Vince

I've seen electric bikes racing on an oval, including one who would have finished on the rostrum in the pro class with the lap times he was doing. Speedway with a few 1 minute races is made for electric bikes if any racing is, current battery capabilities can very easily cope with that. The spectacle was almost exactly the same as normal flat track but the lack of noise definitely made it feel less exciting, whether you would get used to it and feel the same about the racing in the long term I'm not sure. However the prospect of motorcycle racing including Speedway taking place in inner city areas does appeal a great deal. As does the idea of being able to practice and train without complaints from neighbours. So much so that I am currently looking into the idea of getting an electric trials bike purely for the ability to ride at pretty much any time I want very locally.

I think there is a lot to be said for not expecting our young riders to match those from other countries at the same age. Generally speaking Polish, Danish and Swedish riders that I know of and maybe other countries too can have hours of bike time to every minute a British lad can get. Therefore experience wise they are bound to be behind age for age. To my way of thinking we need to be trying to produce decent league riders in higher numbers and from that will come the odd superstar, much like it's always been. Think how many thousands of kids go through MX where they can ride far more often and we only produce a couple of genuine World class riders each generation. Yet some expect 30 or 40 Speedway beginners who get to ride for 6 or 7 minutes once a fortnight to produce World Champions or they are considered failures. If you got 10 capable of riding in a professional league that would be an incredible success rate.

But is it a breach of any rules, let alone legal ones?

Restriction of trade I suspect but also it has been proven in court that you cannot stop even amateur riders competing with other organisations/ clubs by refusing them entry to your events when the ACU have tried to do it.

Absolutely ridiculous not to mention illegal.

If you talk to the older riders including Briggo they will tell you how they bought in 'special' engines for the big events, hired from the likes of Lattenhammer who had set them up for a specific rider and track. I know the 'special ones' who were handicapped for a season were set against it because it meant they had to spend far too much money on motors. Without doubt the engines they used in the leagues would have been much more standard and for all except the busiest looked after by the riders themselves. Colin Cook told us how he had an 897 Jawa and only adjusted the tappets using it home and away for every meeting of the season.

We'll be at Kings Lynn Flat tracking on Sunday, well over 100 riders and best part of 200 races, mostly 6 laps, with everybody competing consecutively so it could be done when the format is as described. Maybe splitting it into two meetings running 3 groups at each but still a full day entry would be easier and maybe if you ran the U23, 450's and Championship together in the afternoon spectators would also come along who don't want to spend a full day there. Track could also be given a really good turn over and grade between meetings if you had something going on in the centre while you did it. I quite like the idea but it would have to be an additional event for tracks as they couldn't run too many of those meetings.

Generally speaking I think the 4 riders, 4 laps is pretty good as it is. If you could lessen the time spent between heats and like the GP's grade every 4 or so it should be absolutely perfect for TV. To appeal though the danger aspect needs to be emphasised and the opposing riders not act like mates in front of the cameras even if they are really. Surfaces need to be investigated to prevent TV rain offs while the open mikes and so on would all increase TV appeal and that is the only hope of attracting any real money into the sport in my opinion. The disparity between riders is then heightened by the best riders being able to afford the best kit so it would be good to see some form of handicap racing tried. Then either ensure that as much as possible standard equipment is used or introduce a claiming rule where any race winning bike can be bought by a competitor for a few quid above the price of a new standard bike. The big thing for me is that currently a really dangerous and exciting sport is marketed as family friendly, it might be that but don't tell everybody up front. Stop punishing riders for getting too pumped up and reacting badly when they are convinced another rider tried to kill them. Let the fans see the passion and become involved emotionally (and while you're at it ban anybody apart from another rider who hits a rider from the pits for life). At least try marketing Speedway as the most extreme sport, tell everybody about the horrific injuries and just how battered the riders are half the time and how they have all broken bones in the sport.

Objected Did have a brief look through and thought it very noticeable that the majority of locals seem to support the application while a high percentage of the objections are from well outside the area, not sure how or if that will affect things though.

I thought the ref was pretty much spot on all evening. I'd like referees to exclude riders more often when they take other riders out but they manage to stay on the bike, it should be the action that is punished not the result.

I don't know if the rule would be the same for Speedway but our finishes are decided by the transponder crossing the line. It's fitted to the front forks so while theoretically that could change the finishing order compared to the front wheel it would be a real rarity and still be far more accurate than watching the replay from a funny angle.

