Bryn Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 Whilst being an indicator of form it would then mean even more 'issues' of team averages. We are currently on Issue 20 in the Elite League and there would be even more fluctuations in averages, which I believe is why Rolling Averages were brought in. Just imagine if a team were certain of their place in the Play-Offs! How much average manipulation would be going on in their final few matches..........? ATB Dave You have my sympathy Gambo and I hope that brick wall is not hurting your head too much! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldy Posted August 31, 2011 Report Share Posted August 31, 2011 Whilst being an indicator of form it would then mean even more 'issues' of team averages. We are currently on Issue 20 in the Elite League and there would be even more fluctuations in averages, which I believe is why Rolling Averages were brought in. Just imagine if a team were certain of their place in the Play-Offs! How much average manipulation would be going on in their final few matches..........? ATB Dave I said a while back on another thread that I would not comment on rolling averages again and here I am. Think you hit it on the head, We are after an indicator of form and 12 matches would give us that. Anywhere between 8 and 12 I think would be ok though. We would not need issues as such. As one match drops off another takes its place, so we would have a "rolling average" If we cannot get a grip on that idea we really are in a state. The way they are being done at present do not measure up to be called meaningful rolling average;(over too big a timescale) though there is room for arguement. Would we continue to support the sport if we thought "average manipulation" was going on?. Please nobody ask how we could tell if manipulation was taking place or not as that really would be a slight on everyones intelligence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g13webb Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 Whilst being an indicator of form it would then mean even more 'issues' of team averages. We are currently on Issue 20 in the Elite League and there would be even more fluctuations in averages, which I believe is why Rolling Averages were brought in. Just imagine if a team were certain of their place in the Play-Offs! How much average manipulation would be going on in their final few matches..........? ATB Dave The original reason for the riders to have an Average is for them to have an indication of their ability against other riders, (ie. Golfer-handicap). If their average is not a correct assessment of their ability then they are pointless. Also, they have always been used to determine the strength of a teams, again based on a true reflection. The point is, using these rediculous method of 'RA' they are not a true reflection and the average are being manipulated to suit whatever you want them too. I dont see what was so bad when they use to use to old system, at least then we knew the average score was a current and true indication of their ability and team strengths were based on those scores. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted September 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 The original reason for the riders to have an Average is for them to have an indication of their ability against other riders, (ie. Golfer-handicap). If their average is not a correct assessment of their ability then they are pointless. Also, they have always been used to determine the strength of a teams, again based on a true reflection. The point is, using these rediculous method of 'RA' they are not a true reflection and the average are being manipulated to suit whatever you want them too. I dont see what was so bad when they use to use to old system, at least then we knew the average score was a current and true indication of their ability and team strengths were based on those scores. Rolling Averages were brought in because the Promoters wanted them. I may be failing to see your point, but it is harder to manipulate a 28 match Rolling Average. A rider who has completed the 2011 Elite season will have his average worked out over his last 28 matches. A rider who has missed matches in 2011 still has an average worked out over his last 28 matches. So they are both calculated using the same criteria. How much fairer can you get? Hans Andersen started with his 2010 average of 8.39 and currently has an RA of 8.27. Having only completed 2 matches so far this season (for a two match average of 5.60), under previous rules he would start next year on 8.39 and not his RA of 8.27. ATB Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g13webb Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Rolling Averages were brought in because the Promoters wanted them. I may be failing to see your point, but it is harder to manipulate a 28 match Rolling Average. A rider who has completed the 2011 Elite season will have his average worked out over his last 28 matches. A rider who has missed matches in 2011 still has an average worked out over his last 28 matches. So they are both calculated using the same criteria. How much fairer can you get? Hans Andersen started with his 2010 average of 8.39 and currently has an RA of 8.27. Having only completed 2 matches so far this season (for a two match average of 5.60), under previous rules he would start next year on 8.39 and not his RA of 