chunky

If only...

If it's only going to be a three meeting season - and you don't want them held in Poland - then there's no bloody point in having a season...

Then write to them and tell them to cancel the GP's until Covid is all finished...

That is my point! What is so wrong with a traditional 20-heat meeting?

Not true... They started introducing the poxy things YEARS ago, well before any of this...

IT. IS. CALLED. COVID-19.

I don't disagree with that, but as I asked; is it fair for the guy who finished 6th to score more than the GP winner?

You want to know my question? Why does every individual meeting these days need a final (and often semi-finals)? Why can't we just use race points from 20 heats?

Amazing the things we'd forgotten about, eh?

I'm asking a serious question...

Was there such a marked difference in gates back then? I know that nobody used to rattle on about it like they do now...

But it shouldn't count for Poles in Poland - apparently that's unfair...

Bloody hell, Steve! I'd forgotten all about that!

But why 10? It could be 8, 9, 11, 12...

But it's only now you are admitting that there was a flaw?

Sigh... You know, they don't even have to award points for those; think of it as a bonus! Nobody complained that the Daily Mirror GP only awarded points to the Top 10...

lt's all very simple, you see; there are three goals in the current system. 1) Qualify for the semi-finals by finishing in the Top 8. 2) Qualify for the final. 3) Win the final and the GP. There is absolutely nothing unfair to it - not to the riders, anyway. Everybody knows the rules, and everybody has the same chance... But you were okay with it in the days of the old World Final? That is my whole point...

The same way that a rider could score 6 points in the Inter-Continental Final and then win the World Final. The first 20 heats are just there to decide the Top 8 finishers - and then everyone starts from scratch.

As I said, I preferred it, but is it right when the winner of a GP gets a lot fewer points that the guys behind him?

It's bad enough travelling around the world for five minutes of action; who the hell would want to do it for TWO minutes? Everyone is so concerned about "being fair" to the fans, but what about being fair to participants?

Exactly. There is no perfect system, and there never will be...

Didn't take long! I've always had my opinions on formats, and I've always been interested in stats! The biggest problem this year is that two riders are running away with it, and the bottom few are really being outclassed. Sometimes that happens, as it's always done.

Sad that there were London area tracks I never got to, but by the time BL II started, my dad wasn't able to go much because of work. My mum took me to Wimbledon by bus and tube, and we only did odd trips to West Ham and Hackney.

I know we all have our own preferences, but I am amazed at how people ignore the flaws in there own preferred World Championship system. Yes, EVERY system has bad flaws, but it just depends where we choose to look. The old World Final system was the most flawed of all, and most of the time, was NEVER designed to qualify the 16 best riders in the world. That - obviously - is the biggest flaw of all. Different riders competed in very different numbers of meetings and rides to reach the World Final, based on their nationality. The title could be lost because of ONE poor race, and engine failure, or a fall. It was possible to win the World Championship without ever winning a race. The GP system is fairer for everyone (everybody has the same number of meetings, and rides against the same opponents), and my personal favourite was the points system used before the current one. However, that was badly flawed too, the biggest of which was the fact that the winner of an individual GP was not usually the highest scorer on the night! As has been said, how can the winner of a GP lose ground on those who finished behind him? It was also possible (and please don't argue this, as I have repeatedly proven this) for a rider to win every GP, yet not finish in the Top 8 at the end of the year! This is largely because of my first point. While the current system seems to be pissing off everybody, let's look at it like this. The winner of the GP gets the most points. The second place man receives the second highest points, and so on. The problem is that people are looking at things the wrong way... With the old World Final system, the sole idea was to qualify from one round to the next, and it was quite possible for riders to scrape through, and then put on a good display next round. That is EXACTLY what the current system is like. The difference is that each GP basically comprises two rounds; a qualifying round, and a finals. The opening 20 heats is nothing more than a qualifying round for the finals (semi-finals and final). It doesn't matter whether you get a 15 point max, or scrape through as the lowest qualifier, the main thing is that you qualified for the next round. This is just the same as qualifying from the British Final to the British-Nordic Final, or the Commonwealth Final to the Inter-Continental Final. You qualify, and then you all start the next round from scratch; what you did the previous round matters not. So, why was that okay then, but not now?

New Cross, Rayleigh, Norwich, Southampton, Somerset.