Plymouth 2013

[CardinalSin]

Good.

Isn't it just

[lewy]

ben was a great rider for plymouth virtually unbeatable at home but unless you have the riders to back him up he is often fighting a lone battle, ithink plymouth will have a more balanced look next season with kurts and anderson at reserve cory in the main body of the team and a couple of 7.5 ave riders and couple of 6.5 riders maybe alden,lemmo,wells,north would do for me

[Steve Irving]

Barker will be a massive miss! The problem for Plymouth last year was A, signing Fisher as well making them way too top heavy, and then B building poorly further down the side.

 

Barker is a guaranteed points machine in this league and the fact he's also very entertaining is a massive bonus.

 

Plymouth's loss is definitely Ipswich' gain.

 

But at least Plymouth are still in there fighting which is fantastic news.

[torpointfanatic22]

ben was a great rider for plymouth virtually unbeatable at home but unless you have the riders to back him up he is often fighting a lone battle, ithink plymouth will have a more balanced look next season with kurts and anderson at reserve cory in the main body of the team and a couple of 7.5 ave riders and couple of 6.5 riders maybe alden,lemmo,wells,north would do for me

 

I really hope we don't have Anderson, he's no more than an average reserve, I'd take Glanz over him every day or for that matter I'd go for Stefan Nielsen if we need a 3 pointer.

[brianbuck]

Very pleased to hear that everything has been put into place to allow Plymouth to continue operating next season. I wish the new promoters every success in their efforts to provide a team that you supporters deserve.

 

Best wishes from a lifelong Birmingham supporter to all Plymouth enthusiasts.

[Roger MARTIN]

Barker will be a massive miss! The problem for Plymouth last year was A, signing Fisher as well making them way too top heavy, and then B building poorly further down the side.

 

Barker is a guaranteed points machine in this league and the fact he's also very entertaining is a massive bonus.

 

Plymouth's loss is definitely Ipswich' gain.

 

But at least Plymouth are still in there fighting which is fantastic news.

 

WE finished bottom last year, and second bottom the year before, and that was without Fisher, so whats your answer to that, it dosen't matter what team you run if you sign a rider on the average Barker or Fisher is on it will leave you weak in other area's, they are both very good to watch granted, but if you know how to build a team that you want to do well, you will leave them well alone, Barker finished on a 9.8 average last year and we finished bottom, it's like an army having one gun , and the rest of the army have a bow and arrow, fighting against an army that everyone has a gun, there is only going to be one winner come the end.

[Steve Irving]

WE finished bottom last year, and second bottom the year before, and that was without Fisher, so whats your answer to that, it dosen't matter what team you run if you sign a rider on the average Barker or Fisher is on it will leave you weak in other area's, they are both very good to watch granted, but if you know how to build a team that you want to do well, you will leave them well alone, Barker finished on a 9.8 average last year and we finished bottom, it's like an army having one gun , and the rest of the army have a bow and arrow, fighting against an army that everyone has a gun, there is only going to be one winner come the end.

You're talking utter nonsense! Of course it matters what team you run if you sign Barker or Fisher! Are you serious? Are you trying to say you simply can't have a successful side with Barker at number 1? Don't judge every other promoter by your own promoters pathetic attempts at building a competitve side. The fact you finished bottom and second bottom the last two years ISN'T because you had Ben Barker at number 1!! It's because your promoter got the remaining 6 horribly wrong.

 

By your logic, Ipswich will now struggle next season because they have Barker at number 1. I tell you what, i bet they don't!

[CardinalSin]

it's like an army having one gun , and the rest of the army have a bow and arrow, fighting against an army that everyone has a gun, there is only going to be one winner come the end.

Maybe you should have signed more cowboys and less indians.

[Halifaxtiger]

Maybe you should have signed more cowboys and less indians.

 

I'd say there were more than enough cowboys connected to Plymouth Speedway last season

[ancient mariner]

Barker will be a massive miss! The problem for Plymouth last year was A, signing Fisher as well making them way too top heavy, and then B building poorly further down the side.

 

Barker is a guaranteed points machine in this league and the fact he's also very entertaining is a massive bonus.

 

Plymouth's loss is definitely Ipswich' gain.

 

But at least Plymouth are still in there fighting which is fantastic news.

