Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Green Sheet Rolling Averages - Reducing in 2022


Recommended Posts

I have posted this in the general section, but thought it worthwhile for those who are only interested in the Prem ...

The Green Sheet Rolling Averages have been based on 20 matches for a while, but this season (2022), the number of matches is reducing by 2 each month, so: June 18, July 16, August 14, September 12, and by October the Rolling Averages will be based on the last 10 matches.

I checked with the BSPL office, and they confirmed that it has always been the last N matches, irrespective of home or away, i.e. not half of each. Therefore, by October it's possible that riders will have averages skewed by 6/7/8 home and 4/3/2 away, or even 4/3/2 home and 6/7/8 away.  Obviously, the smaller the sample, the bigger the impact on the overall average - especially when a new score is added and the oldest is dropped.

Another change by the BSPL for which the consequences have not been thought through ...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This, as you say, could be biased either way(Home or Away) but it could slightly eliminate average manipulation for the following season if riders, in their respective teams, are already in the play offs. It might be a bit strange but most of the meetings in September & October will be Play Off or KO meetings which do not go towards your CMA's.

My personal view on this is ALL types of meetings count but in 20 meetings, drop your lowest 4 scores as the PL only has 6 teams meaning 20 league meetings if the riders ride in all of them, similarly, in the CL 11 teams meaning, again, 20 league meetings if ridden in all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Roger Jacobs said:

I have posted this in the general section, but thought it worthwhile for those who are only interested in the Prem ...

 

The Green Sheet Rolling Averages have been based on 20 matches for a while, but this season (2022), the number of matches is reducing by 2 each month, so: June 18, July 16, August 14, September 12, and by October the Rolling Averages will be based on the last 10 matches.

I checked with the BSPL office, and they confirmed that it has always been the last N matches, irrespective of home or away, i.e. not half of each. Therefore, by October it's possible that riders will have averages skewed by 6/7/8 home and 4/3/2 away, or even 4/3/2 home and 6/7/8 away.  Obviously, the smaller the sample, the bigger the impact on the overall average - especially when a new score is added and the oldest is dropped.

Another change by the BSPL for which the consequences have not been thought through ...

I'd say it's a good move. 20 meetings is far too many to give an accurate account of someone's form!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, IronScorpion said:

This, as you say, could be biased either way(Home or Away) but it could slightly eliminate average manipulation for the following season if riders, in their respective teams, are already in the play offs. It might be a bit strange but most of the meetings in September & October will be Play Off or KO meetings which do not go towards your CMA's.

My personal view on this is ALL types of meetings count but in 20 meetings, drop your lowest 4 scores as the PL only has 6 teams meaning 20 league meetings if the riders ride in all of them, similarly, in the CL 11 teams meaning, again, 20 league meetings if ridden in all.

Dropping their 4 lowest scores will end up in inflated averages

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Najjer said:

Dropping their 4 lowest scores will end up in inflated averages

But it stops average manipulation at the end of a league season(not including play offs) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, IronScorpion said:

But it stops average manipulation at the end of a league season(not including play offs) 

But you will then end up with riders with on inflated averages when they could of genuinely had 4 bad meeting and replaced with higher ones. This once again leads to more watering down of the product by naturally forcing everybody’s average higher. I don’t believe that’s a good idea and I don’t believe that average manipulation come the end of the season is actually that much of an issue - especially in todays market where there is a shortage of riders.

I don’t think 10 meetings is a bad thing either as that represents half a season - however it should include any conbo of 4H/6A, 6H/4A or 5H/5A to prevent lop sided averages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Najjer said:

But you will then end up with riders with on inflated averages when they could of genuinely had 4 bad meeting and replaced with higher ones. This once again leads to more watering down of the product by naturally forcing everybody’s average higher. I don’t believe that’s a good idea and I don’t believe that average manipulation come the end of the season is actually that much of an issue - especially in todays market where there is a shortage of riders.

I don’t think 10 meetings is a bad thing either as that represents half a season - however it should include any conbo of 4H/6A, 6H/4A or 5H/5A to prevent lop sided averages.

Tbf, you could just increase the points limit accordingly. 

While I can understand the logic used for the rolling averages within a season (phased reduction of number of meetings), I would think for the following season using the last 20 (10/10) would be better. The more meetings, the more you dilute the impact of any thrown points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sings4Speedway said:

I can only see manipulation on the rise. Teams whos play-off chances have gone will see riders tripping over themselves to finish last. Two "bad" matches could easily see a rider trim 1-2 points off thier average.

I seem to remember this being the reason rolling averages were brought in, in the first place wasnt it? 

With the wholel premise being the longer the number of races and meetings, the less impact a few dodgy ones had...

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mikebv said:

I seem to remember this being the reason rolling averages were brought in, in the first place wasnt it? 

With the wholel premise being the longer the number of races and meetings, the less impact a few dodgy ones had...

 

It's almost like they want it to be dodgy....

Perish the thought ;)

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, mikebv said:

I seem to remember this being the reason rolling averages were brought in, in the first place wasnt it? 

With the wholel premise being the longer the number of races and meetings, the less impact a few dodgy ones had...

