El Pairs

[Paddy The Rebel]

The whole problem with the method they used to decide who went through to the final is floored.

 

The scoring is 4,3,2,0. So after the second bend, a team decides quickly to let the rider in front go, and settle for a heat winning 4-5. Thats the whole point of pairs. Beat the opposition by riding tactically. No need to win the race as second and third win the heat and see you qualify. Alegedly. So a teams scores 21 points, and ties at the top with another side. What happened when the two teams met? The team more tactically aware team rode out the guy at the back. While his mate went on to win the heat, they lost the heat 4-5. Great tactics. But no. The team that lost the heat 4-5 go through, because the team using tactics and winning the heat didn't have a rider win the race!

 

Winning the heat now doesn't count. Oh but wait. It does again in the final. What a pile of crap.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i coudnt agree more the rules stink the team that were more tactically aware were punished, i can accepting losing, but losing like that makes me stink who ever make these socalled rules up needs there head looking at, Poole were atleast the 2nd best team tonight and should have been in the final with Swindon, and then that happened i reckon it would have been the rightful final, even the announcer thought that Poole would go through as we beat Belle Vue in the Qualifying heats 5-4

[leighrico]

Fair Play Belle Vue for winning, can't really agrue!!! Like Adams said "it wasn't our day"

 

So Belle Vue, Same time, different place maybe?? next year again in the final!

Edited June 4, 2006 by leighrico

[Pinstripe]

Shovvys right. Rules are a joke and it should of either been Poole to go straight through or a run off between BV and Poole.

 

Dont worry Steve we know the real winners were Poole !

[bellevueace]

The play offs, The T/R rule, The bonus point system now meaning you dont even have to win away on the way to becoming champions, and now the pairs ruling, and people wonder why the terraces are threadbare around the country, we could have premier league champions that actually finished eighth in the final table monty python couldnt have made it all up.

[Philip Addison]

But how do they sort it out head to head if 3 pairs tie then ? I agree it seems unfair, it doesn't sit well with me either, i think the whole format is a mickey mouse competition anyway.

[orion]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz crap

[SCB]

But how do they sort it out head to head if 3 pairs tie then ? I agree it seems unfair, it doesn't sit well with me either, i think the whole format is a mickey mouse competition anyway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thats why the BSPa did it this way. Clearly they had thought about this one for more than 30 seconds as someons suggested they had earlier. Imagine the uproar if it was a 3 way tie and the rules said about when teams met but there was still no answer. People would moan the rule had not accounted for that.

 

The best way, IMO if to have the points system as 3,2,1 and 0 BUT bonus points count, so a 5-1 is a 6-1 and a 3-3 is a 4-3 to the 2nd and 3rd place team, the winnig team in the event of a tie is the team with most bonus points, if it's still a tie its when they met in the heats and if it's still a tie. If it's still a tie betwen 2 or more teans, it down to the team that are still left with most race wins.

 

I can't quite work out why they have 4,3,2 and 0 when speedway is ALWAYS 3,2,1 and 0 and the sport has bonus points!!

 

Loved Steadys ride out of the 2nd bend to cover all the track by leaning acorss it, gave Ulamek nowhere to go.

 

Adams = silly man.

Edited June 4, 2006 by SCB

[Addy]

Well done Jason and Simon on winning the pairs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Agreed

 

Really glad I went to this meeting, although as it started raining and the sky darkened as we left Wales, I thought it looked a little doubtful.

 

OK so the rules werea little obtuse in the event of a tie, but they were the rules that the meeting was run by.

 

IMHO the best part was the final race - where both BV riders were excellent, and deserved to win

[Ace no.5]

Well done Crumpy and Steady, deserved winners. Steady came good when it mattered. The rules were there for all to see at the start of the meeting (doesn't mean they're right, but the rules were set out...) so every pair knew exactly what they had to do. BV knew they really needed a 7-2 in their last heat, they got it. That then put the pressure on the Pirates who knew they needed 6 points to qualify. They knew what had to be done...

Now back in September, when Coventry won the 'League title' from finishing second, I, and all other BV fans, were told by god knows how many people on here, from all different clubs, that everyone knew the rules at the start of the day. I've dealt with that, I've said well done Coventry. This is a very similar scenario, apart from not as important. People just have to accept the result for what it was. Except that Shovvy never will and that is just sweet...!

[Squirelnutkins]

Ended up not going to Swindon for the pairs!

 

Well Done to Eastbourne who put up a good fight but as i keep saying, its a HOME TRACK ADVANTAGE! Hold it on a nutrual track!

 

Well done to Belle Vue! (I'm very happy that Swindon didnt win)

[marko]

Would like to ask how many fans travelled to Swindon unaware that one or two of their riders would not be taking part.

There was no mention from Arena that Max wouldnt be riding for us and in fact Johnno has a higher average than Leigh so we had to use our 2nd and 4th best.

 

Ipswich looked in just as bad a situation (no Loram or Louis) as did Wolves with no Karlsson or Hamill.

[salty]

To be honest I was surprised only 3 out of the 22 cried off.

[Rob B]

Obviously delighted with our win yesterday, third time lucky, we had to beat Swindon eventually! But wasn't happy about a few things :

 

The format. With 6 teams in one group and 5 in the other I paid £20 and only got to see my team 4 times during the 25 heats of qualifying whilst others saw there's 5 times. In my opinion they should of just used the top 10 pairs averages, the bottom one missing out. Also no semi finals this year.

