500cc

Looks like there is a good chance that Birmingham will pick their Number Seven before their Number Six then. If their choice of Number Seven is below anybody picked to date the pick him with their tenth pick so they have first choice in Round 2 and get their Number Six. In those circumstances it ensures they get their two riders. If they Pick Number 6 first and he's not lowest ranked so far, they may miss out on their preferred Number 7. Whatever, it makes Birmingham's pick the ultimate poker play

No problem !!! You had me double checking though. There's a lot of Kyle's in British speedway, more than the national average I'd suggest.

I assume you mean Newman H !!! It shouldn't be done like that though. If you choose to take a protected rider, something not on offer to most teams, there has to be some counter balancing. If Poole pick Newman 10th they get the 18th/19th pick. If Poole effectively pick him first they get the same 18th/19th pick. Ranking the riders is very subjective, based on last season there is a big difference between Kings Lynn or Wolves selecting Robert Lambert (he won't be in round 1 of course), yet round 2 is based on a single ranking of a rider. Surely its not beyond the promoters to select the best available rider (for them) ... well maybe not. Assuming Robert Lambert is allowed to be picked in Round 2, then Coventry could pull a stroke. Select the lowest ranked Round 1 rider, maybe Starke, Rose or Wright and have first pick in Round 2 for Lambert !!!

Even the BSPA couldn't get that wrong. Any team who puts a claim on their protected rider will automatically be put to the end of the 2nd round. So if Poole claim Newman they will pick 20th, with Wolves, Lakeside and Kings Lynn preceding them. Anything else and you'll be reminded of who are the three most influential teams in the EL. Assuming Robert Lambert is on the B list (may actually be on the C back-up list), then if left as suggested then Poole, get Newman and Lambert !!! Interestingly would take Poole and Kings Lynn over the points limit. If they select their protected rider and whoever takes Garrity should have that figure trimmed off their top five 32 point average. May not make any difference to their initial team building, but should be on principle. I'd assume during the season that only the top 5's averages are used for re-building, so if a team no longer employs one of those 3, the "trimmed" amount should then be removed at that point. If Simon Lambert's average hit 5+ (I don't think so), then he too should be included.

TV exposure should be a massive plus to a sport, but I suspect that the BSPA or more interested in sponsorship. There is a million pound hole that needs at least partially filling. I don't expect that to come from Sky (getting them to cover production costs will be a great success). The sponsorship worries me as I don't really believe the clubs expect to run without a replacement for at least a good percentage of the million pounds.

Wow, if true this is going to cause chaos at EL reserve where I suspect (although I stand to be corrected) most of the eligible riders will be owned by PL clubs. And even if I'm wrong there, the fact that there is going to be a mixture of riders with EL priority across the 1-7 isn't great for the sport. If this is the rule, then the asset base of each club really needs to be put on public record. I know not everyone agrees, but I do feel strongly that where spectators invest in a sport, they should know whether or not a participant is eligible for a match.

What were the reasons given out of interest?

Does raise an interesting question re-allocation and/or drafting in terms of both the rider and club being happy with the agreement. In most cases I'm sure any conflicting assignments can be managed, but it is a further "parameter" that will need including in the process. Assuming the "lead" reserve is allocated first, the difficulty may be related to the second reserve as it's important to balance the equality at that point. Any issues are more likely to be related to location or race nights as opposed to existing conflicts I'd assume.

0.01 away from being able to name Ward, KK and Magic as the next three signings.

Guilty. That's what happen's when you race off to eat. Meant to say the reduction wasn't as large as being portrayed. Updated my original post and referenced your comment. Still will get disagreements I'm sure, but at least I've corrected it to say what I meant to say !!!

There is a misconception that from a team building perspective that the points limit has been radically cut by 4.5 points, when actually in reality it's been reduced by less than 2 points (about 1.75). So to an extent some teams may well look better. From a points building exercise, then Belle Vue appear to be a definite improvement as the points limit reduction has had no impact on them. Edited because as SteveO pointed out it to say it was not cut but it was reduced was illogical. I meant to say the reduction isn't as large as the headline figures.

