News For Twk

[Sidney the robin]

Typical speedway fan.

 

Try engaging your brain and actually thinking for yourself instead of blindly believing what someone else has said.

If Berry said something and you said something who would i listen to? i am afraid it wouldnt be you.Nothing personnel but say what you like about Berry he knew his speedway but the most important thing was he cared about the sport as well.

There isn't anything to disagree on. You are wrong. John Berry was wrong.

 

Daveallan above who has all the statistics has confirmed you are wrong.

 

Now, you can either act like an adult, learn something and move on, or you can continue acting like an internet troll.

 

There is absolutely no comparison between a substitution in football and a 'tactical substitution' in speedway. It beggars belief that anyone can seriously compare the two.

However, if you really want to go down that route and claim they are similar, your argument holds no water anyway as both teams can make subs in football.. not just the team losing.

I do agree with you in preferring the old system to double points so there is common ground.

Is every subject you discuss about BEING RIGHT/WRONG? Edited April 25, 2017 by Sidney the robin

[steve roberts]

If Berry said something and you said something who would i listen to? i am afraid it wouldnt be you.Nothing personnel but say what you like about Berry he knew his speedway but the most important thing was he cared about the sport as well.

Is every subject you discuss about BEING RIGHT/WRONG?

Morning Sid! I once recall eavesdropping on a conversation between John and some initially irate Oxford fans at Cowley. He came across as both articulate and thought provoking and they ended up shaking hands generously as they parted.

 

It's interesting reading other people's personal experiences with him and it appears that there was two sides to a very complex and private person.

 

Regarding the quote from John that I placed on this particular thread I think that some people need to read it again as it clearly indicated that the tactical Substitute ruling had it's flaws in his view.

[Sidney the robin]

Morning Sid! I once recall eavesdropping on a conversation between John and some initially irate Oxford fans at Cowley. He came across as both articulate and thought provoking and they ended up shaking hands generously as they parted.

 

It's interesting reading other people's personal experiences with him and it appears that there was two sides to a very complex and private person.

 

Regarding the quote from John that I placed on this particular thread I think that some people need to read it again as it clearly indicated that the tactical Substitute ruling had it's flaws in his view.

A guy i know who i respect greatly,was great friends with Billy Sanders he told me he held Mr Berry in high esteem.Michael Lee/Sanders were both helped alot over the years by JB they both were close we know John had his flaws like all of us but his views i respected greatly.

[steve roberts]

A guy i know who i respect greatly,was great friends with Billy Sanders he told me he held Mr Berry in high esteem.Michael Lee/Sanders were both helped alot over the years by JB they both were close we know John had his flaws like all of us but his views i respected greatly.

Very sad what happened to Billy and John Berry carried that mental burden for years...probably to his dying day...thinking that he could have done more.

Edited April 25, 2017 by steve roberts

[BWitcher]

If Berry said something and you said something who would i listen to? i am afraid it wouldnt be you.Nothing personnel but say what you like about Berry he knew his speedway but the most important thing was he cared about the sport as well.

Is every subject you discuss about BEING RIGHT/WRONG?

 

The debate wasn't about Berry, his skills as a promoter or whether he knew his speedway.

 

Just his comment over the tactical ride which was incorrect.

 

Over and over you have a pop at me for discussing a topic I claim I am right on. Well, you'd have to be a blithering idiot to argue something you were wrong on... funny how you are often on that side of the fence.

 

Like yourself I enjoyed reading what Berry had to say about the sport and he had a lot of knowledge.

Edited April 25, 2017 by BWitcher

[Humphrey Appleby]

Regarding the quote from John that I placed on this particular thread I think that some people need to read it again as it clearly indicated that the tactical Substitute ruling had it's flaws in his view.

I've got some correspondence from him on this subject, and whilst I don't have it immediately to hand, my recollection was he considered keeping matches close more important than 'fairness', especially for away teams. It also keep fans involved in the meeting through speculation of what changes might be made, although I think there was acknowledgement the rule tended to favour top heavy teams which was apparently a bugbear of Len Silver in particular. However, he certainly seemed to favour some sort of tactical option, although stated a preference for tactical subs over double points.

 

I can well imagine that the tactical sub rule had a bigger impact on results than tactical rides because you could bring in a better rider in place of another at any time (if 6 points down of course) whereas you have to rely on the heat formula falling your way with the tactical ride. In most circumstances you'd want to have your best or at least second best rider taking the tactical ride, but they're not necessarily going to be programmed in the next heat.

