When Will The New Race Format Be Out & How Can Teams Name Riders When They Don't Know It?

[SCB]

There going to have to be some 2 rides on the trot or some riders having an unfair amount of certain gates - might give the team manager something to do. If you number 1 is better off the outside gates them put him at 1, if he's not then he may be better at 5 where he gets more inside gates etc etc.

 

My biggest worry is that a good second string is going to score 6 in his 2 races against reserves second strings. another probably 1 in his heats vs the heat leader and second string giving 7. Yet a heatleader will probably struggle to get much more than possibly 4 or 5 as he's riding against second strings twice (for 4 points) and other heat leaders for very little (0 or 1). That means the better riders are going to have lower average due to having had harder races. How long before some heatleader says, "hang on, I'm riding two heat 13's yet in the past I got a heat 12 (or 14). Sod this, I quit or want paying more as my heats are harder". Second strings could find themsleevs making a lot more money in 2014 but out of the job the following season.

 

It's not perfect now as all riders dont meet all other riders and meet some twice (the 7's meet 3 times) but this format is going to be even worse.

Edited December 16, 2013 by SCB

[Crazy robin]

There going to have to be some 2 rides on the trot or some riders having an unfair amount of certain gates - might give the team manager something to do. If you number 1 is better off the outside gates them put him at 1, if he's not then he may be better at 5 where he gets more inside gates etc etc.

 

My biggest worry is that a good second string is going to score 6 in his 2 races against reserves second strings. another probably 1 in his heats vs the heat leader and second string giving 7. Yet a heatleader will probably struggle to get much more than possibly 4 or 5 as he's riding against second strings twice (for 4 points) and other heat leaders for very little (0 or 1). That means the better riders are going to have lower average due to having had harder races. How long before some heatleader says, "hang on, I'm riding two heat 13's yet in the past I got a heat 12 (or 14). Sod this, I quit or want paying more as my heats are harder". Second strings could find themsleevs making a lot more money in 2014 but out of the job the following season.

 

It's not perfect now as all riders dont meet all other riders and meet some twice (the 7's meet 3 times) but this format is going to be even worse.

The more you read about formats etc the more madness it seems.

 

What the bloody hell are they going to average wise in 2015.

[Trees]

It's only heats 4 and 10 where the reserves are against a heatleader but then they are against one another? Two races in one etc etc! That happens anyway?

[BeeSting]

Only way I can think of solving the averages problem we may have at the end of this season is by introducing grades which can be assessed to be more realistic.

[SCB]

Only way I can think of solving the averages problem we may have at the end of this season is by introducing grades which can be assessed to be more realistic.

That won't work, who picks the grades? You'll have all sorts of accusations that there favouritism.

 

and what about play-off time this year? Poole have a reaosnable second string who due to being protected by the easier heats averages nearly 8 but in reality he's only a 5 pointer, in comes KK for the play-offs.

[SteveLyric2]

That won't work, who picks the grades? You'll have all sorts of accusations that there favouritism.

 

and what about play-off time this year? Poole have a reaosnable second string who due to being protected by the easier heats averages nearly 8 but in reality he's only a 5 pointer, in comes KK for the play-offs.

I doubt even Poole will have space for Ward, Holder AND KK, come play-off time!!!!

[SCB]

I doubt even Poole will have space for Ward, Holder AND KK, come play-off time!!!!

Didn't you read the post? It's easily achievable. A half decent second string will average 7+ it's asking for a promoter with a will to win to take advantage.

[pointsmeanplayoffs]

From last Thursday, I recall Buster and Rob saying your No.1 has to be the highest av. rider (obviously?!?).

 

Whilst the complete heat/line-up format was TBC they did say;

 

1 and 5's would ride against each other TWICE before the nominated heat 15, (meaning the 1 and 5's could race each other 3 times overall which I would not object to in all honesty but then we do have 2 GP riders).

 

The draft reserves are to be 'protected' in as much as they have two rides where it's 6 and 7 vs 6 and 7, with their other 2 programmed rides to be only against either a reserve or a second string. The only way to ensure this would be the case is to 'lock-in' the riding positions of the second string to only positions 2 and 4. Yes, this would restrict the amount of changes a team manager could make to a line-up, but if not, they could just name there heat leaders in positions 2 and 4 just to beat the 'draft reserves' which would go against the very idea of bringing in these young riders?!? Anyone who thinks otherwise is really not on the right page and has completely missed the point about bring young riders through.

 

So I the promoters just need to agree on;

 

Highest Av. at No.1

Next 2 heat leaders at 3 or 5

Second String at 2 or 4

Draft reserves at 6 and 7

 

Then they can finalise the heat format, c'mon it's not hard?!?!

[Humphrey Appleby]

I do wish the complier luck.

In a spare moment, I sat down to see if I could come-up with a workable formula which keeps reserves away from heat leaders. It's almost impossible if you want to avoid having too much repetitions, riders being programmed with two on the trot, and minimising the number of times riders are programmed every other heat (which is important when using R/R).

[2ndbendbeerhut]

Maybe there will only be 3 programmed rides and more nominated heats?

[g13webb]

From last Thursday, I recall Buster and Rob saying your No.1 has to be the highest av. rider (obviously?!?).

