Were The Play-offs Decided By Reserves?

[Authorised]

On the Sky Broadcast this week, Pearson asked Havelock if the reserves are "as" important as the Number 1s. I believe that they are more important. In fact, when the reserves were announced I said that King’s Lynn would win the league based on it.

 

This may not happen, as of course, the main team cannot have injuries. Reserves are not the be all and end all – but we have plenty of examples of meetings where numbers 1 to 5 have scored 4 or lower and still prevailed to victory this season. Reserves have never been as important in the destination of the league title over the course of a season - I hope that it is not decided on reserves.

 

Reserves have always been important and produced memorable moments and value recognised.

The years of having Rick Miller, Billy Janniro and Steve Johnston in reserve to score points are gone. Who can forget a Coventry side – top heavy, led by Hamill and Hancock – losing at home to Poole with Hans Andersen and Krzysztof Cegielski in reserve, on their Brandon debuts, in 2001. Certainly, this year's reserves are cheaper options.

 

Back in those days, Cegielski went to heat leader and Andersen into the team before breaking his thigh. If they had stayed fit, and in reserve all year. Poole could have overcome Oxford.

 

This season is different to those years –

• You cannot get 1 to 5 dropping into reserve.
• They cannot be removed to be replaced by a number 1 etc..,
• 2 reserve heats and avoid strong heats.
• Margin of victory is important for additional league points (40-38, 46-44 is no longer good enough).

This is also supported via heat leaders dropping averages – thanks to meeting more often. Several decades ago, it was possible for home and away riders – non reserves - to get maximums without meeting.

 

I had a look at the averages – excluding BPs – of all Elite League teams after the 144 fixtures. A unique feature is that all reserves at home have taken between 128 and 133 rides – much closer than previous seasons. Away from home, the spread is 126 to 130, the exception being Coventry at 139.

 

I excluded BPs, because they can collect more than their average share due to having a two heats between them. If it is 3-3, with the same heat winner in both reserve races, we wouldn't count it as 3-4, so BPs are irrelevant when looking for reserve/meeting outcome correlation.

 

For fairness, I have compared the 4/8 ride contribution - all comparisons subsequent to this are based on this to average out R/R, ex 2 mins etc.. changes to make it like for like. First the 4 ride average per reserve, listed team, home, away, total:

Poole , 5.18 , 4.84 , 5,01

King's Lynn , 6.44 , 5.42 , 5.92

Coventry , 5.81 , 5.65 , 5.74

Swindon , 5.21 , 4.40 , 4.80

Eastbourne , 5.97 , 4.16 , 5.07

Lakeside , 5.59 , 3.63 , 4.59

Wolves , 4.47 , 3.88 , 4.17

Belle Vue , 3.78 , 3.07 , 3.42

Leicester , 3.84 , 2.95 , 3.40

 

To be certain of getting into the play-offs, you need reserves to average 5pts per 4 rides, or total 10pts per meeting. Eastbourne and Swindon have swapped over for two reasons :

• Due to the points structure of the league, it is better to perform away from home than at home . It does suggest that away averages need to be north of 4.40 to get to play-offs. Eastbourne reserves didn't measure up away from home.
• Injuries and Unavailability: In all meetings where Lewis Blackbird rode for Eastbourne, the Eastbourne reserves out-pointed their opposition – home or away. He obviously picked up an injury, but also did only 1 out of the 4 away meetings in April, top scoring away at Swindon.

When Blackbird rode, their home average was 6.52, away average 6.12. Total 6.39. Only 4 away meetings (3 of which garnered points). When Blackbird did not, their away average was 3.45 per reserve – on par with Belle Vue and Leicester for 12 fixtures. Eastbourne only collected 1 more point on their travels out of 12 fixtures without Blackbird.

 

When Home Reserves outscored Away Reserves (on 8 ride ave) - 91 out of 144 meetings - 82 resulted in Home Wins, 3 draws and just 6 away wins. It proved nearly impossible to turn around any result where the home reserves had the upper hand.

 

When Away Reserves were either level or outscoring Home Reserves, the result was 30 home wins, 3 draws and 20 away wins - all multiple winners are going to the play-offs.

