Time For A Revamp Of The Gp's?

[dtc]

This year I've gotten back into my speedway after a couple of years not watching it. I am enjoying it but i think it needs to learn from other sports to make it more exciting and bring the new riders through.

 

1 A bonus prize for a maximum (or the prize topped up) to 24000, pounds, euros, dollars, złoty etc dependant on the host country.

I've looked thru the results and a maximum has happened around 6 times since the currant format was started. This would make the riders fight for each point rather than settling for second place, especially in the semis. (Snooker and darts both have bonus structures similar to this and they make the players try to to achive the maximum when they are close.)

 

2 A GP2 seriies to also act as qualifier for the GP,fully televised maybe on the friday night before the gp in new countries or the host country near to the GP, similar format to the gps with rotation of 16 riders from 24 ish with bias towards the host countrys riders. So in the uk it could be in Somerset. A final at the end of the season for a qualification for the GP with the bottom 7 GP riders from last year and top from GP2.

 

3 Involve more countrys this year there are 3 in Poland I know speedway is huge there but 3 is too many. Bring back Germany, Slovenia maybe add Australia, USA etc.

[Humphrey Appleby]

1 A bonus prize for a maximum (or the prize topped up) to 24000, pounds, euros, dollars, złoty etc dependant on the host country.

 

Where will the money come from?

 

3 Involve more countrys this year there are 3 in Poland I know speedway is huge there but 3 is too many. Bring back Germany, Slovenia maybe add Australia, USA etc.

 

The German and Australian GPs were not financially successful, and Slovenia finished as soon as the financial contribution of the local authority finished. As yet, no-one in the US has been willing to stand the financial risk of a GP there.

[dtc]

The money could be easily found 2 ways.

1 Say for the first year there would be one Maximum prize all season Frist come First served. First prize is curantly 11000 US$, which would be 13000 to find per year which is under $1100 per gp and less than $70 per gp per rider so the prizes could be re jigged or just not increaced with inflation next year.

2 Get a sponsor on board, For example "$24,000 for a MONSTER of a meeting", an extra 13k from Monster for sevral verbal or visual nods to the thousands/millions of viewers over 12 meetings over 6 months to a brand is cheap advertisng.

[noggin]

I think there should be some reward for making the semis/final even if you finish 4th (you must finish the race) maybe make the semis 4,3,2,1 & the final 6,4,2,1...

[SCB]

I think there should be some reward for making the semis/final even if you finish 4th (you must finish the race) maybe make the semis 4,3,2,1 & the final 6,4,2,1...

Why? your reward for making the semi's is that you have already scored the points in the heats.

[home straight]

Why? your reward for making the semi's is that you have already scored the points in the heats.

 

Perhaps you could win a nice carriage clock or something if you come fourth in a semi final? Just a little incentive like...

Edited May 28, 2012 by home straight

[JCookie]

No leave them alone, bar the SWC they're the only thing that is entertaining these days

[wjm]

Why are people so obsessive about “revamps” and “rule changes” and the “quality of the field”.

 

The main thing when it comes to speedway, IMO, is the same thing it always has been, track prep.

 

Saturdays night GP was superb IMO, I really enjoyed it. I don’t see the need for massive change.

 

I don’t agree with the idea that there is a lack of strength in the field either.

 

People point to the GP when it had guys like Rickardson, Adams, Gollob, Nilsen, Nielsen and Ermelenko, Hammil in it and say how great it was because “look at how good they riders were” they chose to ignore the fact that you are looking back on riders that went onto achieve a lot over a 10/15/20 year period and ignore how they rode at that time.

 

At the time Rickardson and Nielsen were in it, Adams in particular struggled for years, a bit like Lindgren or a lower order rider does now.

 

When Rickardson dominated for the majority of the time guys like Adams, Sullivan, Hammil and Pedersen were more often than not only making their way in the sport or quite inconsistent.

 

If in 20 years time people were to list this seasons GP riders there is every chance that you could be listing multiple world champions like Gollob, Hancock, Nicki, Crump and who is to say what people like Emil, Holder, Hampel, AJ, Lindgren might win.

 

It is very rare, in fact it has never happened, that all 16 riders have been even and balanced, throughout GP history, like most sports, there have more often than not been 2 or 3 dominant figures with the rest a bit of a mixed bag, its like that now as well.

 

In 20 years time, on paper, this year’s GP could look great.

Edited May 28, 2012 by wjm

[sancho]

haven't we had all the revamps

 

We had 24 riders per GP where losing 2 rides on the trot (i think) got you eliminated

 

We had a scoring system where the winner got 25 points 2nd 20 etc

 

I think they have now got it right as far as each GP is concerned

 

Qualification may need to be "looked at" but I know that will cause major debate

[ImpartialOne]

The only thing wrong with the Grand Prix is the scoring system. Once again, this is where speedway shoots itself in the foot by allowing second place to score more than first place.

