Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
racers and royals

Warsaw Gp Saturday 18th April

Recommended Posts

Humphrey, spook, I run a theatre and there are four different ways of charging for use of the theatre. The first is that the artiste demands a guarantee. This is most often done by the bigger names we have and is most risky for the theatre as we have to meet their guarantee however many tickets we sell, so we can (and have!) lost on this deal. The second is a straightforward percentage, the bigger the star the higher the percentage they take, usually in the range of 70/30, 75/25 or 80/20. But at least we can't lose on this as even if we only sell one ticket we get a percentage of the ticket price.

 

Thirdly, there is a first call, where we agree that the first £1000 (or whatever it is) goes to the artiste and then there is a percentage split. If we only take, say, £900, the artiste gets £900 and we get nothing but we don't have to make up the shortfall as with a guarantee. This is better than a guarantee where we could actually lose money, but not as good as percentage split where we will always make some money.

 

Fourthly, there is a hire, where the artiste or company pay us a fee and all takings go to them, so the risk is entirely theirs whether they make the fire fee or not. Our local amateur drama and musical societies also pay an extra fee per day for hiring the theatre normally for three or four days beforehand for setting up and final rehearsals. This may be most relevant to the number of days Ole Olsen needs to lay a track.

 

I'm not sure whether any of this helps, but I expect it's all much the same for use of stadia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well as most of them were British dont think that was ever going to be the case...

 

to be fair Phil Rising has long defended Ole Olsen on this forum against many of us who had the knives out.... and he isn't British

 

From where I sit the issue usually appears to be the friendships which are made rather than a non compromising impartial position ............ but that could be said for a lot of the speedway community

 

 

Humphrey, spook, I run a theatre and there are four different ways of charging for use of the theatre. The first is that the artiste demands a guarantee. This is most often done by the bigger names we have and is most risky for the theatre as we have to meet their guarantee however many tickets we sell, so we can (and have!) lost on this deal. The second is a straightforward percentage, the bigger the star the higher the percentage they take, usually in the range of 70/30, 75/25 or 80/20. But at least we can't lose on this as even if we only sell one ticket we get a percentage of the ticket price.

 

Thirdly, there is a first call, where we agree that the first £1000 (or whatever it is) goes to the artiste and then there is a percentage split. If we only take, say, £900, the artiste gets £900 and we get nothing but we don't have to make up the shortfall as with a guarantee. This is better than a guarantee where we could actually lose money, but not as good as percentage split where we will always make some money.

 

Fourthly, there is a hire, where the artiste or company pay us a fee and all takings go to them, so the risk is entirely theirs whether they make the fire fee or not. Our local amateur drama and musical societies also pay an extra fee per day for hiring the theatre normally for three or four days beforehand for setting up and final rehearsals. This may be most relevant to the number of days Ole Olsen needs to lay a track.

 

I'm not sure whether any of this helps, but I expect it's all much the same for use of stadia.

Thx Norbold that is interesting............... my cousin experienced this to his cost after he sank a fortune in a club in California (look before you leap!) ........ clearly he must have been going for one of the first three options as the sticking point when acts got in touch was always how many fans were they going to bring with them .......... never an issue when Santana came to town but many other desperate nights!

Edited by spook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humphrey, spook, I run a theatre and there are four different ways of charging for use of the theatre. The first is that the artiste demands a guarantee. This is most often done by the bigger names we have and is most risky for the theatre as we have to meet their guarantee however many tickets we sell, so we can (and have!) lost on this deal. The second is a straightforward percentage, the bigger the star the higher the percentage they take, usually in the range of 70/30, 75/25 or 80/20. But at least we can't lose on this as even if we only sell one ticket we get a percentage of the ticket price.

 

Thirdly, there is a first call, where we agree that the first £1000 (or whatever it is) goes to the artiste and then there is a percentage split. If we only take, say, £900, the artiste gets £900 and we get nothing but we don't have to make up the shortfall as with a guarantee. This is better than a guarantee where we could actually lose money, but not as good as percentage split where we will always make some money.

 

Fourthly, there is a hire, where the artiste or company pay us a fee and all takings go to them, so the risk is entirely theirs whether they make the fire fee or not. Our local amateur drama and musical societies also pay an extra fee per day for hiring the theatre normally for three or four days beforehand for setting up and final rehearsals. This may be most relevant to the number of days Ole Olsen needs to lay a track.

 

I'm not sure whether any of this helps, but I expect it's all much the same for use of stadia.

