I've seen and read many comments about the Superbike Classic TT results but everyone needs to be aware of the Senior Classic result which has been allowed to stand. This is my email that I sent to Gary on the 5th Sept. I will post his reply once you have had chance to read and comment.

Dear Gary,
 
I have taken some time to reflect before writing to you and hope that what follows is moderate and accurate !
 
On Saturday 27th the Senior Classic TT race result was declared by you, with the winner being John McGuiness, Dean Harrison 2nd and Maria Costello 3rd. This was declared a result despite the fact that during post race examination, the machines ridden by John McGuiness and Dean Harrison were subject to a technical infringement and found to have illegal oversize petrol tanks !
 
At this point I would like to quote the appropriate regulation found on page 21 of the supplementary regulations 2016, approved by the ACU.
 
Lightweight / Junior / Senior Classic TT Classes
Each machine must have only one fuel tank with a capacity not exceeding 24 litres.
 
My understanding of this regulation is that it was originally introduced as a matter of safety, as before this, any tank size could be fitted and this was deemed unsafe. Disregarding this regulation is in effect disregarding safety ! A second point being that fitting a bigger tank size will give a rider an advantage and allow more options for pit stops or indeed in some circumstances may allow a machine not to pit at all.
 
I also understand that an additional regulation was used as the reason for not disqualifying the the first two machines and I quote from page 56 Appendix B, Additional Classic TT Technical Regulations. Again this regulation has been approved by the ACU. I will call this regulation A.
 
The organisers retain the ability to accept an entry for a machine that is not compliant with these regulations if in their view it will enhance the spectacle of the racing without giving a competitor an unfair advantage. Such requests must be made in writing prior to the closing date for entries and will be accepted or rejected on a case by case basis.
 
The quote 'without giving a competitor an unfair advantage' is the reason that this regulation cannot be upheld. Why fit an oversize tank ?
 
Then on Monday 29th we had the Superbike Classic TT and again some of the machines were found to have technical infringements at the post race examination, but this time they were disqualified !
 
It is blatently apparent that if you race with an oversize tank or oversize engine you are cheating, but why is one race different from the other ? Why is it one rule for some and a different rule for the rest of us ?
 
I have recently read a statement from one of the disqualified teams from Monday's race who thought they were covered by regulation A, when they ran an oversize engine, unbelievable !
 
These events have brought the Classic TT into disrepute and I have to say have not reflected well on you the Clerk of the Course. I have now decided that after 40 years of Motorcycle racing I cannot continue to be part of an event or sport that condones out and out cheating and sadly have announced my retirement. There is also strong support and agreement with many other classic racers that I spoke to, in the paddock, who will not consider entering this event next year unless changes are made.
 
I would appeal that regulation A is removed from future events, this will remove any ambiguity and riders can enter and race knowing that the technical regulations apply to all without exception.
 
I intend to send the above to the media but would welcome your comments before I do so.
 
Best Regards
 
Allan Brew

Brilliant Alan!! You've encapsulated my own thoughts completely. I too was a regular Classic Manx and Classic TT competitor until an 'incident' at the 26th Milestone during the 2014 Senior Classic TT. I held the races in the highest regard, I did have 'issues' with the Classic TT format but accepted the commercial realities associated with keeping this incredible event viable.

However, if the fuel tanks of the first two finishers were oversized then exclusion was the only option at the time and still is now. In my opinion there's no such thing as legal cheating regardless of the Classic TT regulation's weasel words. Cheating is Cheating!!!!

If any of the named riders did 1 and 3 for fuel/pit then that gives you 2 flying laps as opposed to 1 if you stop after 2 laps - surely that's an advantage ?.

Congratulations Allan, I wholeheartedly endorse your sentiments

I would be interested to see the reply in due course Allan.

Alfie, I used to think the same about flying laps, and the perceived benefits of doing 1 + 3, or 3 + 1 laps, as apposed to 2 + 2 laps, but many years ago someone far better at maths than me pointed out that although it will give you one better individual lap time, it won't actually affect your overall race time, as you have to stop for a pit stop anyway, and wherever that stop falls within your overall race you will still have to slow down, stop, and speed up again, and will lose the same amount of time.

At the time I disagreed, until it was broken down and explained to me several times.

But aside from that, there is of course still an advantage to be gained by having a larger tank, as doing a splash and dash either on lap 1 or lap 3, will enable you to take on less fuel so your stop will be quicker, And it would obviously be a big advantage if you went non stop.

I fully agree that the tank rule should be enforced across the board.

Very well put Allan,
I think you have hit the nail on the head,
As the CoC has had to sign the regs off, i would imagine ?
Has he been influenced by external sources, to make the rules up as they go along,

Look forward to his replie,
Personally, i think he has done a cracking job, since he took it over, but is the Manx Mafia getting to him ?

