2013 Best Ever Gp Line Up?

[The White Knight]

Why am I being silly?

 

I have presented you with your argument?

 

Why should the 300th best tennis player in the world (not me) have to go through qualifying rounds for Wimbledon when Roger Federer does not? Do you have such an issue with that? Or is it ok, because back in the old days it was the same system?

 

Do you have a major issue that 'wild cards' are given to British players at Wimbledon?

 

Does it make a mockery of the event?

 

These are your opinions, I am simply presenting them back to you. If you think they are silly... then what does that tell you?

 

Do you play Tennis to Wimbledon standard - no - I doubt it.

 

I am talking about Speedway Riders in a Speedway Competition - THAT is what I meant by your being silly - unless of course you ARE of Wimbledon standard in which case I will apologise.

 

If not - you were being silly.

[BWitcher]

Do you play Tennis to Wimbledon standard - no - I doubt it.

 

I am talking about Speedway Riders in a Speedway Competition - THAT is what I meant by your being silly - unless of course you ARE of Wimbledon standard in which case I will apologise.

 

If not - you were being silly.

 

Avoiding all the points again WK.

 

The 300th best tennis player in the world. Do you believe its right he/she has to go through qualifying rounds when Roger Federer/Serena Williams do not?

[Humphrey Appleby]

But the system was far more unfair then it is now. its not opinion its fact!!

 

Depends on your definition of fairness. The SGP is a fairer system of determining the world champion, but not with respect to who gets to compete to be world champion.

 

Yes, the old qualifying system had its anomalies and there were certainly seeded riders in the World Final in the past. However, most riders in any speedway country of any note had an opportunity to reach the World Final through a competitive process, unlike today where it largely seems to come down to commercial considerations.

 

With respect to Richard Knight or Zoltan Adorjan being in World Finals... well yes theoretically they might have won them, but in practice it was pretty unlikely to happen. How many shock winners of the World Championship were there in 50-odd runnings under the one-off system?

[Gavan]

White Knight why can you not understand this!! Doesnt matter how good you are you could not make the one off world final due to a bit of bad luck.

 

In the one off system Scandanavia had 7 places to get through so

 

Rickardsson has a fall and ef and gets 7 points and goes out. Feasible as the field could have had:

 

Nicki Pedersen, Bjarne Pedersen, Hans Andersen, Holta, Gunnestad, Jonsson, Nilsen, P Karlsson, M Karlsson to name a few.

 

Much better that we leave the 6 time world champ out of the final isnt it!

[BWitcher]

However, most riders in any speedway country of any note had an opportunity to reach the World Final through a competitive process,

 

They still do.

[Humphrey Appleby]

Why should the 300th best tennis player in the world (not me) have to go through qualifying rounds for Wimbledon when Roger Federer does not?

 

In tennis there's a well-established and extensive circuit of events to determine which players are better than others and who should be seeded direct to the major tournaments. Speedway only really has the SGP, but that doesn't allow empirical comparisons to be made between riders inside and outside the series.

 

I daresay that some sort of ranking system could be devised using averages established in the various league competitions and perhaps major open meetings as well, but it hasn't happened as yet.

 

Do you have a major issue that 'wild cards' are given to British players at Wimbledon?

 

British players don't get all of the wildcard positions at Wimbledon, and I think may even be limited to half of the available quota.

 

I think it's reasonable for tournament hosts to have some flexibility with respect to commercial considerations, but it's about proportionality. Only 8 wildcards are allowed into each Grand Slam (6.25% of the total entry), and I believe there are also restrictions on the number of wildcards a competitor can receive in any one season.

 

By contrast, 25% of the SGP entry is nominated riders which are in addition to the wildcard rider at each SGP. I don't therefore think Wimbledon and the SGP are really comparable in this respect.

Edited December 12, 2012 by Humphrey Appleby

[Gavan]

IN FACT ITS AN EASIER OPPORTUNITY NOW AS THE TOP 8 RIDERS IN THE WORLD WILL NOT BE TRYING TO QUALIFY!!!!

 

Imagine a qualifying system in the old days with no Hans, Erik, Jan O, Moran, Jonsson, Ermolenko and so on, much easier to get through dont you think

[The White Knight]

I'm sorry folks - I have to go out. Be back tomorrow PM. :)

[Humphrey Appleby]

They still do.

 

In theory, but not in practice. National qualifying rounds have been hugely reduced or outright abolished over the years, so there are far fewer opportunities than there once were.

 

With the limited number of places on offer at the end of the qualifying competition as well, I'd imagine a lot of riders simply don't bother entering nowadays.

[Long Eye]

In tennis there's a well-established and extensive circuit of events to determine which players are better than others and who should be seeded direct to the major tournaments. Speedway only really has the SGP, but that doesn't allow empirical comparisons to be made between riders inside and outside the series.

 

 

So there's no leagues in any countries then where riders compete against each other to highlight their abilities?

[BWitcher]

In tennis there's a well-established and extensive circuit of events to determine which players are better than others and who should be seeded direct to the major tournaments. Speedway only really has the SGP, but that doesn't allow empirical comparisons to be made between riders inside and outside the series.

 

I daresay that some sort of ranking system could be devised using averages established in the various league competitions and perhaps major open meetings as well, but it hasn't happened as yet.

 

 

 

British players don't get all of the wildcard positions at Wimbledon, and I think may even be limited to half of the available quota.

 

I think it's reasonable for tournament hosts to have some flexibility with respect to commercial considerations, but it's about proportionality. Only 8 wildcards are allowed into each Grand Slam (6.25% of the total entry), and I believe there are also restrictions on the number of wildcards a competitor can receive in any one season.

 

By contrast, 25% of the SGP entry is nominated riders which are in addition to the wildcard rider at each SGP. I don't therefore think Wimbledon and the SGP are really comparable in this respect.

 

Of course not, because you form logical explanations as to why.

 

WK however does not.

[Humphrey Appleby]

So there's no leagues in any countries then where riders compete against each other to highlight their abilities?

 

Not all riders compete in all leagues, but even if they did, speedway has yet to establish an empirical ranking system to compare competitors.

[BWitcher]

In theory, but not in practice. National qualifying rounds have been hugely reduced or outright abolished over the years, so there are far fewer opportunities than there once were.

 

With the limited number of places on offer at the end of the qualifying competition as well, I'd imagine a lot of riders simply don't bother entering nowadays.

 

That's an individual riders choice and who is to say that the sport wouldn't have naturally evolved along those lines anyway without the introduction of the GP.

 

Events have been reduced due to apathy from the public as well as apathy from the riders. This was already setting in before the GP was introduced.

[SPEEDY69]

They still do.

 

Ahh, but not for the same year whilst they're enjoying a purple-patch season

[The White Knight]

That's an individual riders choice and who is to say that the sport wouldn't have naturally evolved along those lines anyway without the introduction of the GP.

 

Events have been reduced due to apathy from the public as well as apathy from the riders. This was already setting in before the GP was introduced.

 

Hello BeWitcher - I'm back.

 

Still at it I see - as you seem to have the answer to everything, after sleeping on it, I have decide to leave the field to yourself. I am tired of trying to explain my position to you.

 

I can Debate with oldace - but you..........................................................................

 

You've won - SO - it's all yours on this Thread - - - - until the next time I Post on it.

[waiheke1]

.Going back to the original question - is this the strongest line up ever?

Two ways I reckon you can look at this.

Firstrly, in absolute terms. Obviously comparing between eras is impossible – much as you can debate whether Olsen was better than Gundersen was better than Pedersen, it’ s always going to come down to opinions. And you can often only really appreciate the quality of a field in hindsight – for example, Rob points to the 95 GP as being incredibly strong, but partly that view is because we know what the likes of Crump and Gollob have gone on to achieve. 1981 was unquestionably the strongest line up of the 80s, but at the time of the final it contained only 2 Word champions (Lee and Olsen) – of course it also contained the 4 riders (Penhall, Muller, Nielsen, Gundersen) who would win the next finals, 3 others (Carter, Knudsen, Jessup)who would have ben champion had luck gone for them rather than against them on final day , and 3 other riders who were genuine world class at the time (Morton, ANdersson, Ross) – so only looking back do we really appreciate how strong that field was.

 

Looking at todays’ field it looks very good, but until we know what the likes of Ward, Emil and Holder go onto achieve, we ‘ll be somewhat limited in our perspective. That said, with 4 world champions in the field, Ward and Emil who if they fulfil their potential will be regarded as all time greats, 2 others who have appeared on the podium (Jonsson, Hampel), others who have been good enough to win individual GPO (Lindback, Lindgren), while the rest are all top riders, it is certainly right up there.

 

The second way to compare strength is to look at what proportion of the world’s top 15 riders are in the field (or who is missing). Now, the line up isn’t as strong as it could be – you’d probably replace Tai with MJ, and maybe Zagar and KK with G Laguta and Kolodisez , but these are pretty minor changes. The line up isn’t missing anyone that you’d consider to be a strong rostrum prospect. Tai has been derided on here, but he’d still be in the top 25 in the world. Has threr been another World Final/GP series where the worst rider was still in the top 25 riders in the world? Compare that with say the world finals of the 80s, where you had the likes of Starostin, Kroeze, Ondrasik etc. in finals, none of whom would have been in the top 50(or even 100) riders in the world . Those world finals also routinely were missing riders who would have been amongst the favourites had they qualified – Mauger and Olsen in 80, Gundersen in 82, Morton and Carter in 84, Carter again in 85, S Moran and Wigg in 86, Jan O in 89. Were those riders missing because they weren’t good enough – no, they missed out due to one bad meeting, getting injured at the wrong time, and a qualifying system which gave a much easier qualifying route (based on nationality ) to a pool of sub standard riders ( if you exclude Muller, riders from the continental final averaged around 4 points per final, 2 of which were earned from beating the other continental riders).

 

My opinion –next year’s line up is one of the strongest line ups of all time, and in ten years time it may be viewed as the strongest ever.