Paulco Posted July 5 Report Share Posted July 5 Obviously we were disappointed when we got to the track and discovered Steve Worrall was an absentee . But after a poor start we battled away and the racing wasn't too bad . But we were basically a three man team . But the dust was awful towards the end . Scunthorpe are a solid outfit and the return in a fortnight should be interesting, but I fear the bonus point is gone . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelinho Posted July 5 Report Share Posted July 5 1 hour ago, Beirao said: Jack now has a CMA of 5.4 effective shortly. Does that take us over the limit, meaning only like for like changes can now be made. It will. I said "currently", because I don't know when it starts to apply, but it will mean we can only replace riders with others at lower averages. We will lose our headroom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crescent girl Posted July 5 Report Share Posted July 5 2 hours ago, bringbackHalifax said: Still think Starke, Pearson and possibly Ace are too weak on a home and away basis. Rose tinted specs for those who see James at Glasgow but away he is poor and that threatens the bonus points. Top four gone now, how about bringing over Slater Lightcap with a view to next year. Slater Lightcap is in UK, will be at SoN meetings for USAand hopes to get a call for Benfund next Sunday.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazc Posted July 5 Report Share Posted July 5 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Noelinho said: It will. I said "currently", because I don't know when it starts to apply, but it will mean we can only replace riders with others at lower averages. We will lose our headroom. Hence the change if we are even considering making one needs to be made shortly before this month’s new rolling averages take effect. The new averages kick in on the 23rd of each month in June we were 2.8 points under the limit which gives us scope to replace and strengthen assuming we can find someone. Edited July 5 by Gazc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelinho Posted July 5 Report Share Posted July 5 29 minutes ago, Gazc said: Hence the change if we are even considering making one needs to be made shortly before this month’s new rolling averages take effect. The new averages kick in on the 23rd of each month in June we were 2.8 points under the limit which gives us scope to replace and strengthen assuming we can find someone. Piotr Pawlicki had an assessed average for Birmingham, but it became an official average on 3/6. Why would that be, rather than in line with the other averages. Not aimed specifically at you, just wondering if assessed averages work differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazc Posted July 5 Report Share Posted July 5 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Noelinho said: Piotr Pawlicki had an assessed average for Birmingham, but it became an official average on 3/6. Why would that be, rather than in line with the other averages. Not aimed specifically at you, just wondering if assessed averages work differently. Pawlicki has a rolling average currently of 5.11 up to and including 4th July. His current average is 4.48 which will change on the 1st of the month based on whatever his rolling average is on the 23rd July. If we replace Starke for instance he is currently 3.33 and we were 2.5 under the limit so we could replace him with a rider up to 5.83 Marcin Nowak for instance. if we wait and Jack Smith’s new average kicks in of 5.4 we would probably only be able to make a like for like change. Ill get my anorak. Edited July 5 by Gazc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wow68 Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 6 hours ago, CTD26 said: I like Pearson I think he’s a decent little rider. Threw in at the deep end really into the main body at the start of the year. Ace is showing improvement and the pair of them are only young lads. As for starke, well I’m glad he riders for Glasgow and not us Pearson should be riding at number 2 - he and bomber ride very well together. Wrong move putting him at 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmarsbar2 Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 7 minutes ago, Wow68 said: Pearson should be riding at number 2 - he and bomber ride very well together. Wrong move putting him at 4. You're only just realising that, it was obvious a month ago. Still you realised it before Cami Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wow68 Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 1 hour ago, gmarsbar2 said: You're only just realising that, it was obvious a month ago. Still you realised it before Cami Actually no, I realized it when they did it, was hoping it would change back. But thank you for the sarcasm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solidmango Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 5 hours ago, Gazc said: Pawlicki has a rolling average currently of 5.11 up to and including 4th July. His current average is 4.48 which will change on the 1st of the month based on whatever his rolling average is on the 23rd July. If we replace Starke for instance he is currently 3.33 and we were 2.5 under the limit so we could replace him with a rider up to 5.83 Marcin Nowak for instance. if we wait and Jack Smith’s new average kicks in of 5.4 we would probably only be able to make a like for like change. I’ll get my anorak. If my understanding of the rules is correct, we should change Starke now and use up the surplus points we have. Then following this, when Smith gets his new average it gives us scope to make a like for like change with him if required. I suppose it just depends who is available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