@Warrior - thanks for that, I'm still not sure - I can see your point about the pit time having to be taken at some point while I still see that stopping on the first lap gives me 2 flying laps as opposed to one, I think it was Bob Jackson who had a big 3 lap tank on his bike way back in the TT Senior and it seemed to move him further up the positions compared to where his 2 pit race speed would have normally put him, I ran a 7 gallon tank(1 and 3 laps) on my TZ way back in 92 and I beat a few mates who normally I'd be finishing behind, back in those hazy days the TT F1 race had a limit but I don't think the Senior TT had a 24 litre limit neither did the MGP. 7 gallons on the TZ did make the bike noticeably "quicker" into Quarterbridge after pitting as I recall - whooooa hoss haha.

Does anybody know how much over the 24 litre the tanks in question were ?.

This, and I have to say, is the very honest reply that I received from Gary.

Thanks for the email regarding the tank size of the first two machines in the Senior Classic TT Race.
 
You might be aware that dispensation is granted on a case by case basis, this happens at the Classic TT and also the TT (the Norton machine and Suter machine refers).  In respect of the race winning Paton machine, a request for dispensation was received because of a manufacturing error which would have proved costly for the Team to put right before the event.  As John McGuinness was still required to make a pit stop, and the size discrepancy was so small, I don’t believe significant advantage was gained and I also do not believe the race result would have been any different looking at the result and the times of those that finished.

So, the regulation that covers this is the one I have previously quoted and it is being used as a cover for teams to cheat and you cannot say anything other than that.

So if they already knew the tank was oversize why did they bother to check it after the race? Also no mention of second machine as to whether that had dispensation.

(11-09-2016, 11:13 AM)Allan  Brew Wrote: This, and I have to say, is the very honest reply that I received from Gary.

Thanks for the email regarding the tank size of the first two machines in the Senior Classic TT Race.
 
You might be aware that dispensation is granted on a case by case basis, this happens at the Classic TT and also the TT (the Norton machine and Suter machine refers).  In respect of the race winning Paton machine, a request for dispensation was received because of a manufacturing error which would have proved costly for the Team to put right before the event.  As John McGuinness was still required to make a pit stop, and the size discrepancy was so small, I don’t believe significant advantage was gained and I also do not believe the race result would have been any different looking at the result and the times of those that finished.

So, the regulation that covers this is the one I have previously quoted and it is being used as a cover for teams to cheat and you cannot say anything other than that.

Well said Allan. I must say that I agree with all you have said. 
To me these actions have brought our sport into DISREPUTE and Gary's reply only condones cheating.
Allegedly the Technical Officers did not know of any request for dispensation on the tank sizes of these machines, they would not have measured them if they had!!!!
Surely, the Paton team have used this machine for a few years now, so has the tank always been a big one, or was it a special for this event?
There were certainly a lot of disgruntled riders in the paddock after the events surrounding Senior Classic TT and the Classic Superbike races and results!!!

I have to agree with all stated here and well done Alan in your calm and calculated account of your grievance.

Does anyone know just what difference the fuel capacity of the irregular tank was against the normal one?

It is also amazing that the two teams involved in this regulations conflict are probably the two teams with a very big bank balance to afford the correct size tank. I can just imagine what would have been said to a competitor further down the field if he/she had used/asked to use a similar tank.

I would also ad that I think Gary T is a great CoC, a big improvement on the last few. His input from what I hear and know from a marshalling point of view is brilliant. Dare we believe that race politics have played a part in this?

Whatever the outcome of this, IT IS SIMPLY CHEATING; why else would you use a bigger tank unless there was something to gain? It also makes you wonder what other little infringements to the regulations will be deemed ok in the future.

DF

I think it's now clear that cheating in the Classic TT's is acceptable (to some) if you're also a TT rider.

Oversized fuel tanks allow the machine can be ridden much harder plus the machine won't run out of fuel (which many have). In my opinion those are hugely significant advantages.

The real pity of all this for me is that Team Winfield's and Black Eagle Racing's efforts have tarnished what should have been a great event and it's seemingly all been underwritten by the ACU. Incredible!!

However it was an epic ride from the true winner of the 2016 Senior Classic TT, Maria Costello and great second and third places for Jamie Coward and Alan Oversby!!

As a postscript I'm a big fan of both John McGuinness and Dean Harrison and I really admire Gary Thompson which for me makes these sorry events all the sadder.

Guys - how can this be cheating? Dispensation was given for both the Paton and MV to run an oversized tank. The definition or meaning of 'Dispensation' is as follows: 'exemption from a rule or usual requirement'.

