Upcoming Events
12:00 pm 2018 AGM @ Best Western Hotel
2018 AGM @ Best Western Hotel
Nov 24 @ 12:00 pm – 3:00 pm
This year’s AGM event will be held on Saturday 24th November 2018 at the Best Western Hotel, Meriden starting at 12.00 prompt with a break in the middle for refreshments.   The TR3OC AGM will be held[...]


Home Forums TR3OC Members Forum BEEZUMPH FUTURE

This topic contains 10 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  mark chandler 2 months, 1 week ago.

  • Author
  • #7205
    David Lord
    David Lord

    Members will have seen the article by David Turner in the latest issue of Triple Echo.  Responses via TE to David’s opinions will take a long time as the magazine is issued bi-monthly, so feedback can be left by replying to this post.

    We do need your feedback and ideas to ensure the club’s events programme appeals to the majority, so do please contribute.

    David’s original article is attached in case you do not have it to hand.

    You must be logged in to view attached files.
  • #7209

    John Allaway

    Interesting article.  I’ve never been to Anglesey and having read the description of it, I doubt I ever will.  I have been to 2 or 3 Beezumph rallies at Cadwell Park and thoroughly enjoyed them (purely as a spectatore, i should make clear). As the author says, the circuit is in very pleasant surroundings, the track bikes are right next to the circuit in a well defined area in which spectators are welcome, the camping is good and the facilities are excellent, in comparison to all ther race circuits I’ve visited.


    If Beezumph rallies were to be held at Cadwell again, I;d be sure to go, as would several friends. The reason for Cadwell being dropped was not made clear in the article (it was kind of implied that it was due to costs?).

    My local circuit (Snetterton) is exceedingly boring as a visitor but quite liked by racers. I think Cadwell is liked by racers and visitors alike.  So to conclude, for whatever it’s worth, my contribution is simply to say please bring back Cadwell as the Beezumph venue.


    • #7216
      David Lord
      David Lord


      Just to clarify: money is not the issue, the financial profile of using Cadwell or Anglesey is very similar.  Cadwell has not been dropped; the committee reviews potential circuits every year and makes a choice.  The problem we’ve had with Cadwell is the owner’s (MSV) inflexibility.  One example, they will not allow us to bring our own caterers on-site.  They insist we use the clubhouse which is not big enough for our 300 or so attendees to be comfortable.  In the early days at Cadwell, we used to run our own BBQ in the marquee, but things change and we cannot do that now.

    • #7219

      nigel wheatley

      I don’t think Dave Turner meant to put anyone off going to Beezumph at Anglesey. Anyway don’t be put off, John, I’ve been to both venues both tracks are excellent – and on a social level many things about Anglesey are much better, some things about Cadwell are good too (though i can’t think of anything specifically better about Cadwell except the variation between the tracks – both are excellent). I’m happy to be at either venue, its more important that we have a Beezumph to go to – and i don’t know the figures but i don’t get the impression that numbers are dropping. Also for what its worth from a rider’s perspective the journey up the A5 through the welsh hills/mountains on a triple really sets the scene for a good weekend whereas the journey to Cadwell is a nightmare of queuing and filtering through the bottlenecks at the Newark  & Lincoln “by-passes”.

      Anyone who’s been to the club’s AGM over the years will tell you that the venue for Beezumph is always discussed and no one argues against Cadwell. In an ideal world i think  beezumph should alternate between the two venues and maybe even find a third more central venue (mallory park was discussed) – but the problem is always the management at Cadwell who will not confirm a date/booking for the club so that everything can be arranged and tickets sold in good time.

      There are other problems with Cadwell,

      David Lord has mentioned the caterers issue but also on the last but one time we were there, they couldn’t be bothered to open the bar/cafe area for us in the friday night! (Fortunately the scots had brought enough cans in their van!)

      There is relatively little hard-standing area at Cadwell so if it does rain you’re out in the mud with no garages or undercover areas if the weather is really bad

      Weather can be bad at both venues. Sea mist and coastal fog delayed the last beezumph at Cadwell as we couldn’t see our way around the track until late morning

      and then there’s the  security issue, Anglesey have someone on the gate and – as i understand it – the club can collect gate money too – but at Cadwell anyone can wander in without a ticket and wander off with your bike or tent.

  • #7213

    Angus McLeod


    This has all been gone over many times before, but that is not to say the question shouldn’t be asked again as new members may have new ideas.

    As regards the Cadwell/Anglesey debate there will always be people who prefer one to the other often based on where they live.  Not visiting based on someone else’s description is probably not justified.

    As regards non track based rallies or field behind a pub as I would describe them they have been tried before and still are. The GTR and French rally can’t really be compared as due to location attendance is always going to be relatively low. There used to be what  I think was called the Midlands rally. I went once, just for the day, There was perhaps 20 or 30 people there. It seemed the format was put your tent up and go to the pub. Being a miserable teetotal sod this didn’t really appeal, although I appreciate it will to some.

    There is currently the Jim Smith lakeland weekend which by all accounts is well organised (well done Jim) with fantastic scenery etc but attendance is in the region of 50 (I think).

    I don’t think this type of rally is ever going to attract the attendances we get at the normal Beezumph.

    Sorry not much in the way of new ideas just my two pennyworth.


