Vince

To be fair it seems that James is injured and Sam has a meeting for the Mavericks. Since the Academy league first came up we have said that Sam was unable to commit to the series but would ride if he was needed and available. Obviously his CL fixtures have to come first. Out of his scheduled rides he is only able to take part in the meetings at Weymouth and Somerset. Can't believe that George has a wrist injury with the amount of excercise it gets Hope it heals quickly George and we will catch up with you soon.

We once had a bloke turn up at the MX practice track in an RS Racehome (£100,000 +) and then unload 4 small KTM's with all the best bits on (best part of £9000 I would guess) before coming over to sign in his 6 year old son. He then asked where would be the best place to take the boy and teach him to ride as it was his first time. He didn't seem to get my point when I asked him what happened if the boy didn't like riding bikes!

To be fair to the parents a great many of them are learning the job as much as their kids are. In my experience last year many of the parents just ran the engines the same way pretty much everywhere and even gearing was done on the advice of experienced riders so would sometimes be totally wrong for that rider. Several times I have seen parents lowering gearing to try and make the bike more rideable but in fact it has already been too low and the kids are getting into trouble because they are running out of revs. Many of the kids are also very inexperienced and therefore can't tell you what is wrong so it is pretty difficult all round for such young riders. In most cases this isn't down to parents deliberately setting bikes up wrong but just to a lack of knowledge. What I will say is that many of the parents would happily share information about how the bikes were set up although the kids were in competition. I don't know about this year but last year was pretty low on the number of pushy parents - if you want to see just how pushy parents can be try going to a schoolboy motocross meeting!

Of course it is good for the youngsters to have a ride, it is an experience that every rider would enjoy and if there is pressure then it is a good opportunity to get used to it. Judging by the way the track improved during the evening they should have had a full scale junior meeting before the main event.

Has anybody got the results for the kids?

I still think races should be started at 2 minutes, if a rider hasn't got himself on the line ready to go at 1 min 55 then he is excluded. The start marshall could then line the riders up and an assistant puts a block of wood behind the bikes to stop them pulling back. A laser line that indicated who broke it would be ideal but a lump of wood is cheaper. Whatever happens I would hate to see the return of tape touching.

As far as I know Matt Bates and Shane Waldren are still injured and we haven't heard anything. I would guess Simon Lambert as the highest finisher from last year who is available. Or maybe somebody else from this year.

From a Doctor, like I said try it, we have been showing people this for years when teaching them to ride and there have been very few who it didn't apply to. Then again it is difficult for me to combat such a well reasoned argument as yours

Left handed people naturally find it easier to turn right and right handed to turn left, if you doubt it hop on a push bike and turn both ways at a very slow speed.

There's a coincidence, I had a Garelli Tiger Cross which indeed used to blow away fizzy's etc but also used to vibrate itself to bits on a regular basis. Also used to seize at least once a month but that may have been more to do with a 16 year old thinking he knew all about porting a 2 stroke Anyway it would show 70 on the speedo but in hindsight I doubt it ever did much more than 50 - 55 downhill with a gale force wind up it's arse.

I have never seen Ascot but I reckon whoever did the speed check and got 62mph on a 180yard track is the same bloke who made the speedometer for my moped in the 70's I am just a fan of fast Speedway, to me that is an important part of the sport. I can't remember how big Carmarthen was but certainly not much more than 250m so reducing it to say 200m wouldn't make a great deal of difference. I also suspect that some of the demise in attendances at Speedway is that everybody goes faster on the way to the meeting than the racers do on the track these days while in it's heyday they must have seemed to be going much faster. I didn't know you could run the same engine on methanol and petrol but presumably the compression would have to be lowered otherwise the engine would pre-ignite on petrol. The same problem would still arise in circumstances like tomorrow at Newport when 3 riders are riding in both the PL and the CL. I just think that if changes are to be made there has to a definite advantage and not an experiment that could end up being worse for the sport.

That is exactly the point I am trying to make about making the ancillaries (clutch, ignition, carburrettor) standard items, they are easy to see and police. As I think I posted earlier there is little point in spending a fortune on tuning if you are going to put a crap carb on. I don't think you should convert to petrol because you would again be moving too far away from a bike that could also compete in the PL. You already have to use a tyre for a whole meeting in league racing and most of the oil companies have a mineral based oil so there wouldn't be much of an extra market for sponsors. You could equally say that Mauger, Briggs, Moore, Fundin, Loram, Rickardsson etc etc are proof that a big track is better. I have seen some of the videos from the States and the racing is close but the speeds so low that it doesn't interest me in the slightest, it is almost another sport in the way that the indoor or ice meetings are over here. Carmarthen and Weymouth are about as small as I would ever be interested in watching Speedway at, I really can't see that the size of the track is going to get over the problems that stop new tracks i.e. noise and traffic. The only benefit I can see of small tracks is that you could probably find indoor sites where you could hold the odd meeting.

I don't think things like low power engines or a set up for the CL that can't be easily changed for the PL are going to ever work because if a rider is to progress he will at sometime need to ride in both divisions if he is to progress. You would then have the situation where he would have to spend more money than ever because he would need seperate bikes for each division. Personally I hate the idea of smaller tracks, they are already getting smaller than they used to be and Speedway without the speed is only half the spectacle (just how much smaller could Carmarthen have been?). I know they do it in the States but that is hardly a hotbed of Speedway action. The idea that a set up like the ones used in Road racing or Supermoto one make series could be transferred to Speedway is also unlikely in my view. The difficulty is that unlike the R6 cup or similar the bikes (engines) would have to be in several different places with different mechanics working on them, they are also used a lot more often. I still think that the only limit that could be easily policed is to restrict the ancillary parts to less expensive items. These parts can easily be seen at anytime throughout the meeting and would lessen the (perceived) need for expensive engine tuning.

To be fair I think most of the kids are using second hand bikes and kevlars so they sort of inherit the flashy bits.

Having read morganbike's post I have to say that it would be a real shame to see the bad side of the 'racing parent' mentality creep into youth Speedway. Having spent years at schoolboy MX meetings it was really refreshing for me to be part of a set up where the kids were doing the riding and thinking while the dads sorted the bikes out and didn't become involved in every little incident. As Steve says the vast majority of the kids in last years U15's got on really well, which is no surprise as the kids always do, but also the parents mixed well and there was none of the shouting and screaming about 'little Johnny knocking off my little Billy' that ruins youth Motocross. It seemed that everybody accepted that Speedway was a more professional sport and that the kids needed to sort things out for themselves, I would hope that attitude doesn't change because of past incidents in another sport. Good luck to all taking part, George if you switch on and just get on with the riding you will do well.

I think 6 lap races would just lead to the same engines being rebuilt more often and therefore becoming more expensive. Can't see any benefit in bigger engines as I think they would just be adding more speed to the equation. I still think that if you are going to introduce any sort of restriction it has to be simple and easy to police. Restricting manifold sizes or similar will never work as people will just spend a fortune trying to get the same power as before the restriction. One obvious thing that nobody has mentioned is adding weight to the bikes, I don't believe it would be practical as by the time you added enough to make a real difference the bikes might become difficult to ride. It is another option though.

Jim, from what I have seen there are fairly often checks on carbs but as far as I know there has to be a protest in order for the engine to be checked. They are then sealed prior to being checked but I don't know what happens from there (Sam has never gone fast enough to be accused of running an oversize engine ) I suspect that at most tracks the riders have more than enough power and wouldn't need to resort to oversize engines. I do know a very well known Grass Track rider from the 70's who bought an engine off another well known rider and after winning a top meeting commented that the engine he had bought was a flyer to the ex owner who replied that "all those 580's do" I suspect that they have always been more of a myth than fact in Speedway though as the risk of being caught would be pretty great. The R6 cup is a great idea (KTM do a similar thing is Supermoto) in many ways but I do wonder if it stifles talent by only being available to those who can make that sort of investment in one hit. I would think that more people could afford to race with the costs split over the course of a season. Andy M, the last I heard there was a shortage of both GM's and the latest Jawa engines so I don't think there is much chance of getting a substantial discount. There is also the problem that riders tend to buy bikes in bits as many want a GM engine or NEB clutch or Antig frame and so on. Or finances might restrict them to buying an engine now and a new chassis in a few months time. The market is pretty small and secondhand equipment is readily available at very reasonable prices. The problem in the CL is that some are on standard equipment while others are spending several thousand pounds on tuned motors. There are riders in the CL who have 2 or 3 engines each one of which cost more than both of Sam's complete bikes together. Having said that if the rider has the potential to ride that sort of equipment to it's potential he's not going to be in the CL for long, if he is getting beaten by riders on lesser equipment he is the one spending money needlessly. However it is only human nature for riders to think that they are only being beaten because of better equipment and perhaps spend money they can't afford trying to level the playing field. I still think that a 3 grand engine is probably pretty worthless with a £100 carb sat on it.

