fatface

agree with steve, except: 84 Mark Crang and Kelly Moran? - Shooey in foreground 90 - Tommy Knudsen & Dave Bargh? 79 - Sam Nicoj-nicol-nicha (oh, you know who I mean) Also: 73: Foxy Smith 74 - Martin Hagon 77 - Shooey 81 - Frank Varey? 82 - I'll go for Sam nico...... sen again 85 - Eric Monoghan/ Martin Hagon 86 - Les Collins 89 - Keith Bloxome (betcha didn't think i'd get that!)

67 - Mighty Mort 68 - Rod Hunter 69 - Stephen Collins 70 - Dave Morton 71 - Sam Nicolajsen 72 - Lance King I'll be back for more later........ :evil:

Amen to that! Scottie is a cracking rider and for the next 5 years or so will remain one of the World's most exciting and talented racers. I think our opinions on Scott should be based on his performances at the top level - not some crappy individual meeting at Berwick. :roll:

It doesn't! Going into the last GP 4 rider could be World Champion and posisbly 1 or 2 had a chance of 10th. That means 6 riders were intrested in the meting so any race witout these 6 was pointless, surely? NO beacause riders wnat to win every race and that woudl be the same wit the current or the old/future format! It does! Winning a GP means a lot. To Greg Hancock every race certainly counted last week.

OK - I'll be the first to say it and I'll be the first to be shot down in flames if I'm wrong. But despite all the talk of problems in his head, problems with his team and this incident with the idiot who sent him the letter, Crumpy will win the title next year IMO. Why? Because deep down, he knows he should have won it this year cos he is the best in the world. Nicki deserved it, but Crumpie lost it. If Tony R would have won it again, I think that would have affected him more, and he wouldn't be able to believe he was the best. But I think Crump has the beating of Nicki and in 2004, the pressure will be all Nicki's with all the riders gunning for the World Champ. Crumpie is the man for me next year. :!:

I am totally with you on this Grachan. They are not everyone's cup of tea (especially the speedway purists) but BSI have taken our sport and made it far more appealling to the wider masses. In the current format - every race counts. in the old one, it wouldn't. Just another point, but if we went in for 20 heats plus final with 4-3-2-1 points as well or some similar suggestion. Isn't there a danger that quite often two or more riders will emerge as joint top scorers from a GP? Or the winner of the final isn't necassarily the overall winner of that particular GP? :roll: I don't think Joe Public would buy that. People want clear results, were we have a 1st -2nd - 3rd result. Not a winner of the final, but two other guys who have scored the most points .

Agree totally. The current format makes the meeting build to a crescendo, now it will only really get going towards the end. The danger is that people will turn off their TV in droves and tune back in just to watch the final couple of races.

Agree Salty - I had him down for 8 titles in my list. Seems odd to say, but despite winning 4 titles I still think he under-achieved, considering how dominant he was for so long.

I think Poland is the best place to really give the event the stage it deserves. If money were not an option though it would be nice if a joint Australia/New Zealand tournament could be organised.

I agree that Havvy was brilliant in 92. I went to the final in Wroclaw and went away thinking that it was fully deserved and that he had really done the business on the night. But, I also had this nagging feeling that whilst Havvy had won it, Per Jonsson was still the world's best. He was unlucky at the final when he was filled in after the crazy hail-stone storm (did anybody else go by the way? they were like golf balls). But was otherwise brilliant. I also remember him beating Havvy in a run-off for 1st at the World Semi at Bradford. He won it from the back and Havvy didn't have a clue where he was coming from. A peak Havvy would have been a real contender in the GPs, but over 8-10 meetings, Jonsson would have shaded him IMO.

Still think that the points scoring 20-heat formula is not ideal for the unitiated. The various permutations as you go along would making having a programme at home even more important IMO. Good point by sjw on the third/fourth place riders possibly trying to finish last. I actually saw Hans Andersen do this in Prague. In front of us he blatantly let the 4th place rider overtake him in one heat and went on to avoid a "big gun" eliminator and line-up in a weaker one - it worked as well, cos he got through to the semis as I recall. The way to curb this would be for referees to keep an eye on this sort of thing and to stamp it out either by fines or outright exclusion from the next race.

Trying to fill in the last one: 61 - Phil White?

:? The Elite League and GPs are run vastly differently. I've never seen rider replacement, doubling up, guest riders and other silly rules which so disillusion the fans in the GPs.

Great report ajh - I read the lot.

Whilst I see where you guys are coming from, I think the organisers have to be careful they are not just catering for the purists (ie. us lot on here). The "first 2 through" formula works well on TV and is easy for a non-speedway fan to follow. Consequently, IMO, this type of formula gives us a better chance of widening the appeal of the sport.

