How Many Heats In A League Meeting ?

[BWitcher]

I thought we had established you cant look at figures in accessing a riders ability, and any comparison is based on actual achievements, whatever the era. But Bwitcher insists on putting riders down because we only have 10 teams now compared with 20 in the past. What he fails to realise is when we had 20 teams in the league we had twice as many class riders. 20 No.1's etc, and 60 heat leaders. so whatever points they score was well earned. Sure there were also 40 reserve riders in a pool of say 150 riders, that's twice as many as today. To me its irrelevant what their averages were, because they mean nothing when comparing different eras. I know that once we were able to see the best riders in the world, but now we are privilege to see only a few.. and that speaks volumes when talking about quality.....[/b]

 

And still you don't understand.

 

If there are 20 teams in a league, you will have 60 heat leaders regardless of the quality of the riders.

 

If there are 5 teams in a league, you will have 15.. regardless of the quality of the riders.

 

The 5 team league could have better riders in it, but the perception would be there are more top riders in the 20 team league.

 

You're still also making an incorrect comparison. The BL back then was the strongest in the world, so you have to compare it with the strongest league in the world now, which is either Poland or Sweden. The top 20 in those leagues is just as strong as the top 20 in the BL in the 70's.

[oldace]

And still you don't understand.

 

If there are 20 teams in a league, you will have 60 heat leaders regardless of the quality of the riders.

 

If there are 5 teams in a league, you will have 15.. regardless of the quality of the riders.

 

The 5 team league could have better riders in it, but the perception would be there are more top riders in the 20 team league.

 

You're still also making an incorrect comparison. The BL back then was the strongest in the world, so you have to compare it with the strongest league in the world now, which is either Poland or Sweden. The top 20 in those leagues is just as strong as the top 20 in the BL in the 70's.

 

Think your'e banging your head against a brick wall mate.

 

If we staffed the entire league with 70 members of this forum I wonder what he thinks the top twenty averages would look like at the end of the season

Edited March 18, 2013 by Oldace

[stratton]

 

 

He doesn't fail to realise it, it is the basis of his argument, an argument that is 100% correct. You are either not reading the posts or have no grasp of simple maths

Not CORRECT just an opinion like yours, so don't act all self righteous the simplest way to explain to you is.Mauger, Briggs, Olsen were all class as are Ward, Holder, Gollob.All those as examples would have coped in any era,because class comes to the top they would of adjusted to the changes needed can you grasp that!!

 

I think i will admit defeat, some people's opinions are gospel and fact. I have learned from some that whatever sport you have watched you cannot compare anything have a opinion very strange.

[John Leslie]

So what your actually saying is Peter Collins weren't that good; Ole Olsen was a flash in the pan, Eric Gundersen was just another rider, Hans Neilsen weren't that special and if those riders rode today they would be also-rans.......... GET REAL

What definition of the 70s are we using here?

When Ole Olsen was winning his first world title, Erik Gundersen was just leaving primary school.

Barry Briggs keeps popping up but he started his British career in 1952

We seem to be comparing 2012 against the pick of riders from 1952 - 1989 and calling it "the 70s"

[g13webb]

He doesn't fail to realise it, it is the basis of his argument, an argument that is 100% correct. You are either not reading the posts or have no grasp of simple maths

Please don't talk to me as though I'm thick, I don't know why you're having your three pennies worth in a discussion anyway. The goal posts have moved on each posting. This thread was about preferred formats, 13 or 15. It was Bwitcher who brought in points and averages. All my posts were talking about the British League, past and present, But Bwitcher keeps putting in these silly comments, and belittling riders from the past. We even had posts saying that MJJ only score6.5 because of the league quality, The goalposts are now move to incorporate the Poland and Swedish leagues. And you have the cheek to question my maths. (I have a degree in advance mathematic). So rather then carry on with this pointless discussion I will bid you farewell before you move the goalposts again.......

What definition of the 70s are we using here?

When Ole Olsen was winning his first world title, Erik Gundersen was just leaving primary school.

Barry Briggs keeps popping up but he started his British career in 1952

We seem to be comparing 2012 against the pick of riders from 1952 - 1989 and calling it "the 70s"

I think if you look back at my post I referred to a period of the late 60's 70's and 80's . Never once did I mention Briggs, and any reference to riders was in reply to the generalization remark from Bwitcher, belittling riders from the past... Probably it is you who should be more particular.......

[John Leslie]

I think if you look back at my post I referred to a period of the late 60's 70's and 80's .

Ah...you're only comparing the riders of 2012 against the combined total of 3 decades not 4. That makes much more sense!

[oldace]

Please don't talk to me as though I'm thick, I don't know why you're having your three pennies worth in a discussion anyway. The goal posts have moved on each posting. This thread was about preferred formats, 13 or 15. It was Bwitcher who brought in points and averages. All my posts were talking about the British League, past and present, But Bwitcher keeps putting in these silly comments, and belittling riders from the past. We even had posts saying that MJJ only score6.5 because of the league quality, The goalposts are now move to incorporate the Poland and Swedish leagues. And you have the cheek to question my maths. (I have a degree in advance mathematic). So rather then carry on with this pointless discussion I will bid you farewell before you move the goalposts again.......

 

I think if you look back at my post I referred to a period of the late 60's 70's and 80's . Never once did I mention Briggs, and any reference to riders was in reply to the generalization remark from Bwitcher, belittling riders from the past... Probably it is you who should be more particular.......

 

So you will agree then that no matter who the riders the mean average of everyone in the league will always be around 6. Equally for every rider who averages 8 another will be on 4, for someone on 9 there will be a 3 point rider.

 

The individual averages can be heavily influenced by various factors i.e fixed gate positions, race format and in particular heat 15. One of a teams top two is now guaranteed to drop 3, 4 or even 5 points in a match making 10 plus averages nearly impossible. It isn't that the riders are inferior to their 11 plus average counterparts of yesteryear, basic maths dictate those kind of averages cant be posted.

 

The Elite League is not the high standard it was, no one denies that but averages dont prove the point

[BWitcher]

The Elite League is not the high standard it was, no one denies that but averages dont prove the point

 

Correct.

 

Although you will be told to 'ignore averages'. Which in effect is telling you ignore 'all the wins riders had'.. which in effect is telling you to 'ignore them'... and then judge..

 

The point is that the more you see a rider win, the better you will think that rider is. A large league format, with no fixed gate positions and and the old 13 heat format provided opportunity for far more riders to win more races, creating the impression there were far more top guys around.

 

When it came down to it though, on the international stage etc it was, as in all eras, a select group who dominated.

[g13webb]

 

The Elite League is not the high standard it was,

Wonderful, Its took loads of posts, pages of rubbish and we now have an announcement of what I actually said in the beginning.

[oldace]

Wonderful, Its took loads of posts, pages of rubbish and we now have an announcement of what I actually said in the beginning.

 

Are you on a mission to look foolish today?. Is it something to do with Comic Relief?

[bigcatdiary]

13, 14, 15, 16, 18. Whatever you do, the racing will be the same, you just see 13, 14, 15, 16, 18 heats each.

 

And if I'm honest, I don't see the point of a second half. It's 4 pointless, meaningless heats. I only like individuals that mean something (GP, ELRC, PLRC) so taking away actual races that means something for some pointless races. I want to watch real teams and individuals that mean something, not made up teams and individuals that nobody will remember in a months time.

 

Have to say I agree, second half were generally used for testing and hardly ever taken seriously, as for 13 or 15 I would go for 15 every time although I really liked the 18 heat formula they used for cup competitions.

[stratton]

 

 

Are you on a mission to look foolish today?. Is it something to do with Comic Relief?

