24th August 2013 Gp Challenge @ Poole

[salty]

in the years where IMG have had one GB representative they havent had a choice Philip. They have only had Woffy & Bomber to select in recent years and have been hamstrung by poor seasons by them both making it virtually impossible to repick them the next season....... this has created almost a turn taking process............... Woffy making the top 8 as of right breaks that & for the first time in years gives them a chance to have both.

 

I'm not sure if IMG are as financially involved with the 2 Swedish GP's in 2014 as they are with Cardiff........ If they are then I guess their statistics could end up choosing the WC................. re: GB's Speedway rainbow nation i'd suggest those sweeping crowd shots of wall to wall union jacks that they love showing with their tv coverage might suggest otherwise.

But there will be two Brits there (at Cardiff). Harris or some other Brit will be the wild card for the meeting. It's nonsense to suggest Harris should even be considered for a permanent nomination into the series. Plenty of other riders, including at least one Swede, who will be before him in the queue.

[T.N.T.]

GP Challenge in Gorican is an example what can happen when 5 riders have same amount of points after 20 heats.

 

 

Now this example shows a fault in the system.

 

Iversen and Dryml both had just ONE heat win while Madsen and Zagar had TWO and Batchelor had THREE

 

 

In my opinion, BATCHELOR should have been seeded to the Run-Off final

 

Iversen and Dryml should have had a runoff with the winner going to meet Zagar and Madsen with the top one or two going to meet Batchelor.

 

 

As it was, Iversen and Dryml did have a run-off but Dryml got another chance instead of being eliminated.

 

 

 

As for the Poole GPC, when Iversen finished in the top three here, they should have ordered a run-off as fourth place was almost certainly going to be a qualifying place. If they are saying that 4th was only a reserve, then they should stick by that and either nominate another wild card or 9th highest in the GP's qualifies instead.

 

They knew 4th place was going to be a qualifying place, so a run off should have been run.

Edited August 30, 2013 by T.N.T.

[Ghostwalker]

T.N.T no need for a run off at all.

 

Troy had most heat wins and should have been third.

Madsen and Zagar who had two heat wins each should have been 4th and 5th since Madsen was

ahead of Zagar in the heat that they met.

Dryml should have been 6th since he was ahead of NKI in the heat that they met.

 

And there was also no need for a run off in Poole since Smolinski had one more heat win

then Harris and Smolinski was also ahead of Harris in the heat where they met.

 

Smolinski outranked Harris by right.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Ghostwalker

[Irk Deflector]

Just got back from the meeting!

 

Stayed in Poole for the weekend then trip round Cornwall for the rest of the week.

 

Enjoyed the meeting, well presented, some good racing, Bomber was unlucky in his last 2 races which were re-run after he was well placed and most of all enjoyed the company of the Poole fans sat near us! Not all of them are like Shovlar! lol

[racers and royals]

Just got back from the meeting!

 

Stayed in Poole for the weekend then trip round Cornwall for the rest of the week.

 

Enjoyed the meeting, well presented, some good racing, Bomber was unlucky in his last 2 races which were re-run after he was well placed and most of all enjoyed the company of the Poole fans sat near us! Not all of them are like Shovlar! lol

Glad you enjoyed the meeting-I was bitterly disappointed in it-lucky you didn`t watch Tuesday`s Swedish match or last night Torun v Czestochowa(both on wonderfully prepared tracks)or you would have exploded with excitement !

[spook]

But there will be two Brits there (at Cardiff). Harris or some other Brit will be the wild card for the meeting. It's nonsense to suggest Harris should even be considered for a permanent nomination into the series. Plenty of other riders, including at least one Swede, who will be before him in the queue.

 

Salty no one is suggesting that Bomber should be considered. I am suggesting that he will be considered based on quota. History strongly dictates it........... If I was in charge it wouldnt be so..........

 

re: the #16 at Cardiff ..... that is semantics......... it still doesnt change what their attitude (and WC picks) was when GB had more than one possible rider to offer.... we now have that again

 

Still all indications point towards a Brit (Bomber) vs a Swede for the final WC....... unless IMG start changing the way they do things...

[PHILIPRISING]

I SPOKE with Tony Steele about how Chris Harris came to be in the meeting and he explained that it is the job of the CCP Secretary at the FIM to notify the various federations when one of their riders might or would be required to step up following the withdrawal of others.