 

Ben is the kind of rider every team wishes they had. He's a real live wire, can - and does - team ride - and boy oh boy does he entertain. The Witches supporters are in for a treat next season.

 

I'll be delighted to see him back at the SBA next season no matter how many points he scores (and for quite a while now I didn't think I'd be able to say that!).

 

Roll on next season

Edited November 25, 2012 by ancient mariner

[Roger MARTIN]

You're talking utter nonsense! Of course it matters what team you run if you sign Barker or Fisher! Are you serious? Are you trying to say you simply can't have a successful side with Barker at number 1? Don't judge every other promoter by your own promoters pathetic attempts at building a competitve side. The fact you finished bottom and second bottom the last two years ISN'T because you had Ben Barker at number 1!! It's because your promoter got the remaining 6 horribly wrong.

 

By your logic, Ipswich will now struggle next season because they have Barker at number 1. I tell you what, i bet they don't!

 

How come nobody wanted Fisher last year if riders like him and Barker are so good, i think you are talking utter nonsence not to see why, so Stoke were winning everything with Barker in the side, he has yet to prove to anyone he can ride in a a winning PL side, when he do you can say you were right, at the present time you are guessing, and yes we had a pathetic promoter, thats why he had to go, hopefully now we have someone who knows how to build a side.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Devildodger

[msc1874]

 

 

How come nobody wanted Fisher last year if riders like him and Barker are so good, i think you are talking utter nonsence not to see why, so Stoke were winning everything with Barker in the side, he has yet to prove to anyone he can ride in a a winning PL, when he do you can say you were right, at the present time you are guessing, and yes we had a pathetic promoter, thats why he had to go, hopefully now we have someone who knows how to build a side.

 

I can see what you're trying to get at the all round team but I have to bring up a couple if issues.

 

1. The stoke argument doesn't hold water, because at stoke Bens average was nothing like it currently is, Ben was not a 10 point rider at that point in his career. He was a shining light in a poor stoke team.

 

2. So you'd not include the likes if Barker, Doyle, Cook, fishers in your team due to their high averages? For as long as speedway gas been on the go you have had a real number 1 in your side. A guy to win big races and meetings home and away. With that guy you need another 6 to chip in. To suggest you can't win anything with a Ben barker in your team is a flawed argument.

 

As I say u get the whole balanced team thing but for me teams need big hitters. I wouldn't have a monarchs team without Craig cook, I really hope Plymouth can find a winning formula the fans deserve it

[Roger MARTIN]

I can see what you're trying to get at the all round team but I have to bring up a couple if issues.

 

1. The stoke argument doesn't hold water, because at stoke Bens average was nothing like it currently is, Ben was not a 10 point rider at that point in his career. He was a shining light in a poor stoke team.

 

2. So you'd not include the likes if Barker, Doyle, Cook, fishers in your team due to their high averages? For as long as speedway gas been on the go you have had a real number 1 in your side. A guy to win big races and meetings home and away. With that guy you need another 6 to chip in. To suggest you can't win anything with a Ben barker in your team is a flawed argument.

 

As I say u get the whole balanced team thing but for me teams need big hitters. I wouldn't have a monarchs team without Craig cook, I really hope Plymouth can find a winning formula the fans deserve it

 

I'm not saying Ben will never ride in a winning PL team, i'm saying he hasn't yet, with riders like Cook he started the year on a 7.69 average, Ben came in on a 9.94ish average and leaves you over 2 points behind the team Cook is going to ride for to find another rider of heat leader standard, and thats what Ipswitch will be doing this year and somewhere down the team it will tell.

 

Ancient Mariner is spot on when he says that the boy does entertain, he did at the SBA, but that was for four or five heats in a meeting, and they just let Ben go and packed in behind him, the rest of the heats you could predict what the away team were going to do win them, and that was a pattern for the year, but he was great to watch, but i go to watch 15 heats of good speedway not four or five heats, but there were riders that did match him, he did not have it all his way at the SBA, and on a much lower cma than him, and thats the riders i hope Lee and Seemond will be looking at for next year.

 

You're talking utter nonsense! Of course it matters what team you run if you sign Barker or Fisher! Are you serious? Are you trying to say you simply can't have a successful side with Barker at number 1? Don't judge every other promoter by your own promoters pathetic attempts at building a competitve side. The fact you finished bottom and second bottom the last two years ISN'T because you had Ben Barker at number 1!! It's because your promoter got the remaining 6 horribly wrong.

