stratton Posted January 18, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 I disagree fundamentally that there's a qualification system suffient in scope in the CURRENT system for it to warrant being called a fair World Championship. A proper World Championship does not have guaranteed slots for an elite few. All need to qualify. You can go on for ever and a day about the old system, it's the CURRENT system which, if we care about the sport, needs to be looked at now. And it is utter fantasy to claim that riders from all over the world can easily qualify for an SGP series. Rather like those who defend the Royal Family by saying it's good for tourism, those who seek to defend the current SGP series by quoting the case of Sam Nicoljesen from 25 years ago are showing a bankrupcy in their arguments. Try DEFENDING the current system against the charge that it's based far too much on protecting those in it, rather than building a confident system where all with merit can achieve; and then those of us who are sceptical would have something to consider.. Just see a interview on the bbc website with Barry Hearn the snooker supremo saying how i feel.Refreshing really he said he dosent mind if he Upsets a few as long as everyone has a chance to enter every tournament.He said the days of the same 16 Just guaranteed to be in every tournament has gone.If you dont play regular you within 6 months will drop out the elite 16 .Therefore whoever you are and reputation you will have to QUALIFY .He says the game is evolving and there are new stars on the horizon but he said if good anough a 55 year old Steve Davis can attempt to play in every tournament if he wishes.Maybe a thought for speedway the FAIREST way in my view. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 Just see a interview on the bbc website with Barry Hearn the snooker supremo saying how i feel.Refreshing really he said he dosent mind if he Upsets a few as long as everyone has a chance to enter every tournament.He said the days of the same 16 Just guaranteed to be in every tournament has gone.If you dont play regular you within 6 months will drop out the elite 16 .Therefore whoever you are and reputation you will have to QUALIFY .He says the game is evolving and there are new stars on the horizon but he said if good anough a 55 year old Steve Davis can attempt to play in every tournament if he wishes.Maybe a thought for speedway the FAIREST way in my view. apart from the pemanent wildcard spots, isn't it very much the same system as the GP (i.e. top x riders based on performance stay in the series without the need for additional qualifying). I'd suggest the risk of engine failure or injury playing a significant part in the outcome is significantly less in snooker than in speedway, hence why I feel speedway has the need to retain at least some of the wildcard spots to cover riders who potentially miss out due to these reasons. Additionally, one bad meeting can ruin a riders qualifying hopes in speedway, whereas in snooker due to the number of tournaments, this is not the case. Ideally, in speedway there would be some sort of qualifying series to reduce the impact of luck/one off day, however I can't see that this would be financially viable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chunky Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 Just see a interview on the bbc website with Barry Hearn the snooker supremo saying how i feel.Refreshing really he said he dosent mind if he Upsets a few as long as everyone has a chance to enter every tournament.He said the days of the same 16 Just guaranteed to be in every tournament has gone.If you dont play regular you within 6 months will drop out the elite 16 . That sounds very strange, particularly in light of his ideas as far as darts is concerned. The PDC is now more of a closed shop than it has ever been, and it is clear that certain individuals are very much favoured over others... Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 [/b] That sounds very strange, particularly in light of his ideas as far as darts is concerned. The PDC is now more of a closed shop than it has ever been, and it is clear that certain individuals are very much favoured over others... Steve Basically Chunky it used to be if you were in the 16 at the cut off that was it for a year. Now so many events on there are loads of ranking points available,meaning the top 16 changes monthly.So come april Osullivan who is provisionally 14 at mo might have to qualify come the W.C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) Think you remain on a wind up... But please explain this comment. There are not even BRITISH qualifiers for the SGP and certainly aren't, for example, USA ones..! The notion that there's a world-wide set of 'qualifiers' for the current World Championship SGP series is total fantasy...! Sorry didn't see this one!!! Ryan Fisher of the USA has been in GP qualifiers for at least the last two years. James Wright, Ben Barker, Eddie Kennet, Chris Harris, Danny King, Simon Stead all were in last years qualifiers. The qualifying process started with 80 riders from all over the world, over 5 rounds again staged all over the world. Actually I dont think there was a nation that races speedway who didn't have a competitor, Argentina, Hungary, Slovenia, Germany, The Ukraine, Italy, The USA were all represented These are not high profile events hence you probably didn'y know they existed but the riders are getting the chance, just that there are no Brits good enough to take it!!! Edited January 19, 2012 by oldace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsloes 1928 nearly Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Sorry didn't see this one!!! Ryan Fisher of the USA has been in GP qualifiers for at least the last two years. James Wright, Ben Barker, Eddie Kennet, Chris Harris, Danny King, Simon Stead all were in last years qualifiers. The qualifying process started with 80 riders from all over the world, over 5 rounds again staged all over the world. Actually I dont think there was a nation that races speedway who didn't have a competitor, Argentina, Hungary, Slovenia, Germany, The Ukraine, Italy, The USA were all represented These are not high profile events hence you probably didn'y know they existed but the riders are getting the chance, just that there are no Brits good enough to take it!!! I didn't say that some riders from these nations hadn't entered qualifying, I said there was no national qualification process... In the past (sorry for the 'P' word again!) the British Final was one stage on the way to further (international)World Championship qualifiers, now the winner or highest positioned rider not already in it, can look forward to what, er, a basically meaningless one-off 'wild card' position at Cardiff.