RADBMX.CO.UK

Mid School BMX (>87) 1989 to 2003 (<05) => Mid School ( Keep the faith ) => Topic started by: ED209 on February 27, 2014, 08:03 PM

Title: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on February 27, 2014, 08:03 PM
Mid School date debate Vote off

What's the best dating method to represent the era of Mid School?

- (>87) 1989 to 2003 (<05) - set dates with 2 years flexibility either side to accommodate exceptions.

- Decades 80s 90s 00s 10s - not limited to a 'school' or era, simply put a bike in the year it is from.

Vote is running for 7 days  :daumenhoch:

* UPDATE * as the debate is still ongoing we have added the option to CHANGE your vote if you wish to  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Gish on February 27, 2014, 08:15 PM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: senzo milano on February 27, 2014, 08:26 PM
I still think and vote for midschool is from 1990 till 2000  :-[

but IMO  :)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Jaymz on February 27, 2014, 08:48 PM
I still think and vote for midschool is from 1990 till 2000  :-[

but IMO  :)
gets my vote,
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: rodriguez on February 27, 2014, 08:54 PM
So if decades wins is the WHOLE site going to be reorganised?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on February 27, 2014, 08:56 PM
So if decades wins is the WHOLE site going to be reorganised?


Yes, why not?  It will take work and time to do but it is your site (members) and if that is what needs to happen we should accomodate it.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on February 27, 2014, 09:00 PM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

I get where you're coming from G, but re-reading and taking in some of the input in the debate thread it makes sense (and the thread changed my opinion by the end of it). You can't lump a Mad Dog or mid style Revcore in the same section as say for instance a stock FST or Streetbeat (not that I'm saying they're stock bikes because we all build em different :) ) from the same years.

We put a name to eras in essence to define a way of thinking/tech (if that doesn't sound too up it's own 'arris) that cropped up for that era of BMX. The way we list stuff has to have a 'numeric/periodic value' if you like in order to list it, and in order to preserve that (and the eras) in my changed opinion the above poll covers all bases.

I think the above gives everyone a good scale that preserves Vintage/Old/Mid/New and the community in the separate sections on the site that has run well for years. Adding to that it gives the option for the sections to be divided into decades.

Whatever is decided in the poll, I reckon the RAD result will be seen as a way to define stuff for BMX forums/S&S etc for a while to come  :4_17_5:

Fook me that was waffley - and I'm stone cold sober this time round  :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 09:02 PM
 ;D   I still like your bronze age theory best


Rod nailed it 100% when he said the 1989-2003 just has more soul than the decade thing.   decade   .....bluäch!
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on February 27, 2014, 09:02 PM

I get where you're coming from G, but re-reading and taking in some of the input in the debate thread it makes sense (and the thread changed my opinion by the end of it). You can't lump a Mad Dog or mid style Revcore in the same section as say for instance a stock FST or Streetbeat (not that I'm saying they're stock bikes because we all build em different :) ) from the same years.

We put a name to eras in essence to define a way of thinking/tech (if that doesn't sound too up it's own 'arris) that cropped up for that era of BMX. The way we list stuff has to have a 'numeric/periodic value' if you like in order to list it, and in order to preserve that (and the eras) in my changed opinion the above poll covers all bases.

I think the above gives everyone a good scale that preserves Vintage/Old/Mid/New and the community in the separate sections on the site that has run well for years. Adding to that it gives the option for the sections to be divided into decades.

Whatever is decided in the poll, I reckon the RAD result will be seen as a way to define stuff for BMX forums/S&S etc for a while to come  :4_17_5:

Fook me that was waffley - and I'm stone cold sober this time round  :LolLolLolLol:


I read all that is written in red until I realised Danny was off of a waffle and I switched off.

It really isn't going to beat the old 'bronze age' bollox Dan  :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: rodriguez on February 27, 2014, 09:06 PM
So if decades wins is the WHOLE site going to be reorganised?


Yes, why not?  It will take work and time to do but it is your site (members) and if that is what needs to happen we should accomodate it.

Fair enough.

Should this thread not be in BMX chat section then as it's to do with the whole site.

I think it needs to be made clear to the members that after the vote if decades wins there is no more vintage, old school, mid school and new school because I don't think a lot of members really understand that and the implications to the whole site.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on February 27, 2014, 09:09 PM
 :LolLolLolLol:


Just to add to the above - these two frames are both from '88 - one is deffo Old School, and the other is deffo Mid School (sorry for the pic stealing Rob  :daumenhoch: ):

1988 Streetbeat:

(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/b339/robertbransby/beat_II_2_zps6b9c41fd.jpg)

1988 Mad Dog:

(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff443/dannywhack/MadDog1.jpg)

Sorry if I'm conveluting the poll - delete if it's getting in the way  :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Gish on February 27, 2014, 09:09 PM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

I get where you're coming from G, but re-reading and taking in some of the input in the debate thread it makes sense (and the thread changed my opinion by the end of it). You can't lump a Mad Dog or mid style Revcore in the same section as say for instance a stock FST or Streetbeat (not that I'm saying they're stock bikes because we all build em different :) ) from the same years.

We put a name to eras in essence to define a way of thinking/tech (if that doesn't sound too up it's own 'arris) that cropped up for that era of BMX. The way we list stuff has to have a 'numeric/periodic value' if you like in order to list it, and in order to preserve that (and the eras) in my changed opinion the above poll covers all bases.

I think the above gives everyone a good scale that preserves Vintage/Old/Mid/New and the community in the separate sections on the site that has run well for years. Adding to that it gives the option for the sections to be divided into decades.

Whatever is decided in the poll, I reckon the RAD result will be seen as a way to define stuff for BMX forums/S&S etc for a while to come  :4_17_5:

Fook me that was waffley - and I'm stone cold sober this time round  :LolLolLolLol:

Dan I have a 03 S&M Neal wood but would class that as new school not mid school

Also how could you say an 87 CW to be classed as mid school   ???
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 09:10 PM
..........and it's got reason        ---> Main Arguments PRO 1989-2003
->http://www.radbmx.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,171788.msg1726819.html#msg1726819
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
reasons for:

1989  start date:       given By Stu (Discostu):
"This was then the era that S&M amongst others started to come to the fore, if you look back at videos of the late 80's/early 90's you don't really see anyone riding an S&M but plenty of haro's and gt's are about. Yes the S&M was probably a better and stronger bike back in 88 but it hadn't gained any popularity at that time.  :daumenhoch:"

2003 finish date:      given by Rod (rodruigez)
"04ish="US BB phased out, freewheels phased out in favour of cassette and introdution of micro gearing, 48h to 36h, movement towards light and strong as opposed to heavy and strong."

