They Say Never Go Back.

[foamfence]

Would be interesting to know by way of a vote whether people preferred the old system (in whatever shape or form) or the new one as regards the T/S ruling?

Definitely old.

[PHILIPRISING]

Definitely old.

AGREE with that. It has often been suggested but never actually proven that it was Sky who insisted upon the current 'double tactical' rule. Now that Sky have jettisoned speedway perhaps BT would not have the same preference.

[Fromafar]

Would be interesting to know by way of a vote whether people preferred the old system (in whatever shape or form) or the new one as regards the T/S ruling?

Give the Team manager a bit of leeway and thinking.I don't know all the rules but it certainly keeps it interesting.Like has been mention it gives the crowd a buzz when the " lesser rider " beats the tactical.

[BWitcher]

Would be interesting to know by way of a vote whether people preferred the old system (in whatever shape or form) or the new one as regards the T/S ruling?

 

There's no need for a vote. It's pretty unanimous that people prefer the old system.

 

However, I can guarantee, if we went back to the system of being 6pts behind and a tac sub can be brought in it won't be long before someone takes a friend and they fell over laughing when it happened.

[The White Knight]

 

There's no need for a vote. It's pretty unanimous that people prefer the old system.

 

However, I can guarantee, if we went back to the system of being 6pts behind and a tac sub can be brought in it won't be long before someone takes a friend and they fell over laughing when it happened.

.............. as anyone would who was watching a Result being contrived. That's my view and I reckon a fair few others feel the same BW.

 

Feel free to slag me off yet again.

[BWitcher]

.............. as anyone would who was watching a Result being contrived. That's my view and I reckon a fair few others feel the same BW.

 

Feel free to slag me off yet again.

 

The thread has quite clearly shown they DO NOT feel the same White Knight.

 

You seem incapable of understanding the tac sub system was in operation for nigh on 50 years with no issue. You attended for much of that with no issue. Now the sport has LESS contrived results, you decide there is an issue.

 

Pretty much everyone on this thread has stated they prefer the old tac sub system and would welcome it's return and their reasons have been clearly documented.

 

The addition of tactics to the match, the joy of seeing a lesser rider beating a heat leader tac sub to name just two.

AGREE with that. It has often been suggested but never actually proven that it was Sky who insisted upon the current 'double tactical' rule. Now that Sky have jettisoned speedway perhaps BT would not have the same preference.

 

It was introduced as a cost saving measure, Ipswich were one of the driving forces behind it.

 

Tac sub rides mean extra rides for heat leaders, the bigger earners, and of course extra points.

Edited August 31, 2017 by BWitcher

[Hacksaw Jim Duggan]

I seem to be in the minority but I don’t mind the newer TS rule.

 

I found the older rule equally unfair and while there is a misty eyed idea of juniors turning over heat leaders, it rarely happened – what more often happened was a visiting Number 1 would blast away and typically win Heat 8 by a mile in a race massively stacked in their favour and displacing another rider from the race in the process.

 

My natural assumption is riders on a Double Points sub have been turned over far more often than Tactical substitutes were.

 

I also feel there is something more satisfying in seeing a side kill the rule of double points when it is used.

Edited August 31, 2017 by Hacksaw Jim Duggan

[foamfence]

.............. as anyone would who was watching a Result being contrived. That's my view and I reckon a fair few others feel the same BW.

 

Feel free to slag me off yet again.

Totally agree but the question was whether you prefer the old tac sub or the current double points, if the option had been 'neither' I would have gone for that.

[BWitcher]

Totally agree but the question was whether you prefer the old tac sub or the current double points, if the option had been 'neither' I would have gone for that.

 

That would work.. in killing of the excitement of the sport even more.

[BWitcher]

Ironically sky wanted the double tr bollox because the old ts wasn't effective enough!

 

The tactical rule they came up with said it could be used twice and even a third time with a substitute rider going off 15m and a team only had to be 8 points behind. It wasn't brought in to save money but that is how sky sold it to the gullible promoters.

 

Here's a post from another thread when this was discussed at length, I'm sure there are plenty of other threads.

 

http://www.speedway-forum.co.uk/forums/index.php?showtopic=81698&p=2787743

 

It depends who you believe Fred.

 

Do you have a source for this claim to back it up?

 

I can categorically state that CVS stated at a Wolverhampton talk-in it was introduced as a cost saving measure and the idea was put forward by Ipswich. I'm pretty sure, but may be wrong, that Colin Pratt was also present at that talk-in and confirmed.

 

Of course, they may have been telling some porkies, but there you go.

 

If it is true regarding Sky, they are out of the picture now, so no reason at all to continue with the 'double tr bollox' as you like to call it.

[steve roberts]

 

There's no need for a vote. It's pretty unanimous that people prefer the old system.

 

However, I can guarantee, if we went back to the system of being 6pts behind and a tac sub can be brought in it won't be long before someone takes a friend and they fell over laughing when it happened.

...interesting all the same. It appears on here that the T/S ruling splits people and their particular view point which is what an open forum is all about.

 

Me? The old system for reasons stated many times in the past without having to go over old ground but, then again, I have no working knowledge or understanding of the present system.

[BWitcher]

More from the thread I referred to.

 

http://www.speedway-forum.co.uk/forums/index.php?showtopic=81698&p=2787749

 

I'm surprised you can't remember.

 

I can remember it, but it just some folk saying "Sky introduced it" with nothing to back it up.

 

The thread also shows that Matt Ford stated it was introduced as a cost saving measure too and also states that Ipswich were the ones who championed it.

