still relevant...

[Guest BilaHora]

All

 

I was reading through an old copy of the Speedway Star (November 21, 1992) a couple of days ago and found the following open letter from John Louis addressing the ills of speedway at the time:

 

Open letter on entertaining speedway…

 

1. We must have more dirt on many of our tracks to improve the racing. Highly tuned engines on slick tracks only cause processional, follow-the-leader speedway. Tracks prepared with plenty of grip and dirt will encourage more passing, better racing and more excitement, with riders making more mistakes.

2. I do not agree with standardising engines, as I do not believe we should penalise the rider who has the initiative to try different things, or the rider who prepares his equipment in a professional manner.

However, I do believe there is an argument for standardising cycle parts, e.g. leading fork-links, horizontal engines, etc. This year’s World Champion Gary Havelock has proved that there is no need to move in this direction. Banning such items would be a cost-saving exercise for riders and promoters alike.

As for the engines, we – the BSPA – have taken the initiative in the past, introducing 34mm carburettors, reducing the depth of tyres to 8mm, banning megaphone silencers, etc. However, as in all sport, technology has improved, bikes are going almost as fast, track records continue to be broken.

The best people to develop ways of slowing engines down are the riders themselves, and I believe we have acted correctly in involving the SRA in the BSPA Technical Committee, and I look forward to hearing their proposal for 1993.

3. In my opinion the biggest problem of all is the current 15-heat format. After three fairly evenly balanced races, Heat 4 sees the two number threes – usually the best rider from each club – partnered by two reserves! This must be wrong and leads to a very drawn out race.

Heats 6 and 7 also feature reserves versus heat leaders, and while Heat 8 is reasonably balanced (2 & 7 v 2 & 7), the pattern of top riders versus reserves is repeated in Heats 9, 10, 11 and 14.

This is no fewer than seven races in which we find a mixture of top heat leaders and reserves.

This simply cannot be in the interest of close, exciting speedway.

You do not get good racing by pitching the likes of Ben Howe, Scott Smith, Darren Spicer, Glenn Cunningham, Justin Elkins, etc against the riders of the calibre of Per Jonnson, Sam Ermolenko and Hans Neilsen.

I am absolutely certain the current format is speedway’s biggest enemy.

In Sweden and Poland, the two countries who operate league speedway on a scale similar to Britain, reserves do not come up against top riders. Is this a coincidence, or is this because they feel that the best racing is provided by riders of more equal ability?

In Swedish League racing they use eight-man teams with the 1-6 racing each other three times with no tactical substitutes allowed in those heats.

In the Polish League they use six-rider teams with no reserve races but a number seven is named to be used in case of injury, or if a rider is having an off-night. The 1-6 riders are all programmed for five rides.

We are the only nation in the world to have our weakest riders race against the top man – in seven out of fifteen heats! Surely, this MUST lead to processional, drawn-out racing?

 

Swedish format

 

Ht 1: 1 2 v 1 2 Ht 2: 3 4 v 3 4 Ht 3: 5 6 v 5 6 Ht 4: 7 8 v 7 8 Ht 5: 5 6 v 3 4 Ht 6: 3 4 v 1 2 Ht 7: 7 8 v 7 8 Ht 8: 1 2 v 5 6 Ht 9: 5 6 v 1 2 Ht 10: 3 4 v 5 6 Ht 11: 1 2 v 3 4 Ht 12: 7 8 v 7 8 Ht 13: Lowest scorers from 1-6 Ht 14: Next lowest scorers from 1-6 Ht 15: Highest scorers from 1-6

 

Polish format

 

Ht 1: 1 2 v 1 2 Ht 2: 3 4 v 3 4 Ht 3: 5 6 v 5 6 Ht 4: 1 2 v 3 4 Ht 5: 3 4 v 5 6 Ht 6: 5 6 v 1 2 Ht 7: 1 2 v 5 6 Ht 8: 3 4 v 1 2 Ht 9: 5 6 v 3 4 Ht 10: 1 4 v 2 5 Ht 11: 3 6 v 1 4 Ht 12: 2 5 v 3 6 Ht 13: 3 6 v 2 5 Ht 14: 1 4 v 3 6 Ht 15: 2 5 v 1 4

 

If we are to improve our product, surely we must begin by introducing a format where riders of equal status compete against each other?

Tactical substitutes should only be allowed for numbers 1-6, and reserves should only compete against each other.

The problem with our format is obviously the seven-man make-up of teams and we must consider moving to six- or eight-man sides.

 

John Louis

Ipswich Speedway

 

How relevant are Mr Louis' comments to the present day? Have any of his concerns been addressed and can we still learn from what he had written?

 

Regards

 

BilaHora

[SCB 0]

I bet the BSPA laughed at him?!

 

It's no good having someone with a bit of forseight if the rest ignore it.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

How relevant are Mr Louis' comments to the present day?

 

I expect if you went back further, you'd find similar sentiments expressed by others as well. In some respects, it's amazing how little actually changes!

 

With respect to the heat format, I do agree that 7-rider teams create an unbalanced heat format (particularly when you get to 15 or 16 heats), but equally I think mixing reserves in with other riders is not only important for their progress, but it prevents matches from becoming too predictable. The 18-heat format used in 1993 was all very well, but the dedicated reserves races really were the weak point of the whole idea. Often the best races are those featuring a couple of reserves against other riders (e.g. Heat 8).

 

With respect to equipment, John Louis is exactly right, but riders are their own worst enemies when it goes to wanting the latest accessories.

 

Equally, John Louis unlike most of us, is in a position to introduce improvements, yet the only major change that Ipswich would appear to have instigated is the much unloved tactical ride rule.

Edited December 10, 2004 by Kevin Meynell

[SCB 0]

I expect if you went back further, you'd find similar sentiments expressed by others as well. In some respects, it's amazing how little actually changes!

As far back as the 1950's the promoters were saying the same as they are now, the favourite? Cost cutting!!!!