Generally speaking, the 2009 show ran fairly smooth.

The plotted-out spaces worked out well, as did the hang tags and the "Best in Show" voting at the banquet.

But, we did have a few questions come up which might warrant a second look at the rules for this year's show. I remember one protest, specifically, which Jamie Jennison and Greg Hanna were spearheading at the banquet (though, I'm sorry, I don't remember the details—which is largely why I am posting this topic).

Download the 2009 Show Rules, and give them a look.

Then, feel free to post up any feedback or proposals for new rules, or repeal of same.

Can't promise everything will get into the final rules, but I want to try and get the community involved to the largest extent possible.

Thanks everyone!

Best,

M

Please don't take this the wrong way, Mike. I absolutely love what you do for the members of these sites and the BMX community as a whole.

With all due respect, I'd like to point out the following facts:

Great care and detail went into hundreds of the quality and era correct early (bikes from model years 1975-1984 built in the late 1990s through 2005) builds of this hobby that many of us founded. We learned to date tires, chains, bearings, etc from our own childhood experiences and through knowledge gained in the early days of the Vintage BMX hobby. It was not out of the question to purchase a set of forks on eBay simply to carefully remove their decals, clean them, apply new adhesive and use them on the chainstay of a 1976 Squareback. Those of us that were around (heavily involved in BMX) in the 1970s and very early 1980s knew (and know) which freewheels (for example) were in use at the time, and you'll see that type of attention to detail on ALL of the early Ed Porter, Tim Cook, Ben Joy, Dan Goins, Ben Jerry, Jeff Venekamp, Richie & Jeff Haney, Ken Pliska, and Rod Miles builds.

We knew then, as most of us know now, that survivor bikes are in fact built, not simply found. It takes a well educated and creative mind to piece together all of the era correct (non-Restored, non-NOS, non-Reproduction) parts in such a way that triggers the memories of the true old school BMXer, the moment they lay eyes on one of these builds. We know by sight which generation of V-Bars go with that 1976 FMF build and that it is a completely different generation of V-bars that would go on that 1980 Proline build.

The 1975 Schwinn Stingray Scrambler that I have in the National BMX Museum in San Diego, CA came to me as a true survivor but sometime in the last 35 years, someone had replaced a flat tire (early 1975 Scramblers came with 1st generation Aggressor MX tires front and rear) with a modern day Wal Mart tire and tube. Before sending the bike off to the ABA for inclusion in that museum display, I replaced the Wal Mart tire with an era correct date coded Aggressor MX tire AND era correct tube. That act alone would have prevented that bike from being considered a "survivor" in the 2009 Rockford rules as well as the 2010 Rockford draft rules.

It does NOT take talent to "find" and "display as found" as written in both sets of the rules stated above. Even in the most perfect of circumstances, survivors "as found" that I have acquired have a few, if not many, non era correct (or even non discipline correct) parts that have to be replaced prior to displaying them at any show. A DG Super Pro can end up with GT Pro Performer Bars, a JMC Shadow can end up with Haro Tires, a 1979 Patterson can end up with Odyssey Cranks. Very rarely does a survivor end up being a Pro Star that was stashed in the attic the same month it was purchased.

At last year's Rockford event, a couple of us original Rockford founders walked through the show with our ballots and pens in hand to vote on the show's offerings. It was unbelievable how many parts on the bikes on display were just plain wrong. I will not name them by name, but there were several bikes we wanted to vote on that simply didn't deserve a vote because of the glaring mistakes on them. We ended up not voting. Hell, one of the show winner's that was on display near our table, had its cranks off by more than one notch on the 48 spline spindle.

Knowledge cannot be bought, it must be absorbed through time and experiences. I cannot count how many times I have to cringe every time I read a "what fork is this" thread and see what some very well respected members type in. I love all of you guys and believe all of you contribute greatly to the flavor of this site, but some of you are simply shooting in the dark with your responses.

If the rules that were used last year and are drafted for this year are to be followed without changes, you will see less and less emphasis on decent survivor builds and rebuilds of childhood bikes and far too much going into more of these re-plated, re-powdered, re-anodized carpet queens with re-production decals and $6,000 price tags.

True Ken hard to find a bike that has nothing changed from original.
A perfect example is my original candy red 1983/84 CW Phaze 1 I won the 1st survivor award givin for that bike, the wheelset and tires were NOS, also the original 401 cranks, Hadley and the black O'wing's were all robber before I got it back. I replaced everything with what I had on it back in the day so I guess it wasn't atrue survivor.
And as far as the people changing parts over the years I just picked up a 81 nickle Mongoose with first generation JMC 25x 9 bars, national pro forks, Hutch deep H stem, Maxy cross cranks, Tuf Neck seat clamp, Phil Wood hubs just a mix of years on this bike but it's a survivor!
I did find a Pro Star back in 2002 that was a true survivor with parts that the guy changed over some of the parts off the pro star and used on his freestyle bike.


Steve

Ken,

Thanks for writing the below post. i appreciate what you have written, and welcome more frank discussion such as this.

The draft rules you are seeing are still the 2009 rules. I am working to integrate the feedback in the comments threads after last year's event, as well as any new feedback to produce a 2010 ruleset in the next week or so.

I am on the road right now, but wanted to make sure you knew that I hear you, and am considering how to integrate this feedback into the fabric of the show.

More....please, let's have more discussion on how to make this show better....and let's do it now, while we can do something about it, rather than on June 19 at 7:45PM.

Best,

M

nice statement ken. maybe ill bring my 83 gt cruiser (true survivor).

