Lakeside V Belle Vue - 4 May - Sky Match

[Daytripper]

Wolverhampton usually does produce good racing, although it seems to me that it has not been as good the last couple of years. I have not been to Lakeside but have seen some decent matches from there on TV and read good reports about other meetings from people I respect. However, in my opinion a good big track produces a better overall racing spectacle than a good small track.

 

Having been brought up at Hyde Road, like any track it had poor meetings with processional racing but the overall standard was arguably the best I've seen. Kirkmanshulme Lane was capable of producing good racing and the standard the last few years wasn't bad. However, the point being made is that given the opportunity a big track is the way to go. Having now had the opportunity to watch the racing at the NSS last night highlighted what I have been missing since the demise of Hyde Road. It's early days and it will take time for riders to discover and learn all of the racing lines but I am convinced that the promotion made the right decision in going for a big track.

Having been brought up at a big wide track myself and now watch most of my Speedwáy at two smaller tracks I woukd have to agree that a good meeting on a big wide track produces a special type of spectacle that smaller and medium size tracks do not seem to replicate.

 

However as Stevebrum has correctly pointed out there is much more to than track size . A good meeting needs good track prep , two closely balanced teams , and a range of other things that need to click at the same time to produce a memorable meeting.

 

I have to say it took me quite a while to get used to Lakeside, and never liked at all in the Ronnie Russell days, in fact I never really went until the present promotion took over and made big changes to the track and the team, but I do think it's a lot to do with where you watch Speedwáy on a regular basis and what you get used to. For myself , some of the most memorable meetings of recent years were at Lakeside in 2013 when the team were struggling a bit and it seemed that Peter Karlsson and Dave Watt , both track specialists at Lakeside were going out in heats 13&15 to secure the win, often with some terrific cut backs.

 

I think most regular posters on here know there is no magic formula that produces exciting meetings week after week and many different factors have to click at the same time to produce a really good one, but it gets a bit tedious when we get posters like Stoke Potter rattling on with drivel that flies in the face of our own first hand experiences

 

Now you're getting to the point. The majority of British tracks are shoe-horned into places they don't really fit and so aren't conducive to good racing.

It's not the first time I've seen Lakeside on the TV, I wasn't impressed on the previous occasions either but this week's was probably the worst.

 

Well , now you have your remedy. Next time Lakeside or any other British track you don't like is on TV don't watch it. Find something more stimulating to do. That way you'll enjoy life more, we won't have to read your carping complaints and we'll all be happy.

 

Problem solved

[Aces51]

for me it's not about the size but about the shape and how it rides,

 

Is it just me.

[marko]

Aces 51 yeah I think it's just you, I've got the type of mind and didn't spot it until you highlighted it.

 

Day tripper, I think there are those that will never be pleased with the fare offered from Lakeside, there were some good races and a reasonable amount of passing on Monday, in fact when I watched it back it came over better than I had expected it to, but alas if people want to judge our track on the fact overtakes happen in the 35-50 mph range instead of the 50 and up range then they are wasting their time watching because its simply not possible, and I dare say Jon Cook does not care because why should he worry about people who have no intention of visiting because what they want, we can't sell, they are not our target demographic.

Lakeside won't be around for ever but it won't be because crowds have turned their backs because racing on our track happens to be slower than on other tracks.

[SCB]

There is no scientific proof that a big track will always produce better racing than a small one, it is purely down to personal opinions and preferences, for example for me it's not about the size but about the shape and how it rides, Somerset and Peterborough for example ride much faster than their actual size, tons of speed generated and a fair amount of room to manoeuvre, that is more important, if I could change Lakesides track to a copy of any other than Somerset and Peterboroughs would be up their, but also the German track Gustrow which I think is a cracker but not what you would class as a traditionally big.

 

What I will say though whilst a faster track will produce overtaking at higher speeds those higher speeds could also lead to races being more strung out because of the increased differential between the riders/bikes where as on a small track everything is scaled down meaning it's closer but also slower.