Both Teams are aware that for next year they need to run with a 24 litre tank as per the regulations. In the same way as we do at the TT, we give dispensation to allow Teams to run. As per my response which Allan posted above, at the TT this year we allowed the Norton (ran since 2012), the Suter and Bruce Anstey to run the Honda RC213V-S. Everyone wanted to see the RCV, but no doubt had Bruce won then I would bet my mortgage there would have been a thread on here saying that either or both Bruce and Padgett's were cheating.

Had we not allowed dispensation and John McGuinness and Dean Harrison had not participated I can only imagine again what the thread would have been - something like 'the Organisers could have given dispensation for McGuinness and Harrison to run, they have in the past'.

From where I am sat, the phrase 'You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't' fits quite nicely...............

'The organisers retain the ability to accept an entry for a machine that is not compliant with these regulations if in their view it will enhance the spectacle of the racing without giving a competitor an unfair advantage. Such requests must be made in writing prior to the closing date for entries and will be accepted or rejected on a case by case basis.'

Above, once again, is the Classic TT regulation's controversial caveat which clearly states 'without giving a competitor an unfair advantage'. Equally clearly the competitors who finished first and second in the 2016 Senior Classic TT did enjoy 'an unfair advantage' in the form of oversized fuel tanks. Another term for taking unfair advantage in the English language is cheating!! This is sad, but true.

All credit for engaging Gary, it's still not too late to 'right the wrong'.

Firstly, I agree wholeheartedly with the measured comments of Allan Brew. His succinct arguments leave no room for any excuses by the powers that be.
 
I was there and competing when all this was happening. Bikes held in the park ferme for hours, most unusual. Then the story started to emerge. The majority (probably all) of the front line officials were embarrassed to be put in a situation where cheating was condoned. Apparently Black Eagle Racing were willing to be excluded from the results but only if Team Winfield were too. Draw your own conclusions.
 
Like others, I was impressed with the slick and efficient running of the event by the CoC and had thoroughly enjoyed the experience of the meeting up to word leaking out about oversize tanks. There were no ifs and buts, they were oversize. Ergo, Maria Costello was the race winner, and well deserved too.
 
For the CoC to publish a statement in an effort to justify his decision is unfortunate. After three failed attempts to win the race on the Paton what, please, was the “manufacturing error” that would have “proved costly” for Team Winfield to put right? And can we other competitors who abided by the ACU rules see a facsimile copy of the letter requesting special dispensation? And, perhaps, also a copy of the reply? Why wasn’t this special dispensation knowledge made known to other competitors so that they would know what they were up against? Give them a chance to withdraw their entries and save a lot of money and hard work.
 
Paddock talk during practice week indicated that, ridden hard, the Team Winfield Paton was using more than eight litres of fuel per lap. The large Paton tank is said to hold 24 litres (as per the regs) which is ample for two laps but, significantly, not three at the alleged rate of use.
 
A very sad and miserable end to what should be a fine Classic Festival. Stand up and be counted you guys; it’s a sporting event that calls for a sporting spirit.

I wonder how big the tank was on John McGuiness's Paton? Must have been some size as he managed 3 laps before he had to stop! Wonder how much fuel he would have needed to do 2 laps?

Hope the prohibitive cost that the team faced prior to this years event does not exclude them from 2017.

Maybe in future years the organisers could post who has been given dispensation so that we all know who has been experiencing difficulties.

Can't wait foe 2017.

What a sad reflection this has cast over the Senior race. It was a good race and in my opinion fair enough.The coc in my mind does  a top class job and has safety of the riders first at all times. His decisions are allways spot on. Team Winfield support and put top riders on the bikes and a good show is given to the public,also by the MV squad. There,s no question that from now on,all will be fair and the rules adhered to,lessons have been learned all round. Maybe history should have repeated itself,the tanks filled with ping pong test tickles to the correct capacity,and a circular mesh tube inserted through the filler cap to stop the test tickles interfering with the nozzle during refuelling. Cost maybe a fiver,would have stopped all the backlash. Although I do feel that too much is made of the star riders and top teams,a walk along the tented village at the top of paddock shows where the priority lies, but rules are rules and should be adhered to. I hope all sorts itself out for the sake of the races,and the genuine racers.

On a lighter note,i feel cheeted after standing in the row,(I cant spell quew) for scrutineering,and a couple of top teams walk straight to the front,but we were just in the Manx and unknown having spent a small fortune just being there. Cant please everybody I suppose.

To paraphrase George Orwell: All TT and Classic TT teams and competitors are equal but some are more equal than others!!!!

Heh heh,right enough. Best outcome of the week was that all riders came home safe and sound,some a little bent maybe,but repairable and on the mend. It was a decent show all round.