| Author |
 Topic  |
| |
Current Topic Rating:  | Join the Forum to Rate this Topic at: Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums
|
|
|
popeye
Level 2 Member
Western Australia
187 Posts |
 Posted - 22 Aug 2004 : 3:42:36 PM
|
In response to HHH under the other thread
You must be logged in to see this link.
Wakefield, Broadford and Mac Park ought to do it, part of the game would be the necessity for getting together and sorting the logistics of having enough competitors at each event. The concept of having the points awarded to competitors at already established meetings is still of interest to me and may inspire some who have given the game up to come back out and score one for their state by filling up the grids.
One of the things keeping my thoughts to using existing meetings initially is that the sport is already showing that it can only support a limited number of meetings with its present competitors, providing a n opportunity for the non "Boots and All" rank and file to feel that they are contirbuting to a championship (all competitors from the winning state should get a certificate of thanks from the organising body) may lift the profile and broaden the spectator base of the sport in general, it may also knock down some of the walls within the sport which I percieve to be a major impediment to progress.
|
Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we're here we may as well dance |
|
|
Former Member
deleted
72 Posts |
Posted - 23 Aug 2004 : 11:31:10 PM
|
the reasoning behind the original sugestion of 2 tracks, closely located and held over 3 weeks was to keep the general costs down.
racers could easily return to their homes and have a spare weekend to fix any repairs before the next meeting.i realise this is not convenient for QLD, NT or WA riders but they weren't really concidered in the original idea.. plus if the series became too big, then it would NEVER be oranised all.
sorry but i think if this series was to include NSW or QLD then many racers who may have concidered the 2 race series wouldn't do series. i am baseing this on the cost of traveling and getting holidays(for those of us who have to work to support our raceing) and SA racers i have spoken to.
most historic races held in SA and VIC are fairly well attended so it shouldn't be hard to attract these guys, just give them enough notice.
as a seperate sugestion about bike eledgibillity concerning this 'Mexican Challenge', instead of requireing ONLY bikes with MA log books, the series should be open to all bikes which were made before Dec 1984. extend the 'post classic' cut off to 1976 and extend the 'forgotten era' to 12/84.
lets see if some of those Katana owners, GPZ900R owners and Mal Cambell on his 1983 VF750 would be interested?? plus Robbie Phillis and his Moriwaki??
use simple rules, as long as frames and engines were manufactured and used together before the relevant cut off dates,
then they can race. NO restriction on wheel sizes, brakes and suspensions. this was the spirit of the rules in the original 'Swan Series".
Allow SINGLE EVENT LICENCES ( a major concern of many riders)
we are not looking for an Aussie Champion to be crowned, just trying to encourage as many new guys to the track as possible.
perhaps if the guys from NSW and QLD can arrange a similar challenge, then lets all meet someware for a one off 3 day kick-ass event.. |
There are those who do, those who used to do and those who never did..
why is this 3rd group always trying to convince everyone they know best? |
Edited by - n/a on 23 Aug 2004 11:34:24 PM |
 |
|
|
popeye
Level 2 Member
Western Australia
187 Posts |
Posted - 24 Aug 2004 : 08:46:41 AM
|
| Trying not to get into creating new classes or reinventing the wheel, the idea is to get bikes we have lost and others we would not normally get to the meetings and competing with the knowledge they are contributing to a result no matter where they finish, agre that the concept has to be done SA/VIC first due to geography, if we cant do it, no-one else can. If the concept can work within the present competition framework and there is enough support frome the clubs, then it could be broadened into a non-championship series with the regulations relaxed a tad, we already have a successful formula here with the over 45's "run what ya brung" meeting and I'm sure the concept would appeal to many who do track/ride days but do not wish to go balls and all. |
Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we're here we may as well dance |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 24 Aug 2004 : 3:18:57 PM
|
Lets see if using the existing meetings has support.
How would you set up the points score? |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
popeye
Level 2 Member
Western Australia
187 Posts |
Posted - 25 Aug 2004 : 08:13:19 AM
|
| That my dear Sir, is what I need expert guidance and further information with, I am currnetly playing with numbers and formats to see what may work, when it is looking half reasonable I'll shoot it over for perusal, any and all input will be considered. Will also annoy our club elders for ideas. |
Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we're here we may as well dance |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 25 Aug 2004 : 08:18:45 AM
|
The HRR in Sydney have some system for clubs to score points for a long standing trophy for clubs. Try them.
