Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Recommended Posts

Good SGP I thought. Great advert for Speedway with the huge crowd. Shame attendances wont be like that throughout but a great start. Did at one point thought I'd slipped into a parallel universe where Dudek passes riders 

Just on the scoring the only difference I would make would be to award the finalist more points. Even 4th finisher. So have it 6-4-2-1 in the final.

Edited by James Carter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, waiheke1 said:

reality yes. but theoretically you could qualify for every final with 4 points. so 9 points a round. i think it's theoretically possible you could win every round and finish 15th overall!!!

Theoretically under the current system you could go through the entire season without winning a single heat and still be world champion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, waiheke1 said:

full meeting is available now on youtube new yorker. 

Thanks! I'll have a look after work.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AFCB Wildcat said:

Theoretically under the current system you could go through the entire season without winning a single heat and still be world champion.

Good point; I hadn't thought about that!

Of course, that applied to the old World Final system also...

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, mickthemuppet said:

There has to be something wrong with a scoring system when Leon Madsen or anybody else can win a GP when he only won one race all night. The old individual world championship scoring system was far superior as it was a true test .Under the old 20 heat scoring Patrick Dudek would have been the winner and Leon Madsen only 8th

 

Nah, the GPs have been done this way for years, it's fine.  It the grand scheme of things winning an individual GP doesn't mean much does it?  I actually couldn't tell you who won which individual GP across the years (apart from Harris at Cardiff) because we all know the big prize is the GP standings, and at the end of each GP that's all I look at, who is where in the standings. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

link to first 12 heats. same poster has hts 13-20 then the semis and final, should pop up when u get to end of this one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, chunky said:

My whole point; the overall system is a lot fairer, and minimises the luck aspect.  I just feel it is a strange way to determine the winner of an individual GP when you can achieve that by winning just one race!  As I have stated before, it would be possible for a rider to win every single GP - and not even finish in the Top 8 at the end of the season!  No, it will never happen, but yes, I have done the maths.

I see no reason to not adopt the standard 20-heat format, and forget about the semis and finals...  if you really want to keep the interest to the very last heat, you could just change the order of heats 17-20 to ensure that the leader (or at least one of the joint leaders) after heat 16 came out in the last race.

Steve

I just don't understand why you would want to ditch the semis and final. Surely these are the most exciting parts of the match when you throw all the best riders in against each other!?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, James Carter said:

I just don't understand why you would want to ditch the semis and final. Surely these are the most exciting parts of the match when you throw all the best riders in against each other!?

Finals and semis aren't necessarily the most exciting races, and the best races aren't necessarily the result of having the best riders. I still like the traditional 20-heat format alone because the one who scored most points always "won" the meeting. Is that really such a bad concept?

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chunky said:

Good point; I hadn't thought about that!

Of course, that applied to the old World Final system also...

Steve

Yes that's true but I don't think that 10 points would ever have won an old world final but the 140 points available without winning a single race would certainly win a GP series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AFCB Wildcat said:

Yes that's true but I don't think that 10 points would ever have won an old world final but the 140 points available without winning a single race would certainly win a GP series.

Both are/were possible, but neither did/will occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, AFCB Wildcat said:

Yes that's true but I don't think that 10 points would ever have won an old world final but the 140 points available without winning a single race would certainly win a GP series.

I am pretty sure that 10pts has top scored in SGP heats 1-20. 11pts certainly has.

I reckon that was a major problem with the old one-off world final that a bad race and a lot of riders wouldn't be trying as hard. SGP every point counts so you have to keep fighting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, James Carter said:

I am pretty sure that 10pts has top scored in SGP heats 1-20. 11pts certainly has.

I reckon that was a major problem with the old one-off world final that a bad race and a lot of riders wouldn't be trying as hard. SGP every point counts so you have to keep fighting

11 points has top-scored in a regular 20-heat meeting too, but that's not the point here.  We are not talking about a single meeting; we are talking about becoming World Champion. 

AFCB Wildcat stated that it was possible to become World Champion by going through the GP series without winning a race.  That is true, but we all know it won;t happen.

I made a direct response to that statement, saying that it was just as possible to become World Champion in the old days, by going through the season without winning a race.  Again, that is perfectly true, nut it never happened, and it never looked like happening.

That is the way a lot of us feel about the old system; one bad race, a fall, an e/f, or whatever, and you were done.  Luck will always play a part, but with one-off meetings like we used to have - even as far as qualifying - luck (good or bad) could have a much bigger impact.  The GP is about point accumulation over a whole season, not just having one good or bad meeting or race.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chunky said:

That is the way a lot of us feel about the old system; one bad race, a fall, an e/f, or whatever, and you were done. 

I remember my first world final at Wembley in 1978 I think? Dave Jessup was the best rider on the night and an e/f cost him the title. At least with the GP format one bit of bad luck like that doesn't cost you the meeting.

All formats have their merits and pitfalls and generally I think most people agree the current one is fairest to the overall result of the series. As I said before, I preferred the eliminator system as nobody scraped into the finals, they had to scrap to avoid a third or last place and the winner took all but I can see that it probably left riders out of pocket going home after only 2 rides. I personally wouldn't want to see the GP run over just 20 heats but I just feel that winning the final has been devalued by the winner not taking maximum points. Good for sweepstakes & betting though! Does the winner get more prize money? or is it just payment for points? I guess if the winner takes the most money there's a point to it. Anyway, it is what it is. I think I heard Tai say that once lol.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AFCB Wildcat said:

I remember my first world final at Wembley in 1978 I think? Dave Jessup was the best rider on the night and an e/f cost him the title. At least with the GP format one bit of bad luck like that doesn't cost you the meeting.

All formats have their merits and pitfalls and generally I think most people agree the current one is fairest to the overall result of the series. As I said before, I preferred the eliminator system as nobody scraped into the finals, they had to scrap to avoid a third or last place and the winner took all but I can see that it probably left riders out of pocket going home after only 2 rides. I personally wouldn't want to see the GP run over just 20 heats but I just feel that winning the final has been devalued by the winner not taking maximum points. Good for sweepstakes & betting though! Does the winner get more prize money? or is it just payment for points? I guess if the winner takes the most money there's a point to it. Anyway, it is what it is. I think I heard Tai say that once lol.

 

I think most of us were there at Wembley in '78; I know I was!

It's funny, but even though most of us "prefer" the old World Finals, if we are realistic about it, a GP system HAS to be the fairest way.  Winning a GP certainly has been devalued because of the current system, and riders are certainly concentrating on the end results.  Having said that, money really doesn't enter into it when you are trying to win a GP in front of your own fans!

Steve

  • Like 1

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