Racer X

Looked like Matty was plenty hard enough when passing Sully. Those rough first turns are part and parcel of the GPs - Jase nailed Matty, just one of those things.

No - I don't think it applies equally to an old style TS. People are generally familiar with substitutes and the fact that someone can bring in an on form rider for an off form rider was a simple line, easilly communicated. I am astonished that you have talked to people amazed that an off form rider is replaced with a better one. I have NEVER had any problem explaining this to a newcomer (and as I have been involved in sponsorship the number of new people to the sport I have seen has been considerable....) And no - of course this isn't more off track than the new rule... The TS rider still has to win his points in a TS ride and often failed to in my recollection, as the opposition no2 was able to beat him. Of course this is not more off track than the fact that a rider on a TR who earns double points for winning a race just because he has a black and white hat on - I know we have different opinions buts lets be rational about the arguement please! "The rider in green is in black and white because he is on a double points tactical ride!" Easilly explained? Not confusing? I think not! The tac subs rides do keep struggling teams competitive at home - those crowds that Newcastle and Newport get would be decimated if they had no recourse to tactical moves (even TRs are better than nothing). You seriously underestimate how devastating the effect of being thrashed at home can be on a side in my opinion. I see you don't address the point that reserves now have artifically high averages - a massive flaw in the arguement for TR rides.

My biggest gripe with those supporting the rule (and Star Fever is one of those - but I have to respect SF's bravery in supporting the rule in the face of massive opposition) is credibility. Fans (old and partiuclarly NEW) cannot understand why a win suddenly attracts 6 points for no other reason than a Team Manager nominates. I like my sport to take place on the track - this is an off track manouevre that is bad for the sport's credibility. SCB makes a super point about reserves' averages - and he is spot on! Recently, Reading had Chris Mills out on a 4+ average. How many riders do you think Reading could choose a guest from? I think it was about two riders in the PL with an average between 3.01 and 4+! That means that a lot of sides (if not every side) will dump their 4+ rider next year to bring in a 3.00 rider and keep their top men. How much good will this have done the "up and coming" riders? Its a false economy - the arguement that no changes are made to programmed rides and therefore the up and comers are encouraged is a short term fix that will have consequences. PS Phil? I note that CVS is claiming that the Grading System has been a great sucess - personally I don't agree AT ALL. Perhaps we could have a poll on that to gauge opinion?

Reviewing the original thread I wonder whether the original supporters of this rule (Star Fever, lanzilla, rabbit etc) have reconsidered. To me it would be most interesting to hear from them as I am absolutely certain that those who vigourously opposed the rule will not have changed their minds during the season (although I would certainly be interested in reading a post by someone who has..) I still think the rule actively damages Speedway's reputation and the side effect of race fixing (anticipated on the board) is nasty. I will be thrilled if the rule bites the dust - but if it doesn't go next year, I fear it will be around for a long time.

Have to say if Scotty had passed Karlsson I would have been amazed. Scotty didn't have any form from the back on the night - PK did - we should take defeat gracefully and not grizzle about Hans Andersen , who will have truly shafted his repuatation in this country by a needless shut off.

I'd echo that. Middlo did nothing wrong tonight. Well done Brits, so near..........

Well you couldn't hope for a better advert than the meeting than yesterday (or the fact that Timothy will be in the car park)

I think there will be a fair amount of bucking and rearing not mention marches being stolen in last chance salons (sic)....

I have heard people claim that rider X will be challenging for the World title before and these predictions have fallen flat on their faces. There is no doubt that currently Linback looks a glorious future talent, he has come on so much since last season when he struggled around Wimbledon in the Swedish Under 21 side. He is a special talent - whether he can keep improving to the level needed to challenge in the GPs remains to be seen. Many have fallen at this hurdle. For the record I don't think he was dirty last night either - he was badly overriding at times and certainly turned right into Janusz on the first corner which he ought to have been excluded for. A couple of his latter rides showed the sort of talent the lad posesses though. It will be interesting to see how he fares with some of the more agressive stuff from the Danes on saturday.

