British Sgp Decline

[orion]

BTW, I still haven't heard any coherent argument actually in FAVOUR of the GP system...

 

 

Because you never listen you been told about 20 times that tv was not showing the world final anymore intill the Gp's came along ....the Gp is a better and a fairer system what nearly everytime give us the true World Champion .

Edited September 3, 2010 by orion

[WIE-JA]

 

BTW, I still haven't heard any coherent argument actually in FAVOUR of the GP system... All its apologists do is attack what they perceive as the shortcomings (and as in several threeads above they more often than not get these wrong! ) of the previous system of worldwide QRs and a one-off Final!

OK. I am in favour of the GP system as it provides great entertainment throughout the season. It is a test of which riders can be consistently strong and focused in a series of high pressure meetings. It gives fans in various countries the chance to see a round (or 2!) each year. It's good for casual tv viewers who can relate to it in the same way as they do with F1, Moto GP, WSB, World Rally, etc. It allows riders to sell the product to sponsors. It allows the organisers the chance to sell a good package to tv companies and sponsors. At the moment we get 11 'World Finals' a year . It's damn good excitement to watch, which is what I want. That help you?

[mickthemuppet]

Adams and Gollob have not been the best riders in the last decade and they have never won it because over the season they were never good enough ...you can be a world champion in f1 without winning anythink , you can BE no 1 in the world in golf and not win anythink in a year Just like Tiger Woods has .

 

 

When you come to think of it there are loads of other sports when you don't have win a round to be World Champion ,plus if the people knew they had to win maybe they would have put more effort in to do so ... in Loram case he done what he had to do to become world champion .

 

So perhaps young Orion you can tell me who has been the most consistent riders in British and Polish speedway in the last ten years than. When was Leigh Adams not in the top three averages in GB then. When was Tomasaz Gollob not the top rider in Polish Leagues.

Perhaps you would care to name the world champions in F1 without winning "antyhink" then .

Number One is not world champion . In golf many numbers ones have been that for less than a month, or in one case one week. There is a world of difference between World Champion and being number one.

 

With the amount of replies you make on this forum this year, you could be number one but not world champion, almost certainly many regard you as a number two

[orion]

So perhaps young Orion you can tell me who has been the most consistent riders in British and Polish speedway in the last ten years than. When was Leigh Adams not in the top three averages in GB then. When was Tomasaz Gollob not the top rider in Polish Leagues.

Perhaps you would care to name the world champions in F1 without winning "antyhink" then .

Number One is not world champion . In golf many numbers ones have been that for less than a month, or in one case one week. There is a world of difference between World Champion and being number one.

 

With the amount of replies you make on this forum this year, you could be number one but not world champion, almost certainly many regard you as a number two

 

 

First of all what you do at league level has little to do with what do at World chapionship level ..Adams maybe one the best league in the world but never had what it took to be a world champion unlike someone like nicki p who would miss league matches and put most of his effort into the gp's hence why ne become world champion .

 

 

You said in your post what other sport could you be World champion without winning a race/round i said F1 but could have picked a number of sports or events ...asking weather someone has done before is a another question all togeher but not the one that you asked

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

At the moment we get 11 'World Finals' a year

 

Come on, it is absolutely NOTHING like 11 World Finals...!

In a World Final (the proper 16 rider, 5 rides each, 20 heat formula) - the person with the most points after everyone has met everyone else is - shock! horror! - the winner..

In the GP a rider can get a maximum 15 and lose in the Final to someone who scored just nine in the 20 heats...

Why have the semis and Final...?!: these act against the spirit of what you said was the point of the GPs and mean there can be (and actually quite often is...)a 'GP winner' and yet another rider finishing the night on more points! That cannot be justified surely and I'd struggle to find ANY sport which would sanction such an entirely daft concept..!

[Jeff Scott]

Well Jeff unlike you I don't have a pre-conceived personal agenda that I'm working to and/or a single, self opinionated point of view of people who at least try to improve speedway. They don't hide behind a keyboard critiquing it, they have the entrepreneurial spirit to aim higher. The tone and content of your reply was exactly what I suspected it would be ... but thought I'd put to the test! Thank you.

 

You really should show more respect to the people who buy or could potentially buy your books.

 

PS ... Having been involved in brand marketing and advertising for over 30 years I do have a wee bit of knowledge of what can affect TV ratings and despite the stand point you write from I have seen little evidence of a valid, impartial and credible argument from you on this "catastrophic further collapse"!

 

 

Sorry you feel that way George. If you add the telly audience to the attendances figures issued there looks to be a shortfall even allowing for all the mitigating factors you suggest.

[WIE-JA]

Come on, it is absolutely NOTHING like 11 World Finals...!

In a World Final (the proper 16 rider, 5 rides each, 20 heat formula) - the person with the most points after everyone has met everyone else is - shock! horror! - the winner..

In the GP a rider can get a maximum 15 and lose in the Final to someone who scored just nine in the 20 heats...

Why have the semis and Final...?!: these act against the spirit of what you said was the point of the GPs and mean there can be (and actually quite often is...)a 'GP winner' and yet another rider finishing the night on more points! That cannot be justified surely and I'd struggle to find ANY sport which would sanction such an entirely daft concept..!

