Tactical Ride / Tactical Substitutes Poll.

[Phil]

Last year I did the same and 84.40% voted NO to keeping the Tactical Ride / Tactical Substitute.

 

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

 

Have your views changed?

 

So what do you think of it?

[shazzybird]

I think it makes a mockery off a meeting you might just as well run one race and have that as the meeting, gone are the days when the riders would race to the end for his points as each one counted. Now they have the chance to drop back, in the hope they can go so many points behind that way the meeting can be stolen in the last heat. All well and good as long as you are not the team that has rode your nuts off all night to get the lead. (Does that make sense well it does to me shazzybird sense anyway. )

[Grachan]

No more unfair than the old Tactical Sub rule, but much much much more silly.

[BobC]

I think its time to scrap the whole of the tactical thing altogether.

 

Im fed up with sub standard performances being rewarded for failureThats all speedway is doing at the moment.If you are losing,you get the reward of being allowed subs to get back in the meeting.Where is the justice in that?The team that does well,has to look over their shoulder all the time,and and try and second guess the results of the next heat or so.Like it or not,riders and managements manipulate certain heats to try and help their own cause.Rightly so I suppose.

 

Build a team that is likely to be competitive in every heat.By doing this,the teams will have to get rid of the customary 3 point rider.It will take away the 'top heavy' look to the teams,and create a more balanced looking lineups.This in turn allows teams to sign riders with the awkward 5-7 points average.Therefore making the teams exactly that.....TEAMS.Not 3-4 good uns,and pray.

 

Just a thought...............

[Simon j Mulford]

The whole debate about this rule depends on which way you look at it. If your team can come back from a 9 point deficit and win the meeting then the majority probably think that it is the best thing since sliced bread but if you are on the other end and you have lost the meeting after leading then you will feel robbed.

Personally, i think the rule should be scrapped and we go back to the old tac subs when you are 6 points behind.

[AndyM]

The whole debate about this rule depends on which way you look at it. If your team can come back from a 9 point deficit and win the meeting then the majority probably think that it is the best thing since sliced bread but if you are on the other end and you have lost the meeting after leading then you will feel robbed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not particularly relevant. I saw my own team come back from a much bigger deficit using the old TR rule, but it happened over a longer period. For the match to be flipped virtually in one race is absurd.

 

More to the point, which person voted in favour? Own up and let us know WHY you believe that!

[DanTheMan]

a big fat no, its stupid that a meeting can turn after one race

[AndyK86]

No and always will be no !!!

[Star Lady]

I was against it when it was introduced and still am. I've seen it help my team on several occasions but have NEVER yet seen it produce better racing which is what the public pay to see. In fact it does the exact opposite when the non TR/TS rider is constantly looking for the opportunity to allow his double point teammate to pass him.

 

Drop the Dingly Danglies from a great height

[SwineTown]

Does anyone know how much difference it makes to overall results?

 

It seems to dangle a carrrot but never pay off. I know bonus points are affected but how often do teams come back using a TR and win?

 

I have no idea myself.

[Grachan]

It certainly makes less difference to match results than the old TS rule. I went through a few matches in 2004 to see how it might have gone under the old TS rules and there was little difference. Actually, in general the TS rule made matches closer.

 

When Swindon lost at Oxford in 2004 I think it would have probably been 1 point closer if the TS when 6 points down had been used (using the same criteria - if the TR race was won, then assuming the on TS race would have been etc.)

 

Since then, of course, it was changed from 8 points to 9 points before it can be used, making it even less likely to change a match than the old TS rule. It doesn't make matches closer than they were before. It makes them less close.

 

Some people do complain about it being unfair, but it's no more unfair than the old rules - probably less so. The trouble is, it's just so damn stupid!

[tigerblues]

Get it scrapped! It can win a meeting but it can go the complete opposite. If a team are 9 points behind, then quite simply they're not good enough for the points!

[barrow boy]

a big fat no, its stupid that a meeting can turn after one race

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The tactical ride is just as stupid and Mickey Mouse as the WTC joker that can enable, and has done, a team to become world champions by not cheating I suppose,but by using a cheating stupid facility that should be outlawed in such a so called serious competition. The old tactical substitute facility was much more sensible but I agree ought not to be necessary if our sport is to be taken seriously again. Perhaps it would work without any false aids if the losing team were always given their choice of starting gate positions.