I too wonder if there will need to be a revision, mind you I was more thinking around June/July time !!! I'm a massive advocate of opening up opportunities to the British youngsters (and not so young to). I just worry the jump is too far in one go. We've got to allow these riders to at least get a reasonable recompense to start with. We do though appear to be asking 2012 NL second strings to ride as EL (second) reserves in 2013. With mention of Number 8's (without them we could hit big problems with injuries, but there are finances again), the pool becomes further inexperienced. This all assumes that everybody qualified takes up the offer. In many ways the more inexperienced riders will jump at the chance. Those who are 2012 PL reserve level will particularly need to ensure the financials stack-up. That's not showing no ambition, but they need to be sure that they can continue their progression at the correct current level for the majority (PL) with the EL being the extra fast-tracking. To extent, providing their costs (including intangibles) are covered at EL level then that may be fine, providing it has no impact on their earning potential at PL level (I'm down the road of fixture clashes here). I'm actually quite excited to see the opportunities being made available here; I'm concerned though that the number crunching (costs, availability, pool of riders etc.) may not back this up over a long season.

That's fine. One photo of you, and one of your mate !!!

I agree that's the concern. To an extent the current format has a kind of equality on strength of opposition. By creating a greater inequality, the averages become distorted and once again open up manipulation and loopholes.

We shouldn't forget that Tai became world champion on the back of being invited (not qualified) to the GP series. That was based on a perception and a body of work built up in the previous years. There was certainly an argument to be had that he wasn't the most qualified to become one of the four wild cards. We should remember that when considering the ten nominated, they had a season of achievement on the back of previous pedigree. In mainstream sports a Tai could have come through, but its just not going to happen in speedway. The sport has to be recognisable. The Paralympics has given Para sports a platform to build from for example. I really don't think you can blame the BBC here. The BBC is no longer at the forefront of British sport. The media as a whole has the bigger influence. My experience is that the BBC do consider all sports; I seem to remember Matt Dawson being on a panel for the coach of the year award and putting forward Fab Flournoy (Basketball) as Coach of the Year.

We need to be realistic here. We can object as much as we like, but like many things in this world its about improving your profile. in sport we know who the best are because they win, they become world champions. But Sports Personality is about bringing together that high profile success. I'd love to see Tai there, but in the end its about raising the profile of the individual and the sport. Ben Ainslie has made the cut off a high profile background that had a specific successful performance this year. No other Brit would have made the Top 10 had they been in the boat instead of Ainslie. It's about building the profile over time. And Murray gets in the Top 10 year on year, but needed the Wimbledon success to make him favourite this year. The success of the programme requires the public having association with most of the participants. We might not like that, but its the truth. I hope they put their effort into getting Tai included in the actual show as opposed to just complaining; don't forget the BSPA doesn't take kindly to whingers on the internet !!!

But Giggs was probably an example of where the award was made on personality (all round personality, not charisma) as opposed to sporting achievement. Had is affair been known at that stage you can be sure he wouldn't have won.

I should just add for clarity that my example of a reserve beating a Darcy Ward was primarily as a result of the top rider failing to score (exclusion ,ef etc). And that was the point really; a near certain 3 and 0 can turn into a 0 and 1; a four point swing.

Sorry, got to pick you up on this. I follow a lot of cycling and I don't believe that would have happened. Last season Wiggins was as dominant a rider as there has been across a season for many a year. By the time the season reached the TDF, I found it difficult to see how he could be beaten It's so easy to underestimate the impact of a team, but Sky so dominated the 2012 race that nobody got a look in. It was actually a fairly boring race because of that, but Wiggins was the ultimate in what has become the incredible planning and preparation of British cycling. What we saw was Froome making a couple of points in the mountains where he accelerated. But he and Wiggins knew it was about being steady. Like Wiggins, there are a number of riders capable of blowing away from Froome on the hills, but like Wiggins his strength is regaining the distance over a period of time. They could have battled each other and let Nibali into contention, a bit like two riders forgetting to team rider to win a meeting and instead thinking of themselves. Froome is/was the better climber, but Wiggins learnt how to maximise his potential, better than any rider I've ever seen. The only time they were in direct battle were the time trials where Wiggins gained over two minutes on Froome. At no other point was Wiggins treating Froome as a competitor. The real reason though I believe Wiggins would have won a one-to-one battle with equal supporting team strength is Wiggins rode the tour to perfection doing everything that was asked of him. You'd be amazed what happens when a rider gets isolated and/or attacked. Froome didn't directly face this because his team was controlling the tempo for Wiggins. The opposition were targeting Wiggins as he was the leader, cretainly at the points of the race there was still a realistic chance to overhaul him. Later in 2012 Froome was given free reign to win the Veulta Espana. In the end three Spaniards picked him to pieces in the mountains and he was a very distant 4th overall. In truth that was the end of a long hard season which took its toll, but it emphasises how these riders are riding to the limit. This season Froome was looking the better rider, but last season it was Wiggins. Don't get me wrong, Froome was excellent in 2012 (and to be a ticket holder stood on Hampton Court Green in front of the podium watching him get an Olympic Bronze in the same race Wiggins took Gold was a moment I treasure), but Wiggins was the better rider in the TDF.

There is a danger of creating matches within matches if the heat format rules become too stringent. Assuming the reserves get four programmed rides and they are protected from heat leaders (do we still have three of those or has modern speedway downgraded to two?) then this is the type of scenario we get. 67 v 67 26 v 26 47 v 47 27 v 46 46 v 27 67 v 67 That leaves 8 heats 1, 3 and 5 on each side is in half those heats. Your now struggling to create pairings that really should be a staple of team speedway. 2 and 4 only have 2 rides left. You could pair them with 1 and 3 for those rides. But then 5 rides with another heat leader in all four of his heats. Regardless of the format of these 8 heats, there is a danger of a top heavy team dominating that section. Now the reserves will to an extent by a lottery due to inexperience. But if your team hits on successful reserves combined with top end strength I'd doubt second strings will have much influence on the result. I'm not sure I'd totally protect the youngsters from the big boys. There will be occasions that a youngster will outscore a Darcy Ward in a heat. That will happen, we already know that. I'd certainly have one ride where they are in with the big boys. Adds a bit to their experience and will better balance the heat set-ups. I'd also have a lead reserve riding at 6. There is going to be a difference. The lead reserve will typically be a rider at PL reserve level. The other reserve will be an NL second string. I'd expose the lead reserve to the slightly tougher programme and be restrictive on the ability to switch them around. I'd also have supplemental reserves in the top 5. The impact of a youngster getting hot (we saw in in the PL a few years ago), replacing weaker second strings and staying at reserve all year will distort matches too much. I've never believed any rider should get 7 rides unless injuries dictates anyway. As I say, we need to be careful with the format. Allow the youngsters some competitive races, let them gain experience against the better riders, but protect the integrity of the match as a competition at the same time.

In truth it will be highly unlikely that Tai will make the Top Ten. The ten will feature sports men and women who are more household names. That's not a fault of the BBC, but the profile of speedway isn't high enough at the moment. I expect the experts will have Tai on their long list, but in the end he is unlikely to make the cut. However, there is some potential in him being used in a different way. He has a story that is of interest to sport followers. Ride in to the studio on his bike, quick discussion on the speed and no brakes (I know !!!!), Eurosport clips of his crashes, his cycle ride to Cardiff, quick discussion of his injuries, a show of his tattoos. Cliched I know. Focusing on crashes (which we all know what can happen), but it is part of the sport. But the story of what he's overcome to succeed this year will strike a cord. Success over adversity is always of great interest. Speedway is difficult because of the extent of the adversity (injuries). But that is a way to move him towards a household name and the admiration of his sporting peers.

You can put the speedway authorities in that category. Not sure if I can think of worst example of a business that has not only failed to embrace the modern social media but more pertinently is also actively antagonistic towards it's customer's who do. I'm aware that by posting this I'm just adding further fuel to their view. I'm not a fan of social media, but have come to realise that is the new way of the world. Many of the rider's have grasped the reality and have enhanced their reputation by their behaviour in this environment. Whilst I appreciate its not easy, those with influence in the sport need to avoid the confrontation that occurs. Speedway does tend to specialise in criticising its customers.

What is the rule? Are second strings operating as supplementary reserves, or are the reserves as we know them today but with a change to their programmed rides?

They will likely have three British riders as they have promised Kyle Howarth a spot and you'd assume he is over qualified for a reserve spot. I actually think that is very good for British speedway. I don't think many people would argue that Poole are probably the best run team in the league (it's the other bits that people of a problem with). To have virtually half the team filled by promising youngsters at a club that is reputed to be popular for riders can only be a good thing when you consider British riders going forward.

I'm quite surprised none of the other promoters leaked that info. In the past they probably would have done. In fairness they have collectively improved in that area and allowed the promoter and/or rider to make it public (although we still get exceptions).