Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Sings4Speedway

MSDL Results no longer included in Speedway Star?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PHILIPRISING said:

I HAVE read all of the above and respect everyone's opinion even if, as in this case, I don't agree with them. 

My view of the 'new' Star is that I have got used to it. The journalism is certainly a step up from much of what went before.

I have noticed the match reports segment are getting longer, more detailed and, I think, nicely crafted by David Rowe. Approve of that.

TBH, if I want to look at heat details, I go to speedwaygb and click to the referee's scorecard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Richard Weston said:

My view of the 'new' Star is that I have got used to it. The journalism is certainly a step up from much of what went before.

I have noticed the match reports segment are getting longer, more detailed and, I think, nicely crafted by David Rowe. Approve of that.

TBH, if I want to look at heat details, I go to speedwaygb and click to the referee's scorecard. 

You have got to watch out though, those who want to look at race times and heat details might just cancel their subs to the Star and wander across to the internet like your good self. I hear the world wide web also produces quite a bit of speedway news without waiting a week to find out. But you can't please everyone.

Edited by moxey63
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, moxey63 said:

You have got to watch out though, those who want to look at race times and heat details might just cancel their subs to the Star and wander across to the internet like your good self. I hear the world wide web also produces quite a bit of speedway news without waiting a week to find out. But you can't please everyone.

Yes, I see your point as far as heat details etc concerned. However, I now find the Star has interesting pieces on riders/clubs that I, for one, have not read elsewhere.

Perhaps the Star needs, a 'for the record' couple of pages at the back of the mag for those who like the detail and just keep developing the rest along the lines it has.

You have to admit some of the match reports from the past were tedious in the extreme, let alone so out of date.

If you think about, the Star should not try and compete on match reports, heat details, times etc -- they are on the internet for free. It should tell us stories which are not elsewhere, which I think it is to a large extent succeeding in doing.

I have had divergent views in recent times with Philip Rising but, speak as you find (as mother said), I think the Speedway Star's new course is pretty good.

They might consider a few tweaks round the edges (MDL etc, race times) but as a strategy - all good by me.

Good to see a print product trying to be different to the web.

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, moxey63 said:

You have got to watch out though, those who want to look at race times and heat details might just cancel their subs to the Star and wander across to the internet like your good self. I hear the world wide web also produces quite a bit of speedway news without waiting a week to find out. But you can't please everyone.

Yes, I agree...that's why I think they need a couple of pages "for the record". It can be done efficiently, inexpensive .....

Mr Rising can pay me a cup of tea for the idea or send his editor down to Arlington to do the honours.

Joking apart, always good to see the editor of the SS at a speedway match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
6 hours ago, PHILIPRISING said:

I HAVE read all of the above and respect everyone's opinion even if, as in this case, I don't agree with them. 

Well said PHILIPRISING. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is all about opinions. I admire Philip Rising for the job he's done over the years at the Star. He has more knowledge than I do how to run a successful mag. But I also believe the sport itself is in the position it is because promoters held the position of knowing what's best and disagreeing to what fans wanted.

Edited by moxey63
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Much is being made of the need for race times to be carried in 'Speedway Star.' Has anyone considered that sometimes - maybe not often - that a given race time might - just might - not be accurate.

For instance a race time officially may be 72.4 seconds. But the meeting reporter could have a touch of 'fat fingers on his keyboard' and key in 73.4 seconds in his report. A reader who attended that meeting may notice this difference but not take the matter up on the assumption they have the time wrong. Thus the error presumably would last for speedway posterity.

And, offhand, wasn't there a period in the late 1950s when no race times were given at meetings?

Share this post


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

Much is being made of the need for race times to be carried in 'Speedway Star.' Has anyone considered that sometimes - maybe not often - that a given race time might - just might - not be accurate.

For instance a race time officially may be 72.4 seconds. But the meeting reporter could have a touch of 'fat fingers on his keyboard' and key in 73.4 seconds in his report. A reader who attended that meeting may notice this difference but not take the matter up on the assumption they have the time wrong. Thus the error presumably would last for speedway posterity.

And, offhand, wasn't there a period in the late 1950s when no race times were given at meetings?

I don't give a toss about race times these days because the way of recording them (to two decimal places!!!) is out of date, what we all want to know is was the race a great one .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Richard Weston said:

Yes, I see your point as far as heat details etc concerned. However, I now find the Star has interesting pieces on riders/clubs that I, for one, have not read elsewhere.