Been giving this some thought and what might be possible is to police all the ancilaries rather than the engines. If riders (in the CL) had to run standard Jawa frames, forks, clutches and carbs that could represent a substantial saving over some of the aftermarket equipment. It would be easy to see at a glance if a rider was running a different clutch or expensive plates, Jawa frames are considerably cheaper than others although many riders would complain that they don't like them. I would also guess that Antig, NuTrack, Stuha and JHR might not be best pleased with the idea. Then if there was a good supply of the standard Jawa flat slide carb (or maybe the dellorto round slide) there would not be very much point in spending a fortune on tuning engines. It would also mean that a rider could go and buy a competitive bike out of the crate for just over a couple of grand. It has to be said though that a new bike would probably be competitive anyway but riders wouldn't be happy with it. Such a bike could represent a saving of several grand over a bike with all the extras and an engine from a well known tuner.

The mid pack guys run standard motors and the front guys have their engines blueprinted which leaves them as standard in theory but actually uses a large selection of parts and some machining to make the tolerances perfect. Blueprinting can be just as expensive (maybe more so) as what we would call tuning. I have seen 2 identically built car race engines run on a dyno on the same day and with the same carbs etc and one has produced nearly 5% less power than the other. Even Moto GP riders who have 2 supposedly identical bikes that have cost a fortune to put together inevitably find one to be better than the other.

I think that from a riders point of view standardisation would be OK, it would still allow for timing, jetting, compression and cam changes which is all they would ever have to do. The problem woud be to police it, you couldn't logically seal engines because they would still need rebuilding from time to time and to check that an engine was standard would require a complete strip down. There is also the problem that 2 apparently identical engines can perform very differently and if they had to remain as built and you happened to buy the lemon you would be stuck with it. The 2 year time scale might also cause problems as there are a great many riders running around on engines that are 5 or 6 years old. The age isn't usually a problem as you keep replacing the internals anyway. It's a great idea but I doubt that it could ever be enforced.

SCB, I was talking about the suggestion that the team that was x amount of points behind went from the gate while the other team went from 15yds. Even with your suggestion there are going to be times when you have riders with 0.X higher average than their opponent having to give them 15 yards (home or away). I honestly believe that would produce the most processional racing ever. It would also still be a fact that the engine tuners would be the ones to benefit the most from any form of handicapping. At the moment a guy on not quite so good equipment can still win races if he gets his nose in front, he certainly won't do that from a handicap. Can you imagine what Boycie would do to Karlis if he held him up for 3 1/2 laps when the team needed the point to win

Yeah I saw that in the Star but I assume they meant the Academy league not the U15's. From the way I understood it the kids won't actually be attached to one team but will be sorted into teams for each match so that they can produce even teams presumably like they did at Newport last year. I could well be wrong though. I think the league will be a big success as that try out at Newport seemed to please everybody from the riders to the spectators.

I believe Briggo's objection was that they were spending a fortune on engines and that the riders they were giving a start were getting better. Much the same argument would apply now I would have thought in that only those riders with the best (most expensive) motors would be succesful from a handicap. I would also expect riders to have to take greater risks to pass quickly and therefore the injury rate to go up. I can see how it would work in the States on smaller tracks where the speeds are lower but can you imagine Boycie having to give 20 yards to Watto on the Island, it would be carnage if he could catch him. Same in reverse at Newport.

As far as I am aware the only rider from last years top 5 in the U15 Championship who is age eligible is Josh Auty. As I remember it the others were Shane Waldron, Simon Lambert, Gary Cottham and Matt Bates all of whom were born in 1989 so won't be eligible. As far as the league goes I know the age criteria is slightly different and allows for riders who were still 15 at the start of the season. Many of these will have CL experience but I would assume that the reasons for their inclusion are that the CL may be a big step up and this league could be a confidence builder when things aren't going too well. This was certainly the case for Sam last year when the U15 rounds gave him the chance to be competitive after spending time riding at 2 or 4 in the CL and really struggling. There is also the need for riders to be competing who have enough experience to entertain the crowds, there won't be too many tracks volunteering to hold rounds in future years if the crowds don't enjoy it. Finally but probably most importantly riders need to be competing against faster opponents in order to improve, for the youngsters this will usually be those with CL experienece and those riders are competing against fater riders all the time in the CL. Otherwise the standard will remain stagnant. If you watched the early U15 rounds last year there were a couple of riders head and shoulders above the rest but during the year the gap closed by a huge amount as the front runners improved less than those who were chasing them.

I quite liked the idea that they used at an U15 meeting at Newport last year where each rider had 3 rides and then the 2 lowest point scorers from each team went into one race, the next 2 lowest in the next and the 2 highest scorers from each team in the final race. I thought at the time that this would make a good format for league racing. It could easily be adapted with 4 rides for each rider as they are already programmed and then all except the lowest scorer for each team taking part in the final 3 races which should all be competitive.