There Can Be Beauty In Simplicity...

[Midland Red]

Two things Sir Shoutalot gets excited about:

 

We're entering tactical country

 

We're on for a last heat decider

 

Quite agree about the second one, but not the first - double points should be done away with, a return to the old tac sub rule and choice of gates

[BWitcher]

Two things Sir Shoutalot gets excited about:

 

We're entering tactical country

 

We're on for a last heat decider

 

Quite agree about the second one, but not the first - double points should be done away with, a return to the old tac sub rule and choice of gates

 

Which would mean 'Sir Shoutalot' getting excited much more often about 'entering tactical country'.

[False dawn]

At least what we have now, we all know when we go home if bonus points have been won and they matter in every meeting, not just the second leg.

We could do both. Or is that too complicated for the average announcer? I note that Swedish TV show the aggregate score after every race in the 2nd leg so you can follow the score on the night and where we are with the bonus point. Not complicated really. However, if it's a choice between one or the other, I'd go for the current system. But we could do both.

 

OR

 

Maybe we should go down the GP route. Team's score points according to their total race points. Win or lose, it doesn't matter. Only your score matters. Wouldn't make a great deal of difference except that Wolves would have finished top of the league AND Rye House would have finished 4th (by 3 points). Can't see Matt going for this idea then! Oh, and Leicester would have finished 6th.

[HenryW]

 

Which would mean 'Sir Shoutalot' getting excited much more often about 'entering tactical country'.

Ooh...Just imagine his excitement at the possibility of seeing Jason Doyle brought in for an extra race!!

[Paulco]

 

The points system used in speedway is almost perfect.

 

The only mistake they made was removing the 2pts for a home win of 1-6pts.

Agreed , that was a mistake changing that

[Blazeaway]

 

Which would mean 'Sir Shoutalot' getting excited much more often about 'entering tactical country'.

 

Is "tactical country" a pseudonym for Kelvin Tatum?

[E I Addio]

The current point scoring system is brilliant. It's rare a heat 15 doesn't mean something these days. As mentioned, it was better when you only got 2 for a home win of 1-6 points though.

g.

How they came to mess that up I gave no idea, but the 3-2-1 scoring system was tailor made to replace the TR. They ruined it by allowing the TR to continue when with that scoring system it favoured top heavy teams , especially as at that time two TR's were allowed so with for example Holder and Ward, and perhaps Lindgren and Karlsson on the form they were then it almost guaranteed an extra 6 points which made it very difficult for strength in depth teams to gain sufficient advantage to get the full 3 points.

 

Whichever way you look at it the TR is and always has been a disaster, except, arguably if the rider in black and whit goes off 15 metres, but it is still probably the daftest rule the sport has ever known.

 

Alternate gates was fine when it was around but when you have your top men on say £120+ per point or even a fixed wage and his second string on not much over half that the sevond string has no chance to make money if he is put on the unfavourable gates all the time. One start from each of four gates is at least fair if nothing else.

[cityrebel]

It was dropped to stop teams being built focused purely on home performance. For example lakeside.

and Exeter!

[Tsunami]

and Exeter!

and Sheffield.

[steve roberts]

How they came to mess that up I gave no idea, but the 3-2-1 scoring system was tailor made to replace the TR. They ruined it by allowing the TR to continue when with that scoring system it favoured top heavy teams , especially as at that time two TR's were allowed so with for example Holder and Ward, and perhaps Lindgren and Karlsson on the form they were then it almost guaranteed an extra 6 points which made it very difficult for strength in depth teams to gain sufficient advantage to get the full 3 points.

 

Whichever way you look at it the TR is and always has been a disaster, except, arguably if the rider in black and whit goes off 15 metres, but it is still probably the daftest rule the sport has ever known.

 

Alternate gates was fine when it was around but when you have your top men on say £120+ per point or even a fixed wage and his second string on not much over half that the sevond string has no chance to make money if he is put on the unfavourable gates all the time. One start from each of four gates is at least fair if nothing else.

...that's always been the perception but the more I read interviews with riders it wasn't as prevalent as it appeared looking back although, obviously, it varied from team to team, rider to rider.

 

Personally I have no real issue with fixed gates except under the formula I was familiar with the gates didn't alternate which, as stated previously, did sometimes give a team an unfair advantage.

Edited September 15, 2017 by steve roberts

[cityrebel]

and Sheffield.

and eastbourne!

[racers and royals]

The old tac sub rule was dropped for 2 reasons

1 the promoters couldn`t afford it

2 the 2nd strings and reserves earnings were suffering because of being taken out of rides(sometimes their easiest as well) and they just couldn`t make speedway pay,

[False dawn]

The old tac sub rule was dropped for 2 reasons

1 the promoters couldn`t afford it

2 the 2nd strings and reserves earnings were suffering because of being taken out of rides(sometimes their easiest as well) and they just couldn`t make speedway pay,

Sound arguments.

So it is more cost effective to

1. Piss off a vast majority of the average punter with "It's a Knockout" rules.

2. Lose meetings because you have no real opportunity to win them.

[Grand Central]

The old tac sub rule was dropped for 2 reasons

1 the promoters couldn`t afford it

2 the 2nd strings and reserves earnings were suffering because of being taken out of rides(sometimes their easiest as well) and they just couldn`t make speedway pay,

 

All correct.

 

1. For the promoters benefit.

2. For the riders benefit.

 

Which are the only people to consider.

 

No one else counts.

[racers and royals]

 

All correct.

 

1. For the promoters benefit.

2. For the riders benefit.

 

Which are the only people to consider.

 

No one else counts.

Without both- we wouldn`t have speedway.

[The White Knight]

Without both- we wouldn`t have speedway.

You probably wouldn't have it without Paying Customers either.

 

So it is a three way thing, not a two way thing.

 

Though you wouldn't think it.

 

The last thing to be considered, if they are considered at all, are the Customers.

 

I know this from experience.

[racers and royals]

You probably wouldn't have it without Paying Customers either.

 

So it is a three way thing, not a two way thing.

 

Though you wouldn't think it.

 

The last thing to be considered, if they are considered at all, are the Customers.

 

I know this from experience.

It`s so easy to blame the promoters for everything wrong in the sport today. they have done things for the punters, like giving us 15 competitive heats, instead of the farce that the 2nd halves became.

[The White Knight]

It`s so easy to blame the promoters for everything wrong in the sport today. they have done things for the punters, like giving us 15 competitive heats, instead of the farce that the 2nd halves became.

That is one opinion - oh - and they did it to save money - not as you suggest for us.

 

It is not my opinion either.

[racers and royals]

That is one opinion - oh - and they did it to save money - not as you suggest for us.

 

It is not my opinion either.

So putting on 2 extra heats in the main match, saved them money over the 2nd half- I don`t think so !!!

[The White Knight]

So putting on 2 extra heats in the main match, saved them money over the 2nd half- I don`t think so !!!

They gave us three less races.