Letters

LETTERS

THE TZ RETURNS. . . BUT NOT TO THE TRACK

I congratulate you for the fine work you produce, although I do not always agree. The many letters in the April issue on the TZ750 AMA ban seem to support your position, but it seems to me it is a case of Yamaha or H-D domination of the dirt tracks. Yamaha certainly is dominant on the road circuit, particularly with the other factories giving up. I was in on the cycling scene from 1945 to 1950 and enjoyed much fine racing under the old class C rules. Perhaps a return to strict class C, with a handicap on displacement of two-strokes would revive small-buck racing. I attended many good races that had no big-time entries; racing was competitive and fun. It is still competitive, but I’ll bet it is not much fun for the riders. It would be interesting to see Honda and Yamaha 500 Twins racing, as I still think a 500 is a good all-around bike at a reasonable price. And what is more fun for spectators to see than their bike racing?

Herbert L. Voorhees Levittown, Pa.

I feel that your publication of five letters in the April, 1976, issue about the American Motorcycle Association ban on multi-cylinders in general, and the TZ750 in particular, calls for a response. First, some background. As the Class A Board of Trustees Member of the AMA from the eastern region of the United States, I do not consider myself an expert on all forms of motorcycle activity. However, readers of this letter should be aware that I am also not an apologist for the AMA, but my one vote on the Board of Trustees is the same as the one vote of John Harley, believe it or not.

The decision to allow or not to allow certain kinds of equipment to race is subject at once to both a very simple and a very complex set of formulas. The decision is made by the Professional Rules Committee, consisting of one representative from every manufacturer or importer of a brand of motorcycle used in sanctioned competition, plus a road race promoter, a dirt track promoter, and a motocross promoter, all three having been elected by their own fellow promoters. Money at work. Add six pro. racers, a pro hillclimber, two elected pro referees, plus one AMA staff member.

This totals to 23 people, any of whom may place an item on the meeting agenda. Then it is assigned to a subcommittee for study; if it passes through that subcommittee, it is brought to a vote on the floor. If passed by vote on the floor, it is recommended to the Board of Trustees for ratification, amendment or overrule.

The multi-cylinder ruling eliminates from pro dirt track competition in 1976 the following units: Yamaha TZ750, Kawasaki and Suzuki Triples, fourstroke Triumph and BSA Triples, and the four-cylinder Honda 750 or any 750 with more than two cylinders.

The Multi ban was proposed initially not only by an AMA staff delegate to the Pro Rules Committee, but by a rider delegate, as well. After the process detailed in the preceding paragraph, it was adopted. The damn bikes are too fast for the tracks they have to run on, and even the riders say so. If anyone wants the rule changed, they are welcome to use the system as it exists. To think that this rule was proposed for or designed by Harley-Davidson Motor Co., John Harley or AMF to help them is just plain not true. We don’t work that way. . .not then, not now, and not in the future.

One of your letter writers said that he intended to keep his AMA race attendance money in his pocket. That really is unfortunate, because he will miss the classiest road races, dirt track races and Expert rider performances in the world by not showing up at Laguna Seca, Terre Haute or other Camel Pro Series points events around the country.

No less a personage than Kenny Roberts has said that the TZ750 is the very devil to ride and hard as hell to handle. Harley-Davidson won the Manufacturers Trophy this year because it won the most dirt track events. No doubt Yamaha would win it next year if more promoters sanctioned road races. Harley does not have a competitive road racer. However, promoters aren’t going to lay out their money if they can’t make a profit. How about it race fans, want more road races?; call up your local promoter. I really don’t want this to be a Harley commercial, but since motocross is the fastest going segment of motorcycle competition in the country, Harley-Davidson is spending large amounts of money to develop a competitive motocrosser. I saw them race in Daytona; they didn’t win there either.

What must be realized is that the AMA is not now and probably never will be all things to all people, be they racer, manufacturer, oil company, woods rider, accessory distributor, street biker, or whoever. We do the best with what we have to work with, and that is 140,000 members, 55 dedicated and hard-working staff employees in Ohio, 80 concerned Competition Congressmen and -women, and hundreds of unpaid volunteers throughout the country who work at races as flagmen, cornermen, tech inspectors, starters and referees. I guess we all see something in our Association that some of your writers don’t see. Our rules work most of the time for most of the people they concern. That’s good enough for me.

(Continued on page 14)

Continued from page 10

Mark B. Rosen Eastern Region Class A Trustee, AMA

We appreciate your standing up for the AMA ruling system, but the fact remains that the Pro Rules Committee is made up of people with many varied interests. For that reason there are unqualified people making decisions in areas that they shouldn’t be getting into, i.e., motocrossers deciding class “C” rules and vice versa. Because of this, the system is about to be revised. And by the way, Mark, if you were paying more attention to what’s happening outside of all those meetings, you’d know that Yamaha, not H-D, won the Manufacturer’s Trophy in 1975.Ed.

I think it is high time someone filed a complaint about the American Motorcycle Association’s rude letter-answering habits. I recently wrote a rather extensive three-page letter dealing with, among other things, the ban on multicylinder motors in pro dirt track. I was inspired to this by your excellent article on the TZ750 Miler.

My letter was answered by a photocopy of what is probably a dictated standard answer designed to pass the buck to someone else. I realize that there must have been an avalanche of mail in support of allowing the TZ, and that not all of it could be answered personally, but I had included some other rather important questions effecting me, a Novice 360 short track rider in district 36. These were not even dealt with in the AMA’s reply.

It appears that my correspondence was either round-filed or generally categorized by some mail sorter who in his rush did not even bother to thoroughly read it. If you don’t write to the AMA once in a while, they flood you with flyers telling you to support them and take an active part in your organization. If you do write, it’s too much hassle for them to send a decent answer.

Although I’ve been a member of this organization for 19 of my 24 years, I can no longer be very proud of this fact.

(Continued on page 18)

Continued from page 14

Can anyone be proud of a supposedly impartial sanctioning body that so openly displays favoritism toward a single machine manufacturer? Now that I have experience with their methods of dealing with honest concern, I am even more skeptical of their ethics.

Michael K. Galbraith Daly City, Calif.

After reading your April, 1 976, issue, I was immediately overcome by the shortsightedness of a professional motorcycle journalist. While I concede that the ban of the TZ750 Miler was unfair when viewed from certain aspects, 1 can also understand the feelings of the AMA: the feelings toward a company that has dominated road racing to such a degree that its only real competition has determined that contesting road races is no longer profitable.

You made the statement that the possibility of the TZ dominating dirt track was a bunch of crap. How long ago would we have to go back to find a time when a four-cylinder two-stroke capable of 170-mph speeds was a bunch of crap? I have to point out that a little further on you stated that nobody knows how they will work. Therefore you cannot say they will not dominate dirt track. Certainly the engine has the potential. That has been proven time and again on the road racing circuit beyond a shadow of a doubt. If Yamaha proper became involved, certainly the suspension problems would disappear. After all, if the solution did not already exist, the Monoshock people could invent something. And consider this: if all that power gets to the ground, the H-D dirt track racing you so greatly fear becomes Yamaha dirt track racing.

Now, to come to my major reason for writing. If, indeed, you are so concerned with competition in AMA racing, why haven’t you turned to road racing. That is a domination, pure and simple. Now it is a monopoly with the loss of the factory efforts of Kawasaki and Suzuki. What of this? Admittedly the TZ is a triumph of engineering, a road racing marvel, but I submit that it is not a marvel but rather a curse on AMA road racing. Choose any road race in the last couple of years and you already know what you will find—99-percent Yamaha domination. Perhaps Yamaha said it best in an advertisement a few years back. . .maybe they should call it Yamaha Beach, Florida. That’s the truth, incredible arrogance, and a damn shame.

By the way, Triumph’s Twins were competitive. If Yamaha cares to try, theirs can also be.

Bufford D. Moore LaPorte, Texas

THE DISAGREEMENT GOES ON

I am one of those procrastinators who often intend to write a letter to a magazine. . .whether to protest, compliment or give helpful advice—but just never get around to it. Well, witness ye the awakening of one such individual. It took quite a controversial subject to awaken me, I’m ashamed to say. The subject is helmets.

I am pro-helmet. I do not intend to change the anti-helmeteers, but maybe help shed a little light for those who are unsure.

One argument against helmets is that you cannot hear traffic or sirens with one on. Well, I find that with the wind roar at speeds sometimes as low as 35 mph, I couldn’t hear the car next to me explode.

Another argument is their restrictions of sight. I’ve seen more bull at a vegetarians’ banquet. I wear a full coverage helmet, and know exactly what is around me at ALL times.

The philosophy some have that one shouldn’t guard against accidents, but should not get into dangerous situations to begin with, is patently absurd. To assume you are not going to get into an accident is asking for one. Every time I get on a bike, or in a car, I count on some (in your words) “quadraphonically deafened cigar-puffing lardo to stuff his gas-sucking smogmobile into the lane I am occupying.”

I (here comes the personal experience) have had three accidents in my years of riding. The only way they were anywhere near my fault is that I should have been that little bit more ready, but wasn’t. Twice I distinctly remember feeling my head bounce along the pavement, and once off a car, and being thankful to no end that I happened to be wearing a helmet.

There is one disadvantage to wearing a helmet, I must admit, and I feel it is my duty as a pro-helmeteer to inform others about it. This is the false sense of security that helmets give you. One tends to go a little faster, take corners a little sharper, and cut in front of that truck a little more readily with a helmet on. If you can deal with this, I see no reason not to wear a helmet.

In my observations, I find that most of the riders not wearing helmets are doing so for reasons of vanity, and that all other “reasons” are only excuses. Do a little soul-searching. Make your own decision, whether it be for or against wearing a helmet. Remember, “To thine own self be true.”

Ron Dziobecki Long Beach, Calif.

I’m a psychiatrist with a ’72 Kawasaki 750-based cafe racer, a Honda 1000 and my favorite, a ’74 Norton 850. Please allow me some psychological observations on helmets. . .or “Zen apd the Art of Street Riding.”