 

By your logic, Ipswich will now struggle next season because they have Barker at number 1. I tell you what, i bet they don't!

 

Where do they go from this.

 

Lanham, 6.92.

Risager, 6.68.

Tungate, 6.55.

North, 6.49.

Poole, 5.99.

Tresarrieu, 5.84.

Heeps, 4.40.

= 42.87+ Ben Barker 9.94.

 

For Ben Barker to fit two will have go even if Lanham goes it will be 45.89, i'm not say all these riders are staying just to to give an example.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Devildodger

[CardinalSin]

they just let Ben go and packed in behind him, the rest of the heats you could predict what the away team were going to do win them, and that was a pattern for the year,

But that is because the rest of the side was built poorly. I certainly don't expect us to be constantly on the wrong end of heat advantages at Foxhall in the heats not involving Ben Barker! We've already made what looks to be a shrewd signing in young Ellis at reserve who I expect to up a 3 point average. I also expect our other signing to date, Leigh Lanham, to also up his starting average now he won't be riding at number 1.

 

Signing a high averaged number 1 doesn't mean a struggling team in general. It does if you put together a poor SEPTET like Plymouth have these last two years, but if you're shrewd with your remaining 6 riders then you'll have every chance of being very competitive.

 

I think, in fact I'm certain, you're in a very tiny minority that wouldn't want Ben Barker leading their team at number 1 next year.

[spinkox]

Hang on - I thought the consortium werent interested unless they could run the track for more than one year. . . What happens in 2014??

[lewy]

100% agree a big hitting no 1 is the way to go providing the rest of the team can maintain thier averages or improve them slightly you wont go far wrong unlike the devils last season who had the likes of holder who had a nightmare season and 3 other riders who were only reserve standard tbh i think ipswich will do well next season and hopefully the devils will improve as i am sure they will i have every faith in our new promotion and team manager to deliver a much more competitive team

[torpointfanatic22]

I'm not saying Ben will never ride in a winning PL team, i'm saying he hasn't yet, with riders like Cook he started the year on a 7.69 average, Ben came in on a 9.94ish average and leaves you over 2 points behind the team Cook is going to ride for to find another rider of heat leader standard, and thats what Ipswitch will be doing this year and somewhere down the team it will tell.

 

Ancient Mariner is spot on when he says that the boy does entertain, he did at the SBA, but that was for four or five heats in a meeting, and they just let Ben go and packed in behind him, the rest of the heats you could predict what the away team were going to do win them, and that was a pattern for the year, but he was great to watch, but i go to watch 15 heats of good speedway not four or five heats, but there were riders that did match him, he did not have it all his way at the SBA, and on a much lower cma than him, and thats the riders i hope Lee and Seemond will be looking at for next year.

 

 

 

Where do they go from this.

 

Lanham, 6.92.

Risager, 6.68.

Tungate, 6.55.

North, 6.49.

Poole, 5.99.

Tresarrieu, 5.84.

Heeps, 4.40.

= 42.87+ Ben Barker 9.94.

 

For Ben Barker to fit two will have go even if Lanham goes it will be 45.89, i'm not say all these riders are staying just to to give an example.

 

In fairness Roger, Ippo have already re-signed Lanham and have compensated having Ben at number 1 by signing a 3 point rider at reserve. Whether that will work out only time will tell.

 

The reason no-one wanted Fisher was because he wanted too much money rather than his high average. Fisher has been a part of championship winning teams in the PL on a high-ish starting average and I have to say I'm gutted Ben won't be back at Plymouth regardless of his average.

 

I totally get your point (I think) though. When signing a rider on 9.87 or on that kind of average it's not often a team is successful, that's no fault of Ben's though as he can only get 15 each meeting. It does mean there is huge pressure on the management to go out and find a solid supporting cast whom can improve whilst the huge number one maintains his average. Rye House this year will have the same problem with Olly Allen on 9.5+ and he isn't the rider Barker is in my opinion. But that is where promoters earn their money finding riders who can improve their averages especially at the bottom end sadly ours over the years hasn't managed to do that. Signing Fish with Barker was great for entertainment but that was highly unlikely to warrant good results as the rest of the team weren't good enough as a collective. I still maintain had we got the right supporting cast behind Barker and Fisher we could have had a good season and the points were there to do it but Bowden built the team poorly.