Your the fool so anyone who disagrees with you is a fool?you have a opinion and say it is fact it is just your opinion.If you look back to the first post nobody even mentioned averages figures.All that was said was in Britain the strength in depth quality and quantity is not there anymore that was mentioned in the 13/15 heat debate is that to hard for you to digest? Britain now is not the no1 place to be that's the way it is you and Bewitcher twist things to suit yourselves but you are welcome to believe what you think. An (ex)of the difference between the 70s and present day are Swindon had Briggs/Ashby. Leicester had Wilson,Boulger,Jessup, Belle vue had Mauger,Sjosten,Collins.Last year Birmingham had Pedersen, King,Ulamek, Eastbourne had Kylmakorpi,Gustafsson,Lahti. Belle vue had Schlein, Cook,Gjedde any difference !

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

What definition of the 70s are we using here?

When Ole Olsen was winning his first world title, Erik Gundersen was just leaving primary school.

Barry Briggs keeps popping up but he started his British career in 1952

We seem to be comparing 2012 against the pick of riders from 1952 - 1989 and calling it "the 70s"

 

Not really. The riders I listed all rode in the BL in 1975... Only Briggo was at the end of his career (though it was getting towards the end of 'Banger's as well)

[BWitcher]

Not really. The riders I listed all rode in the BL in 1975... Only Briggo was at the end of his career (though it was getting towards the end of 'Banger's as well)

 

And your list was also selective with the benefit of hindsight. Chris Morton was simply a rising rider in 75, yet you have him listed there because of what he went on to achieve. That's just one example.

 

Your the fool so anyone who disagrees with you is a fool?you have a opinion and say it is fact it is just your opinion.

 

An opinion isn't a fact, neither is a fact an opinion. Sadly Sidney, you can't seem to distinguish between them.

 

I like your examples though.. Because I can tell you this, Transport the riders you list into the present day format, i.e. 10 team league, fixed gate positions, current heat format.. and the third rider in those clubs you list, they'd be averaging around 7. Wouldn't appear to be so fantastic then would they?

Edited March 18, 2013 by BWitcher

[Paulco]

Another thread that started off interesting , but wasted by the know alls telling everyone how stupid they are . I feel for poor Sidney , everytime he adds input to a conversation , the pack converge on him .

[The White Knight]

Sidney, you have absolutely no idea about the ability of riders in the 70's compared to the riders of today and there is no way for you to do so.

 

sidney has as much right to his opinion as you do BW. I think most of the TOP Riders of yesteryear would have found a way to be top of the tree today. I can't prove it - but - I am allowed to think/believe it - I hope.

 

Correct.

 

Although you will be told to 'ignore averages'. Which in effect is telling you ignore 'all the wins riders had'.. which in effect is telling you to 'ignore them'... and then judge..

 

The point is that the more you see a rider win, the better you will think that rider is. A large league format, with no fixed gate positions and and the old 13 heat format provided opportunity for far more riders to win more races, creating the impression there were far more top guys around.

 

When it came down to it though, on the international stage etc it was, as in all eras, a select group who dominated.

 

I errrm THINK I understand what you are trying to say here - but - I am not certain. Perhaps some clarification is due. :blink:

[stratton]

Another thread that started off interesting , but wasted by the know alls telling everyone how stupid they are . I feel for poor Sidney , everytime he adds input to a conversation , the pack converge on him .

Thats ok Paulco like you everyone is entitled to there opinion does it matter who is right or wrong NO.

[BWitcher]

sidney has as much right to his opinion as you do BW. I think most of the TOP Riders of yesteryear would have found a way to be top of the tree today. I can't prove it - but - I am allowed to think/believe it - I hope.

 

 

 

I errrm THINK I understand what you are trying to say here - but - I am not certain. Perhaps some clarification is due. :blink:

 

Of course he does TWK, nobody disputes that. It's when he confuses opinions with facts that things get muddled.

 

Nobody disputes that the 70's was a great era for speedway, or that the top riders of the 70's weren't the equals of the top riders of today, or other eras (compared against their peers). What has no substance is claiming that Simmons was a better rider than Nicholls for example because 'you've seen them both race'. All you can compare is their records and achievements. They were riding different bikes, different tracks, so vastly removed from the sport now you can't compare.