I readily admit I prefer a big one (there you go Aces51) as a general rule. A faster, flowing race just seems better than a more stop start race on a smaller track. But I'd say it's more than just big vs small, You can have a big track with tight bends and it will still be crap but you can get smaller tracks with longer sweeping bends (and then small straights) that are briliant to watch. Basically, I think a good track is one where the straights are further apart.

 

It's also no surprise to Lakeside fans to hear I don't love their track, I think it can be utterly dull BUT I do think since Stuart Douglas and Jon Cook took over the racing has improved 10 fold and even the general feel at Lakeside is pretty good. I find Lakeside either pretty good or terrible, the other small, tight EL track Wolves has always been one of my favourites, watching PK and Lindgren around there is always a joy and I'm lucky to have seen Chris Harris ride there a disproportionate amount of time and he's great there! But after Wolves, I'd say my favourite UK tracks are Somerset and Scunthorpe (285 and 300 metres) which I say still puts them in the "small" category but people think they're big - because as I talked about earlier, the straights are a long way apart. As a result of this the rider rarely scrub off much speed so it looks faster and speed is always exciting!

[Aces51]

I was in the process of replying but then saw SCB's post. He says pretty much what I would have said but he probably said it more succinctly.

Edited May 7, 2016 by Aces51

[E I Addio]

I readily admit I prefer a big one (there you go Aces51) as a general rule. A faster, flowing race just seems better than a more stop start race on a smaller track. But I'd say it's more than just big vs small, You can have a big track with tight bends and it will still be crap but you can get smaller tracks with longer sweeping bends (and then small straights) that are briliant to watch. Basically, I think a good track is one where the straights are further apart.

 

It's also no surprise to Lakeside fans to hear I don't love their track, I think it can be utterly dull BUT I do think since Stuart Douglas and Jon Cook took over the racing has improved 10 fold and even the general feel at Lakeside is pretty good. I find Lakeside either pretty good or terrible, the other small, tight EL track Wolves has always been one of my favourites, watching PK and Lindgren around there is always a joy and I'm lucky to have seen Chris Harris ride there a disproportionate amount of time and he's great there! But after Wolves, I'd say my favourite UK tracks are Somerset and Scunthorpe (285 and 300 metres) which I say still puts them in the "small" category but people think they're big - because as I talked about earlier, the straights are a long way apart. As a result of this the rider rarely scrub off much speed so it looks faster and speed is always exciting!

I think most people would broadly agree with that, especially the first paragraph, but it's completely more reasoned and sensible than the simplistic "big is better " drivel that Stoke Potter was coming out with.

 

Interesting that you think the feel at Lakeside is pretty good. I think that is one of the unquantifiable things that are important but which never come across on TV . For example I can't remember ever seeing a really good meeting when I've been to Coventry but I nearly always enjoy it because I like the stadium and always seem to finish up talking to local fans who are generally really nice people, and that's all part of the experience. Even more so at Rye House where there rarely seems to be much passing but I think its a great place to be when the weather is nice.

 

Like a lot of things in life, if you go to a Speedwáy meeting with the intention of enjoying it, the chances are you probably will. I f you go with the intention of fault finding, then you"ll find plenty to complain about.

 

I

[SCB]

Interesting that you think the feel at Lakeside is pretty good. I think that is one of the unquantifiable things that are important but which never come across on TV . For example I can't remember ever seeing a really good meeting when I've been to Coventry but I nearly always enjoy it because I like the stadium and always seem to finish up talking to local fans who are generally really nice people, and that's all part of the experience. Even more so at Rye House where there rarely seems to be much passing but I think its a great place to be when the weather is nice.

It just feels like speedway should feel at Lakeside. Trying to be professional but you just sort of know it's not. But nice, almost "lovely", Reading always felt that way for me too.