szkocjasid Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 (edited) 58 minutes ago, Solidmango said: If my understanding of the rules is correct, we should change Starke now and use up the surplus points we have. Then following this, when Smith gets his new average it gives us scope to make a like for like change with him if required. I suppose it just depends who is available. It would be very harsh on Smith to wait until he's out 2+ points so his average, then drop him! Dropping Starke for a 5 points rider, putting Pearson at reserve, may be the only change they need to make. Edited July 6 by szkocjasid 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solidmango Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 2 hours ago, szkocjasid said: It would be very harsh on Smith to wait until he's out 2+ points so his average, then drop him! Dropping Starke for a 5 points rider, putting Pearson at reserve, may be the only change they need to make. Yep, agreed. However, if Smith was to struggle to maintain the form we need, he could be replaced with a 5+ point rider. Smith has surprised me to be honest, but I reckon he would struggle at 2 or 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazc Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 Just now, Solidmango said: Yep, agreed. However, if Smith was to struggle to maintain the form we need, he could be replaced with a 5+ point rider. Smith has surprised me to be honest, but I reckon he would struggle at 2 or 4. He might but as you say he has surpassed expectations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cast1rn Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 7 hours ago, Wow68 said: Pearson should be riding at number 2 - he and bomber ride very well together. Wrong move putting him at 4. He should be at number 2 however Starke was never meant to perform so badly. At 2 Starke is paired up with Bomber in 3 of his 4 rides so the reality is we are more guaranteed to get 3-3's with him in that heat than having him paired up with Leon and having to rely on him in heat 14. But again you can opt for the "Cami's clueless" option if you think that sounds more probable. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 2 minutes ago, Cast1rn said: He should be at number 2 however Starke was never meant to perform so badly. At 2 Starke is paired up with Bomber in 3 of his 4 rides so the reality is we are more guaranteed to get 3-3's with him in that heat than having him paired up with Leon and having to rely on him in heat 14. But again you can opt for the "Cami's clueless" option if you think that sounds more probable. Not sure many Glasgow fans could figure the Starke signing in the first place.Well past his best. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cast1rn Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 5 hours ago, Solidmango said: If my understanding of the rules is correct, we should change Starke now and use up the surplus points we have. Then following this, when Smith gets his new average it gives us scope to make a like for like change with him if required. I suppose it just depends who is available. Well let's reward the guy who's put almost 2 points on his average by dropping him?? Guys won us two meetings when we've been utter garbage. Replacement wise for 4 points you can only get a non Brit who has never raced in the UK, or at any level in Poland..... So i'd probably stick with the guys that's scoring well round ashfield 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazc Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 9 minutes ago, Fromafar said: Not sure many Glasgow fans could figure the Starke signing in the first place.Well past his best. He fitted that’s about it , we can strengthen if we can up to 5.83 using Starkes average and the points we are under currently. Needs to be soon . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cast1rn Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 7 minutes ago, Fromafar said: Not sure many Glasgow fans could figure the Starke signing in the first place.Well past his best. Because he was on a "false average".... As an engineer who has an extreme soft spot for maths I F'ing hate that term, unless it is an Assessed average it is a true indication of a riders performance. It's done over 20 meetings so it is a pretty good indication of what you'd expect to see from his results. The only time I would expect it to shift dramatically was if Paul was suddenly to find himself on improved equipment and from an engine failure on Press and Practice day I think it was clear to see that wasn't the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelinho Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 I wouldn’t get rid of Jack. He’s scoring at home and he’s exceeded expectations. If a rider plays their part, they should keep their place, for me. Same goes for Worrall. He’s done what he could be expected to do, so he should keep his place. Not his fault he was missing last night. Ace has also had two good meetings in a row now, so I’m inclined to say he should stay too. It’s fair to say he’s not met expectations this year, but getting rid of him when it looks like things might be starting to click would be silly. We’ve stuck with him for long enough that we should give him the opportunity to show this is a real improvement and not a flash in the pan. We have to give space for young riders to develop. I’m a bit concerned about Pearson. He was poor last night. He has shown good improvement at home, but the away form isn’t cutting it at the moment. Leon has got better over the season and he’s put in some gutsy rides on the road. Bomber seems a bit distracted/frustrated this season, but he’s scoring as you’d expect. Which leaves Paul. He doesn’t look fast, he doesn’t look like turning it around, and I’m struggling to see the fire burning inside. If we’re going to make a change, it needs to be him. Butnweve been talking about this for a long time now and there’s been a lot of false dawns, so I’m not holding out a lot of hope. I think the loss last night makes the aggregate point difficult, and this was a fairly important aggregate point to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
szkocjasid Posted July 6 Report Share Posted July 6 1 hour ago, Fromafar said: Not sure many Glasgow fans could figure the Starke signing in the first place. Well past his best. I've never understood the "well past his best" argument against signing Starke. Of course he's well past his best, otherwise he'd be on a 7 point average & wouldn't have fitted in the team. Now if you said, couldn't understand it, because no-one saw him improving his average, that would be a fair point. I could argue Chris Harris, Sam Masters & Ben Barker are "well past their best" don't get many complaints about their signings lol! 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.