 

The heat scores should stay but the semis and final need GP points.

 

Final:

1st - 24

2nd - 21

3rd - 19

4th- 17

 

Semi finalists:

=5th - 15

=6th - 13

 

Bottom eight keep their heat scores.

 

No more embarrassing 1st 19, 2nd 20, 3rd 17, etc.

[Dave_minall]

Really? Another revamp? Your attention span must be beyond short. The current format simply works. That's all we can ask for,

 

As mentioned earlier the tracks are what need the most attention. Every other saturday I always go in thinking 'we're in for another slick one'

 

How many times have we been treated to a GP where there was actually too much grip? only once in my memory. It's another side to the coin that the GPs very rarely venture into.

[ImpartialOne]

No, the current points system doesn't work unless Manchester City could score 2 against Chelsea's 3 and still win the match.

[PHILIPRISING]

The only thing wrong with the Grand Prix is the scoring system. Once again, this is where speedway shoots itself in the foot by allowing second place to score more than first place.

 

The heat scores should stay but the semis and final need GP points.

 

Final:

1st - 24

2nd - 21

3rd - 19

4th- 17

 

Semi finalists:

=5th - 15

=6th - 13

 

Bottom eight keep their heat scores.

 

No more embarrassing 1st 19, 2nd 20, 3rd 17, etc.

 

WHY are they embarrassing? Winner of the final is the winner of the GP. Points accumulate for the championship.

 

Good to see you posting again by the way (apart from this one!!)

 

Really? Another revamp? Your attention span must be beyond short. The current format simply works. That's all we can ask for,

 

As mentioned earlier the tracks are what need the most attention. Every other saturday I always go in thinking 'we're in for another slick one'

 

How many times have we been treated to a GP where there was actually too much grip? only once in my memory. It's another side to the coin that the GPs very rarely venture into.

 

RIDERS on Saturday said the track was perfect. Not too slick, not too grippy, very smooth, no ruts. What more do you want?

[waiheke1]

Why? your reward for making the semi's is that you have already scored the points in the heats.

 

and have the oppotunity to score more points by doing well in the semi (and final)

 

No, the current points system doesn't work unless Manchester City could score 2 against Chelsea's 3 and still win the match.

 

not really a valid analogy. And if anything, its the opposite. Under the current system, the rider who gets the most points (goals) gets closer to the title. Under a proposal where the winner of the final gets guaranteed the most points, its like saying Chelsea scored three goals, Man City only got two, but they scored the last goal, so Chelase should take the points (last goal wins like).

 

Personally, I think the current points system is by far the best that there has been, striking the right balance between EVERY RACE counting towards the title, rewarding the best rider on the night, and still having the excitement of a meaningful final on the night.

 

good to see you back IO

[ImpartialOne]

As unlikely as it is, this system could result in a rider winning all 12 rounds and not being World Champion. Is that a good system?

[PHILIPRISING]

As unlikely as it is, this system could result in a rider winning all 12 rounds and not being World Champion. Is that a good system?

 

ANYONE winning 12 rounds would more than deserve to be World Champion.

[Sotonian]

As unlikely as it is, this system could result in a rider winning all 12 rounds and not being World Champion. Is that a good system?

Even more unlikely, a rider could become World Champ without winning a single race. Finish second in every heat, semi and final with different winners of all the finals and it's job done!

[ImpartialOne]

 

 

ANYONE winning 12 rounds would more than deserve to be World Champion.

They would, I completely agree. Such an eventuality is more than likely never going to happen but it is still possible. And that's where it is flawed. In all other GP events the winner of each round gets the most points so why does speedway have to mess with logic and common sense?

[waiheke1]

They would, I completely agree. Such an eventuality is more than likely never going to happen but it is still possible. And that's where it is flawed. In all other GP events the winner of each round gets the most points so why does speedway have to mess with logic and common sense?

but if you compare with say Moto GP or Formula I, in those events there is only one race per GP. So the winner of that one race is the winner of the GP, and understandably, gets the most points.

Speedway GP, the riders have five to seven races, the best rider on the night (i.e. the one who does the best in all races) is likely to finish with the most points, BUT will not neccesarily be the rider who wins the final, and hence the GP. I have no issue with this,

Of course, another way to look at it would be to say that "qualifying" in Formula I is the same as the first 20 heats of the Speedway GP, but I'm not sure you can really compare the two like that.

 

As unlikely as it is, this system could result in a rider winning all 12 rounds and not being World Champion. Is that a good system?

the counter-example to your suggested points system though would be that a rider could win 72 races and finish 2nd in 12 others over a season, and miss out on the world title to someone who won 12 races, finished second in 60 and last in 12.

both are equally unlikely IMHO, and i don't belive "extreme" examples are the best way to prove/dis-prove a particular system.

[ImpartialOne]

All I'm saying is that the winner of the GP should also be the rider with the most points. It has always been that way until recent years and my points system above would ensure that.