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatface Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 A proper World Championship does not have guaranteed slots for an elite few. Dead right. FIFA World Cup? Absolutely farcical - hosts and defending champions are automatically granted a place. IAAF World Athletics Championships? Drivel - each defending gold medallist automatically qualifies. Formula One World Championship? Meaningless - all the top drivers are chosen by the top teams. Rugby World Cup? Utter nonsense - all top nations are all seeded. Grand Slam Tennis and Golf? What a joke - all the world's top ranked players don't have to go through qualifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 to be pedeantic, I don't believe the holders fo the football world cup are seeded anymore (just the hosts). But, plenty of other sports you could add to that list, cricket springs to mind. I'd suggest there are very, very few sports (if any) in which every participant in the world is given equal opprtunity at qualifying - hence no sports have "proper" world championships? Parsloes - I guess the question is does (or should ) BSI have the right to dictate to national federations how they select their qualifiers? Personally, I'd be happy to see a system where the number of "seeded" riders which national federations could be capped at the greater of 1 spot or 50% of their total allocation (rounded down), the remainder to be determined by placings in the national championship. (so for example, if Britain has 5 places, then the BSPA could select two riders to "seed" into qualifying, the remianing three slots would go to the top pace getters in the British Final, excluding those already in the series). Potential issue though is for nations where the national championship is not held prior to the qualifying meetings starting? And does this actually improve the qualifying process any? Also - don't Australia have a national qualifying process,a dn Troy Batchelor is already out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chunky Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Basically Chunky it used to be if you were in the 16 at the cut off that was it for a year. Now so many events on there are loads of ranking points available,meaning the top 16 changes monthly.So come april Osullivan who is provisionally 14 at mo might have to qualify come the W.C. That's all well and good, but what I'm saying is that the PDC runs very differently. Even though there are now a total of 128 tour cards, it's basically a closed shop, with all the players that Barry Hearn wants. Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 to be pedeantic, I don't believe the holders fo the football world cup are seeded anymore (just the hosts). But, plenty of other sports you could add to that list, cricket springs to mind. I'd suggest there are very, very few sports (if any) in which every participant in the world is given equal opprtunity at qualifying - hence no sports have "proper" world championships? Parsloes - I guess the question is does (or should ) BSI have the right to dictate to national federations how they select their qualifiers? Personally, I'd be happy to see a system where the number of "seeded" riders which national federations could be capped at the greater of 1 spot or 50% of their total allocation (rounded down), the remainder to be determined by placings in the national championship. (so for example, if Britain has 5 places, then the BSPA could select two riders to "seed" into qualifying, the remianing three slots would go to the top pace getters in the British Final, excluding those already in the series). Potential issue though is for nations where the national championship is not held prior to the qualifying meetings starting? And does this actually improve the qualifying process any? Also - don't Australia have a national qualifying process,a dn Troy Batchelor is already out? If you could have your time again Waihekeaces1 are you glad you see the 1off finals?.Or do you wish you had seen the Briggoes [ ect ] in this format .? I moan but i dont mind the g.ps i should hate the old format really .Because my favourites Crump, Autrey E Boocock Wilson Ashby were not done any favours over the years in it ,injury unlucky [ect ] suppose they were the rules. That's all well and good, but what I'm saying is that the PDC runs very differently. Even though there are now a total of 128 tour cards, it's basically a closed shop, with all the players that Barry Hearn wants. Steve I am not keen on Hearn really but i wouldnt say snooker is a closed shop now.What i think would be better if they had less tournaments and had better prize money in the ones they run.Saying that Hearn says the bread and butter players are earning a hell of alot more.Stewart Bingham is a great [ ex ] of that always has been good now he is playing more he has just won his first event as a pro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 of course i'm pleased i saw the old format, went to two finals (83 and 85), loved them both though the racing in 83 was dire and on neither occasion did I get the winner I wanted (morton and S Moran). Also, loved going to the qualifying meetings, the tension,, some great races etc. I have great memories of the old system and I remember being disapointed when they were replaced by the GP system - however, indisputably the GP is better at determining who the best rider in the world is, and I can see no rationale whatsoever for going back to the old one-off system as a replacement for the GP system (as mentioned preivously I'd be happy to see a pared-down knock-out World Championship run in parallel if it could be made to work). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chunky Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 I am not keen on Hearn really but i wouldnt say snooker is a closed shop now. I'm not saying that either. What I'm querying is why he would open up snooker to more qualifiers, but then do the total opposite with darts; the PDC was never intended to be a closed shop... Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 I'm not saying that either. What I'm querying is why he would open up snooker to more qualifiers, but then do the total opposite with darts; the PDC was never intended to be a closed shop... Steve Strange Steve i watch darts but have no idea what his vision is on that sport.There has been alot of moans in the snooker fraternity because some players are losing money on some PD events. First prize in places like India 10,000 barely covering your costs and thats if you win the event.So it isnt all plain sailing Hearn is a bit of a dictator but i do think he is in danger of over SATURATING the sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chunky Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Strange Steve i watch darts but have no idea what his vision is on that sport.There has been alot of moans in the snooker fraternity because some players are losing money on some PD events. First prize in places like India 10,000 barely covering your costs and thats if you win the event.So it isnt all plain sailing Hearn is a bit of a dictator but i do think he is in danger of over SATURATING the sport. It's pretty much the same with darts. There are so many more events these days, and while the rewards may be there, so too are the expenses. It's okay if you actually win, and it's okay for the top few, but for the others who need to travel in order to qualify for the majors, it's very very difficult. If it's that hard for European-based players, you can imagine how hard it is for Americans or Australians, say. Of course, this is not far off what has happened for some of the GP riders, even going back to Billy Hamill. Then, there was also the ill-fated attempt at running the old World Team Cup on a similar basis! Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 I didn't say that some riders from these nations hadn't entered qualifying, I said there was no national qualification process... In the past (sorry for the 'P' word again!) the British Final was one stage on the way to further (international)World Championship qualifiers, now the winner or highest positioned rider not already in it, can look forward to what, er, a basically meaningless one-off 'wild card' position at Cardiff.. Hear, hear!!! :approve: Gone a bit off Thread on this. No - I don't think Mike Bast would have been a World Champion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsloes 1928 nearly Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Dead right. FIFA World Cup? Absolutely farcical - hosts and defending champions are automatically granted a place. IAAF World Athletics Championships? Drivel - each defending gold medallist automatically qualifies. Formula One World Championship? Meaningless - all the top drivers are chosen by the top teams. Rugby World Cup? Utter nonsense - all top nations are all seeded. Grand Slam Tennis and Golf? What a joke - all the world's top ranked players don't have to go through qualifying. Keep up - the defending World Cup Football champs are no longer seeded. And even they were that's hardly the same as the top eight plus getting automatic qualification. Have no idea if what you say about the World Athletics championships is true - it sounds unlikely but I'll bow to your greater knowledge. Quite often the defending champs no longer compete in the T&F event they are the defending champs of though - through retirement or change of event. And I've said before the day we actually boast of having the same elitest and cash-led system as Formula 1 was a sad day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatface Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) Keep up - the defending World Cup Football champs are no longer seeded. And even they were that's hardly the same as the top eight plus getting automatic qualification. Have no idea if what you say about the World Athletics championships is true - it sounds unlikely but I'll bow to your greater knowledge. Quite often the defending champs no longer compete in the T&F event they are the defending champs of though - through retirement or change of event. And I've said before the day we actually boast of having the same elitest and cash-led system as Formula 1 was a sad day! Seems the Football World Cup has changed - I did not know that. Still, it was worth making that one mistake just to have the delicious irony of you telling me to "keep up". :-) On the rest, I am bang on. I have worked in athletics for the last 10-11 years, so you'll have to trust me on that one. If you still have doubts, there's a link below which should convince you. Not sure what you are on about when you say 'quite often defending champs no longer compete in the track and field championship' either. Berlin 2009 winners Bolt, Bekele, Idowu, Ennis, Campbell-Brown and the vast majority of defending champs were fit and well, present and correct for Daegu 2011 (in the same events too). Probably best if you try not to hammer that point home and discus it no further, until someone relays the truth to you. http://mobi.supersport.com/athletics/international/news/110621/Bolt_will_bypass_Jamaican_meet Anyway...back to speedway. Interesting topic. I - like virtually - everyone on this thread can only go on facts, stats and second hand opinions of those in the know. I'd have to say yes, Mike Bast could have been a force. If he was the leading rider in the US for so many years in an era that brought through Penhall, Autrey, Schwartz, then