 

Where as Poole feel very professional and I can't fault it but it's not got that speedway feel to it and I have no idea what that is. Lakeside really come on massively in the first couple of years of the Douglas/Cook era.

[stevebrum]

There is no scientific proof that a big track will always produce better racing than a small one, it is purely down to personal opinions and preferences, for example for me it's not about the size but about the shape and how it rides, Somerset and Peterborough for example ride much faster than their actual size, tons of speed generated and a fair amount of room to manoeuvre, that is more important, if I could change Lakesides track to a copy of any other than Somerset and Peterboroughs would be up their, but also the German track Gustrow which I think is a cracker but not what you would class as a traditionally big.

What I will say though whilst a faster track will produce overtaking at higher speeds those higher speeds could also lead to races being more strung out because of the increased differential between the riders/bikes where as on a small track everything is scaled down meaning it's closer but also slower.

 

excellent post but I'd imagine Stoke Potter would still disagree.

 

Having been brought up at a big wide track myself and now watch most of my Speedwáy at two smaller tracks I woukd have to agree that a good meeting on a big wide track produces a special type of spectacle that smaller and medium size tracks do not seem to replicate.

However as Stevebrum has correctly pointed out there is much more to than track size . A good meeting needs good track prep , two closely balanced teams , and a range of other things that need to click at the same time to produce a memorable meeting.

I have to say it took me quite a while to get used to Lakeside, and never liked at all in the Ronnie Russell days, in fact I never really went until the present promotion took over and made big changes to the track and the team, but I do think it's a lot to do with where you watch Speedwáy on a regular basis and what you get used to. For myself , some of the most memorable meetings of recent years were at Lakeside in 2013 when the team were struggling a bit and it seemed that Peter Karlsson and Dave Watt , both track specialists at Lakeside were going out in heats 13&15 to secure the win, often with some terrific cut backs.

I think most regular posters on here know there is no magic formula that produces exciting meetings week after week and many different factors have to click at the same time to produce a really good one, but it gets a bit tedious when we get posters like Stoke Potter rattling on with drivel that flies in the face of our own first hand experiences

 

Well , now you have your remedy. Next time Lakeside or any other British track you don't like is on TV don't watch it. Find something more stimulating to do. That way you'll enjoy life more, we won't have to read your carping complaints and we'll all be happy.

Problem solved

Again another excellent post and much more depth than the bigger is better one.

[New Science]

Don't really think I was missing your point however if you equal things up I've seen equally as good racing at Monmore as I've seen at any track in the country so I have to disagree with you on that point.

You must have a good memory .Sadly the quality of racing at Monmore these days is not what it was.

[E I Addio]

You must have a good memory .Sadly the quality of racing at Monmore these days is not what it was.

Even nostalgia is not what it used to be.

[stevebrum]

You must have a good memory .Sadly the quality of racing at Monmore these days is not what it was.

I have, I wasn't referring to this year as I've already stated that the past 2 seasons have been poor by its usual high standards.

[Speedwaycrazy]

Even nostalgia is not what it used to be.

Funniest quote of the week....love it!

[orion]

Wolverhampton usually does produce good racing, although it seems to me that it has not been as good the last couple of years. I have not been to Lakeside but have seen some decent matches from there on TV and read good reports about other meetings from people I respect. However, in my opinion a good big track produces a better overall racing spectacle than a good small track.

 

Having been brought up at Hyde Road, like any track it had poor meetings with processional racing but the overall standard was arguably the best I've seen. Kirkmanshulme Lane was capable of producing good racing and the standard the last few years wasn't bad. However, the point being made is that given the opportunity a big track is the way to go. Having now had the opportunity to watch the racing at the NSS last night highlighted what I have been missing since the demise of Hyde Road. It's early days and it will take time for riders to discover and learn all of the racing lines but I am convinced that the promotion made the right decision in going for a big track.

