waiheke1

But surely new promoters are simply taking over the license, not the business. Can't see any reason why they would take over the previous promoters debt? With your track record, that's bad news for the creditors! This. They must have taken hundreds of thousands over the season on gate receipts.

Most of those better riders, but better domestically over a sustained period of time, im not sure. I dontbthink jessup was for example, or Betts. Young Mike lee I'd probably agree, though not his 2nd spell. NickI p was only number one for a season ( and arguably didnt surpass puk), Crump maybe but he was only for a couple of seasons. Puk has been number 1, and in the top handful of number 1s in the league, for 5 straight seasons. I think it's a valid opinion that he's as good a number 1 as you've had.

Agree 13.7 looks funny. It's not an opinion that riders will drop their averages, it's a fact, given that on average each team will drop 8 points off the 50 point limit. The odd rider will hold or improve their average, but a lot will decrease significantly, I would say in particular 2nd strings on 7-9 point pl averages (e.g. worralls, garritty, tungate etc.) and some edr on 5-6 pt averages (e.g. Nielsen, Jacobs, kerr).

That would be an awful team. If you could fit kk for Robson it would be a good line up, but think that is a little over the limit, but you need a number 1 in there, even if it is just someone like joonas/fricke/k bjerre

Agree two weak reserves is ok. If you use just over 4 points, deduct the 15% "inflation" in the team building figures, you need about 3.5 per meeting between them for them to have been an effective use of points. Call it 5 at home 2 away, and you are guaranteed 2 of those 7 points so long as you have a finisher in the reserve heat. I don't agree you'll have points to strengthen though, the only way the points limit can work is if either the points limit gets dropped or an average conversion is used throughout the season chris Louis has alluded to the latter, though imo the former makes far more sense. Who has been better?

But they haven't ever applied this x 1.4 before. The logical thing is that limit us dropped to 43 after first set of greensheets and the new averages used force declarations. The other rule I would suggest is that the exemption to points limit if replacing a rider with a lower averaged rider be removed, so any changes must still remain within the 43 points. What this means is on average every team shedding 15% off their averages - so Doyle averaging 11+ would be doing his job.

Of course Oxford in 86 built a side in which over 20 of the 45 point limit went on two riders. Tbh that worked out ok for them. ..

Actually agree with the first part of this. I've stated repeatedly that bib think Ellis' average was right. But I can understand Poole not picking him, as of the middle order I think b kurtz j holder and Newman are all better value on their lower averages.Disagree re holder and Doyle though. Don't look at the absolute value of the average, look at it compared to others, and be aware that the league is built to a points limit 15% higher than will be achieved. Is holder worth 2.5 points more than say Hans or fricke? I would say yes. Again, that doesn't mean poole are foolish not hiring him, justvtgatvthey are aiming to build in a less top heavy way.

Nor guaranteed that Ellis will be a heat leader. And I don't think any team is assuming they are going to have extra points to re declare with.

Downgrade holder or puk to k bjerre who will be a more than decent 3rd hl. Then use the extra points to upgrade a reserve to someone like kerr. Or Porsing if he fits

Morris and a 2 pointer surely musts. Two good signings so far for the Robins

Don't understand why you would be happy to sign josh g on a 9 but not holder on a 12.5. Holder will surely offer much better value.

Why would you not sign them? Holder on a 12.5 is better value than say garritty on an 8.5 or fricke on a nearly 20 imo

I think there will be plenty of weak pairings. But agree, you want to make sure you have one decent reserve (I think a weak number 7 is fine). If u downgrade Williamson to a 2 pter you can upgrade clegg to Klindt. Or alternatively go with a pairing of clegg and a 2 per but a very strong 1-5. I think clegg is decent value on a 4 if he continues to improve.

Care to be plain what is pathetic about honouring a contract with the rider who was arguably the best in the world in 2016?

Nigel didn't ever win the British final sid, so he's not in the field.

Is 7.8 really a hl average? It's only a fraction over the average 7.14 per rider allowed for team buidling, so I'd be inclined to say it is a 2nd string average.

Craven lee p Collins Carter Loram havelock jessup Simmons Tatum Smith

With the easier heat format and decreased standard, I can see Freddie averaging close to 10. Best value number one in the league imo. Wolves look well placed I think, as masters is also very good value as is asset Klindt.

Not often I disagree with you on statistical topics, buy I do on this occasion. The basis for analysis should surely be the most likely outcome, not the best possible.I think by far the best measure of this is using your own weighted averages ftom 2016 and comparing to the averaged used for team building purposes. Using this approach Doyle and Holder look far better value than the likes of Fricke and garritty, with the bonus of having the strongest possible rider to take the extra ride. That said I can understand poole going with hans at number one, as he also represents good value and will likely allow them a strong 1-6 consisting entirely of riders on attractive averages. In reality what they should have done is used pl average x .85 and EL average x 1.2. Proportionately you'd have ended at the same place, but you could have built to 42/43 (so no need to change limits or convert averages for re declarations) and people wouldn't be getting hung up on these high averages. Reality is that Doyle and holder are still in the top quartile of best value riders, regardless of the fact that they are on unattainable averages. One can also assume the aim of the agm was to reduce costs by making gp stars, who presumably are the highest paid, less appealing.

I've criticised Darcy in the past, but can't see anything wrong with this tweet. He and holder have been the two stars you associate with poole for this decade, so it is an end of an era. And this year's top flight will be arguably the weakest ever. That's what he's pointing out here, and it's hard to deny that it's true.

You could have kk Newman Hans j holder b kurtz. Leaves 8 points for reserves which could get you Klindt plus a sub 3 point number 7. More likely you goHans at number one, someone like harris as second hl which would then allow you to fit batch and have b Newman at reserve.Poole have a range of options, as most of your last year's riders are on attractive averages.

I initially thought so, but on reflection 1.4 is about right. If you compare to scbs weighted averages, the number ones from last year are still amongst the best value riders. At 1.25 someone like harris or Hans would be on comparable averages to the likes of garritty and r worrall.

just like holders real average isn't 12.5, but poole fans are saying he shouldn't be picked because he can't maintain that.Gavan is correct, you have been caught talking cr@p.

Slowly: if Hans had a two year deal, signed in 2016; then he was signed for 2017 before jack holder. Therefore jack holder was not your first signing... But you have also said Hans was on a one year deal while agreeing that Matt said he was on a two year deal. So was your first statement wrong, or was matt lying?