2003 finish date:      given by Danny (Dannywhac)
"It's when you start seeing true micro gearing, the dropping of US BB's and a new 'make it light and strong' approach kicking in that for me defines the start of new. Although as any kid at a park and they don;t give a fook about owt earlier than last year  :LolLolLolLol:"

2003 finish date:      given by Philbert:
"This for me ran up until about 03. Then new school made a real headway with companies jumping on the standard bandwagon and using lighter tubing from strengthened metals, smaller chainrings, euro, Spanish, and mid bbs were becomingly widely available."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: rodriguez on February 27, 2014, 09:11 PM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

I get where you're coming from G, but re-reading and taking in some of the input in the debate thread it makes sense (and the thread changed my opinion by the end of it). You can't lump a Mad Dog or mid style Revcore in the same section as say for instance a stock FST or Streetbeat (not that I'm saying they're stock bikes because we all build em different :) ) from the same years.

We put a name to eras in essence to define a way of thinking/tech (if that doesn't sound too up it's own 'arris) that cropped up for that era of BMX. The way we list stuff has to have a 'numeric/periodic value' if you like in order to list it, and in order to preserve that (and the eras) in my changed opinion the above poll covers all bases.

I think the above gives everyone a good scale that preserves Vintage/Old/Mid/New and the community in the separate sections on the site that has run well for years. Adding to that it gives the option for the sections to be divided into decades.

Whatever is decided in the poll, I reckon the RAD result will be seen as a way to define stuff for BMX forums/S&S etc for a while to come  :4_17_5:

Fook me that was waffley - and I'm stone cold sober this time round  :LolLolLolLol:

Dan I have a 03 S&M Neal wood but would class that as new school not mid school

Also how could you say an 87 CW to be classed as mid school   ???

Did you not read the points made in the thread about how these things would be handled?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Gish on February 27, 2014, 09:17 PM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

I get where you're coming from G, but re-reading and taking in some of the input in the debate thread it makes sense (and the thread changed my opinion by the end of it). You can't lump a Mad Dog or mid style Revcore in the same section as say for instance a stock FST or Streetbeat (not that I'm saying they're stock bikes because we all build em different :) ) from the same years.

We put a name to eras in essence to define a way of thinking/tech (if that doesn't sound too up it's own 'arris) that cropped up for that era of BMX. The way we list stuff has to have a 'numeric/periodic value' if you like in order to list it, and in order to preserve that (and the eras) in my changed opinion the above poll covers all bases.

I think the above gives everyone a good scale that preserves Vintage/Old/Mid/New and the community in the separate sections on the site that has run well for years. Adding to that it gives the option for the sections to be divided into decades.

Whatever is decided in the poll, I reckon the RAD result will be seen as a way to define stuff for BMX forums/S&S etc for a while to come  :4_17_5:

Fook me that was waffley - and I'm stone cold sober this time round  :LolLolLolLol:

Dan I have a 03 S&M Neal wood but would class that as new school not mid school

Also how could you say an 87 CW to be classed as mid school   ???

Did you not read the points made in the thread about how these things would be handled?

Did you not read read where it says 2 years flexibility either way

Vintage, old school & new school don't have it so why should mid school be any different
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 09:22 PM
.... those would only be OBVIOUS exceptions that we're talking about ..........same reasoning could apply to the other sections, i guess.

So basically this vote is about 1989-2003.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: GavinDavis on February 27, 2014, 09:24 PM
Voted  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: rodriguez on February 27, 2014, 09:25 PM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

I get where you're coming from G, but re-reading and taking in some of the input in the debate thread it makes sense (and the thread changed my opinion by the end of it). You can't lump a Mad Dog or mid style Revcore in the same section as say for instance a stock FST or Streetbeat (not that I'm saying they're stock bikes because we all build em different :) ) from the same years.

We put a name to eras in essence to define a way of thinking/tech (if that doesn't sound too up it's own 'arris) that cropped up for that era of BMX. The way we list stuff has to have a 'numeric/periodic value' if you like in order to list it, and in order to preserve that (and the eras) in my changed opinion the above poll covers all bases.

I think the above gives everyone a good scale that preserves Vintage/Old/Mid/New and the community in the separate sections on the site that has run well for years. Adding to that it gives the option for the sections to be divided into decades.

Whatever is decided in the poll, I reckon the RAD result will be seen as a way to define stuff for BMX forums/S&S etc for a while to come  :4_17_5:

Fook me that was waffley - and I'm stone cold sober this time round  :LolLolLolLol:

Dan I have a 03 S&M Neal wood but would class that as new school not mid school

Also how could you say an 87 CW to be classed as mid school   ???

Did you not read the points made in the thread about how these things would be handled?

Did you not read read where it says 2 years flexibility either way

Vintage, old school & new school don't have it so why should mid school be any different

That point was made and addressed in the thread, why didn't you contribute to the thread?

The short answer is there were bikes built in the same year that fit into different schools as Danny has shown above.

Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 09:26 PM
....and your '87 CW would have course NOT be put into mid :daumenhoch: ::)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Gish on February 27, 2014, 09:31 PM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

I get where you're coming from G, but re-reading and taking in some of the input in the debate thread it makes sense (and the thread changed my opinion by the end of it). You can't lump a Mad Dog or mid style Revcore in the same section as say for instance a stock FST or Streetbeat (not that I'm saying they're stock bikes because we all build em different :) ) from the same years.

We put a name to eras in essence to define a way of thinking/tech (if that doesn't sound too up it's own 'arris) that cropped up for that era of BMX. The way we list stuff has to have a 'numeric/periodic value' if you like in order to list it, and in order to preserve that (and the eras) in my changed opinion the above poll covers all bases.

I think the above gives everyone a good scale that preserves Vintage/Old/Mid/New and the community in the separate sections on the site that has run well for years. Adding to that it gives the option for the sections to be divided into decades.

Whatever is decided in the poll, I reckon the RAD result will be seen as a way to define stuff for BMX forums/S&S etc for a while to come  :4_17_5:

Fook me that was waffley - and I'm stone cold sober this time round  :LolLolLolLol:

Dan I have a 03 S&M Neal wood but would class that as new school not mid school

Also how could you say an 87 CW to be classed as mid school   ???

