Vince

You're entitled to your opinion that it's crap but speed wise there's very little in it with regards to lap times between the fast guys and NL Speedway riders. They can broadside but with the tyres it isn't the fast way around. However that is immaterial, it's a different sport and like saying MotoGP isn't as fast as F1.

It's not a professional sport by a long way and all the better for it, does attract some very god sponsors though. Quite simply Aidan is better at this than he was at Speedway and Eddie Kennett, Kev Doolan and even Jason Crump haven't turned up and run away with it so the idea any NL rider would is a load of nonsense by people who don't understand that it isn't a variant of Speedway but a completely different sport. The bikes are different, even more importantly the tyres are different and you ride in a completely different way, some tracks suit road racers while some suit those with an off road background better. If you watch it thinking it should be ridden like Speedway it only goes to show a complete lack of understanding of the way different motorcycles work. The fact that somebody like Marquez who is one of the best motorcycle riders ever thinks flat track is difficult to ride and excellent training for MotoGP while Steve Shovlar and Speedibee think it's easy tells you everything you need to know. But my bikes are still available to either so they can show me just how easy it is, perhaps if they can stay in front of an old man like myself I can pick up a few tips. That's an old man who has actually ridden Trials, Grasstrack, Speedway, MX and now Flat track bikes and thinks the Flat Track is as skilled as any of the others unlike those two spectators of course! Speedibee continues to spout nonsense as the pit atmosphere is the best I have come across in any motorcycle sport including years of MX. Speedway riders do well of course and will hold their own up to a point but the standard of the top boys in British Flat Track is now as high as any in Europe and such that they can hold their own in the states. It has changed a great deal in the past 5 years.

This is a complete livestream from one of the UK Championship meetings held this year. Doesn't show all the groups because the meeting was split into two but gives a good idea of what goes on. Nothing happens until about 20 minutes in though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ObAgHApQ7Y And I'd love to do some meetings in any Tesco's car park, taking motorcycle racing of any sport to people rather than hoping they'll turn up would be brilliant

In my opinion any track that makes a bit of dirt but any Speedway track works. Record entries during 2016 with well over 100 riders at meetings with some riding in more than one group. The classes are now Pro (expert), Restricted (intermediate) and Rookie (Novice) on mostly DTX bikes which are the converted MotoX bikes. Vintage, Thunderbikes (which can be anything from specialist flat track 'framers' to converted road bikes), Minibikes and then kids classes. 12 riders to a race starting off 3 rows in the UK series can make for some very good racing. The sport is really taking off now with a lot of Road Racers realising how the top boys have been using it as training for years, at it's best it's great racing, at times it's follow the leader, like all motorsport. Ignore Speedibee, he's probably not seen a meeting for some time and the standard has risen unbelievably the past few years. He has a real bee in his bonnet about flat track, no idea why but most of his comments proves he knows very little about it. He assures us it is really easy to ride but despite repeated offers to ride my bike doesn't want to show us. In fact like most motor racing it is really easy to do but incredibly difficult to do very well. The Road Racers did show the top Flat track boys the way home last night but those lads are probably on a flat track bike more than the specialists themselves, many have their own track or one they use daily and Marquez will win at any motorcycle event he puts some effort into. It also has to be said that they run on different size wheels and completely different tyres to the ones used normally in flat track. Put them on a normal sized track on flat track tyres and it wouldn't be so easy.

This year there was flat track racing at Rye House, Peterborough and Kings Lynn as well as a trotting track in Ammanford, Wales and Greenfields Lincs. 2017 fixtures should be out soon, I know there will be an event at the MCN show at Peterborough and Dirt Quake at Kings Lynn for sure. I think the Spanish go to the superprestigio because of the road racers mainly, not so sure they would be that keen on Speedway.

Now says 18;35 on Motors

Oliver Brindley quickest of the open class riders in yesterday's practice!/ qualifying beating top American Brad Baker in the process. Only Moto Gp champion Marquez is quicker. Alan Birtwistle is 7th I the open class with George and Toby further down but competitive. Being shown live on motors tv, 1700 tonight

Four of this years UK top 5 riding in this, British Champion Alan Birtwhistle, Oliver Brindley who qualified fastest of everybody for this event two years ago, George Pickering and Toby Hales who are both having their first ride here. The standard is rising rapidly in this country and it is quite possible that we could have two riders in the final, given a bit of luck any or all of the four could be there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiNLSx8V2CE That is a big crash!!

Hopefully they are too busy producing a magazine to get too involved in the theory of whether it is a sensible proposition in the business sense. Like Speedway itself too much research is likely to conclude it's not sustainable. However we are fortunate enough to have some people around the sport who allow passion to overcome logic and put in the money and/or work to keep the sport alive rather than worry about market research and the like. No doubt it is a big part of the reason why Speedway survives rather than either thrives or disappears with the help of sound business sense but survive it does. Market research and consultants could very easily be the end of this sport as it has been for many businesses that live because of passion rather than theory.

