Grachan Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 Just now, iainb said: Don't think you can ever count Hancock out, Dudek is consistent if nothing else, Janowski if he can eliminate his couple of duffers and Lindgren surely if (as with the others) injury free. Maybe Emil too if he can turn his career around and recapture his speed of a few years ago Not saying it is beyond anyone else, but I only see it being one of those 3 next year - and I'm no longer convinced that Jason Doyle really wants it badly enough. Likewise Hancock. Lindgren a possible dark horse. Janowski needs to up his game once he realises he is up with the leaders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted October 18, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 7 minutes ago, Grachan said: I'm no longer convinced Jason Doyle really wants it badly enough. Likewise Hancock. I'm sure if they didn't want it they wouldn't be riding in the GP's... Have you seen the prize money on offer? I can't see they're making a profit from it compared to Poland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 9 minutes ago, iainb said: I'm sure if they didn't want it they wouldn't be riding in the GP's... Have you seen the prize money on offer? I can't see they're making a profit from it compared to Poland I don't mean want it. I mean WANT it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARK246 Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 49 minutes ago, waiheke1 said: Well at the start of the year Doyle as reigning champ, Zmarzlik, Lindgren who started the season on fire, Emil. So Woffinden had 3 serious rivals one possible rival, ten chances instead of one, the backing of three team mates and when he wins he is the best ever. How stupid am I, to not understand how great a rider he is, in fact the best ever hahaha 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARK246 Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 (edited) 57 minutes ago, waiheke1 said: Well at the start of the year Doyle as reigning champ, Zmarzlik, Lindgren who started the season on fire, Emil. And the backing of the series main sponsor just in case. Edited October 18, 2018 by MARK246 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted October 18, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 3 minutes ago, MARK246 said: So Woffinden had 3 serious rivals one possible rival, ten chances instead of one, the backing of three team mates and when he wins he is the best ever. How stupid am I, to not understand how great a rider he is, in fact the best ever hahaha Best British rider ever 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 21 minutes ago, MARK246 said: So Woffinden had 3 serious rivals one possible rival, ten chances instead of one, the backing of three team mates and when he wins he is the best ever. How stupid am I, to not understand how great a rider he is, in fact the best ever hahaha More than Hans Nielsen had. Hans had one serious rival. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARK246 Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 2 minutes ago, Grachan said: More than Hans Nielsen had. Hans had one serious rival. But in 5 rides one mistake is crucial over 70 races it is what it is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 13 minutes ago, MARK246 said: But in 5 rides one mistake is crucial over 70 races it is what it is Likewise, you can be fortunate and win a one-off because another rider who should have won made that one mistake that you mention. Apples and oranges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatface Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 6 minutes ago, Grachan said: Likewise, you can be fortunate and win a one-off because another rider who should have won made that one mistake that you mention. Apples and oranges. ...and this year went down to the 229th race of 230 before Woffinden clinched it. That’s a pretty fine room for error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARK246 Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 8 minutes ago, Grachan said: Likewise, you can be fortunate and win a one-off because another rider who should have won made that one mistake that you mention. Apples and oranges. Why fortunate ? You still need to score in your other four rides to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 6 minutes ago, MARK246 said: Why fortunate ? You still need to score in your other four rides to win. Fortunate because the person who would have won failed to win because of an engine failure or whatever. Consequently, it must, therefore, mean that the person who did win only managed to win due to someone else's bad luck. Without that bad luck they wouldn't have won. Pretty self-explanatory really. And the exact same scenario could occur within a Grand Prix. A single engine failure could, for example, prevent a rider reaching a semi-final while their main rival wins an extra race, plus a semi, plus a final. So one engine failure could lose you 9 points instead of just 3. Both systems require the same amount of dedication and skill. I don't get why people try to undermine the Grand Prix system just because they think it's not the same as in the good old days of upright engines and monkey masks. It's just as good a system and gives an equally valid World Champion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARK246 Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 1 minute ago, Grachan said: Fortunate because the person who would have won failed to win because of an engine failure or whatever. Consequently, it must, therefore, mean that the person who did win only managed to win due to someone else's bad luck. Without that bad luck they wouldn't have won. Pretty self-explanatory really. And the exact same scenario could occur within a Grand Prix. A single engine failure could, for example, prevent a rider reaching a semi-final while their main rival wins an extra race, plus a semi, plus a final. So one engine failure could lose you 9 points instead of just 3. Both systems require the same amount of dedication and skill. I don't get why people try to undermine the Grand Prix system just because they think it's not the same as in the good old days of upright engines and monkey masks. It's just as good a system and gives an equally valid World Champion. When you have a world championship which can be won without winning a race ( second is good enough) it will always have it's detractors. The fact that to qualify for the system, you use a 5 ride meeting which requires a totally different approach (win at all cost) makes it all seem a total farce. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 1 hour ago, MARK246 said: You put 3 and Emil as an after thought, after two GPs it was obvious Doyle wasn't a threat How is that different from 12 of the field of 16 being out if it after 2 rides of a one off final...... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted October 18, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 51 minutes ago, MARK246 said: But in 5 rides one mistake is crucial over 70 races it is what it is It only took one race for Jason Doyle to lose the world title in 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARK246 Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 9 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said: How is that different from 12 of the field of 16 being out if it after 2 rides of a one off final...... There were one off finals won on 12 and 13 points it was never over after race 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted October 18, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, MARK246 said: There were one off finals won on 12 and 13 points it was never over after race 8 The earliest it could have been over was heat 17, depending on who was in it, but for half the field it was generally over after their second ride Edited October 18, 2018 by iainb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 1 minute ago, MARK246 said: There were one off finals won on 12 and 13 points it was never over after race 8 It would be interesting if someone eas able to provide stats on that I wonder how many time the champion came from outside the top 4 after 2 rides I have no idea but an educated guess would be not very many Equally I wonder how many GP champions have been outside the top 4 after 2 rounds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARK246 Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, iainb said: It only took one race for Jason Doyle to lose the world title in 2016 Strange way to put it, but injuries happen the timing was bad though. Edited October 18, 2018 by MARK246 Spelling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted October 18, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 4 minutes ago, MARK246 said: Strange way to put it, but injuries happen the timing was bad though. Only took that one race though... Just like in a one off world final. In Speedway you're only ever one race away from disaster 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.