Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Boring


Recommended Posts

By that logic no one should reply to anyone :lol:

 

If people say things on a public from they are consciously choosing to put their “opinion” out there for others to read, expecting others to simply agree, or not express their opinion in return is precious at best

 

 

I said certain posters!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you state in this post the new silencers have been a massive negative in the quality of speedway at Monmore. Yes I remember Ermolenko,Correy and the Karlssons , but I also remember the 2009 season,only 7 years ago. What a season for Freddie Lindgren,only dropped 7 points I think at home all year and Freddie didn't make the gate that often. Be it Crump, Adams, Pedersen, he would simply round em up at Monmore, inside, outside he was simply impossible to defend against. Now an outside pass at Monmore is as rare as hens teeth. So yes as recent as 2009 / 2010 the passing at Monmore was off the scale and rarely gating was the be all and end all.

And as a footnote this is the reason the people I know have stopped coming, because the speedway is not as good as it used to be

 

Again, I agree with much of it.. BUT.. a significant difference also is we had a very good team in 2009 and as you say Freddie was flying.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens this season at Wolves if the team continues its impressive start to the season with regards to attendances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone could explain the silencer matter, it would be appreciated.

 

What affect does a silencer have on racing and why?

 

Imagine the silencer is a bath, the water taps are the power, and the plughole is the baffles now in speedway silencer..

With the old silencer (bath with plug out) taps on full, no problem..

 

New silencer (bath with plug in)

Taps on full, BIG problem!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Except that isn't the case is it, what you should say is you don't care how much posters go on as long as they agree with you... they 'bug' you if they have a different view and bug you the most when they can factually prove it too... hence you never having a cross word to say about the nonsensical abusive ramblings of Sidders when he's been on the sherry.

lots of things you cant prove factually. hence our woffy "disagreement" on the british final, think we have to agree to disagree at times, whereas, on other subjects, I agree with you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Except that isn't the case is it, what you should say is you don't care how much posters go on as long as they agree with you... they 'bug' you if they have a different view and bug you the most when they can factually prove it too... hence you never having a cross word to say about the nonsensical abusive ramblings of Sidders when he's been on the sherry.

If you say so! Blimey! Pot, kettle and black comes to mind here!

Edited by steve roberts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lots of things you cant prove factually. hence our woffy "disagreement" on the british final, think we have to agree to disagree at times, whereas, on other subjects, I agree with you

 

That's different and is entirely a matter of opinion.

 

You presented yours, I presented mine. The only thing I questioned you on was your belief other championship contenders would ride in a meet in another country the night before a GP.

 

Other than that simply a matter of opinion which is fine, we can debate it, remain civil and agree to disagree.

 

Where the issues come in is when someone makes a factual claim that is false... they are corrected, not always by me, but others as well, but rather than accept that they go off on a rampage screaming "Were you there", start hurling abuse and it all descends from there. That is not an opinion, just someone who is wrong. There's a big, big difference.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't going to bother anymore...but these last few posts have really annoyed me.

 

A few posters on here who are very vocal and aggressive in their posts, get in a right pickle because they actually don't read posts properly and seem to just pick bits to suit their blinkered agenda.

 

For example...these vocal minority seem to have a go at anybody who questions the racing of today.

 

They are adamant, because they've seen videos, that racing is exactly the same as how it used to be.

 

They couldn't be further from the truth. Yes...it wasn't overtaking on every race and yes, often races were strung out like so often today.

 

However...that's all they focus on.

 

The tracks and bikes were completely different.

 

The tracks had to be ridden differently.

 

The riders had to use different skills and different throttle control to now.

 

It was more exciting...even 10 years ago it was exciting.

 

The fact people are walking away because, like other people on this thread, because they find Speedway less exciting, speaks volumes.

 

It's not just about the outcome of the race...it's the race itself, the bikes and track set up, whether it's got grip, a little dirt, various racing lines, and at least a chance for a rider to try and overtake on different lines.

 

That's the difference to Speedway as it sits today.

 

Now watch someone come back and say the opposite, because they've seen some videos on youtube....yet people who were actually there say it was different...beggars belief sometimes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't going to bother anymore...but these last few posts have really annoyed me.

 

A few posters on here who are very vocal and aggressive in their posts, get in a right pickle because they actually don't read posts properly and seem to just pick bits to suit their blinkered agenda.

 

For example...these vocal minority seem to have a go at anybody who questions the racing of today.

 

They are adamant, because they've seen videos, that racing is exactly the same as how it used to be.

 

They couldn't be further from the truth. Yes...it wasn't overtaking on every race and yes, often races were strung out like so often today.

 

However...that's all they focus on.

 

The tracks and bikes were completely different.

 

The tracks had to be ridden differently.

 

The riders had to use different skills and different throttle control to now.

 

It was more exciting...even 10 years ago it was exciting.

 

The fact people are walking away because, like other people on this thread, because they find Speedway less exciting, speaks volumes.

 

It's not just about the outcome of the race...it's the race itself, the bikes and track set up, whether it's got grip, a little dirt, various racing lines, and at least a chance for a rider to try and overtake on different lines.

 

That's the difference to Speedway as it sits today.

 

Now watch someone come back and say the opposite, because they've seen some videos on youtube....yet people who were actually there say it was different...beggars belief sometimes.

 

And here is the perfect example.

 

You do realise the videos on Youtube are what happened? They are hard and fast, undisputable evidence. They are not fictitious events, created by CGI.

 

What you wish us to believe is, those meetings, and there are many of them now, are not real. Somehow false. Not a fair representation?

 

As I have quite clearly explained numerous times, but you don't seem to grasp is I am not referring to a few videos. I also have the recollection of how brilliant racing used to be in the late 80's to early to mid 90's. Yet I have EVERY SINGLE ONE of those meetings on DVD and when I rewatch them, I soon realise that its nothing like I remember it at all, in fact much of the time its quite dull.

 

Excitement has little to do with speedway's success. Speedway struggles because it has a poor marketing image. It's not deemed 'cool'. All sports have a churn of fans, I know many people who used to go to every home game in football, but no longer go anymore, the difference is they are replaced by new younger fans.

 

Speedway WAS better in the past, not because the racing was much better, if better at all, but because there were good crowds and a vibrant atmosphere. In such an environment a poor race can seem average, an average race is great and a great race is simply out of this world.

 

It's rare these days that feeling can be replicated, with the exception of the playoffs, which is why I love them so much.. its one of the rare times that the old feelings can come flooding back.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was more exciting...even 10 years ago it was exciting.

 

I watched 3 meetings last weekend - two E.L. and one P.L. - at Coventry, Leicester and Peterborough and do you know what all three were exciting and had some brilliant racing so how does that fit in with your assessment? On the other hand I used to think Leicester v Coventry matches back in the 70's and 80's were thrilling, but having recently watched 3 on video (sorry but I'm still old fashioned and have some videos ) the racing was pretty boring with hardly any passing. I blame Ole Olsen. :lol:

 

 

 

......wealdstone......As I posted earlier who do you think ask again, what do you think.

 

 

Don't tell him Pike ~ he's a Poole fan and you'll only start him off. :P

Edited by Gemini
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I watched 3 meetings last weekend - two E.L. and one P.L. - at Coventry, Leicester and Peterborough and do you know what all three were exciting and had some brilliant racing so how does that fit in with your assessment? On the other hand I used to think Leicester v Coventry matches back in the 70's and 80's were thrilling, but having recently watched 3 on video (sorry but I'm still old fashioned and have some videos ) the racing was pretty boring with hardly any passing. I blame Ole Olsen. :lol:

 

 

 

That completely backs up what I've said as well Gemini.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it does because it's true. I don't hark back to the past because I know the racing is no worse today than it used to be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I posted earlier who do you think ask again, what do you think.

I don't know, I have absolutely no idea.

 

To give you a bit of background, Inhavent regularly attended the speedway for at least five years and only recently have I returned to regular viewing. Hence, my knowledge is limited.

 

However, since you're asking, let me make an uneducated guess: Peter Andrè.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy