stratton Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Was going through the records, does Nielsen officially get 3rd in 1990 for Morans disqualification.Always been said Wiltshire was world no 2 but on some records Hans hasnt been reconized if so his record is F 19 W 4 P9 Rather than placed 8? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) Was going through the records, does Nielsen officially get 3rd in 1990 for Morans disqualification.Always been said Wiltshire was world no 2 but on some records Hans hasnt been reconized if so his record is F 19 W 4 P9 Rather than placed 8? No. Moran was stripped of second but the other positions were no altered, Wiltshire was still third Edited January 19, 2012 by oldace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmet Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 No. Moran was stripped of second but the other positions were no altered, Wiltshire was still third Correct. Here is official confirmation I received of this from FIM when I queried the same point ~2 years ago. There was no 2nd place awarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) Correct. Here is official confirmation I received of this from FIM when I queried the same point ~2 years ago. There was no 2nd place awarded. I had forgotten how poor a world final line up that was, looks even worse with the removal of Moran's name as well doesn't it. I think most people recognise Shawn Moran as second that year anyway, it's only the record books that dont show it. The perils of night nurse eh. Edited January 19, 2012 by oldace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Correct. Here is official confirmation I received of this from FIM when I queried the same point ~2 years ago. There was no 2nd place awarded. Correct. Here is official confirmation I received of this from FIM when I queried the same point ~2 years ago. There was no 2nd place awarded. Thanks britmet some sites have some havent 8 Placed it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatface Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 I had forgotten how poor a world final line up that was, looks even worse with the removal of Moran's name as well doesn't it. I think most people recognise Shawn Moran as second that year anyway, it's only the record books that dont show it. The perils of night nurse eh. Agreed. It was Nielsen's to lose going into it. It was a enjoyable night though - some really good racing. It was months and months later when the FIM announced Moran had tested positive at the Overseas Final. I really wanted Shawn to win that night, but I shudder to think if he had won that run-off. How daft would the sport look then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Agreed. It was Nielsen's to lose going into it. It was a enjoyable night though - some really good racing. It was months and months later when the FIM announced Moran had tested positive at the Overseas Final. I really wanted Shawn to win that night, but I shudder to think if he had won that run-off. How daft would the sport look then? Falcace, I never expected Nielsen to win that final. He had been very good at Bradford in the past, but that all changed after Erik's accident. Hans started to have some very mediocre performances for Oxford at Bradford, even failing to hit double figures one or twice, which was almost unheard of. Hans lost some of his edge over Erik's accident (although he was still good enough to finish a point ahead of anyone else in the 1990 British League averages), in particular at Odsal. But he was still the best rider in the world for most of the time between 1990-1996, but not the force of 1985-1989. As for Shawn Moran, it was a farcical situation, especially as he had been completely open at the Overseas Final as to what he'd been taking for his cold. The FIM should have either stopped him from riding that day, or excluded him from the championship shortly afterwards - to leave it until after the final was just crazy. I thought he was going to win it, as he just seemed to get better and better as the night progressed. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatface Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Falcace, I never expected Nielsen to win that final. He had been very good at Bradford in the past, but that all changed after Erik's accident. Hans started to have some very mediocre performances for Oxford at Bradford, even failing to hit double figures one or twice, which was almost unheard of. Hans lost some of his edge over Erik's accident (although he was still good enough to finish a point ahead of anyone else in the 1990 British League averages), in particular at Odsal. But he was still the best rider in the world for most of the time between 1990-1996, but not the force of 1985-1989. As for Shawn Moran, it was a farcical situation, especially as he had been completely open at the Overseas Final as to what he'd been taking for his cold. The FIM should have either stopped him from riding that day, or excluded him from the championship shortly afterwards - to leave it until after the final was just crazy. I thought he was going to win it, as he just seemed to get better and better as the night progressed. All the best Rob In the whole field, Kelvin Tatum was the only other rider who had even been on a World Final rostrum. Hans Nielsen was a point better than anyone else in the BL averages. He was the defending champion, a three-times winner. And you didn't think he was favourite?! The way he took Tatum shows this was a man very much up for the fight. Any suggestion that he was lacking any edge due to Erik Gundersen's accident is pure speculation at best and a figment of your imagination at worst. This is not a man who is holding back: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeTydgtELM0 Why are you always making excuses for Hans Nielsen's World Final failures? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 I had forgotten how poor a world final line up that was, looks even worse with the removal of Moran's name as well doesn't it. I think most people recognise Shawn Moran as second that year anyway, it's only the record books that dont show it. The perils of night nurse eh. Thats why Nielsen averaged well over 11.30 for some years the level had dropped alarmingly.No comparison to the 11.74 average Ivan got against far far superior opposition.Then you sometimes had someone only 12th or 15 th in the top averages on a big 9.00 figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Thats why Nielsen averaged well over 11.30 for some years the level had dropped alarmingly.No comparison to the 11.74 average Ivan got against far far superior opposition.Then you sometimes had someone only 12th or 15 th in the top averages on a big 9.00 figure. Big averages for the "superstars" were largely a result of the race formulas at the time though. In Ivans day there was no heat fifteen, no fixed gate posiotions and a formula that only pitted the number 1s together once in a match. Nowadays, no matter who is in heat 15, one of the big guns will run a last place. The old way did in fairness create superstars because it was easier for more of the big guns to average double figures, today a double figure average is a monumental task Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Big averages for the "superstars" were largely a result of the race formulas at the time though. In Ivans day there was no heat fifteen, no fixed gate posiotions and a formula that only pitted the number 1s together once in a match. Nowadays, no matter who is in heat 15, one of the big guns will run a last place. The old way did in fairness create superstars because it was easier for more of the big guns to average double figures, today a double figure average is a monumental task No cant agree with that today is easy pickings compared to years ago you look at Mauger,s averages 11 plus over 35 matches nine years on the trot 1968/76 .A example in the 70s you go to Belle vue away as a no1 Mauger at no 1 Pusey, Wilkinson ,Sjosten, Collins .The difference is no 2s 5 and 4s then could beat in and out no 1s.I know figures can be dressed up and do heat 15s now even count on the averages?Your point about gate positions is right but that shows second strings must of defeated in and out no 1s off unfavourable gates.Take Ward for example now most weeks at home when he is on his game he knows he will probably only drop maybe a point at worst.Only Bjerre,Lindgren,Holder, Ward now that average over 9 and there figures are only lower because of a busy workload they have.A example 1980 Lee Jessup v Collins Morton 2011 King Barker v Nicholls Klindtd heat 15 examples does that tell you something?No way is it harder to get double figures in the E.L now than in yesteryear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 No cant agree with that today is easy pickings compared to years ago you look at Mauger,s averages 11 plus over 35 matches nine years on the trot 1968/76 .A example in the 70s you go to Belle vue away as a no1 Mauger at no 1 Pusey, Wilkinson ,Sjosten, Collins .The difference is no 2s 5 and 4s then could beat in and out no 1s.I know figures can be dressed up and do heat 15s now even count on the averages?Your point about gate positions is right but that shows second strings must of defeated in and out no 1s off unfavourable gates.Take Ward for example now most weeks at home when he is on his game he knows he will probably only drop maybe a point at worst.Only Bjerre,Lindgren,Holder, Ward now that average over 9 and there figures are only lower because of a busy workload they have.A example 1980 Lee Jessup v Collins Morton 2011 King Barker v Nicholls Klindtd heat 15 examples does that tell you something?No way is it harder to get double figures in the E.L now than in yesteryear. Sidney do you understand the principle of averages. If you took the league as it was in 1976 and raced it again with the same riders but using todays format very few would be double figure averages, thats not opinion, its a mathematical fact. I dont disagree that the quality was better years ago, largely because there was no sub 42.5 average limit weakening the league year on year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Sidney do you understand the principle of averages. If you took the league as it was in 1976 and raced it again with the same riders but using todays format very few would be double figure averages, thats not opinion, its a mathematical fact. I dont disagree that the quality was better years ago, largely because there was no sub 42.5 average limit weakening the league year on year Like i said we can DRESS the figures up, we can all do what we want with figures.Again averages why are they not SIMPLE ,like they were? rolling averages no B.P ect it is madness.Mathematical fact you are RIGHT oldace but you know what i mean, but i looked at Ward he had a low average of 8.94? i think somewhere how? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Like i said we can DRESS the figures up, we can all do what we want with figures.Again averages why are they not SIMPLE ,like they were? rolling averages no B.P ect it is madness.Mathematical fact you are RIGHT oldace but you know what i mean, but i looked at Ward he had a low average of 8.94? i think somewhere how? Possibly because he would have ridden in every heat fifteen, often from gate 4, he would take at least 1 ride from gate 4 in the other 4 races and because the figure possibly doesn't include bonus points. You are right in that the quality of the league was better years ago, you are wrong however to try and use the number of double figure averages to illustrate the point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Possibly because he would have ridden in every heat fifteen, often from gate 4, he would take at least 1 ride from gate 4 in the other 4 races and because the figure possibly doesn't include bonus points. You are right in that the quality of the league was better years ago, you are wrong however to try and use the number of double figure averages to illustrate the point It was not really the DOUBLE figure averages i wanted to point out though. More importantly people below that mark (ie) 1971 Persson 12th in averages 9.84 in june 1972 C.Lofqvist 17th in averages 9.31 in june 1973. B.Jansson 21st in averages 9.03. 