Perhaps everybody that participates should get a small trophy for being part of the challenge. |
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 - 25 Aug 2004 : 7:20:36 PM
|
| I particularly like this topic especially the bit about extending the date to 1984, and rescuing the old superbikes. Incidently I love the oldies meeting at Mac Park, only trouble is the old farts bring out bikes that put mine to shame for preparation! |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2004 : 12:02:38 AM
|
Cut it out about the Period changes, we will never get agreement for a challenge series and a period change at the same time.
Be resonable. I reckon you need to separate the goals and seek support separately to get success.
Now back to the points system Popeye needs help.
Maybe some account of the number of stubbies consumed on Saturday evening should be considered as well.
Then sidecars should have double points, and maybe an interstate State team could get extra points based on numbers turning up over the Border. Then points could be allocated for all positions in a race with some consideration for the number of entries in a race. Less for winning a race with 8 entries compared with a race with 25. One of the HRR blokes has worked something out I shall try and track him down.
It would all need to be easily programmed on a computer.
|
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 - 26 Aug 2004 : 06:19:08 AM
|
| I suggest the first 5 places in any race of the series, should bring points, 5 for first down to 1 for fifth (or a finish). Perhaps we should require people to 'enter' their team in the series, and riders who accumulate points should get their 'points sheet' rubber stamped and initialled at each meeting. At the end of the series the competitors/teams would have to put in a 'claim' for the trophy, with their points sheets as evidence. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2004 : 08:01:13 AM
|
The NSW system took into account the number of entires in a race. Small entires collected lower scores than a race with 25 entires.
Maybe onlt selected races should be chosen either prior too or at the meeting when good fields have ben observed. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
popeye
Level 2 Member
Western Australia
187 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2004 : 08:32:32 AM
|
forget the "first 5 places" caper, the idea is to enable ALL competitors in ALL classes/periods to contribute to their state tally , Something like 10 points for a meeting entry in your own state and 20points for an interstate entry with bonus 10 points for every 5 competitors at an interstate meeting, where it gets messy is then taking an inverse number for finishing positions in nominated races by each competitor (only 1 race for each competitor to add points with) and throwing those into the mix.
are you confused yet???? |
Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we're here we may as well dance |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2004 : 1:03:00 PM
|
YES!! very confuesd.
The attendance points is clever.
The Bonus, maybe.
Inverse order points is clever, it would automatically provide for the greater difficulty of beating a greater number of riders.
Perhaps the points could be allocated from the entries listed in the program, that would make admin a lot easier.
Do your programs include the Club that the Rider belongs to? Ours do and so do the time keepers details. With luck the time keepers may be able to allocated points automatically.
Would you alocate all the locals to the points score and compare that with all the locals at the other meeting?
How would we deal with an obvious fact that Vic meetings may be naturally bigger than SA metings?
Would we include all events in the scoring system or just the sidecar races? |
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 26 Aug 2004 3:00:15 PM |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2004 : 6:02:25 PM
|
| John, perhaps you need to rate meetings and apply a multiplying factor to the scores? |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
matcho mick
Advanced Member
New South Wales
570 Posts |
Posted - 26 Aug 2004 : 11:37:42 PM
|
why not make up state teams of say 5 or 6 nominated riders,arrived at from the lesser number of interstaters entered?,mixed classes,whatever,obviously home state would have more riders entered,so just make up more teams,thats basically the makeup for Bob Brown trophy in NSW,not sure how the point scoring works but?  |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2004 : 03:06:59 AM
|
Perhaps the way to go with the points score would be to number the riders in order of finishing, then reverse the numbers and multiply them by the circuit factor. For example a guy who raced at Bathurst and beat 39 other riders would get 40 points, multiply this by 10 for the circuit difficulty factor, and he would get 400 points. What it means in effect, is that every rider you pass in a race is worth ten points to your team!
You could do the points system on an Excel Spreadsheet or MS Access database - know any Access programmers? |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
David
Site Administrator
Australia
999 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2004 : 05:36:00 AM
|
You could also place the points system online.quote:
Originally posted by acotrel
You could do the points system on an Excel Spreadsheet or MS Access database - know any Access programmers?
I could do that via an access Database.... Could have logon IDs for officals to add the points to each rider. Save the rider having to make phone calls to see where they stand. 
|
Regards,
David
Webmaster & Owner of Classic Motorcycling Australia
Quote: I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted to be paid. |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2004 : 08:40:14 AM
|
Thanks David.
Al I think the difficulty factor would be hard to manage. Since we would all be racing on the circuits anyway such a plan may never be worked out properly and just complicate it. Still I will take more points for a sidecar though if there are any on offer.
Lets wait for Popeye to get our suggestions together |
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 - 27 Aug 2004 : 10:15:52 AM
|
You guys are really heading off in all sorts of directions, i rekon i could write the sequel to war & peace before you agree on anything.
Why not pick out 2 dates next year and have a head to head clash (and i don't mean the dates clashing). Pick the best track you can get, in SA it would be Mac Park and in viccy I imagine the island would cost to much so go with Broadford. The classes are already there, so is the point system (remember 25 for first and so on) all you really have to do is have a equal number of point scoring riders in each race. A decent perpetual trophy along with the customary scabby give aways and people will be happy. Sounds simple to me but then i've got the advantage of being a female. |
Jayne |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2004 : 4:45:25 PM
|
John, the 'difficulty factor' would simply be a multiplier which indicated the degree of difficulty of the circuit. You could rate Bathurst as a 10, Phillip Island as a 9, Mt Gambier as a 7, Broadford as a 6, Winton as a 5. A team racing solely at Winton or Braodford, wouldn't achieve points at the same rate as one racing at Bathurst or Phillip Island.
One thing I didn't mention was how to calculate the points for a race. If you register every rider's finishing position in a spreadsheet column, then get the programme to pick the highest number from the column (total number of finishers), add 1 to the number then subtract each rider's finishing position from that, you get the raw points score. Multiplying by the 'circuit difficulty factor' then gives the final rider's score for each competitor, with compensation for whether the feat occured on an 'easy' or 'hard' circuit.
The 'difficulty factor' means that a rider passing another at Phillip Island picks up 9 points, at Winton he would pick up 5 for the same action. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
72 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2004 : 9:03:40 PM
|
reading what's going on regarding this subject, its no wonder nothing ever happens. who cares about a points system at this stage?
if you really want to try and attract some new guys and bikes to your race meetings then you better try something new guys..soon you will be too old to race your oldies, you have to encourage some new guys and newer bikes, hard to accept but it's inevitable, sorry.
as the saying goes K.I.S.S. (keep it simple stupid)
1) NO MA LOGBOOKS REQUIRED
2) SINGLE EVENT LICENCESS ACCEPTABLE.
3) CUT OFF DATES ADVANCED BY 4 YEARS FOR ANY CLASS.
4) REDUCED ENTRY COSTS IF ENTERING BOTH MEETINGS.
5) SIMPLE ELIDGABILLITY REQUIREMENTS- BIKE AND ENGINE MUST HAVE RUN TOGETHER IN PERIOD REPRESENTED.
6) ALL ENTRIES RECEIVE A FREE T-SHIRT AT SCRUTENEERING.
lets try and oranise an enjoyable, fun meeting with hopefully some news guys who will stick around and enter more races.
|
There are those who do, those who used to do and those who never did..
why is this 3rd group always trying to convince everyone they know best? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 27 Aug 2004 : 10:08:14 PM
|
With your plans Hunter you could run a modern meeting, it would be easier. I would not support such rules.
I thought the expression was KIISS, Keep it in Southern States.
I belive your suggestion would simply replace one imperfedt system with anothe imperfect system
Two questions, what fee structure would you have in mind to cover costs and why do you think moving the cut off dates would work. |
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 27 Aug 2004 11:12:46 PM |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2004 : 7:57:01 PM
|
John, there is one thing to be said about 'cheating' - we all LOVE doing it! Trouble is it stuffs the sport.
I suggest that advancing the cutoff dates, might not be such a bad idea. The main thing is to get our objectives clear, and I believe one of them is to preserve a bit of history by recreating what happened 'back then'. Anyone who wants to prove something by building the worldbeating bike THAT NEVER EXISTED, should take up racing an R1, and do all the mods on that!
I must be going funny in my old age, but I cannot see any value in doing drastic modernising mods to old bikes, which would be better used if they were simply restored entirely back to original!
The cutoff date thing is largely irrelevant. I believe your worry is simply that the guys are going to take advantage and use technology that wasn't really available for earlier periods.
Let me say this - any schmick hi-tech bike in historic racing can be beaten (- even Rex) provided you use the right technology - that isn't the point of the exercise. The point is to race something THAT ACTUALLY EXISTED, with all its limitations. You might actually get some idea as to what earlier riders had to put up with! |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
72 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2004 : 03:20:02 AM
|
john, if i was to quote someone...
John Daley Sidecar #68 HMRAV Secretary
" It is far better to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the grey twilight that knows not victory nor defeat" |
There are those who do, those who used to do and those who never did..
why is this 3rd group always trying to convince everyone they know best? |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
72 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2004 : 03:39:52 AM
|
at this time i could not answer any questions about cost and how to recouperate them. i think moving the cut off date would encourage the owners of VF1000R, RZ500, FJ1200, Katana or GPZ900R to enter a historic race meeting instead of worrying about whether they should try and race in a modern meeting.
whether you support the meetings is really irrelavant.
this forum is a stage for ideas to be suggested and perhaps some promotors to read some idea they like.
|
There are those who do, those who used to do and those who never did..
why is this 3rd group always trying to convince everyone they know best? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2004 : 08:28:21 AM
|
Hunter thanks for the reminder!
When you spoke of shifting the cut off dates I assummed you meant moving 1962 to 1966. 1972 to 1976 etc.
But you mean adding someting at the end of 1980.
I am expiementing with a chook chaser class which I shall submit here once its had a go over with a small group just to check the clarity etc.
Basically it tries to pick up the style of off road bikes that did road racing in the 60's and 70's. More on that later.
Entry fees look like moving up not down. The pressures of increases are always there. The HMRAV turned over $90,000 in 12 months and went backwards $800.
I am not convinced log books are a issue for a substantial number of bikes. Yes, some have chosen not to get them, but many have.
Tee shirts is a good idea, particularly if we had an advertiser come on board to cover the cost.
There is talk about $100 one event licence fees to reflect the true cost of having racing in place. |
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 - 29 Aug 2004 : 10:44:18 AM
|
| John, I might be a bit strange, but I don't like 'chook chasers' on road race circuits. I believe the steering is set up wrong, and they're a bit dangerous. At the recent meeting at winton, one cut across a 'normal' bike, and they ended up picking them both up in an ambulance. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2004 : 5:46:34 PM
|
| We are looking at a chook chaser race only, anyway arent sidecars normal and I agree chook chasers with sidecars would be a weird mix. You would perhaps use a shovel to pick them up rather than a ambo. |
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 - 30 Aug 2004 : 4:15:16 PM
|
| Isn't a race with only chookchasers called 'supermotard' ? |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2004 : 4:21:33 PM
|
| Actually there is a bit of potential for 'cross-entry' with chookchasers. I believe some of the BEARS are chookchasers, certainly supermotard are, and so are some period 4 and 5 historics. An event solely for chookchasers could be a great support feature at an historic meeting. I just get a bit p*ssed off when I've lined up with a roadracer with fairing, clipons and re****ts, and see someone on a MXer next to me. I get more p*ssed off when they prove to be faster, but I don't think I'd do what Jeff Curley did to one guy on a chookchaser in C grade. The kid got round him twice in a couple of corners, Jeff kicked him off into the dirt, he said 'he ain't going to do that to me!' |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2004 : 4:43:20 PM
|
| Settle down. I need to get support from the gang before I go public. Dont forget though it will be Chook chasers only by defintion, no allowance will be made for anybody who complains about special favours, and wanting to enter a road bike. We are trying to get something diffeent along to raise the numbers. |
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 - 30 Aug 2004 : 9:10:04 PM
|
| John, anything original is worth considering. As I said previously, I don't like 'chookchasers', but if they bring the young guys to our historic meetings, they can't be all bad. I hope your committee is open minded enough to give your idea a try. |
Is your machine authentic or merely eligible? |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