 

Didn't it have something to do with riders manipulating lower averages from the first six matches of the following season such that a 2.00 rider could then be replaced by a 5.00 as the other six riders had collectively dropped 3 points between them, for example. As at the start of a new season the first set of new averages was based entirely on that seasons scores. Making it easy for a 9 pointer to 'take it easy' over the first six matches and lower their average before miraculously rediscovering their form and finishing the season as a 9 pointer.

By introducing rolling averages it was then much more difficult for a rider to reduce their average at the start of the season (or at any time) because they'd need to 'take it easy' over 20 matches which is difficult when points = money.

I've really no idea why they'd reduce this to 10 matches? That's worse than pre rolling averages.  At least then a riders starting average for the following season was based on their performance across the whole of the last season, in which there used to be plenty of matches.

Aside from manipulating lower averages for the start of the following season a team guaranteed a play off spot could actually manipulate their averages to have a stronger reserve for the play offs.  Say Belle Vue have a commanding lead in the PL with even six matches to go. Could Charles Wright, for example, have six bad matches and find himself at reserve for the play offs?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, enotian said:

Didn't it have something to do with riders manipulating lower averages from the first six matches of the following season such that a 2.00 rider could then be replaced by a 5.00 as the other six riders had collectively dropped 3 points between them, for example. As at the start of a new season the first set of new averages was based entirely on that seasons scores. Making it easy for a 9 pointer to 'take it easy' over the first six matches and lower their average before miraculously rediscovering their form and finishing the season as a 9 pointer.

By introducing rolling averages it was then much more difficult for a rider to reduce their average at the start of the season (or at any time) because they'd need to 'take it easy' over 20 matches which is difficult when points = money.

I've really no idea why they'd reduce this to 10 matches? That's worse than pre rolling averages.  At least then a riders starting average for the following season was based on their performance across the whole of the last season, in which there used to be plenty of matches.

Aside from manipulating lower averages for the start of the following season a team guaranteed a play off spot could actually manipulate their averages to have a stronger reserve for the play offs.  Say Belle Vue have a commanding lead in the PL with even six matches to go. Could Charles Wright, for example, have six bad matches and find himself at reserve for the play offs?

Most seasons many of the play off positions are pretty much guaranteed for some teams by the end of July so plenty of scope for manipulation I would think...

Matej at 6 would be good for the Aces.. .. :D

Edited by mikebv
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, mikebv said:

Most seasons many of the play off positions are pretty much guaranteed for some teams by the end of July so plenty of scope for manipulation I would think...

Matej at 6 would be good for the Aces.. .. :D

Have a 45 point limit every season then none of this would have any effect at all really. Did I just really say that......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, gazzac said:

Have a 45 point limit every season then none of this would have any effect at all really. Did I just really say that......

I presume no rationale has been explained with the rule change? 

If so, I can only think that it actually could be designed as a way of reducing averages for next season for some riders...

Isn't the plan to bring back more GP riders next year? If so, including them AND all the doubling up Div One HL's currently sat on 6/7/8/9 point averages might be difficult...

Therefore the current lads drop a decimal point or two and they can then get team places to keep doubling up next year...

As if they dont double up, they then may want more to ride in Div 2...

 

Edited by mikebv
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gazzac said:

Have a 45 point limit every season then none of this would have any effect at all really. Did I just really say that......

where you conjuring the extra higher averaged riders from then? So that all teams can have a team average of 45 points?  Otherwise you'll have some teams averaging 45 points whilst others average maybe 39 points, if you're building from the existing pool of riders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mikebv said:

Isn't the plan to bring back more GP riders next year? If so, including them AND all the doubling up Div One HL's currently sat on 6/7/8/9 point averages might be difficult...

Exactly why you can't use averages for team building, in that scenario.

Wouldn't Woffinden come back in on his previous top division average which was about 7.50 or something ridiculously low.  So even if riders did drop points you'd have the likes of Sam Masters on a higher average than him.

If they can attract the GP stars back, even if Poland allow it, just grade them.  They're already doing it with rising stars. Of course a riders average would play a part in defining the grade but averages to 2 decimal places just aren't accurate enough to rank individual riders. They're only even an indication

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, enotian said:

Exactly why you can't use averages for team building, in that scenario.

Wouldn't Woffinden come back in on his previous top division average which was about 7.50 or something ridiculously low.  So even if riders did drop points you'd have the likes of Sam Masters on a higher average than him.

If they can attract the GP stars back, even if Poland allow it, just grade them.  They're already doing it with rising stars. Of course a riders average would play a part in defining the grade but averages to 2 decimal places just aren't accurate enough to rank individual riders. They're only even an indication

Far too many variables make up averages...

Eg a riders liking for a home track v his away performances, his position in the team, how many points get "gifted" or "lost" by engine failures, falls, riders "giving up at the back" and riders  "managing" their own averages, riding in meetings missing the best riders through fixture clashes, team riding by riding "shot gun" and probably many more...

Grade them all...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, mikebv said:

I presume no rationale has been explained with the rule change? 

If so, I can only think that it actually could be designed as a way of reducing averages for next season for some riders...

Isn't the plan to bring back more GP riders next year? If so, including them AND all the doubling up Div One HL's currently sat on 6/7/8/9 point averages might be difficult...

Therefore the current lads drop a decimal point or two and they can then get team places to keep doubling up next year...

As if they dont double up, they then may want more to ride in Div 2...

 

In answer to your first line, does the BSPL ever explain why they make decisions or ignore rules in their own regulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy