One League - Matt Ford

[Skidder1 7,634]

On 7/16/2019 at 7:28 AM, waytogo28 said:

This is an essential but very unlikely to come about with the current BSPA "leaders" in place.

Stand down NOW Chapman and Godfrey ( even though it is too late to save the sport in the UK ).

Aren't 'rev limiters' due to come in next season?!

[waytogo28 2,054]

That will no doubt be a help - if policed adequately.

[HGould 2,213]

On 7/15/2019 at 5:41 PM, mikebv said:

Maybe even run a four riders per team per match league?  Like the Danes used to do and the SWC runs..

£2500 max per team would need £12000 to pay all the riders on show and VAT..

£5k per match to run it ex rider costs, (is that about right?) And you'd need circa £17k..

Without any sponsorship, 1200 at £15 would bring £18k in, so would having three away teams worth of fans bring an average 1200 in if nationally ran to bring in some variety, and the odd 'regional week' where you race your local rivals..

16 teams would need 64 riders, with, per team, one earning £300, one earning £500, one earning £700 and one earning £1000 per night..

Complete all four fixtures in a group per week and that's £4k for the Number ones, down to £1.2k for the Number fours..

16 heats of racing where each No1, 2, 3 and 4 just race against their same numbers four times so each gets a gate position...

And all 16 races then have riders of roughly equal levels so hopefully decent racing...

Make the No4 position British U23 only (or over 23 but less than two years racing), and no rider at No4 can have an average over 4 at Champ level.

They get four races per night and can only get replaced in a team if not good enough by similarly classified riders..

And they stay at No4 all season, not earning a fortune for four nights but better than NL money (?)..

The other three positions in the team can be inter changeable using rolling averages, meaning if you improve over time you get more money, or vice versa should you drop performances..

No team riding maybe but then again, not much takes place now..

Grade the riders A to D, and use mean averages for each sector to deliver an overall team strength which will prevent any team signing the best of each sector..

Hopefully meaning close racing due to similar levels of rider per race, a fair share of gate positions to deliver an overall true picture of each riders capabilty, responsibility and pressure on each rider to deliver within their sector, you improve and you get more money, or vice versa,  so performance related pay is in place, three lots of away fans to hopefully bring in some money and create some atmosphere, a variety of teams to stimulate interest, a protected structure for young inexperienced British riders and hopefully several spare riders out there to bring in rather than using guests to cover injuries..

All ran at each track on the tracks own choice of race night due to riders only being allowed to come on board if they make themselves available when the sport in Britain dictates...

The actual amount of times each teams meet each other would need to be worked out and it may end up with more local teams meeting more regularly (hopefully those being the money spinners) but the US Sports show it can be done where you play some teams more than others..

24 weeks of racing would give 24 home meetings and, at four times per week, 96 matches per rider overall...

A chance to get and earn plenty of coin..

Radical but maybe the sport needs radical...?

 

 

 

interesting concept Mike but crowd figures are way out.

I've been to Wolverhampton, Poole; Belle Vue and Kings Lynn this season, doubt any was 1000 let alone 1200. Wolverhampton a lot down this year.

On the flip side heard Ipswich have been getting some big crowds for derbies.

Also been to Berwick; Eastbourne; Leicester; Sheffield ; Somerset of which Berwick / Sheffield / Somerset looked about 600 (similar to Brummies) and Leicester and Eastbourne about 1200 (but earlier in season when crowds generally higher). Glasgow seem to get decent crowds and heard Redcar really picked up.

[auntie doris 2,342]

Swindon get around 1200, a couple of bigger crowds earlier in season, and slightly more during school hols.

[cityrebel 2,960]

If any track gets a crowd of 1000 or over in this day and age, must be considered a good turn out.

[auntie doris 2,342]

Good to see Glasgow and IOW crowds are up, good promoting paying off.

[Fortythirtyeight 840]

3 hours ago, auntie doris said:

Good to see Glasgow and IOW crowds are up, good promoting paying off.

Yes, good promoting, but Glasgow are sill losing money every week. They openly admit to needing 2,500 each week to break even and are currently getting around 1200 paying customers with ' promotions ' ( free or massively discounted tickets ) bringing in around 2-300.

They won't put up with this forever.

 

[Littleze 29]

Nailed it,the sport is contrived.. one of its biggest problems as to why it isn’t taken seriously.Even the SON is contrived... you still get big home wins,the racing isn’t any closer because of it & the crowds reflect it too,not solely for that reason...obviously.Presentation is amateurish,music outdated etc... 

[Fromafar 10,359]

On 7/20/2019 at 1:36 PM, Fortythirtyeight said:

Yes, good promoting, but Glasgow are sill losing money every week. They openly admit to needing 2,500 each week to break even and are currently getting around 1200 paying customers with ' promotions ' ( free or massively discounted tickets ) bringing in around 2-300.

They won't put up with this forever.

 

I find it hard to believe that they are losing money if the average crowd is  around 1200.

[Fortythirtyeight 840]

8 minutes ago, Fromafar said:

I find it hard to believe that they are losing money if the average crowd is  around 1200.