 

Of these 20 – Coventry (7), King’s Lynn (5), Swindon (3), Poole (3), Lakeside (1), Wolves (1). Coventry never won away if their reserves didn’t outpoint the Home reserves (based on 8 ride ave). Coventry also lost 3 out of 6 at Home, where their pairing could not outpoint the opposition. Coventry were the most vulnerable based on reserves alone.

 

Belle Vue had to win 7 home fixtures with a reserve deficit to the away team – all other teams were 4 or less. In doing so, you are likely to give up League Points. 4 teams were 50% or lower in being able to turn around away advantages - Coventry, Lakeside, Leicester and Wolves.

 

If the 8 ride average is compared, only 9 matches out of 68 were “turned around”, where the eventual winners had reserves who averaged MORE than a 5 point deficit vs opposition. The 9 matches were 8 where the Away team had the advantage, and all turned to Home Wins. The other was a Home team, turn to a draw – Eastbourne v Poole. Of the 9, it broke down Eastbourne (4), Poole (2), Coventry (1), Swindon (1), Wolves (1) failed to capitalise on reserve advantages.

 

To put into context Eastbourne's 3 defeats from the reserve advantage. First was away at Swindon, and they lost 46-44 despite 3 heat leaders picking up just 13 points. Away at Leicester, they lost 45-44, despite running a R/R for Kylamkorpi picking up 2 points, away at Belle Vue, they lost 47-43 despite guest bookings at 3 and 5 picking up 6. In previous years, a team would be smashed under these circumstances. Belle Vue lost the reserve races for a maximum 10-2. The reserves got them 3 league points from these 3 fixtures.

 

If the Home team reserves average 5 points MORE than Away from their 8 rides, it never resulted in an Away victory.

 

Leicester had no away fixtures where the reserves combined for double figures, Belle Vue just one. All other teams had at least 4. Belle Vue also allowed the home reserves to collect a combined double figure score on 15 out of 16 meetings on their travels – the exception being a trip to Brandon, where Jason Garrity was unavailable. Conversely, King’s Lynn only met this kind of resistance on the road 4 times, mainly due to their strength in this area. This demonstrates a clear correlation between double figure scores and opposition weakness in reserves. This usually didn’t happen in 2001, for example, where reserves had to beat more main team opposition to get scores / maximums.

 

Belle Vue lost the most points due to reserves, whilst King's Lynn had the strongest pairing, Coventry were the most dependent on their reserves as KL also lost matches where their reserves were strong as they were clocking up the higher averages. If Garrity had ended up at Belle Vue, I am sure the league would have looked very different for both sides. The same cannot be said if you swap other riders in the 1 to 5.

 

I am broadly in favour of the Fast Track idea, but some changes need to take place to prevent a predictable league happening:

• Adequate replacements for injuries to reserves. An entire season is based upon them.
• Elite League needs priority of availability.
• Perhaps alter the points distribution between Home and Away wins.
• Limit reserves to 3 programmed rides per meeting. Removing the 2^nd reserve heat will not impact development, as that line up could be replicated in a Reserve League, of the 1980s quality.
• Perhaps go to a 13 heat format (with reserve league), or replace the 2^nd reserve heat with another nominated ride. This could make sure 4 out of the top 5 get 5 rides, and incentivise riders to make a progression to the team.

That said, it would seem perverse to make changes for next season. It would be unfortunate to not allow the bottom sides to strengthen and get the picks. Rule changes should be made for 3-5 years to allow fairness, but equally difficult to hold back individual riders from progressing.

 

The perfect reserves will be:

• Average of 5.00 – at least 4.50 away from home (exc. BPs).
• Always available and prioritise EL Racing - or make sure date clashes are at a minimum.
• Influence Away Form (no Home Track specialist)
• Reserves who can outscore their opposite numbers by more than 5 from 8 rides.

If the format stays the same, and I was advising a half decent reserve, I would make sure they were paid or "sponsored" to the value that they bring to the team and not by skill / grade level.

[Jonny the spud]

So only 3 rides per meeting for a reserve to keep two bikes to elite league standard, all for £50 a point ? I don't think you'll find many youngsters lining up for that.

[phillipsr]

Bikes dont have to be Elite standard there reacing agsinst NL riders and PL second strings

[Pirate Baz]

Wow Authorised .......... can you not sleep at night?

 

You aren't cricket's Duckworth/Lewis in disguise are you?

 

A lot of hard work and it confirms what is revealed in the EL averages (from this weeks SS).

