2022 Teams & Points average

[wtf]

1 hour ago, Marshall07 said:

The biggest problem with streaming is cost. Unless you have a very dedicated and knowledgable team of volunteers willing to run it for you then you're looking at £1500 minimum per meeting for a live stream. The revenue from that wouldn't change anything, not once other costs were taken into account

People will always find the money for the things they value the most. The clubs that value it will find a way, they then need to make it of value to their customers. £1500 per meeting If that is the cost is 150 people at £10 each. I guess as a promotion they have to look at it as can I get 150 (away fans probably) to sign up for the stream? Then build from there. Just the usual risk vs reward business decisions they have to make?  I'd have thought it was a lower risk and a longer term gain than some of the kneejerk rider acquisitions some of them go for. When you think of what plymouth were spending on two heat leaders each meeting this year, it makes streaming seem cheap. 

I guess many will stick to doing the same thing year after year and miraculously expect a different result. 

 

[MartinBSN]

1 hour ago, wtf said:

People will always find the money for the things they value the most. The clubs that value it will find a way, they then need to make it of value to their customers. £1500 per meeting If that is the cost is 150 people at £10 each. I guess as a promotion they have to look at it as can I get 150 (away fans probably) to sign up for the stream? Then build from there. Just the usual risk vs reward business decisions they have to make?  I'd have thought it was a lower risk and a longer term gain than some of the kneejerk rider acquisitions some of them go for. When you think of what plymouth were spending on two heat leaders each meeting this year, it makes streaming seem cheap. 

I guess many will stick to doing the same thing year after year and miraculously expect a different result. 

 

It's not 150 people though. £10 stream means £8 after vat. There's then payment processing costs and the stream running costs. The £1500 is purely for the production team.

The profit would be closer to £5-6 per stream. Meaning you now need 300 people. If championship clubs are only getting 500-800 to actual meetings then 300 buying an away stream is a big ask

[GS550]

On 10/21/2021 at 2:11 PM, Ryan555 said:

Would say this is a better balance across the 2 leagues in my opinion by not having an overly strong championship where teams can manage to fit 4 heat leaders in a team

You say Championship teams had 4 heat leaders.  Glasgow had only 2 heat leaders until Ostergaard got injured, and after that only 1 heat leader.  The rest have effectively been second strings and reserves.  And Glasgow finished the season in 2nd spot in the Championship table.  So not as if with only one or two heat leaders they finished in the bottom half of the table.  Sorry but your point that Championship teams have 4 heat leaders this season doesn't seem to hold water.

[Ryan555]

6 hours ago, GS550 said:

You say Championship teams had 4 heat leaders.  Glasgow had only 2 heat leaders until Ostergaard got injured, and after that only 1 heat leader.  The rest have effectively been second strings and reserves.  And Glasgow finished the season in 2nd spot in the Championship table.  So not as if with only one or two heat leaders they finished in the bottom half of the table.  Sorry but your point that Championship teams have 4 heat leaders this season doesn't seem to hold water.

I never said  it’s every team but in my opinion I’m kinda needs to be made very hard or result in you needing like a 2 point rider at 2 to make it happen 

[GS550]

5 hours ago, Ryan555 said:

I never said  it’s every team but in my opinion I’m kinda needs to be made very hard or result in you needing like a 2 point rider at 2 to make it happen 

Nor did I say its every team.  But you clearly did make a point about 4 heat leaders in Championship teams.  I only pointed out that the second placed team Glasgow did not have 4 heat leaders, that until Ostergaard got injured they only had 2 heat leaders and after that only 1, the rest being second strings and reserves.

If you are going to make a point about teams having 4 heat leaders as you did then you would maybe have a point if it was widespread, i.e. not "all" but commonplace throughout the division, and that teams with only 1 or 2 heat leaders e.g. Glasgow were rooted to the bottom of the table but clearly this is not the case.

Your mention of 2 point riders is maybe more where the attention needs to be focused as if teams are only allowed say one 2 point rider then it would discourage teams from assembling 4 heat leaders and the rest all 2 pointers.  I know somebody will say something about an existing rule and that's fine as I gave up trying to follow the ever changing rule book a while ago.

[Jaizer]

Thought on the "rising star" situation. Why not just create a list of riders considered to be rising stars (Josh bates need not apply) and say that every team has to consist of at least 2 of them but based on their CMA and new riders come in on a 2.00 from NL? Means for example Berwick can keep flint and bickley, Leicester the Thompson twins, Edinburgh kemp and Edwards, Glasgow Bailey and Brennan but without drastically weakening the league. And will allow same riders more spots in the top league, if there is one

[SteveLyric2]

5 minutes ago, Jaizer said:

Thought on the "rising star" situation. Why not just create a list of riders considered to be rising stars (Josh bates need not apply) and say that every team has to consist of at least 2 of them but based on their CMA and new riders come in on a 2.00 from NL? Means for example Berwick can keep flint and bickley, Leicester the Thompson twins, Edinburgh kemp and Edwards, Glasgow Bailey and Brennan but without drastically weakening the league. And will allow same riders more spots in the top league, if there is one

The Rising Star scheme should increase to '2 per team' only in the Championship, with the Premiership remaining at 1 Rising Star!  Just my opinion.

