frenchy Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 Can anyone explain why a rider is said to have recorded a maximum (doesn't matter whether 'paid' of 'full') only when they have ridden unbeaten (by an opponent) in 4 or more rides ? Surely, you've still scored 'maximum' if you are unbeaten after 1,2 or 3 rides (especially if you've been unable to continue in the meeting for some justifiable reason such as injury) ? Back in the mist of time - in the 30's for instance, matches were over 9 heats with riders taking only 3 rides each - so do none of the times a rider was unbeaten by an opponent (and for those times, by a team-mate too) count as a rider having scored a 'maximum' ? From the 40's onwards reserves have been limited in the number of rides they are programmed with compared to their team-mates (2 rides under the 14 heat format used through to the mid-50's, 2 rides for the early 13 heat format, 3 rides for the 'traditional' 13 heat format). Just why shouldn't we record a riders' unbeaten efforts as a 'maximum' when he is undefeated in a meeting/match however many rides he's taken ? Any ideas (and I've tried to keep this reasonably short so please don't pick up on some of the inconsistencies and fudges) ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 Is that the case? I've always maintained that Billy Legg scored a paid maximum in 2005 against Edinburgh when he score 2' 2' 2' = 6+3 And Justin Elkins scored a 2+1 maximum for Newport vs Trelawny in 2001(ish). Theres no advantage to having scored a maximum anyway, really, is there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchy Posted January 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 Is that the case? Look in any yearbook (well since the 70's anyway), the Star's annual roundup, most places were results are given and they all only count a maximum as having occurred when the rider has taken 4 or more rides. It's really why I thought I'd ask if anyone knows the reason as, per your Legg and Elkins examples, a 4 ride minimum doesn't make sense to me. Either a rider is unbeaten (for that meeting/match) or not, does it matter how many rides they've had ? I've always maintained that Billy Legg scored a paid maximum in 2005 against Edinburgh when he score 2' 2' 2' = 6+3 And Justin Elkins scored a 2+1 maximum for Newport vs Trelawny in 2001(ish). Theres no advantage to having scored a maximum anyway, really, is there? Both maximums to me. Actually, I think there might be a slight advantage (other than being paid more !) in that you can say I went through x number of matches unbeaten - bragging rights I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 (edited) I think it really happened once four rides became the accepted norm and cmas were based on four rides per match. In my books I always refer to a reserve's maximum if a reserve wins both his rides. (Edit: Ooops! Just noticed the missing apostrophe....) Edited January 14, 2011 by norbold Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsloes 1928 nearly Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 And Justin Elkins scored a 2+1 maximum for Newport vs Trelawny in 2001(ish). Hmm, why did our Justin only have that one ride..? Don't tell me, his bike then wouldn't start..?!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dietbowers Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 Is that the case? I've always maintained that Billy Legg scored a paid maximum in 2005 against Edinburgh when he score 2' 2' 2' = 6+3 And Justin Elkins scored a 2+1 maximum for Newport vs Trelawny in 2001(ish). Theres no advantage to having scored a maximum anyway, really, is there? I remember that Legg maximum,never seen anything like it before or since,it was awful Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerTom Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 A maximum was awarded to a rider winning ALL his scheduled FOUR rides. By doing this he would have riden against all the top riders from the other team (arring they did not ride in a race due to no fault of rider getting the Max!)If a rider takes an extra ride he would need to win that race also to get a max! A reserve could win four races and never meet all of the top riders from the other team thereby getting easy rides. So to a purist a true maximum is when a rider wins all his four scheduled rides plus any extra tactical rides he is given. Tiger Tom.