BWitcher Posted June 12, 2014 Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 What a ridiculous statement that is. Ivan Mauger was one of the greatest riders ever in this sport, and you slander him as a cheat.. Ivan Mauger used every opportunity to his advantage. every time there was a rule, he would used it to the best possible outcome. Sure, he moved and rolled at the start, he was allowed to, sure he would push the tapes, of cause he would psych riders out to jump the start. He was brilliant. BUT if the rules then were the same as now, I can assure you Mauger would be the best at keeping still, and would always be first out of the traps. That man was the best starter the sport has ever known...... I don't see where he was being slandered as a cheat? He said Ivan Mauger loved the old way... he did. He said that's how he won most of his races.. it was. Where's the problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g13webb Posted June 12, 2014 Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 I don't see where he was being slandered as a cheat? He said Ivan Mauger loved the old way... he did. He said that's how he won most of his races.. it was. Where's the problem? His whole post was, His insinuation and sarcasm that ' Mauger only won his races because he was allowed to roll at the start ' . that to me that making out he was cheating. He won most of his races because he was the best gater, Not because he was any different to everyone else. just better....... I have No Problems...........I was privileged to see the real master at work........ The Ultimate Professional..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Fever Posted June 12, 2014 Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 I happen to think that doubling a score for no extra effort is a ridiculous concept and the best way of illustrating that is the engine failure scenario. A lone rider lines up at the tapes against a double tactical from the opponents. The track is very slick like Birmingham and passing is impossible. He makes the start and is away but on the last bend his bike stops and his opponents pass him, he limps home for the solitary point. 5-1. The same scenario today and 8-1! The team using the tactical gain an EXTRA 3 points for nothing! Not as simple as that tho is it? If the losing team were (say) 10 behind when they used the double tac sub in heat 8 (that was the usual favorite) and whether they got a lucky 5-1 or not they'd still be 6 behind and could have yet another tac sub in the next heat if they so desired so can potentially gain even more points! With the TR rule they might get an extra 3pts but its then less likely they'll get 12 behind and so can't use another one - that is much fairer surely?? As for the starting gate rules they're fine as they are EXCEPT refs should be more lenient if a rider appears to get a flyer. If he's satisfied that the riders are still before he releases the tapes its ludicrous to penalise a rider just because he anticipated the start perfectly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted June 12, 2014 Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 There seems to be a misunderstanding between what is an advantage and what is fair as for as the off topic discussion is concerned. Mathematically the old tactical could give a bigger advantage than the new one, not difficult to understand. If you don't want the losing team to have a bigger advantage while losing then I can live with that but saying it's 'not fair' is a bit like saying it wasn't fair when Muller had the GM for his world final. Massive advantage, yes, unfair, NO. For me the issue is about credibility. Substitutes are common in team sport, fact. Each sport uses substitutes in a different way but the principle of changing one competitor for another is commonplace. That is NOT a comparison by the way, lol! Some sports include some form of handicap to either make it more difficult for the winning team or easier for the losing team or player. The old tactical was just putting the two principles together to give the losing team an advantage which can be a bigger advantage than the new rule but is far more credible. The new tactical is just an off the wall barnpot load of bollox, it's not based even vaguely on any generally accepted rule and actually goes against one huge principle of fairness which is equal return for equal achievement. Holy crap. I think i agree with Drop a cog! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Fever Posted June 12, 2014 Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 There seems to be a misunderstanding between what is an advantage and what is fair as for as the off topic discussion is concerned. Mathematically the old tactical could give a bigger advantage than the new one, not difficult to understand. If you don't want the losing team to have a bigger advantage while losing then I can live with that but saying it's 'not fair' is a bit like saying it wasn't fair when Muller had the GM for his world final. Massive advantage, yes, unfair, NO. For me the issue is about credibility. Substitutes are common in team sport, fact. Each sport uses substitutes in a different way but the principle of changing one competitor for another is commonplace. That is NOT a comparison by the way, lol! Some sports include some form of handicap to either make it more difficult for the winning team or easier for the losing team or player. The old tactical was just putting the two principles together to give the losing team an advantage which can be a bigger advantage than the new rule but is far more credible. The new tactical is just an off the wall barnpot load of bollox, it's not based even vaguely on any generally accepted rule and actually goes against one huge principle of fairness which is equal return for equal achievement. The TR might be a load of bollox but its a better load of bollox than the old TS rule simply because of the limitations of use. If the TS was re-introduced but with TR limitations then maybe people would be happier? i.e. only usable twice, when the losing side is 10 then 12pts down, and same limitations of heats that it can be used in. That way it'd still achieve what it's meant to (make matches closer with a small chance that the losers might actually win) but without the double-scoring which seems to irritate everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.