Whats The Thoughts On The New Format After The First Month

[*JJ]

 

It's not, and actually irrelevant - even if Harris, King or whoever could end up with PL convertable averages, then if they are unaffordable then no one with any sense will sign them anyway.

I don't know - Danny King, for example, has only done four matches in two months and can't have made much money. He is probably desperate to get into a PL team!

[SteveLyric2]

I don't know - Danny King, for example, has only done four matches in two months and can't have made much money. He is probably desperate to get into a PL team!

Thought he was riding for one!!?

[Woz01]

The likes of Harris, Nicholls and King usually get rides abroad so not sure they would be that keen on PL.

[A ORLOV]

The averages for the 1 - 5 riders and list of draft riders for May 1st just put on bspa site, there are a few interesting rises and falls.

[Alan_Jones]

The new FTDP rider list, effective May 1st, with (this months positions) and [original draft positions]. Josh Bates and Marc Owen are new additions in a guest only capacity. Seems a fair compromise in Josh's case.

1 ( 1) [ 1] Lewis Kerr

2 ( 3) [ 3] Kyle Newman

3 ( 4) [ 4] Lewis Blackbird

4 ( 2) [ 2] Jason Garrity

5 ( 7) [ 6] Adam Ellis

6 ( 5) [ 5] Stefan Nielsen

7# ( 6) [--] Charles Wright

8 (13) [12] Steve Worrall

9 ( 8) [ 7] Ashley Morris

10 (10) [ 9] Joe Jacobs

11 ( 9) [ 8] Paul Starke

12 (11) [10] Tom Perry

13 (12) [11] Simon Lambert

14 (19) [17] James Sarjeant

15 (15) [--] Benji Compton

16 (26) [20] Lewis Rose

17# (--) [15] Josh Bates

18# (22) [--] Oliver Greenwood

19 (14) [13] Lee Smart

20 (18) [16] Daniel Halsey

21 (21) [18] Ben Morley

22 (16) [14] Ben Reade

23 (17) [--] Darren Mallett

24# (20) [--] Tim Webster

25 (23) [19] Ben Hopwood

26# (24) [--] Liam Carr

27# (25) [--] Kyle Hughes

28 (27) [21] Max Clegg

29 (28) [22] Darryl Ritchings

30 (29) [23] Dan Greenwood

31 (30) [--] Brendan Johnson

32# (35) [--] Jack Kingston

33 (33) [--] Nathan Greaves

34# (--) [--] Marc Owen

35 (31) [--] Lee Payne

36 (32) [--] Luke Crang

37 (34) [--] Matt Williamson

38# (36) [--] Brandon Freemantle

Edited April 28, 2014 by Alan_Jones

[gee jay]

i think in general it's been very good to watch, a few issues with riding orders, which if sorted would be fairer to some riders. 1st reserves well on the pace, 2nd choice with a few exceptions seem to be progressing.

[david2905]

First thought is we need to bring back the one 8 pointer per side rule rapidly (possibly change it to 8.5 or 9 pointer after a season of the averages being warped in 2014), the difference in quality between some side is alarming and no good for the sport in general.

[foamfence]

What about the knock on effects of the third heat leaders who have a much tougher time now.

I can see the likes of uk based riders like Harris Nicholls king watt etc having averages which allow them to double up in the PL thus raising the standard and expense even higher.

You are allowed to put your heatleaders in any order, they don't have to be at number five.

[A ORLOV]

Will Poole announce a change tonight?

[waiheke1]

Tl

First thought is we need to bring back the one 8 pointer per side rule rapidly (possibly change it to 8.5 or 9 pointer after a season of the averages being warped in 2014), the difference in quality between some side is alarming and no good for the sport in general.

Only two teams started this season with two riders over eight, and one of them is struggling.

The issue seems to be that brum and leicester couldn't afford a top number one rider, so all your suggestion would have done is meant batch and bjerre may not have got a club and the el would be weakened.

Tbere are always going to be weak and strong tesms, its the nature of sport.

You are allowed to put your heatleaders in any order, they don't have to be at number five.