I always have the same thought Lioness but............. Although Honey says maybe the last one should be a permanent track, I can't help but think, that maybe if the last meeting was in Cardiff what a buzz it would be, winning the "Cardiff Crown" is just like winning the GP series to a lot of the riders, yet win the World Title in front of 45000+ fans the roof would almost certainly be lifted off! Bring the final round to Cardiff that's what I say!!!!!! Agree that Cardiff would be a great place for the GPs to end. But I would guess we get a summer slot, because thats the only time we can be fitted in. Welsh Rugby will get a few weekends at start of the year and football will take over post-June.

What strange logic you have and an amazing ability not to be able to compare like with like. Those meetings were run on a fair format, everyone met everyone else once and once only, everyone had to have at least one race off each gate position. None of those riders beat the champion twice. None met twice. its crazy to use a format where one rider can score 3,3,3 but then be knocked out by a sudden death semi-final after being given a poor gate on a poor slick track by the toss of a coin, whilst an opponent can score 0,2,2,R,2,2 and then be handed the best semi-final gate on the toss of a coin. There's no criticism of Nicki Pedersen whatsoever. He and his team perfectly exploited a flawed system and well done to them. Its a great achievement for an 8 point rider to lift the title ahead of better riders. Nifty editing there SS - choosing to leave my GP example out from my original posting. ;-) Anyhoo - point is whatever format it is, there will always be a crunch point. When Nicki's came, he responded brilliantly. He had a poor gate, but had the ability to overtake to make the final. When JC's crunch time came, he had a rush of blood and blew it. You can't just play down the significance by saying he was unlucky (as you did earlier). His opportunity arrived and he didn't take it. That's what the World Championship has always been about and always will, whatever the format.

Its always going to be difficult to get the atmosphere when you're sat at home watching it on TV. But I agree that Hamar is not the place for GP decider. I think that Australia were originally pencilled in for it, but when that fell through, the Norway GP became the final round.

Agree with what some have been saying abouit 1st bend bunching - the were a few 50-50 incidents at the GP which should have been called all 4 back. Must admit, as a fan, I enjoyed the chaotic action the track threw up. But, from a riders perspective, it seemed that once you had committed to a move, there was no going back, that's probably why there were so many incidents.

But Crump met Pedersen twice last night and beat him both times. So he went into the final round in the lead, beat his closest rival twice, was not beaten by Pedersen and still didn't get the title. Crump was unlucky that the one race he messed up was a tough sudden death semi-final. When Pedersen messed up in one race it just gave him a second chance in an eliminator. Unfortunately the format is badly flawed. The best way to decide the true champion would be a series of 16-rider 20-heat championship format meetings. Strange logic. Perhaps speedway's history could be re-written for you. Ivan Mauger beat Peter Collins at 76 Final - Mauger is new champ Dave Jessup beat Mike Lee at 80 Final - Jessup new champ Slawomir Drabik beat Gary Havelock at 92 Final - Drabik new champ Mark Loram didn't win a GP in 2000 - despite overall points advantage, title given to Tony Rickardson, or whoever else was deemed most "unlucky"! Whatever formula there is, someone will always have complaints. The fact is that all the riders know the formula at the start. I'm just pleased that the title was won fair and square. Nicki took his chance, Crumpy didn't, simple as that.

51 - Martin Scarisbrick - confirms no 48 52 - Neil Collins 53 - Gundersen and Phil collins 54 - David Bargh 55 - Far from sure, but would guess Billy Sanders 56 - Ari Koponen (or is it Per Sorensen?), Neil Collins, Phil Crump 57 - In Reading colours, but looks like Tommy Knudsen to me.

I'll try and fill in the gaps, but its not easy.... 35 - Shawn Moran 40 - Kurt Hansen (with Mort about to p*** past him!) 47 - Frank Andersen is a good shout, but I'd lean toward Andy Campbell 48 - v difficult, but my guess is Martin Scarisbrick

So why have you gone for Crumpy to win then, Phil? Good point! Hardly anything between all the top really. Think Crump will get second but just pointing out Nicki appears to be relaxed which will help him. Guess that does not really answer the question It is a tough one. I have to say I am not a big Crumpy fan. But if he didn't win it I would really feel for him. He deserves it, he has been one of the best in the world for a few years now and has produced some really gritty performances this year. If he doesn't win it, he may never. And that would be a shame, because worse riders than him have been World Champion.

I also think its sensible to keep it as it is. Whilst this "top 2 go through" is not speedway as the traditionalists know it. It does makes the whole thing much easier to follow and consequently is more likely to attract the interest of the layperson.

Isn't that the original GP formula?