[Jaizer]

1 minute ago, Skidder1 said:

The Rising Star scheme should increase to '2 per team' only in the Championship, with the Premiership remaining at 1 Rising Star!  Just my opinion.

Suppose depends how many teams in top league. Of the rising stars in championship not there now that might hold their own Thompson twins, Jenkins, bickley, Thomas bowtel, bailey is getting there. Might be enough to keep it competitive. I'd say if do have 2 in top league should have 2 protected reserve races

[Endeavour]

On 10/22/2021 at 12:00 PM, Falcon1983 said:

This is why averages to build teams should be abolished and replaced with categorized riders A B C, D, E plus the rising stars

 

And who categorises them? There was so many discrepancies in standard of rising stars and the grading. A fair points limit and let the teams build accordingly .

[Gazc]

On 10/20/2021 at 1:58 PM, lisa-colette said:

I like it, not sure we have ever been described as the 'people's league champions' before though! Lol.

But of a tongue twister too! Try saying it really fast 

Replied to the wrong post edited.

Edited October 24, 2021 by Gazc

[Gazc]

If you can score up to 45 Points per meeting then that should be the points limit to build to , If clubs want to build lower that is there prerogative continually diluting the product will eventually lead to fans voting with there feet more so than they are now.  

[sparks123]

10 minutes ago, Gazc said:

If you can score up to 45 Points per meeting then that should be the points limit to build to , If clubs want to build lower that is there prerogative continually diluting the product will eventually lead to fans voting with there feet more so than they are now.  

Only 42 points per meeting. 

Averages based on 4 rides per rider per meeting.

For heat 15 a riders average is usually divided by 5 (5 races instead of 4). Scoring 8 points from 4 races is the same average as scoring 10 points from 5 races.

 

[gazzac]

8 minutes ago, sparks123 said:

Only 42 points per meeting. 

Averages based on 4 rides per rider per meeting.

For heat 15 a riders average is usually divided by 5 (5 races instead of 4). Scoring 8 points from 4 races is the same average as scoring 10 points from 5 races.

 

Said years and years ago, 42 points for every league and leave it alone for 3 seasons, everyone can team build at the end of the season knowing what next season will be. Too simple and won't happen though. 

[Gazc]

1 hour ago, sparks123 said:

Only 42 points per meeting. 

Averages based on 4 rides per rider per meeting.

For heat 15 a riders average is usually divided by 5 (5 races instead of 4). Scoring 8 points from 4 races is the same average as scoring 10 points from 5 races.

 

42 or 45 average for team building should never be below that ceiling it isn’t rocket science for those decision makers.

[Ryan555]

4 hours ago, GS550 said:

Nor did I say its every team.  But you clearly did make a point about 4 heat leaders in Championship teams.  I only pointed out that the second placed team Glasgow did not have 4 heat leaders, that until Ostergaard got injured they only had 2 heat leaders and after that only 1, the rest being second strings and reserves.

If you are going to make a point about teams having 4 heat leaders as you did then you would maybe have a point if it was widespread, i.e. not "all" but commonplace throughout the division, and that teams with only 1 or 2 heat leaders e.g. Glasgow were rooted to the bottom of the table but clearly this is not the case.

Your mention of 2 point riders is maybe more where the attention needs to be focused as if teams are only allowed say one 2 point rider then it would discourage teams from assembling 4 heat leaders and the rest all 2 pointers.  I know somebody will say something about an existing rule and that's fine as I gave up trying to follow the ever changing rule book a while ago.

Yeah fair point about 2 point riders as well i agree with you 

[Falcon1983]

3 hours ago, Endeavour said:

And who categorises them? There was so many discrepancies in standard of rising stars and the grading. A fair points limit and let the teams build accordingly .

You would need a panel selected unfortunately by the BSPL maybe 3 people minimum and hope it's done fairly with no hidden agendas for their club benefits

Or a rule base of if your average is between 2 figures you're category D for example

I think whole average system to build teams just doesnt work anymore and it's so open to foul play 

[Fortythirtyeight]

5 minutes ago, Falcon1983 said:

You would need a panel selected unfortunately by the BSPL maybe 3 people minimum and hope it's done fairly with no hidden agendas for their club benefits

Or a rule base of if your average is between 2 figures you're category D for example

I think whole average system to build teams just doesnt work anymore and it's so open to foul play 

‘Done fairly with no hidden agendas ‘…..that’s the BSPL buggered then.

Only an independent body with no ties to any club can give speedway any credibility back as regards a rule book.

Edited October 24, 2021 by Fortythirtyeight

[Jaizer]

4 minutes ago, Falcon1983 said:

You would need a panel selected unfortunately by the BSPL maybe 3 people minimum and hope it's done fairly with no hidden agendas for their club benefits

Or a rule base of if your average is between 2 figures you're category D for example

I think whole average system to build teams just doesnt work anymore and it's so open to foul play 

I think all you cause there is a bidding war for the riders towards upper end of said average limits. Do nothing to reduce costs IMO

[Endeavour]

22 minutes ago, Jaizer said:

I think all you cause there is a bidding war for the riders towards upper end of said average limits. Do nothing to reduce costs IMO

Oh for a team of Aussies with British parents and 3 strong heat leaders 

[GS550]

2 hours ago, Ryan555 said:

Yeah fair point about 2 point riders as well i agree with you 

No worries.  I do also agree with your underlying point, I guess more than one way to skin a cat.