Non AMA Supercross

[firstturn]

Or the first step in FIM for all and AMA for none.  What you are going to read is fine on the surface, but my mission has been and always will to see the best riders come up the ranks and move on to the highest level in Moto Cross in the USA.  The FIM isn't really interested in anything in the USA except the money revenue that the largest market in the world will do to bring in more money for THEM.  This is just a post and I am not looking for any response just to keep people in the loop.  Thank you.

The following is from the AMA...


The American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) and the Fédération Internationale de Motocyclisme (FIM) are pleased to announce the Monster Energy® AMA Supercross, an FIM World Championship. The 2008 championship, for the first time ever, will combine both the AMA sanctioned Supercross Series and the FIM sanctioned World Supercross GP programs into a single, consolidated championship and will crown one supercross champion.

The 2008 Monster Energy® AMA Supercross, an FIM World Championship Schedule:

DATE LOCATION VENUE

January 5, 2008 Anaheim, Calif. Angel Stadium

January 12, 2008 Phoenix, Ariz. Chase Field

January 19, 2008 Anaheim, Calif. Angel Stadium

January 26, 2008 San Francisco, Calif. AT&T Park

February 2, 2008 Anaheim, Calif. Angel Stadium

February 9, 2008 San Diego, Calif. Qualcomm Stadium

February 16, 2008 Houston, Texas Reliant Stadium

February 23, 2008 Atlanta, Ga. Georgia Dome

March 1, 2008 Indianapolis, Ind. RCA Dome

March 7, 2008 Daytona Beach, Fla. Daytona International Speedway

March 15, 2008 Minneapolis, Minn. Metrodome

March 29, 2008 Toronto, Canada Rogers Centre

April 5, 2008 Irving, Texas Texas Stadium

April 12, 2008 Detroit, Mich. Ford Field

April 19, 2008 St. Louis, Mo. Edward Jones Dome

April 26, 2008 Seattle, Wash. Qwest Field

May 3, 2008 Las Vegas, Nev. Sam Boyd Stadium


Since 2002, the AMA Supercross Series and the FIM World Supercross GP have run together at stadiums across the United States, with two separate titles awarded at the series finale each year in Las Vegas, Nev. Beginning in 2008, these programs will now be combined, with all of the races counting towards one single world championship.

In 2008, Monster Energy® AMA Supercross, an FIM World Championship, will include one race outside the United States when the championship returns to the Rogers Centre, in Toronto, Ont., on March 29th. The remaining 16 rounds will be conducted at stadiums across the United States. For 2009, Monster Energy® AMA Supercross, an FIM World Championship, will again include two races outside the United States.

"We are pleased to be able to work together with the FIM to create the consolidated Monster Energy® AMA Supercross, an FIM World Championship," said Rob Dingman, AMA President and CEO. "The consolidated series maintains the strong foundation and tradition of AMA Supercross and at the same time internationalizes the championship with select races at stadiums outside the United States. To make the transition as seamless as possible for the teams, riders and support staff, the championship will only include one international race in 2008, in Toronto, however, the program may include a second international race in 2009 and beyond."

FIM President Vito Ippolito stated, "I have no doubt that the Monster Energy® AMA Supercross, an FIM World Championship, will be an exciting and thrilling World Championship that will continue to grow season after season. It has all the potential to become a truly 'big sport' on the world sports scene in the years to come with rounds outside the United States. I am truly satisfied that the good cooperation between the FIM, the AMA and Live Nation has lead to the integration of supercross into a unique and exclusive World Championship. This will prove to be beneficial for all parties concerned and especially for supercross fans in the United States and all over the world."


Ron Carbaugh

[brian kirby]

Ron,

I saw this on CycleNews.com but I'm not that knowledgeable in the ways of the FIM. Could you expand on this a bit? How is this good or bad for US riders?

Brian

'72 Six Day (on loan from Ernie P.)

[TGTech]

The AMA is a National member of the FIM, like individuals are members of the AMA.

Dane

[Jack Penton]

This means that future American superstars like Bubba Stewart will have the opportunity to win world titles, something that was not available to Ricky Carmichel and Jeremy McGrath.