 

Missing riders, before hand the only rider we knew would be missing was Barker, then suddenly Loram, Karlsson and Max are missing. I presume Loram missing was something to do with this form he didn't sign but where were Karlsson and Max? I bet they will be riding tonight.

[Eastie]

The whole problem with the method they used to decide who went through to the final is floored.

 

The scoring is 4,3,2,0. So after the second bend, a team decides quickly to let the rider in front go, and settle for a heat winning 4-5. Thats the whole point of pairs. Beat the opposition by riding tactically. No need to win the race as second and third win the heat and see you qualify. Alegedly. So a teams scores 21 points, and ties at the top with another side. What happened when the two teams met? The team more tactically aware team rode out the guy at the back. While his mate went on to win the heat, they lost the heat 4-5. Great tactics. But no. The team that lost the heat 4-5 go through, because the team using tactics and winning the heat didn't have a rider win the race!

 

Winning the heat now doesn't count. Oh but wait. It does again in the final. What a pile of crap.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shovlar,

Its funny how you didn't mention about this rule last year or the year before

but this year its worked against Poole and dont we know it

[Grachan]

Adams = silly man.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Leigh is a great team rider if his partner manages to gate with him, but when it comes to slowing a race, getting a partner through, it's not something he does. Normally I'd say fine. It's not his forte so why take the chance. In this though - a one off final - there really was no point going off into the distance like that and leaving Seb Ulamek to fend for himself against Crump and Stead.

 

How great would that final have been if Leigh had slowed right down as well and tried to temp Crumpie past him. We could have had all four going of the line together in a blanket finsish. It would have been great.

 

Now then. Just how obsessed are people with Steve Shovlar on here? A perfectly logical point to be raised, yet everyone is having anti-Poole rants. The qualification in the event of a tie was very odd, when the whole system was altered to make riding as a pair the main priority.

 

Who beat whom is the logical way, as the scoring was set up to always have a winner in the heats. In the event of a 3 way tie, then it could have gone to the number of times the riders finished as a pair. Or, as SCB says, have the normal system with bonus points counting in the event of a tie, which is effectively the same thing.

[ABS]

I just love the honesty of speedway riders - Kylmakorpi really had nothing to ride for, other than professional pride and points money, but gave it his all in beating Lindback and Pedersen. But for his ride in Heat 25, us Aces fans would nothing to celebrate.

 

I do believe that Kylmakorpi should be in the GP, but "politically" there are only around 4.5 million in Finland, so not a huge expansion market for BSI. I hope JK and Hans Andersen both qualify for the GPs next season, as both are better than quite a few of this years crop.

[John Leslie]

The format was bizarre.

25 qualifying races for 1 final made it a snoozathon.

 

In the group of 6 they shouldn't have had 15 heats with everyone racing every other pair.

They should have cut back so that each team met 4 of the 5 other teams. Then the top two from each group should have gone to 2 semis and a final.

That would have kept more interest, rather than half the teams being out of contention halfway through the 25 heat qualifying snoozefest.

 

The method of deciding a tie on race wins was also strange for a pairs contest...

 

BUT

 

The rules were clear to everyone. In the event of a tie race wins were more valuable. Crump reacted accordingly and went for those race wins. Poole also knew the rules. They weren't settling for a 5-4 in their last qualifying race, they were going for the win which they knew they needed. They failed to win and failed to qualify.

 

In the Final the 5-4 gave a win and again Crump acted accordingly (with the astute Thomas). Adams off the wrong gate, and shooting off into the distance abandoning his partner, got it wrong (with the help of the less than astute Rossiter).

 

You can't say Poole would have qualified if the rules had been different.

If the rules had been different, Crump, Stead and Thomas would have adapted their tactics to secure 5-4's rather than the race wins which the format demanded.

 

Under the rules Poole weren't good enough. Under different rules they still wouldn't be good enough.

It was the rightful winners who stood on the B&Q paste table at the end of the meeting.

For all neutrals it was good to see a BSPA event not won by the home team. And the whinging from Shovlar is the icing on the cake to show it was an enjoyable result.

[KEITH M]

All I can say is that this tournament sucks C*ck big time.  What the f*ck? Rant over.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Taken from the Forum Rules and Guidelines section:

Obscenity

Contributors are prohibited from posting obscene language including swearing or images on the forum. Please use polite alternative words

 

Hope the mods have lit up his warning box for that, I have young children reading the forum and no doubt many others do to

Edited June 5, 2006 by KEITH M

[ABS]

Hope the mods have lit up his warning box for that, I have young children reading the forum and no doubt many others do to

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But had Poole won, it would have been "great event", "great format", "best team won", etc.

 

Still the Crump/Stead victory will further fuel his hatred of Belle Vue, which is bordering on the paranoid.

[John Leslie]

Taken from the Forum Rules and Guidelines section:

Obscenity

Contributors are prohibited from posting obscene language including swearing or images on the forum. Please use polite alternative words

 

Hope the mods have lit up his warning box for that, I have young children reading the forum and no doubt many others do to

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely right.

I meant to mention this in my post.

I hope the mods can edit his post to remove his disgusting obscenities before they are seen by more children.

 

I don't think the "report a post" button works.