| Author |
 Topic  |
| |
Current Topic Rating:  | Join the Forum to Rate this Topic at: Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums
|
|
|
john feakes
Advanced Member
Victoria
791 Posts |
 Posted - 08 Mar 2011 : 10:48:20 AM
|
With the advent of P6 we have a new game to play.
My thoughts are that our old concepts of period racing have to be modified to accommodate the new players.
This would mean bikes of similar technology (regardless of period) running together to make better use of available track time.
I would envisage the current P2 bikes running with P3 and drum braked P4 bikes.
Disc braked P4 to run with P5 and P6.
Racing by capacity class and bikes to carry an additional smaller number to designate which period they belong in.
Can we have some CONSTRUCTIVE thoughts please?
Cheers, John
|
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE
A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple. |
|
|
JasonL
Level 3 Member
Victoria
240 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2011 : 11:18:50 AM
|
John,
I suppose an initial thought is: what happens in other countries? NZ, US, UK, Europe etc - how do they run?? |
 |
|
|
john feakes
Advanced Member
Victoria
791 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2011 : 11:52:12 AM
|
Jason, from what I can see in most of those countries clubs do their own thing and make their own rules.
We appear to be the only country governed by one set of rules.
I'm not sure how N.Z. works.
However, it is what we do here that matters to us.
Check out the CRMC site and you will see that they have little in common with us. |
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE
A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple. |
|
|
|
Historic
Level 2 Member
New South Wales
46 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2011 : 11:59:32 AM
|
John,
I don't think I'll make a dint here, but...
You and one other absent friend have been pushing this "why race in periods" topic for a while now. By the numbers rushing to support your point of view I'd have to say it's time to stop flogging the horse it is well and truly dead.
I'd like to offer another point of view. The sport isn't broken. Watering down the concept of historic racing by ignoring periods will eventually see historic racing disappear. We are already bigger than modern racing, draw bigger crowds etc. To go down the path you champion will see historic racing become a memory.
The introduction of P6 isn't a call to change everything it's an opportunity to have other promoters start including an historic class.
Not all club/promoters need or want to cater for every historic class. Some prefer P2/3 other P4/5 and now 6.
It's human nature to want to be first across the line. If you combine periods then people will start adding newer bits (brakes etc) to older bikes to stay competitive with the newer class they get combined with. It's happened time and time again. Combine capacities and the smaller bikes vanish. Combine Periods and the older bikes stay parked.
We should all try a do what we can to improve the sport, increase numbers playing and watching.
I do not believe that doing away with periods (oh and by the way periods are based on technology changes - not perfect but close)is even close to the right answer.
Leave period racing as it is. If someone really thinks there's another way...let them promote their own race meeting and see who turns up. For and example Mr Blythe started what is now the Barry Sheene based on the American historic classes. Slowly to ensure numbers the Sheene returned back to the Australian rules. |
|
|
|
john feakes
Advanced Member
Victoria
791 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2011 : 1:57:17 PM
|
Greetings Historic and welcome back.
If you read what I posted you will not find me advocating abandonment of your beloved periods, merely suggesting that they can be regrouped to make way for P6 to participate in Historic Racing.
Whatever periods certain clubs favour is really not important on the national scene.
When it comes to the National Championships all periods will need to be accommodated.
The question is "how are we going to achieve this?"
My suggestion was NOT that we combine periods but that we have the grid made up of bikes from more than one period where they are compatible but still have their separate periods designated by an extra number.
Read my post again and think about what I am saying please. |
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE
A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple. |
|
|
|
holma
Level 2 Member
Tasmaina
20 Posts |
Posted - 09 Mar 2011 : 06:43:49 AM
|
| I have heard that period 6 will not be run in the Australian titles and the Island classic until at least 2013. |
Edited by - holma on 09 Mar 2011 7:08:31 PM |
|
|
|
conker
Really - acotrel - Now banned
Victoria
361 Posts |
Posted - 09 Mar 2011 : 08:06:17 AM
|
| Period 6 has been included in the MOMS? Why wouldn't it be included? It's a legitimate period? History doesn't stand still -In a minute we'll be up to the next 'period'! What then? - Time for a rethink? |
|
|
|
JasonL
Level 3 Member
Victoria
240 Posts |
Posted - 09 Mar 2011 : 08:41:56 AM
|
| Holma, I thought you'd be able to enlighten us regarding the titles this year?? My understanding was that a letter was to be circulated shortly seeking interest re P6 for Symmons Plains, and on the strength of submissions (or otherwise) then a decision to include or not would be made. |
|
|
|
john feakes
Advanced Member
Victoria
791 Posts |
Posted - 09 Mar 2011 : 3:45:40 PM
|
Are the Supp. Regs. out yet?
They should give a clue.