I really like the Star and have no wish for the sports only magazine to start becoming an investigative tabloid type read. There is enough knocking of the sport on the internet in my opinion we don't need more in print. My favourites are the technical articles and I actually prefer the magazine in the off season as they look for different articles.

I agree that it is a possibility and worth investigating but I do think you are tending to ignore the problems because you think it is the answer. Equally I am undoubtedly making some of the problems worse than they need to be because I'm not convinced it's the way forward. You have but I don't think you're right If you employ all the current tuners how are you going to make sure all the engines are as equal as possible? It can only really work if you use a very limited number of mechanics and the same checking equipment. For example Moto2 engines all come from the same workshop and are checked on the same dyno, I believe that in the karting series that run sealed engines there are a very limited number of engine builders allowed to work on the motors. Very few riders can afford or will want to run completely different equipment for the few individual meetings. Grasstrack is dying on it's arse and you won't lose a dozen engines a year to that. However you look at it those engines are scrap value. You can take this as 100% gospel, liability waivers aren't worth as much as the paper they are written on, it's just a hope that some people will assume they are and not take legal advice. Seems to me that current thinking is to get engines to rev higher and higher by shortening the stroke and lightening flywheels, if you can't rev them there is no point carrying on down that route. Same with lightweight parts although there are some other benefits it's often in the chase to gain revs that they are fitted. Since the first motorcycle was made they tinkered with it trying to make it faster. Since the second one was made they started racing them and had to tinker more to beat the other guy!! If they can't tinker with the engines they will produce more expensive ignitions and clutches and carbs and more adjustable frames and so on. The only way I can see to keep the price of machinery down is a claiming rule where if you win a race anybody can buy your bike at the end of the meeting for £x therefore ensuring you make sure it's never worth more than that. has been done in other motorcycle sports but there have always been issues and problems around it.

But given the very limited production runs of Speedway engines using only one manufacturer would very likely put the other out of business. There might be the rest of the Speedway world and a very minimal Grasstrack sales but British Speedway must be a very significant part of GM's business. As soon as Jawa have a monopoly do you really believe that their engines won't rise in price? It's all well and good saying you have to find a way to make it work but that is because you believe this to be the answer, those of us who don't are entitled to explore the possible pitfalls and alternatives. Start with the pitfalls: Clubs are barely surviving so for them to suddenly spend quite considerable sums on engines isn't really very practical at this time. Don't forget it is no good having 14 engines because some will be away for service and you have to allow for breakdowns etc. Presumably the clubs supply ignitions and carbs as well. Who services these engines and won't their prices rise once the other tuners have packed it in? What happens to all the engines riders are currently using? As a cost cutting measure reducing the main assets of the competitors to scrap value overnight isn't going to be very helpful. It doesn't matter how carefully they are assembled there will be a performance differential in the engines. What happens when a rider gets hurt because of an engine failure, is the club liable? There must be other issues that actually need looking at rather than saying "this is a good idea we need to find a way to make it work" In my opinion the single engine idea could only work if you got somebody like Rotax involved who aren't dependant on Speedway. Alternatives: For my money the best is the rev limiter with a gradual lowering of the limit year on year. I think there are numerous benefits the big one for me being that it would reduce the ever shorter stroke/light flywheel engines that have come in. I firmly believe they cause more problems for riders than the silencers ever do. Encouraging the introduction of longer stroke engines with heavier flywheels would also future proof against the inevitable lowering of noise limits in years to come. Also a very easy item to police. Flywheel weight and or minimum stroke limits would, I believe, help a great deal but would be incredibly difficult to police. Then there is the question of just how much of a saving does any of this actually represent to the riders. On here it's become the latest cause that could save the sport but how much are we actually talking about per rider? If you take an average PL rider and say he does approximately 100 heats per year league matches. I'm out of date with prices but lets assume that it's about £500 for a service and double that for a full rebuild. 50 heats between services that is £15 per heat per rider on servicing costs. For sure its quite a lot of money but its a lot less than it takes to run the van to get you to meetings or than you are likely to lose taking time off work. In reality reducing rider costs by £1500 per season isn't going to save the sport. If it's not about costs but providing better entertainment then I have three suggestions. Run a short practice so everybody gets to start with a good set up. Let the losing side have the pick of gates 1 & 3 or 2 & 4 every race. Prepare tracks to give good racing rather than home advantage, although fans have to take the bulk of the blame for that as it has been seen many times how a winning side brings in more spectators than good racing does.

If you restricted British Speedway to Jawa supplied bikes only what would happen to the price a couple of years down the road, especially if GM don't survive the restriction of their trade?

So despite all the theory the only bloke regularly using one says he had no problems and it reduced his costs? When they did the tests at Scunthorpe wasn't David Howe also in favour? He's been around long enough to know what's what I'd have thought. My son rides a bike with a rev limiter that he hits twice every lap, has a carburettor and has yet to wash the bore or lock up. I rode the same bike and did the same thing to it for 4 years and did blow it up, after it had 180 hours on the engine! It behaved no differently hitting the limiter to my injected bike. Despite being methanol that won't happen on a Speedway engine either, it doesn't when they misfire now.