8.27. ATB Dave Appreciate your response, Please dont think I hold you responsible for the RA system, its just that you come accross as something of expert in dealing with issues on this subject. My gripe is that, in the present system the only time that the RA are current and correct is at the end of the season, only then providing the rider has competed in all of the 28 fixtures, failing that, then his previous meetings used to calculate are somewhat dated. A rider shouldn't be pressurized or burdened with scores he did years back. In the example of Hans Anderson you offered, is it right he should be laidened with scores of prevoius years, Surely it would be better to acess him at 8.39, and his average be worked out after he had completed say 6 or 8 meetings. That would give you a true average. Manipulated is probably the wrong word to use, buy when working with fiures results can be worked to suit whatever way you want to look at them. Having a RA of 28 meetings is a way of lowering all riders averages to suit a team building limitations. Again thank for the reply. GRW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.N.T. Posted September 24, 2011 Report Share Posted September 24, 2011 The trouble with counting matches ridden at the end of the previous season is a team can either be out of the running (or already qualified for the play offs) and in the remaining matches could score lowly as they know these rides will seriously lower next seasons averages and possibly the season after too. If next season every team rides each other twice at home and twice away, there will be 36 league matches ..... will it revert to a 38 match rolling average ? ...... if it does then Wolves can keep both Fredrik Lindgren and Tai Woffinden as Tai's 38 match average is way below 8 points a match Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iand Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 When a rider guests for another team, are his scores included in his rolling averages. ie Hawkins in main body of Rye House team yet rode at reserve for Ipswich last night. and also Nelson who is a rye House reserve but rides at No 3 for Plymouth tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 When a rider guests for another team, are his scores included in his rolling averages. ie Hawkins in main body of Rye House team yet rode at reserve for Ipswich last night. and also Nelson who is a rye House reserve but rides at No 3 for Plymouth tonight. In a word... No! Only matches and rides during the time that you have been in the declared line up of a team count towards the Rolling Average. You can ride for more than one team in a season. e.g. James Wright Workington & Somerset. ATB Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HPool Posted October 30, 2011 Report Share Posted October 30, 2011 Gambo, may I ask you where I find the assessed averages for riders, who never rode in UK like Lindback, Laguta, Bogdanovs and many others? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted October 30, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2011 (edited) Gambo, may I ask you where I find the assessed averages for riders, who never rode in UK like Lindback, Laguta, Bogdanovs and many others? Lindback??? Never ridden in the uk????? The other rider assessments are listed in the rule book.........if you can find one. They may be +1 or -1. (Depending upon who is asking.) ATB Dave Edited October 30, 2011 by Gambo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.N.T. Posted October 30, 2011 Report Share Posted October 30, 2011 Gambo, may I ask you where I find the assessed averages for riders, who never rode in UK like Lindback, Laguta, Bogdanovs and many others? Antonio Lindback is a rider often linked with a return to England having spent most of his time at Poole before returning for a bad spell at Belle Vue where he soon retired from the sport. His average at Poole finished on 7.94 but at Belle Vue he had just 11 meetings scoring 73 points from 48 rides. He had a 3h3a average of just 4.15 and a short spell at reserve where he did score a bit better before leaving. As that was 2007 it remains to be seen on what average he would return on. Would they go off his last 28 matches which would make him around seven points a match or would he be reassessed as a Grand Prix rider at 8.00 ? As for Laguta .... Grigory would start on a 5.00 average while Artem would have started 2011 as a GP rider on 8.00 but as he no longer rides in the GP's you would have to go off his Swedish or Polish average which arent great so he should start on a 4.00 as would Maksim Bogdanovs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 Is there anywhere that has all team's 2011 actual rider's averages available yet anyone? Cheers BB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