I just don't know what Neil Street was thinking of when he didn't nominate Leigh Adams as a Golden Joker. Was he expecting to be six points down later on in the match? I certainly didn't expect this, and because even at this early stage it was looking like the Aussies would have an unbalanaced side, he should have whacked in a joker straight away. I can't see what you have to gain by saving the move up. And when will people stop saying things are "cheating" this year when the rule book permits them? It's very annoying - you can't be cheating if the rulebook says you can do something!!! I would vehemently disagree with the statement that you should be allowed to use a joker in heat 25. Why on earth should one of the two trailing sides be disadvantaged because they have more points than the other side? It's a disgrace. At least if the Joker was used earlier then the two sides behind the leaders could have the chance to get back on terms it's blatantly unfair that a move can be used in the lat race and I would have thought this was an eventuality not forseen by the rulemakers.

More crap refereeing. Totally with you on both decisions - the Lindback one was absolutely blatant. AL turned the corner too hard and too clumsily and clobbered Janusz. He should have been out. Shocking decision. The Johnston one was harder to call but it looked like he was passed and took a gamble to drop his bike. There was certainly contact but just as no contact doesn't always mean there hasn't been a foul ride contact does necesarilly mean that has been a foul ride. Apparently the ref studied the video too (what was on it Coronation Street??????) Absolutely TOP CLASS meeting though, and Janusz's price should have gone up so much that hopefully the Racers can keep him as an asset.

Swiderski isn't the same standard as Janusz? Well he might be at Wroclaw where Janusz didn't get a point in May. He's back in early August at Wroclaw so we ought to get an idea of whether this is going to be a "bogey" circuit for him then. As far as Swiderski being a long way behind Janusz - dunno haven't seen him ride but the stats don't suggest a big gap. Swiderski 6.41 - Miskowiak 7.77 (but a lower average than Swiderski at Wroclaw!) - Janusz Kolodziej 7.59. There's not too much difference there I would say. But, Crazy Munchie, it would seem we both want the same winners. Matej Zagar is a class touch and an undoubted future GP regular in my book. I think he'll go all the way and I think Bjerre, Lindback and Kolodziej will too. Schlein can also join then on top form, but I would make Bjerre the favourite. He has top class experience everywhere and the formbook says Dane! Go Matej! (or Janusz!)

I don't mean to do Smolinski down - far from it - to me he is the out and out discovery of the U-21s this year and would be high on my "wanted" list if I was a Promoter! Beating Lindback in the qualifiers was a cracking result. However his limited experience and lack of Polish / British regular action will count against him I would say, but I would be happy for him to prove me wrong. I would say the top eight would contain at least four Poles, Bjerre, Lindback, Lindgren. Schlein should be there too but doesn't seem to be making the impression I thought he would. I have to say that Smolinski does tend to do well in the finals though - if he makes the final cut he has a good chance of a top placing. Good luck to him!

errrr Piotr Świderski is a Wroclaw rider as well (does the home advantage only go to Robert Miśkowiak?) It will take a strong performance to beat the Poles on home shale (go Matty!). The form book doesn't look good for Janusz who scored 0 when Tarnow went to Wroclaw! (And the Wroclaw boys were well in control that day.) Lindback, Lindgren, Zagar, Schlein and (especially) Bjerre all have a decent chance. But you can't really rule out any of the five poles (I'll bet they'll all have extensive practice at Wroclaw if they want it!) and Korneliussen and The Davidssons are useful enough. Only Hefenbrock, Smolinski and Eric Andersson's chances look very limited. Looks a superb Under 21 this year and its a crying shame that Britain can join in the fun. I'm sure Edward will bounce back into the rankings next year - at least.