The rider crossing the finish line 1st in the final after surviving the pressure of both 5 qualifying rides and a semi-final has obviously proved themselves to be worthy winner of the GP. Not that hard to understand is it? Look at the reactions of riders that win a GP and tell me that they are not that bothered about winning as they get on the podium.

Are you trying to tell me that Valentino Rossi, Micheal Schumacher or James Toseland have not really achieved much because they didn't win world titles decided on one day?

[Humphrey Appleby]

At the moment we get 11 'World Finals' a year . It's damn good excitement to watch, which is what I want. That help you?

 

Look at the bigger picture though. The 11 World Finals have come at the cost of taking 11 (22 if you include Fridays) of the most lucrative race nights away from league racing.

 

All very well if the SGP could provide full-time employment to the participating riders, or alternatively put money back into lower levels of the sport (as international cricket does), but it does neither. It uses assets of those developed and employed by others for a cut price fee (not to mention public money in some cases) for the benefit of a private corporation.

 

Enjoy it while you can, because once professional speedway as we know it is strangled, IMG/BSI will move onto the next sport willing to do its bidding.

Edited September 4, 2010 by Humphrey Appleby

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

The rider crossing the finish line 1st in the final after surviving the pressure of both 5 qualifying rides and a semi-final has obviously proved themselves to be worthy winner of the GP. Not that hard to understand is it?

 

Actually that is hard to understand, if in the qualifiers that rider (having faced up to all of his opponents just like the rest of the field) was to score say just nine whilst someone else gets a maximum 15...

How can you then say should they win the single race that's the final that they've deserved the GP title more than that other rider..?

I’ve asked the question before but if people support the concept of the GP series being all about an aggregate score over a whole series (and of course there is a merit in that even though it takes away the excitement from the progressive WC of old..) then why interfere with that logic by having the semis and final. Top scorer on night= GP winner! What’s wrong with that..?!

Quite often they’ll be a tie anyhow and they’ll need a (non-GP points scoring) run-off so that would be part of it…

[WIE-JA]

Actually that is hard to understand, if in the qualifiers that rider (having faced up to all of his opponents just like the rest of the field) was to score say just nine whilst someone else gets a maximum 15...

How can you then say should they win the single race that's the final that they've deserved the GP title more than that other rider..?

I’ve asked the question before but if people support the concept of the GP series being all about an aggregate score over a whole series (and of course there is a merit in that even though it takes away the excitement from the progressive WC of old..) then why interfere with that logic by having the semis and final. Top scorer on night= GP winner! What’s wrong with that..?!

Quite often they’ll be a tie anyhow and they’ll need a (non-GP points scoring) run-off so that would be part of it…

If a rider has genuine world title aspirations, then he needs to be aiming for maximum scores at each GP. The semi and finals help to add excitement for the crowd and also it helps a rider who has had problems during his 5 qualifying rides to have a chance to come out of the event with something (extra points towards title or the GP win).

You have yet to convince me that a one day World final is better than a GP series.

Anyway, off to a grasstrack now so GP 3 of this discussion will be held Monday.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Anyway, off to a grasstrack now so GP 3 of this discussion will be held Monday.

 

Fair enuff!! Have a good time!!!

[pandorum]

The idea that the reintroduction of the old one off world final would invigourate speedway in some way is so utterly barmy that it's not even worth laughing at.

But I will anyway.

I can remember that so much interest was paid to the old world final from my fellow fans when it was held outside the UK that often they had no idea who had won it a week later and even less interest.

I have been to two one at Wembley and one at Bradford.

Neither was that great.

The GP system is exciting and absorbing and fans are able due to the TV coverage it gets be part of the whole event sharing the excitment over a series of months and not read about it in the papers a week after.

If they can even be bothered.

The old system was poor and the only saving grace it had was that your local rider could be part of it for an hour or so at some meaningless qualifier event.

The GP pits a decent line up against each other without the old system which had to pander to poorer speedway nations by giving them half a dozen no hoper places.

Of course there will be riders who can't have a hope of winning the event but as Chris showed last time they can be spoilers and have an affect on the overall winners and losers.

The GP system is massively better than the old one off final and anyone who thinks it is not is loony tunes.

The fact that speedway does not capitalise on the TV coverage is speedways fault.

Promoters have a product that gets good TV exposure and waste it by the fact they are amateurish idiots who could not promote thier collective way out of a paper bag.

It's not GPs fault crowds are down and the GP is the only bright spot in a mediocre summer of elite league racing.

High prices, lack of any proper long tem planning regarding the future of the sport and promoters who after decades of TV live speedway still cannot interest anyone in sponsoring the league shows where the problems lie.

GP has lifted the sports profile here in the UK but the sport still wants to be a little known minority sport run by used car salesmen who I would not buy a second hand wheelbarrow from.

The farce that is the Elite League a week before the start of it's showcase finish shows who is to blame for the decline of the sport in the UK.

And it's not GP speedway.

