Tactical Ride / Tactical Substitutes

[Phil]

There were lengthy discussions about the new Tactical Rides and Tactical substitutes introduced for the 2004 season. The topic and poll can be viewed here

 

The new ruling basically allows a team managers to nominate two riders whose points can count as double if a team is eight points behind.

There was an overwhelming majority of people who voted against these new facilities however some people wanted to see how it went this year before voting and giving there views.

 

We have now had almost a full season with the Tactical Rides and Tactical substitutes so the vote and discussion are starting again.

 

So what do you think of it? Discuss and Vote....

[Grachan]

I just voted YES by mistake, and meant NO. Is there any way of removing my vote or changing it? I feel dead silly now.

 

The TR rule is ridiculous.

[Phil]

I just voted YES by mistake, and meant NO. Is there any way of removing my vote or changing it? I feel dead silly now.

 

The TR rule is ridiculous.

 

 

Is the question worded ok?

 

Sorry Grachan I cannot change it to allow you to vote again.

[Grachan]

I think it's worded ok Phil, I just did it all in a bit of a rush without reading it properly. It's just inexcusable (copyright Dennis Sigalos, 1983).

 

The TR rule is ridiculous.

[Star Lady]

The dingly danglies should be dangled from a very high bridge and dropped never to be seen again.

Sorry Phil, I can't be serious about such a ridiculous concept .

 

The Tac Sub off 15metres I can live with, at least extra effort for extra points is involved......well in theory

[norbold]

Shame about your vote at the moment, Grachan!

 

The current consensus seems quite clear.

[Racer X]

Reviewing the original thread I wonder whether the original supporters of this rule (Star Fever, lanzilla, rabbit etc) have reconsidered.

 

To me it would be most interesting to hear from them as I am absolutely certain that those who vigourously opposed the rule will not have changed their minds during the season (although I would certainly be interested in reading a post by someone who has..)

 

I still think the rule actively damages Speedway's reputation and the side effect of race fixing (anticipated on the board) is nasty.

 

I will be thrilled if the rule bites the dust - but if it doesn't go next year, I fear it will be around for a long time.

[Star Fever]

Well I'm still for it for the following reasons:

- I always thought the old TS rule was ridiculous. Why should team A ride out of their skins only to have an in-form member of team B pop-up where they shouldn't be and more often than not nick points back? Team B might only have 3 on form riders but putting them in the right places could win team B the match. Hardly a TEAM performance and most unfair on team A. With the new rule there's no chopping and changing and riders either succeed or fail where they would have done anyway. As riders in heats are unchanged the use of a TR rarely alters the match result and if it does it means the rest of the team have improved sufficiently during the match to give their team a deserved win. Hence the result is fair and it was a TEAM performance.

- In addition use of the old TS stopped lesser team members having a full quota of rides, more often than not losing their easier rides in hts 8 or 14. This cannot help up'n'comers much. With the new rule though there've been several cases when a rider has scored none or one point from first 3 rides only to get a vital point or points in his last. This can only boost their confidence and help their development?

 

I've probably just repeated what I said in the original thread but my views certainly have not changed.

[SCB]

Fair points Star Fever and I guess what ever happens what you say is right.

 

However, with regard to the young reserve, where as before in heat 8 a heatleader would come out and win it and the reserve scored say 1+1 he now comes out against an easier rider and beat hims and scores 2+1 which keeps his average lower and FAIRER.

 

The home number 7 rides against the number 7 3 times, the number 6 twice the number 5,3 and 2 once each where as the number 1 comes out against the numuber 1 twice, the number 2 twice, the number 2,3,4 and 6 once each. Who has the easier rides? The number 7, so he finds it easier to get a higher average. Throw in a tac sub and the number 7 still gets the easier rides!

 

So where as there used to be bias to artificaly increase the number 7 averages, it's now even more noticeable and riasing the lower order riders averages (not meeting heatleaders as often) and so leaves them without a team place the year after, after all, who's going to want Paul Lee on a near 7 point average when you can have Oavel Ondrasik on 5.5 and he has had the harder heat 1 and 13 to contend with?