Because it would be very difficult to police while a rev limiter would be really simple. The end result is the same though, rev limiters would be no more dangerous in my opinion, possibly less so as they would misfire rather than sign off completely. The way bikes are over revved on the start by some has to shorten the life span considerably. The oil system is so primitive that there is no way anything is getting adequate feed at those sort of revs.

I think the benefit of a rev limiter could, in the long term, be to make short stroke engines obsolete. Then possibly you get back to long stroke engines with heavier flywheels which in my opinion are inherently safer especially as silencers become more restrictive which they will undoubtedly do. Can't see how an engine hitting a limiter in the middle of a race is any different to one which over revs, either way the power disappears and you get some unexpected grip.

You do realise there are other tracks than the one at Poole and Neil took riders to many of them over the years? He spotted and then helped many youngsters in his time and was brilliant at it.

I think Neil Street was about the nicest man I ever met and superb at bringing out the best in riders, great talent spotter, superb motivator and the best coach I've ever seen. I do believe that he lacked the ruthless streak I think a great team manager sometimes needs, if anything though that's a compliment to the character of the man.

Wasn't that bad a bike although not well prepped :-) to be fair he had never ridden an upright. The engines would probably be competitive if you laid them down but I suspect that on modern slick tracks an upright would struggle against the laydowns. Then again on a modern track at race speeds would an old Weslake etc be any better reliability wise with the way they are revving these days I doubt it. Still think the rev limiter has the most potential given that you could over time reduce the limit to a point where extra flywheel weight would be more beneficial than a very short stroke engine. Would be interesting to know what happened to it given that the last we heard those who had actually ridden with it were largely in favour.

A case where air fences aren't necessarily the best option, personally I think the Rye fence was superb.

Seen a couple in the Classic magazines with upright Speedway engines, one a GM and one a Jawa I think. Not the most reliable engine to cover lots of miles with I would imagine! Quite a few 2v Jawa's running in pre 65 MX including some Metisses which are beautiful to see and hear.

Being really old I can remember when the Motor Cycle News was more about racing than road bikes. You would have the results and reports of all meetings, Speedway, Trials, MX, Enduro, Grasstrack all featured heavily. Even local meetings had the results printed I actually learned to read at an early age because my mum stopped looking up my Uncles results for me so I had to do it. Later Wednesday mornings was the day you rushed to get the MCN so you could see where you came in Sundays Trial and the source of endless trouble as I tried to read it first lesson in school. In those days though Motorcycles were much more a mode of transport and competition was for the enthusiast. Even then Speedway had a niche of its own as if it were not quite a motorcycle sport but something a little separate and most of the crowd had little interest in Motorcycling otherwise. For as long as I can remember though competitors in other motorcycle sports were interested in Speedway so there is a cross over there somewhere. Nowadays owning a road motorcycle is in itself a hobby and magazines and the Motor Cycle News have gravitated toward that as there are huge numbers in comparison to competitive racing. The advent of the Trials and Motocross News probably took them further away from sport when they were no longer the main source of results. Road racing is much more associated with the new motorcyclists because it's something they can associate with I assume. Much as I love Speedway on the TV I think BSB and Moto2 & 3 are at least as good to watch. Despite my assertion that it's all about the racing I always watch Moto GP as well and that often is as much about the personalities as the racing.

I think the asset system is poor and does a lot more harm than good, particularly to the development of British riders. However I can also see that in a team sport like Speedway you can't have riders operating as completely free agents as they could choose a team based on the pay offered and track being ridden literally week by week. Clearly they have to be contracted to a team on a yearly basis and certainly can't be allowed to ride as a guest when their own team is racing. The sport cannot afford to pay and treat riders as employees when they are free to go and work abroad or for other teams when theirs isn't racing so some sort of compromise has to be reached and generally where it is suits most. The Ben Hopwood situation appears to be more about whether he was sacked or not and not as straight forward as you are making it out to be.

OK, maybe a better phrase would be very expensive. I just don't think all tuners are products of the devil, some, probably most, do a decent job for the price they charge. And yes, I have paid for a Speedway engine to be serviced a few of times although I was generally too much of a tight arse to pay somebody else and did them myself.

I think that there are good and bad 'tuners' like everything else. Some charge a very reasonable price and do a very good job. Doing your own engines will always be cheaper because somebody who does it for a living can't take the risk of running a rod for an extra spell or just replacing rings and not the piston. Too many breakdowns and the 'tuner' loses his reputation and livelihood. As for the Gerhard engine even at NL level there will be a couple of riders with plenty of dad's money to spend who will have somebody try to get more out of them. If they start winning then everybody will be back on the same merry go round with a higher starting price. The opportunity is there to reduce costs but only if they jump on it now, once the tuning starts it's back to square one. Perhaps they should bring in a claiming rule set at just above the price of a standard Gerhard engine. Any rider can buy a race winning engine for say £250 above the standard engine price (for the inconvenience of having to replace it). If riders then choose Jawa or GM engines they have the leeway to spend up to that figure on tuning them, any more is a major risk.