 

Whilst the complete heat/line-up format was TBC they did say;

 

1 and 5's would ride against each other TWICE before the nominated heat 15, (meaning the 1 and 5's could race each other 3 times overall which I would not object to in all honesty but then we do have 2 GP riders).

 

The draft reserves are to be 'protected' in as much as they have two rides where it's 6 and 7 vs 6 and 7, with their other 2 programmed rides to be only against either a reserve or a second string. The only way to ensure this would be the case is to 'lock-in' the riding positions of the second string to only positions 2 and 4. Yes, this would restrict the amount of changes a team manager could make to a line-up, but if not, they could just name there heat leaders in positions 2 and 4 just to beat the 'draft reserves' which would go against the very idea of bringing in these young riders?!? Anyone who thinks otherwise is really not on the right page and has completely missed the point about bring young riders through.

 

So I the promoters just need to agree on;

 

Highest Av. at No.1

Next 2 heat leaders at 3 or 5

Second String at 2 or 4

Draft reserves at 6 and 7

 

Then they can finalise the heat format, c'mon it's not hard?!?!

 

Moving on from what you say, It will be interesting to see what effect these projected heats will have on the CMA. Obviously, because the 2nd strings will have a much easier rides then the Heat leader, Hence, their scoring potential will be reflected in their scores. Once this happens, it will be then be impossible to make comparisons between them and the heat leaders. No doubt, some clubs will might see this as an opportunity to manipulate changing riders..

 

Once you start bringing in different heat formats the CMA goes out the window..

[Anzum]

Best format I could see to avoid repetition and successive heats was the following.

1 3 v 4 5

6 7 v 6 7

4 5 v 1 3

2 6 v 4 7

4 7 v 2 6

1 2 v 3 5

4 7 v 4 7

3 5 v 1 2

6 7 v 6 7

1 5 v 3 4

3 4 v 1 5

2 6 v 2 6

1 5 v 1 5

2 3 v 2 3

NN v NN

 

Problem is some riders have 3 rides in one half of the meeting. Not that easy if you are going to keep the reserves away from the heat leaders entirely. Also as pointed out earlier the heat leaders have more difficult set of heats.

[RobMcCaffery]

In a spare moment, I sat down to see if I could come-up with a workable formula which keeps reserves away from heat leaders. It's almost impossible if you want to avoid having too much repetitions, riders being programmed with two on the trot, and minimising the number of times riders are programmed every other heat (which is important when using R/R).

Same here. The problem comes with those eight heats that would not include the reserves. You have sixteen slots to fill on both sides but second strings only available to take four per side (with their others being with the reserves) so it's incredibly hard to keep a balance.

 

At the top end it's going to be very hard to avoid repetition of the same heat leaders meeting and some of the lower-averaged examples are soon going to wish they were second strings elsewhere. How long before riders are demanding extra money for racing a full line up heat leaders in almost every ride?

 

I'm not trying to put a spoke in this, just pointing out the real problems, and this is before even looking at sharing out gate positions.

 

On a separate point, comparing this situation with Sweden isn't that appropriate given this selection of Elitserien reserves:

 

Hans Andersen (Vastervik)

Davey Watt (Dackarna)

Kenni Larsen (Smederna)

Anders Mellgren (Vargarna)

Joonas Kylmakorpi (Indianerna)

Simon Gustafsson (Dackarna)

Ludvig Lindgren (Vastervik)

David Ruud (Vetlanda)

 

With all due respect to our British youngsters almost all have a lot further to go within the sport!

Edited December 16, 2013 by rmc

[SteveLyric2]

Isn't the Swedish format different in that the top scoring 2 in week 1, drop to reserve the next week and so on!!?

[Andrew Postie Thompson]

I have come up with a 15 race formula which would work, 4 rides each, keeps the reserves away from the heat leaders, If anyone wants to see it please PM me as im sure some on here will rip it to shreds lol

[The White Knight]

I think that the BSPA are waiting for the good folk on this Forum to sort the Format out for them. THAT explains why they haven't announced anything yet.

[naffer]

I think that the BSPA are waiting for the good folk on this Forum to sort the Format out for them. THAT explains why they haven't announced anything yet.

Is that the format that all the teams fans agree with and then the Poole fans one is adopted

[MattK]

I think that the BSPA are waiting for the good folk on this Forum to sort the Format out for them. THAT explains why they haven't announced anything yet.

 

You may mock, but if the BSPA had two brain cells to rub together they would have put together a template and asked fans to complete a heat format with justification of how they have laid it out.

 

For example, in the format above, the home #1 meets the away #5 three times. That may be a good or a bad thing, depending on your point of view.

[Anzum]

Matt K good spot. If I alter heat 1 to 1 3 v 1 4 and heat 3 to 4 5 v 3 5 . It would solve that problem. Personally, think the BSA made the statement about keeping the reserves away from the heat leaders without realising how difficult it is to do. Especially if every rider goes out of all four gates during the meeting.

[RobMcCaffery]

Matt K good spot. If I alter heat 1 to 1 3 v 1 4 and heat 3 to 4 5 v 3 5 . It would solve that problem. Personally, think the BSA made the statement about keeping the reserves away from the heat leaders without realising how difficult it is to do. Especially if every rider goes out of all four gates during the meeting.

 

The price of segregating reserves is that you also segregate heat leaders. While that could make for some great racing I just wonder how it'll go down with some riders.