Did you not read the points made in the thread about how these things would be handled?

Did you not read read where it says 2 years flexibility either way

Vintage, old school & new school don't have it so why should mid school be any different

That point was made and addressed in the thread, why didn't you contribute to the thread?

The short answer is there were bikes built in the same year that fit into different schools as Danny has shown above.

Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?

Hey rodders if you go to page 1 and mine is the 3rd comment.

Also I understand the options that's why I've voted for decades
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OrgasmDonor on February 27, 2014, 09:36 PM
:LolLolLolLol:


Just to add to the above - these two frames are both from '88 - one is deffo Old School, and the other is deffo Mid School (sorry for the pic stealing Rob  :daumenhoch: ):

1988 Streetbeat:

(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/b339/robertbransby/beat_II_2_zps6b9c41fd.jpg)

1988 Mad Dog:

(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff443/dannywhack/MadDog1.jpg)

Sorry if I'm conveluting the poll - delete if it's getting in the way  :LolLolLolLol:

that streetbeat is well on the cusp tho
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dark Diggler on February 27, 2014, 09:45 PM
Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?
I have always fooking hated the "school" bit, especially new school, that's just shit.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on February 27, 2014, 09:49 PM


that streetbeat is well on the cusp tho

Yep - totally agree, but after the debate thread I concede that what the Street Beat has and what the Mad Dog has puts em both into two different schools.

Think what in a waffley way I'm trying to say is I've been swayed to keeping the Schools the way we all have made a community around them, I think now if we go decades we'd lose the essence and the banter we've made around em  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: BMX1973 on February 27, 2014, 09:57 PM

Just voted and very interesting to see results.  :)

I always say 80s 90s 2000s. But when you look at certain make bikes in the late 80s you would call them mid school.  :-\
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: midschooljon on February 27, 2014, 10:00 PM
Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?

WHy not?

70's - vintage
80's - old school
90's - mid school
2000's - new school
2010+ - current

its really not that big a deal.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on February 27, 2014, 10:03 PM
Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?

WHy not?

70's - vintage
80's - old school
90's - mid school
2000's - new school
2010+ - current

its really not that big a deal.

Exactly, people can actually call things whatever and whoever they like, what we would simply be doing is moving some dates around.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 10:04 PM
that's what i thought too at some point

but it's too harsh approximation - it's the observation of actual riders that convinced me

the terms have meaning ....... and the dates do too
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on February 27, 2014, 10:05 PM
Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?

WHy not?

70's - vintage
80's - old school
90's - mid school
2000's - new school
2010+ - current

its really not that big a deal.

Because Jon - that won't be true, what it will equal is:

70's
80's
90's
2000's
2010+

There will be no more 'Schools' - a 1989 Dirt Bike will be an 80's bike, your (exactly the same) 1990 Dirt Bike will be a 90's bike. Not Old or Mid. You lose the (imho) the meaning behind what was going on and just change it into a metric way of listing stuff.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 10:10 PM
Exactly, we just don't want to lose the meaning behind those terms. It's about cultivating history
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: midschooljon on February 27, 2014, 10:14 PM
that's what i thought too at some point

but it's too harsh approximation - it's the observation of actual riders that convinced me

the terms have meaning ....... and the dates do too

The problem is that everyone likes to say its about "Eras", "attitude" and the "mindset" of riders that defines the schools. Then when you ask them to put dates to that they rattle on about BB's, 990's, and micro drive.   :LolLolLolLol:

If you cant define the atttude change in BMX with fixed dates or events its isn't worth mentioning. Similarly, if you going to use tech to justify eras we need to clarify what tech had the biggest impact. Its commonly accepted that threadless headsets were one of the biggest technical advances in BMX, but no one wants to use it as a start finish of an era? Why? Because it comes right in the middle of their bike collection, and they want the whole thing to be mid school.  :LolLolLolLol:

The thinking is flawed and the lines are blurred. I will be the first to admit that. Define it by decades (like every other industry) and lets just crack on with building bikes.  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OrgasmDonor on February 27, 2014, 10:19 PM
Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?

WHy not?

70's - vintage
80's - old school
90's - mid school
2000's - new school
2010+ - current

its really not that big a deal.

Couldnt look more sensible :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 10:20 PM
people who witnessed change are capable of putting dates on when certain develpoments became common = mainstream
->http://www.radbmx.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,171969.msg1727360.html#msg1727360  :daumenhoch:

but fair point you made
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: rodriguez on February 27, 2014, 10:24 PM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

I get where you're coming from G, but re-reading and taking in some of the input in the debate thread it makes sense (and the thread changed my opinion by the end of it). You can't lump a Mad Dog or mid style Revcore in the same section as say for instance a stock FST or Streetbeat (not that I'm saying they're stock bikes because we all build em different :) ) from the same years.

We put a name to eras in essence to define a way of thinking/tech (if that doesn't sound too up it's own 'arris) that cropped up for that era of BMX. The way we list stuff has to have a 'numeric/periodic value' if you like in order to list it, and in order to preserve that (and the eras) in my changed opinion the above poll covers all bases.

I think the above gives everyone a good scale that preserves Vintage/Old/Mid/New and the community in the separate sections on the site that has run well for years. Adding to that it gives the option for the sections to be divided into decades.

Whatever is decided in the poll, I reckon the RAD result will be seen as a way to define stuff for BMX forums/S&S etc for a while to come  :4_17_5:

Fook me that was waffley - and I'm stone cold sober this time round  :LolLolLolLol:

Dan I have a 03 S&M Neal wood but would class that as new school not mid school

Also how could you say an 87 CW to be classed as mid school   ???

Did you not read the points made in the thread about how these things would be handled?

Did you not read read where it says 2 years flexibility either way

Vintage, old school & new school don't have it so why should mid school be any different

That point was made and addressed in the thread, why didn't you contribute to the thread?

The short answer is there were bikes built in the same year that fit into different schools as Danny has shown above.

Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?

Hey rodders if you go to page 1 and mine is the 3rd comment.

Also I understand the options that's why I've voted for decades

You're right you commented you hardly argued your point like you have in this thread.

Cool  :daumenhoch:

Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?
I have always fooking hated the "school" bit, especially new school, that's just shit.

Mightn't annoy you for much longer.

Maybe it's the future.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: GavinDavis on February 27, 2014, 10:27 PM
Will it mean that Jon has to have a new username it the decades win?