1972 in june Belle vue in one team alone ) Mauger 11.14, Sjosten 9.20, Pusey 9.16,.a massive gulf in standard i think.Now you have explained Oldace how the averages are done now I am the wiser still baffling though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 It was not really the DOUBLE figure averages i wanted to point out though. More importantly people below that mark (ie) 1971 Persson 12th in averages 9.84 in june 1972 C.Lofqvist 17th in averages 9.31 in june 1973. B.Jansson 21st in averages 9.03. 1972 in june Belle vue in one team alone ) Mauger 11.14, Sjosten 9.20, Pusey 9.16,.a massive gulf in standard i think.Now you have explained Oldace how the averages are done now I am the wiser still baffling though. The reason the standard has dropped Sidney is the constant sub 42.5 limit. In average terms 42 is the equilibrium, the average team average if you like. It matters not who the riding staff are, the 42 will always remain constant, as will the average rider average being 6. A few factors sway these figures to a few decimel places but not much. Now to put that into context if you got together 70 people of this forum to staff the 10 teams for the season the above would still be true. Therefore after wobbling your way through the season with a limit of 39 then that bunch of riders would still be too strong to all compete next year, 30 points too strong in average terms. That takes some getting rid of, Four 11+ average men would have to go and be replaced by four new 3 point wobblers. Yes those riders listed above were all quality riders but for every one on a 9 point average there is someone on 3. Like I said your point about quality is correct, you are just using the wrong means of illustrating it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 The reason the standard has dropped Sidney is the constant sub 42.5 limit. In average terms 42 is the equilibrium, the average team average if you like. It matters not who the riding staff are, the 42 will always remain constant, as will the average rider average being 6. A few factors sway these figures to a few decimel places but not much. Now to put that into context if you got together 70 people of this forum to staff the 10 teams for the season the above would still be true. Therefore after wobbling your way through the season with a limit of 39 then that bunch of riders would still be too strong to all compete next year, 30 points too strong in average terms. That takes some getting rid of, Four 11+ average men would have to go and be replaced by four new 3 point wobblers. Yes those riders listed above were all quality riders but for every one on a 9 point average there is someone on 3. Like I said your point about quality is correct, you are just using the wrong means of illustrating it Your point is spot on Falcace, maybe you can answer me this strange and i sometimes point to this when people debate the points limit. In 1973 i think Rick France was no 7 in the averages for Sheffield average i think was 6.73? roughly.Yet they didnt win the league i know Owlerton had a big home advantage and most averages were boosted by that.And Reading had a great side then does it show you figures and buying success might not always work?Thats what people say now the richer teams Poole and Coventry would win it every year without the points level.If you said in 73 you would have a no 7 on a 6.73 average and not win the league you would think you were mad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Your point is spot on Falcace, maybe you can answer me this strange and i sometimes point to this when people debate the points limit. In 1973 i think Rick France was no 7 in the averages for Sheffield average i think was 6.73? roughly.Yet they didnt win the league i know Owlerton had a big home advantage and most averages were boosted by that.And Reading had a great side then does it show you figures and buying success might not always work?Thats what people say now the richer teams Poole and Coventry would win it every year without the points level.If you said in 73 you would have a no 7 on a 6.73 average and not win the league you would think you were mad. You have pretty much answered your own question, big home wins coupled with away losses lead to higher than expected averages. Exeter tended to be the same, riders could get an 8 point average based around getting 12 at home and 4 away. Teams built that way would usually finish mid table but the guaranteed home wins kept the fans happy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 You have pretty much answered your own question, big home wins coupled with away losses lead to higher than expected averages. Exeter tended to be the same, riders could get an 8 point average based around getting 12 at home and 4 away. Teams built that way would usually finish mid table but the guaranteed home wins kept the fans happy Sheffield did also have a good away record in 73 won at Reading ( no Lovass).Reading though amazingly won ten away that year in the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 The points limit is entirely neccesary but as long as the number of teams in the league stays the same then it should always be 42.5. Any lower and it forces riders out to be replaced by inferior ones, any higher and teams at the bottom wont be able to strengthen up and wont be competitive 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.