500cc Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Does anybody know how many years can count in a rider's rolling average going forward? In an extreme scenario would a rider making a single appearance per season carry his 2010 EL meeting all the way through to form part of his starting average for the 2038 season? i.e. 28 meetings over 28 years? Or do "old seasons" get dropped off after a certain period? Personally I think that only the previous seasons meetings should count when calculating the starting averages for the following season, provided the rider has ridden a qualifying minimum, e.g. 4H and 4A. Two years is a long time in speedway. It would make sense that the 2012 starting averages were based on 2011 meetings only (subject to 4H & 4A). Although small, the building of teams below 42, effectively means that year on year, a rider should have a small increase on his average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted November 27, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2011 I can confirm that the promoters have decided that Rolling Averages, (which initially had a start dating from the 2010 season avearges) will continue in the same vein. All rolling averages will be compiled from a rider's last 28 (EL) or 38 (PL) matches irrespective of how many years that may encompass. For example Eddie Kennett's RA for the start of 2012 will be his 16 completed matches from 2011 plus his last 12 matches from 2010. ATB Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khabiboulin Posted November 27, 2011 Report Share Posted November 27, 2011 (edited) Thanks Dave. But does that mean 2009 (and earlier) meetings count where necessary, even though they didn't last year? Your wording seems to suggest so. It obviously wouldn't affect many riders, but would, for example, Renat Gafurov use his last 4 meetings for Swindon to go with his 24 for Poole? If so, it seems strange given that didn't apply similarly last year. But if not, it makes the start-2010 cut-off incredibly arbitrary. I quite like the idea of rolling averages but I think once a season is complete, it should only be that season's meetings that count for a current average (a rider could still have an average based purely on an earlier season if he hadn't ridden enough meetings in that last season). So 500cc - I agree with you. What Dave appears to be saying is the current system seems to over-benefit riders on an upward curve (e.g. Darcy Ward, who is clearly one of the world's best riders, but gets his average reduced by results from two years ago) and over-penalise riders on a downward curve. Oh and one more thought - I thought the 28 and 38 were based on "whole" seasons. But next year the PL will have 26 league meetings plus 10 "early-season competition" meetings, excluding later rounds, cup, play-offs etc which shouldn't count. So will they still use 38? Edited November 27, 2011 by Khabiboulin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted November 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 28, 2011 Thanks Dave. But does that mean 2009 (and earlier) meetings count where necessary, even though they didn't last year? Your wording seems to suggest so........... The earliest start date for all Rolling Averages is 2010. Assessed riders who did not achieve 4H & 4A in a previous season will still be on their assessed averages until they achieve 4H 4A in the current season. As far as I am aware it is 28/38 (EL/PL) matches. ATB Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snyper1010 Posted December 23, 2011 Report Share Posted December 23, 2011 No wonder new fans are hard to come by and old fans are walking away. Its a train wreck of a rule that doesnt really give a true reflection of anything meaningful. How can you take for example 13 2010 meetings and 13 2011 meetings and claim that gives you a fair avg for 2012. Yet again this shows the BSPA is out dated and out of touch. They are in it for the good of their own clubs not the sport as a whole. Its abit more proof that we need an independent body free of club influence to govern the sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldy Posted December 23, 2011 Report Share Posted December 23, 2011 No wonder new fans are hard to come by and old fans are walking away. Its a train wreck of a rule that doesnt really give a true reflection of anything meaningful. How can you take for example 13 2010 meetings and 13 2011 meetings and claim that gives you a fair avg for 2012. Yet again this shows the BSPA is out dated and out of touch. They are in it for the good of their own clubs not the sport as a whole. Its abit more proof that we need an independent body free of club influence to govern the sport. Well said, this way of calculating a meaningful average is so far off the mark its laughable. What do I suggest, all said in a previous post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovey Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 I can confirm that the promoters have decided that Rolling Averages, (which initially had a start dating from the 2010 season avearges) will continue in the same vein. All rolling averages will be compiled from a rider's last 28 (EL) or 38 (PL) matches irrespective of how many years that may encompass. For example Eddie Kennett's RA for the start of 2012 will be his 16 completed matches from 2011 plus his last 12 matches from 2010. But will the 12 matches from 2010 be taken to balance the number of home/away matches - or will it just arbitrarily be the last 12? Could well make a difference ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted December 29, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 But will the 12 matches from 2010 be taken to balance the number of home/away matches - or will it just arbitrarily be the last 12? Could well make a difference ... In Kennetts case, just the last 12 meetings from 2010. In the previous years a rider may have had an imbalance in Home and Away matches due to injury, GP's etc. ATB Dave 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.