Mark Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Not ideal having selector's picks and wildcards period. Every rider should be there on merit. Disagree. You have to have cover for a top rider who suffers injury like Hampel. Not sure he will come back anywhere near as good after two broken legs but he deserves another chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Which only highlights the inadequacy of the GP system, where only 15 riders in a given year get to fight for the title. In my humble opinion of course as a fully paid-up member of the Nostalgia Brigade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted September 9, 2015 Report Share Posted September 9, 2015 Which only highlights the inadequacy of the GP system, where only 15 riders in a given year get to fight for the title. In my humble opinion of course as a fully paid-up member of the Nostalgia Brigade. They don't. There are 15 riders in the GPs and there were 48 GP qualifier places that were determined in some cases by national titles. That means in theory 63 rider had a chance - lose a handful for those who did the GP and the qualifier but gain a few more for those who had to qualify via a national championship like the Danes, Poles and Aussie had to do AFAIK. What riders haven't had a chance to qualify for the GPs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted September 10, 2015 Report Share Posted September 10, 2015 They don't. There are 15 riders in the GPs and there were 48 GP qualifier places that were determined in some cases by national titles. That means in theory 63 rider had a chance - lose a handful for those who did the GP and the qualifier but gain a few more for those who had to qualify via a national championship like the Danes, Poles and Aussie had to do AFAIK. What riders haven't had a chance to qualify for the GPs? EXCELLENT post ... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted September 10, 2015 Report Share Posted September 10, 2015 They don't. There are 15 riders in the GPs and there were 48 GP qualifier places that were determined in some cases by national titles. That means in theory 63 rider had a chance - lose a handful for those who did the GP and the qualifier but gain a few more for those who had to qualify via a national championship like the Danes, Poles and Aussie had to do AFAIK. What riders haven't had a chance to qualify for the GPs? EXCELLENT post ... It gets like groundhog day though Phil. For years the same suspects have banged on about the so called "closed shop" of the GPs. Many of us have shown that there is now a more open to all qualification process than ever existed before. It then dies down a while before the same crap crops up again.. Tell the Americans how fair the old system was pre early 70s, and even after that when they could have no more than 2 riders in the championship chase proper at a time they could boast Penhall, Autrey, the Morans, Sigalos, Schwartz etc, Tell PC how fair it was in 1981 Bet Martin Dugard thought 1992 World Semi Final was fair The list goes on (and on and on, rather like the dinosaurs on here) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted September 10, 2015 Report Share Posted September 10, 2015 This Dinosaur will bang on no longer. The World Final is dead...Long live the GP. (though no GP I have seen so far has equalled Wembley 1981 ). And...I think Tai would be World Champion under any system. p.s. To all dinosaur haters...I promise not to post any more "I love the World Finals" messages . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted September 10, 2015 Report Share Posted September 10, 2015 This Dinosaur will bang on no longer. The World Final is dead...Long live the GP. (though no GP I have seen so far has equalled Wembley 1981 ). And...I think Tai would be World Champion under any system. p.s. To all dinosaur haters...I promise not to post any more "I love the World Finals" messages . You are not alone in loving the old World Final, I went to many and enjoyed them. The reality is often different to the memory though. The qualification system was very unfair, it was rife with seedings, one year (1970) almost 40% of the field were home country seeds, and p1ss poor ones at that. Many very top riders missed out while second rate foreigners were there. Almost always by heat 8 at least half the field could't win and by the interval it was usuall down to 3 or 4 possibles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted September 10, 2015 Report Share Posted September 10, 2015 I promised not to comment 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPEEDY69 Posted September 10, 2015 Report Share Posted September 10, 2015 They don't. There are 15 riders in the GPs and there were 48 GP qualifier places that were determined in some cases by national titles. That means in theory 63 rider had a chance - lose a handful for those who did the GP and the qualifier but gain a few more for those who had to qualify via a national championship like the Danes, Poles and Aussie had to do AFAIK. What riders haven't had a chance to qualify for the GPs? The crucial difference of course is that qualifiers are for the following years' GP, not that year and as KK has shown, a year can make a big difference! So you prefer to consider folk who make no effort to qualify... interesting. Guess that puts me ahead of Lindback and Kildemand in the pecking order of your selection process! I've re-read my post and I don't think that's what I said. Two examples of potential wildcards for next year were Hampel and Ward, neither of whom contested qualifiers but would have deserved a pick in my view. The other wildcard places, if we have to have them should go to the next highest finishers in the GP, so 9th, 10th etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave the Mic Posted September 10, 2015 Report Share Posted September 10, 2015 Disagree. You have to have cover for a top rider who suffers injury like Hampel. Not sure he will come back anywhere near as good after two broken legs but he deserves another chance. I disagree. All that does is makes it more of a closed shop. Sadly, injuries - as we all know only too well - are part and parcel of the sport. Many riders have missed out qualification in the past due to the timing of injuries. It is unfortunate, but I would much rather have 16 riders in the GP series on merit, rather than having been handed a place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted September 11, 2015 Report Share Posted September 11, 2015 Depends on how you define merit. Hampel performances this year would place him in the top half dozen riders in the world. That suggests to me that "on merit" he is more deserving of a place than riders who finished outside the qualifying places. Same would apply to Emil and Darcy if they were available. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 Depends on how you define merit. Hampel performances this year would place him in the top half dozen riders in the world. That suggests to me that "on merit" he is more deserving of a place than riders who finished outside the qualifying places. Same would apply to Emil and Darcy if they were available. Hampel is a certainty to be in the series and he fully deserves it,he has comeback well from bad injuries before so i think he will do it again also he is a terrific gater which will help loads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 I agree and hope so Sid, though it may mean bsi changing what has seemed to be a policy of not giving wildcards to nations with 3 riders already qualified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdmc82 Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 Hampel is a certainty to be in the series and he fully deserves it,he has comeback well from bad injuries before so i think he will do it again also he is a terrific gater which will help loads. I agree. Hampel is always up there in the table in the top 3 places. Sadly he has suffered injuries through no fault of his own over the last couple of years. I have missed him in the SGP and hope he will be one of the first wild cards announced. Definitely deserves one. I agree and hope so Sid, though it may mean bsi changing what has seemed to be a policy of not giving wildcards to nations with 3 riders already qualified. Magic & KK are currently outside the top 8 at the moment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 Yes but magic is a good chance of top 8 which would make 3 poles 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMills Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 the gps weakness is, it select riders by nationality over ability..if it has to be 4 poles, so be it..if 3 poles qualify,it would mean excluding someone like hampel, you just weaken the field and quality of the competition.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave the Mic Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 Depends on how you define merit. Hampel performances this year would place him in the top half dozen riders in the world. That suggests to me that "on merit" he is more deserving of a place than riders who finished outside the qualifying places. Same would apply to Emil and Darcy if they were available. I define it as having qualified. I appreciate that Hamel has been unfortunate, but my personal view is that is part of speedway. I appreciate that you may have a different view, but that is my opinion, right or wrong. I don't like the nomination system, I prefer to see riders who have qualified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 Nominated riders and wildcards should have no place in major championships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 Nominated riders and wildcards should have no place in major championships.Why?Do u consider Wimbledon, f1, motogp, the old speedway world finals devalued because they have/had these? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted September 12, 2015 Report Share Posted September 12, 2015 Because selector's picks are arbitrary choices and wildcards keep out genuine competitors. Why should Alexander Conda get a place to appease local interest for one GP, thereby denying a better rider a GP place. There will always be people who miss out on qualifying but good/bad luck is cyclical. If everyone had to qualify for the GP series they would all be there on merit. 1 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.