Jack

[tomale]

Thanks Ron, In some ways I am glad to see this but only because I think there should be more competition beween the US and the rest of the world. but I for one have never been much of a supercross fan. To me, It is neither super nor is it motocross. It is at best a side show. If it is such a good thing for our sport then why have we yet to come even close to the annual dirt bikes sales we had in the 70's I see lots of razzel dazzel but that is about all. I go to the local bikes shops and I see an amazing amout of products. but have we really done that much for our sport. Why is the supercross venue growing and the outdoor venue struggling. If supercross is a great way to introduce new people to our sport then why is out door racing struggling to stay alive. why do we have less tracks and promoters than we did when our sport was young here in the US? I believe people are tied of all the vegas glitz and want someting with substance. Why did we inbrace motocross so quickly in the first place, I believe it was because we could see that it was a sport that could be done by the average guy and yet feel good about it because inorder to do well you had to be able to overcome a tough course. you may not win but you still feel good because you did your best and you overcame. Vintage motocross still believes in these core values.. and it is why I love it so much ...I also believe that the vintage racing we do does more to introduce new people to motocross than supercross could ever do... a grass roots effort (pun intended)

Thom Green,Still crazy after all these years!
76' 250 MC5 (orginal owner)74'
250 hare scrambler (project bike)
72'sixday (project bike)

[TGTech]

Thomas,
I fully agree with you on this topic. My opinion is that Supercross is easier than motocross and as a society, we just don't have the ability to be as tough as when we were kids.

As far as Supercross being so popular compared to outdoor motocross, from the fan stand point, they can sit in a chair with a beer and a hotdog in their hand and see the whole track. They don't have to deal with rain or mud or have to walk around the track to see everything. Just like the rider side of things, the fans just don't have the durability that we did as kids.

Dane

[tofriedel]

Some good points regarding outdoor VS indoor racing.  The crux of all of this is that we do not have the outdoor venues today versus the 70's and it is due to the lack of available land for youngsters to ride on.  The hue and cry is from many individuals, who migrated from the cities to the country, is the noise and trespassing on private property.  This has resulted in many municipalities, under pressure from certain (minority) landowners, to write legislation to eliminate motorcycle riding and/or racing in many areas.

Let's not forget that the lawyers and their litigious ways have gotten involved big time in law suits due to injury, environmental issues, etc., particularly on both public and private property.  They were not much of an issue in the 70's.

Motorcycles have gotten a bad rap(some were desreved) and the majority of residents do not like them for many reasons.  This is due mostly to the one-sided coverage from the various media outlets that have their own agenda regarding MC's.

The more densely populated the area, the more problems and fewer venues to ride motorcycles.  Here in the Mid Atlantic region there are substantially fewer tracks then in the 70's and the biggest reason is due to environmentalists and legislation.  We use to have 400-500 riders per day on a race weekend and there was almost a 2 day race every weekend.  REMEMBER WHEN?

Bottom line is that it will never be like the 70's and the best we can for is to try to protect what we have now.  This means, as individuals, we have to get involved and lobby our local, state and federal politicians to protect our sport.   Many of the national organization's, AMA, etc do not do enough for the grassroot riders of America.  

This is my last ranting for 2007.

Wishing everyone in the dirt bike arena Happy New Year.

[SouthRider]

Cheers Thom for voicing my own thoughts.

Supercross is not motocross and never will be.

To illustrate the point I have had several people in the last year ask me if I have been watching the "motocross" on TV. When I questioned them about what specifically they had seen it wasn't motocross, wasn't even supercross. It was that horrible circus act of riders jumping things & doing tricks.

The TV and advertising people have now co-opted the term motocross to this new perversion on dirt bikes. It is often listed as motocross in program guides on cable & satellite.

After running my 1st grass track in over 24 years at the ISDTRR in October I wondered why I have disliked motocross so much over the years. The grasstrack was fun - the rest isn't.

Nuff said.

Happy New Year to you all.


Clark Gristina

[firstturn]

Might be worth picking up a Cycle News.........

SUPERCROSS - It's Not All Rosy
By Paul Carruthers
This Week's Edition 1/9/2008  

This week's online edition of Cycle News is now available for viewing and it features the latest on the controversy surrounding Supercross and Live Nation's plan to make the series international.