  • #7354

    David Turner

    Well I went to Beezumph as is my usual habit and I felt like a character in an H M Bateman cartoon “The Man Who Suggested That The Beezumph Rally Might Not Always Be Held at A Circuit!” and there was undisguised hostility from at least one Committee member. A prominent concern was the publishing of my article immediately prior to the Rally – as if it was going to affect attendance. I doubt it as those present were the usual diehards who I would have expected to attend and who would have gone even if they’d had to push the bike there! There was also surprise that I was present since, as I was told, I didn’t like Beezumph. However I had never said I didn’t like it – merely that there were differences. I listened to the comments made at B27 and have read with interest those on Facebook and TE234. The letter from James Herbert is very evocative and a joy to read.

    I am disappointed in that many seem to have failed to grasp the gist of my article. My main concern is the future custodianship of the Triples and how that is affected by the general perception of Beezumph (as the primary Club event). This seemed to be lost on most who spoke to me who were more agitated about not losing the chance to ride on a track. In this I take James’ point that the world has changed and that the track is the only chance many get the throttle open. I was not lobbying for a return to Cadwell per se. I was merely pointing out that the character of the Rally is influenced by the venue. As the Rally has only had two venues then I could only contrast the two different characters that the Rally has had. Everything is relative. Cadwell is relatively more accessible and it renders a relatively more intimate, family friendly atmosphere. Of course Anglesey isn’t without attractions – and we can only muse on how Beezumph might morph if held at Lydden, Silverstone or Oliver’s Mount for example or even on a County show ground. Of course Beezumph is eagerly anticipated by current Club members – but I was thinking of the extent to which the Rally appeals to the heathen who still await conversion to the Push Rod Triple.

    It was stressed to me that the Rally is actually designed to be a track day to celebrate the racing Triples (which was news to me) – without which record apparently the bikes wouldn’t have amounted to anything. Well, the racing history is of supreme importance and as I said it must be celebrated. I was just trying to look at Beezumph through the eyes of someone who might take the plunge into our world and who might need his family’s support. It had occurred to me that what could be said to be the negative aspects of Triple ownership i.e. expense (particularly of racing versions), fragility (in some circumstances) and to a lesser extent intensity of maintenance, are emphasised at an uncompromising racing venue rather more than are the positive aspects of ownership – which are appreciated by we who already own Triples.

  • #7357
    David Lord
    David Lord

    Changing or modifying Beezumph to have wider appeal is certainly possible and I’m sure some fresh ideas are needed.  There has been an effort to turn it into more of a rally since it was changed from two days of track riding to one day on track preceded by half a day of rally activities.  But I could never imagine the event not being track based.  To me, a combination of track action and rally atmosphere is the ideal and makes Beezumph stand out from any other club rally.  Although it is still an excellent rally, I do feel though that it has become a little stale.


    To be blunt, the real issue here is the committee.  I mean no disrespect to the current and past committee members who have all worked extremely hard to deliver what we have today.  They are to be applauded for the time and effort they put in, in some cases performing more than one role to fill in for vacant committee posts. But we do need new blood with new ideas and the energy to implement them.  This isn’t directed at you personally David, but any member can criticise what the club does, yet very very few ever put their neck on the line to change anything.  A significant part of the committee is not standing for re-election at the forthcoming AGM:

    • Dave Smith as Editor
    • Martin Rawson as Events Sec
    • Roy Maddox as PRO
    • Myself as Treasurer and as Webmaster.
    • We still also lack a Merchandise Sec

    So that is six committee positions available for members to take on.  My biggest fear is that none or only one or two members will step forward.  In the six years I have been on the committee it has been notoriously difficult to find people willing to commit some time and energy to the club.  It is surprising really as an increasing proportion of members are retirees and ought to have the time available!


    This is a fantastic opportunity!  There are no limits to what we can do.  In the past, there were worries about what the club could afford to take on financially.  That is no longer the case as we are in a very healthy financial position.  So anyone with creativity and imagination and the energy to put in some work or to organise others to do the work would be extremely welcome.  Even if you have only limited resource but want to be involved in a small way, please do come forward.  Talk to a committee member now.  Don’t wait for the AGM.

    • #7379

      David Turner

      I would be perturbed to think that there is any implied criticism of the Club Committee.  The Committee organise what the members want.  I’ve had a slight experience of committee work and appreciate what is involved.  I’ve always believed that  the TR3OC has been very lucky with its officers.

      • #7380
        David Lord
        David Lord

        None at all implied or meant. I am really trying to make it clear to everyone that we are already short handed and it is potentially about to become much worse.  Having served on the committee for 6 years I feel I have run out of ideas and that new blood is needed, hence why I am stepping down.  But as I said, I worry that people will not come forward to fill these vacancies. I hope I am wrong!

  • #7382

    Dominic Kramer

    I totally support David.  Six years should be an absolute maximum for any committee post in any type of organisation.  Its unacceptable to expect people to keep giving of their time and not to have rest.  We should adopt 3 year terms for all posts renewable to six years only.  I suggest more might volunteer if they felt they wouldn’t be ‘stuck with the job’ and there’s no stopping active members from returning to committee posts after a break.  I like to think the TR3OC is run along democratic lines so rather than writing about it, put yourself forward and get on and do it.

  • #7391

    mark chandler

    my through’s

    I was a regular at Cadwell park, but when it changed to Anglesey it meant that I couldn’t attend for the day due to the distance from sunny Essex, I like to stay for the Saturday as a spectator just looking at the bikes and track sessions which is just possible at Cadwell. As I didn’t want to attend Anglesey due to the distance I missed the first first one there. I did miss the event so decided to give it a go ! I now have  attended Anglesey three times, we now also spend the week in North wales my family. I’m also building a bike to take around the circuit (don’t mind which one) as i would now like to give it ago. Anglesey does seem to be a lot bigger when walking around which makes things seem a lot spread out. I’m glad I gave it a try !

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.