I like midschooljon.........90'sjon doesnt have the same ring to it  ;D
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: rodriguez on February 27, 2014, 10:35 PM
Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?

WHy not?

70's - vintage
80's - old school
90's - mid school
2000's - new school
2010+ - current

its really not that big a deal.

Well I think it is because it' not right, mid-school began in the late 1980's and ended in the early 2000's, either schools or decades not a fudge of both.

I can understand some people don't like the whole schools thing but to fudge them together is a horrendous idea.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: gary4130 on February 27, 2014, 10:37 PM
Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?

WHy not?

70's - vintage
80's - old school
90's - mid school
2000's - new school
2010+ - current

its really not that big a deal.
agree with you '90s john  ;D :nuts:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on February 27, 2014, 10:38 PM
If you cant define the atttude change in BMX with fixed dates or events its isn't worth mentioning. Similarly, if you going to use tech to justify eras we need to clarify what tech had the biggest impact. Its commonly accepted that threadless headsets were one of the biggest technical advances in BMX, but no one wants to use it as a start finish of an era? Why? Because it comes right in the middle of their bike collection, and they want the whole thing to be mid school.  :LolLolLolLol:

But that's what the debate thread has done - it's argued the definition of a development of a change in the overall way that BMX was being owned/run/freestyle changed  by date.

It's not down to a single 'tech' change that adds up to one of the 'Schools' and it really does have looking through the debate thread have nothing to do with someones collection - re-read through all 10 odd pages of the thread and it's a load of people inputting what they think and being talked around to changing their opinions on dates in order to come up with a workable solution for a site. 1 1/8" was a revelation, but it didn't change a style of riding - all it did was stop people eternally having to re-tighten their 1"ers  and put their bars into line  :LolLolLolLol:

The thinking is flawed and the lines are blurred. I will be the first to admit that. Define it by decades (like every other industry) and lets just crack on with building bikes.  :daumenhoch:

 I started off thinking that the decade thing was a good idea, but it (imho) would make the site a bit less personal and more like Bikepedia. Have a look through the whole old Mid section of the site and see the stories that have been shared about the mid period in BMX and see how out of context they'd be if you separated them into decades.

Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 10:39 PM
...still was a good debate.
And i pull my hat to rad, that allows for this, and to those, who say what they believe is right
(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/v521/fischflo/annaspuss.gif)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OrgasmDonor on February 27, 2014, 10:51 PM
People still call vacuum cleaners 'Hoovers.' etc etc, people will still call bikes by the school they thinkk its from, so the terms will always be used, but some will be wrong by a couple of years :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on February 27, 2014, 10:57 PM
I think that sums it up Daz.

I've been struggling to know whats best to vote for, or even if either is right ... but reading the debate here if we go for Decades you can have an 80s Mid School bike ... like the S&M ... or a 90s Old School bike like the Haro Sport ( bashguard or not ) ... you can use 'schools' to define your own bike as and when you see fit ... and argue the case if someone disagrees.

Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 11:09 PM
.....but the point is .........if these terms make sense ........why not acknowledge them with sensible periods?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on February 27, 2014, 11:20 PM
I think that sums it up Daz.

I've been struggling to know whats best to vote for, or even if either is right ... but reading the debate here if we go for Decades you can have an 80s Mid School bike ... like the S&M ... or a 90s Old School bike like the Haro Sport ( bashguard or not ) ... you can use 'schools' to define your own bike as and when you see fit ... and argue the case if someone disagrees.

Ahhhhhh.......chuff!

Now I'm struggling from thinking decade to school and back to decade again  :LolLolLolLol:

Reason being.....wasn't the subtitle on the Mid Section 'It's all about the 90's' a while back?

Aaaaargghhhhh  :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OrgasmDonor on February 27, 2014, 11:21 PM
.....but the point is .........if these terms make sense ........why not acknowledge them with sensible periods?

Because, as is woefully evident, the periods can not accurately be defined, dates can
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on February 27, 2014, 11:24 PM
Do you understand the option decades above means no more vintage, old school, mid school or new school the site will be totally reorganised and those terms won't be used again?

WHy not?

70's - vintage
80's - old school
90's - mid school
2000's - new school
2010+ - current

its really not that big a deal.

Well I think it is because it' not right, mid-school began in the late 1980's and ended in the early 2000's, either schools or decades not a fudge of both.

I can understand some people don't like the whole schools thing but to fudge them together is a horrendous idea.

If we just attach schools to decades then nothing has been achieved IMO... its too simplistic a resolution and will kick off the discontent all over again ....

I was going to vote 'Decades' but now I'm not sure if schools will be attached.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 11:25 PM
.....but the point is .........if these terms make sense ........why not acknowledge them with sensible periods?

Because, as is woefully evident, the periods can not accurately be defined, dates can

blääääh
(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/v521/fischflo/smiley_v.gif)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OrgasmDonor on February 27, 2014, 11:31 PM
.....but the point is .........if these terms make sense ........why not acknowledge them with sensible periods?

Because, as is woefully evident, the periods can not accurately be defined, dates can

blääääh
(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/v521/fischflo/smiley_v.gif)

Exquisite
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 27, 2014, 11:40 PM
 >:( ...hrmph

well, whatever happens, i vote for Danny and Rod being instated (wd?) to the mid  .....yeah i know....90's section as mods

 :slayer:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: rodriguez on February 27, 2014, 11:44 PM
.....but the point is .........if these terms make sense ........why not acknowledge them with sensible periods?

Because, as is woefully evident, the periods can not accurately be defined, dates can

.......with no schools attached   :daumenhoch:

Attach schools and it's bollox again and back to square one, for example, mid school equals the 90's is just wrong as was proved in the debate thread.

NOBODY who said that mid school = 90s was able to argue successfully WHY this was so in the debate thread, a few people made statements that mid school = 90's because that's what they thought/felt it was but that's it.

If anybody wants to put forward any arguments now why mid school = 90s go for it, I'd be interested to see them.

Decades = 70s 80s 90s 00s 10s
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on February 27, 2014, 11:57 PM
Guys

We all know that this is an emotive and important issue, so Ed has added a remove vote option to the poll above, just in case you need/want to change your mind.

As you can all see there is no secrecy, the poll results are visable you as soon as you have voted. 