We also take a look at the FIM's plans to take its premiere class of motocross from 450s to 350s, and what the AMA manufacturers think about the plan and the impact it may have on AMA racing.

And that's not all: How about a look at the controversy regarding energy drinks in the Supercross Series and just who is looking at buying the AMA Superbike Series.

This and more in this week's edition of Cycle News, America's Weekly Motorcycle Newspaper.


Ron Carbaugh

[brian kirby]

I hope they do reduce the four stroke size, four strokes are killing amateur racing. Plus, they are getting tracks closed all over the country because they are so loud and the sound carries much farther than a two strokes sound. They ought to take a cue from MotoGP only in the other direction and just say "MX/SX is a two stroke sport" and ban four strokes.

Brian

'72 Six Day (on loan from Ernie P.)

[t20sl]

Brian:  I disagree.  I have always preferred 4 strokes from way back.  Its not 4 strokes closing the tracks its the AMA not imposing stricter noise riles.  When was the las time you heard people complaining about KLR and XR/XL noise???  $ strokes can be made quiet and all it will take is the AMA to get off their collective butts and do something. The manufacturers will then follow because they want to sell bikes.  Ted

[brian kirby]

The problem isnt the AMA, and most local tracks are not AMA anyway. People buy a 4 stroke and the FIRST thing they do before the even get he thing out the door of the dealership is put a earsplitting loud exhaust on it that you can hear 10 miles away. Now, when they go ride at their favorite track neighbors that never heard the two strokes are pissed and get the track closed. It happens every day, and Ive seen it many times personally. A two stroke isnt made louder with an aftermarket pipe, and the sound they make doesnt carry as far.

Second is cost. Four strokes cost a lot more to buy, and cost much more to maintain than a two stroke. If you blow up a two stroke it costs, maybe $500 for a top an bottom end, while I've seen four strokes cost just in the cylinder head.

Four strokes were/are killing amateur racing, which is exactly why they changed the rules to take away the displacement advantage they get in amateur racing. You can still run them, but a four stroke has to run in its true displacement size with two strokes of the same size. The AMA knew it had a problem and this is only the first step in fixing it.

I see all of this every day working at a motorcycle dealership. I beg people not to buy aftermarket exhaust until they ride the bike and see how fast it is stock, but they wont, they all get the loud systems before they even ride the bike. I also see how much they spend vs how much they used to spend on two strokes to maintain them and the difference is staggering.


Brian

'72 Six Day (on loan from Ernie P.)

[t20sl]

Here in Ohio most tracks are AMA.  Tracks that are not AMA should be.  That is one reason for the problems.  No oversight.  Riders shouldn't race if the event isn't AMA.  I am the first person to say the AMA has done a lot of stupid things but I believe they should be the only game in town.  It helps keep the scheduling down to a managable task.  The AMA can provid the oversight to keep noise down.  EVERY enduro I ride has a sound test.  Too loud, you don't ride.  Simple and it works.  Why can't that be brought over to MX?
I also work at a dealership and see what your talking about.  Which brings up a whole new point which is why the aftermarket companies are allowed to manufacture noisey, non EPA compliant systems.  As long as we are talking about pollution, the 2 strokes are behind the times as far as being a clean burning engine.  I agree the new 4 strokes are expensive to own and operate.  I also see that a lot of tracks have 4 stroke classes so the displacemnet rules aren't going to change how many guys are riding them.  Having companies try and make them more enviromentaly friendly is probably not going to happen.  In my opinion the cure is to pass rules and have the sanctioning body enforce them to make 4 strokes quieter.

[brian kirby]

Those are good points about sound Ted. I would hope that riders themselves would make their bikes quiet, but sadly most want "NASCAR" sound levels.

Two strokes emissions are not a credible issue other than from the political angle. I raced personal watercraft and we had issues with emissions from environmental lobbies. Studies were done and the total amount of emissions produced by all two strokes, outboards, leaf blowers, motorcycles, everything two strokes, for a year only equaled something like one days worth of emissions from just the LA area road vehicles. It is a political issue, but not a real environmental problem.

Also, clean two strokes can be made, Evinrude has some new two strokes, E-TECs, that are lower in emissions that their four strokes, cost half as much and are lower on maintenance. It can be done we just have to give the manufacturers a reason to build them.

Brian

'72 Six Day (on loan from Ernie P.)

[TGTech]

Brian, Ted and the rest of the POG readers,

When the modern four stroke machinery came into play, the sanctioning bodies had absolutely no idea of the performance that they would provide, and that's why the playing field was so tilted. They figured that since the four strokes only had 1/2 of the compression strokes and more weight, they figured that at least double the displacement would be OK. Well they were definitely wrong. Think about why Yamaha only made a 400cc machine to use as their exemption to race in the 250 class in AMA Pro Racing. At the time, they could have built a 550cc machine. Why do you suppose that they didn't do that?

Well I'll tell you: if they had, the sanctioning organizations, the FIM and the AMA, would absolutely not let them race with the 250 two strokes, because they would have been so much more powerful. But with the 400, it was very close to the performance of the 250's and both organizations let them in. As people began to buy them by the boat load because they were "easier" to ride, nobody really paid any attention to how their performance was increasing. After the first year, the displacement went to 426cc, and the performance got a little better. At the same time the KTM's and Husabergs in Europe were showing how powerful they were and both sanctioning organizations were seeing that things needed to be changed. At that point, that's when the 250/MX1 class limit was reduced to 450cc.

But this was already too late, because the performance of these machines were already better and more powerful than the 250's. And if that weren't bad enough, Yamaha then brought out the 250F, and it kicked the tail of the 125's right of the race tracks.

The other issues that have risen, are the cost issues which have mentioned, the noise issue which is a complete disaster, and another thing that many people don't understand: ergonomics.

The four strokes are heavier, though maybe not that much heavier, but still heavier, the center of gravity is higher, and the rotating mass is much greater due to the valve train. Because of all of this, the four strokes handle differently than the two strokes, and basically if you screw up over a jump, the front end drops like a rock and you're going to get hammered. Look at the number of professional racers who have had serious injuries, since the four strokes came out.

The noise issue is completely stupid as well. If the AMA and the FIM had done testing to compare the noise levels, the four stroke would not had the advantage that they do. But no, nobody did testing to see how noisy the four strokes are.

In 2005, I was at Loretta Lynn's standing behind the starting gate when the "125 B Modified" class was loading in the gate. I noticed a fellow with a db meter standing to my left, and I walked over to look over his shoulder when the bikes took off. If I remember rightly, the level was 122 db. The fellow who was holding the db meter, was Chris Real, and he is one of the premier sound technicians in the industry. I talked to him for a while, and asked him if a statement that I heard, was correct: every three db's doubles the sound level. At that time, AMA Pro Racing was allowing 102 db's. In the AMA Amateur rule book the sound level was 99 db's. What was wrong with that picture.

Even worse, the manufacturers were allowing the production bikes to be 102 db's. I just can't understand why that was allowed.

If the four strokes' sound level were limited to the same as the AMA Amateur rule book the playing field would have definitely been much more level. And if they'd made the bikes as quiet as the XR/XL's, then things would defintely be quieter and the two strokes would still be whipping the four strokes.

Ted, I don't want to crush your understanding of the tracks in Ohio, but I don't think that most of them are AMA. In our area, there is the CRA, and there are no AMA tracks up here. In District 12, this past year, they lost 3 of their tracks due to financial issues.

And in regards to the tracks doing testing, the problem is that unless there is some direct AMA involvement, there won't be any testing because it will chase the riders away. And the promoters need as many riders as they can get. The CRA gets way more riders at their tracks than District 12 does.

In regards to the emissions issue, the modern four stroke racing machines, do not meet the EPA's emission levels. The "off road" machinery does, but the "closed course" (motocross) machines do not. I totally agree with Brian in regards to the amount of emissions that the two strokes emit. The reason that the EPA and the regulators have pressed that side of things is because they can.

Do you know what group of vehicles in this country, emits the most gasses? The U.S. Military. Now why won't the legislators fix that?

The FIM and the AMA are trying to change the rules to try and keep people in the sport, and what they've seen, is the modern four strokes are chasing them away. If the four strokes' advantage is taken away, I'm very sure that people will look back to the simpler, lighter, quieter, and cheaper two strokes.

Dane