While I agree with much of what you say but unlike Road Race circuits which have a variety of uses Speedway tracks couldn't be maintained for 1 or 2 meetings a year. If it gets to that stage most of them will just be put to other use, mainly housing I suspect. It's possible that some tracks could survive running a variety of meetings, amateur Speedway, flat track get grass track clubs to run an event, (I think there is a new sport in karts on shale ovals waiting to be started in the UK as well) where the riders pay an entry fee and it doesn't matter if spectators attend. At least you wouldn't be losing as much as some Speedway teams are reported to. There is no doubt that some of these things are already helping some teams survive but for many it's not an option.

In the younger junior classes a lot of the kids are riding MotoX bikes these days, KTM 65's and the like. At least they are in this area. Makes a lot of sense really, you can have a 14 year old turn to Speedway who has been racing motorcycles competitively every weekend for 8 years. While the grasstrack and Speedway kids have been getting 5 minutes saddle time at a meeting and maybe 10 on a really good practice day the MX kid is getting an hours racing and 2 hours plus on a practice day and the practice days are far more local and frequent for most. Personally I think practice days are the reason people turn away from Grasstrack and Speedway, it is far too difficult to get enough seat time to become any good. I can practice MX every weekend without travelling more than 40 minutes from home and race every weekend without travelling more than an hour. By contrast for a Speedway track now I need to travel a minimum of 2 1/2 hours for fairly infrequent practice sessions. On another tack I think this thread shows up why Speedway is failing and we are all guilty of it. Look at most of the suggestions for improving the sport and how many are going to get a new spectator through the gate? Points limits, doubling up and so on mean nothing to people outside the sport and aren't the reason they aren't going to the track. It's a radical shake up in the way the sport is promoted that will bring new spectators in the gate in my opinion although the IOW do a fantastic job showing what can be achieved with things as they are. The big problem as I see it is that Speedway is a weekly spectator sport and people just have too much other stuff to do these days to commit to a weekly sport unless it is top level Football (and even that is bi-weekly in the main). Unfortunately Speedway desperately needs to be using their facilities for other things but few own the track to enable this, and even those that do often struggle with planning permission allowing it. So if we accept that Speedway cannot rely on people through the gate to make money then the alternative is to bring other income into the sport or cut costs. Cost cutting will bring the sport to a largely amateur level in the UK in the next decade I believe. Speedway is made for TV but unfortunately failed to capitalise on the opportunity and unless they can change that I don't see large scale sponsorship saving the sport. In my opinion the sport now relies on it's future on TV to survive at a professional level and therefore probably as a team sport.

Ask Barry Bishop and Martin Widman to be in charge of bringing Speedway into the 21st century. They not only understand that these days you need to provide more than 15 heats of Speedway to make a night out but will listen to the ideas and thoughts of others. In fact they are so forward thinking that they were forced out of league Speedway in the UK!

I'm not so sure about MX, seen electric bikes there and exactly the same problem with the lack of noise, whether it is something that we would get used to I'm not sure, after all nobody was ever going to watch Speedway again when silencers were introduced. Grass Track and Speedway are similar but not the same though, what works on Grasstrack won't necessarily transfer to Speedway. I went to watch the upright Championships a couple of weeks back, really good value for money with lots of races. Plenty of old bikes there with the pre-75 class and some of the racing was excellent throughout the classes. Not a big difference between the uprights and laydowns to watch, for my money though the best to watch were still the modern 500s. Whether that is because it is what the younger lads ride or the bikes it's difficult to say but it is what the younger competitors want to ride so why risk losing them? I regularly rode a modern 450 MX bike on shale ovals until a couple of years ago and now ride a 750 Norton (old one). It's not much like riding a Speedway bike. The tyres being road legal rather than knobblies are what makes it difficult but put Speedway tyres on and we would only be able to slide coming off the corners because we just don't have the flywheels to turn in on the throttle consistently when there is a lot of grip. Some of the racing, especially in the Pro class at DTRA Flat Track meetings is incredible but apart from family and friends attracts one man and his dog to spectate live on a good day, and it's normally free. For some reason though it seems to be really press friendly and attracts good coverage Europe wide, was popular on TV, especially with racers from other disciplines, a few years back too. Speedway can't afford to do that because if the riders aren't paid they wouldn't be able to race in a league for long. However I think what the IOW are doing with running modern bikes as the main event team sport then other classes in support is the way to go. The Speedway should still attract those wanting team events and the other classes add value to the evening. Even if the additional classes only bring a few friends through the gate it's still a chance to show Speedway to a new audience.

Recently watched an all electric flat track race on an oval. The winner was an ex British champion on an expensive and very well set up Alta developed with his help in the US. He was amazing on it and set times that would have seen him podium in the Pro class final. However despite the speed there was very definitely something missing with regard to excitement. On the other hand you would instantly do away with one of the biggest problems Speedway now has as a city centre sport. Personally I don't think there is anything to be gained by moving away from methanol engines. Large manufacturers aren't going to invest heavily in Speedway, the sales numbers would be miniscule in their terms and the exposure largely to non motorcycle people when it comes to Speedway fans. Speedway engines are expensive to maintain if you think of it as an hourly cost but in per race terms not quite as bad. An awful lot of that cost could be lessened by a standard engine rule that didn't require the engine to be full of parts that cost 2 or 3 times as much as those from the manufacturer. That would also let more riders do their own general servicing with perhaps one visit per year to a tuner/ engine builder. I think a minimum stroke /return to long stroke - engines would benefit the sport in many ways. The fact they burn a clean fuel should be used as a positive in promoting the sport.

But there still isn't a petrol engine I know of that has or even has room for the flywheels found on speedway bikes. The flywheel weight is what allows a Speedway bike to broadside better than anything else, lose the flywheels and you lose the real essence of speedway.

I think Rich is spot on, methanol allows high compression and big flywheels which not only gives the right sort of power needed but a lot of engine braking too. The problem with road engines (or MX etc) on Speedway has always been the lack of flywheel effect.

I'm a fan of Nicki too, have been ever since he ran an Interspan training school at Newport which my lad attended. World Champion at the time he was out in the pouring rain all day and nothing was too much trouble for him, he was working on kids bikes, pushing them to get them started and explaining everything to them with a smile. Very different to a couple of the riders generally perceived to be 'nice' who did the minimum to collect the money. One of the nicest guys you could ever meet with no hint of the aggression he can show on track, to be fair there are many times you wouldn't want to be an on track opponent but off track a great bloke. As for arguing with the ref, they should get a bonus not a fine. Same with punch ups between riders which will always get spectators through the gate for future meetings. As far as I'm concerned the riders should be allowed to get on with it but any non rider or rider not in that meeting hitting a rider should be banned from the pits for life.

Supermarkets are open 24 hours so many of their workers plus delivery drivers and supply warehouses are on 24 hour shifts for starters compared to Speedways popular times. Same applies with so many businesses who now open extended hours that mean large numbers of staff work either very early or late. I'm not talking about the past year but in general over the past few years.

I think working hours have changed so much for both riders and fans that weekday meetings are no longer viable for quite a large percentage.

I hope that a way of funding legal action is found to fight the Speedway authorities. What they are doing is undoubtedly illegal and was proven so in the 1970s (maybe very early 80s) when the ACU were taken to court after threatening the withdrawal of ACU race licences of riders competing in AMCA mx events. Didn't stop the ACU just making threats they knew had no bite for years after the decision until it got to the stage everybody just ignored them. Remember how they threatened the licences of any rider practicing at Lydd not so very long ago? I can't remember it ever happening because they knew it was an empty threat. In addition if they are treating riders as professionals then their contracts should come under employment law, no more asset system, the addition of sick pay, holiday pay and pension schemes, no dropping riders to bring in somebody else because the numbers fit unless you're willing to keep paying the dropped rider. Put all that under threat and I suspect they will withdraw their threats to riders.

People who take the knee aren't booed because they receive racial abuse but because they do so in support of a decidedly dubious movement, many of whose members are as racist as anybody they protest against not forgetting the whole take a knee nonsense was inspired by the death of a career criminal. I have no issues with anybody wanting equality, everybody deserves it and it should be offered unconditionally by all. However I have always had doubts that the way to gain equality for anybody is for a relatively small minority of a minority to behave outrageously. I would go out of my way to back any individuals right to be treated in the same way as others but that includes the need to avoid the positive discrimination demanded by the more extreme minority groups. Equality will only come from the majority mixing with minorities on equal terms, we have come a very long way in the past few decades because of that but all BLM and the more outrageous Gay pride events do is create further division. Equality comes from people not caring about the race, religion or sexuality of others. Standing up and screaming 'look at me I'm not the same as you' achieves nothing good.

But clever enough to know that somebody having a different point of view and expressing it politely takes more intelligence than name calling!

I don't get the Gay pride thing at all, nobody should be ashamed of their sexuality but being proud of it is like being proud of having dark hair or blue eyes, it's not an achievement. While we are on the subject how come Homosexuals are always grouped with transgender people or those who refuse to identify when it is all completely different things that are not any more to do with being gay than straight in many cases. Are we to assume that every gay person thinks there should be no sexual identification? In which case why would they be proud to be gay? Or are we to assume that all straight people are completely unaccepting of minorities while all gay people are completely tolerant of all other aspects of sexuality and identification? Or, as seems most likely to me, are we to assume it's about the loud minority yet again needing to make themselves feel more important while the majority just want to get on with life regardless of what they think about sex and identification?