 

On the other side of the coin look at Sheffield of last year, they had no out and out number one and struggled nearly as badly as we did so it is a fine balance but like a few above have said we must have a rider that you can put your faith in to win almost any race on any track and that is what a Barker, Doyle or Fisher can do. Don't get me wrong every now and again a team will surprise us and riders will improve their averages by a couple of points (ala Doyle a few years ago) but it's about finding those riders.

 

For me I'd be looking at something like this if we can't get Fisher back...

 

1. Morris - 8.00

2. Sanchez - 6.20

3. Wells - 6.47

4. Gathercole - 6.33

5. Roynon 7.07

6. Kurtz - 4.38

7. Glanz - 3.69

 

Now whilst I'm not suggesting for one minute this is my proposed line up, this is how I'd like to see the team built as far as average split go.

[lewy]

i agree mikey i think thats the way to go as far as the average split goes ithink in lee we have the right man to put together a team along those lines

[Roger MARTIN]

But that is because the rest of the side was built poorly. I certainly don't expect us to be constantly on the wrong end of heat advantages at Foxhall in the heats not involving Ben Barker! We've already made what looks to be a shrewd signing in young Ellis at reserve who I expect to up a 3 point average. I also expect our other signing to date, Leigh Lanham, to also up his starting average now he won't be riding at number 1.

 

Signing a high averaged number 1 doesn't mean a struggling team in general. It does if you put together a poor SEPTET like Plymouth have these last two years, but if you're shrewd with your remaining 6 riders then you'll have every chance of being very competitive.

 

I think, in fact I'm certain, you're in a very tiny minority that wouldn't want Ben Barker leading their team at number 1 next year.

 

I take your point and i think you have to be more than shrewd, you have to get them before they sign for someone else, but if you do yes you can have a good team, its all about getting them first, it's not like we had the best rider in the PL last year we also had Ryan Fisher to, who would also be a number 1 in any PL team, so you could say we had the best two last year.

[Roger MARTIN]

In fairness Roger, Ippo have already re-signed Lanham and have compensated having Ben at number 1 by signing a 3 point rider at reserve. Whether that will work out only time will tell.

 

The reason no-one wanted Fisher was because he wanted too much money rather than his high average. Fisher has been a part of championship winning teams in the PL on a high-ish starting average and I have to say I'm gutted Ben won't be back at Plymouth regardless of his average.

 

I totally get your point (I think) though. When signing a rider on 9.87 or on that kind of average it's not often a team is successful, that's no fault of Ben's though as he can only get 15 each meeting. It does mean there is huge pressure on the management to go out and find a solid supporting cast whom can improve whilst the huge number one maintains his average. Rye House this year will have the same problem with Olly Allen on 9.5+ and he isn't the rider Barker is in my opinion. But that is where promoters earn their money finding riders who can improve their averages especially at the bottom end sadly ours over the years hasn't managed to do that. Signing Fish with Barker was great for entertainment but that was highly unlikely to warrant good results as the rest of the team weren't good enough as a collective. I still maintain had we got the right supporting cast behind Barker and Fisher we could have had a good season and the points were there to do it but Bowden built the team poorly.

 

On the other side of the coin look at Sheffield of last year, they had no out and out number one and struggled nearly as badly as we did so it is a fine balance but like a few above have said we must have a rider that you can put your faith in to win almost any race on any track and that is what a Barker, Doyle or Fisher can do. Don't get me wrong every now and again a team will surprise us and riders will improve their averages by a couple of points (ala Doyle a few years ago) but it's about finding those riders.

 

For me I'd be looking at something like this if we can't get Fisher back...

 

1. Morris - 8.00

2. Sanchez - 6.20

3. Wells - 6.47

4. Gathercole - 6.33

5. Roynon 7.07

6. Kurtz - 4.38

7. Glanz - 3.69

 

Now whilst I'm not suggesting for one minute this is my proposed line up, this is how I'd like to see the team built as far as average split go.

 

I do like the way you have put the team together Mike, like Lewy i think it's the way to go, i don't agree with everything you say, but i do with this.