BWitcher

So you're most certainly not a man of principle who stood up for what you believed in then. You spent the overwhelming majority of those years watching the sport with a far more unfair system than is in place now but didn't feel the need to boycott it. So, basically you are boycotting the sport over a rule that has been made fairer. I agree with all you say Colin, but the discussion is about fairness. WK wants fairness. The changes have made it fairer and he's abandoned the sport.

How many years were you attending speedway?

Apologies, that should have said when you claim it is MORE unfair. Of course all tactical systems are unfair to the winning team... however, the fact remains we now have the least unfair system the sport has ever had. Strange that you choose to boycott the sport at this time.

It's not even a debate WK. The current tactical rule is fairer than any other tactical system the sport has had. There is no argument against that. Now if you said you didn't like double pts because you thought it was cheapening the sport, you may have a case. However, when you claim it is unfair, you are wrong. The claim from WK is that the rule is 'unfair'. In the old days a team gets 6 pts ahead, away team can replace a weaker rider with a top guy to pull it back... home team works hard, gets 6 ahead again.. the away team can do it again! Then potentially a 3rd time.. The current system, a tactical can be used once, a team has to be 10pts behind to do it, the races in which they can do it are restricted. It's quite simply the fairest it has ever been towards the winning team... which is what WK wants. He advocates fairness. Now please note, I'm not saying it is 'better'. I preferred the old tac sub as most people do.. BUT the old tac sub was more unfair.

Completely ignorant, head in the sand comment that you can't prove in anyway. A business calls its customer idiots.. its almost certain it will lose some customers. There's a precedent for this sort of thing, as Wolfsbane can attest too.

Sadly your argument has no credence at all once you introduce fairness into the equation. You quite happily attended the sport for decades when a more UNFAIR system was used. The tactical rule is now the FAIREST it has EVER been in the sports history.

Brilliant post Dave the Mic, really enjoyed reading that and I pretty much agree 100% with it! The only rider I would perhaps give a bit more credit too is Billy Hamill who was one I feel had injuries curtail his effectiveness earlier than some. I think he topped the Elite League Averages 3 years running for 3 different teams? That said, he'd still rank behind the other American World Title winners, so perhaps not too much of a difference to your analysis.

The irony!

Did a bit of digging as Sidney was infatuated with how quickly riders hit their stride. Here's a sample of riders and their averages in their second full season of racing in the British League. There's a surprise guy at no 1! Bobby Schwartz 10.00 Bruce Penhall 9.88 Sam Ermolenko 9.72 Dennis Sigalos 9.32 Hans Nielsen 8.85 Billy Hamill 8.77 Kelly Moran 8.47 Scott Autrey 8.32 Shawn Moran 8.27 Erik Gundersen 8.09 Per Jonsson 6.33 Greg Hancock 5.51

Another rant.. Let me know which part of my post is incorrect. It's not an opinion, its reality.

Yep, the Morans were so good it took Sam a full 3 years from when he first got on a speedway bike to surpass everything the Morans ever achieved between them. Even in his mid 50's, the lacking in ability Ermolenko can race nigh on as fast as the worlds best.. For all their so called 'natural ability' the Morans and Lee could barely ride a bike in their mid 30's.

What's that got to do with it? Sam was averaging 7.7 19 years after a run-off for the World Title. He was beating Maciej Janowski and Darcy Ward 28 years after a run-off for the World Title, 20 years after he was World Champion and 8 years after he'd retired. Quote it.

Where have I said Lee achieved more? You've just made that up entirely. I didn't say it, quite simply because he didn't achieve more.

Ermolenko hit the ground running more than most riders.. How many others were in a run-off for a World Title 3 years after first getting on a speedway bike and with only 12 months experience of racing in Europe?

He averaged 4.25 in 4 meetings, 12 months after first ever getting on a bike. More than Michael Lee managed to average from 5 meetings in 1991 in what you call a 'poor era'.

Sidney, why do you always try to ruin interesting threads? There has been a lot of sensible, civil discussion on this thread where a few of us have learned new things. I researched and learned more about Scott Autrey and admitted my initial opinion about him was incorrect, I did so because others advised me as such on here. I was WRONG about him.. see it's easy to admit that. Unfortunately, despite being shown you are completely wrong about Moran (no shame in that) you decide to go into rant mode, start making threats etc. There's no need, you love your speedway, so do the rest of us.. we all have certain memories of certain riders that influence who we think were better BUT what we have to do is sit back and actually look at the cold hard evidence, like I did with Autrey and accept our memories can play tricks. Now have a sit down, read back through the thread at the difference between the two and you'll see why Ermolenko was the better rider. Less ranting, more discussion Sid, you'll enjoy it more

Very true Although that was the bottom end of the teams. Whatever era, the top end always has class riders.

:rofl:

No he didn't change it. You should be careful what you preach for, on any well regulated forum you would have been banned a long, long time ago.

Let's not forget, Sam didn't even take up speedway till his 20's, within just over 3 years of first ever having a go on a speedway bike he was in a run-off for the World Title.. you don't do that without 'natural talent'.

It might have helped if Moran had reached World Finals to be able to win a title.. he only made it 3 times. Why? He wasn't good enough. It doesn't matter how you twist it, over a prolonged period of time Moran was not up to it even though he raced in what you call a 'weak era'.

Not my opinion, just reality. He spent most of the year at second string, so his average is a second string one. Those who claim he should be on the heat leader list have no concept of the problem the list is trying to solve and are just looking at his average.. a suitable word for such people is 'thick'. Seems the BSPA fall into that category. There don't need to be 'anomalies' and opinions are not needed. A method could quite easily be put into place that is definitive.

Of course it does, PK should be on the list. Wolves were just too dumb not to sign him. Danny King should not be on the list. Edward Kennett should be on the list. Buzkowski should be on the list. Watt shouldn't be on the list. Just to name a few. They've pretty much got away with it due to how the teams have been built, but that was through luck rather than judgement and it leaves exactly the same problem for next year.

One slight problem... Neither Jacob Thorssell or Peter Karlsson are on the heat leader list.. so its clear Cook really hasn't the foggiest what he is talking about! Just when you think it can't get worse http://speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.29906 Edited to add the link above to the list, where neither Jacob Thorssell or Peter Karlsson can be found. So all in all, what an absolute load of nonsense Cook has spouted!