Grand Central

so this team riding thing. shall we leave it till tomorrow before we bother with that.

A 4-2 with no team riding will do, I suppose.

Cheers. Often, there is a policy of 'seeing what happens on the first bend', or as you say letting one opponent go and concentrate on the minor places. In the earlier parts of the meeting when total points are still important getting to the front and trying to dictate the race by slowing it down from there to let your partner through can come into play Here, in the final though, right from the start you should be trying to optimise your chances of getting one opponent to be last as the main tactic. Choosing gate positions with that single objective and setting out with that plan. After the first bend/lap you may never get a better chance. Sacrificing your top guy to do it is a gamble but a sensible one i would say. The fact that they are trying to do it to you, while you are doing it to them ... Will be interesting. And as Iris says ... The ref may not view it kindly. As I said on Tuesday if you are clear of warnings by that stage a bit of movement at the start to put your oppo into the tapes wouldn't go amiss either, as an option.

I actually didn't say I had a problem in this discussion. This is the rule created for this meeting. OK it is not my preference. But who cares about that now. We need to work WITH it to win. I was highlighting the totally different tactics needed from 'usual' deciding races. As Mr Millik proved on Tuesday, when the riders is not too bright ... It loses the race for his team.

Again true. But going for a 5-1 still encourages the pair to ride for the win. Nothing else. That just not whats needed here. The key to this 3-3 scenario is totally different. It encourages the exact opposite tactics . Tai off gate two in the final can 'sacrifice' his race by clamping the guy on the the inside to the kerb, almost to the a standstill. He doesnt care if his partner or the other opposition guy streak off into the sunset. And the positions of those two guys are irrelevant ... Tai just keeps the hapless guy behind him. Half a lap behind. And England (sorry GB) are world champs ! Actually , now I've written it ... Let's hope that is just what happens !

Many a time. True. But it the great majority of those instances a race win would have sufficed. Only under this (and other infrequent pairs contests) is it that a 3-3 will do but ONLY if the opposition has a guy made to come last.

You are right of course. Nothing could beat the poles if they are on that form. But it still is technically true that GB getting 4-2s right through to final would still be a winner. Fantasy land i know.

Tbh I think we have all got a bit obsessed with 'team riding'. We never usually go on about this so much with league racing as we have been doing here. I would want a British win above everything else. A 4-2 in every race, right though to the final, with Tai winning by a mile and Lambert scrabbling a third place ... That would would do fine. If a bit of team work brought that about, fair enough, but it is the result that matters not marvelling at 'synchronised speedway'.

Regulation 3.4 states that if a medical certificate is available for injury or illness and the Jury approves them a replacement is allowed. There is no distinction made for the rounds or the two days of the final.

Thanks for that. I do love the 'of course' bit ... when (apart from this thread title)it has seemed to have been avoided by everyone in print and commentary in any terminology used. Edit .. I do see the FIM regs state it Is.

I got that first time. But is this an official 'World Championship' ?

I made my mind up as the details were presented to me. As each snippet of information was made available the flaws were instantly obvious. if the ideas had been good i would not have been able to 'make my mind up' in that way. But time And again the FIM/BSi have made it for me. And IS this a world championship? As far as I have seen only a couple of Speedway Star reporters this week have inferred that. No one else seems to have the courage of that conviction.

As yet i have not had to serve on Jury. And would not want to if they would still be deliberating in a 'banged to rights' case such as this. The case against the FIM/BSI in the matter of SON presented by learned counsel above had been well made on all those grounds months ago by others, but the court wasn't listening.. The crime against the SWC actually never should have taken place if simple common sense had been applied by the negligent blazered folk in Geneva. Mind you the court reporters have been utterly appalling in their role for months as well. As the current prevalent phraseology has it ... to avoid public disasters. You could SEE the errors being made. There were plenty here SAYIng that it was a massively flawed move. But no bugger SORTED it.

There was once a period of time when England/Great Britain were dominant in the WTC for 4 /5 man teams. No one seemed to think it appropriate to suspend that world championship to stop them winning each year.

When choosing to rebut accusations. It is revealing to find which one must feel to be the most offensive.

I cant see why, from his point of view, that he decided to carry on with the job this year. Once it was obvious the way things were shifting with the new regime and the return of the prodigal one. Wasn't that the time to go for your own self respect ?

I hope so too. But the FIM make they rules, daft as they may be, and the competitors must obey them Winnings the final is NOT the primary requirement, as the rules are. Making one one your opponents score zero is.

The object of the final and race off (under these rules) is to use any (legal) means possible to get one of your opponents into last place. That is it. Nothing else. Or force them not to finish/start at all, a technique Millik had rather wasted by using it perfectly in heat one. Anyone who has kept themselves free of warnings right to the final on Saturday would be well advised to use the 'green light bunny hop' Millik did last night in heat one to cause a tape touch from the opponent in the final and instantly win the tournament for his nation !

The rules have been discussed here for days. It is patently obvious that the object of the final is NOT to set out to win the race it is to do whatever necessary to make sure neither of you comes !ast. That is ALL! I just don't think some folk - some riders - have the capacity of understanding necessary.

Do they still hang people upside down in Italy ? Armando Castanga certainly deserves some sort of punishment for stupidly forcing this ridiculous folly on us all.

No matter how good the racetrack it cannot make up for a crap concept like this.

Well done Steve You've taken the pressure off Pearson and Tatum !

What is the Polish for Woosh!

Well the 'opposition' rider Laguta played such a perfect inside line anchor role. He rode just as if he WERE a team mate. All without prior arrangement i assume.

Looking at tonight's meeting itself ... What are people's thoughts? Surely there are three teams going out without much doubt ... Finland, Italy and France. with one of them lasting until heat 22 before being KO'd. You would think that Sweden, Australia and GB may all get (easy?) 5-1s in those nine races against the lesser sides as well. The rest will decide who gets the two straight final places and who has to fight it out with the Czechs in the race off. The big races must be heat 10 Swe v Aus, heat 17 GB v Aus and heat 20 Swe v GB when big points can be dropped. But it really could be all down to the Czechs and heats 4, 8 and 15 when the three favourites meet them. It would seem to be 21 races to work out which of the top three have to race against the Czechs in heat 23 and then win and go through anyway ? I know I am going to be proved massively wrong ... But at least it makes a change to talk about the meeting rather that the commentators or officialdom.