Forget that, I see they are not until November. |
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE
A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple. |
Edited by - john feakes on 09 Mar 2011 3:49:34 PM |
|
|
|
holma
Level 2 Member
Tasmaina
20 Posts |
Posted - 09 Mar 2011 : 7:05:17 PM
|
| We were planning a letter to go out asking for what classes people would be interested in entering , but have been waiting for MA to confirm if the classes could be run. As of today, we were advised that we cant run period 6 . The reasons for this are unclear but i think it has something to do with not having enough time to run them within the historic format and that there has only been a total of four ( 4 ) P6 logbooks issued to date. It also looks unlikely that p6 will be run at the Island Classic until 2013 . I am still waiting for a statement to be issued. |
|
|
|
JasonL
Level 3 Member
Victoria
240 Posts |
Posted - 09 Mar 2011 : 9:44:18 PM
|
| 4 P6 logbooks? I've got 2 alone and one more to do. I can think of at least another half dozen already done and another half dozen to come through shortly. Who advised this and who is suggesting it won't be run?? Until we see something "official" we should take it all with pinches of salt?? |
|
|
|
conker
Really - acotrel - Now banned
Victoria
361 Posts |
Posted - 10 Mar 2011 : 05:27:28 AM
|
| Oh Goody, MA is going to make a decision! I used to watch a TV show called 'Father Knows Best'! |
|
|
|
john feakes
Advanced Member
Victoria
791 Posts |
Posted - 10 Mar 2011 : 07:18:07 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by holma
We were planning a letter to go out asking for what classes people would be interested in entering , but have been waiting for MA to confirm if the classes could be run. As of today, we were advised that we cant run period 6 . The reasons for this are unclear but i think it has something to do with not having enough time to run them within the historic format and
that there has only been a total of four (
4 ) P6 logbooks issued to date. It also looks unlikely that p6 will be run at the Island Classic until 2013 . I am still waiting for a statement to be issued.
Would you care to read my opening post again? |
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE
A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple. |
|
|
|
holma
Level 2 Member
Tasmaina
20 Posts |
Posted - 10 Mar 2011 : 8:55:45 PM
|
Ok , i phoned MA today to try and find out first hand what is happening with it all .
I was told that P6 is not authorised as a championship class ( as per John HMRAV Secretary's post in " P6 is up " ).
Club's can run P6 as State events or feature race's only. |
|
|
|
john feakes
Advanced Member
Victoria
791 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 08:13:42 AM
|
So P6 is a Claytons class.
This is crazy.
But not surprising.
I feel sorry for all those who had their hopes raised only to have them dashed so soon afterwards.
I ask again where are we going? |
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE
A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple. |
|
|
|
Historic
Level 2 Member
New South Wales
46 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 11:26:21 AM
|
Sorry John, but to call P6 a Clayton class is wrong. Have a look at the history of historic racing in Australia. Historic bikes have been in the MoMs since the early eighties (don't hold me to the exact date) but weren't recognised as an Australian Championship class until the early nineties. That's around ten years, have a look at P5 I think that went into the book at least a few years before it was granted title status.
P6 will probably get there quicker than that because everyone knows a big trophy is more important than preserving and racing old bikes. You have to consider the fact that while P6 type bikes have been a support class for a number of years, they've only been in the book for a couple of months. Those rules are close to what some states have run in the past, but I think all the various incarnations of the next era of historic racing will have to be modified in most states to bring them into line with the book.
That's going to take some time. To build the class up to decent numbers across the country is going to take time.
So give them time to do it. |
|
|
|
JasonL
Level 3 Member
Victoria
240 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 11:55:47 AM
|
Historic,
I take your point. As one of the proponents trying to get P6 included wherever possible, I accept that it will not happen overnight. But we have to try because that's our nature. We just want to see it on the Historic stage !!
"P6 will probably get there quicker than that because everyone knows a big trophy is more important than preserving and racing old bikes" I feel this is a particularly unfair comment. The rules are the biggest influence on preserving bikes, not racing impetus. Or put another way, big trophies are not contingent on how faithfully preserved or otherwise a bike is. I would hope P6 will be more representative of the period rater than some of the P5 Frankensteins we have seen. Entertaining no doubt, but a paradox for Historic racing which cuts to your point and the crux of the sport: how "authentic" should it be to the era??
What I really want to know is this:
1/ What prevents P6 from being given Championship status?
2/ Who decides?