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOBBATH Posted January 21, 2011 Report Share Posted January 21, 2011 I agree with Tigertom for the reasons he outlines- Bryan Seery the statistician for the BL starting in 1965 developed this and the CMA with similar rationale- btw is Bryan still with us-if not when he passed was another person appointed by the BSPA to keep the official stats?? Many forumlanders will hopefully recall the page "Seery's statistics" in the Speedway Star of that era. Amazing that he kept all these numbers updated before the age of the computer. I hope Bryan is still with us -but if not God Bless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchy Posted January 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2011 A maximum was awarded to a rider winning ALL his scheduled FOUR rides. By doing this he would have riden against all the top riders from the other team (arring they did not ride in a race due to no fault of rider getting the Max!)If a rider takes an extra ride he would need to win that race also to get a max! A reserve could win four races and never meet all of the top riders from the other team thereby getting easy rides. So to a purist a true maximum is when a rider wins all his four scheduled rides plus any extra tactical rides he is given. Tiger Tom.... Understand your explanation and the rationale behind it and many thanks. However, a reserve wining 4, or more, rides IS credited (just check out the track reviews or yearbooks) with a full or paid maximum, so who they rode against is immaterial. ! It's only when less than 4 rides have been taken and a rider is unbeaten that it appears that the rider is not credited with a maximum. See also the recent thread on this site regarding riders from opposite teams recording maximums in the same match - both riders are credited with a maximum (if over 3 rides) but have not raced each other in that match or so it appears. Interesting Bobbath, did Seery have 'official' approval for his definitions or is it just that he said it so often that 'fiction becomes fact' and we now just accept it because it's what we've always been told ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerTom Posted January 21, 2011 Report Share Posted January 21, 2011 Hi Frenchy, I know they give it to a reseve who wins four races these days that's why I said to the purest. Unfortunately I am nearly as old as Bob Bath and we are stuck in the old days LOL!. Brian Seery was, I believe, the official statistician for the League. He was a Math professor who truly enjoyed statistics. In Canada our Brian Seery is Duncan luke. who is a retired accountant! Seems these people love numbers of any sort. If we did not have Duncan we would have miseable stats from Canadian Speedway racing. Looing back at Statistics it is truly amazing to see Ivan Maugers figures in the British League. 10 point averages are amazing now ad Ivan ran off 11 plus for a few years. Tiger Tom..... Oh, and Bob I believe Brian Seery passed on more than a few years go! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOBBATH Posted January 21, 2011 Report Share Posted January 21, 2011 Many things to say-firstly and most importantly to Tigertom- I am one year younger than you since you are 30 and I am 29 -like Jack Benny(just using that name dates me)-secondly I do think that the Seery calculation method was officially adopted by the BSPA-it does make mathematical sense - and good for him for devising it. He was a real speedway enthusiast.He must have done all his calcs. by hand too because it was before computers. I am sorry to hear that he may have passed away-surely he was a young guy when he died. There is a photo of him in an old Speedway Star that I have-with Garry Middleton-does anyone know the answer to the mystery of Garry-like where he disappeared to???? He was pretty tall-but not of course the tallest rider ever-who was that again?? BTW I am freezing my ass off here in Toronto-all the witches are walking around with double padded bras here!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DW Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 I can only assume that because almost everyone in the team was programmed to take 4 rides then that was the minimum requirement for a maximum( I think it was 6 riders in the old 13ht format and then 5 once it changed circa 1968). Of course nowadays everyone has 4 programmed rides so a minimum of 4 still makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImpartialOne Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 As far as I've always been aware a maximum is when a rider is unbeaten by an opponent in any meeting regardless of rides taken. The CMA over 4 rides is irrelevant as 3 wins out of 3, or 2 out of 2 is still a 12.00 average. The only reason I can think that this would not be the case is if a rider failed to take his place in a race for some reason. So if Justin Ellins had 2+1 in his first race but then didn't take his place due to his bike not starting (he is surely one of the most mechanically unprepared riders ever!) that would count as 2+1, NS = 2+1. If a rider wins two races and is replaced by the team manager and takes no further part he is still unbeaten and it is recorded as a maximum 3,3 = 6. The programmed rides don't count for anything in terms of a maximum as an on form rider may be switched to suit and be taken out of a programmed ride and take another rider's place in another race. Also if a meeting is abandoned and the result stands, a rider may have only taken 2 of 4 programmed rides and won both. This is still a maximum. It's basically the maximum points a rider can score from rides taken. 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.