This way nobody can say it wasn't all above board when the final decisions are made.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on February 28, 2014, 07:32 AM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

This came out through discussion in the other thread so I'd defend it as not 'bollocks'  :)

The 'Mid School' era would be firmly defined as 1989 to 2003 ... BUT with the option for those with bikes from the 2 years before and after these dates to include them if they felt it was appropriate. This decision was reached through discussion as a good way to resolve current issues.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Gish on February 28, 2014, 07:56 AM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

This came out through discussion in the other thread so I'd defend it as not 'bollocks'  :)

The 'Mid School' era would be firmly defined as 1989 to 2003 ... BUT with the option for those with bikes from the 2 years before and after these dates to include them if they felt it was appropriate. This decision was reached through discussion as a good way to resolve current issues.

So I class my 87 Cw as mid school because the old school section in this forum stops at 86.

That's why it would be better if it went to decades.

Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: pickle on February 28, 2014, 08:00 AM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

This came out through discussion in the other thread so I'd defend it as not 'bollocks'  :)

The 'Mid School' era would be firmly defined as 1989 to 2003 ... BUT with the option for those with bikes from the 2 years before and after these dates to include them if they felt it was appropriate. This decision was reached through discussion as a good way to resolve current issues.

So I class my 87 Cw as mid school because the old school section in this forum stops at 86.

That's why it would be better if it went to decades.

Nope, i would say you'd put that in old school due to the 2 year grace period depending on frame design  ???  isn't that what they are suggesting or am i wrong?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Gish on February 28, 2014, 08:08 AM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

This came out through discussion in the other thread so I'd defend it as not 'bollocks'  :)

The 'Mid School' era would be firmly defined as 1989 to 2003 ... BUT with the option for those with bikes from the 2 years before and after these dates to include them if they felt it was appropriate. This decision was reached through discussion as a good way to resolve current issues.u

So I class my 87 Cw as mid school because the old school section in this forum stops at 86.

That's why it would be better if it went to decades.

Nope, i would say you'd put that in old school due to the 2 year grace period depending on frame design  ???  isn't that what they are suggesting or am i wrong?

So why not have old school 80-88, then mid school 89-2001 instead of having flexible dates
That's firm dates
When one class ends another opens not overlapping each other by 2 years
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: pickle on February 28, 2014, 08:13 AM
because i think a few people have given examples of frame sets from 87/88 that have their roots firmly planted in mid  ???

It's not that bigger deal is it  ???
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on February 28, 2014, 08:48 AM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

This came out through discussion in the other thread so I'd defend it as not 'bollocks'  :)

The 'Mid School' era would be firmly defined as 1989 to 2003 ... BUT with the option for those with bikes from the 2 years before and after these dates to include them if they felt it was appropriate. This decision was reached through discussion as a good way to resolve current issues.

So I class my 87 Cw as mid school because the old school section in this forum stops at 86.

That's why it would be better if it went to decades.

The 2 year flexible' period for Mid School allows you the opportunity to put your 87 CW into Mid School if you felt it needed to be there - otherwise it would stay in old school by default - you'd have to offer some reason why it would be classed as Mid School and that decision would be moderated as well.

I think its a good work around from the opinions that came out  :daumenhoch:

Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on February 28, 2014, 08:51 AM
I don't understand this 2 years either way.
2 year of flexibility to accommodate exceptions what a fookin load of bollocks

It's either mid school or not NO exceptions

This came out through discussion in the other thread so I'd defend it as not 'bollocks'  :)

The 'Mid School' era would be firmly defined as 1989 to 2003 ... BUT with the option for those with bikes from the 2 years before and after these dates to include them if they felt it was appropriate. This decision was reached through discussion as a good way to resolve current issues.u

So I class my 87 Cw as mid school because the old school section in this forum stops at 86.

That's why it would be better if it went to decades.

Nope, i would say you'd put that in old school due to the 2 year grace period depending on frame design  ???  isn't that what they are suggesting or am i wrong?

So why not have old school 80-88, then mid school 89-2001 instead of having flexible dates
That's firm dates
When one class ends another opens not overlapping each other by 2 years

it only overlaps to accommodate members with bikes in that period what would be classed Old School but are, for whatever reasons given, wanting to me classed as Mid.

The define date thing was tried and didn't seem to be working... this was created to try and solve the problem.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: insectbones on February 28, 2014, 09:07 AM
This thread and the other one related to it have been great reading, nice to see the passion  :daumenhoch:

I've voted for the 'schools' rather than the 'decades', interesting to see how close the voting is  :shocked:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on February 28, 2014, 09:14 AM
bump this example of why its needed.

:LolLolLolLol:


Just to add to the above - these two frames are both from '88 - one is deffo Old School, and the other is deffo Mid School (sorry for the pic stealing Rob  :daumenhoch: ):

1988 Streetbeat:

(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/b339/robertbransby/beat_II_2_zps6b9c41fd.jpg)

1988 Mad Dog:

(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff443/dannywhack/MadDog1.jpg)

Sorry if I'm conveluting the poll - delete if it's getting in the way  :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on February 28, 2014, 09:19 AM
Knew I should have vacumned (notice I didn say Hoover) before I took that pic Ed  :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: pickle on February 28, 2014, 10:48 AM
Always good to see my old beat though  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Gnarlyscoots on February 28, 2014, 10:55 AM
As I said previously though Ed, a mid school bike is quite easy tell just by looking at it, in my opinion anyway's  :daumenhoch:

bump this example of why its needed.

Just to add to the above - these two frames are both from '88 - one is deffo Old School, and the other is deffo Mid School (sorry for the pic stealing Rob  :daumenhoch: ):

1988 Streetbeat:

(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/b339/robertbransby/beat_II_2_zps6b9c41fd.jpg)

1988 Mad Dog:

(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff443/dannywhack/MadDog1.jpg)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OrgasmDonor on February 28, 2014, 11:02 AM
My bikes span from late 80s to 90s, in my mind I pigeon hole my bikes as midschool 89-99 (my youngest is 1993 and oldest 1987). If the site decided on decades, I would post them or any new purquirements in the correct section, I would also (if the decade sections become as cliquey as the current sections) post a thread "I know this isn't 80s/90s but thought you guys might like to see this" if I feel it is older/younger than the allocated decade but appropriate to the majority of bikes in the other section. Giving the opportunity to open rad up a bit and venture into different sections and share.

I can understand the sentiment of schools, but do feel this will not change at all.
I understand the logic of decades simply because it is logical.
I do not understand how we can encapsulate everyone's personal evaluation of where they think their bike should be posted and accurately define an era.

I will however fully accept whatever decision is made coz it makes no difference at all to my bikes, they are what they are, and more importantly, they are what they are to me. how can any change change that?

would love to see more votes tho
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: midschooljon on February 28, 2014, 08:54 PM
Will it mean that Jon has to have a new username it the decades win?

I like midschooljon.........90'sjon doesnt have the same ring to it  ;D

 :LolLolLolLol:

I dont understand why everyone thinks that just because a bike is in a section dedicated 90's bikes that it cant be called mid school any more. Who was that conclusion reached?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on February 28, 2014, 10:15 PM
Will it mean that Jon has to have a new username it the decades win?

I like midschooljon.........90'sjon doesnt have the same ring to it  ;D

 :LolLolLolLol:

I dont understand why everyone thinks that just because a bike is in a section dedicated 90's bikes that it cant be called mid school any more. Who was that conclusion reached?


Jon mate, you can call yourself whatever you want mate, however judging by the voting so far I think your midschool moniker is safe.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: fischflo on February 28, 2014, 11:07 PM
90sjon "nono"
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: monkian on February 28, 2014, 11:29 PM
Why try to fit the terms to years at all?
Just let the bike spec define if it's old or mid.
Maybe too rad?? 8)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: midschooljon on February 28, 2014, 11:48 PM
Will it mean that Jon has to have a new username it the decades win?

I like midschooljon.........90'sjon doesnt have the same ring to it  ;D

 :LolLolLolLol:

I dont understand why everyone thinks that just because a bike is in a section dedicated 90's bikes that it cant be called mid school any more. Who was that conclusion reached?


Jon mate, you can call yourself whatever you want mate, however judging by the voting so far I think your midschool moniker is safe.

And none of my bikes will be new school either.  :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: aerostylie on March 01, 2014, 11:17 AM
When we use ebay or the like, do we search by old, mid, new, or by decade?

bmx museum I just search by individual year and define my own era type.

Like the idea though of rounded up years split by type ie got a mongoose decade 87 which I'd class as old rather than mid.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: brakedancer on March 01, 2014, 07:55 PM
is the old school section going to have a  2 year flexible' period so it over laps with the mid then.... :)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 01, 2014, 09:17 PM
is the old school section going to have a  2 year flexible' period so it over laps with the mid then.... :)

That was one of the motivations behind the whole thread and vote... 1987 being too early a start date for mid school ... by moving that start date of mid school to 89 then we have provided and extra 2 years to encompass old school  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Gish on March 01, 2014, 10:29 PM
is the old school section going to have a  2 year flexible' period so it over laps with the mid then.... :)

I reckon old school should have z 3 year flexibility aswell to accommodate old school bikes that were made in 87 & 88
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 01, 2014, 11:09 PM
is the old school section going to have a  2 year flexible' period so it over laps with the mid then.... :)

I reckon old school should have z 3 year flexibility aswell to accommodate old school bikes that were made in 87 & 88

That's exactly what is being proposed  :daumenhoch:

Old school ending in 88 ... Mid school starting in 89 ... but with flexibility to include bikes from 87/88 that could, at the owner/builders request, be classified/mderated as 'Mid'.  :daumenhoch:

Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: brakedancer on March 01, 2014, 11:38 PM
is the old school section going to have a  2 year flexible' period so it over laps with the mid then.... :)

I reckon old school should have z 3 year flexibility aswell to accommodate old school bikes that were made in 87 & 88

That's exactly what is being proposed  :daumenhoch:

Old school ending in 88 ... Mid school starting in 89 ... but with flexibility to include bikes from 87/88 that could, at the owner/builders request, be classified/mderated as 'Mid'.  :daumenhoch:

sounds like a plan.... :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 04, 2014, 10:32 PM
any more votes?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: dordymush on March 04, 2014, 11:47 PM
tbh i dont care what anybody classes my bikes as i class them mid school and im happy with that.
where your gonna get problems and bad feeling is at the like of the show and shine at MK etc.
i can see arguments or moaning if such as robs streetbeat won in a mid school class.
if these dates for the sections are gonna be used for s + s i can see trouble ahead  :-\.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 05, 2014, 07:09 AM
...if these dates for the sections are gonna be used for s + s i can see trouble ahead  :-\.

Whys that then Dave? if you think theres an issue we ned to hear about it  :)

set dates of 1989 to 2003 with the option for those with deserving bikes from 2 years either side to have them in the section they want.

That, to me, will solve more problems than it creates  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on March 05, 2014, 07:39 AM
...if these dates for the sections are gonna be used for s + s i can see trouble ahead  :-\.

Whys that then Dave? if you think theres an issue we ned to hear about it  :)

set dates of 1989 to 2003 with the option for those with deserving bikes from 2 years either side to have them in the section they want.

That, to me, will solve more problems than it creates  :daumenhoch:


Same here Ed, I can't see why there would be trouble ahead and me and Rob run the S&S at MK, so as long as things are done right at registration then there will be no problems at all.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: pickle on March 05, 2014, 07:41 AM
Looks fine to me  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: pickle on March 05, 2014, 08:07 AM
Should i move my 88 Beat to old school freestyle in BOTY then?  ???
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on March 05, 2014, 08:12 AM
Should i move my 88 Beat to old school freestyle in BOTY then?  ???

No Rob leave it where it is, the vote hasn't ended yet and the BOTY threads have closed.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OllyHall on March 05, 2014, 09:14 AM
Should i move my 88 Beat to old school freestyle in BOTY then?  ???

Yes :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 05, 2014, 09:33 AM
Yep - can't see why it wouldn't work like that. And ignore Olly - I do  :LolLolLolLol:

Did a load of cogetating in the end and settled on the dates rather than decades. Makes a bit more sense for me anyhow.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OllyHall on March 05, 2014, 10:00 AM
You defo do that! It's like I don't exist on your radar!!
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 05, 2014, 10:12 AM
You defo do that! It's like I don't exist on your radar!!

"Whys Dan angry with me ... I'm a good person"  :2funny: :2funny: :2funny: :2funny: :2funny:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OllyHall on March 05, 2014, 10:17 AM
Only coz I couldn't under stand what I could have done you idiot :Aresehole: :2gunsfiring_v1:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 05, 2014, 10:21 AM
You defo do that! It's like I don't exist on your radar!!

"Whys Dan angry with me ... I'm a good person"  :2funny: :2funny: :2funny: :2funny: :2funny:

 :LolLolLolLol: Ahh - what a 'jape' that was  ;D

I'm paying on the karma stakes though now:

Chain snapped last night on a ride - went over the bars.
Flipped pancake number three and handle on frying pan snapped off covering me in hot oil and half cooked pancake.
Paid for a hotel room for EPMD - only to find website had fooked the booking so have lost £120.
Forgot wallet this morning.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OllyHall on March 05, 2014, 10:28 AM
You might find if lets say maybe I got some slam bars and a primo seat your luck might change my hippy chap
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 05, 2014, 10:31 AM
You might find if lets say maybe I got some slam bars and a primo seat your luck might change my hippy chap

You're getting em free - have patience my young padawan. And you forgot the pegs.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OllyHall on March 05, 2014, 11:20 AM
Oh sheet yes and the pegs, very nice old bob of Marley free like your seat hurry up the mc is at the powder coaters;)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 05, 2014, 11:33 AM
Oh sheet yes and the pegs, very nice old bob of Marley free like your seat hurry up the mc is at the powder coaters;)

Bablefish needed  :uglystupid2:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: GavinDavis on March 05, 2014, 11:34 AM
Wheres my stickers Olly?  You great big bear!!  :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: dordymush on March 05, 2014, 12:26 PM
im not gonna get involved in this any more tbh.
im not bringing fook all to mk if i do go. so im just gonna sit back and leave you gents to it  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 05, 2014, 12:39 PM
im not gonna get involved in this any more tbh.
im not bringing fook all to mk if i do go. so im just gonna sit back and leave you gents to it  :daumenhoch:

Nooooooo - Dave, if you can bring em at least bring the old blue Holmes and TNT - pretty please? Oh and a Sabbath  :4_17_5:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: oberonspacefruit on March 05, 2014, 12:41 PM
:LolLolLolLol:


Just to add to the above - these two frames are both from '88 - one is deffo Old School, and the other is deffo Mid School (sorry for the pic stealing Rob  :daumenhoch: ):

1988 Streetbeat:

(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/b339/robertbransby/beat_II_2_zps6b9c41fd.jpg)

1988 Mad Dog:

(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff443/dannywhack/MadDog1.jpg)

Sorry if I'm conveluting the poll - delete if it's getting in the way  :LolLolLolLol:

that streetbeat is well on the cusp tho

its got 990 mounts....both have threaded forks.....would that not make the beat more midschool? >:D
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 05, 2014, 12:43 PM
One's got double drops on frame and forks, welded steerer, HT angle changed - poo-poo to you  ;D
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: oberonspacefruit on March 05, 2014, 12:50 PM
Its all good fun. :P
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 05, 2014, 01:09 PM
 :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: pickle on March 05, 2014, 01:36 PM
Wheres my stickers Olly?  You great big bear!!  :LolLolLolLol:

Where's my frame sex machine?  ;)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OrgasmDonor on March 05, 2014, 01:37 PM
:LolLolLolLol:


Just to add to the above - these two frames are both from '88 - one is deffo Old School, and the other is deffo Mid School (sorry for the pic stealing Rob  :daumenhoch: ):

1988 Streetbeat:

(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/b339/robertbransby/beat_II_2_zps6b9c41fd.jpg)

1988 Mad Dog:

(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff443/dannywhack/MadDog1.jpg)

Sorry if I'm conveluting the poll - delete if it's getting in the way  :LolLolLolLol:

that streetbeat is well on the cusp tho

its got 990 mounts....both have threaded forks.....would that not make the beat more midschool? >:D

the more I think about these two, the beat is deffo more mid than old
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OllyHall on March 05, 2014, 02:21 PM
The more I think about it the more  ithink there both pos! And both old school!
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: pickle on March 05, 2014, 02:22 PM
You can go off people real quick you know!  :yahoo_silent:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 05, 2014, 02:23 PM
The more I think about it the more  ithink there both pos! And both old school!

the more you post up the more I lose the will to live  ;D
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 05, 2014, 03:46 PM
The more I think about it the more  ithink there both pos! And both old school!

Kinda weird Ed as I read that as:

'Bashguards are the mutts nuts and S&M suck teh balls. I now hate bashguards and am building an S&M'  ;D
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 05, 2014, 04:12 PM
The more I think about it the more  ithink there both pos! And both old school!

Kinda weird Ed as I read that as:

'Bashguards are the mutts nuts and S&M suck teh balls. I now hate bashguards and am building an S&M'  ;D

He's the Mr Benn of BMX Dan  :2funny:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OllyHall on March 05, 2014, 04:24 PM
 :LolLolLolLol:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: oberonspacefruit on March 05, 2014, 04:29 PM
I was thinking about this on my hour long drive home. I dont mind what the results of the poll is, but Im always up for a discussion, and 3 points have come to mid that may or may not be relevant.

Point 1
In ref to dordies S+S point, this 88 bike
(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff443/dannywhack/MadDog1.jpg)

would probably walk away with an armfull of trophies if it were placed in a mid school class. If the dates of mid related the year of construction this making it oldschool, it would probably not get a second glance in a show and shine, as most old school punters only want to see bikes that they had/aspired to have as a kid, and by the time that bike came onto anyones radar those people had discovered mountain bikes, motorbikes, drugs and tits.

Point 2
If we change the dates on the categories, does this relate to oss racing as well? if not, why not? for instance, this streetbeat, which we have decided is deffo in the oldschool camp,
(http://www.radbmx.co.uk/archive/albums/b339/robertbransby/beat_II_2_zps6b9c41fd.jpg)

would NOT be allowed into the oldschool racing season as a rider due to its 990 mounts. if we are classing a bike to its age related date, it should be allowed in the race. is this bike oldschool, or midschool- there seems to be a contradiction in opinions. Whereas I rode this 1992 robbo in the OSS summer series

(http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb121/beckyboo222/054.jpg)

this involved cutting the steere of a set of 1 1/8th landing gear, welding a threaded steerer tube on and running no bearing race in the bottom cup and looseballs in the top bearing cup. it should be classed as mid, in anyones definition, but no one blinked an eye (partly, in fairness because i never won any races due to being continually hung over, also its not about the winning, I prefer a leisurly tootle round the track so that I can wave at my fans) as it conformed to the OSS rules. So, do we change the OSS rules to conform with this new poll?

Point 3

If we are classing bikes by the technology that they employ in their build process, IE non double drops, threaded steerer tube, non euro bb etc, what class would this bike fall into?