 

Top 5 fast track riders.

 

8.95 Lewis Blackbird

8.25 Jason Garrity }

8.23 Lewis Kerr } Play off

8.13 Kyle Newman } Qualifiers

7.63 Steve Worrell. }

 

Lewis Blackbird's injury is covered in your detail and poses the question "Would the Eagles have squeezed into the play off's had it not been for his injury?"

 

I think that quite simply the teams with the best fast track rider(s) are always going to be the main challengers under the current system. Poor reserves and two 1-5's in heats 2 and 9 and you're give the opposition an 8 point start each match.

 

The whole thing really needs looking at this winter. The afore mentioned riders are not going to be fast track next year, so will their (on any other) clubs give them a 1 to 5 slot?

If not they will be returned to the PL and to my mind that will have made the fast track idea a pointless exercise.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Pirate Baz

[foreverblue]

Wow Authorised .......... can you not sleep at night?

 

You aren't cricket's Duckworth/Lewis in disguise are you?

 

A lot of hard work and it confirms what is revealed in the EL averages (from this weeks) SS.

 

Top 5 fast track riders.

 

8.95 Lewis Blackbird

8.25 Jason Garrity }

8.23 Lewis Kerr } Play off

8.13 Kyle Newman } Qualifiers

7.63 Steve Worrell. }

 

Lewis Blackbird's injury is covered in your detail and poses the question "Would the Eagles have squeezed into the play off's had it not been for his injury?"

 

I think that quite simply the teams with the best fast track rider(s) are always going to be the main challengers under the current system. Poor reserves and two 1-5's in heats 2 and 9 and you're give the opposition an 8 point start each match.

 

The whole thing really needs looking at this winter. The afore mentioned riders are not going to be fast track next year, so will their (on any other) clubs give them a 1 to 5 slot?

If not they will be returned to the PL and to my mind that will have made the fast track idea a pointless exercise.

I don't think Eastbourne would have made it, their 1-5 is too weak, they haven't won away all season which would have included meetings with Blackbird in the team.

[SteveLyric2]

Wow Authorised .......... can you not sleep at night?

 

You aren't cricket's Duckworth/Lewis in disguise are you?

 

A lot of hard work and it confirms what is revealed in the EL averages (from this weeks SS).

 

Top 5 fast track riders.

 

8.95 Lewis Blackbird

8.25 Jason Garrity }

8.23 Lewis Kerr } Play off

8.13 Kyle Newman } Qualifiers

7.63 Steve Worrell. }

 

Lewis Blackbird's injury is covered in your detail and poses the question "Would the Eagles have squeezed into the play off's had it not been for his injury?"

 

I think that quite simply the teams with the best fast track rider(s) are always going to be the main challengers under the current system. Poor reserves and two 1-5's in heats 2 and 9 and you're give the opposition an 8 point start each match.

 

The whole thing really needs looking at this winter. The afore mentioned riders are not going to be fast track next year, so will their (on any other) clubs give them a 1 to 5 slot?

If not they will be returned to the PL and to my mind that will have made the fast track idea a pointless exercise.

At least one EL promoter is proposing only one FT reserve next year with the other being any under 22 years - foreign or otherwise!!

 

Presumably those clubs with both reserves as their assets eg KL, Coventry, could still choose to keep both assuming their calculated averages suit the format/points limit next year?

Edited September 27, 2014 by Skidder1

[B.V 72]

The point of the draft system was to bring on younger riders etc and for some of them it has done its job.So if we dont keep them at reserve next year it will have been a waste of time.This year has sorted out which riders can hack it and which riders cant.

So in my opinion it seems like we will have 8 teams in the top league next season.If we keep Blackbird,Garrity.Kerr.Newman.Worrall and add Birks.Auty and Roynon that gives us a fairly evenly balanced No 6 position.

Then for the No 7 position teams could pick from Wright Ellis,Nielsen Strarke,Morris Jacobs.Bates,Rose.Greenwood and Perry.

From this group of riders we would have much more balanced teams we will have lost all the riders that are not good enougth or not yet good enougth.Then pay them more they have proved themselves and have earned a position in the team.

My last thought is that in my opinion the draft should be done the same as this year riders graded from 1 to say 18,teams should be able to keep there own asset in the No 6 position if they want to but the No 7 position should be open to all as this would help balance the teams according to there 1st pick.If they dont do this the whole project has been a waste of time.

[woodenspoon]

At least one EL promoter is proposing only one FT reserve next year with the other being any under 22 years - foreign or otherwise!!

 

Presumably those clubs with both reserves as their assets eg KL, Coventry, could still choose to keep both assuming their calculated averages suit the format/points limit next year?

The fairness of this years draft pick was destroyed from the start with clubs claiming their assets, which gave KL & Poole an advantage.

Belle Vue made a total arse of their picks, and could never recover, doomed from the start.

Garrity as far as I am aware is still a Rye House asset and as such should be available for first pick, from the bottom teams of this year. I assume BV will now claim S Worrall as their FTR now that he is their asset.

You can rest assured that whatever is decided for next year, certain teams will make sure that they come out on top.

[Woz01]

Wouldn't surprise me at all if Garrity becomes a Bees asset especially if the draft continues and he is in it.

[Grachan]

Wow Authorised .......... can you not sleep at night?

 

You aren't cricket's Duckworth/Lewis in disguise are you?

 

A lot of hard work and it confirms what is revealed in the EL averages (from this weeks SS).

 

Top 5 fast track riders.

 

8.95 Lewis Blackbird

8.25 Jason Garrity }

8.23 Lewis Kerr } Play off

8.13 Kyle Newman } Qualifiers

7.63 Steve Worrell. }

 

Lewis Blackbird's injury is covered in your detail and poses the question "Would the Eagles have squeezed into the play off's had it not been for his injury?"

 

I think that quite simply the teams with the best fast track rider(s) are always going to be the main challengers under the current system. Poor reserves and two 1-5's in heats 2 and 9 and you're give the opposition an 8 point start each match.

 

The whole thing really needs looking at this winter. The afore mentioned riders are not going to be fast track next year, so will their (on any other) clubs give them a 1 to 5 slot?

If not they will be returned to the PL and to my mind that will have made the fast track idea a pointless exercise.

 

What's being missed out here is that Swindon's other reserve is 16 years old and struggles to score in many matches. Worral has scored well but Swindon haven't had much advantage all year at reserve.

 

The reason Swindon reached the play offs was through improvement in their second strings.

[SCB]

Wouldn't surprise me at all if Garrity becomes a Bees asset especially if the draft continues and he is in it.

Kennett for Garrity. Works for all involved.

 

What's being missed out here is that Swindon's other reserve is 16 years old and struggles to score in many matches. Worral has scored well but Swindon haven't had much advantage all year at reserve.

 

The reason Swindon reached the play offs was through improvement in their second strings.

Must admit, while Worrall has been a massive hlp to your lots season. It is, as you say, the 2nd strings where you have been winning meetings.

[Rob Lee]

You people need to get out more. It's just four blokes riding motorcycles round in circles !!

[tocha]

You people need to get out more. It's just four blokes riding motorcycles round in circles !!

Who let you out then.

[weatherwatcher]

Yes. At least 3 of the teams would have been a lot lower down the pecking order if not for thier FTR scoring 13 or 14 points a metting. Some of these youngster have been riding better that the main riders in the teams.

[Bruiser McHuge]

So fast track reserves are on £50 a point are they ?....for the good ones scoring 12 points a meeting in heats that you certainly don't need to spend ridiculous amounts of money on tip top machinery that is £600 a meeting......that's a good deal for the rider in my book ....bloody good in fact.

 

And yes...I do think they have had far too big an influence in teams this year and yes they are more important than a number 1 which surely cannot be right ...and I certainly don't think the format helps bring them on at all and in fact disguises their ability into thinking they are better riders than they are due to the vast amount of points some are scoring under pretty easy conditions.

[Grachan]

You people need to get out more. It's just four blokes riding motorcycles round

 

 

No it isn't. It's much more than that.

[Crazy robin]

At least one EL promoter is proposing only one FT reserve next year with the other being any under 22 years - foreign or otherwise!!

 

Presumably those clubs with both reserves as their assets eg KL, Coventry, could still choose to keep both assuming their calculated averages suit the format/points limit next year?

Surprise, surprise & I wonder who that could be!!.

[HenryW]

If the play-off teams were decided by the reserves, would that actually be a bad thing?

 

The original claim was that this was a move to encourage the British youngsters. If that was genuinely the intent and it wasn't just about saving money, which I think most suspect it really was, the reserves being a deciding factor would surely be a good thing!

 

If a team needs to have good young British riders to win the league then surely teams will learn that they actually need to invest in young British riders so that they can win the league...That surely delivers the on the claimed intent to encourage British youngsters.

 

The fairness of this years draft pick was destroyed from the start with clubs claiming their assets, which gave KL & Poole an advantage.

I disagree that the claiming of assets was a bad thing.

Personally, I think that the biggest flaws of the system this year were the "draft" and the fixed points money for FTR riders (although I'm not sure whether that was actually enforced).

 

If you want to genuinely benefit the young Brits surely you keep the race format the same but get rid of the draft. Why not let teams fight for the young Brits financially rather than having the draft and a set pay scale?

 

If the reserves are crucial to winning the league it should become an incentive for teams to actually work on developing young talent or at least encourage them to pay other teams that are willing to work on developing riders. Aside from transfer fees it also encourages teams to offer good money to the kids and encourages the local companies to sponsor the kids that can make a big difference to the league winning chances....

Is that not what we really want? Rather than money being thrown at the middle order Dane, Swede, Czech, etc, the money gets pushed towards the young Brits?

[SteveLyric2]

Surprise, surprise & I wonder who that could be!!.

Leicester's!!!!

[Authorised]

So only 3 rides per meeting for a reserve to keep two bikes to elite league standard, all for £50 a point ? I don't think you'll find many youngsters lining up for that.

 

 

As I also pointed out, if there was a 2nd half - or Junior League - they wouldn't be fussed. Surely it is about track time, and not the money?? It needs a willingness on both parties to understand what the Fast Track is there for.

 

 

Lewis Blackbird's injury is covered in your detail and poses the question "Would the Eagles have squeezed into the play off's had it not been for his injury?"

 

I think that quite simply the teams with the best fast track rider(s) are always going to be the main challengers under the current system. Poor reserves and two 1-5's in heats 2 and 9 and you're give the opposition an 8 point start each match.

 

The whole thing really needs looking at this winter. The afore mentioned riders are not going to be fast track next year, so will their (on any other) clubs give them a 1 to 5 slot?

If not they will be returned to the PL and to my mind that will have made the fast track idea a pointless exercise.

 

I think with Lewis Blackbird riding, they could have got into the play-offs. They picked up 0.75 league points per away meeting that he did, compared to 0.08 that he did not do. Eagles couldn't cover adequately, but also do not forget he missed meetings due to fixture clashes too.

 

Equally, if Belle Vue and Coventry had swapped reserves - Belle Vue would be in the play-offs. Again - vs. previous seasons - weak reserves usually meant a stronger 1-5. Not this year, so the 1-5 will always struggle to pull back that 8 point deficit.

 

In 4 meetings - reserves combined for 2 points or less, Belle Vue twice at home, Leicester twice away. Leicester managed just 1 point at Eastbourne. 2 should be the bare minimum ( 2 * 5-1s, remainder zeros). Belle Vue managed to overturn it once without taking maximum home points.

 

 

At least one EL promoter is proposing only one FT reserve next year with the other being any under 22 years - foreign or otherwise!!

 

Presumably those clubs with both reserves as their assets eg KL, Coventry, could still choose to keep both assuming their calculated averages suit the format/points limit next year?

 

Should be British only imo.

 

If the play-off teams were decided by the reserves, would that actually be a bad thing?

 

 

I disagree that the claiming of assets was a bad thing.

 

I don't think the competition is very "Elite" if it is decided by reserves, and top 5s are interchangeable. Does a company in the outside world exist on a make/break on its apprentices.

 

The Asset system goes against the definition of what a draft should look like in my opinion. The entire system is dated as has been long discussed on this forum.

 

As with a point I made in the original post, if a 16 year old is coming through and the draft is continued, he would be more valuable (and costly) to acquire as an asset, than someone with draft experience etc...? Price tags and making them a key to league success may weigh heavy on their shoulders when it should be about learning your trade.

 

There is a happy medium to be found between the draft and league success. I wouldn't be happy if I was a bottom 4 side and rules are changed to suit play-off finalists / asset holding clubs this season. Bidding wars on assets cannot be a long term ambition of the draft, it will force clubs out.