Yes in essence that's true - the ruling by the RTTC (the time trilling body) was in 1938 after most of the unorthodox designs were introduced. However the makers did like their frames to be readily identifiable regardless of whether they were being raced or being ridden on the Club run...
Hilary Stone, Bristol, British Isles
Peter Brueggeman wrote:
> In reference to a Baines Flying Gate, Harvey Sachs said "...My guess is
> that this, like the "curly" stay Hetchins and the "Cantiflex" with
> "diadrant" (?) recurved forks was an effort to do almost anything to
> make your brand identifiable in races where no brand markings were
> allowed. ..."
>
> My unschooled understanding is that the use of unorthodox frame designs
> to make brands identifiable where no brand markings were allowed (in
> British racing) is a recurring CR urban legend, and there's been no
> documentation to back this up?
>
> I checked the CR Archive and couldn't find anything but it is a tough
> topic to keyword search.
>
> Peter
> ..........
> Peter Brueggeman
> La Jolla California USA
> 4peebee(at)peterbrueggeman.com