At the very least it gave some theatre to the whole shambles ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have an issue in people saying 'that the track was perfectly adequate' or 'perfectly rideable' ....... watch ht10 please and tell me it was 'perfectly' anything

.............. The riders should have been going back out there and had no grounds to down tools for the night.... but they did have a case for grumble....and there was a case that the track needed attention

 

Well said. That is pretty much the point

 

Anyone who does not agree with Oldace is, in his words "a moron" but then reality is that, as you say the track was not perfectly anything, at least that's what a lot of the "morons" think. The mere fact that even before the riders meeting it was said that after heat 12 there would be some extended track maintenance, is in itself evidence that the track was not perfectly adequate, otherwise they would not be doing it when the meeting was already running 2 hours late.

 

The question of whether the extended track maintenance would have returned the track to a decent standard suitable for the occasion is something will shall now never know. However, Paul Burbidge makes an interesting point in SS when he said that there seems to be a common denominator in temporary tracks that don't come up to scratch, and that Is excessive moisture. If that was the case on Saturday it difficult to see how the track werecould have been significantly improved as the evening got colder. However that is just speculation.

 

Speedwáy Star has just arrived and I have to say that I think t he article by Peter Oakes (presumably another"moron" on Oldace line of thought) is excellent. Peter Oakes in my view draws the right balance between bluntly saying what needs to be said without mincing his words but at the same time without going OTT as Oldace and a few others seem intent on doing.

 

There were a few interesting quotes from riders in SS:-

 

Chris Harris: Everyonewas in agreement that the track wasn't raceable and for safety reasons the right call was made. Everybody could see that the track wasn't great . We didn't want anyone seriously hurt.

 

Matej Zagar: I even refused to practice. I knew the track wasn't ideal ......I did my best to take points from 3 heats. But rider safety comes first. I totally agree with this. We made a common decision. Everybody has there own opinion but common sense won.

 

NKI . We ne ed to look at safety before anything else. It would have been the wrong decision to continue because people were falling off by them selves. When it's like that I tells you everything about the conditions. I think it was the right decision to call it off, but it's really disappointing

 

 

Jason Doyle: The track was very dangerous for myself........the right decision was made in the end. Something went wrong with the track and it was like walking on cushions......It wasn't that we didn't want to ride, it was just how dangerous the track was.

 

Nicki Pedersen : The surface was unstable. It was very inconsistent and just moved around all the time when they did the preparation and grading.

 

I put the riders quotes out for what they are worth, to be put in the melting pot of opinion. What is not in dispute is that the track had been giving problems from the first practice session. Maybe in theory the track could have been improved after maintenance and maybe the combined hassle of the practice sessions, the starting gate, and Batch and Holders crashes were the last straw. I don't know. I tend to agree with Peter Oakes when he says that whether the full story of what went wrong will ever come out is hard to say at this juncture. What is clear though is that the bulk of the eveidence suggests that the track was less than "perfectly adequate" as Oldace would have as believe.

Edited by E I Addio
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been told by someone unfortunate enough to have been there that they have been informed if they post their tickets back they will be exchanged for tickets for next years event.

 

Question is would you risk it considering travel/accomodation costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Batch and Holder was injured and that is the main reason they fell off ..who else bar them also fell off on this so called dangerous track like Puk was saying .. Harris said the track was not raceable ? well I watched the last few heats and people were racing and passing . Zagar was happy for it to end I bet he was ££££

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been told by someone unfortunate enough to have been there that they have been informed if they post their tickets back they will be exchanged for tickets for next years event.

 

Question is would you risk it considering travel/accomodation costs.

Interesting, I've not heard anything about this yet. Do you know who they spoke to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said. That is pretty much the point

 

Anyone who does not agree with Oldace is, in his words "a moron" but then reality is that, as you say the track was not perfectly anything, at least that's what a lot of the "morons" think. The mere fact that even before the riders meeting it was said that after heat 12 there would be some extended track maintenance, is in itself evidence that the track was not perfectly adequate, otherwise they would not be doing it when the meeting was already running 2 hours late.

 

The question of whether the extended track maintenance would have returned the track to a decent standard suitable for the occasion is something will shall now never know. However, Paul Burbidge makes an interesting point in SS when he said that there seems to be a common denominator in temporary tracks that don't come up to scratch, and that Is excessive moisture. If that was the case on Saturday it difficult to see how the track werecould have been significantly improved as the evening got colder. However that is just speculation.

 

Speedwáy Star has just arrived and I have to say that I think t he article by Peter Oakes (presumably another"moron" on Oldace line of thought) is excellent. Peter Oakes in my view draws the right balance between bluntly saying what needs to be said without mincing his words but at the same time without going OTT as Oldace and a few others seem intent on doing.

 

There were a few interesting quotes from riders in SS:-

 

Chris Harris: Everyonewas in agreement that the track wasn't raceable and for safety reasons the right call was made. Everybody could see that the track wasn't great . We didn't want anyone seriously hurt.

 

Matej Zagar: I even refused to practice. I knew the track wasn't ideal ......I did my best to take points from 3 heats. But rider safety comes first. I totally agree with this. We made a common decision. Everybody has there own opinion but common sense won.

 

NKI . We ne ed to look at safety before anything else. It would have been the wrong decision to continue because people were falling off by them selves. When it's like that I tells you everything about the conditions. I think it was the right decision to call it off, but it's really disappointing

 

 

Jason Doyle: The track was very dangerous for myself........the right decision was made in the end. Something went wrong with the track and it was like walking on cushions......It wasn't that we didn't want to ride, it was just how dangerous the track was.

 

Nicki Pedersen : The surface was unstable. It was very inconsistent and just moved around all the time when they did the preparation and grading.

 

I put the riders quotes out for what they are worth, to be put in the melting pot of opinion. What is not in dispute is that the track had been giving problems from the first practice session. Maybe in theory the track could have been improved after maintenance and maybe the combined hassle of the practice sessions, the starting gate, and Batch and Holders crashes were the last straw. I don't know. I tend to agree with Peter Oakes when he says that whether the full story of what went wrong will ever come out is hard to say at this juncture. What is clear though is that the bulk of the eveidence suggests that the track was less than "perfectly adequate" as Oldace would have as believe.

 

 

No, the evidence as seen through your own eyes suggest it was adequate. A bunch of quotes fro 18 riders now realizing they are in the sh!t are worthless

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, I've not heard anything about this yet. Do you know who they spoke to?

Sorry no, but he often goes on organised trips so if he did this time could be the tour organiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's face it,what you aren't going to get is a quote from a rider saying "i thought the track wasn't as bad as some we have ridden on.I wanted to continue,but the others were adamant,so I respected their opinions".Batch has already pretty well given us his good reason and it would go for Jonsson in particular as well.If the meeting carried on they would only fall further behind with points.Not really sure why if Jonsson had already pulled out of the meeting,he was asked and included in the riders who voted for it to be called off?

And you ain't going to get a quote from Jim Lawrence saying "I made a right cock up in a couple of those early heats....."

 

Phil hasn't expanded on just what the media have falsely reported........maybe it was the fact that the stadium was handed over on the 12th,but work didn't start until two days later.Maybe this wasn't the case,but as Olsen seems to be in the firing line and Phil mentioned there were promises that lessons had been learnt from previous mistakes,i guess this isn't false.I wonder what is.......

 

The other thing that really gets me peeved in all this is the lack of planning for such an outcome.BSI have by now enough experience in cock ups.They should know how to react and have a plan,especially as by Friday it was looking dodgy.But no,they don't have a plan and the fans are left in the dark.Bad enough on the night,but unacceptable days afterwards when people still don't know if and when they are getting a refund or will they have to accept a ticket for next years GP!!!!! All BSI can say is they have a good record and will continue doing what they do as long as fans want them to.......

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were a few interesting quotes from riders in SS:-

 

Chris Harris: Everyonewas in agreement that the track wasn't raceable and for safety reasons the right call was made. Everybody could see that the track wasn't great . We didn't want anyone seriously hurt.

 

Matej Zagar: I even refused to practice. I knew the track wasn't ideal ......I did my best to take points from 3 heats. But rider safety comes first. I totally agree with this. We made a common decision. Everybody has there own opinion but common sense won.

 

NKI . We ne ed to look at safety before anything else. It would have been the wrong decision to continue because people were falling off by them selves. When it's like that I tells you everything about the conditions. I think it was the right decision to call it off, but it's really disappointing

 

 

Jason Doyle: The track was very dangerous for myself........the right decision was made in the end. Something went wrong with the track and it was like walking on cushions......It wasn't that we didn't want to ride, it was just how dangerous the track was.

 

Nicki Pedersen : The surface was unstable. It was very inconsistent and just moved around all the time when they did the preparation and grading.

 

I put the riders quotes out for what they are worth, to be put in the melting pot of opinion. What is not in dispute is that the track had been giving problems from the first practice session. Maybe in theory the track could have been improved after maintenance and maybe the combined hassle of the practice sessions, the starting gate, and Batch and Holders crashes were the last straw. I don't know. I tend to agree with Peter Oakes when he says that whether the full story of what went wrong will ever come out is hard to say at this juncture. What is clear though is that the bulk of the eveidence suggests that the track was less than "perfectly adequate" as Oldace would have as believe.

Riders will give anything a go, but there comes a point where it becomes to dangerous. You cannot argue with them, they ride the track, the So called track curators come experts who sit in the stands don't.

Anybody who has thrown his or her leg over a speedway bike will know the feeling with all that power between your legs, and you hit a really bad rut at that sort of speed you'l be through the airfence and in most cases through the chicken wire and come out the other side as chips. Now, im not for one minute saying that the riders are totally exhonerated, but i still say it was a poor poor show for the fans that were in the stadium, and reguardless of what heat it finished for the purposes of a result whether its to keep the takings and appease the riders the bookmakers, which those who backed the outright winner or one for the frame would have lost their money. you could say its the equivelent of a 16 runner h'cap reduced to 15 so first 4 suddenly becomes first 3, how many times do you see that ?

From a bookmakers perspective theres not a lot you can do about it, but those in the stadium have been vastly short changed, and i still believe if those patrons have kept their credit card details or ticket stubs they should be compensated in some way or another by the organisers. problem nowadays is, money comes into everything.

Edited by Starman2006
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hold no candle for Ole Olsen.

Have never been able to stand the guy.

 

I have been irritated by Phil's oft repeated mantra.

That building one-off tracks is 'not an exact science'.

 

But ....

 

They are on the right side of the argument.

 

Every single GP that is to be staged inside a roofed stadium demands a temporary track that is created in the matter of a few days. No getting away from that fact.

If you want Cardiff ... You have to have a temporary track.

 

But there will never be an infallible method.

It will be impossible to guarantee it. There will always be a risk.

You may refine it. You may have to just stick to the stadiums that are best suited. Who knows?

But there can never be a guarentee.

 

But after the events of Saturday. Everyone is now wanting that absolute certainty that just cannot be given.

And now with zero good will from the riders.

 

Isn't the 'answer' further away, than ever after what was done in Warsaw.

Rather than patting themselves on the back for their 'achievement'.

Where do THEY, the Warsaw 18, think we go from here?

 

I can just imagine Pedersen picking up his fourth crown at Norden.

With just a few hardy souls for company.

Wondering 'what happened?'

Edited by Grand Central

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Batch and Holder was injured and that is the main reason they fell off ..who else bar them also fell off on this so called dangerous track like Puk was saying .. Harris said the track was not raceable ? well I watched the last few heats and people were racing and passing . Zagar was happy for it to end I bet he was ££££

nonsense .... there is no sign of Holder having issues in ht10 and the viciousness of the grip he picked up left him no chance................. Batch in ht12 i'll agree with as he seemed unable to control what looked normally controllable and during that race he appeared to be struggling with his cornering......it cant be denied that he hit the same rut as Nicki though

did you also miss Nicki's issue in ht10 Orion?

 

Been told by someone unfortunate enough to have been there that they have been informed if they post their tickets back they will be exchanged for tickets for next years event.

Question is would you risk it considering travel/accomodation costs.

I cant understand the logic in that over a straight refund other than they are betting on x thousand people not coming back next year...... sounds unlawful to me and if challenged I suspect they would be required to give back hard cash......... I guess at this stage it is something though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All i will say to the organisers is, get Cardiff right, even if it means getting in there a few days earlier and letting the track bed in. Get TWO starting gates in, don't cut corners and do everything properly. Me, id get the Doc down from Wolvehampton to oversee the track prep.
I would also suggest that somebody from authority goes and checks the state of the shale that is going to Cardiff !!

Edited by Starman2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hold no candle for Ole Olsen.

Have never been able to stand the guy.

 

I have been irritated by Phil's oft repeated mantra.

That building one-off tracks is 'not an exact science'.

 

But ....

 

They are on the right side of the argument.

 

Every single GP that is to be staged inside a roofed stadium demands a temporary track that is created in the matter of a few days. No getting away from that fact.

If you want Cardiff ... You have to have a temporary track.

 

But there will never be an infallible method.

It will be impossible to guarantee it. There will always be a risk.

You may refine it. You may have to just stick to the stadiums that are best suited. Who knows?

But there can never be a guarentee.

 

But after the events of Saturday. Everyone is now wanting that absolute certainty that just cannot be given.

And now with zero good will from the riders.

 

Isn't the 'answer' further away, than ever after what was done in Warsaw.

Rather than patting themselves on the back for their 'achievement'.

Where do THEY, the Warsaw 18, think we go from here?

 

I can just imagine Pedersen picking up his fourth crown at Norden.

With just a few hardy souls for company.

Wondering 'what happened?'

I'm not going to teach anyone to suck eggs on this subject but I DO think that it can be more of 'an exact science'

 

I was always critical of Ole's track prep for who his surfaces were suiting .... that combined with some of the grading antics he was orchestrating during meetings left me in no two minds that he couldnt be trusted in the race director position..................... On the whole with the track curating I think he has been a fairly safe pair of hands though.............. i'd like it to be pushed on though, and especially if he is now going to operate as a commercial company and presumably pick up $'s

 

it seems there would be several factors that should be considered and measured in relation to each other............ temperature, moisure, type of shale, base, humidity, storage to name a few ........... speedway does not have the money of football or golf or many other sports....... but it does KNOW that if the surface is no good then it is hamstrung and that means it HAS to nail it with no exceptions

 

Edited by spook
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy