Letters

LETTERS

BANNED IN BOSTON. . . AND EVERY WHERE ELSE

The following is just a sampling of the mail we’ve received concerning the AMA ’s ban of the Yamaha TZ750 Miler. To date we have not gotten a single letter upholding the AMA ban.-Ed.

It has always been easier to legislate the opposition into 10th place—or onto the trailer—than it has been to finish nine bikes ahead of them. This is by no means limited to motorcycle racing, either. It is impossible to name the most offensive law of this type, but here are a few that are on my list: 1. NCAA bans the slam dunk in basketball. 2. USAC bans the turbine engine at Indy. 3. NCAA bans the forward-flip long jump. 4. FIA, SCCA and USAC ban the Chapparal ZJ ground-effect machine. 5. AAU bans the burr-sole shoe. 6. USGA bans the croquet-style putt.

What can be done about it? In general, nothing. For every one of the above rules, some reason was given that had nothing to do with the real motives. Publicly, the ban on the slam dunk was to reduce injuries, not to stop Lew Alcindor. Publicly, the ban of groundeffect machines was to save money, not to stop Jim Hall and the ZJ. When people refuse to tell why they are doing something, it is impossible to talk them out of it. They will deny that the real reasons are motives at all and will fanatically support the stated reasons because they can’t seem to be backing something that has no logic.

Each case has to be fought individually. First, you have to be able to show that the publicly stated reasons are patently false. Then, you need to convince a large number of people that it would be good for racing (basketball, track, etc.) to have the ban lifted.

If the abovementioned method seems too difficult, there is another alternative. You can outlive them. It is almost always a conservative, older establishment behind such rules trying to resist a threat by a group of young lions. The establishment is bound to die off first of natural causes, although it may be too late to do any good then.

Well, what do you think the chances are of seeing the ZJ again?

Bruce W. Walker San Pedro, Calif.

Your article on the banning of the TZ750 Miler was a good one. The AMA

had an easy way out of this situation, just as they had an easy way out of the same situation when the Harleys started their total domination two years ago. Why not a simple carburetor size restriction like that on auto racers? Because the AMA never does things the easy way. Sure, a bunch of guys might wind up swapping Mikunis every once in a while, but that’s a lot cheaper than all new bikes. Perhaps if they’d done something sensible like that we’d still be seeing those beautiful Triumph dirt trackers of a few years back.

We’ll be able to watch the same thing happen in the Novice short track set next year, since the AMA has banned all those neat Yamaha 250 Twins that sound so bitchen—and also all the current 360cc Singles—in an effort to cut back the speed of the small bikes. Why not a simple carb size reduction? No 360 Astro will run as fast with a 30mm carb. Yet next year riders will be eating this year’s equipment.

No, the AMA won’t take the easy way. But then maybe they have a reason. You see, if everyone was equal, Harley wouldn’t have an edge. And Harley has probably helped the AMA more than anyone else, although I’m not sure. But I am sure that the average bike owner doesn’t join the AMA. In working for different shops for seven years, I didn’t see many people get AMA cards. So I guess you get what you pay for, huh?

James Davis Ft. Polk, Calif.

The fading away of the Triumph dirt trackers has resulted from the inability of riders to get parts for them because of the current labor situation in England. It certainly isn’t because they are no longer competitive.-Ed.

Thanks for the fine publication. I found the Jan. article about the multicylinder Kawasakis, Yamahas, Suzukis and Hondas being banned quite amusing. Looks like the early ’50s are here again: anything that can beat a Harley is immediately banned.

The Big Four deserve much credit for their technical advances and more. Thanks to a bunch of bigoted fools those beautiful racing machines will not be seen in action by the American public. I feel cheated and intend to keep my AMA race attendance money in my pocket until this ridiculous situation is corrected. I’m going to buy a new bike in about a month; it won’t be a Harley.

Kent Miller South Gate, Calif.

