Objects Of Ridicule ?

[Vince]

Don't forget Nascar has a nigh on 40 race season (a few less, not sure of exact number).. from which with 10 races to go they reset everything and only the top 10 drivers (and others within a certain amount of pts) can win the Championship. The other 30 odd drivers are all still in the race, but can't win.

 

Just like British Superbikes where the top 6 go into the 'showdown'

[jimmy jimmy]

Wonder if their forums have object of ridicule threads too?

[oldace]

Wonder if their forums have object of ridicule threads too?

 

Well I was talking to a bloke in the pub about F1 introducing these new rules and he said

 

Well you all know the rest don't you

[jimmy jimmy]

Well I was talking to a bloke in the pub about F1 introducing these new rules and he said

 

Well you all know the rest don't you

Whatever happened to Soldier Boy at BV? Is he still alive? My mates dad was talking about him recently when he went in the 1970's

[oldace]

Whatever happened to Soldier Boy at BV? Is he still alive? My mates dad was talking about him recently when he went in the 1970's

 

Tony Ganley was his real name and the last I recall I think he was living somewhere in Ireland

[Ray Stadia]

Wonder if their forums have object of ridicule threads too?

To be honest, I reckon there will be many F1 fans who won't like the rule and may, dare I say it, use the 'R' word!

[Humphrey Appleby]

Double points in the last race isn't really the same thing as a tactical ride. All the F1 drivers have the opportunity to score double points, not just those who are 10 points or whatever behind.

I don't really see a problem with it in F1 if it keeps things interesting to the end, although it would be better if the last GP was somewhere like Interlagos where you usually get decent racing, and not Abu Dhabi..

Don't forget Nascar has a nigh on 40 race season (a few less, not sure of exact number).. from which with 10 races to go they reset everything and only the top 10 drivers (and others within a certain amount of pts) can win the Championship. The other 30 odd drivers are all still in the race, but can't win.

 

That is silly though.

[Tsunami]

 

Tony Ganley was his real name and the last I recall I think he was living somewhere in Ireland

I'm pretty sure that Soldier Boy died a few years ago, and I think I read it on here.

[Halifaxtiger]

 

I totally agree and I know many others that do. The one thing that could be said in favour of the tac/sub in its day is that at least the fans got to see an on-form rider out in place of s struggling rider (usually) and the tac/ride doesn't even do that but times have changed , the world has moved on and its time to consign all the tacticals to history.

 

I disagree, the point being that the reason for tactical changes being introduced - keeping meetings alive - still exists.

 

Some meetings would be dead rubbers in terms of the result after six heats if were not for tactical changes. Do we want dead rubbers or do we want meetings that at least potentially remain exciting ?

 

The best example I can give is Sheffield v Glasgow, 2012. Heat 4 Sheffield 19 Glasgow 5, game over. Tactical ride heat 5, 20-13, game on.Heat 8 33-18, game over. Heat 10 tactical ride 37-29 game on. Glasgow (albeit aided by some Sheffield mechanical problems and an unbelievable team management decision) went on to win.

 

For a neutral like me this was a terrific meeting. Had there been no tacticals, it would have been nowhere near as good.

[Ray Stadia]

 

I disagree, the point being that the reason for tactical changes being introduced - keeping meetings alive - still exists.

 

Some meetings would be dead rubbers in terms of the result after six heats if were not for tactical changes. Do we want dead rubbers or do we want meetings that at least potentially remain exciting ?

 

The best example I can give is Sheffield v Glasgow, 2012. Heat 4 Sheffield 19 Glasgow 5, game over. Tactical ride heat 5, 20-13, game on.Heat 8 33-18, game over. Heat 10 tactical ride 37-29 game on. Glasgow (albeit aided by some Sheffield mechanical problems and an unbelievable team management decision) went on to win.

 

For a neutral like me this was a terrific meeting. Had there been no tacticals, it would have been nowhere near as good.

Did Glasgow raise their game, because they had the incentive to catch up and win? or was their standard of racing still inferior to Sheffield? The point being, was the overall standard of the meeting raised due to the tactical ride and gave Glasgow, as a team, a fresh impetus?

[orion]

I disagree, the point being that the reason for tactical changes being introduced - keeping meetings alive - still exists.

 

Some meetings would be dead rubbers in terms of the result after six heats if were not for tactical changes. Do we want dead rubbers or do we want meetings that at least potentially remain exciting ?

 

The best example I can give is Sheffield v Glasgow, 2012. Heat 4 Sheffield 19 Glasgow 5, game over. Tactical ride heat 5, 20-13, game on.Heat 8 33-18, game over. Heat 10 tactical ride 37-29 game on. Glasgow (albeit aided by some Sheffield mechanical problems and an unbelievable team management decision) went on to win.

 

For a neutral like me this was a terrific meeting. Had there been no tacticals, it would have been nowhere near as good.

I Argee ..I am fan of the ts rule ..I bet you this much as soon as it is taken away people would moan that the meeting was dead to soon .

[E I Addio]

 

I disagree, the point being that the reason for tactical changes being introduced - keeping meetings alive - still exists.

 

Some meetings would be dead rubbers in terms of the result after six heats if were not for tactical changes. Do we want dead rubbers or do we want meetings that at least potentially remain exciting ?

 

The best example I can give is Sheffield v Glasgow, 2012. Heat 4 Sheffield 19 Glasgow 5, game over. Tactical ride heat 5, 20-13, game on.Heat 8 33-18, game over. Heat 10 tactical ride 37-29 game on. Glasgow (albeit aided by some Sheffield mechanical problems and an unbelievable team management decision) went on to win.

 

For a neutral like me this was a terrific meeting. Had there been no tacticals, it would have been nowhere near as good.

 

 

It's one thing to keep a meeting alive, but a totally different and a rather unattractive proposition to hand an undeserving team league points.

 

To my mind any possible merit the tactical ride may have once had is negated by the introduction of the present system of league points.

 

In the example you give the T/R rule would have made no difference to the quality of the racing. You do not state the final score but it is clear that even without the T/R rule Glasgow would have taken at least a league point from it which is fair reward for putting up a decent fight and Sheffield get two points for a deserved win but a "must do better" lecture from the TM for not getting all 3 points.

 

For a team to get a 3 league points getting a 7-point win is a reasonable ask but be sure of overcoming two T/R's means they have to achieve what is in real terms a13-point advantage to win by 7 on the score sheet and get all 3 league points.

 

The worst aspect of the t/r rule IMO is that it favours top heavy teams. A good solid strength in depth team is probably going to stay in striking distance and have limited chances of a t/r but a team with a strong top two and a weaker tail can get two successful t/r rides then be able to come on strong in heats13 and 15. For that reason especially I don't think you can ever have a fairly balanced league competition while you have a rule that favours one team against another

 

I understand what you say as a neutral but the fact is that it is the week-in, week-out regulars that keep a club afloat and from that perspective I think there is nothing more demoralising than seeing your team win on the track but lose under the t/r rule.

 

I can see the merit in making the t/r go off 15 metres to add an element of risk in the tactic,

Edited December 10, 2013 by E I Addio

[oldace]

I'm pretty sure that Soldier Boy died a few years ago, and I think I read it on here.

Hw would have been getting on a bit. Shame characters like him arent around anymore. He certainly livened up meetings at belle vue

I'm pretty sure that Soldier Boy died a few years ago, and I think I read it on here.

Hw would have been getting on a bit. Shame characters like him arent around anymore. He certainly livened up meetings at belle vue

[Ray Stadia]

Hw would have been getting on a bit. Shame characters like him arent around anymore. He certainly livened up meetings at belle vue

 

Hw would have been getting on a bit. Shame characters like him arent around anymore. He certainly livened up meetings at belle vue

Seems like you are getting on a bit! I say, it seems you are getting on a bit!

[Bagpuss]

I don't think it's as easy to say that 'without the TR(s) team x would have beaten team y by z points' because IMO an 8-1 can have a big psychological effect on both teams and lead to a significant swing in the meeting's momentum.

 

An 8-1 can galvanise a team who has been down and out and put the wind up a side who had been cruising.

 

I agree that it's not always fair on non top heavy sides and appreciate why many dislike it but if it was designed to keep some meetings closer than they would be otherwise then a I'd have to say that it works quite well.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Bagpuss

[Grachan]

 

 

 

To my mind any possible merit the tactical ride may have once had is negated by the introduction of the present system of league points.

 

In the example you give the T/R rule would have made no difference to the quality of the racing. You do not state the final score but it is clear that even without the T/R rule Glasgow would have taken at least a league point from it which is fair reward for putting up a decent fight and Sheffield get two points for a deserved win but a "must do better" lecture from the TM for not getting all 3 points.

 

 

 

I totally agree regards the present league scoring. It should be a good way of getting rid of the silly TR.

 

The score was Sheffield 47 Glasgow 48. So would have been Sheffield 47 Glasgow 42 (assuming Glasgow got 6 extra points from the TRs).

[The White Knight]

 

I disagree, the point being that the reason for tactical changes being introduced - keeping meetings alive - still exists.

 

Some meetings would be dead rubbers in terms of the result after six heats if were not for tactical changes. Do we want dead rubbers or do we want meetings that at least potentially remain exciting ?

 

The best example I can give is Sheffield v Glasgow, 2012. Heat 4 Sheffield 19 Glasgow 5, game over. Tactical ride heat 5, 20-13, game on.Heat 8 33-18, game over. Heat 10 tactical ride 37-29 game on. Glasgow (albeit aided by some Sheffield mechanical problems and an unbelievable team management decision) went on to win.

 

For a neutral like me this was a terrific meeting. Had there been no tacticals, it would have been nowhere near as good.

 

 

So, because of the Tactical Ride - Sheffield Lost. The loss was because of the Tactical Ride and NOT because of competition. Proves my point really doesn't it?

 

If you are using this to support your argument HT - you are on a loser.

 

The Result was manufactured by the Rule and NOT by sporting competition.

 

If you can't see that - well................................................................

 

 

I Argee ..I am fan of the ts rule ..I bet you this much as soon as it is taken away people would moan that the meeting was dead to soon .

 

Why am I not surprised. I didn't know you were Argentinian by the way.

 

...................................... and as regards people moaning - I doubt if myself and a lot of other people would be moaning. I suspect we would be extremely happy.

 

 

 

I totally agree regards the present league scoring. It should be a good way of getting rid of the silly TR.

 

The score was Sheffield 47 Glasgow 48. So would have been Sheffield 47 Glasgow 42 (assuming Glasgow got 6 extra points from the TRs).

 

 

As above. The Tactical Points gained won the Meeting - not those actually scored by the Riders on the Track.

 

Tactical Rides and Tactical Substitutes should be consigned to the dustbin of history. It is where they belong.

[John Leslie]

So, because of the Tactical Ride - Sheffield Lost. The loss was because of the Tactical Ride and NOT because of competition. Proves my point really doesn't it?

I think the loss was more due to Hugh Skidmore breaking down twice in the closing heats and Sheffield conceding a 5-0 in heat 13 wasn't it?

 

You'll always get a freak result somewhere whatever the rules.

[The White Knight]

I think the loss was more due to Hugh Skidmore breaking down twice in the closing heats and Sheffield conceding a 5-0 in heat 13 wasn't it?

 

You'll always get a freak result somewhere whatever the rules.

 

 

Doesn't change the facts though. Without the Tactical Rides - Sheffield would have won.

 

How many Tactical Rides did Sheffield have -, by the way? None - thought not and THAT is why the Tactical Ride is so UNFAIR!!

 

I know that folk don't like me saying this - BUT - it IS true.

[BWitcher]

 

I totally agree regards the present league scoring. It should be a good way of getting rid of the silly TR.

 

The score was Sheffield 47 Glasgow 48. So would have been Sheffield 47 Glasgow 42 (assuming Glasgow got 6 extra points from the TRs).

We don't know that.

 

As Bagpuss has highlighted, the tac ride would have given Glasgow extra impetus and more to go for. This in turn can lead to better racing. A team giving up early on is awful.