 

Hence my question, where have you got the information that it was Sky that introduced it? I'm not saying that they didn't, we don't know that for sure, what we do know is we have several different promoters on record as saying it was introduced as a cost cutting exercise.

[crazyb]

Not being able to get off the bike would make life difficult for those riders who are on the short side. Bjerre, Tungate and Bewley would find their bikes weighed down with spiders they wouldn't be able to stamp on.

 

I thought that getting off the bike was banned a couple of season's ago, but, more than likely the 'Powers that be" hadn't got the guts to see it through.

[waiheke1]

As Bwitcher says , probably 99% prefer the TS to the double points ride. I certainly do.

The only issue is if people start trying to say the old rule was "fairer" when blatantly in most circumstances it was far more advantageous to the trailing team than the new rule

That said I recall someone doing the stats, and the old rule didn't change the meeting outcome significantly more than the new rule (as measured by team using it picking up a draw or win).

[crazyb]

People really need to build a stronghold of opinion of the wider audience before imposing their views of common sense on everyone and assuming all fans wish to see such changes as well..

 

I’d be more inclined to think most fans who have walked away from the sport in recent years couldn’t care less about gardening, upright engines and second half racing – and I doubt altering such things would entice them back – small, minor, quick and easy changes they might be but they are not the kind of thing that will shift the needle attendance wise or how most people now feel about the sport.

 

 

 

I agree, apart from gardening, but the two things that have stopped me from going is the TR and double-uppers-downers. The TR to me is just like It's a knockout, and when you see a Joker card brought out in the World team Cup (or whatever it's called), then what more is there to say.

[Gemini]

I seem to be in the minority but I don’t mind the newer TS rule.

I found the older rule equally unfair and while there is a misty eyed idea of juniors turning over heat leaders, it rarely happened – what more often happened was a visiting Number 1 would blast away and typically win Heat 8 by a mile in a race massively stacked in their favour and displacing another rider from the race in the process.

My natural assumption is riders on a Double Points sub have been turned over far more often than Tactical substitutes were.

I also feel there is something more satisfying in seeing a side kill the rule of double points when it is used.

Make that two of us then because I don't mind it either and actually prefer it to the TS now it can only be used once. It also makes things more interesting wondering when or if a team mate is going to let his 'other half' through so he gets the double points. Seems someone hadn't told KK this week.

 

 

I thought that getting off the bike was banned a couple of season's ago, but, more than likely the 'Powers that be" hadn't got the guts to see it through.

I think riders can get completely off the bike as long as they are hanging onto the handlebars.

[steve roberts]

Make that two of us then because I don't mind it either and actually prefer it to the TS now it can only be used once. It also makes things more interesting wondering when or if a team mate is going to let his 'other half' through so he gets the double points. Seems someone hadn't told KK this week.

 

I think riders can get completely off the bike as long as they are hanging onto the handlebars.

Interesting viewpoints and goes to show that people have different opinions about the T/S ruling (old and new)

[steve roberts]

As Bwitcher says , probably 99% prefer the TS to the double points ride. I certainly do.

The only issue is if people start trying to say the old rule was "fairer" when blatantly in most circumstances it was far more advantageous to the trailing team than the new rule

That said I recall someone doing the stats, and the old rule didn't change the meeting outcome significantly more than the new rule (as measured by team using it picking up a draw or win).

I generally refrain from using assumptions whatever the subject personally. Seen evidence of that regarding other matters on this forum.

 

Having a background in statistics personally it's generally the case that a goodly sample is taken before arriving at any given figure rather than plucking figures out of the air based on assumptions and/or opinions.

 

It appears to be the case regarding the matter under discussion, in this instance, which on the face of it appears to side with the old T/S ruling but a broader picture would be advantageous before drawing a defining conclusion. I guess that older fans would be drawn more to the old ruling but it would be interesting to get a view from present day fans who have no experience of what the ruling once was but based on the present ruling (of which I have no working knowledge)?

 

Hence a vote from a cross section of fans of all ages would prove interesting as I commented elsewhere.

Edited August 31, 2017 by steve roberts

[The White Knight]

I generally refrain from using assumptions whatever the subject personally. Seen evidence of that regarding other matters on this forum.

 

Having a background in statistics personally it's generally the case that a goodly sample is taken before arriving at any given figure rather than plucking figures out of the air based on assumptions and/or opinions.

 

It appears to be the case regarding the matter under discussion, in this instance, which on the face of it appears to side with the old T/S ruling but a broader picture would be advantageous before drawing a defining conclusion. I guess that older fans would be drawn more to the old ruling but it would be interesting to get a view from present day fans who have no experience of what the ruling once was but based on the present ruling (of which I have no working knowledge)?

 

Hence a vote from a cross section of fans of all ages would prove interesting as I commented elsewhere.

What we need is a Poll asking which do you prefer.

 

i) Old Tactical Substitute.

 

ii) New Tactical Ride (Double Points).

 

iii) No Tacticals at all. Results to be decided on Points scored on the Track only - no enhancements.

 

What do you reckon steve?

[steve roberts]

What we need is a Poll asking which do you prefer.

 

i) Old Tactical Substitute.

 

ii) New Tactical Ride (Double Points).

 

iii) No Tacticals at all. Results to be decided on Points scored on the Track only - no enhancements.

 

What do you reckon steve?

Sounds reasonable to me dear boy!

 

Views have been expressed many times on the subject but not by a large enough sample to arrive at any one conclusion.

 

To re-iterate my preferred choice would be i) but I am of the old school as it was a system that I grew up with and accepted as part and parcel of the sport hence why an input from modern day participants would make for an interesting comparison.

Edited September 1, 2017 by steve roberts