GP qualifying - Changes needed?

[KevH]

9 minutes ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

How would those riders be paid for, given that 24 rider fields weren't financially viable before?

You could argue that the prize is qualification, therefore no need to pay the participants.

[Mark]

Just now, KevH said:

You could argue that the prize is qualification, therefore no need to pay the participants.

Do you work for nothing and pay staff ?  

[KevH]

Just now, Mark said:

Do you work for nothing and pay staff ?  

Just playing devils advocate :/

[enotian]

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 11:17 PM, Humphrey Appleby said:

You might see it, but history would suggest that 2-day speedway meetings aren't well supported. For some reason there's more of culture of it in ice racing, but there's presumably a reason why it doesn't happen much in speedway. 

I think you refer to the Amsterdam World Final(s) so hardly an extensive trial, perhaps there are more examples.

This years SON will have two meetings in two days but I agree what's the point of seeing the same meeting twice.

But the GP qualifier would have 8 different riders from the GP.  I'd expect the meeting to be fiercely contested with the prize of reaching the following days/later that day full GP line up.

Why do people attend Moto GP, F1, WSB, BSB, music festivals etc etc over the course of a weekend? Qualifying for Moto GP etc appears rather dull to me yet all three days appear well attended.

If the content is good a 2 day/2 meeting GP could attract two attendances I'm sure.

[enotian]

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 11:15 PM, Humphrey Appleby said:

How would those riders be paid for, given that 24 rider fields weren't financially viable before?

And you'd still have the problem that the 24 riders would have to be hand-picked, which doesn't improve the current situation much whilst greatly increasing costs.

To have a reasonably inclusive field drawing from various national nominations, you really need to have a minimum of 48 riders and that's not going to be financially viable for any organiser, especially those outside of Europe. 

The previous 24 rider field participated in one meeting only so only one set of ticket sales.

With a qualifier then the GP as two separate meetings there'd be two revenue streams plus potential additional TV revenue for two meetings each covering the cost of a 16 rider field.  It would appear the venues are hired for at least two days anyway so no additional cost there.  So you might as well put on an event to attract additional revenue if you've hired the venue anyway.  Provided you can attract income to cover the marginal cost of putting the meeting on.  So it would have to be a meaningful/entertaining event, which I think a qualifier would be to many.

Surely hand picking the riders is an advantage?  Notwithstanding there'd be qualifying rounds to determine some of the 24. Surely hand picking is better than most motorsports in which riders/drivers with the best sponsorship backing get the GP places.  Those riders/drivers are not necessarily the best in the World.  Surely the aim is to see the best riders fight for the championship?  Isn't that the nature of sport?

I've no idea why you'd want to dilute the product by having 48 riders of various nations? For example, what value would including David Bellego add to the series?  France is a big country but if you think his inclusion will add thousands to the gate and attract French TV coverage to justify his inclusion that's just not going to happen. When he's earned a place by being competitive at that level he'll be a welcome addition but just turning up to be a token Frenchman would add no value to the product at all.

[Humphrey Appleby]

On 5/24/2018 at 1:40 AM, enotian said:

Surely hand picking the riders is an advantage?  Notwithstanding there'd be qualifying rounds to determine some of the 24. Surely hand picking is better than most motorsports in which riders/drivers with the best sponsorship backing get the GP places.  Those riders/drivers are not necessarily the best in the World.  Surely the aim is to see the best riders fight for the championship?  Isn't that the nature of sport?

I've no idea why you'd want to dilute the product by having 48 riders of various nations? For example, what value would including David Bellego add to the series?  France is a big country but if you think his inclusion will add thousands to the gate and attract French TV coverage to justify his inclusion that's just not going to happen. When he's earned a place by being competitive at that level he'll be a welcome addition but just turning up to be a token Frenchman would add no value to the product at all.

The 24-rider format was dropped because it was too expensive. Running a qualifying meeting at the same venue might seem like a good idea, but how would you sell tickets for the main meeting without knowing exactly who's going to be riding? Plus what happens if a particular favourite or top star doesn't make it to main meeting?

There are also costs associated with running a meeting beyond hiring the venue, such as staffing, and what sort of attendance would you get for a Friday meeting? I'd also imagine there could be issues with track preparation for back-to-back meetings, especially at the temporary venues where it seems hard enough to get things right for one meeting let alone two.

If you could run Saturdays and Sundays that might be one thing, but speedway is fairly unique amongst other sports in that it's 'premier' event has to compete with domestic competitions, namely Polish speedway that's run on Sundays. 

And whilst I disagree with the hand-picking of riders, I see no advantage in picking 24 over 16. You're just increasing costs and potentially diluting the quality of the lineup.

