BWitcher

You're getting silly now Sid, take a breath and calm down. I take it you don't disagree with me then, all those riders listed are capable of winning a final?

There you go. I'm assuming as he is talking about the GP's he means a GP final..

I haven't forgotten anyone. You've said there are six riders in the GP field that have no chance of winning a final. I've said there is arguably only one you could apply that argument to.. but now you are arguing against your very own statement! Or are you suggesting there are six others, not including Lambert, in last years GP field that would never win a final? Seriously Sid, think about it. Look at the field for the last GP.. are these riders capable of winning a GP on their day? Madsen - Yes Lindgren - Yes Dudek - Yes Iversen - Yes Zmarzlik - Yes Lindback - Yes Vaculik - Yes Zagar - Yes Woffinden - Yes Sayfutdinov - Yes Doyle - Yes Kolodziej - Yes A Laguta - Yes Lambert - ? Lambert is the only one you could possibly question.

He said at least six wouldn't have a chance of winning a final.... not World Champ.. winning a final.

He did, but that's the only one that comes close to your statement of not having a chance of winning a final. The fact you disagree with him speaks volumes! I challenge you to name one other, never mind the six you claimed

Again Sid, that is completely false. You're so far out with that statement it's staggering. Out of last year's starting field the ONLY one you could possibly put an argument together for would be Lambert. It is completely different to the old format for the reasons I described to you. Every race means something to every rider.. the only exceptions might come in the final round or two of the season when for some it would be like... you guessed it, an old style World Final they can't win.

Sorry Sid, that doesn't really make sense. In the old World Final you often had five riders who were totally out of their depth. After a couple of rides you had as much as half the field out of contention. In a GP it's far from easier, firstly because of the reason you have used to suggest its easier to score, the semi finals... it means much more of the field has something to race for.. And even without the semi-finals, every single pt in every single race counts towards their overall season end standing. There's no slacking of or just dialing it in as it all counts.

MAY have matured. You don't know. Some riders reach a level and that's it. Joe Screen a classic example.. Burst on scene as a 16 year old, got better and better, clocking up a 10.82 average in 1995 aged 22. Yet he petered out (mainly due to a bad crash) and never troubled the elites at the highest level.

I'd agree with that. I can't think of many times a rider hit an 11pt average (including bonus of course) since the advent of the nominated heats. I've got: Ermolenko 1993 11.14 Crump 2006 11.21 Adams 2008 11.04 All three of those were extra remarkable for different reasons... Ermolenko didn't race any reserves. Crump and Adams also had the new 'Heat 13' race as well to contend with. In addition Adams achieved his in a 9 team league. Ermolenko and Crump 11 teams. The size of the league also bolsters Nielsens argument, his sensational 1986 season was achieved in an 11 team league. Mauger's averages were all from 18-19 team leagues I believe... same with Briggs? Fundin however clocked up an 11.60 in a 10 team league in 1958.

Not quite making the target, or making it a day or two late isn't really an issue.. or shouldn't be. What many don't like is the manipulation of figures. Simply be honest, say we're almost there, and within another day or so we will be there.

The levels of gullibility have no bounds it seems! And now it transpires the tests have been 'posted'... Marvelous. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/01/ministers-accused-of-changing-covid-19-test-tally-to-hit-100000-goal

Because of greed? A number really has been done on you hasn't it. Far better to have clubs go to the wall and more people made unemployed.

This is the point. Most people get a bit of a cold and call it the flu.. it isn't. Flu knocks you about always. Whereas Covid, 80% of the time does nothing of the sort. However, if you are vulnerable (especially the elderly) covid can be very dangerous indeed as we have seen.... hence the need for such groups to be protected. Its not rocket science. For the rest, its less dangerous than the flu.

Glad you recovered. However reality is, and its absolute fact, flu is more dangerous AND causes greater illness than covid-19 for the vast majority of the population. For some Covid-19 is very dangerous of course.

Exactly. Unfortunately this is the hole the government (and the media even more so) have now dug. Such ill educated people out there that will cause immense problems with any proposed relaxing of the lockdown.

So you thought you'd top it eh? You succeeded. If you're under 50 you'd far rather have Covid-19 than the flu.

No the deaths aren't all who have tested positive for Covid-19, not in the UK, or the USA, or Italy. It is believed it is the case in Germany however.. Nobody has ever said it was 'instead' of flu, although that being said there are scientists now beginning to suggest that the deaths may well end up being just that.. 'instead of'.

120,000 a year die from flu/pneumonia in UK on average.. Let's see what Covid-19 reaches.. and if it comes back every single year... What's staggering is how such large scale deaths are dismissed as meaningless by folks such as you. Young children and babies in that figure.. all dismissed. Of course Covid-19 is serious, for the elderly and seriously ill. For the rest it quite simply is not. It is the elderly and seriously ill that need protecting.

Very poor actually, very one dimensional, seems to be trying to insinuate that every excess death is Covid-19 when clearly that is not the case. The majority of them are Covid-19. Some recorded as Covid are not Covid. Some countries won't be revealing their true Covid figures There will be many excess deaths caused by lockdown that aren't Covid related.

Fair point.. but even less Under 50 as you say.. and given most speedway riders are under 40, even less still.

And even less when you add in 'fit'.. i.e. no serious underlying condition.

That has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation at all. You've made claims that are false, been shown to be wrong and are now trotting out nonsense. No disrespect is being shown to anyone who dies, death is always tragic, whatever the circumstances. Sorry to hear of any loss you have had.

I already have. Now go check it against the number of under 50's dying from other things and learn some context. If you're under 50 and healthy you have more chance of being killed in a car crash than dying from Covid-19. It's nothing to do with 'respect'.. it's to do with reality.

What risk would the riders be taking? I wasn't aware we had many 65+ aged riders.

This planet, it's a fact.