As you ask so nicely, of course I will.... TACTICAL RIDES (TR) * permitted when a team is 8 or more points in arrears after Heat 4. * subject to use of a maximum of twice per Team per Meeting * each Rider may only take one TR ride *not permitted in the same heat as a TS is being used *not permitted in any Nominated or High Scorers Heat * a rider already having taken a TS cannot also be nominated as a TR These points count double for the meeting and count at their normal value for average puposes (this will cause headaches) TACTICAL SUBSTITUTES (TS) (These replace the old style six points down bring in a heat leader for a reserve in heat eight version) A rider is introduced for another (subject to a three ride minimum), and takes a 15 metre handicap. * permitted when a team is 8 or more points in arrears after Heat 4. *only one TS ride is permitted per Team per Meeting *not permitted in any Nominated or High Scorers Heat * a Rider cannor replace himself as a TS * a rider already having taken a TR cannot also be nominated as a TS (These rides are discounted from official averages completely. Note that in previous seasons the speedway star has insisted on including these points at their normal value in their averages.) GUEST RULES These will take me half an hour to type in....soooo Basically for single injuries = gest for no 1 / RR for everyone else apart from top reserve. more than one injury / incl number 1 = guest for no1 RR for 2nd guests for rest. more than one injury / not number 1 = RR for highest guests for lowest there are other complications but I'll leave it for a while if that's OK? Hapilly (as far as I'm concerned) no mention of Golden or Jokers anywhere! I'm sure it will take announcers and management alike a little while to adjust to the new termology...

I still hope they grde riders coming into the EL from the PL on their PL average. To me it seems the fairest thing and "rewards" those who did take the trouble to race EL. And yes, you are quite correct that a lot of Charlie's rides were earned from reserve. A rider like Charlie should be a prized asset not a white elephant if he's lumbered with a grading he will struggle to match. Chris Harris is another - 7.05/6.87 - who could benefit from some leeway in this respect. (You had better Bee-lieve that there's yet another track up for his services..)

Back on page six I suggested the very same thing Grachan, I would have thought that there was every danger of this happening. Maybe the averages which govern grades will be flexed from season to season? It would be a shockingly bad idea to keep the average grades the same from year to year as there is bound to be wholesale fiddling. I wonder whether Charlie Gjedde (8.09 official EL average) will be given a higher grade than Mark Loram (7.86 down to 7.66 with the 2.5% reduction). May seem to be a rider where some discretion about grading is needed?

Not only that but where - prey tell - to all these unattached riders come from? There are usually one or two on the sidelines at the start of the year who are soon snapped up as soon as any injuries hit. If you lose a second heat leader on say 8.00 - how do you replace him? If you are under the 45 point limit you could go out and get a 9.00 foreigner but if you are over you are pretty much stuffed. Effectively you have to ship out a lower order rider (say replace a 4 pointer with a 3 pointer) and axe your injured rider to bring in a 9 point rider. This will cuase howls of protest if anyone has to do it.

I can't quite follow the logic of rider control = gradings. As the grades all have powers and you have to build to 19 its patently clear to me that this is a points limit. If you are only allowed to pick one A or one B - I assume that means that Poole cannot track Tony Rick and Lukas D.... Lukas D if he was number one for someone could be replaced by Tony Rick if he got injured though!!! Riders in the unlimited C grade bracket of 7-8.32 are going to be highly sought after as I would imagine most sides would want two of them. Bit of a shame that there are only 11 riders in this bracket. If I was Mark Loram - I would be totting up the zeroes I was going to put on my pay packet. As for the other sides Mark Loram or Seb Ulamek??? Tough call. PS Just a thought come the end of the year when you are a rider on 8.35 - you are gooing to make darn sure that you get an average of below 8.32 for the following season aren't you? Under the old averages system that wouldn't have matterred too much, byut look out at the end of the season for widespread sudden drops in form of those riders on the cusp of grades....

Pleased to count you amonst the opponents of this rule Grachan, we may not (and certainly will not!) agree on everything but I respect your opinion and yours is one I would have looked for in voicing opposition to this. I wonder whether the supporters of the golden mess up will take any notice of the NINE TO ONE opposition to the rule, or whether they will continue to claim that support is growing.

I agree about the Golden Double Tac Sub - the extra points won there (inevitably from heat 2 or 14) will be justified, the rider would have had to work hard to get from last to first. I realise there is opposition to GDTS as well - but I like these. I do not like Golden Jokers because suddenly a rider gets double points for no extra effort. It makes meetings artificially close especially on fair tracks and will hand a huge and unfair advantage to team with good top ends. It is patently un fair for a team being well beaten to come back and even win a meeting courtesy of having three very good heat leaders. This will happen next year if the rule goes ahead. Teams will be able to come back from a big deficit as they have big heat leaders. All round teams normally fearful of heat 13 could face losing the race 8-1 and then lose heat 15 5-1 and lose a meeting they led by ten points due to the performance of two good opposition riders. If you think that this is fair Star Fever the fair enough, I don't think its fair and I feel the average fan will end up feeling cheated. Seen the poll latey Star Fever - no amount of rolling eyes will ever make up for a bankrupt arguement.

And I've got a problem with comments like that!!! So what if people are saying they don't mind this new ruling - it's their opinion and I'm standing in the 'give it a go' court too. You got a problem with me also? You've made it quite clear in numerous posts today what your thoughts are on this but don't have a go at those of us for having differing views. Its nothing to do with disregarding what you have to say (you've left us in no doubt) but I think we're all big enough and ugly enough to make our own minds up on this without being told what to think thanks! You carry on your campaign to get it thrown out but leave those of us who are happy to wait and see how it works for ourselves to have our say! Just because it wasn't to you liking doesn't mean we all have to roll over and agree with you! Of course I have because we in the PL HAVE given it a go yet people like you and Lanzilla appear to give no regard to our opinions. I can have a go at you just as you can have a go at me - I have never claimed anything else. I have never said that people like you don't deserve to be heard - indeed I have even asked for justifications why you people want this rule to be introduced and I am still waiting for a decent arguement. I notice that you can't come up with one (something better than give it a chance perhaps?) - so why not try instead of slagging me off??? -ier than you mate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lanzilla - I'm sorry but I have a real problem with opinions like yours. We in the PL HAVE given this a chance. We have had an entire PL KO Cup grounded in this competition and even the IoW (who were the winners) didn't even really like it, so how can you say give this achance when we already have???? Do all of you EL fans have such a superiority complex that you completely disregard what us PL fans have to say after experiencing this rule???? Cos that's what it feels like!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I hope that the PL Promoters if nothing else can get this reversed. I know Reading voted against this and so (I assume) would have Sheffield. We need to find out who supported this rule change and get them to change their minds before the rule is ratified. Mr Pearson - your "successful" golden double rule is not being echoed by the fans on this forum. The question is do you have the courage to admit this???????????? Or are you a complete puppet??? The fans deserve to be listened to on this point. It is a massive majority against this rule - not just a few votes.

as usual Steve - yours is a questionable call with inaccurate info and a poorly informed opinion (quite surprising as you appear to have talked to the England TM) If you look at the reaction to fans that have actually seen the golden double in action - they are not convinced, perhaps you should ask yourself whether all these fans have a point? Why should a rider get double points for no extra effort? It is simply illogical. You can follow the need for a bog standard TS but not this. "No guests" ? ...wrong - guests stay but restricted to number ones only. "plus of course the golden double off 15 metres, providing he has not been used as a tac from the line already."...wrong - there are NO tac subs - only Golden double tac subs so what you are saying here is wrong - even more worrying that it appears to be coming from Middlo. I would also quesion whether the grading system brings an end to "the dreaded points limit". As I understand the grading system a team has graded riders with values - so sorry BSPA you aren't fooling anyone (steve Shovlar apart that is!) this is a points limit by another name and all you have done is increased costs because teams will try and get the best grade riders possible. This is a disasterous move on its own and couples with the terrible Golden Jokers it makes the EL look very shakey indeed. I hope the likes of Swindon and Arena will survive it. Yes there are some good decision - the PL points limit, the restriction of doubling up, the banning of doubling down. Yes - there were some very good decisions but there are a few decisions here which will hurt our sport badly. Protest people !- I would suggest you complain to your local promotions sensibly and we just might get Golden Doubles axed when they come up for ratification later this year.

OK I am interested in the reasons why people support this. Why is it one of the best things to happen - considering the universal oppostion to the rule from almost all quarters?