Ken, I`m glad someone had the balls to come out and stait what you just did. It seems to me[and me only] that Rockford has come to "lets BLING this bike out as much as I can,with rare,prototype parts,so no one else can beat me" attitude.
As to the survivors,I`m working on getting this baby...as found- Race Inc. Nothing has been changed on it at all

The topic that Mike refers to that I had issue with revolved around the copper Redline being allowed in restored class.

As defined by last years rules. if a replated/restored part is in it's natural state if stripped, then the part or bike it is used on qualifies as restored. As interpreted on the Redline if the copper was removed from the parts you would have raw unfinished original parts......problem is the raw unfinished parts were never sold that way. Flights, Redline V Bars, etc. were never offered in raw finish.

Many pointed to Juan's Candy red GJS freestyler and said "then what about this". Well, under last years rules if you took off the never available candy red color, that F/F was chrome underneath and that F/F originally was offered in chrome (and happened to be a f/f set that was originally chrome).

I took interpretting last years rule to the extreme and posed this example. If I had brought a restored original bike with a leopard skin covered NOS Kashimax Aero on it, that seat would be accepted, because remove the ridiculous seat cover material and you have a Kashi Aero in it's natural state. Take it one step further. Even If i had painted that seat with chrome paint under the leopard seat cover it would still have been considered acceptable. So, Yes, the rules were a little vague, and open to alot of interpretation.

Hopefully, this year the rules will be more defined with a few more more rigid guidelines.

The rule did not address colors or plating that was never offered on said parts.

A few people asked, why I did not bring it during the show. It was because I saw the bike and just assumed it was too modified to even had been classed as original restored. I just kinda figured it was obvious that it couldn't have been placed in the restored original class.
A few others asked why I did not bring it up when winners were announced late saturday while still at the track. It was because I was kinda stupified by the fact that it was classed as it was, and also because I didn't feel it was proper to address it with Mike at such an informal, public, and somewhat chaotic time.

I addressed it with Mike at the banquet, and was hoping for some form of corrective action. But I was not expecting it. I hope that I was respectful and provoked some further thought (at a later date) from Mike.

You guys were nothing but respectful, Greg...and I empathized with your well-argued case. And the discussion DID provoke further thought on the subject. We'll make the necessary clarifications in this years rules (which are not yet released, by the way).

A couple more thoughts on Ken's post:

The motivation behind the "survivor" class was not necessarily to micro-analyze the entry in the way Ken described—yet I understand the need/desire to do that. It is, afterall, a show, with voting and a winner. Basically, I thought it would be cool to see guys bring out bikes they found, and see what kind of cool stuff turned up.

One thing I have considered, to Ken's point, is making two "classes" of awards, under which there would be multiple categories.

The "Judged" Class, which would be scored by a panel of three or five judges who could not enter bikes of their own. These guys would be looking at bikes entered in these classes with the critical eye described in Ken's post (down to era correct tubes and valve caps, if they so choose). In this class, there would be fewer categories...perhaps Pre 1980 Race, 1980-1990 Race, Pre 1990 Freestyle and Pre 1990 Cruiser. I would let the judges actually decide what the final categories should be.

and, also,

The "People's Choice" Class. This would be the class that we have seen in previous years. Categories within the People's Choice class would probably look similar to the ones we had last year (I think we had too many classes last year, so might be taking a look at some of those). People could be as critical or as liberal as they want to be when completing their own ballot, as it is a people's choice vote. But we make sure the show is relevant to the "purist" by way of the judged class.

Maybe, by doing it that way, we could have it both ways...the guys who are super hardcore can compete with each other, using rules that are created by their own kind, and judged by people who are "take no prisoners" types and have the kind of encyclopedic knowledge to know that Schwinn tubes never came with black threads on the valve stems, pre 1980, or whatever.

...and those who just want to show off the cool builds they have done this year, can do so under a little less scrutiny, voted on by people who may not, in fact, know date codes on Aggressors, but know a ride that touches their "happy" button on sentimental grounds, and thus, they are voting for it.

A bike could be entered in both the Judged and Peoples Choice classes in the category best corresponding to their entry.

I'd be curious how the community feels about that concept. If people like it, we'd go to the next level: finding three or five people who could fit the bill to do the judging.

Best,

M

A Judged class would be good so long as the judges can remain 100% un-biased. IMO the best way to make this happen would be for no one to know who the judges are and not allow anyone in the competion to have any contact with them in any way what so ever (auto DQ for it). Maybe even have each bike entered in the Judged classes to be brought to a controled Judging area as many of the big time car shows are done. I don't think anyone would be too surprised by the differances in the bikes that would win or even be competive in a class judged on techincal correctness vs the popularity/bling contest that mass voting has become IMO.

I vote for 5 judges agreed upon and appointed by the Moderators and Admins

I agree that if a judge panel is appointed it should be someone neutral whitin the industry of BMX choosen by V-bmx staff out of a group of folks who apply to do it. there is alot of guys out there in vintage land that would rather dig down into the persons reason for the build ( childhood bike, etc etc ) correction of parts the list can go on and on. Rockford has always been looked at from my eyes as The SuperBowl of a show and only the best of builds are taking home the prize. If the classes are going to be less and the voting more detailed then maybe the show needs a bit more reward for the winners? I love the plaques and or other awards given and would love to have one next to my builds as that is good enough for me, But for instance if i make sure i have everything period correct down to the dated diacompe brake cable that could fetch a pretty penny to aquire could even bring a nice survivor build to a high price. Just my two cents if they make and cents at all LOL