Lastly, I wonder what "decent numbers" really are. I feel that there are already quite a few P6 bikes across the country. Ok, there may not be enough PER CLASS but that to me suggests feature races are the right way to ease the class in, initially, at larger meets (outright tracktime / program restrictions notwithstanding)
As for me, I do want a big trophy and lots of other P6 guys are keen too - why? Because they know that it will soon be populated by big name riders on professionally prepared bikes, a la P5. This is no bad thing in itself, indeed it will be the making of P6, but fore those of us without the cash or talent to match that, we'd like a wee bit of glory before we get relegated to mid pack. And let me also make one comment - I think one of the joys about Historic racing is that it caters for a wide range of racing purposes - if you want to be serious, you can be. If you don't care about winning and just want to have a great social time and be absorbed in preserving old race bikes, you can do that too. Or even both!
|
|
|
|
Historic
Level 2 Member
New South Wales
46 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 12:25:16 PM
|
Fair enough. In answer to your question
1/ What prevents P6 from being given Championship status?
A decision by MA. I may be wrong but to date, and remember p6 is officially only a few months old, nobody has asked for championship status.
2/ Who decides?
MA
What are decent numbers..10 per class entering a title event. I agree the place to start is feature events show casing the class to potential riders/owners but not a championship race. I should also make the point that expecting or even demanding that all current clubs/promoters must include P6 or indeed any period in local events is not fair on them.
Years ago a group of people wanted more p4 events included in my clubs race meetings. They were then the new boys and not the focus. In the end they split off and started to run their own meeting catering mostly for their passion P4. We both survived cross entered where appropriate and enjoyed the sport. Now they are others are facing the same question with p6. |
|
|
|
JasonL
Level 3 Member
Victoria
240 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 12:41:23 PM
|
Historic,
Thanks for the clarification - it also takes time to understand the sport's mechanisms - so I am right to say that if a club / promoter wished championship status for P6 then it would be considered by MA? I'm just trying to get to the nub of what reasons MA would have NOT to allow it??
I take your point about expecting/demanding events take a class into account. I have been somewhat guilty of this, however two important points on that:
1/ I am on a state historic committee, in my first meeting I had it minuted that one aim was for P6 to be introduced without detriment to existing classes.
2/ I think some of us, myself included, were naive in believing that once in MoMs, P6 would be up and running. It's clearly a two-tier mechanism.
|
|
|
|
john feakes
Advanced Member
Victoria
791 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 12:42:06 PM
|
Jason asks:-
1/. What prevents P6 from being given Championship status?
2/. Who decides?
I would ask why put it in MOMS if it is not going to be recognised?
Surely now that it is a legitimate (or is it?) part of historic racing it should be recognised immediately or it should have been held over until such time as it will be recognised.
Claytons was advertised as the drink to have when not having a drink.
P6 seems to be the era to race in if you don't actually want to race.
There is something negative about all this and it needs some positive action to get things moving.
Oh, and if we weren't so fixed on racing in periods we could probably make room for these "new" bikes by letting them race with P5 until they have reached the required numbers (whatever they may be).
|
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE
A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple. |
|
|
|
Historic
Level 2 Member
New South Wales
46 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 1:01:47 PM
|
Jason, not a problem it can sometime be daunting to dive into the world of rules and regs and have an instant understanding of how things do work rather then perhaps the way they should work.
John...why is it in the book if it is not going to be recognised? How about until people know about a class of racing and what the national rules are they can't get/build a bike to compete in it. I don't know if you have actually read the MoMs but there are loads of bikes mentioned that don't have title status. Some did and lost it some have never had it and some like P6 will more than likely gain it when enough people are participating to warrant it.
One class close to my heart F2 sidecars, been in the "book" for years, been racing at Australian Championship meetings for years. Not recognised as a championship class because there are still not enough turning up consistently to be granted it.
Two school of thought give them a title and they will come in enough numbers, or when the come in enough numbers they'll be given a title. |
|
|
|
john feakes
Advanced Member
Victoria
791 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 1:41:25 PM
|
I would say give them a title and they will compete for it.
That's the nature of the sport.
I have mates who race F2 and are not happy at not being recognised.
We can do better. |
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE
A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple. |
Edited by - john feakes on 11 Mar 2011 1:44:15 PM |
|
|
|
OldKwak
Level 2 Member
Victoria
156 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 2:54:19 PM
|
| It seems as if this discussion is all over the place. The fact is P6 is being run at the Vic Champs for modern bikes. Its probably also running in other Modern State champs. It will probably also be run in the various Nationals for Modern Bikes. Jason is better off dealing with the people there than trying to further squeeze the already too tight schedules in the current historic lineup. Fact is that most historic classes (P5 and lower)have been squeezed out of most modern club arrangements by having been forced to run against pre moderns and P6 (witness Preston and Hartwell)for some time without even the dignity of an explanation being offered to historic bike riders. I for one am not too happy about the idea of P6 proponents trying to arrive on the scene at the State historics and putting added pressure on the already tight schedules at State and National Champs for historics when there is no reciprocation elsewhere. When the other clubs allow historics to be run at the various Modern State Champs we should consider P6 but not before. |
|
|
|
JasonL
Level 3 Member
Victoria
240 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 4:23:13 PM
|
1/ Hartwell still offer separate P4, 5 and 6 comps. In light of the fact they run a lot of other classes I'd say they've been pretty mindful of fitting historics in when there may well have been pressure to get them off the schedule altogether. And these periods were all off the same grid only, not racing each other (well, for line honours but not points)
2/ I can't speak for Preston but the fact that there is HMRAV suggests 2 things: one, modern clubs don't feel compelled to run Historics and secondly, a lot of historic runners would naturally NOT enter modern meetings accordingly. So if Modern comps ran historics how many would run anyway???
