Humphrey Appleby

The only realistic alternative for fixed race days are Wednesdays and Thursdays. Fridays are no use as riders will be off to the SGP etc.. nearly half the time. Yes Poland might run the occasional Friday meeting, but they don't run as many rounds and don't use Fridays as a regular race day so can work around these issues. To run on just two race nights, teams would need to be split equally between them unless the plan is to just run a 14-round programme. Going to 28 or more meetings would mean teams riding twice some weeks and that won't work if there's more teams riding on one day than another. However, he question must be asked that even if the intention is to attract the so-called top boys back, how can they be afforded anyway and what they going to bring in terms of increased revenue? And as soon as their Polish team has a crucial match that they insist they're fit for, the sick notes will be produced and there will be no sanctions against either the rider or their Polish team. Spectator preferences and financial conditions are entirely different in Poland. Do Polish fans have to negotiate the M25 or other busy roads on a Friday evening? Similarly why has top-level speedway on Sunday never been that popular in Britain? British teams mostly have to share multi-purpose stadia, so there's no option to have just one race day. Moreover, the nature of the stadium leasing and cost structure of British speedway generally requires a more extensive programme of fixtures than in Poland and Sweden which simply can't be fitted into the season if there's just the one race night. This is aside from the fact that guesting would be impossible with a single race night, as all the other teams would be riding as well (why has nobody thought of that?). Some might say that's a good thing, but nobody's really come up with a viable alternative for short-term replacements at short notice. The simple fact is that even getting back 200 or 300 hundred existing fans a meeting is papering over the cracks. The speedway demographic is ageing and without attracting a young audience will be doomed in 10 years or so beyond a handful of amateur tracks. You only have to look at official attitudes to social media and viral marketing to see how badly the sport is being run by those in charge.

There are plenty of nimbys in the city as well, quite probably Labour voting too. However, the City Council has generally been supportive of speedway down the years. Having 'greasy biker types' making noise in the countryside - do you think the average shire Tory would be supportive?

But Labour doesn't control the area where any stadium would likely to be built.

Can't be any good then...

There's really nowhere in Oxford to build a new speedway stadium. Much of the undeveloped land is green belt and the city whilst Labour controlled, is completely surrounded by nimby Toryshire. Potentially Standlake Arena could be developed into a speedway facility, but it's someway out of the city and in another local authority district. It's also absurd to be knocking down a perfectly good stadium and building another one.

Yes, the amusing sounding Himmelfahrtstag.

Opportunity for another farewell meeting then...

Not suggesting it's the top of the list of issues to address, but the system is broken. The 3-2-1-0 system doesn't encourage team riding, whilst bonus points inflate averages. The casual observer already isn't going to get bonus points and many accepted aspects of the sport. I feel people would get used to team scoring fairly quickly.

I've picked up quite a few Go-Pros off the track. That admittedly was a while back though, so maybe they improved the fixings.

Yes, and how often do they fall off said helmets onto the track?

They should not be included for overall team building, but should be included for the determining the heat-leader/second-string/reserves and guest purposes. The points system should be changed in team speedway so you only score points for finishing ahead of opposition riders. That then solves the problem of bonus points inflating averages and pay packets.

The sports psychology thing is quite interesting. I certainly found there were racing days when I was able to get into a zone and actually won things, but I could rarely replicate it in any consistent way. However, it can be overemphasised. A few ago years our boss in his clueless wisdom hired a psychologist who had supposedly coached the British Olympic rowers. The sessions basically consisted of us being told "we're highly skilled athletes" (actually we weren't, we worked for an Internet organisation), and that "we're big winners" (err.. what have we won or got to win) and "we can achieve anything" (well whatever). Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I couldn't see how anyone could buy into that and I'd question how much use it would be even to Olympic athletes. Of course, all these things get positive reinforcement - the Olympic rowing team did well so ergo it must be the psychology. Nothing of course to do with selecting elite athletes in the first place, and the physical training...

Factored averages as previously used in Sweden would be better. I think it's just a matter of perception and what people are used to. Baseball batting averages are usually between .100 and .300 and quoted to three decimal places, but every baseball fan understands there's a vast difference in ability between the top and bottom of that range.

Yes, but with the 15 heat format the top scorers will regularly score more than 12 in a match yet still have less than a 12-point average. So their CMAs are essentially calculated down, whereas reserve CMAs under the old 13-heat format were essentially calculated up which does not seem quite as illogical.

Makes more sense to me. CMAs are somewhat meaningless where some riders routinely take five or more rides. I suppose it made more sense with the old 13-heat format, and for the points limit as it approximated the match score.

Speedway is the ultimate mercenary sport, and whilst it masquerades as a team sport, team work is not intrinsic to results unlike most other team sports. Riders are competing against other riders for team places and points money, so there's little incentive to help others - at least not until their own careers are over. There also aren't the same opportunities for practice - limited tracks and limited track time available so you just have to make the best of it. In fact, I'd say it's the same with most motor sports, and the best drivers and riders are usually those that have natural ability. If you're the type of person who needs a lot of practice - odds are you won't make it to a high level - same as those flying fast jets for example.

A 3-point should be replaced with another 3-point rider. It completely undermines the 'point' of the system if you're effectively having guests for such riders, or even worse overseas riders.

This idea just keeps coming around again and again, but it's just moving the deckchairs. All grading achieves is to make riders with high averages in their grade more in demand, and those with low averages less so. It's a points limit by any other name, and taken to extreme examples under your scheme, one team could track riders with combined averages of 52.50, and another team only 37.00. Where is the fairness in that and simply leads to even more cheque book speedway as teams chase riders with the right grade, if not encouraging even more blatant average manipulation. Any decent system needs to allow teams to develop and grow up to point, but force rider redistribution if they become overly strong. Teams should not be penalised for finishing just above mid-table, and certainly not because they happen to find a good 3.00 pointer. Indeed, teams should be positively rewarded for having a good 3.00 pointer. Any under-21 rider or in the first three seasons of their career that's started at British track should be given and keep a 3.00 point average during that period, particularly if they stay at the same team. If they're good enough to move up, that should be done on a draft basis with the worst teams getting the preferential picks.

They might be called thick or biased...

Certain approved helmet cameras are allowed - I think they're supposed to be an integral part of the helmet though. It's absolutely lunacy to attach an external camera to a helmet though, whether allowed or not. It's not only potentially weakening the shell, but it creates an impact point.

Yes, indeed...

The reality is that speedway physically allows riders to ride for more than one team, and the sport has evolved that way it's accepted that riders make a living that way. I suppose it's no different to a self-employed contractor working for several clients.

In fairness to the BSPA (and others), I think the efforts to develop speedway riders actively started in the late 1990s, but the real problem was the retain-and-transfer system. Riders moving between British teams attracted a transfer or loan fee, whilst riders from abroad could be signed for nothing. There were financial disincentives to sign British riders, and also little done to encourage the inclusion of developing riders in teams. Whilst many riders did come through grasstrack, I think a lot also came from motocross encouraged by the better earnings possible in speedway. I seem to remember John Berry writing that he thought motocross skills were easier to adapt to speedway than grasstrackers could, and I think there's some truth in that.

Why are you conflating the Polish League and OneSport? They've no more in common than the BSPA and BSI.

The American Civil War was fought by the southern states to free themselves from the tyranny of potentially not being allowed to maintain slavery. It can dressed up any which way, but that was the root cause. I think history has been overly kind to Lincoln and it's certainly true that slave states remained in the Union, but the heralded 'southern way of life' was based on legalised oppression of others - both before and after emancipation.