Tr Farce Of A Rule.

[BWitcher]

I can't be wrong as I stated an opinion. It's an opinion. You have difficulty in accepting that. That is arrogance on your part. I don't need anybody else to tell me I am right or wrong. You are obviously a very insecure person that you need other people to back up your opinions and beliefs. I am not asking you to agree, but you seem unwilling to accept what I say telling me I am wrong. In your opinion I am wrong. This is what debate and conjecture is, you cannot grasp this which says more about you than it does about me to be perfectly honest.

 

I will come on here and disagree and agree with people. But you cannot tell somebody that they are wrong? Because you say so...I respect you right to disagree but I will not accept you persistently shooting down my views and opinions and calling them "wrong" get off your high horse.

 

Maybe we will never agree..but I respect your right to have an opinion and will never call it wrong. I can agree to disagree but you seem to be unable to move on unless I back down on my views. I won't do that. But honestly you need to step back a bit and not expect everyone to agree with your view..

 

It isn't an opinion. You stated that the current Tactical rules are more unfair than the old Tactical sub rules. That is mathematically incorrect.

 

Its like you saying you have an opinion that 4 is more than 5. It is wrong and there is no debate.

 

Your argument is the equivalent of someone doing their GCSE Maths, getting Grade E and claiming they should have had an A because in their opinion they got all the answers right!

 

I have no issues with your overall views about tac rides etc and indeed agree with many of them. All I did (and others) was point out the old rule was not fairer or better as you'd claimed... why you choose to get all worked up about that.. who knows.

Edited May 24, 2013 by BWitcher

[msc1874]

 

 

It isn't an opinion. You stated that the current Tactical rules are more unfair than the old Tactical sub rules. That is mathematically incorrect.

 

Its like you saying you have an opinion that 4 is more than 5. It is wrong and there is no debate.

 

Your argument is the equivalent of someone doing their GCSE Maths, getting Grade E and claiming they should have had an A because in their opinion they got all the answers right!

 

I have no issues with your overall views about tac rides etc and indeed agree with many of them. All I did was point out the old rule was not fairer or better as you'd claimed... why you choose to get all worked up about that.. who knows.

I

 

My opinion is that double points in unfair. The context of 4 riders starting from one point and one getting double is unfair.

 

 

You cannot leave it be can you... You for some reason need me to say I am wrong which I am not going to do.

[oldace]

I can't be wrong as I stated an opinion. It's an opinion. You have difficulty in accepting that. That is arrogance on your part. I don't need anybody else to tell me I am right or wrong. You are obviously a very insecure person that you need other people to back up your opinions and beliefs. I am not asking you to agree, but you seem unwilling to accept what I say telling me I am wrong. In your opinion I am wrong. This is what debate and conjecture is, you cannot grasp this which says more about you than it does about me to be perfectly honest.

 

I will come on here and disagree and agree with people. But you cannot tell somebody that they are wrong? Because you say so...I respect you right to disagree but I will not accept you persistently shooting down my views and opinions and calling them "wrong" get off your high horse.

 

Maybe we will never agree..but I respect your right to have an opinion and will never call it wrong. I can agree to disagree but you seem to be unable to move on unless I back down on my views. I won't do that. But honestly you need to step back a bit and not expect everyone to agree with your view..

 

It has nothing to do with opinion. The old Tac Sub rule could skew a result by 8 points, the current rule can only skew it by 3. You can have an opinion as to which you prefer but the facts are facts, the old rule was more unfair.

 

That said I preferred the old way, it gave a dimension to team managing that doesn't exist now, a team manager these days is just a glorified programme filler almost

[The White Knight]

I

 

My opinion is that double points in unfair. The context of 4 riders starting from one point and one getting double is unfair.

 

 

You cannot leave it be can you... You for some reason need me to say I am wrong which I am not going to do.

 

Let's agree to differ folks. Not worth getting worked up about. We are supposed to enjoy ourselves on here.

 

I am leaving for the Duxford Air Show on Sunday in about half an hour - so I intend to enjoy myself.

[BWitcher]

I

 

My opinion is that double points in unfair. The context of 4 riders starting from one point and one getting double is unfair.

 

 

You cannot leave it be can you... You for some reason need me to say I am wrong which I am not going to do.

 

Sigh, you don't even know what you're arguing against do you? What hope is there of you having a debate if you don't know what it's about?

 

NOBODY has questioned that. What you were corrected on was your assertion the old rule was fairer. It doesn't matter whether you say you are wrong or not. That comment WAS wrong.

 

It has nothing to do with opinion. The old Tac Sub rule could skew a result by 8 points, the current rule can only skew it by 3. You can have an opinion as to which you prefer but the facts are facts, the old rule was more unfair.

 

That said I preferred the old way, it gave a dimension to team managing that doesn't exist now, a team manager these days is just a glorified programme filler almost

 

Oldace has it spot on.. he too, like yourself AND myself prefer the old system. However, it wasn't 'fairer'.

[Vince]

Well I think both are unfair and Speedway should be about the 4 blokes in the program racing bikes and not a management game!

[msc1874]

 

 

Sigh, you don't even know what you're arguing against do you? What hope is there of you having a debate if you don't know what it's about?

 

NOBODY has questioned that. What you were corrected on was your assertion the old rule was fairer. It doesn't matter whether you say you are wrong or not. That comment WAS wrong.

 

 

 

Oldace has it spot on.. he too, like yourself AND myself prefer the old system. However, it wasn't 'fairer'.

