waiheke1

agree . The points limit is there to keep teams relatively even. If s team wants to go top heavy and be weaker at reserve then do be it. The key is setting the points limit correctly and making sure anyone without a 2017 pl average comes in on an average which reflects their 2017 form globally.A really disappointing decision imo. It clearly not cheating. And its not going to balance things up, 42.5 is probably too high and Poole being able to get someone like Woryna on a 4.5 clearly gives them a big advantage.

Thorssell for a 2 pointer?Schlein and howarth for klindt and a 2 pointer?

Yeah but thats still irrelevant. It doesnt matter how dangerous the job is that you are paying someone to do, they are still less likely to miss a days work injured as a result of working elsewhere if u stop them working elsewhere.

Zmarzlick Woffy Doyle Dudek Emil Greg Janowski Holder Lindgren Laguta Pedersen Zagar Vaculik Pawlicki Cook

Exactly. Additionally they would like to minimise the risk that riders are unavailable due to injuries sustained in other employment.

Jimmy Mac, Bruce cribb and Mavis all look pretty much unchanged as well!

Belle vue aces 81-87 if we can be that specific

12, which Im surprised at given the era ended 8 years before I was born

Not sure how you say it looks weak compared to this year, with 12 riders the same.Pawlicki for Pawlicki is a pretty even swap, Id say Prem out performed Piotr this year. Laguta is at least as good as lindbsvk Ill admit Puk is better than Cook.

So if in most lines of work you cant have multiple employers, why do you think its unreasonable for the poles to take the same stance?As it is, I think plenty of tradesmen are in a similar situation ie contracting to multiple customers at the same time. I wouldnt think it unreasonable if I was paying 10x the going rate to ask a builder as a condition of taking the contract not take any other jobs til mine was completed? Or would you have an issue with that?

or the poles have agreed if uk top flight is set race nights... out of interest Steve, does your main employer allow you to work for any other employer you choose to, even if it impacts on your ability to do your job?

Actually I meant top 8 in any given meeting making the semis.But I also think the qualification method is about right, the only question mark is whether riders in the series should also be permitted to go through the challenge rounds which effectively gives them 3 possible qualification routes. But next years line up looks good, you could argue that the likes of Hampel/milik/lebedevs ahead of Holder/cook would make it stronger, but Cook was consistently superb in the qualifiers and deserved his spot. The GP as a whole has most things right, good racing, good line ups, well presented.

I think this has the best of worlds. The best performer on the night gets the most points. There is the tenseness around making top 8, the excitement of the final and the final winner gets the glory of being a gp champ. Plenty of things wrong with speedway, but this imo is something they have got right.

WHeras I think the current points system is spot on. IMO a rider who scores a 15 point max, wins his semi and finished 2nd in the final deserved more points than someone who scored 7 in the main meeting a second in the semi but wins the final.

53-25 that season, one of 14 times the aces topped the 50 point mark that year I do remember in 82 they bartered them by s bigger score, possibly a ko cup match?

Conversely you could argue that a number of riders who missed out due to ef or controversial exclusions despite being the best rider on the night or over the season may have ended as world champ.

Surely he will put a few on the gate, sponsorship could cover some cost and potentially you offer him less money than he was on a couple of seasons back? Just like any business, it can be worth having someone who costs more if they help grow your revenue, but you dont pay them more than you can afford taking that into account.

LOokong at the proposed teams, what an awful league it would be. Poor racing due to mid matches when the top riders come up against the weaker ones. Nothing for quality young Brits like bewley and lambert to aspire to. A guaranteed decrease in crowds. Riders still missing due to overseas fixture clashes. Respect others rights to differing opinions, but I think it would be an awful move. If Cook cant get an overseas team slot, how would you expect him to be competitive in GPs with tgat league as his practice. Or team gb ever bring conpetitive.

More of an issue than declining revenue? Id say revenue is a bigger issue, costs can be cut but to grow revenue is tougher

Agree Tai Hancock pedersen all in the top 30 of all time and all ahead of gollob. Gollob for me is one of the greatest single world champs, but Id rank him behind Collins and perhaps Lee, though ahead of the likes of Doyle and Michanek.

Exactly. There is a clear split between those who want to see top riders and potentially less meetings. Then those who would rather see a lower standard of rider at a cheaper price and more meetings. Id note that despite people complaining about the standard of top tier in uk, crowds are still better than the cheaper cl and nl though appreciate that part of that is related to club following rather than the quality of rider. The only way it would be viable to drop pricing AND attract riders would be a good sponsorship deal and a 2-3 times increase in crowds. Which I actually think could be achievable if someone with vision and money to invest cane along.

Yeah, basically you should feel free to steal anything you probably wouldnt purchase because no one is really losing out...

Illustrated if you look at the averages when the bl went from 16 to 11 teams in 1985. And also, if you look at the drop on top averages when ht15 was introduced in 1989 (I think, I could be one year out). Its been an interesting thread, Id say certainly the standard of weaker riders now is stronger than it has ever been. If you compare the NL to the old junior/colts sides of the 80s there is no comparison. GP riders are more evenly matched, possibly because there is no stand out superstar, or possibly because there are more top riders, the gp fields are much stronger than most of the old world finals, and riders have something to race for every heat. Certainly those who say top riders are not as good as those in days gone by cannot be basing it on the quality of racing, so unclear on what basis they make the claim?

Id say there were 7 riders with a claim for 4 places. Hancock plus a dane were nailed on, and when I look at nickis record the last few seasons (as well as 3xWC) I think he was also an obvious choice. Vaculik in 9th was also very likely. Of the others, Puk has been consistently solid but since his injury hasnt regained form of a few years back. Milik has impressed in GPS. Lebedevs is sec champ and arguably the best season of any of the riders outside the top 8. Then Holder, whose claim is probably based on being world champ 5 years ago and 4th last year. His final placing this year and last year though boosted by injuries to other riders and definitely the worst form of the 7 this year. I wouldnt have given him one, BUT he is not an outrageous pick. The reserves are all decent choices, apart from Sundstrom ahead of lebedevs. But assume they felt they needed a Swede in the reserve list?

Emil is probably my favourite rider of the current decade, but Id rank Zmarzlick as ax more likely world champ next year if its one from outside this years top 3. Those 5 would have to be the favourites, and though Id say you cant write off Hancock totally, Id be surprised if the world champ was not one of them.