Grachan

The racing last night reminded me of how Swindon became before they shortened it. Four riders going round equispaced for four laps in many races.

Are you sure it's not Jurgen Klinsmann?

That's when I used to go. Yes, it was really good. I reckon Scud Smith would liven things up! ☺

I used to go to Sheffield regularly and the racing was excellent. I was just thinking I'm sure it used to be better than this. Maybe it will improve later.

You could, for team building, leave out fractions. It does, perhaps, leave some riders exposed. You could, for example, have all riders from 6.50 to 7.49 rated as a 7.00 riders, but is that fair on riders who average 6.50? Perhaps base in on 0.50 of a point. So 6.75 to 7.24 become 7.00. Riders from 6.25 to 6.74 become 6.50. This would be for team building only. They would still retain a proper average for team positions. In case you haven't guessed, I actually quite enjoy the fractions of a point! But it can cause problems in team building where riders miss out by the smallest of margins. Then again, it's open to manipulation, but what isn't? So, for example, Belle Vue: Kurtz 7.5 Bewley 7.0, Wright 6.0, S. Worrall 5.5, R. Worrall 5.0, Etheridge 5.0 Kings Lynn: Jorgensen 6.5, Riss 6.0, Lawson 6.0, Heeps 6.0, Kerr, 6.0, Wells 4.0

Why would you scrap studio analysis? Surely more ineresting than tractors grading the track.

I agree, which is what made the commentary on Eurosport all the more essential. It was explained clearly at, first of all, Madsen had to win his last heat to still be in with a chance of winning the title. Then, if Michelsen won his final heat he was guaranteed the championship, but he came second. So, it needed Madsen to win the final and Michelsen to come last for there to be a run off. Michelsen needed just 1 point to win, so offered little resistance to Madsen's challenge without it. I would say that the meeting would not even have been half as interesting without having all this explained in the final few races.

Neither did the director by the looks of things, as they seemed to show Leon Madsen looking not particularly overjoyed at winning the meeting for quite a while.

Enjoyed the meeting, and must say it was enhanced thoroughly by David Rowe's brilliant commentary and constant breakdown of the figures, points and how they affected the outcome. I don't know who put on the production, but I was amazed that it gave no indication of the championship standings on the graphics, and I can see from comments on here that people who, presumably, didn't have that commentary, weren't sure what was happening because of it.

I nearly mentioned the maximum in Mike Keen's Testimonial. I remember Mike Keen going onto the second bend with a hosepipe and watering the track in the midst of a rain storm!

Dag was brilliant. So classy. He was virtually unbeatable in the wet. I always felt that if he'd rode in 1977 and reached the rain-soaked World Final he would have won it.

This used to be a regular occurrence and part of the fun of going to speedway. I remember Rosco doing it at Swindon. Everyone had a laugh and a cheer and a good time with it. Can't have that though, can we!

Thanks for the clarification, although it does seem a little odd that a rider not riding as a rising star and averaging over 5 points per match can be used in such a way. Be careful with the rule quoting. You'll get accused of being an anorak!

So why have a rule that says that they are determined by average once they achieve one?

People thinking it's no more than just 4 blokes going round a track one after the other and no more is why it won"t appeal to the masses. The masses will have no knowledge of me making a post on a forum and will have no knowledge of the rule book. Also, riders' families being condescending towards anyone who feels inclined to look at the rules on the bspa website and commenting on them by refering to them as an "anorak" won't help either. I've been a fan of speedway since 1974, and the intricacies of the rules and the averages were always a big part of its appeal to me. Sorry if you don't like them.

For me, Anders Rowe's place in the Sheffield side is very dubious - even more so if riding at reserve. Looking at the rules, supplementary rule 12.3.1 states that, once an average is obtained, riders positions in the side are determined by match average. From today, Anders is on an average of 5.49. Bates is still on a "Rising Star" 4* figure. I know that both are on the original 4 star list, but Rowe has an official average that not only puts him higher than Josh Bates but also higher than Justin Sedgman, who is in the Sheffield 1-5. And the rules say that once that average is obtained then that determines his position in a team.

If Ipswich fail to make the play-offs on the basis of a Sheffield home win then they don't deserve to be there anyway.

Coverage was decent. Not much of a match though. Kent not really at the races despite Nicholls and Starke providing the highlights in terms of passing.

Surely this means Sheffield are riding without a "rising star" in the team. Is that within the rules?

Watching the stream. Sounds like Rosco as a co-commentator. Looks like a decent enough production. Would possibly be better with a pit of a pit view from time to time.

Could it be because a KO Cup match is over 2 legs so therefore needs to be raced evenly over both legs?

What I am saying is that if they can't even get enough people through the gate that the Covid restrictions allow for, then the Covid restrictions can't be the reason for the cancellation.

Disappointing for me, though. It would have been my first time to Kent and probably the only meeting I was going to go to this year.

I see that the reason given is because England are playing football on those nights which, alongside the Covid restrictions, will mean a low attendance. That makes no sense. If they can't even meet the restricted figure because the football is on then Covid restrictions can't have anything to do with it.

That's annoying. I was going to go to the Poole match.