[Humphrey Appleby]

It's not GPs fault crowds are down and the GP is the only bright spot in a mediocre summer of elite league racing.

 

If crowds and viewers are down for the SGP, then I can't see who elses' fault that is. The simple fact of the matter is that it became tedious over the past few seasons, to the point where a member of the SGP setup felt compelled to respond to the criticisms on a medium of which he'd previously been critical of. Although I've long only been a passive viewer of the SGP, I actively chose other things to watch because it simply wasn't worth the effort, and I'm sure many others (and sponsors - where is 'The Know' these days?) did as well.

 

I'll acknowledge the SGP has been a lot better this year, but it's much easier to lose viewers than to gain them, and it's a shame that so much turgid fare had to be served up before the penny dropped.

 

With respect to the change of time for the British GP - well why was the time changed? AFAIK, it was because of the scandalous accommodation prices and poor transport to/from Cardiff in the evenings, which makes it surprising that so many are religious about the place.

[WembleyLion]

I have watched every British Grand prix on Sky Sports. This year I was away and watched it on the internet and found a polish programme and an english one (but not Sky channel). This was not available two or three years ago and more and more people are watching speedway on the net. These viewers will not be counted but must be rising every year. There must be a time in the near future when it is not worth paying a Sky sports Subscription especially as mine has now gone up to £47 (which started at £4) Nodody can tell how many people watch a programme, so the figures are completly useless. How many people watched the football live and watched the GP the next day?

 

I agree with you Mick about the increased numbers watching Speedway (and many other things) via the internet and I certainly know of Speedway fans who no longer bother with Sky because of this.

[george.m]

I agree with you Mick about the increased numbers watching Speedway (and many other things) via the internet and I certainly know of Speedway fans who no longer bother with Sky because of this.

 

We are simply now seeing the start of 'TV' viewing of the future. In ten years time or less internet TV will be huge. Personally I sometimes watch GPs on my laptop whilst watching TV in the same room. I can watch a TV programme with the family and interrupt this with one minute's racing. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

 

One of the flaws with the argument that declining viewing figures directly correlates with a reduced interest in GPs is that this takes no account of the quality of the product SKY delivers. SKY have kept the same basic format and commentators/analysts, hence this is another potential factor. Non-hardcore speedway fan viewers may not be watching the programme, rather than the GP as it could be a case of 'same old, same old'.

 

Jeff Scott chose to respond to my posting about transmission time by belittling it. Transmission time is a significant factor in TV viewing figures. A prime example being late evening news. Just look at how ITN changed News at Ten to 9pm and then reverted back to 10pm. This happened for various reasons. Transmission timing is key to viewing figures. A little known 'trick' employed by satellite companies is the timing of TV breaks. Have you ever been watching a programme, the adverts come on and you switch over to another channel and the adverts are on there too? Sister channels deliberately do this. Yes, I appreciate this is not the same as absolute transmission time, but it demonstrates how important timing is.

Edited September 4, 2010 by george.m

[HenryW]

We are simply now seeing the start of 'TV' viewing of the future. In ten years time or less internet TV will be huge. Personally I sometimes watch GPs on my laptop whilst watching TV in the same room. I can watch a TV programme with the family and interrupt this with one minute's racing. I'm sure I'm not the only one. GPs for me are now 22 minutes of racing and 2 hours of adverts and repetitive and frankly dull 'expert' opinion.

Sorry, a bit off topic, but....At the moment, there are plenty of speedway matches shown illegally on the internet.

I wouldn't expect this to continue if the rights owners see a definite decline in subscriptions for their services. They will start to close down these feeds to ensure that people correctly pay to view these events.

[george.m]

Sorry, a bit off topic, but....At the moment, there are plenty of speedway matches shown illegally on the internet.

I wouldn't expect this to continue if the rights owners see a definite decline in subscriptions for their services. They will start to close down these feeds to ensure that people correctly pay to view these events.

 

From a financial POV this would be impractical . For SKY to close for example, a Polish website, would be a legal mine field with far reaching implications for the internet as a whole. It would take years, probably go to Brussels, and would cost more than it's worth. And if they did close it, a new site would open up next day in a non-EU country.

 

SKY make money from advertising. Although they'd never publicly admit it, they want to show advertisers an appealing audience figure, whether or not these people have subscribed is neither here nor there in the grand scheme of things.

 

In a similar vein, you can walk into almost any pub in the UK and 'buy' a SKY card that allows you to watch without subscribing. How much effort have SKY put into stopping this? Not a lot! Again in the grand scheme of things, if viewers are watching SKY rather than BBC they're happy. Occasionally SKY will claim to be changing your SKY card to stop this practice. This is done in the main, not to gain more subscription money, but to demonstrate to those people honest enough to be paying to watch, that SKY takes their business serious and will not tolerate the non payers.

Edited September 5, 2010 by george.m

[Trees]

Because you never listen you been told about 20 times that tv was not showing the world final anymore intill the Gp's came along

The GPs coincided with the birth of satellite tv didn't they, certainly since BSI bought 25 years of rights anyway ..........

Edited September 7, 2010 by Trees