 

This said, a tactical substitute still has to score points the same way as everyone else, so I think ultimately has more credibility than double points. For me, I think tactical substitutes should only be allowed when a team is at least 8 points down as there's too much advantage when only 6 behind, but I don't have any problem with the basic premise.

[Seymour Dix]

 

I've got some correspondence from him on this subject, and whilst I don't have it immediately to hand, my recollection was he considered keeping matches close more important than 'fairness', especially for away teams. It also keep fans involved in the meeting through speculation of what changes might be made, although I think there was acknowledgement the rule tended to favour top heavy teams which was apparently a bugbear of Len Silver in particular. However, he certainly seemed to favour some sort of tactical option, although stated a preference for tactical subs over double points.

 

I can well imagine that the tactical sub rule had a bigger impact on results than tactical rides because you could bring in a better rider in place of another at any time (if 6 points down of course) whereas you have to rely on the heat formula falling your way with the tactical ride. In most circumstances you'd want to have your best or at least second best rider taking the tactical ride, but they're not necessarily going to be programmed in the next heat.

 

This said, a tactical substitute still has to score points the same way as everyone else, so I think ultimately has more credibility than double points. For me, I think tactical substitutes should only be allowed when a team is at least 8 points down as there's too much advantage when only 6 behind, but I don't have any problem with the basic premise.

I agree except for ten points behind, and only one per match

[BWitcher]

I've got some correspondence from him on this subject, and whilst I don't have it immediately to hand, my recollection was he considered keeping matches close more important than 'fairness', especially for away teams. It also keep fans involved in the meeting through speculation of what changes might be made, although I think there was acknowledgement the rule tended to favour top heavy teams which was apparently a bugbear of Len Silver in particular. However, he certainly seemed to favour some sort of tactical option, although stated a preference for tactical subs over double points.

 

I can well imagine that the tactical sub rule had a bigger impact on results than tactical rides because you could bring in a better rider in place of another at any time (if 6 points down of course) whereas you have to rely on the heat formula falling your way with the tactical ride. In most circumstances you'd want to have your best or at least second best rider taking the tactical ride, but they're not necessarily going to be programmed in the next heat.

 

This said, a tactical substitute still has to score points the same way as everyone else, so I think ultimately has more credibility than double points. For me, I think tactical substitutes should only be allowed when a team is at least 8 points down as there's too much advantage when only 6 behind, but I don't have any problem with the basic premise.

 

Good post, agree with all of that.

[steve roberts]

I've got some correspondence from him on this subject, and whilst I don't have it immediately to hand, my recollection was he considered keeping matches close more important than 'fairness', especially for away teams. It also keep fans involved in the meeting through speculation of what changes might be made, although I think there was acknowledgement the rule tended to favour top heavy teams which was apparently a bugbear of Len Silver in particular. However, he certainly seemed to favour some sort of tactical option, although stated a preference for tactical subs over double points.

 

I can well imagine that the tactical sub rule had a bigger impact on results than tactical rides because you could bring in a better rider in place of another at any time (if 6 points down of course) whereas you have to rely on the heat formula falling your way with the tactical ride. In most circumstances you'd want to have your best or at least second best rider taking the tactical ride, but they're not necessarily going to be programmed in the next heat.

 

This said, a tactical substitute still has to score points the same way as everyone else, so I think ultimately has more credibility than double points. For me, I think tactical substitutes should only be allowed when a team is at least 8 points down as there's too much advantage when only 6 behind, but I don't have any problem with the basic premise.

Interesting post and there are aspects of that to which he referred to in his book (quoting Uncle Len) that is very familiar. A bit different to suggesting that he was wrong as has been stated but only that he was stating his preference and his dislike of the double points scenario which is what I was trying to imply when I posted a quote from his book.

 

Thanks for your input and clarification regarding what John had implied and your view on the matter.

Edited April 25, 2017 by steve roberts

[Sidney the robin]

The debate wasn't about Berry, his skills as a promoter or whether he knew his speedway.

 

Just his comment over the tactical ride which was incorrect.

 

Over and over you have a pop at me for discussing a topic I claim I am right on. Well, you'd have to be a blithering idiot to argue something you were wrong on... funny how you are often on that side of the fence.

 

Like yourself I enjoyed reading what Berry had to say about the sport and he had a lot of knowledge.