After reading the article about the TZ750, I felt it was necessary to issue a protest.

I have enjoyed motorcycle racing for the past eight years and can look back to the days of BSAs, Triumphs, Nortons and even an occasional Royal Enfield.

(Continued on page 14)

In those days a spectator could cheer for the machine and rider of his choice. The passing of the English bikes narrows the field considerably. In the future, a fan will only be able to choose which Harley he wants to win.

Any advancements made in the field of racing can and often do benefit the consumer. These advancements further safety, handling, performance and aid in developing much more maintenance-free machines. With the development of the multi-cylinders came smoother, safer and more hassle-free bikes. A banning of their type is nothing more than the elimination of the trial and error system!

Such a ban also eliminates the need for Harley to improve in order to compete. They haven’t made any drastic changes in a long time. I have owned three Harleys and if they ever make one as maintenance-free as a multi, I’ll own another one, but not until.

The ban also leaves dirt oval racing to the Hog. I, for one, think it is the most narrow-minded decision ever made in the field of motorcycle racing. I would love to experience the feeling of riding such a machine as the TZ750.

In the past I have heard that HarleyDavidson has a lot of power in the AMA. At the time I didn’t believe it, but now I’m not too sure.

Wayne D. Garrison (no address)

Your article on the TZ750 Miler was a real piece of Cosell tell-it-like-it-is. I agree that the rules committee was a bit hasty or biased on the TZ750 ban. After firing a letter off to Mr. Boyce, I felt you should be commended on the article and for the magazine as a whole.

Harley, or any brand of bike, taking the checkered flag at every race will surely hurt the sport. People won’t pay to see a race when the outcome is known in advance and the fans and other drivers know that faster bikes are banned.

This same type of thing happened in another motor sport; Chrysler has had all types of restrictions placed on its engine to prevent, or attempt to prevent, Richard Petty from sweeping every race entered.

This ban by the AMA seems to be aimed at assuring AMF all the checkered flags. I personally feel that Yamaha wasn’t given a fair shake and that the new limitations aren’t fair to the manufacturers or the thousands who attend cycle racing. Track promoters are also going to feel the pain in the future. . . right in their wallets.

Charles Harris Strasburg, Va.

UNSAFE AT SPEED

I am writing this letter in response to your article on the race at Laguna Seca (“Doing The Ditto”), in the Nov. issue.

I was very disturbed with your comments on the race and the promotion of said race. When are we, as motorcyclists, going to put a stop to the injustice we are receiving from promoters? I know they are in the business to make money, but when the decisions they make cost one life, is it worth all the money they make?

In the Laguna Seca article you said promoters made a wise decision to start the Novice class in two waves per heat. This practice is unsafe and did cause the death of a human being. Can a decision that cost the life of Steve Souter be called wise? Was the time saved worth the life of Steve Souter?

And then the inexcusable action in not immediately stopping the race. The man who made the decision to replace the red flag with the second flag should never be allowed to officiate at any race, on any track. Does that sound harsh? Not as harsh as death.

(Continued on page 18)

And this is not the only instance of completely inadequate and unsafe race conditions. Another instance is the Sacramento Mile. Poor track conditions were the primary cause of a nearly fatal crash. A group of riders complained to officials about track conditions. But the promoter refused to do anything.

During the heat races Scott Brelsford crashed into the fence and had to be taken to the hospital for observation. During another semi Mike Renslow crashed into the same section of the fence and severely cut his jugular vein. Track officials did not stop the race until three laps later. It took those three laps for the ambulance to reach Mike. A fast-thinking fireman jumped the fence and stopped the bleeding. At no little danger to himself I might add. He probably saved Mike’s life.

I do not race flat track. I do race motocross. A few years back, at the Lion’s Drag Strip during night races, Dave Smith crashed and landed on a steel post used for marking the course. The steel post hit him in the throat and almost killed him. Metal posts are inexpensive. But to use them as course

markers to save money? Steel posts are killers.

Let’s look at a recent race conducted at Indian Dunes. Because the promoter did not take the time to properly mark the course or off-track hazards, Mike Green left the course, crashed in the unmarked hazardous area, and later died of a broken back plus complications.

Is the amount of money race promoters make worth the risk of a man’s death? We must insist upon safety.

One popular cycle magazine, on two separate occasions, wrote a scorching article about unsafe tracks and the incompetent handling of races by promoters. Motorcycle magazines are one way of making our views known to the public and to promoters. Racing a motorcycle is dangerous, but should not be made more so by the inconsideration of promoters.

We must demand safe, well-marked tracks. We must demand promoters who care about the safety of the rider more than the almighty dollar. Racers can and should boycott races held on unsafe tracks or under unsafe conditions. Motorcycle magazines should blast the promoter who, through unsafe conditions or actions, causes needless injuries or compounds incompetence with ignorance. The AMA, as the sanctioning body, can prevent these occurrences by refusing to sanction races on unsafe

tracks or to incompetent promoters. If we all *pull together we can eliminate hazards. How many riders must die before we take action, before promoters are made to realize safety comes first?

I would like to see this letter printed in your magazine. I am sure there are many who feel as I do about safety. I am sure CYCLE WORLD would like to see all races conducted safely. Now let’s fight for it.

Robert W. Husman APO N.Y.

Starting road racing events in different waves is common practice at AMA meets where the grid is filled with many competitors. Picture, if you will, an 80or 100-rider field charging for the first turn en masse and having someone fall in the middle of it all. The pile-up would result in pure carnage. The incident at Laguna Seca was preventable. . . if the flagmen had been paying attention and warned the oncoming wave of riders. They didn’t and we all know what ensued.-Ed.

IN GRAPHIC DETAIL

Should you decide to eventually collect “The Trials Notebook” together and publish it in magazine form, I would gladly send a couple of clams for one.

(Continued on page 22)

Picture it: bike between legs, notebook in pocket, butterflies in stomach. Approach hill. Stop. Consult trusty manual, page 7. Follow directions. Collect bike from bottom of hill. Retrieve trusty manual from bush. Consult trusty manual, page 8.

Keep it up. It’s a great feature, especially for putt-around, get-brave, fall-off, get-bruised, ego types like me.

Rick Belloff St. Charles, Mo.

OPPOSING POINT OF VIEW

I would like to reply to the letter of Rodney Davey, Seattle, Wash., in your Dec., 1975, issue of CYCLE WORLD.

Hi there Rodney!

I hope you can still read this letter. Chances are that you can since you are required to wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle in this state. You are still coming off with the old semantics trick: “I have a constitutional right to go around endangering my own life,” Bull—! Man! Where do you get this jive? You must have noticed that two riders died near here in the Cascade Mountains last summer. . .and they were riding without their helmets. So what? They both died of massive head injuries—only!

Some non-helmet-wearing accident victims are not as fortunate as those two lads; many become “vegetables.” Our society is set up to care for “human vegetables,” which sometimes are created out of non-helmet-wearing cyclists. Their freedom of choice has then caused untold anguish for the immediate family and will cost society many unnecessary “megabucks” for their life support. They are then infringing on the rights of everyone. That isn’t constitutional, either!

I speak from a position of personal experience, since I have worked around hospitals and was involved in a serious traffic accident while riding my cycle. My helmet was a Premier and the fiberglass was badly damaged, but I was working at the hospital the next day rather than lying in the hospital as a patient. I can still remember striking that car and the pavement several times with my helmet and each time feeling as though my head were wrapped in pillows.

CYCLE WORLD magazine is really fun to read and cycling is a fantastic “trip,” so don’t throw away your head since you need it to enjoy all of this. Buy a good brandname helmet of fiberglass or combination-ply construction and wear it!

Harold E. Ruark East Wenatchee, Wasl>.