Edited March 6, 2006 by barrow boy

[smedley_scott]

I believe the tactical ride should be kept but must be radically changed. Detailed below iare changes I feel should be made to the rule.

• One tactical substitute per team per meeting
  
• Can only be used when a team is 12 or more points behind
  
• The team member with highest average is not eligible to take a tactical substitute ride
  
• A rider must have ridden in at least two heats before being eligible for a tactical substitute ride (the rider being replaced must have ridden three heats by the end of the meeting or the points from the tactical substitute ride are not doubled)
  
• An opponent must be beaten for the points to be doubled (same as current rule)
  
• Tactical rides cannot be used beyond heat 12
  

[The Third Man]

just what we need more complicated rules to get broken / bent, just either scrap all together or go back to the old tac sub rule

[Ron Butler]

I believe the tactical ride should be kept but must be radically changed.  Detailed below iare changes I feel should be made to the rule.

• One tactical substitute per team per meeting
   
  
• Can only be used when a team is 12 or more points behind
   
  
• The team member with highest average is not eligible to take a tactical substitute ride
   
  
• A rider must have ridden in at least two heats before being eligible for a tactical substitute ride (the rider being replaced must have ridden three heats by the end of the meeting or the points from the tactical substitute ride are not doubled)
   
  
• An opponent must be beaten for the points to be doubled (same as current rule)
   
  
• Tactical rides cannot be used beyond heat 12
  

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

just what we need more complicated rules to get broken / bent, just either scrap all together or go back to the old tac sub rule

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I threw away my slide rule at the end of my student days. I don't feel that any of us would want to be in a position where we have to take a laptop with us to follow the progress of meetings

 

Scrap both versions of tactical substitutes and tactical ride rules and let's get back to simple 3-2-1 scoring. There are other television led innovations I would like to see abolished but I can't see it happening any more than I can imagine the tactical rules disappearing over the horizon.

 

Regrettably 'our' sport has been sold to the highest bidder - Sky Television. I am fortunate in that I remember the far distant days when the governing body of speedway, the promoters and everyone on the other side of the fence put on meetings primarily for the benefit of the club supporters.

 

Halcyon days they were.

 

Ron.

[star ghost]

One of the oddest points about the tac sub and such things is in two-legged matches the home team can win by 20 points. When they become the away team in the second leg and get nine points behind they can do a tac-sub. But they are still 11 in front at the time as the totals are on-going. One season the t-s was dropped from Cup matches but it was back the next from what I remember. As has been said so many times - Remember when the rules were easy to understand.

[Kevin Meynell]

It doesn't make matches closer than they were before. It makes them less close.

 

I haven't actually done any scientific analysis of how tactical rides affect the outcome of matches, but it's certainly been my impression there have been less close matches since the TR rule was introduced, compared with the old TS rule.

 

One explanation might be that tactical subs could be introduced as and when they were needed. With tactical rides, it's not just a case of going nine points (in reality ten points) down, but doing so at the right time when you have a decent rider programmed in the next heat. There is far less flexibility to use your tactical options than in the past.

[Kevin Meynell]

Remember when the rules were easy to understand.

 

No, I don't remember when the rules were ever easy to understand (rider control, double rider replacement etc..).

[Grachan]

I haven't actually done any scientific analysis of how tactical rides affect the outcome of matches, but it's certainly been my impression there have been less close matches since the TR rule was introduced, compared with the old TS rule.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I've been through a few meetings over the last couple of years where TRs have been used (normally when people have complained about the result being false).

 

I did this by looking at how the first two probable Tac Subs might have been used and basing their success on the scores from the TR (eg if the TR produced a win, so does the TS), plus guessing how any further probable Tac Subs may have gone based on the form of the riders.

 

Every time I have done this the match would have been closer under the old TS rule.

 

The TR is a horrible rule for me as it emphasises this unfairness and imbalance in the scores so obviously, but the TS rule was more unfair.

 

Personally I see no reason why we need either. The low points limits these days are enough to ensure scores should remain relatively close. I know it can create closer matches, but it's just horrible.

 

Imagine if someone loses the Play-off final because of it! Nightmare.