3/ P6 or any other period shouldn't suffer under some tit for tat trade off. It is almost as if P6 is being blamed for something quite unrelated.
4/ Pls re-read the posts here - It was stated P6 should be introduced WITHOUT DETRIMENT to other periods. P6 is a legitimate historic class and as such deserves equal treatment as one. If I ran a P5 or whatever yes I'd be concerned about fitting more into the program but I wouldn't be hostile to a fellow historic class.....we'll see how many people change their tune when P6 is huge in a few years time and is keeping some events viable for the other periods to get a run at.
So you'll have to forgive the P6 people for wanting to arrive on the "scene" and clearly they'll have to wait their turn - when will that be???
|
|
|
|
JasonL
Level 3 Member
Victoria
240 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2011 : 4:25:35 PM
|
By the way, this is a good example of why I don't think combining P4, 5 and 6 unlimiteds for example is a good idea to fit P6's in, other than a fastest 40 or some such feature type event - ideally we don't want to dilute what makes the existing periods what they are, nor P6 either. |
|
|
|
conker
Really - acotrel - Now banned
Victoria
361 Posts |
Posted - 12 Mar 2011 : 10:18:59 PM
|
| Jason, I agree with your comment about 'feature races'. An historic superbikes feature for all periods with two capacity classes and heats would be promotable, and might even increase gate takings. The trouble comes when we decide what to do with the rest of the programme. The period concept is good for ensuring a degree of authenticity, other wise.......? |
|
|
|
conker
Really - acotrel - Now banned
Victoria
361 Posts |
Posted - 13 Mar 2011 : 7:52:42 PM
|
| It looks as though anyone wanting to race in P6 should wait a couple of years until the rules are set in concrete by MA, and the class is up and running? |
|
|
|
conker
Really - acotrel - Now banned
Victoria
361 Posts |
Posted - 15 Mar 2011 : 09:18:20 AM
|
| BSFOS - 'P6 & Pre modern is over subscribed & there is now a reserve list!' - Historic ?? |
|
|
|
JasonL
Level 3 Member
Victoria
240 Posts |
Posted - 15 Mar 2011 : 10:52:10 AM
|
I thought the class was up and running, which is why it is now in MoMs. It looks ever more clearer that not much is going to happen in P6 this year, at least at a formal / national level. There is a risk too for myself and others to push too much for P6 inclusion at this year's Titles in Nov in Tassie - if the numbers don't materialise, we'll never hear the end of it, and it could set P6 back more than if we allow events to take a more normal course (ie: slower) |
|
|
|
john feakes
Advanced Member
Victoria
791 Posts |
Posted - 15 Mar 2011 : 11:24:33 AM
|
Jason, do you know how many P6 bikes PCRA could muster?
It seems to me that NSW is the leader in this type of racing and it seems that the inclusion was largely driven from NSW.
It seems that more pressure from the riders is needed to progress beyond the token recognition that has been offered.
If it is left to others it may never happen.
|
125 RIDERS' ALLIANCE
A wise person simplifies the complicated, a fool complicates the simple. |
|
|
|
Historic
Level 2 Member
New South Wales
46 Posts |
Posted - 15 Mar 2011 : 12:32:43 PM
|
Jason, glad you can see the trees in the forest. I think your approach is very sensible.
As for my two other friends;
Conker or Alan or what other name you choose to post under'
BSFOS - 'P6 & Pre modern is over subscribed & there is now a reserve list!' - Historic ??
Yep and in the state with the most riders, the state that runs closer to the P6 rules than any other, the state that has championed this class more than most....
Not one class in P6 (to date on the list I've seen) has managed the minimum number for a champ class. Not one. Remove the modern class for the mix, the pre-moderns, and there is about half a grids worth of P6 at the creek. Not a bad roll up for year 1 of competition but...
So that just backs the points I've been trying to make, let them build and the numbers will come. Pushing for champ status too soon will hurt and not help.
John, calling it a clayton's class or saying it only got token recognition shows an absolute misunderstanding of how things work. We should be celebrating P6's inclusion/recognition as an historic class. Bleating on and on about championship status like a child "I want it now!" "are we there yet, are we there yet, are we there yet" does the sport no good, the class no good. In fact it only fills page upon page in forums and while they can be amusing and informative to date have not actually achieved a fraction of what others have by doing rather than talking. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Where are we heading?
