ch958

lovely stadium and track, i went there often, wouldn't say there was an enormous amount of overtaking

if they don't like travel they're in the wrong game

I'm all for riding when its best for the club even if we lose commuting riders, I don't get excited by big names I get excited by good close racing but I'm almost certainly in the minority so its down the plughole we go

where's Honest John these days, used to enjoy his robust opinions

next year - rd 1 Ipswich, rd 2 Kings Lynn, rd 3 Belle Vue. 3 reasonably well attended meetings and no excuses Do it over 3/4 nights

personally i think 2nd wd be ok

correct - which puts pressure on their averages and earning potential. In the past beating a top bloke was an event - Mauger, Briggs, Wilson, Ashby et al used to be virtually unbeatable by anyone other that other top blokes. Ashby in a heat with, say, Munday, Cole and Wakefield Swindon v Cradley , would win at a canter usually with only maybe Persson or Trigg to worry him

you are quite correct

And also, heat leaders would prosper because top riders wd be spread out like they were in the early BL days which is how some blokes ended up with 10 and even 11 averages. That wd make up a perceived drop in earnings

which is yet another expense that needs addressing - one tyre per meeting shd be the aim. Somehow

nice ideas but there's a lot of holes there. Redirecting money from riders? Good luck with that They tried to make it a flagship. league but they still don't turn up and cutting their money will see the end of Sayfudinov, Laguta, Doyle, etc. What you do here is illustrate the massive chasm amongst fans: A - chuck money at it and get the names in or B- live within our means and watch semi pro riders. both have their virtues and both could be the final nail for the record I'm a B.

an independent review is the only way forward imo but there'd be so many toys chucked out of prams it'd be like Black Friday at Hamleys.

looks to me his behaviour was reasonable, the bloke cd have been armed. You just seem to have an agenda

coming from someone who can't spell know

"I'll just step in front of these 4 motorbikes as they come round, I'm sure they'll apply their brakes"

nowhere near enough attention has been paid over the years to tyre/ surface interraction and revs/ surface. Would be nice if riders had to use their noggins and use the dirt

'starting to'? !

to be honest, despite the spectacular action due to the banking I'm not sure I saw one overtake in 4/5 visits

one division yes but NL is essential to clubs not able to compete financially, as well as rider development and tracks that want 2nd teams.

got to start somewhere Truthy

agree its not the no1 problem. I prob posted 2 years ago that we're in survival mode and we still are and costs to riders get knocked on as salary demands and then knocked on as entrance fees so they are linked. Its a hoary old chestnut but admission fees have to be linked to what folk will stand versus what else they could get for 20 quid. 12 or 15 quid and its an easier decision so, somehow, costs of running would need to accommodate that and it prob doesn't allow for flying GP stars in to ride in front of 3 figure crowds. Like I said originally, tough unpopular decisions needed.

if thats what you take from it, fine. My point was and is that the 'progress' in machinery means nowt to fans and merely adds huge costs that the sport cannot afford. It certainly adds nothing to the racing.

funny - just what this debate needs

needs tough decisions unpopular with riders and some fans. The day 4 valves came in was the beginning of the bike wagging the rider so to speak. 90pc of fans couldn't give a moneys about the bikes, just want decent racing at a price we can afford.

the rules have to be complicated because people are always looking to bend them