 

If EVERY rider rode against EVERY other rider and even number of times it might work, but tno the way the current meeting format is.

[Phil]

Agree with the "old TS stopped lesser team members having a full quota of rides, more often than not losing their easier rides in hts 8 or 14."

 

but IMO it still not does mean we have to have the stupid Tactical Ride / Tactical Substitutes where points are just given away.

 

I don't care if teams are being hammered especially if means races such as the big heat 13 are not thrown.

 

I am getting robbed of decent racing because riders are asked throw races!

 

It is worrying that some riders such as Chris Louis continually plug it on sky and think it is great!

[Midnight_Lady]

I am with SL on this matter.

 

Get rid of the easy option TR. Double points for doing nothing special is a farce. I don't mind the TS as at least the riders have to work a bit harder to earn their double points.

[Sloop]

I'm agreeing with The Ladies here.

 

My opinion hasn't changed since last season, when this "concept" was introduced into the PL KO Cup. Why gift teams extra points for doing nothing more than they would have done anyway ?

 

The arguement that it keeps matches close doesn't stand up ; this is why we have the bonus point for an aggregate win ; to keep matches interesting, even though the scores may be one-sided.

 

At least the old Taccy Sub rule required some sort of tactical awareness on behalf of the team manager in selecting which rider to use, which rider to replace and which heat(s) to use the TS ; similar to a football manager using a substitute to replace a player who may be off form.

[Racer X]

My biggest gripe with those supporting the rule (and Star Fever is one of those - but I have to respect SF's bravery in supporting the rule in the face of massive opposition) is credibility.

 

Fans (old and partiuclarly NEW) cannot understand why a win suddenly attracts 6 points for no other reason than a Team Manager nominates.

I like my sport to take place on the track - this is an off track manouevre that is bad for the sport's credibility.

 

SCB makes a super point about reserves' averages - and he is spot on!

Recently, Reading had Chris Mills out on a 4+ average. How many riders do you think Reading could choose a guest from?

I think it was about two riders in the PL with an average between 3.01 and 4+!

 

That means that a lot of sides (if not every side) will dump their 4+ rider next year to bring in a 3.00 rider and keep their top men.

 

How much good will this have done the "up and coming" riders?

Its a false economy - the arguement that no changes are made to programmed rides and therefore the up and comers are encouraged is a short term fix that will have consequences.

 

PS Phil? I note that CVS is claiming that the Grading System has been a great sucess - personally I don't agree AT ALL.

Perhaps we could have a poll on that to gauge opinion?

Edited September 3, 2004 by Racer X

[Star Fever]

By RacerX:

Fans (old and partiuclarly NEW) cannot understand why a win suddenly attracts 6 points for no other reason than a Team Manager nominates.

I like my sport to take place on the track - this is an off track manouevre that is bad for the sport's credibility.

 

But don't you think this statement equally applies to the old TS rule?

I've known newbies who were totally gobsmacked by the fact that a losing team could substitute a poorer rider with their top rider. And surely doing this is even more an 'off-track manouevre' than the TR?

 

Obviously in a perfect world there shouldn't be a need for ANY tactical subs or tactical rides or whatever - out of form riders should simply be replaced by an on-form reserve, and if that doesn't work then tough. Its just that in our strange but compelling sport there is a desire to keep the scores closer to make the match 'more interesting' - and IMO the current way is preferable. Perhaps we ought to have a season totally devoid of tacticals of any kind - it wouldn't make much difference in the long run really would it?

[Racer X]

No - I don't think it applies equally to an old style TS.

 

People are generally familiar with substitutes and the fact that someone can bring in an on form rider for an off form rider was a simple line, easilly communicated.

 

I am astonished that you have talked to people amazed that an off form rider is replaced with a better one.

I have NEVER had any problem explaining this to a newcomer (and as I have been involved in sponsorship the number of new people to the sport I have seen has been considerable....)

 

And no - of course this isn't more off track than the new rule...

