MARK246 243 Posted October 18, 2018 8 minutes ago, Grachan said: Likewise, you can be fortunate and win a one-off because another rider who should have won made that one mistake that you mention. Apples and oranges. Why fortunate ? You still need to score in your other four rides to win. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grachan 7,360 Posted October 18, 2018 6 minutes ago, MARK246 said: Why fortunate ? You still need to score in your other four rides to win. Fortunate because the person who would have won failed to win because of an engine failure or whatever. Consequently, it must, therefore, mean that the person who did win only managed to win due to someone else's bad luck. Without that bad luck they wouldn't have won. Pretty self-explanatory really. And the exact same scenario could occur within a Grand Prix. A single engine failure could, for example, prevent a rider reaching a semi-final while their main rival wins an extra race, plus a semi, plus a final. So one engine failure could lose you 9 points instead of just 3. Both systems require the same amount of dedication and skill. I don't get why people try to undermine the Grand Prix system just because they think it's not the same as in the good old days of upright engines and monkey masks. It's just as good a system and gives an equally valid World Champion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MARK246 243 Posted October 18, 2018 1 minute ago, Grachan said: Fortunate because the person who would have won failed to win because of an engine failure or whatever. Consequently, it must, therefore, mean that the person who did win only managed to win due to someone else's bad luck. Without that bad luck they wouldn't have won. Pretty self-explanatory really. And the exact same scenario could occur within a Grand Prix. A single engine failure could, for example, prevent a rider reaching a semi-final while their main rival wins an extra race, plus a semi, plus a final. So one engine failure could lose you 9 points instead of just 3. Both systems require the same amount of dedication and skill. I don't get why people try to undermine the Grand Prix system just because they think it's not the same as in the good old days of upright engines and monkey masks. It's just as good a system and gives an equally valid World Champion. When you have a world championship which can be won without winning a race ( second is good enough) it will always have it's detractors. The fact that to qualify for the system, you use a 5 ride meeting which requires a totally different approach (win at all cost) makes it all seem a total farce. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,706 Posted October 18, 2018 1 hour ago, MARK246 said: You put 3 and Emil as an after thought, after two GPs it was obvious Doyle wasn't a threat How is that different from 12 of the field of 16 being out if it after 2 rides of a one off final...... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iainb 4,994 Posted October 18, 2018 51 minutes ago, MARK246 said: But in 5 rides one mistake is crucial over 70 races it is what it is It only took one race for Jason Doyle to lose the world title in 2016 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MARK246 243 Posted October 18, 2018 9 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said: How is that different from 12 of the field of 16 being out if it after 2 rides of a one off final...... There were one off finals won on 12 and 13 points it was never over after race 8 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iainb 4,994 Posted October 18, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, MARK246 said: There were one off finals won on 12 and 13 points it was never over after race 8 The earliest it could have been over was heat 17, depending on who was in it, but for half the field it was generally over after their second ride Edited October 18, 2018 by iainb Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,706 Posted October 18, 2018 1 minute ago, MARK246 said: There were one off finals won on 12 and 13 points it was never over after race 8 It would be interesting if someone eas able to provide stats on that I wonder how many time the champion came from outside the top 4 after 2 rides I have no idea but an educated guess would be not very many Equally I wonder how many GP champions have been outside the top 4 after 2 rounds Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MARK246 243 Posted October 18, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, iainb said: It only took one race for Jason Doyle to lose the world title in 2016 Strange way to put it, but injuries happen the timing was bad though. Edited October 18, 2018 by MARK246 Spelling Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iainb 4,994 Posted October 18, 2018 4 minutes ago, MARK246 said: Strange way to put it, but injuries happen the timing was bad though. Only took that one race though... Just like in a one off world final. In Speedway you're only ever one race away from disaster 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barney Rabbit 727 Posted October 18, 2018 1987 in Amsterdam saw a third format for deciding the World Champion, each rider having 5 rides on two consecutive days. After day 1, Sam Ermolenko was leading with 13 points from 5 rides but the eventual winner was Hans Neilsen with a 15 point max to add to his 12 from the previous day, Sam dropping back to fourth over-all with 24 points. Doesn't make much difference to the discussion but I can't remember it being mentioned yet so thought I'd just mention it now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iainb 4,994 Posted October 18, 2018 5 minutes ago, Barney Rabbit said: 1987 in Amsterdam saw a third format for deciding the World Champion, each rider having 5 rides on two consecutive days. After day 1, Sam Ermolenko was leading with 13 points from 5 rides but the eventual winner was Hans Neilsen with a 15 point max to add to his 12 from the previous day, Sam dropping back to fourth over-all with 24 points. Doesn't make much difference to the discussion but I can't remember it being mentioned yet so thought I'd just mention it now. There'll be somebody to tell you Tai wouldn't have been able to win this either 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MARK246 243 Posted October 18, 2018 1951 Jack Young 12 points 55 Peter Craven 13 pts 56 Ove Fundin 13 pts 72 Ivan May get 13 pts 73 Jerzy Szczakiel 13 pts 78 Ole Olsen 13 pts 85 Erik Gundersen 13 pts 90 Per Jonsson 13 pts 93 Sam Ermolenko 12 pts 94 Tony Rickardsson 12 pts 28 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said: It would be interesting if someone was able to provide stats on that Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iainb 4,994 Posted October 18, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, MARK246 said: 1951 Jack Young 12 points 55 Peter Craven 13 pts 56 Ove Fundin 13 pts 72 Ivan May get 13 pts 73 Jerzy Szczakiel 13 pts 78 Ole Olsen 13 pts 85 Erik Gundersen 13 pts 90 Per Jonsson 13 pts 93 Sam Ermolenko 12 pts 94 Tony Rickardsson 12 pts And of those finals, how many could still have won it after 8 heats? And another question for you while you're researching... Would it have been possible to have won a World Final with 5 seconds equaling 10pts? Edited October 18, 2018 by iainb Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MARK246 243 Posted October 18, 2018 4 minutes ago, iainb said: And of those finals, how many could still have won it after 8 heats? And another question for you while you're researching... Would it have been possible to have won a World Final with 5 seconds equaling 10pts? I don't have the stats for the first question, sorry. You couldn't win a one off final on 10 points with out winning a run off. So under the old system you needed to win a race unlike the GPs Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
