False dawn

According to a rider I know, when I spoke to him a couple of years ago, it is still in the rules that all riders have to sign a document to say they have been paid for the previous meeting before the start of the next meeting. Obviously the reality is that riders sign even when they haven't been paid for all sorts of reasons and we end up with this type of story where riders are owed large sums. Of course, the authorities would blame the rider in these circumstances for not refusing to ride.

Nigel (100%) Boocock. Peter Collins, Dave Jessup, Chris Morton, Tai Woffinden, Mark Loram, Uncle Freddie, Simon Wigg, Joe Screen and Jimmy McMillan

I've had a few over the years. Used to be my role to get my coat on a regular basis.

Pinched from Wikipedia...... Ronnie Moore In 1950 at the age of 17, Moore was the youngest rider ever to qualify for the final of the Speedway World Championship. He won the championship in 1954 and again in 1959. He also finished runner up on three further occasions. His first win was all the more notable given the facts that he was still only 21 years of age, that he was riding with a broken leg and that he won with a maximum score. Got to be a good candidate for your list!

What, no Jason Crump? He was born in Bristol. Alright, I'll get my coat.

Surprised no one has included Tai in their lists! Alright, I'll get my coat.

And giving the losing the side choice of gates, means the track staff don't know which gates to favour in those circumstances doesn't it?

Not sure how this thread got revived after being dormant for many months but having reread it I still think there are ways to solve the problem. I read with interest the pros and cons of concrete starting gates but can't believe for a minute this is the way forward. Surely the torque generated by modern bikes rules out this as a possibility? My original contention was that although the stats show a clear advantage for one gate at times, looking at several meetings at the same circuit suggests that there is nothing intrinsically right or wrong with any one gate. To me, that suggests track preparation around the start line and the upkeep of the surface during the meeting are more crucial. It never fails to amaze me that when one gate is becoming an obvious graveyard during a meeting, no attempt is made to level up the surface. I'm no expert and I'm sure I couldn't look at the surface and say what needs to be done. But then I'm not the track curator or the starting marshal who stands there week in week out. Grade the starts and those that want it, could have an argument to ban "gardening".

I spent many happy hours on the Island, as well as at Somerset and many other circuits (King's Lynn left a lasting impression, but for all the wrong reasons). Gillman was another favourite, but that's a whole other hemisphere. The sport has seen a small resurgence in the last year or two but solo fans never seem to take a real shine to it. And I don't know why. Ironically, you'll see at least as much overtaking despite the relative size of the outfits. Imagine four outfits across the start line at Plymouth and then what might ensue when the tapes rise. Well I don't have to, I've been there. And jolly good racing it was. Compare that with the old Exeter track which I managed to race once, the year before it closed. Yes sidecars have a lot to offer and all that despite being amateur. Go and see a meeting if you get the chance, it's exciting (trust me, I could have been a doctor!)

Commiserations from a Bees supporter.

Well I'm listening to Leicester vs The Bees from Blackbird Road on the Home Service on Tuesday. You're welcome to my time machine

I have wondered if this was a possible solution. Although it could cause damage to the tyres and lead to riders wanting a new rear tyre per race.

Simply question: Is it possible to make all 4 starting gates roughly equivalent? Those of you who know me well know that I like to gather and analyse meeting statistics. Actually, I'm a bit of a nerd, but you've been too polite to say so thus far. But stats are just data. Their interpretation is information and information that can be useful. Take the last 4 years GPs at Krsko for example. Many of you will have noticed that gate 4 on Saturday night was a stinker. It produced 1 race winner (Magic in heat 19) and, in my opinion, more significantly, yielded the fewest points. Now you could propose quite credible reasons for this based on the run to the first corner and the shape of the track. And if we look at last year's stats you will find some support for this conclusion (0 wins and an even lower number of points). But go back to 2016 and the theory breaks down. Gate 4 was the 2nd best gate. Now all these numbers are well and good. I think the sample is significant enough to draw some conclusions. Certainly riders are generally pretty sure which gate to chose in the semis and the final based on the first 20 heats. My question is more related to track preparation. Is the fact that gate 4 is on the racing line significant? Is there more (or less) loose material out there? Does the rain drain down to the inside? I don't know, but surely the track curator has some ideas. Would you want to prepare a track where riders had very little chance of scoring points from one or more gates? Surely there are ways to even out the surface? Men with rakes around the start, working between every race (not an original idea btw)? A more scientific measure of the surface such as Kelvin's dirtometer (!!!). Whatever method is used, please remove some of these disparities. All too often the last third of a meeting is spoiled, ruined dare I say, due to the unfair advantage offered by a given gate or two.

Great minds eh?

This is just another case of referees applying the rules in an inconsistent fashion. Like many on here. I've seen lots of new rules introduced over the years. Some of these have been controversial, even downright unpopular. But at the end of the day it isn't the rules that cause the problems it's the referees application of them. Consistency is the watch word. What happened last night was job's worth and we all know it. There have been countless examples of riders "not being read to race" after the clock ticks to zero. Many examples could be seen last night. Of course you have to define what being "ready to race" means. Taking last night as an example, the starting marshal seemed to be determined to have the riders within a gnat's whatsis of his idea of where the riders should be. So where he was calling riders forward after the clock had gone to zero, were all those riders subject to exclusion. Of course not. We'd have had more exclusions than not. Forget that heat 16 last night was the most mouth watering line up at that point in the championship you could imagine, every race counts in the GP series. A bloody silly exclusion of any rider in any race is significant, by definition. Bartosz Zmarzlik beats Tai Woffinden by 1 point to win the World Championship on 6th October and guess what everyone will be talking about?