First of all, there is the reduced sensory input of tactile, auditory, visual and vibratory information. Many helmeted riders will not be conscious of this perceptual “distancing” from the road, but, taken in combination with the subjective conviction of protection through armor, it may subtly lead to increased risk taking. The almost universal conviction that “safety” helmets offer highly significant protection may not be objectively based; see Ed Armstrong’s analysis of the Snell test in the February issue.

Thus the bare-headed rider may be more perceptually alert and more cautious. Perhaps of more importance, he presents a more human and less armored appearance. Many “accidents” are not accidents at all, but frustration or alcohol-triggered attacks. I am convinced that many car drivers have flashes (consciously or not) along these lines: “He’s got a helmet on so it won’t kill him if I crowd him.” To those really out to get you, a bare head signals murder. Enlightened paranoia is required to survive as a street rider!

It is more difficult in a helmet to make direct eye contact with that perceptually isolated driver sitting in his armored box, a mobile living room complete with central air, sound system and reclining cushions. No cyclist should take intersection stop signs for granted, for example, but should always slow for eye contact. “I just didn’t see him” appears on all those accident reports.

To be armored is to invite attack. Americans in particular seem blind to this subtle and paradoxical fact; just consider our “defense” establishment or compare the “Tac Squad” cop to the unarmed London Bobby. Motorcyclists are now being forced by helmet laws to join the Great Demolition Derby of the American road.

The European tradition of motoring as sport reached its highest development in the late, lamented British sports car and motorcycle. My young sons will never know my old pleasures with a MG-TC or Lotus Elan or the flowing and total involvement with the road astride a Triumph Bonneville. My Honda Gold Wing has its engineering virtues, but after 10,000 miles I am still reaching for a parking brake, since it feels so dully automotive. The auto industry not only has ecologically plundered our planet, but has destroyed this aristocratic sport in getting everybody on four wheels. No matter if the dimwits were incapable of shifting or steering. . .the Detroit profiteers took care of that with Hydramatic tanks incapable of evasive handling. Corporate Japan now follows; having knocked off the English bike, it is busy getting everybody on two wheels with commuter bikes and now automatic transmissions and braking systems, etc., etc. Enough of these downers. . .

(Continued on page 22)

Continued from page 19

“All you have to do is stay fully awake and quit conceptualizing,” instructs a Zen Master of the 9th Century. To still the ego’s inner dialogue (“roofbrain chatter”) is the goal of all the meditative disciplines. As is now being realized, high-risk sports are a form of yoga through meditation in action. Street riding can fulfill the Zen conditions, since awake vigilance and suspension of the inner verbal dialogue are required to survive. Rather than being “suicidal,” such activity may lead to the mystic flash and intensification of life through a conscious focus on death. Current motor car design and even “safety” helmets are dangerous to the extent that they promote illusions that we are not confronting death on the road.

Thanks for the pulpit.

J. Shelton, M.D. Program Chief, Shasta County Mental Health Services Redding, Calif.

HUBBUB

Thank you very much for your kind coverage of the safety hub in the May ’76 “Round Up.” I have found the device to be a worthwhile addition and would like everyone to benefit.

Joe Bolger, with his usual modesty, evidently omitted telling you of his part in the development of the safety hub. The truth is, my contribution was but about five minutes of semi-coherent thought. Joe Bolger and John Richards contributed many hours of hard work and totally coherent thought to the development of the prototype. The first one worked and is still working, which must be a record as prototypes go. I know that John Richards spent many sleepless nights working on the project, and I feel that his and Mr. Bolger’s contribution should not go unrecognized.

The financial backer and my sponsor, Kodiak Enterprises of Torrington, Conn., also deserves a word for its interest in the sport of motorcycling.

Again, thank you for printing my name, but without my friends I would still just be thinking. So please print my thanks to them and this expression of my appreciation.

Joseph Zeigler Marlborough, Mass.

ANOTHER MOTHER FOR MOTOCROSS

I read with great interest your editorial regarding the development and future of high school motocross. My two sons started racing last summer upon the announcement of their father and themselves that they were going to “race motorcycles.” The boys had owned bikes since the ages of nine and 11, and I was as afraid of them five years later as I had been the day they had been bought.

To make a long story short, I went to the track and became addicted to the smell of gasoline and oil mixture. I thought, “Why not have motocross just for high school riders?” and began to inquire as to how to start such an organization. I soon learned that California was the pioneer in such activity and that nothing of note had been executed on the East Coast. So, I started in my school jurisdiction, overcame opposition and got the support of kids within a 100-mile radius. They brought their parents and friends to the first of our meets at Hagerstown, Md., in March.

What a success! We have paid expenses, have leased a track for our second meet, bought insurance, purchased respectable trophies, and have more than 100 rider memberships to the club we named The Scholastic Motocross Club.

My dreams include owning our own track, recognition as a high school letter sport, and free admission to the track for riders.

Please pass these encouraging remarks along to your readers and let me know if I can assist. These young men and women need us, so let’s not let them down.

Dr. Elizabeth H. Moores Thomas A. Edison High School 5801 Franconia Road Alexandria, Va.