customhouseregular Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 From the recesses of my memory I recall the finish line at Wimbledon being forward of the start line, resulting in each race being 4 laps+a few extra yards. I can't recall this being the case at any other track I visited or read about. Does anyone know whether this system was/is used anywhere else? Does/did it fall foul of any FIM regulations?. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iris123 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 I thought it was done to come within FIM standards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryW Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 The current Edinburgh track is like this although the difference between start line and finish line is much smaller than the old Wimbledon track had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted February 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 There are/were smaller tracks so it can't have been the 4 lap race distance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iris123 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 (edited) There are/were smaller tracks so it can't have been the 4 lap race distance. Why not?Sure you can have smaller tracks,but they didn't host FIM meetings.Dohren is one.But I think back then to host FIM meeting you had to have a certain length.Think you also had to have a certain width,as I recall some story of a promoter tricking the FIM inspectors Edited February 16, 2015 by iris123 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted February 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Maybe Iris but Wimbledon used the system for all meetings, not just FIM sanctioned. I don't remember a smaller track back then hosting FIM events so I can't comment. Thanks for your input by the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iris123 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 (edited) It's probably nothing to do with the FIM,but it would be a bit strange to have two different lengths with two different track records,seeing as they regularly held FIM meetings.Although there was most likely a track or two that did have such things happening.And I think this only came about at Plough Lane after the track was altered,due maybe to the Stock Cars..... Edited February 16, 2015 by iris123 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted February 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 On the question of track records, as an aside, how does Wimbledon's record from the late 60's compare with a similar sized track today?. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 New Cross held FIM sanctioned events and was only 278 yards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadster Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 My understanding was then when they changed the track it was felt that the run to the first turn would be too short so they moved the start line back. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salty Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 (edited) Maybe Iris but Wimbledon used the system for all meetings, not just FIM sanctioned. I don't remember a smaller track back then hosting FIM events so I can't comment. Thanks for your input by the way. Actually I don't think they did use the separate finish for FIM meetings. I was there for a WTC qualifier in the early 80's and pretty sure they just raced over the 4 laps. Edit: Just checked the programme and the times in a few races were within the track record so that suggests the "second" finishing post wasn't used. Track record wasn't altered in future programmes. Edited February 16, 2015 by salty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted February 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Thanks for your replies folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iris123 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 (edited) Actually I don't think they did use the separate finish for FIM meetings. I was there for a WTC qualifier in the early 80's and pretty sure they just raced over the 4 laps. Edit: Just checked the programme and the times in a few races were within the track record so that suggests the "second" finishing post wasn't used. Track record wasn't altered in future programmes. But in the 70s the Internationale for instance was an FIM meeting with an attending FIM official and an FIM trophy and they raced over the 1234 yards and the race times were the same as most weeks and in 73 in a run-off between Olsen + Michanek the track record was broken.Nt that it proves much.Rules change from time to time.A couple of years back the FIM changed the rule on how big a Longtrack had to be,so they could include a big speedway track....... Chadster is probably right though and I do seem to recall there was a thread or this topic came up within a thread a while back Edited February 17, 2015 by iris123 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadster Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 I was a regular at Wimbledon from the late 70s and never saw them race from different start lines or to different finish lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsbottom Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Sittingbourne (Iwade) also has a finishing line past the starting gate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveallan81 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 The 1983 WTC qualifier saw the meeting start and finish at the tapes with no extension. Rob McCaffrey says in commentary that he believed that the extra bit of track was to conform with the FIM minimum track length but points out that 4 laps around Plough Lane is 1234yds, which equals the FIM minimum length. The referee's box was shifted in line with the tapes. I'm sure there was a FIM stipulation that the start/finish line had to be one and the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityrebel Posted February 18, 2015 Report Share Posted February 18, 2015 The 1983 WTC qualifier saw the meeting start and finish at the tapes with no extension. Rob McCaffrey says in commentary that he believed that the extra bit of track was to conform with the FIM minimum track length but points out that 4 laps around Plough Lane is 1234yds, which equals the FIM minimum length. The referee's box was shifted in line with the tapes. I'm sure there was a FIM stipulation that the start/finish line had to be one and the same.you are correct in what you say about the the start and finish being altered, I was working on the track staff for that meeting. It might have been the last FIM event to be staged at plough lane, although I'm not sure if the world games was FIM in 1985. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveallan81 Posted February 18, 2015 Report Share Posted February 18, 2015 you are correct in what you say about the the start and finish being altered, I was working on the track staff for that meeting. It might have been the last FIM event to be staged at plough lane, although I'm not sure if the world games was FIM in 1985. Give us a wave and I'll watch out for you. The programme, which contained quite possibly the worst attempt at a racecard in the history of the sport, states 'FIM officials in attendance' so it looks like it was sanctioned. Programme here https://app.box.com/s/5s7ggxs7156pfo0ww77n/1/536055648/5165045752/1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityrebel Posted February 19, 2015 Report Share Posted February 19, 2015 I remember it well. It was a large magazine with a sheet of paper inside! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmet Posted February 19, 2015 Report Share Posted February 19, 2015 My understanding was then when they changed the track it was felt that the run to the first turn would be too short so they moved the start line back. . Just found and trawled thru this topic before I entered my answer as to why. Then came to this post (quoted above,) which cracks it. Indeed, after the track was shortened to have the speedway bends inside the stox bends, (because of surface damage they created,) but still with common straights, it was felt that the run to the first bend was too short, so to lengthen it without loosing the run to the line on the last lap, the start and the finish were separated. What happened in later decades, v/v FIM req'ts I can't speak on, as I was only an inactive follower at that period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.