 

He said that the ACU received an email from the FIM prior to the Challenge asking them (as the host nation) to have riders on stand-by because it was felt there might actually be a shortage on the night. The ACU (along with the BSPA) nominated a number of riders beginning, I believe, with Craig Cook but he declined. As riders withdrew and the FIM could not provide alternatives Harris first moved up to no 18, then 17 and then into the meeting itself.

 

Tony said that the ACU and BSPA did nothing more than what was asked of them and there was no skullduggery on their part. It does appear true that the German federation was upset that they were not given the chance to send riders but their complaint is with the FIM and nothing to do with the ACU or the BSPA.

[racers and royals]

I SPOKE with Tony Steele about how Chris Harris came to be in the meeting and he explained that it is the job of the CCP Secretary at the FIM to notify the various federations when one of their riders might or would be required to step up following the withdrawal of others.

 

He said that the ACU received an email from the FIM prior to the Challenge asking them (as the host nation) to have riders on stand-by because it was felt there might actually be a shortage on the night. The ACU (along with the BSPA) nominated a number of riders beginning, I believe, with Craig Cook but he declined. As riders withdrew and the FIM could not provide alternatives Harris first moved up to no 18, then 17 and then into the meeting itself.

 

Tony said that the ACU and BSPA did nothing more than what was asked of them and there was no skullduggery on their part. It does appear true that the German federation was upset that they were not given the chance to send riders but their complaint is with the FIM and nothing to do with the ACU or the BSPA.

Thanks Philip for asking the relevant questions-I would like to think there is a set procedure for the riders next in line to be asked (probably the federation not the rider themselves)So these questions would be relevant.

1 when did Zagar withdraw ?

2 When where the Croatian federation asked about Pavlic replacing him (next in line from Lonigo)

3 When where the Polish federation asked about Buczkowski replacing Zagar/pavlic ? (next in line from lonigo )

[iris123]

I SPOKE with Tony Steele about how Chris Harris came to be in the meeting and he explained that it is the job of the CCP Secretary at the FIM to notify the various federations when one of their riders might or would be required to step up following the withdrawal of others.

 

He said that the ACU received an email from the FIM prior to the Challenge

 

Tony said that the ACU and BSPA did nothing more than what was asked of them and there was no skullduggery on their part. It does appear true that the German federation was upset that they were not given the chance to send riders but their complaint is with the FIM and nothing to do with the ACU or the BSPA.

Think it was quite clear that the Germans were upset with the FIM for apparently not following procedures.That is why they named two people in the FIM who are not doing their job competently.One they say doesn't even appear to know the rules he is supposed to be applying.No reason why they would have a beef with the ACU,BSPA or even Harrs,who only done what was asked of them.The fact is the people running the sport seem to be incompetent

Edited September 8, 2013 by iris123

[SPEEDY69]

I SPOKE with Tony Steele about how Chris Harris came to be in the meeting and he explained that it is the job of the CCP Secretary at the FIM to notify the various federations when one of their riders might or would be required to step up following the withdrawal of others.

 

He said that the ACU received an email from the FIM prior to the Challenge asking them (as the host nation) to have riders on stand-by because it was felt there might actually be a shortage on the night. The ACU (along with the BSPA) nominated a number of riders beginning, I believe, with Craig Cook but he declined. As riders withdrew and the FIM could not provide alternatives Harris first moved up to no 18, then 17 and then into the meeting itself.

 

Tony said that the ACU and BSPA did nothing more than what was asked of them and there was no skullduggery on their part. It does appear true that the German federation was upset that they were not given the chance to send riders but their complaint is with the FIM and nothing to do with the ACU or the BSPA.

If Cook declined, I wonder if Kennett and Nicholls also declined, as they were ahead of Harris in the qualifiers - I will try and ask them.

[f-s-p]

T.N.T no need for a run off at all.

If you are talking about the Gorican meeting, you are wrong. There's always a runoff for TOP3 places and last quali places for the next round. With 5 riders tied on 2nd place, you need to sort it out. I read the Spar report from the Challenge and was surprised how big of a deal this Smoli/Harris runoff apparently was after the meeting. Just shows IMO how far you can go with just going with the flow... And in this case I mean fellows Middleditch and Rossiter who both been involded in the sport probably the 36 years each that I've lived...