 

 

I am trying to move off this and you continue to insult me. Telling me I don't know what I'm talking about and telling me I am wrong. Can you not just accept what I said is an opinion and move on or are you that arrogant that you refuse to do that. I will never admit that my comment was wrong because I stand by it.

 

I may not like what you say I accept it. I don't call your comments wrong, they are your opinions even if I think I evidence proves otherwise. Just move on mate and accept that my comment was not correct in your eyes maybe, but that fact is it was not wrong as it was an opinion.

[orion]

I can't be wrong as I stated an opinion. It's an opinion. You have difficulty in accepting that. That is arrogance on your part. I don't need anybody else to tell me I am right or wrong. You are obviously a very insecure person that you need other people to back up your opinions and beliefs. I am not asking you to agree, but you seem unwilling to accept what I say telling me I am wrong. In your opinion I am wrong. This is what debate and conjecture is, you cannot grasp this which says more about you than it does about me to be perfectly honest.

 

 

You were told before and it was shown that were wrong by saying the old tac wrong was fairer than the new rule ..so it has nothing to do with opinion ....if that is not the case then feel free to show us otherwise rather than name calling .

[SCB]

The new rule does fudge things a bit as I think we are the only sport now where percentage wise you can amass more points than their opponents but still be on the loosing side.

Well, apart form that little game Tennis. Or snooker. Or darts.

[ouch]

Well, apart form that little game Tennis. Or snooker. Or darts.

I'm not a sports fan as such so anymore information you have on this that I can throw back at the lads at work when they take the p out of my sport would help. Ta.

[SCB]

I'm not a sports fan as such so anymore information you have on this that I can throw back at the lads at work when they take the p out of my sport would help. Ta.

In snooker there are circa 140 points available in a frame. So you could score 65 and your opponent 75 and he wins the frame. Lets say it's a best of 5. He does that 3 times. Bu in another frame you won it 130-0. You have scored 310 to his 225 but he has won 3 frames and you just the one. you lost.

 

Tennis works on a similar thing, it's not just one game, its a game within a game, so a best of 5. You could win tow of the game massively but lose the other 3 only slightly so you won most points but he won most games.

 

Darts, bit different but same concept. You could outplay your opposition in 2 games and make him look really bad but but the 3 games he wins he just eeks over the line and beats you. You've played between but he's got lucky that he played well when needed.

[BWitcher]

I am trying to move off this and you continue to insult me. Telling me I don't know what I'm talking about and telling me I am wrong. Can you not just accept what I said is an opinion and move on or are you that arrogant that you refuse to do that. I will never admit that my comment was wrong because I stand by it.

 

I may not like what you say I accept it. I don't call your comments wrong, they are your opinions even if I think I evidence proves otherwise. Just move on mate and accept that my comment was not correct in your eyes maybe, but that fact is it was not wrong as it was an opinion.

 

You're insulting yourself by refusing to accept what is a FACT. That's your problem, not mine. It's not an opinion. Until you learn what is and isn't an opinion, there's little hope.

 

Now I see you even claim you think 'evidence' proves your point. Let's see hear your evidence then, show to me how the old tac sub rule was fairer and I will quite gladly say you were right. You see, there's the difference, if I'm shown to be wrong I'll gladly admit it and most importantly LEARN from it.

 

In this case however, you won't... quite simply because you can't.

 

In snooker there are circa 140 points available in a frame. So you could score 65 and your opponent 75 and he wins the frame. Lets say it's a best of 5. He does that 3 times. Bu in another frame you won it 130-0. You have scored 310 to his 225 but he has won 3 frames and you just the one. you lost.

 

Tennis works on a similar thing, it's not just one game, its a game within a game, so a best of 5. You could win tow of the game massively but lose the other 3 only slightly so you won most points but he won most games.

 

Darts, bit different but same concept. You could outplay your opposition in 2 games and make him look really bad but but the 3 games he wins he just eeks over the line and beats you. You've played between but he's got lucky that he played well when needed.

 

Spot on SCB, those were the sports I was thinking off.

 

Tennis being the most obvious example.. 6-0 6-7 6-0 6-7 6-7 You've won 30 games, your opponent 21. Your opponent wins. Its the nuance of the scoring system used, just how the tac rides are a nuance of the scoring system used in speedway.

 

You could probably throw cricket in there too once they go into the Duckworth-Lewis mode!

[ouch]

Never thought of it like that. Even a normal match can be judged the same as you can "win" nine races 4-2 and lose six 1-5 and still lose the match even with more heat wins.

Then you have the GP, Loram never won a round but became World Champ.

There's more to this than I first thought and its making my head hurt now so I'm just going to leave it and enjoy the Bank Holiday.

[SCB]

Never thought of it like that. Even a normal match can be judged the same as you can "win" nine races 4-2 and lose six 1-5 and still lose the match even with more heat wins.

Then you have the GP, Loram never won a round but became World Champ.

There's more to this than I first thought and its making my head hurt now so I'm just going to leave it and enjoy the Bank Holiday.

A rugby team can score more tries and lose. Ok a football team can't score more goals and lose but you can score the same and lose on aggregate because of away goals - you can evern outplay the other team, you can win more passes, tackle more players, have more possession but just not score the goals. Sport isn't as simple as scoring the most points, there often more to it than that.

 

On that note, I wonder if speedway could be split into 5 lots of 3 heats, first to 3 wins. Mind you, it could make the last 6 heats pointless. Would remove the need for a TR though and 3 5-1s against you doesn't mean meeting over. Maybe each set of 3 heats could be a league point - the issue then is rain offs.