Perhaps the Star needs, a 'for the record' couple of pages at the back of the mag for those who like the detail and just keep developing the rest along the lines it has.

You have to admit some of the match reports from the past were tedious in the extreme, let alone so out of date.

If you think about, the Star should not try and compete on match reports, heat details, times etc -- they are on the internet for free. It should tell us stories which are not elsewhere, which I think it is to a large extent succeeding in doing.

I have had divergent views in recent times with Philip Rising but, speak as you find (as mother said), I think the Speedway Star's new course is pretty good.

They might consider a few tweaks round the edges (MDL etc, race times) but as a strategy - all good by me.

Good to see a print product trying to be different to the web.

 

 

 

I really do appreciate all that you say.  And I am glad that you are enjoying the Star in 2019. Hopefully there are plenty more like you to keep it going.

It must be me. More than anything. But I just dont like it and am not enjoying it at all this year. Main problem is probably the Lanning-ising of the articles now. Didnt like it in 1993 in the Mail and dont like it now.

But I'll move along and allow others to get their fix as I did for 30 + years.

Edited by Grand Central

Share this post


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

Much is being made of the need for race times to be carried in 'Speedway Star.' Has anyone considered that sometimes - maybe not often - that a given race time might - just might - not be accurate.

For instance a race time officially may be 72.4 seconds. But the meeting reporter could have a touch of 'fat fingers on his keyboard' and key in 73.4 seconds in his report. A reader who attended that meeting may notice this difference but not take the matter up on the assumption they have the time wrong. Thus the error presumably would last for speedway posterity.

When I copied out  a score chart and heat details from a 1986 meeting at Belle Vue from the Speedway Star,the time given for heat two was printed as 62.3.Nobody ever went that fast around Hyde Road,so logically the time must have been 72.3.A honest mistake and no doubt there are many other misprints etc.It still happens nowadays,on Somerset's match report on their recent meeting at Sheffield,it mentions that Todd Kurtz won a race in 50.38! (actually 60.38)

Share this post


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

When I copied out  a score chart and heat details from a 1986 meeting at Belle Vue from the Speedway Star,the time given for heat two was printed as 62.3.Nobody ever went that fast around Hyde Road,so logically the time must have been 72.3.A honest mistake and no doubt there are many other misprints etc.It still happens nowadays,on Somerset's match report on their recent meeting at Sheffield,it mentions that Todd Kurtz won a race in 50.38! (actually 60.38)

And no doubt there are times when the 'timekeeper' fails to start the watch at all and just guesses 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares about race times? I don't get it, what's so important about it? This is speedway racing and it is about race winners and place getter, but totally irrelevant what times are achieved. 

Here in Bavaria we ususally don't get told the race times at the meetings, but they usually do tell us the average speed achieved by the race winner, at least when he was really fast. Then at some tracks (Pocking for example) they do not even employ a time keeper at all. The F.I.M. does not make it mandatory to have a time keeper.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going to meetings is enough for me, i don't particularly want to read about it. There is a website called speedway news now where i can catch the latest club press releases. I only need the line ups and an accurate weather forecast to determine wether i go or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we are on the subject of race times and whether they can be trusted. Thought I'd share this gem with you:

June 23, 2008

SKY SPORTS’ electronic timer recorded Jason Crump’s Heat 1 win as a new track record. The 55.9 was a full second lower than the record time set two weeks before. The Sports' channel always used their electronic timer when covering matches live. Immediately the new record time came under scrutiny from Crump himself, who stated he did not feel he was going that fast and also added he had slowed down on the last lap because he was so far ahead.

Only when the race was replayed in the SKY studios they registered a time of 58.0 seconds - 2.1 seconds slower than the electronic board clocked - and confusion reigned as to what had gone wrong with the timer. Nobody came close to the supposed new record for the rest of the meeting – Crump recorded next fastest, 57.8 in Heat 6. Belle Vue’s regular timekeeper said all the other races agreed with the times he had taken.

One theory was that Ipswich’s Piotr Swiderski had retired in the race in question and the SKY clock had stopped when he crossed the line with Crump still coming round on his last lap. Belle Vue contacted the BSPA about having the time checked and revised. The SKY time was annulled.

Crump lowered the track-record again, ironically against Ipswich in August, clocking a time of 56.8 - only one tenth of a second quicker than his previous (official) best (56.9) against Eastbourne in June.     

Edited by moxey63
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I AM told that info from the MSDL hasn't been forthcoming this season but there will be something in next week's issue.

  • Like 4

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
Sign in to follow this  

×

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