Debating anything with you it is odvious i am always going to be the loser being right or wrong means nothing to me the banter is the most important thing.One thing we agree on is John Berry and what a telling contribution he made to speedway he is up there with the Varey,s ,Fearman, Dent Oliver, (ect).

[BWitcher]

In the recent Belle Vue v wolves meeting wolves used the double tr bollox. After a great race lindgren rode round to congratulate Cook on the win but pointed out that he was the top scorer in the race.

 

The loser scored more than the winner!

 

When you factor in that apparently the old ts rule was actually more successful at doing what it was meant to do (make meetings closer) you do wonder why some people argue in favour of the double tr bollox at all.

 

If it was a choice between the double tr bollox and nothing, I'd pick nothing but there would probably be more one sided meetings. Given that there used to be a speedway sew on badge that said 'happiness is 40-38' I'd suggest more speedway fans prefer close meetings.

 

I don't think anyone, bar the BSPA, do argue in favour of it do they?

[steve roberts]

Debating anything with you it is odvious i am always going to be the loser being right or wrong means nothing to me the banter is the most important thing.One thing we agree on is John Berry and what a telling contribution he made to speedway he is up there with the Varey,s ,Fearman, Dent Oliver, (ect).

Hi Sid! I enjoy having a good old chat/debate about the good old days with you...and perhaps disagreeing on some aspects.. but that's the beauty of having opinions that may differ especially you being a 'Budgie' and myself a 'Rebel/Cheetah!'

 

PS Just sent you a PM!

In the recent Belle Vue v wolves meeting wolves used the double tr bollox. After a great race lindgren rode round to congratulate Cook on the win but pointed out that he was the top scorer in the race.

 

The loser scored more than the winner!

 

When you factor in that apparently the old ts rule was actually more successful at doing what it was meant to do (make meetings closer) you do wonder why some people argue in favour of the double tr bollox at all.

 

If it was a choice between the double tr bollox and nothing, I'd pick nothing but there would probably be more one sided meetings. Given that there used to be a speedway sew on badge that said 'happiness is 40-38' I'd suggest more speedway fans prefer close meetings.

...nothing quite better than winning a last heat decider. Some we lost...some we won...all added to the drama!

Edited April 25, 2017 by steve roberts

[Sidney the robin]

Hi Sid! I enjoy having a good old chat/debate about the good old days with you...and perhaps disagreeing on some aspects.. but that's the beauty of having opinions that may differ especially you being a 'Budgie' and myself a 'Rebel/Cheetah!'

 

...nothing quite better than winning a last heat decider. Some we lost...some we won...all added to the drama!

Funny thing is Steve i was never a Oxford/Reading/ hater having those tracks were great certainly took up alot of my social time.My wife was never a big fan but she always came with me and i loved Smallmead and Cowley.The year i most enjoyed were Martin Dugards first year as a cheetah and Per Sorensen going there later i always liked Per.God wish we had those tracks now both easy to get to and a great night out.For two or three years i did Swindon,Reading,Oxford and another everyweek looking back i dont know how i could afford to keep going.

[orion]

In the recent Belle Vue v wolves meeting wolves used the double tr bollox. After a great race lindgren rode round to congratulate Cook on the win but pointed out that he was the top scorer in the race.

 

The loser scored more than the winner!

 

When you factor in that apparently the old ts rule was actually more successful at doing what it was meant to do (make meetings closer) you do wonder why some people argue in favour of the double tr bollox at all.

 

If it was a choice between the double tr bollox and nothing, I'd pick nothing but there would probably be more one sided meetings. Given that there used to be a speedway sew on badge that said 'happiness is 40-38' I'd suggest more speedway fans prefer close meetings.

The question being asked was it more fair ..all the facts shows that is not the case as it brings more false results something that we keep hearing fans don't like ....I have no problem if people like the rule because it makes matches more closer let again the facts show that is the case .

 

I Have never seen anyone on here in favour of the double points rule or argue in favour of it ...where the problem lies is people try to make out the old rule was fairer ...the bottom line both were and are mickey mouse and should have no place in pro sport .

[steve roberts]

Funny thing is Steve i was never a Oxford/Reading/ hater having those tracks were great certainly took up alot of my social time.My wife was never a big fan but she always came with me and i loved Smallmead and Cowley.The year i most enjoyed were Martin Dugards first year as a cheetah and Per Sorensen going there later i always liked Per.God wish we had those tracks now both easy to get to and a great night out.For two or three years i did Swindon,Reading,Oxford and another everyweek looking back i dont know how i could afford to keep going.