you'd have to say if they could cut it, then he probably could too. Don't be fooled by the 1977 Intercontinental at White City either. There was another guy well off the pace that day - Bruce Penhall. I've always suspected that the skills required to ride a big track are more easily acquired than the subtle throttle control required for small tracks. If Bast's American contemporaries adapted, then I reckon he would have too. Clearly, he had a comfortable existence in the US and didn't have the hunger for international success that Penhall did. In terms of lifestyle, you'd have to be really motivated to leave California for Cradley! Edited January 20, 2012 by falcace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Seems the Football World Cup has changed - I did not know that. Still, it was worth making that one mistake just to have the delicious irony of you telling me to "keep up". :-) On the rest, I am bang on. I have worked in athletics for the last 10-11 years, so you'll have to trust me on that one. If you still have doubts, there's a link below which should convince you. Not sure what you are on about when you say 'quite often defending champs no longer compete in the track and field championship' either. Berlin 2009 winners Bolt, Bekele, Idowu, Ennis, Campbell-Brown and the vast majority of defending champs were fit and well, present and correct for Daegu 2011 (in the same events too). Probably best if you try not to hammer that point home and discus it no further, until someone relays the truth to you. http://mobi.superspo...s_Jamaican_meet Anyway...back to speedway. Interesting topic. I - like virtually - everyone on this thread can only go on facts, stats and second hand opinions of those in the know. I'd have to say yes, Mike Bast could have been a force. If he was the leading rider in the US for so many years in an era that brought through Penhall, Autrey, Schwartz, then you'd have to say if they could cut it, then he probably could too. Don't be fooled by the 1977 Intercontinental at White City either. There was another guy well off the pace that day - Bruce Penhall. I've always suspected that the skills required to ride a big track are more easily acquired than the subtle throttle control required for small tracks. If Bast's American contemporaries adapted, then I reckon he would have too. Clearly, he had a comfortable existence in the US and didn't have the hunger for international success that Penhall did. In terms of lifestyle, you'd have to be really motivated to leave California for Cradley! I disagree i think costa mesa [ect he was comfortable that day in 77, Penhall looked competetive beat Bast ,Bast looked way of the pace.Penhall also beat Bast regular in the usa .I also disagree on the point about riding the larger tracks that it is easier ive seen loads of riders of class never master the big ones.Jessup Kennett Simmons to name a few i am not saying they couldnt ride them to win top class meetings at Hyde rd Sheffield they couldnt.My opinion is Bast deep down wasnt confident anough in his own ability outside his safety zone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 I disagree i think costa mesa [ect he was comfortable that day in 77, Penhall looked competetive beat Bast ,Bast looked way of the pace.Penhall also beat Bast regular in the usa .I also disagree on the point about riding the larger tracks that it is easier ive seen loads of riders of class never master the big ones.Jessup Kennett Simmons to name a few i am not saying they couldnt ride them to win top class meetings at Hyde rd Sheffield they couldnt.My opinion is Bast deep down wasnt confident anough in his own ability outside his safety zone. Kennet! OK he was a small track expert but to say he never mastered the big ones isn't right. He was pretty darn good round White City in his 3 years there!!!!. Dave Jessup always rode bigger tracks round the white line and at Hyde Road, Sheffield etc it was easy for the likes of PC, Mort, Dougie Wyer to pick him off. Falcace is spot on though. As long as he has a quick enough bike a rider who learns his trade on a small track will get round a big one ok. Not quite so in reverse, someone learning their trade at say Sheffield may struggle to adapt to a smaller track. There are always exceptions though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Kennet! OK he was a small track expert but to say he never mastered the big ones isn't right. He was pretty darn good round White City in his 3 years there!!!!. Dave Jessup always rode bigger tracks round the white line and at Hyde Road, Sheffield etc it was easy for the likes of PC, Mort, Dougie Wyer to pick him off. Falcace is spot on though. As long as he has a quick enough bike a rider who learns his trade on a small track will get round a big one ok. Not quite so in reverse, someone learning their trade at say Sheffield may struggle to adapt to a smaller track. There are always exceptions though. Kennett was always decent at Blunsdon but for me never really regularly beat Crump Petersen Autrey [ 1 season ] the big guns.Also in my exsperience White City was always slick as a board suited a white line er.Jessup i wasnt a fan of a gater for me, and on the real race tracks wasnt a threat.With the little track/ big track point i agree but i also think it happened the other way as well. [ examples ] in the 60s 70 s and 80s Pendlebury ,Paulson , Haynes , Sharpe ,Kentwell, Baker, Janke, P,Carr , A. Smith , good at home big track riders away pretty poor. The other way round decent little track riders D.Kennett, Geer, Gachet, E.Dugard, Standing,Woods [nearly top class at home ]excellent at Crayford] Buck, were pretty poor on the big pacey tracks.Also years ago there were not many technical tracks about most were middle size to big excluding Wimbledon Eastbourne who were sometimes in the 2nd tier.Bast for example maybe if he had rode for Wimbledon he would of done well at home away some big tracks to master also Kings Lynn Cradley proper racing tracks.I dont think he would of averaged over 8 away maybe less than that.? 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.