Tactical Ride / Tactical Substitutes Poll.

[Ron Butler 0]

I believe the tactical ride should be kept but must be radically changed.  Detailed below iare changes I feel should be made to the rule.

• One tactical substitute per team per meeting
   
  
• Can only be used when a team is 12 or more points behind
   
  
• The team member with highest average is not eligible to take a tactical substitute ride
   
  
• A rider must have ridden in at least two heats before being eligible for a tactical substitute ride (the rider being replaced must have ridden three heats by the end of the meeting or the points from the tactical substitute ride are not doubled)
   
  
• An opponent must be beaten for the points to be doubled (same as current rule)
   
  
• Tactical rides cannot be used beyond heat 12
  

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

just what we need more complicated rules to get broken / bent, just either scrap all together or go back to the old tac sub rule

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I threw away my slide rule at the end of my student days. I don't feel that any of us would want to be in a position where we have to take a laptop with us to follow the progress of meetings

 

Scrap both versions of tactical substitutes and tactical ride rules and let's get back to simple 3-2-1 scoring. There are other television led innovations I would like to see abolished but I can't see it happening any more than I can imagine the tactical rules disappearing over the horizon.

 

Regrettably 'our' sport has been sold to the highest bidder - Sky Television. I am fortunate in that I remember the far distant days when the governing body of speedway, the promoters and everyone on the other side of the fence put on meetings primarily for the benefit of the club supporters.

 

Halcyon days they were.

 

Ron.

[star ghost 7]

One of the oddest points about the tac sub and such things is in two-legged matches the home team can win by 20 points. When they become the away team in the second leg and get nine points behind they can do a tac-sub. But they are still 11 in front at the time as the totals are on-going. One season the t-s was dropped from Cup matches but it was back the next from what I remember. As has been said so many times - Remember when the rules were easy to understand.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

It doesn't make matches closer than they were before. It makes them less close.

 

I haven't actually done any scientific analysis of how tactical rides affect the outcome of matches, but it's certainly been my impression there have been less close matches since the TR rule was introduced, compared with the old TS rule.

 

One explanation might be that tactical subs could be introduced as and when they were needed. With tactical rides, it's not just a case of going nine points (in reality ten points) down, but doing so at the right time when you have a decent rider programmed in the next heat. There is far less flexibility to use your tactical options than in the past.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

Remember when the rules were easy to understand.

 

No, I don't remember when the rules were ever easy to understand (rider control, double rider replacement etc..).

[Grachan 7,361]

I haven't actually done any scientific analysis of how tactical rides affect the outcome of matches, but it's certainly been my impression there have been less close matches since the TR rule was introduced, compared with the old TS rule.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I've been through a few meetings over the last couple of years where TRs have been used (normally when people have complained about the result being false).

 

I did this by looking at how the first two probable Tac Subs might have been used and basing their success on the scores from the TR (eg if the TR produced a win, so does the TS), plus guessing how any further probable Tac Subs may have gone based on the form of the riders.

 

Every time I have done this the match would have been closer under the old TS rule.

 

The TR is a horrible rule for me as it emphasises this unfairness and imbalance in the scores so obviously, but the TS rule was more unfair.

 

Personally I see no reason why we need either. The low points limits these days are enough to ensure scores should remain relatively close. I know it can create closer matches, but it's just horrible.

 

Imagine if someone loses the Play-off final because of it! Nightmare.

[The Third Man 2,214]

it wasnt brought in to make matches closer it was brought in to save money

 

promoters dont have to pay the no 1 to have another ride, saves a lot of money and this is the reason why it will stay. no matter how much the supporters dont it, no matter what other consequences of the rule there are, i.e. fans staying away all the promoters see is another way to save money at the fans expense, dont know why we bother sometimes

 

must admit i have been watching for about 38 years and for a very simple sport the rules have always been complicated, but i must say they are more complicted now than ever.

[south coast robin 0]

The rule also deters newcomers that the sport needs to attract ... they see it as a bit micky-mouse

[AJK86 180]

why cant speedway just be 7 v 7, no tacticals no nothing just 7 v 7 and see who builds the better team.

[speedwaynomad 0]

As stated earlier it probably will be kept because it is a cost cutting exercise for the promoters, and Sky seem to like it. Personally I dislike it .I've seen my team benefit and lose through it and whatever the result I think it makes a mockery of the sport, and most new comers think it's a stupid rule.

[moxey63 1,785]

Don't know if it's been said, but I feel the GD kills a match dead. I feel there are more races being thrown as teams try to stay less than nine in front. Then when you do fall nine in arrears the fightback depends on what riders you have programmed before you use the GD. The old 6 points in arrears was best as a side could use more of its resources in an attempt to pull back. To me, the GD has tarnished speedway's image even further, plus it's crap.

If the rule was brought in to save money, why bother with the heat 15 nominated race. We already see the same riders in heat 13. In fact, to save cash, go back to 13 heats. But that's another grumble.

Edited September 30, 2006 by moxey63

[Where's Sverre 0]

Just about everybody seems to be very against the current TR/TS rule on the basis it is unfair to reward poorer teams with an opportunity to catch up. If this is the basis of all the disapproval then does it mean that everyone is also against the various forms of team limits applied each winter?

 

After all, the points limit rule is also designed to stop good teams being too good and give the poorer teams more of a chance - and it has a much bigger and longer-lasting impact than allowing a team that has fallen behind the opportunity of a few extra points in a meeting. The enforced destruction of strong teams at the end of each year is at least as illogical to non-fans as the ability to get double points in a meeting.

[moxey63 1,785]

What annoys me is the changing of the 3, 2, 1, 0. The old T/S was a much fairer way and you didn't have to award a rider double points just because he was wearing a different helmet colour. It was a level playing field for everyone.

Perhaps a much better way than the Golden Double is to allow the side that does fall a certain amount of points in arrears to be able to name a rider from the leading team to go back on a handicap. I can't see the chosen riders being happy though.

[The Third Man 2,214]

Just about everybody seems to be very against the current TR/TS rule on the basis it is unfair to reward poorer teams with an opportunity to catch up.  If this is the basis of all the disapproval then does it mean that everyone is also against the various forms of team limits applied each winter?

 

After all, the points limit rule is also designed to stop good teams being too good and give the poorer teams more of a chance - and it has a much bigger and longer-lasting impact than allowing a team that has fallen behind the opportunity of a few extra points in a meeting.  The enforced destruction of strong teams at the end of each year is at least as illogical to non-fans as the ability to get double points in a meeting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

couldnt agree more, no points limits and get rid of the jokers and we might be on the way to a professional sport at last

[Where's Sverre 0]

The only problem is - if you get rid of the jokers, who will sit on the various governing bodies

[The Third Man 2,214]

just a dream but we might some people with common sense and a common interest in taking the sport forward, if only.