However I used to hate that 3TT Easter 'thingie' (the worse heat formula in my view). We always used to get turned over by either the Reading 'Berks' or the Swindon 'Budgies' but then again we had to leave some scraps for you uns to fight over!

 

Per was a master stroke signing and really turned our season round (thanks to Swindon re-introducing the fit again Finn Thomsen?).

[Sidney the robin]

However I used to hate that 3TT Easter 'thingie' (the worse heat formula in my view). We always used to get turned over by either the Reading 'Berks' or the Swindon 'Budgies' but then again we had to leave some scraps for you uns to fight over!

 

Per was a master stroke signing and really turned our season round (thanks to Swindon re-introducing the fit again Finn Thomsen?).

Was never a fan of that meeting either Steve,a Reading early meeting start usually meant Smallmead being as slick as a board.One Oxford 3tt early meeting start that stuck out for me was a heat 1 Reading 5.1 Shirra/Holloway over Nielsen/Cox a real shock.Before going to Oxford regularly i was never a fan of Nielsen always wanted Erik/Knudsen to beat him but Hans won me over a period a pleasure to see him in action.Nielsen i can remember him flying around Hyde Rd ( not usually a favourite hunting ground) in the Ivan farewell meeting with six in a race a really exciting sight. Edited April 25, 2017 by Sidney the robin

[steve roberts]

Was never a fan of that meeting either Steve,a Reading early meeting start usually meant Smallmead being as slick as a board.One Oxford 3tt early meeting start that stuck out for me was a heat 1 Reading 5.1 Shirra/Holloway over Nielsen/Cox a real shock.Before going to Oxford regularly i was never a fan of Nielsen always wanted Erik/Knudsen to beat him but Hans won me over a period a pleasure to see him in action.Nielsen i can remember him flying around Hyde Rd ( not usually a favourite hunting ground) in the Ivan farewell meeting with six in a race a really exciting sight.

Reading on a Bank Holiday Morning...dust flying everywhere and as you say slick as a board. To think that maybe none of those tracks will exist if the situation isn't soon sorted at Blunsdon and Cowley. A real shame and with the apparent demise of Coventry and long gone Dudley Wood all the local derbies that I once enjoyed very much a thing of the past.

 

As regards you're reference to Tommy Knudsen...not one of my favourites I have to say although I would enjoy an interview with him in 'Backtrack!'

Edited April 25, 2017 by steve roberts

[Sidney the robin]

Reading on a Bank Holiday Morning...dust flying everywhere and as you say slick as a board. To think that maybe none of those tracks will exist if the situation isn't soon sorted at Blunsdon and Cowley. A real shame and with the apparent demise of Coventry and long gone Dudley Wood all the local derbies that I once enjoyed very much a thing of the past.

 

As regards you're reference to Tommy Knudsen...not one of my favourites I have to say although I would enjoy an interview with him in 'Backtrack!'

Knudsen what a class rider he was he had a good head to head record with Hans.Knudsen to even comeback to that level after those horrendous back injuries took alot in 1986 WF that one got away from Tommy he was very unlucky that night.

[steve roberts]

Knudsen what a class rider he was he had a good head to head record with Hans.Knudsen to even comeback to that level after those horrendous back injuries took alot in 1986 WF that one got away from Tommy he was very unlucky that night.

Tommy could be quite ruthless round the first and second bends and some of his encounters with Hans were hand ringing stuff...no quarter asked or given on both sides. I was at the 1986 World Final and admit that Hans rode a very tough fourth bend and the decision could have gone either way. Personally I felt Tommy was riding his usual 'square' bend and left a gap and tried to close it but unfortunately, for him, Hans had filled it...now if Frank Ebden had been in charge!

[Sidney the robin]

Tommy could be quite ruthless round the first and second bends and some of his encounters with Hans were hand ringing stuff...no quarter asked or given on both sides. I was at the 1986 World Final and admit that Hans rode a very tough fourth bend and the decision could have gone either way. Personally I felt Tommy was riding his usual 'square' bend and left a gap and tried to close it but unfortunately, for him, Hans had filled it...now if Frank Ebden had been in charge!

Dont mention Ebdon✌️️my take on the incident was it was a 50/50 decision and to be fair Hans deserved the rub of the green sometime because he had been unlucky in other years.