[Ghostwalker]

If you are talking about the Gorican meeting, you are wrong. There's always a runoff for TOP3 places and last quali places for the next round. With 5 riders tied on 2nd place, you need to sort it out. I read the Spar report from the Challenge and was surprised how big of a deal this Smoli/Harris runoff apparently was after the meeting. Just shows IMO how far you can go with just going with the flow... And in this case I mean fellows Middleditch and Rossiter who both been involded in the sport probably the 36 years each that I've lived...

 

Well we just have to agree on disagree then,

 

I still think that run-offs can be avoided in most cased and that they should only be used a last resort if it's not possible to separate the riders through heat wins, 2nd places and etc.

As it was in Gorican some riders had more heat wins then the others and therefore they should have been ranked higher then others.

[f-s-p]

Well we just have to agree on disagree then,

 

I still think that run-offs can be avoided in most cased and that they should only be used a last resort if it's not possible to separate the riders through heat wins, 2nd places and etc.

As it was in Gorican some riders had more heat wins then the others and therefore they should have been ranked higher then others.

OK, you believe/think/feel there should be no runoffs, I quote the rules. Thats the difference. One should always remember that for each rule there is a reason and it has been created to correct a mistake or non-existance of a rule or a process in such case as the 5 riders tied for 2nd. I would not have been wanted to be the ref in the meeting when for the first time there was 5 riders tied for a podium finish! What a mess that must have been...

[SCB]

Were the rules the same last year that the run off was used for the qualifiers (top 3) but count back used for the reserves? If so, Troy Batchelor has been screwed over, he had 3 wins to Madsens 2 and Drymls 1 meaning the reserves should be Batchelor, Madsen and Dryml and NOT Dryml, Madsen and Batchelor.

[racers and royals]

Were the rules the same last year that the run off was used for the qualifiers (top 3) but count back used for the reserves? If so, Troy Batchelor has been screwed over, he had 3 wins to Madsens 2 and Drymls 1 meaning the reserves should be Batchelor, Madsen and Dryml and NOT Dryml, Madsen and Batchelor.

Last year 5 riders tied on 10 points for 2nd-6th therefore 4 extra races were needed to sort final positions.

[SCB]

Last year 5 riders tied on 10 points for 2nd-6th therefore 4 extra races were needed to sort final positions.

But if run -offs are only used to determine the qualifiers and not the reserves then the race-offs are irrelevant to Dryml, Madsen and Batchelor as they didn't qualify. They're only used to determine the top 3, after that it's based no count back, which last season Batchelor won.

[racers and royals]

But if run -offs are only used to determine the qualifiers and not the reserves then the race-offs are irrelevant to Dryml, Madsen and Batchelor as they didn't qualify. They're only used to determine the top 3, after that it's based no count back, which last season Batchelor won.

You will have to look here to see that ALL the 4 races were needed http://www.speedway.org/ click on union flag than results and reports then speedway wm quali 2012.

[f-s-p]

But if run -offs are only used to determine the qualifiers and not the reserves then the race-offs are irrelevant to Dryml, Madsen and Batchelor as they didn't qualify. They're only used to determine the top 3, after that it's based no count back, which last season Batchelor won.

If you are in the runoff, then your final position will be according to the results of the runoff, and in this case the three heats for the five riders. Countback is not an option anymore.

[SCB]

You will have to look here to see that ALL the 4 races were needed http://www.speedway.org/ click on union flag than results and reports then speedway wm quali 2012.

I know what happened but the run-offs are ONLY used for qualification and NOT for the reserve spots. The reserve spots are determined on count-back thus Troy won the countback over Ales Dryml and Leon Madsen. The race-off is not relevant, it doesn't matter, it doesn't count.

 

Either it's race-off or count-back.

[racers and royals]

I know what happened but the run-offs are ONLY used for qualification and NOT for the reserve spots. The reserve spots are determined on count-back thus Troy won the countback over Ales Dryml and Leon Madsen. The race-off is not relevant, it doesn't matter, it doesn't count.

 

Either it's race-off or count-back.

I just don`t get what you are on about

5 riders tied for 2 places in the GP Zagar won the 1st race NKI won the 2nd-Both went into the final race.the next race had Dryml Madsen and Batchelor(last chance race)the winner goes on to race with Zagar and NKI-1st 2 in gp other 1st reserve-so back to the last chance Dryml won Madsen 2nd Batchelor 3rd-Therefore that`s how Madsen became 2nd reserve and Batchelor 3rd.

Edited September 9, 2013 by racers and royals