Then you live in cloud cuckoo land with the advertising they do, the investment they have made ( all good ) and the over the top wages they pay ( compared to every other track in their division ).

[Fromafar 10,359]

6 minutes ago, Fortythirtyeight said:

Then you live in cloud cuckoo land with the advertising they do, the investment they have made ( all good ) and the over the top wages they pay ( compared to every other track in their division ).

You seem to an expert in the financial affairs. I was told they  weren’t bothered about the money spent on upgrade ,they are only concerned on the sport paying for itself through the gate now.( Whether true or not I’m not sure).

ps

I live in Scotland

[Fortythirtyeight 840]

15 minutes ago, Fromafar said:

You seem to an expert in the financial affairs. I was told they  weren’t bothered about the money spent on upgrade ,they are only concerned on the sport paying for itself through the gate now.( Whether true or not I’m not sure).

ps

I live in Scotland

They make no secret of the break even crowd figure and have quoted it many times. Their wage bill alone is three times that of other clubs ( Mr.Cook does not come cheap ) and their have often stated they will not go on forever suffering losses. They have invested heavily and good on them for doing so but 1200 is still losing them money. They are very approachable gentleman so you can ask them yourself .

P.S. Scotland is a very nice place, I live nearby and drive into it most days.

 

[Topcat 58]

I think breakeven is more like 1500. No promotion tries harder and we do not want to loose this one.

[brianbuck 928]

I don't believe anyone disagrees with the fact that there have to be major changes if speedway is to start turning the corner, but in the light of the current financial climate, any changes which will increase costs for promoters would have no chance of being accepted.

I would suggest that the BSPA considers reducing the number of riders per team from seven to six (hopefully, this would only be temporary, and we would in time, be able to return to seven man teams). A race formula used in 1959 (when each match was followed by a 5-heat Reserve League match) featured 6-man teams racing over 15 heats with each rider having five rides. This format did not include a nominated riders' race which I would think was beneficial costwise, and helped to avoid clubs going for top-heavy teams which in effect, in the race formula currently used, give these clubs virtually a "free" 5-1 and usually means that heats 13 and 15 are duplicated and more predictable.

With the suggested format, the home club would be required to provide an "emergency 7th rider" who would receive no programmed rides but who could be utilised by either team should the need arise. (I realise that on occasions, this might mean that the Emergency Reserve might have to ride for both teams which isn't desirable but would be no more of a farce than some of the nonsense that we are witnessing all too often these days.)

With all 12 riders in each match receiving five rides, this would realise additional income for the riders without increasing costs for the promoters.

A redistribution of riders and a genuine equalisation of team strengths would be an essential requirement of any "new deal" and I would suggest scrapping the points limit in favour of a grading system which would be administered by a small "Grading Committee." The Grading Committee members would have to be independent, and would need to be thick skinned since they would inevitably find themselves under pressure from all sides, but there must be three or four people not involved with a particular track or promoter, whom all parties could trust and who would be willing to take on what would probably be a thankless task. (I'd volunteer!!!)

The grading need not be complicated or extensive - perhaps with riders graded as "A" "B" and "C" with clubs being allowed no more than two riders from each grade, and being allowed to retain the six riders they have chosen, for say, cycles of three years. The Grading Committee would have to have the power to regrade a rider making either exceptional progress or completely losing form should the need arise, and would also need to have the authority to prevent a club from using its financial clout to get themselves the best rider from each grade.

A rider's average would clearly have to be used to determine his grade, but this could be weighted by other considerations such as his age, his experience, whether he is regarded as "on the way up" or a bit "past his best" etc. Not an easy job, and the Committee would get a few wrong, but that's inevitable - and they would at least have the authority to correct any serious howlers!

The "Emergency Reserves" would be regarded as "D" grade riders, but any who advanced enough to gain a place in a club's top six would immediately be upgraded to "C" status.

Inevitably, Guest Riders and Rider-Replacement would have to continue at least for the time being, but I feel that the return of the Tactical Substitute rule this season has been helpful, although I would like to see the rule as it used to be - when a team could make a tactical change whenever they were six points in arrears, and not limited to a single occasion as the rule now stipulates.

Changes like these would be difficult to get enough support I know, but this wouldn't be impossible, and whilst it obviously will not cure all of speedway's ills, it could be a suggestion worth examining.

I'd welcome the thoughts of other posters, even if they want to shoot down my suggestions. We are care for our sport and want to see it back on an even keel.

 

[topsoil 2,498]

39 minutes ago, brianbuck said:

A race formula used in 1959 (when each match was followed by a 5-heat Reserve League match)

One point I would agree with wholeheartedly is that every team should have a junior team and every league meeting should be followed by a junior match. I wouldn't insist on a strict make up of teams, as I think the purposes that would be served is that young riders would get extra track time and the crowds get extra races if they want to stay back and see them. You could even name teams after local defunct teams just to keep names alive (e.g. Poole could call their junior team Weymouth, Swindon could call their's Reading) and teams could be made up of 500 / 250 / 125cc riders if needed. Regionalise it to cut down costs if you like, I wouldn't even worry about league tables, just make sure the young riders get as much track time as possible and the fans get more races for their money.