Khabiboulin

Six hours in bank holiday traffic for nothing

Full scorecard (including your missing heat time, Derek) available here: http://eliteeaglescouk.ipage.com/pdf/eaglets-lakeside.pdf

Scorecard available here: http://eliteeaglescouk.ipage.com/pdf/2012-British-Youth-R4.pdf

Dekker, I don't think I can quote on my phone. But my point was that a lot of meetings are called off having had much less bad weather than Berwick had. So if assume covers on those tracks would give a slightly better end result than at Berwick on Saturday, then yes, I do think it's worth it. Also, a bit more practice and experience with covers would probably have given a better track on Saturday too. It did look like the tractors made the bends a bit worse to start with so I'm sure a bit more experience would help with preparing a track in those conditions. The racing wasn't great but there were a few ok races towards the end.

We drove up from Kent so I too am grateful to the track staff. A nice venue, I enjoyed it. Berwick have proved that covering tracks can work in this country. They had about the worst conditions possible and got the meeting on which suggests to me that at least half of current rain-offs could be saved.

But 2-minute exclusions don't count towards averages whether the rider is (or can be) replaced or not. I think in that case it is 3 from 1 although his team will only have had 28 rides that count towards averages that night. Slightly odd maybe but I think that's the right way - the same as if there are three-rider races because of injuries.

Three 2-minute exclusions when he didn't turn up? That's interesting, although in my book I wouldn't count that as a meeting because he didn't actually appear on track (or even in the pits, presumably!) Any ideas when the SCB (not you!) might finally decide to replace the 2011 rules on their website with 2012 ones?

If a rider takes part in a meeting but officially takes no rides, what happens? The scenario I mean is when a rider is injured in his first ride (which is stopped and re-run), he is not excluded but is unable to take any further part in the meeting. In normal record keeping, this would go down as the slightly odd (but in my opinion, totally correct) 1 meeting, 0 rides. Normally that has no impact on averages. But under these rolling averages where only the last 28 or 38 meetings count, it matters. The scenario happened to Joonas Kylmakorpi this season and it appears the BSPA have completely discounted his appearance in that meeting which I think is the wrong thing to do. In many ways, I quite like the rolling averages, but (as well as the above scenario) I don't like the way that meetings from so long ago can still count. When very, very few riders ride every meeting in a season, they are very likely to have meetings from 2 seasons ago counting - that doesn't seem right really. The rider who is quite cleaely the best rider in the Elite League is still getting his average reduced by his less impressive 2010 form - is that right? Is it really relevant now? And what I find even more silly is that now the PL has a different number of meetings from last year, every single rider is guaranteed to have very old meetings counting.

Thanks Bryn - appreciated. Oh, and I meant to ask, did Slick Nick Laurence recover his stolen equipment?

Do you have heat details, Derek? I was at the meeting but not in time for the "first half". It's disappointing Arena put these meetings on as first halves and not second halves; I'm not sure why - they don't have a curfew, do they?

Thanks Dave. But does that mean 2009 (and earlier) meetings count where necessary, even though they didn't last year? Your wording seems to suggest so. It obviously wouldn't affect many riders, but would, for example, Renat Gafurov use his last 4 meetings for Swindon to go with his 24 for Poole? If so, it seems strange given that didn't apply similarly last year. But if not, it makes the start-2010 cut-off incredibly arbitrary. I quite like the idea of rolling averages but I think once a season is complete, it should only be that season's meetings that count for a current average (a rider could still have an average based purely on an earlier season if he hadn't ridden enough meetings in that last season). So 500cc - I agree with you. What Dave appears to be saying is the current system seems to over-benefit riders on an upward curve (e.g. Darcy Ward, who is clearly one of the world's best riders, but gets his average reduced by results from two years ago) and over-penalise riders on a downward curve. Oh and one more thought - I thought the 28 and 38 were based on "whole" seasons. But next year the PL will have 26 league meetings plus 10 "early-season competition" meetings, excluding later rounds, cup, play-offs etc which shouldn't count. So will they still use 38?

Congratulations to Henry Atkins on winning the inaugural title. Here's the scorecard on the unofficial Eastbourne site: http://eliteeaglescouk.ipage.com/pdf/125cc-british.pdf

That was my first visit to Smallbrook and it made an enjoyable day out. I had thought Nick Simmons was going to be a bit lucky getting a maximum having being third in the race when Chessell crashed before winning the re-run. But he certainly earned it the hard way in heat 15, so well done to him. Jason Garrity was again very entertaining and he looks a real prospect. Seems to be quite a character too. Also good to see John Resch continuing to progress.

It does seem a bit harsh. I doubt he'll ever progress beyond his current level but he's obviously keen and puts the effort in so probably didn't deserve such public criticism. By the way, you've spelt his name wrong: it's Laurence

Does anyone know the heat format used for this? If anyone would be kind enough to scan the programme that would be ideal and much appreciated.

So how many perfectly good speedway tracks are going to be lying fallow this year now then? Coventry Peterborough Oxford Weymouth Mildenhall Any others? It's an absolutely ridiculous state of affairs.

That's professional of him. Nice to see the Coventry management going about things in the correct and proper way.

Produce your own talent if you don't want to pay for others'.

I'd love to have King's Lynn back in the EL. But I don't think having some tracks bankrolled by others is any sort of solution. We're losing money hand over fist as it is - where will all this extra cash come from?

Considering the fuss the Coventry fans made about the possibility of Bridger returning to Eastbourne in this way, I assume the forum fascists will soon be making their feelings known about this (or maybe it doesn't matter if it has no direct effect on Coventry?)

Judging by the scores, and what's been said earlier in the thread, it looks like Lewis Bridger got injured in this. Anyone know how badly? Was the early diagnosis of a dead leg and double vision correct?

Thanks for that, Scunny (although I've never heard of the DJ )

Is it L'Anson or I'Anson? I've noticed Speedway Star always writes L'Anson, but his kevlars last year looked more like I'Anson to me and that seems the more common spelling here. L'Anson sounds like a French name but I'Anson strikes me as an incredibly unusual name - how on earth is it pronounced? Eye-Anson? That's how I've heard it said, but it's not a name I've ever come across before.

I think it's important to develop riders that are committed to British speedway, wherever they happen to come from. Aussies and Kiwis tend to put British racing first, and you don't find them disappearing off to all manner of meetings abroad during our season. I have nothing against riders from Continental Europe riding in Britain, but their commitments elsewhere are increasing and causing endless disruption to the British leagues. We simply cannot go on having the number of absences in teams that we've seen in recent years. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Good point, Kevin. The Antipodean riders do tend to become almost honoury Brits, and certianly seem to put their British teams first, so I don't mind them riding in our leagues.

Yeah, Steve Purchase used to publish the Oxford attendances.