I think given a blank canvas you should have a big track ...of course you can have great racing on all types of tracks but I think it's important if the brits are to get better that we have big tracks so that they do better in Poland, Sweden etc when the time comes

Edited May 7, 2016 by orion

[Stoke Potter]

I think most people would broadly agree with that, especially the first paragraph, but it's completely more reasoned and sensible than the simplistic "big is better " drivel that Stoke Potter was coming out with.

 

Interesting that you think the feel at Lakeside is pretty good. I think that is one of the unquantifiable things that are important but which never come across on TV . For example I can't remember ever seeing a really good meeting when I've been to Coventry but I nearly always enjoy it because I like the stadium and always seem to finish up talking to local fans who are generally really nice people, and that's all part of the experience. Even more so at Rye House where there rarely seems to be much passing but I think its a great place to be when the weather is nice.

 

Like a lot of things in life, if you go to a Speedwáy meeting with the intention of enjoying it, the chances are you probably will. I f you go with the intention of fault finding, then you"ll find plenty to complain about.

 

I

It's not the first time you've utterly failed to understand what I've said. Evidently you must be lacking the intellectual capacity in that regard.

If you look through my posts you'll see I stated that not all big tracks are good and not all meetings at even the best big tracks are good.

Of course other factors are involved, width, banking, surface, preparation, weather.

I'll say again, if you want the absolute best spectacle the sport can offer, it's on the best big tracks.

And I agree with the poster above who said if you're starting with a blank canvas the preference would always be to put in a big track with the appropriate width and banking, etc.

[E I Addio]

It's not the first time you've utterly failed to understand what I've said. Evidently you must be lacking the intellectual capacity in that regard.

If you look through my posts you'll see I stated that not all big tracks are good and not all meetings at even the best big tracks are good.

Of course other factors are involved, width, banking, surface, preparation, weather.

I'll say again, if you want the absolute best spectacle the sport can offer, it's on the best big tracks.

And I agree with the poster above who said if you're starting with a blank canvas the preference would always be to put in a big track with the appropriate width and banking, etc.

If we look back through your posts as you suggest, we find that the first post you made when you started digging this hole was that Lakeside was an appalling track and they should be ashamed to show it on Sky. That is a long way from the position you have now back-pedalled to in saying that if you started with blank canvas you woukd have a big track. The poster who made that comment, Orion,also said you can have great racing on all tracks, something that anyone with any common sense woukd agree with. SCB who is a pretty fair judge of things suggested that the important thing was not so much size as width between the straights that is important.

 

Your judgement of Lakeside is based on a few TV meetings but never having been there. Those posters who have been there would I think all say it's never going to be a GP standard circuit but has improved massively under the present promotion and there have been some decent meetings and some poor ones, like most tracks , which is pretty much in the nature of the sport.

 

You are entirely in the minority with your description of it being appalling and shouldn't be on Sky, although you are entitled to that opinion, based though it is on a few TV broadcasts, but as has been pointed out in post #122 your remedy is to not watch it next time it's on Sky. It's a free country and nobody forces you to watch something you don't enjoy. Then you won't have to come back on here moaning about it. Nevertheless it's part of the Sky deal, they call the shots and they will be doing at least one more broadcast this season, irrespective of what you think so get used to the idea.

[Guest]

LAKESIDE HAMMMERS PRESS RELEASE:

 

 

LAKESIDE star Kim Nilsson moved one step closer to a place in the 2017 Grand Prix series with a fine performance in his GP Qualifier in Terenzano on Saturday night.
The Vortex Hammers ace stormed to a second place finish in Italy, bagging four race wins and 13 points from his five rides.
It was a tremendous performance from the popular Swede as he continues his encouraging start to the 2016 campaign.
The meeting was won by GP regular Piotr Pawlicki with Danish racer Michael Jepsen Jensen joining them on the rostrum in third place.
Former Lakeside star Peter Ljung also advanced to the next stage with 10 points.