought classic racing was travelling ok, logs books were accepted, and now we can get back to enjoying ourselfs. nobody asked for sweeping rule changes because they arnt needed. MA need to really tell us if they want to get rid of classics or if they are just on a office ego trip. the bottom line is lot of guys have lost confidence in MA. you can delete this reply if you want but when i listen to what everyone is saying this is how it is. |
Jayne |
|
|
|
David
Site Administrator
Australia
999 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 8:26:06 PM
|
Snoozer,
There is no way I would delete a reply of someone who has a genuine issue.quote:
Originally posted by Snoozer
you can delete this reply if you want but when i listen to what everyone is saying this is how it is.
This is a genuine issue and all are entitled to their opinions and responses. This is why I have set the site up to get these types of things out in the open, and MA have given a response above and I have added it to the topic for fairness.
|
Regards,
David
Webmaster & Owner of Classic Motorcycling Australia
Quote: I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted to be paid. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
