Kevin Meynell Posted February 16, 2006 Report Share Posted February 16, 2006 They chose to do this through the British Final, but other Nations simply selected the riders they wanted to represent them. I think Britain was fairly unique in using our national championship to qualify riders for the World Championship the same season. Our countries (e.g. Sweden) had domestic qualifying rounds, but these were usually separate from their national championship. The majority of countries nominated their WC entrants on the basis of their placings in their national championship the previous season, with the odd direct seeding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
home straight Posted February 20, 2006 Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 How about reintroducing the 4 finals that featured originally? The top 4 to contest the A Final, the next 4 the B Final etc. A Final points to be 25-20-18-16.B Final points to be 15-13-12-11, C Final points to be 10-8-7-6, D Final points to be 5-3-2-1 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> In theory that works quite well, but unfortunately, in practice it just makes the first 20 heats into qualifying races and the only heats that matter are the last four. At least with the current systemevery race potentially means something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted February 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 In theory that works quite well, but unfortunately, in practice it just makes the first 20 heats into qualifying races and the only heats that matter are the last four. At least with the current systemevery race potentially means something. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> But wouldn't races 1 to 20 be just as important as trying to get in the top 8? They would instead be for tryng to finish in as high a final as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissPosition Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 Have always fancied something along the lines of... The riders score the points they score after 20 heats. We then have the semis and final as we do now. The riders in the final would then be awarded 5 points for a win, 3 for second, 2 for third, 1 for last, and these would be ADDED to the points scored after 20 heats. So, if a rider reaches the final with 12 points, then wins the final, they get a total of 12 + 5 points for the GP. This would make it extremely difficult for a rider in 8th place to sneak up and win the thing, but would also retain the importance of the final. Additionally, because a win in the final no longer amounts to "double your points" for the day, it should keep the table a lot tighter at the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted April 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2006 How about after the first GP the bottom 2 are replaced by the next 2 in line for GP2. After GP2 the bottom 2 are replaced by the 2 that dropped out after GP1 and so on right through the series. 2 extra places being available should provide more variety and interest at both ends of the meetings and there will as a result be something for those not doing so well to fight for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanTheMan Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 i think it's fine as it is, but i would like to see changes in the qualification system somehow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted June 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2006 Last year the best rider won but because it is now easier for the best riders to reach the last 8 and with the big points only being available in finals I would suggest to BSI that they consider providing more big points as follows. Ist 25pts, 2nd 20pts, 3rd 18pts, 4th 16pts, each 3rd placed semi finalist 14pts, each 4th placed semi finalist 12pts, others to keep their scores. The best rider will still win but the overall competition would be more interesting. What does everyone else think? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Did you catch Keith Hewden and Sam Ermolenko calling for the losing semi finalists to get some bonus points for their efforts on Saturday. Somebody should tell them we thought about it first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted June 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2006 How about after the first GP the bottom 2 are replaced by the next 2 in line for GP2. After GP2 the bottom 2 are replaced by the 2 that dropped out after GP1 and so on right through the series. 2 extra places being available should provide more variety and interest at both ends of the meetings and there will as a result be something for those not doing so well to fight for. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Something on these lines was also talked about on Saturday also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted September 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 25, 2006 In support or otherwise my theory that the losing semi finalists be rewarded for reaching the top 8. I took the librty to award the highest qualified third placed semi finalist 14 pts, the second highest qualified third placed semi finalist 13 pts, the highest qualified fourfh placed semi finalist 12 pts and the second highest qualified fourth placed semi finalist 11 pts. If any of these riders actually qualified with more points then their qualifying score was retained. Just for the record the outcome is:- 1st Jason Crump Australia 193 2nd Greg Hancock USA 151 3rd Nicki Pedersen Denmark 137 4th Andreas Jonsson Sweden 124 5th Leigh Adams Australia 122 6th Mate Zagar Slovenia 114 7th Scott Nicholls England 104 8th Tomaz Gollob Poland 97 9th Jarek Hampel Poland 96 10th Antonio Lindback Sweden 92 & Bjarne Pedersen Denmark 92 12th Hans Andersen Denmark 61 13th Niels Kristian Iversen Denmark 58 14th Tony Rickardsson Sweden 44 15th Lee Richardson England 42 16th Piotr Protasiewicz Poland 31 Not much difference at the very top end but interestingly it would seem that Scott Nicholls is worthy of another chance when it is also considered that he had one less GP than the others. His GP average is in fact better than Mate Zagars. It would also confirm that the riders down to 11th place did well enough to warrant another chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted September 25, 2006 Report Share Posted September 25, 2006 How does Hans drop so far back? He won 2 GP's giving his 50 and had a 2nd in another giving him 70. So how does he only have 61? Or are you not including Wildcards but you are including GP reserves. I notice Ryan Sullivan is not in there if it's the latter. Just me being awkward BTW What this does prove is Scott is capable of making semi's but then bombs out. That suggests he often makes the top 8 in GP's, it just with the scewed point system you get a better reward for coming last a few times and then having a good GP/podium finish rather than being consistent like Scott. Other stats I'd like to see is riders average finishing position in a GP and a rider average number of points per GP (not including semis and final). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted September 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 25, 2006 How does Hans drop so far back? He won 2 GP's giving his 50 and had a 2nd in another giving him 70. So how does he only have 61? Or are you not including Wildcards but you are including GP reserves. I notice Ryan Sullivan is not in there if it's the latter. Just me being awkward BTW What this does prove is Scott is capable of making semi's but then bombs out. That suggests he often makes the top 8 in GP's, it just with the scewed point system you get a better reward for coming last a few times and then having a good GP/podium finish rather than being consistent like Scott. Other stats I'd like to see is riders average finishing position in a GP and a rider average number of points per GP (not including semis and final). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [/quoteWild cards do not count Hans Andersen's points only count from the time he replaced Tony Rickardsson. One of his wins was as the Danish wild card.No reserves included only the official 15 riders that started out + HA as explained. I'll work on your other points later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted September 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 25, 2006 How does Hans drop so far back? He won 2 GP's giving his 50 and had a 2nd in another giving him 70. So how does he only have 61? Or are you not including Wildcards but you are including GP reserves. I notice Ryan Sullivan is not in there if it's the latter. Just me being awkward BTW What this does prove is Scott is capable of making semi's but then bombs out. That suggests he often makes the top 8 in GP's, it just with the scewed point system you get a better reward for coming last a few times and then having a good GP/podium finish rather than being consistent like Scott. Other stats I'd like to see is riders average finishing position in a GP and a rider average number of points per GP (not including semis and final). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [/quoteWild cards do not count Hans Andersen's points only count from the time he replaced Tony Rickardsson. One of his wins was as the Danish wild card.No reserves included only the official 15 riders that started out + HA as explained. I'll work on your other points later. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Here are the average placings SCB JC-3 GH & HA 5 NP-6 LA & SN & MZ & AJ 7 TG-8 AL & BP & JH 9 NKI-12 LR-13 PP-15 You're correct. It proves yet again that SN is worthy of another go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.