The TS rider still has to win his points in a TS ride and often failed to in my recollection, as the opposition no2 was able to beat him.

Of course this is not more off track than the fact that a rider on a TR who earns double points for winning a race just because he has a black and white hat on - I know we have different opinions buts lets be rational about the arguement please!

 

"The rider in green is in black and white because he is on a double points tactical ride!" Easilly explained? Not confusing? I think not!

 

The tac subs rides do keep struggling teams competitive at home - those crowds that Newcastle and Newport get would be decimated if they had no recourse to tactical moves (even TRs are better than nothing).

You seriously underestimate how devastating the effect of being thrashed at home can be on a side in my opinion.

 

 

I see you don't address the point that reserves now have artifically high averages - a massive flaw in the arguement for TR rides.

[shortoi]

Definitely NOT all for it. I spent 10 minutes explaining to the Pharmacist (my boss, who had been to the speedway for the first time in years the previous evening) exactly why Swindon had managed to pull off a win. I also had to try to answer his questions about why the rule is in place and what sense does it make.

 

I had very little success.

[Star Fever]

By RacerX:

I am astonished that you have talked to people amazed that an off form rider is replaced with a better one

Well Ok, but it's happened, astonishing or not. Perhaps it is because it doesn't happen to such an extent in any other sport that the concept seems so strange to SOME people. I should perhaps have added that these people soon got used to the move - just as I would expect people to gradually accept the new rules.

 

And no - of course this isn't more off track than the new rule...

The TS rider still has to win his points in a TS ride and often failed to in my recollection, as the opposition no2 was able to beat him

But once again the same applies doesnt it? If your sentence said TR instead of TS that statement is also true. Whatever happens the nominated TS or TR has to perform.

 

You seriously underestimate how devastating the effect of being thrashed at home can be on a side in my opinion

No I didn't - I said "in a perfect world"

I see you don't address the point that reserves now have artifically high averages

Do they then? Looking at the current averages the bottom two for most teams have averages of less than 5pts - this is normal isn't it? Its only the top teams that have reserves of a higher average - again, nothing odd with that surely. I'd have thought it was swings and roundabouts anyway - if their averages ARE artificially high, then they'll soon not be once they're in the top 5? As for SCB's question "who's going to want Paul Lee on a near 7 point average when you can have Pavel Ondrasik on 5.5" I'd guess LOTS of teams would go for Paul Lee - I'm sure Lynn would!

 

Just as a matter of interest do you think the TR rule would more acceptable if it could only be used say, from ht 4 to ht 12? Or shift the ht14 line-up earlier in the match and have say, riders 3 & 4 in ht14? After all we have heat-leaders in ht13 & 15. If the match finished with a trio of top-class heats there should be no need for TRs or TSs!

 

Anyway, over to you or shall we just agree to disagree? We're so obviously entrenched in our different views this debate could go on forever. Whatever the outcome next year, one of us is going to be unhappy!

[Trees]

Would the TR rule be more acceptable if the winners points weren't doubled then, if they only gained an extra 2 for the win and 1 for coming 2nd perhaps.

[SCB]

Thats still a farce. A rider comming 2nd bget as many points as the rider comming 1st, how and why?

[Grachan]

Would the TR rule be more acceptable if the winners points weren't doubled then, if they only gained an extra 2 for the win and 1 for coming 2nd perhaps.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That would be even more ridiculous than doubling them in my opinion as it's just further complications. At least double points is easy to remember! I think the argument in general against it isn't that it gives away too many points or is unfair in any way (it is, but no more than the TS rule). It's just that giving out double points for nothing other than being behind defies sporting logic. It's a question of Speedway's credibility more than anything.

 

Personally, I always found the Tac Sub rule a bit of an embarassment too due to it only being available to the team behind, although at least the substitution concept wasn't as ludicrous as the Joker. In terms of closeness of results there isn't much difference between the two anyway. On the 3 occasions I've been through a programme this year to see what the likely result might have been I have reckoned that on 2 occasions the team that used the TR would have had a better result under the old TS rule and on the other occasion it was the same.