48 is a number that would allow every speedway riding country to nominate at least one rider, but still ensure the stronger countries could have 3 or 4 in the field. It's clearly not currently economic, but I used it as a illustration to show that you're not going to improve anything just by expanding the field. 

Do you really think riders for the speedway GP aren't selected because they have particular backers rather than because they're the best riders?

[enotian]

31 minutes ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

 Do you really think riders for the speedway GP aren't selected because they have particular backers rather than because they're the best riders?

All bar 4 riders qualify by on track performance.  Either by finishing in the top 8 in the previous year or via the GP Challenge.

Of the 4 wildcards I'm sure if money talked there would be more Poles selected. I look forward to hearing your evidence as to who has bought their way into the series...….

[enotian]

45 minutes ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

 but how would you sell tickets for the main meeting without knowing exactly who's going to be riding? Plus what happens if a particular favourite or top star doesn't make it to main meeting?

 

So nobody bought tickets for tomorrows Champions League Final because there's no guarantee Ronaldo will be playing.....?

If you're that fixated on seeing a certain top star wouldn't you buy a ticket for the qualifier knowing that they were in it? So people would pay to watch a qualifying meeting after all? Then another ticket if they qualify for the GP.

[enotian]

55 minutes ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

 

There are also costs associated with running a meeting beyond hiring the venue, such as staffing, and what sort of attendance would you get for a Friday meeting? I'd also imagine there could be issues with track preparation for back-to-back meetings, especially at the temporary venues where it seems hard enough to get things right for one meeting let alone two.

 

I presume the majority of those staff attend practice and their cost is marginal.  Might as well utilise them in managing a meeting that you can create income from (ticket sales and TV, potentially sponsorship). Check out sports channels Friday night schedules particularly during the summer.  Zero content bar T-20 cricket.

As I understand it they now often run a pre-meeting on the temporary tracks anyway and they run practice the day before a GP but I agree that must be a consideration as track conditions are essential to the product.  But just because something might be difficult doesn't mean you shouldn't do it.

To be fair I'm more than happy with the GP series as it is (although there needs to be more than 10) as I have stuff to do on Friday nights but others expressed that only 15 GP regulars didn't offer sufficient variety.  So rather than change the almost perfect 23 heat format to allow more participants I suggest having a pre gp qualifier

[Humphrey Appleby]

1 hour ago, enotian said:

So nobody bought tickets for tomorrows Champions League Final because there's no guarantee Ronaldo will be playing.....?

Don't know how many times it needs to be said that speedway isn't football.

You're comparing apples and pears, not least because the Champions League is a team event whose fans will generally follow regardless of who's playing, versus the individual event that's the SGP. And not to mention that fans can be sure both teams will be playing in the final match.

If having qualifying events before the main event was such a good idea, why does the Champions League not hold its Semi-Finals and Final at the same venue? 

As I said, I'm sure speedway has thought of running two-day meetings before, and has indeed experimented with it on the odd occasion. But they obviously don't do it for good reasons, and the ditching of the SWC which had a qualifier on the Friday before the Final, is just another nail in the coffin of the idea. 

[enotian]

9 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Don't know how many times it needs to be said that speedway isn't football.

You're comparing apples and pears, not least because the Champions League is a team event whose fans will generally follow regardless of who's playing, versus the individual event that's the SGP. And not to mention that fans can be sure both teams will be playing in the final match.

If having qualifying events before the main event was such a good idea, why does the Champions League not hold its Semi-Finals and Final at the same venue? 

As I said, I'm sure speedway has thought of running two-day meetings before, and has indeed experimented with it on the odd occasion. But they obviously don't do it for good reasons, and the ditching of the SWC which had a qualifier on the Friday before the Final, is just another nail in the coffin of the idea. 

Both are forms of entertainment, both competing for custom but if you want a more direct comparison how about speedway itself.  Based on the potential for injury (or work permit issues if you want an example from today) what guarantees are there that the advertised line up at the time of purchase will be the actual participants?  Absolutely none.  You also have people who buy their tickets a year in advance.  Effectively they don't know how will be appearing but it's the event that they subscribe to.  i.e. a whole host of people didn't stop watching SGP when Rickardsson retired.  You'll also find that not everyone in Kiev tonight is either a Liverpool or Real supporter. You don't have to be a supporter of a team or individual to enjoy an event.  Granted you might not enjoy it as much as a supporter of the winning team but you enjoy it if the product is entertaining.

Sport has moved on.  It competes as a form of entertainment against anything else people can spend their disposable income on. 

If UEFA thought they could make more money holding Champions League semi finals at the same venue they would.  Alas those poor footballers aren't able to perform on  successive evenings so it's not feasible.