 

Throughout these debates its actually been Sidney who has been dismissing others opinions with his claim that 'we didn't seem them race'. Some of us have tried to point out that has no real relevance.

 

I will try and explain the 'averages' comment I made... Firstly, lets consider what makes us judge how good a rider is. I would suggest the most important thing is winning races? The more races a rider wins the better we will think he is.. seems a fairly common denominator as a rule of thumb. Averages are simply an extension of that. The higher the average, the more they win and the better you perceive the rider to be. I don't think anyone can disagree with that surely?

 

The point where some understanding goes out the window is when you throw in the formats operated. The format in the 70's, with a large league, fixed gate positions, no heat 13 and 15 meant that the top riders met much less often than now. It also meant many always had the favourable gate position, unlike now. A larger league meant the best 2 riders in the league might clash twice over the course of a season, compared to a possible 12 times over a course of a season now. What it adds up to is a far greater number of riders who you are seeing consistently winning races, achieving a high average and therefore establishing themselves in your mind as being a legit top line rider. That would be the case regardless of who the contesting riders were.

 

Some take this to be 'belittling' riders from that era, it isn't at all, its just putting a mathematical slant on things is all.

 

Let's put it this way.. imagine you had the top 70 riders in the 70's riding in a 10 team league, as per the current format. You never saw them in any other format but that, by Sidneys reckoning he'd still identify 60 heat leaders.. I say he wouldn't.. he'd think 40 of the riders he thought were superstars were pretty average.

 

By the same token, take 140 riders from now, put them into the format of the 70's, if you never saw them in any other format, you'd think there were 60 damn good riders.

 

There's no question that the BL was stronger then in terms of its world standing than the EL is now, thats obvious, but even then you still can't prove the standard was better (head to head).

 

That's all the debate is about, its not an attack of older riders which for some reason some take it to be... its simply explaining perception plays a major, major role in our judgement

[stratton]

BWitcher you seem the guy confused what you have said is your opinion not Fact!Also ok don't take my word on it in the 60s and 70s there are endless other members on here who will tell you and the Norbold,s of this world will tell you more what the level was.Ok an (ex) Mauger averaged 11.74 ok you want to take 2 points off his average does that change my perception of him no it's there all in the history books and my personal experience of seeing him.My Point of some years being 18 and 20 teams in the league just showed you the numbers you had to pick from that was without including no8s and juniors and a terrific div 2.Now could we fill 18 EL teams with the right quality?

[BWitcher]

BWitcher you seem the guy confused what you have said is your opinion not Fact!Also ok don't take my word on it in the 60s and 70s there are endless other members on here who will tell you and the Norbold,s of this world will tell you more what the level was.Ok an (ex) Mauger averaged 11.74 ok you want to take 2 points off his average does that change my perception of him no it's there all in the history books and my personal experience of seeing him.My Point of some years being 18 and 20 teams in the league just showed you the numbers you had to pick from that was without including no8s and juniors and a terrific div 2.Now could we fill 18 EL teams with the right quality?

 

If Mauger had averaged 2 pts less throughout his career it would have MASSIVELY changed your perception of him. He wouldn't have won 6 world titles if his ability was 2pts lower in that era, so again Sidney your comment makes absolutely no sense.

 

All these world stars you claim, yet how many of them really achieved consistently on the world stage? No more than consistently achieve on the world stage now. In any era you will have your elite group of 4-5 riders, another set of perhaps 6-8 just below them who on their day can be at the same level as the top few, but not so consistent.. and so the tiers continue.

 

That has been the case in every single era of the sport.

 

An example.. a big league format can make a rider like Chris Morton appear to be not far off a rider like Ole Olsen. The reality is it's like comparing Chris Harris to Nicki Pedersen. They're not even close.

 

Its also interesting Sidney, that you keep telling us to ignore averages.. yet the only riders who you keep mentioning are, funnily enough, the ones with the high averages. I wonder why that is...

Edited March 18, 2013 by BWitcher