That doesnt alter tge fact that third ( and weaker top and second) hl are likely to drop averages due to tougher heats, regardless of ridind at 1 3 or 5?

[weatherwatcher]

I must say that Doyle is doing the Lions quite proud so far this season. The problem with them is being let down by the rest of the team. They are far to inconsistant.

If the team had been picked a little better then I think they could have made it into the top 5 by now.

But the same goes for a lot of the teams. They all seem to have one top rider the rest are made up of riders that are nearing there sell by date and then a mix of up and coming young riders.

It looks like the lack of the big money that Sky have been handing out over the past 10 years that has now stopped, with no big sponser taking over it seems that all the teams have had to cut back on the wages.

Not sure what happened in the Lions case, it may just be that the money just wasn't there to let them pay out for a top placed rider and anything better from 2 to 5. The way things are going it will be a very interesting season, when it comes to the play offs time.

Will Poole finally be knocked off the winnins podium this year. We will have to wait and see how the season plays out. Of course it all depends what changes Poole make to thier line up if thing start to go bad for them.

[thecoombdog]

This has probably been said elsewhere but how stupid is it that Swindon are missing Worrall a lot ,which effectively means we have zero chance of winning that meeting, but yet he's riding for other teams as a guest every night and scoring big points. Its an absolute crock of sh1te.

Edited May 4, 2014 by thecoombdog

[MattK]

I like the new race format, but the guest situation is a mess.

[BWitcher]

 

It's not, and actually irrelevant - even if Harris, King or whoever could end up with PL convertable averages, then if they are unaffordable then no one with any sense will sign them anyway.

 

There's a major flaw in your statement there. 'no one with any sense'.

[Najjer]

I don't know - Danny King, for example, has only done four matches in two months and can't have made much money. He is probably desperate to get into a PL team!

 

Assuming it is affordable and sustainable at Premier League level, then we should welcome the idea of having British riders of that calibre doubling up like that.

 

However, what we can't have is someone in the Premier League signing Chris Holder and then pleading poverty and being bankrupt within a year.

[waiheke1]

I think the format has had pretty much the anticipated outcomes:

 

1. 3^rd HL (and weaker first and second) have struggled, and dropped averages, as you’d expect. Also predictably, these riders have come in for heavy criticism from fans who obviously don’t understand that this was a statistical certainty. So the likes of Proctor, Kennett, Schlein, Hansen, Harris, Bridger, King, Cook (away) etc. have all been tagged as underperforming, when in reality that have performed much as a rational person would expect.

And even more predictably, at least one team has dropped such a rdier, just as they dropped to second string. Ludicrous, not only given that the performances were pretty much as expected (you’d expect Kennet to score around 4 as a HL in this format, 7+ as a second string, so he was under performing by a touch over 1 a meeting), but that a) a rider deemed good enough at the start of the season not given chance to reclaim form as a second sting and b)the rider is now available to other teams on a reduced average.Surely they should at least give riders a few meetings as second string, if for no other reason than the almost certainty that they will increase average.

Co-incidence that the likes of Bridger and Proctor have now started scoring well after dropping down to second string – no doubt some fans think they have just re-discovered form? Similarly the likes of Bech, Fisherhave significantly dropped their scoringafter promotion to HL slots.

1. As expected second strings putting plenty of points on their average. Even the two biggest underperformers (Klindt and gustaffson) have basically maintained their average. But apart from those to riders, almost no second strings have come in for criticism, instead plenty of praise for the “improvement” second strings have shown.

 

Note: Clearly I’m not saying that HL should be exempt from criticism , nor that second strings shouldn’t be praised – simply that the balance of criticism/praise should be more measured.

 

Next season:

 

Clearly, massive issues in terms of how averages will be used for team building. The “imbalance” isn’t really new. Clearly, a 5 point rider who spent the whole season at reserve was historically not as good as a rider who achieved a 5 in the main body of the team. Similarly, an 8 point rider who rode in most of his teams “heat 15s” was clearly a better performer than an 8 pointer who was rarely called on in such heats.

All that has happened this year is that this difference has been exaggerated. One solution is that a “weighting” be used for scores achieved as a second string (say a 50% “multiplier.”) It would be reasonably easy come the end of the season to find a fair statistical basis for this.

 

However – plenty of speedway fans say the “double point” rule is too difficult to understand, so god knows how they would cope with such a system, and no doubt Poole would be accused of fiddling the system no matter how transparent the calculation methodology.

 

The other major issue is that if such a system applied only for team building at the start of the season, but not re-declarations during 2015, the excercise would have essentially been wasted, as within a month of the season starting, averages would again be skewed (assuming same format kept).

And if you are going to “weight” for meetings as second strings, do you then need to do the same for riders racing in heat 15? what about riders racing in the tougher number 5 spot (meet HL 10 times and 2^nd strings twice) compared to numbers 1 and 3 (8 v HL and 4 v 2^nd strings).

 

So clearly issues with “weighting.” But if you don’t what happens – the likes of Porsing and Palm toft will be unemployable next season on a 6, when you will be able to have the likes of Harris/Schlein on a similar average. How do you assess new riders to the league, when they would be a 9 pointer as a second sting or a 4 pointer as a HL)?

 

The draft riders I think are fine, it will be easy enough to convert a “reserve average” to an average usable if they are to join the main body of the team (or it may just be assumed a “3”) – and also to rank draft list riders.

 

 

In terms of outcome of format on success/otherwise of teams, again i think it has been as predicted:

 

1. A strong top to is essential, always has been in the days of tactical subs, more so when the nominated heat came in and even more so under the new format
2. At least one strong reserve is essential, ideally two.
3. Second strings on low starting average with the potential to increase by to or three points is the ideal, particularly if you have a third heat leader strong enough to get solid scores and allow these “weaker:” 2nd strings to hoover up the easy points from second string. The other benefit of this approach is potential to replace these second strings with inflated averages with much stronger riders.

 

Fans viwe. Those that were open and supportive of the concept seem tpo have noted more even racing, as heats match riders who are of a more equal standard. Those who were against the draft have bemoaned the dilution of quality, riders finishing well off the pace and made nonsencial claims about teams being of/below PL standard. Seems in a lot of cases people’s minds were made up well in advance of the season.

 

Thoughts...?

[T.N.T.]

The idea and principal of the format is great but there are a number of things could be done to balance out the races and who rides who

 

 

The reserves are playing a major part in the meetings now and while I support the inclusion of draft riders to some degree, A team with two in form or strong reserves have almost a 12 point advantage and this makes it near impossible for the other team to overturn. So how about changing the team scoring a little bit.

 

 

Instead of both reserves races being a potential 8 point advantage, how about putting just 2 team points on offer in each race. If a team gets a 5-1 or a 4-2 then they get 2 points for the team. A drawn 3-3 heats gives each team 1 point each. This would also mean that both reserves only get two programmed rides each and a rule can be added to ensure each reserve rides in two races apart from the reserves race.

 

 

That however is just a thought, but I do have a number of race formats that I feel are more balanced and will give a better reading of the strongest team rather than having riders in the right heat at the right time.

[Gloves]

Don't mind the new format although I would only have one fast track rider as the second rider is just out of his depth and tends to get his points when the other rider falls. Well unless you own two fast track riders such as Kings Lynn and Coventry who will have an advantage over the rest all season.

[stevebrum]

Don't mind the new format although I would only have one fast track rider as the second rider is just out of his depth and tends to get his points when the other rider falls. Well unless you own two fast track riders such as Kings Lynn and Coventry who will have an advantage over the rest all season.

 

Disagree. How has Ben Morley - for one - managed a paid maximum?

I agree that it would be better if it was one fast track rider but you are doing some of the better second riders a disservice.

[Shale Searcher]

I think once the likes of Kerrs and Garrity's have left the draft, I mean that in a nice way, riding as main team members next yr I would think, the skill level of the draft riders pool will be a lot levelled.... Think it's first yr was always going to be imbalanced.. Also, there needs to be a max time you can spend as a draft rider, otherwise you could end up with a number of "professional draft riders" who everyone would want!!