Blazeaway Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 I was alluding to the fact that Mark Loram was World Champion without winning a Round. I feel I must state that I am a big Mark Loram Fan - I thought he was GREAT!! In the context of this discussion though, the evidence is incontrovertable. yep it's clear that the GP series is the best and fairest way to find the Worlds best rider. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 (edited) yep it's clear that the GP series is the best and fairest way to find the Worlds best rider. Are you going to answer my question from a couple of weeks ago. Are you ashamed of your Country? I would very much like to know, and so, I suspect would some others. Edited December 10, 2012 by The White Knight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickthemuppet Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 yep it's clear that the GP series is the best and fairest way to find the Worlds best rider. Even though this years GP did not include Darcy Ward, Neils Christian Iversen or Krzysztof Kasprzak but included Chris Harris, Peter Ljung and Bjarne Bedersen? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted December 10, 2012 Report Share Posted December 10, 2012 I was alluding to the fact that Mark Loram was World Champion without winning a Round. I feel I must state that I am a big Mark Loram Fan - I thought he was GREAT!! In the context of this discussion though, the evidence is incontrovertable. White Knight, you still haven't answered my question: who should have won the 2000 GP series then? Because whoever you think it should have been, he scored less points overall than Mark Loram. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 White Knight, you still haven't answered my question: who should have won the 2000 GP series then? Because whoever you think it should have been, he scored less points overall than Mark Loram. All the best Rob Haven't you noticed yet Rob, Ian applies different criteria to suit his argument. It is OK for a rider to win a world final with 2 race wins to an opponents 4. Oh yes that is fine because he accumulates more race points over the meeting, Of course we move onto the GP and it is totally unacceptable for a rider to accumulate less wins than an opponent even if he accumulates more race points over the series. Ian has been tying himself in knots this last few weeks to the point that within a few posts he has been arguing with himself. We had the disgrace of Woffinden being seeded to the GP on the strength of nationality and within a few minutes we were hearing of how a seeded rider winning a world final is what the sport is all about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickthemuppet Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Now the Grand Prix organisers are trying to make the GP's a lottery with the gate positions for the semi final a draw and not a picked on points. So now we can have the spectacle of a rider getting the worse gate in the semi final even though he has won his 5 previous heats. Looks like the best rider might not now win the GP. or even make the final. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Central Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 (edited) Now the Grand Prix organisers are trying to make the GP's a lottery with the gate positions for the semi final a draw and not a picked on points. So now we can have the spectacle of a rider getting the worse gate in the semi final even though he has won his 5 previous heats. Looks like the best rider might not now win the GP. or even make the final. It actually looks as if they are trying to make it more likely that the best rider does not win. On this forum people constantly argue about the best way to get to a worthy winner of the Championship. Despite disagreements on how we think this is best acheived we generally agree that we want the most worthy winner. It does not look like the FIM share that view. Edited December 11, 2012 by Grand Central Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 White Knight, you still haven't answered my question: who should have won the 2000 GP series then? Because whoever you think it should have been, he scored less points overall than Mark Loram. All the best Rob Right - Mark Loram SHOULD have won the World Championship because under the System and Rules employed then, and now, that is the way the scoring works. My contention is that under the old 'One Off' System you had a Winner who finished FIRST ie WON the Meeting. You did not have a Winner who had a multitude of Second Places in GPs who actually won nothing apart from the Championship.. I hope that clarifies my position. I can't make it any plainer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Right - Mark Loram SHOULD have won the World Championship because under the System and Rules employed then, and now, that is the way the scoring works. My contention is that under the old 'One Off' System you had a Winner who finished FIRST ie WON the Meeting. You did not have a Winner who had a multitude of Second Places in GPs who actually won nothing apart from the Championship.. I hope that clarifies my position. I can't make it any plainer. Now you are being silly. Then, as now, and as always in fact, you had a winner who had more points than anyone else under whatever format was in place at the time. Like I said you have applied the GP win crireria to someone being world champion, it never existed any more than race wins were a factor under the old system. You have got yourself into a hole and rather than admit you are totally wrong you keep on digging Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Haven't you noticed yet Rob, Ian applies different criteria to suit his argument. I don't agree. It is OK for a rider to win a world final with 2 race wins to an opponents 4. Oh yes that is fine because he accumulates more race points over the meeting, Yes - it is OK for that to happen because that was the Rules at the time. Of course we move onto the GP and it is totally unacceptable for a rider to accumulate less wins than an opponent even if he accumulates more race points over the series. See my answer to the Post below. Ian has been tying himself in knots this last few weeks to the point that within a few posts he has been arguing with himself. Wrong on that point oldace. My arguments have been consistant - you can, of course, twist my words and meanings. We had the disgrace of Woffinden being seeded to the GP on the strength of nationality and within a few minutes we were hearing of how a seeded rider winning a world final is what the sport is all about It IS a disgrace - but - that is the Rule as things are at present. My contention is that it is the RULES that are wrong. I already admitted to you that I was ignorant of the fact that Sczakiel was 'seeded' to the Final in 1973 - that was wrong too. What is needed is a root and branch reorganisation of the Qualifying Rules to make them FAIR. Allocated places, Wild Cards, Selected Riders, is NOT the way to run a World Championship, I am sorry but it isn't. ALL Riders should have the chance to QUALIFY for the Sports Premier Event - that is fair. How they do that I frankly don't know - but - first and foremost the Sport should be FAIR to all. It is NOT at present. I have tried my best to answer each of your points in a reasonable manner. I am not in the habit of arguing with myself - I have my beliefs and I am true to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Know Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 (edited) Even though this years GP did not include Darcy Ward, Neils Christian Iversen or Krzysztof Kasprzak but included Chris Harris, Peter Ljung and Bjarne Bedersen? thats because they were not in it. one by his own choice, two didnt qualify so not good enough on the night. i do agree the ones you said about were dire. you forgot Hans though lol. Edited December 11, 2012 by The Know Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowCaptain Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Right - Mark Loram SHOULD have won the World Championship because under the System and Rules employed then, and now, that is the way the scoring works. My contention is that under the old 'One Off' System you had a Winner who finished FIRST ie WON the Meeting. You did not have a Winner who had a multitude of Second Places in GPs who actually won nothing apart from the Championship.. I hope that clarifies my position. I can't make it any plainer. TWK - The person who wins an individual meeting is the best rider in the meeting. The point of a GP series is that whoever accumulates the most points over a season is the best rider over a season, and deserves the accolade of World Champion. Mark Loram winning the world championship without a GP win was unusual, but his performance was the most consistent across a variety of tracks. A rider winning the single meeting championship may have gone through a series of qualifying meetings, but could easily be in that championship meeting by only finishing in the top six of all of the qualifiers. Much more opportunity for a fluke victory there than across a GP series accumulating points in each meeting. Speedway is concentrated in about five countries, but there are excellent individual riders from other countries, too. How can any qualification system take into account the claims of the individuals as well as the claims of the major speedway countries? No matter how many disputes there are about the claims of some riders who are not in the GP series, fifteen of the top riders in the world will compete in the series, joined, in each of the GPs, by another rider with a claim to be in the series. Difficult to deny that the rider who gets the most points from that series is a worthy World Champion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 I agree with most of what you say SC. Whilst I DID prefer the 'One Off' World Final - I realise that not everyone agrees with me - Fair enough. I have recently had my views on that shown to be wrong in one sense. My problem is, and always has been, the Qualifying method to get in to the GPs. I just believe that everyone should get a chance. Some Riders will NEVER get a chance to test themselves against the very BEST Riders in the World - if they did, you never know, we might discover a new World Champion.. I am not arguing my case for the sake of argument - I am arguing my case because I believe passionately in Fair Play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Now you are being silly. Then, as now, and as always in fact, you had a winner who had more points than anyone else under whatever format was in place at the time. Like I said you have applied the GP win crireria to someone being world champion, it never existed any more than race wins were a factor under the old system. You have got yourself into a hole and rather than admit you are totally wrong you keep on digging No Oldace he isn't silly!! i liked Mark i think to win the world championship without winning a round is a different QUALITY? To win a one a one off meeting is a massive achievement, a GP Scenario is so different . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPEEDY69 Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 (edited) I agree with most of what you say SC. Whilst I DID prefer the 'One Off' World Final - I realise that not everyone agrees with me - Fair enough. I have recently had my views on that shown to be wrong in one sense. My problem is, and always has been, the Qualifying method to get in to the GPs. I just believe that everyone should get a chance. Some Riders will NEVER get a chance to test themselves against the very BEST Riders in the World - if they did, you never know, we might discover a new World Champion.. I am not arguing my case for the sake of argument - I am arguing my case because I believe passionately in Fair Play. Completely agree about qualifying - sometimes riders have really great years which they never repeat and during that year they should have the chance to be world champion. The biggest example of that was NKI last year, 1st 2nd and 3rd in Poland, Sweden and UK leagues. Edited December 12, 2012 by SPEEDY69 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 I agree with most of what you say SC. Whilst I DID prefer the 'One Off' World Final - I realise that not everyone agrees with me - Fair enough. I have recently had my views on that shown to be wrong in one sense. My problem is, and always has been, the Qualifying method to get in to the GPs. I just believe that everyone should get a chance. Some Riders will NEVER get a chance to test themselves against the very BEST Riders in the World - if they did, you never know, we might discover a new World Champion.. I am not arguing my case for the sake of argument - I am arguing my case because I believe passionately in Fair Play. You are wrong again. There is qualifying every year, so to state that some riders will NEVER get the chance is wrong. No Oldace he isn't silly!! i liked Mark i think to win the world championship without winning a round is a different QUALITY? To win a one a one off meeting is a massive achievement, a GP Scenario is so different . You're right. You need to be better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 You are wrong again. There is qualifying every year, so to state that some riders will NEVER get the chance is wrong. You're right. You need to be better. Is being placed in 12 rounds (ie) semi finals minimum, harder than say winning 6 rounds? i would say winning six rounds should be a lot more rewarding is it at the moment in it's form.? As for everyone being able to enter the qualifying system everyone has a chance that is a myth.A lot of riders just can't afford it, a lot of young riders i would imagine would love to say enter the under 21s it is just not viable. Travelling to places like Slovenia with no financial help,it is impossible did Joe Haines say that?.The GP series is in affect a closed shop if you have wealthy parents or backers maybe but everyone on the same playing field as years gone by NO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long Eye Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Even though this years GP did not include Darcy Ward, Neils Christian Iversen or Krzysztof Kasprzak but included Chris Harris, Peter Ljung and Bjarne Bedersen? Who was to know how well NKI and KK would go this year in League matches? Ward had a chance to compete but declined. What are the organisers supposed to do, hold the GPs in November and December and pick the entire field based on League performances? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavan Posted December 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 You are NEVER going to get a fair system whatever way its done but the gp has to be a better way of finding the worlds best rider surely!! the old system was far more flawed and where 1 bad ride or an ef could stop you progressing and then we always had 5 eastern block riders who more often then not had little or no chance. I remember the days when the BLRC was a far more illustrious line up then the World Final. Sorry but by all means prefer the atmosphere of the one day but to get the best world champ under the fairest qualifying system its gp all day long. only 1 rider shouldnt be their this year, in the one offs you had 4 or 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 (edited) Who was to know how well NKI and KK would go this year in League matches? Ward had a chance to compete but declined. What are the organisers supposed to do, hold the GPs in November and December and pick the entire field based on League performances? Read what I Posted above. The answer to your question is to run Qualifying Rounds for all Riders who wish to take part. If Riders, as sidney says, don't wish to ride, for whatever reason - they should not be forced to do so. Those who WOULD like to ride in the GP Series SHOULD be given the chance to Qualify............... Are you following me about BeWitcher? Edited December 12, 2012 by The White Knight 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.