You've got me on that SWC nail in the coffin though.  They'd never replace it with SON which has finals on a Friday and Saturday night at the same venue.  Apologies for resorting to sarcasm but some of your arguments are wafer thin.

 

 

[Humphrey Appleby]

1 hour ago, enotian said:

They'd never replace it with SON which has finals on a Friday and Saturday night at the same venue.  Apologies for resorting to sarcasm but some of your arguments are wafer thin.

Difference is that the same lineup is guaranteed for both days of the best pairs, and of course it remains to be seen how successful this 2-day event will be.

Like I said, if there was money in a two-day GP it'll already have been done.

[enotian]

Spoken like a true innovator.  I look forward to nothing new ever happening ever again on the basis that it would have already been done if it was worthwhile doing.

[Humphrey Appleby]

8 minutes ago, enotian said:

Spoken like a true innovator.  I look forward to nothing new ever happening ever again on the basis that it would have already been done if it was worthwhile doing.

There's nothing new about a glorified pairs competition. Was previously run from 1993 to 1998 and everyone was relieved when the proper team competition came back.

There's nothing even new about running it over 2 days - ice racing has been doing it for years.

[Bavarian]

3 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Difference is that the same lineup is guaranteed for both days of the best pairs, and of course it remains to be seen how successful this 2-day event will be.

Like I said, if there was money in a two-day GP it'll already have been done.

Apparently the Poles are selling two-days tickets only for the SoN Finals on Friday and Saturday. They need to, otherwise the stadium would be half empty on the Friday.

[bigcatdiary]

On 5/26/2018 at 5:38 PM, Bavarian said:

Apparently the Poles are selling two-days tickets only for the SoN Finals on Friday and Saturday. They need to, otherwise the stadium would be half empty on the Friday.

Of course that’s assuming that everyone buying the two day tickets actually attend both days.

[RPNY]

Was generally the same for the world cup, the race offs (often brilliant racing)  were generally very small crowds as the home nation wasnt there and most people just wanna see the 'Main Event'

[fatface]

On 5/17/2018 at 7:18 PM, Tex said:

I know we could fill 1000 pages with the rights and wrongs of qualifying for the GP but  there's 1 issue in particular that I find a real shame... Speedway like many sports has a lot to do with who is on 'form' everything going right for them and therefore performing at their best. Cant help but feel that by qualifying 1 season for the NEXT season GPs, we get robbed of seeing a rider performing at their best. First time noticed it was in fact was 1995 when Joe Screen was on fire but then not quite the same rider in 1996. Hans Andersen a similar scenario in 2006/07 and there's been a good few others too. Cookie to a certain extent is a similar scenario this year.

So I guess the question is, would there be anyway of the  qualifiers being done at the start of the season? I know they need the winter to build sponsors etc & Its not a major issue, but was just wondering if there was any way around it?

I like innovation and every sport needs a refresh every now and then. But this is just change for change sake. I think the current system works well. Each GP has its individual climax and ultimately the best rider across the year wins.  I don't buy into the view that many in the pro-one off World Finals camp subscribe to that the GPs somehow miss out on the best riders that year because they have had to qualify the previous season. So often in speedway - and indeed wider sport - a competitor can seem an absolute world beater when outside of the harsh spotlight of a World Championship or Olympic Games. But when they do step into that spotlight, they are not quite as great as they seem. I like him, but harsh reality is something Craig Cook is going to have to swallow this year. There have been lots of others too...Chris Morton was my big hero and regularly he was in the top 3 of the averages across the season...an absolute giant of the British League, but on World Final night, he just wasn't at the races.

[RPNY]

36 minutes ago, falcace said:

I like innovation and every sport needs a refresh every now and then. But this is just change for change sake. I think the current system works well. Each GP has its individual climax and ultimately the best rider across the year wins.  I don't buy into the view that many in the pro-one off World Finals camp subscribe to that the GPs somehow miss out on the best riders that year because they have had to qualify the previous season. So often in speedway - and indeed wider sport - a competitor can seem an absolute world beater when outside of the harsh spotlight of a World Championship or Olympic Games. But when they do step into that spotlight, they are not quite as great as they seem. I like him, but harsh reality is something Craig Cook is going to have to swallow this year. There have been lots of others too...Chris Morton was my big hero and regularly he was in the top 3 of the averages across the season...an absolute giant of the British League, but on World Final night, he just wasn't at the races.

I hear what you are saying. I love the GP series as it is, was just wondering if there was anyway to make it even better!

Edited May 29, 2018 by Tex

[James Carter]

I quite like the qualifying format this year. What I don't understand is how the 4 SGP Challenge wildcards get picked.

Zagar chose to ride the challenge and qualified through his semi so does that mean that current SGP riders wont get a pick for the final as they could have rode in the semi? 

Can anyone shed any light on this. Seems really weird