chunky

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.

Great point... Besides, it's the same for everyone.

Funny, isn't it? I spent the night listening to how Laguta is the best rider in the world right now, yet Zmarzlik has won his fourth GP in five, and increased his lead in the World Championship...

And he had gone the night without a warning!

That's unusual for Doyley...

Yeah, nobody has ever gone through that before... Nobody has had ups and downs before... Sad when it's happening to Woffinden, Madsen, and Janowski all at the same time...

And not just because of the weather tonight. Most GP's don't liven up until halfway through, when the track settles down. If they did it is a matter of course, I'm sure it would really improve things.

He mentioned it once, but I think he got away with it...

It is most weeks...

Exactly...

A few laps by a few riders wold probably do a lot more than a lap or two by the tractors...

I was just getting on here to say that! Juniors going out for a few races would make a HUGE difference...

Can he call it moist spiced ham???

It's showing a 6.30 start, Steve...

Should be. The others have been...

When I think I struggle to get concert tickets for non-headline names for that, damn right it is!

That is an all too common occurrence at tracks that stage greyhound or other motorsports. I recently stumbled on an online article about Plough Lane, and there was no indication that they ever held speedway...

Have to say, that would be my five also!

That sounds great, Barry! I know that nobody wants a long drawn-out meeting full of lengthy breaks, but I can't understand those on here who wants everything done in under an hour. As I said, if I go somewhere to be entertained, I want some entertainment! I have driven all over the country to see speedway meetings, and if I thought everything would be over in 45 minutes, I probably wouldn't have been to half of them... That's why I used to love grass-track.

How did I know... ...that you'd leave Plough Lane off???

Ila and Pepe Teromaa in 1976. Cieslak and Jurczynski in 1978.

Vaclav and Jan Verner rode together a few times in 1978...

And a lot of people seem to want all that done in less than an hour... I'm sorry, but if I drive a few hours to watch a meeting, and spend that kind of money, I want more than a 45-60 minute show... The trouble is, it seems that no two speedway fans want the same thing. One wants team, and one wants individual. One wants it over in an hour, and one wants a full evening. One wants outside entertainment, and one doesn't. One wants good racing, and one wants a thumping home win. One doesn't care as long as it's exciting, and one only wants to see the top stars.