(http://bmxmuseum.com/reference-images/haro_vintage_press_photo_lg.jpg)

Just some little points to get the old grey matter bubbling, before you decide what to vote for.

Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 05, 2014, 04:53 PM
Good pointage  :daumenhoch:

For me:

1. Totally get that point (although on a side not there's no way that bike would win a Mid S&S - it's now got acorn mags - the thin spoked ones, CW bars with a bell and horn on em, tassles coming out the grip ends and a layback this is a joke)

2. This is where the overlap bit comes in - see I'd still say the essence of a bike is the frame - that Robbo smacks of mid, the botchit steerer Landers do as well. Brakes maybe not. OS Racing sections would still allow for a lugless 1" Dirt Bike or Holmes, which stink of middness.

3. Modern repop I guess. I'd personally love it if they remade Acorn Freeway frames. Cos I had one till 'Alan fat arse Kemp' snapped the seattube. Totally get why people want em, but just not my bag.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: nosepickben on March 05, 2014, 07:40 PM
I dont think im clever or articulate enough to add much to this debate, but i really have a dislike for Alan Kemp. The fat-arsed wankpot.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: oberonspacefruit on March 05, 2014, 09:16 PM
HA!
What year did he snap it? perhaps that year could be proposed as "the death of oldschool" -starting mid school from the following year.....
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 05, 2014, 09:40 PM
HA!
What year did he snap it? perhaps that year could be proposed as "the death of oldschool" -starting mid school from the following year.....

 ;D

Believe it or not........1988 (it all fits  :LolLolLolLol: ) Gave it to him on a 'lendsie' as I'd managed to get me hands on a beefier single toptube Torker and spray bombed it flouro 'it'll jump higher' green. Thought the Torker would make me fly on a local quarter and over the dirt jumps (well humps) in Bridlington.

Miss that Freeway (did I just say that in the mid section), built that bugger up one January after buying bits and bobs from Percy Bolton (a local old bloke who's shop was his garage attached to his 60's bungalow) in 1984. Four years it lasted till that big bummed wankpot (thanks Ben for that summary - you must have met him  :daumenhoch: ) sat trundleing it round on a bent layback till he tried a jump with me and it went.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: dordymush on March 05, 2014, 11:51 PM
Glad somebody got what I was trying to say Phil  :bow:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on March 06, 2014, 08:46 AM
Glad somebody got what I was trying to say Phil  :bow:

We all knew what you were trying to say Dave, however the whole discussion thread had sorted these details out already.

Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 06, 2014, 09:00 AM
60 voters so far and it closes tonight ... is that a good turnout?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: pickle on March 06, 2014, 09:05 AM
deffinately Ed.........normally only get about 90 on BOTM votes  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: nosepickben on March 06, 2014, 09:25 AM
An '88 Maddog is OLDSCHOOL.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on March 06, 2014, 12:43 PM
An '88 Maddog is OLDSCHOOL.


An 88 Maddog is whatever the moderators of midschool say it is, that will be their job if the vote stays as it is.  :police:

That is how it works ladies and gentlemen.  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: OllyHall on March 06, 2014, 02:12 PM
Who's the mods?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: ED209 on March 06, 2014, 02:55 PM
Who's the mods?

We are...

(http://mistercrew.com/files/2010/05/who_quadrophenia_2.jpg)
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: oberonspacefruit on March 06, 2014, 03:08 PM
Ive just read the ten page discussion thread….and I realise now the need for positive productive resolutions to this problem.
I can see stidds point of view about needing a definitive dater rather than feathering (nice term) the date of old to mid) Ive judged at MK too, and it’s a hard job, when you’d much rather be having a beer like everyone else.It makes it even harder when after wandering around for four hours you get slaughtered by several groups about issues that are to them,  of great importance, but are completely open to a matter of opinion. It make you not want to do it again, which is not in the spirit of RAD. It then makes it even harder, that whilst in a bad mood, you’ve got to go and pick up all the rubbish that the people who have just been arguing with you about NOS and survivor decals have chosen to leave on MK site.
It’s the right decision to make the judges/mods decisions more accurate, not easier, by all agreeing to a group concensus. If we don’t do that, its understandable that when after all the hard work behind the scenes has been done, and they still get bashed, that they decide not to do it again, and therefore threatens the future success of the event and ultimately the quality and atmosphere of the site.

Lets all agree to be a bit flexible and put this issue to bed, in a democratic way shall we?

In terms of a 2004 bike being entered into a midschool comp and winning, its not really gonna happen in all honesty is it, which made me think of the following:

Can we not volounteer some real mid school torchholders to be specific judges for the S+S section at MK etc, by doing that any crossover bikes are never going to cause the uproar of winning, as it will be true, knowledgeable judges, who know the difference between old/mid/new, regardless of dates?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: stidds on March 06, 2014, 08:10 PM
Well that is it guys the vote/poll has run its course and the overwhelming decision is for the midschool section to be (>87) 1989 to 2003 (<05) - set dates with 2 years flexibility either side to accommodate exceptions.


So I will set about changing the sections to reflect this.


Thanks to all who took the time to get involved in the decision making process and also for those who voted.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Gary72 on March 06, 2014, 08:16 PM
Thank you Sean for one of the best threads I have read on Rad for awhile :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: pickle on March 06, 2014, 08:24 PM
It was emotional  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Dannywhac on March 06, 2014, 08:34 PM
Yep - was a top debate. What people wrote changed my mind a few times  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: GavinDavis on March 06, 2014, 08:38 PM
Nice one lads...

I kindq kept outtq the way after one or two posts cos it was frying my brain lol

But im glad it went the way it did  :daumenhoch:
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: rodriguez on March 06, 2014, 11:11 PM
Nice one Sean for initiating the debate and seeing it through to the end.

Nice one Ed for keeping the thread on track and clarifying the odd point here and there.

Nice one Danny for invaluable contribution.

I obviously reckon this is the best outcome and I hope in the future others who aren't so sure will do too.
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: laidback on March 07, 2014, 12:14 AM
**Stupid noob question alert**- I haven't had a chance to read the last couple of pages of this discussion, but with the results of the poll now in, does that make my 88 FST and Master old or Mid, or is that a matter for the mods to decide where they sit?
Title: Re: Mid School dates debate Vote off
Post by: Discostu on March 07, 2014, 01:26 AM
I would say its old school. Mid school for Haros begins in 89, but for S&M begins in 87.  :daumenhoch:
Unless I'm wrong!  :LolLolLolLol:
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal