British Speedway to be reborn?

[FAST GATER 852]

I still think we can work with the tracks we have ,one of the great things about the UK  is  the smaller tracks in the past riders come  here to "hone" their skills, I loved the big open spaces of Crewe but  riders  then had to negociate the likes of Crayford .The sport needs to address costs and it will be easier to adapt what we have than start from scratch ,we don't have the goodwill other counties seem to enjoy for the creation of new tracks .In fact we are often battling to save what we have how long and how much did the NSS cost ,IMO it will probably be that last new stand alone track ever built  in this country .

 

[foamfence 2,917]

9 minutes ago, FAST GATER said:

I still think we can work with the tracks we have ,one of the great things about the UK  is  the smaller tracks in the past riders come  here to "hone" their skills, I loved the big open spaces of Crewe but  riders  then had to negociate the likes of Crayford .The sport needs to address costs and it will be easier to adapt what we have than start from scratch ,we don't have the goodwill other counties seem to enjoy for the creation of new tracks .In fact we are often battling to save what we have how long and how much did the NSS cost ,IMO it will probably be that last new stand alone track ever built  in this country .

 

Crewe and Crayford where in the days of uprights, these days you have laydowns struggling to negotiate tracks that were OK for uprights but are too narrow and the wrong shape for laydowns (with a very small number of exceptions). We've had loads of Speedway meetings on YouTube etc over the last few days, some of them were advertised as 'great meetings' and as someone who started his Speedway involvement in the early 50s, I quite looked forward to them but in the main it's been a borefest. I hope it has a future but I see it more as a part-time or amateur sport here, as it is it's unsustainable. 

[FAST GATER 852]

13 minutes ago, foamfence said:

Crewe and Crayford where in the days of uprights, these days you have laydowns struggling to negotiate tracks that were OK for uprights but are too narrow and the wrong shape for laydowns (with a very small number of exceptions). We've had loads of Speedway meetings on YouTube etc over the last few days, some of them were advertised as 'great meetings' and as someone who started his Speedway involvement in the early 50s, I quite looked forward to them but in the main it's been a borefest. I hope it has a future but I see it more as a part-time or amateur sport here, as it is it's unsustainable. 

IMO powerful laydowns should be for the GPS ,I am saying we should have less powerful unified engines in the league ,easier to change the engines than try to build new tracks .I have watch some old racing  have seen some good /excellent and boring bit like the racing today really ,the olny difference is a few seconds faster and a shed load of cost today  .

Edited April 21, 2020 by FAST GATER

[foamfence 2,917]

21 minutes ago, FAST GATER said:

IMO powerful laydowns should be for the GPS ,I am saying we should have less powerful unified engines in the league ,easier to change the engines than try to build new tracks .I have watch some old racing  have seen some good /excellent and boring bit like the racing today really ,the olny difference is a few seconds faster and a shed load of cost today  .

Plus there's no one watching! I certainly agree with you though.

[steve roberts 9,242]

23 minutes ago, FAST GATER said:

IMO powerful laydowns should be for the GPS ,I am saying we should have less powerful unified engines in the league ,easier to change the engines than try to build new tracks .I have watch some old racing  have seen some good /excellent and boring bit like the racing today really ,the olny difference is a few seconds faster and a shed load of cost today  .

If memory serves that was the situation when they were first introduced (1995?) but of course the authorities succumbed and they found their way into the domestic programme.

[Grachan 7,360]

1 hour ago, DC2 said:

 

Is a scoreboard necessary if the PA announces the score after every race?

I think it is, yes. I think it should be on display at all times. I don't always know the score if I'm watching a match and have to look at someone's programme. Having to listen out for announcements should not be necessary but an enhancement.

[DC2 11,150]

9 minutes ago, Grachan said:

I think it is, yes. I think it should be on display at all times. I don't always know the score if I'm watching a match and have to look at someone's programme. Having to listen out for announcements should not be necessary but an enhancement.

 

I agree one is desirable but wonder if it can be afforded by every club.  I suspect they cost at least £10,000?

I’m not sure that expense can be justified simply to inform those who are not paying attention to the PA.

[mikebv 10,262]

1 hour ago, foamfence said:

Crewe and Crayford where in the days of uprights, these days you have laydowns struggling to negotiate tracks that were OK for uprights but are too narrow and the wrong shape for laydowns (with a very small number of exceptions). We've had loads of Speedway meetings on YouTube etc over the last few days, some of them were advertised as 'great meetings' and as someone who started his Speedway involvement in the early 50s, I quite looked forward to them but in the main it's been a borefest. I hope it has a future but I see it more as a part-time or amateur sport here, as it is it's unsustainable. 

Watched loads of recent meetings on YouTube and there is a huge clear difference between the racing standards from track to track.. 

In no particular order..

The NSS, Somerset, Redcar, and Scunthorpe seem to have the majority of their races close and with passing, with Glasgow, Berwick and Peterborough having several 'very decent races' in the next level down..

Not seen too much from anywhere else to be honest other than an odd decent race per meeting, with some tracks getting you to 'move on' to the next coverage after four or five heats such is the lack of any close action post bend two..

It must be hard to sell the racing at some tracks..

[waytogo28 2,054]

2 minutes ago, mikebv said:

It must be hard to sell the racing at some tracks..

It became much too hard in recent seasons to stomach what was on offer at King's Lynn. I found myself going less and less. but am still willing to sample it again - once, to see if the promised improvements to the racing surface do result in on track racing to make it wortjwhile.

[steve roberts 9,242]

25 minutes ago, mikebv said:

Watched loads of recent meetings on YouTube and there is a huge clear difference between the racing standards from track to track.. 

In no particular order..

The NSS, Somerset, Redcar, and Scunthorpe seem to have the majority of their races close and with passing, with Glasgow, Berwick and Peterborough having several 'very decent races' in the next level down..

Not seen too much from anywhere else to be honest other than an odd decent race per meeting, with some tracks getting you to 'move on' to the next coverage after four or five heats such is the lack of any close action post bend two..

It must be hard to sell the racing at some tracks..

I've always thought that whatever the era the standard of racing varied depending upon the track. People are sometimes critical of speedway past and that the racing is generally better nowadays but some of the tracks riders were expected to perform on in the past would create similar difficulties today...in my opinion.

Poor old Somerton Park always gets its fair share of criticism but I would defy riders today managing any better round what was a technically challenging, almost, square, track...although Phil Crump had it mastered but even he admitted that it was a poor track due to constraints forced upon it surrounding a football pitch as it did and a retaining wall.

Edited April 21, 2020 by steve roberts

[Grachan 7,360]

12 minutes ago, DC2 said:

 

I agree one is desirable but wonder if it can be afforded by every club.  I suspect they cost at least £10,000?

I’m not sure that expense can be justified simply to inform those who are not paying attention to the PA.

It doesn't even need to be expensive. Just numbers on a board would do it. It frustrates me a bit that they don't do this.

[HGould 2,213]

2 hours ago, Stoke Potter said:

And they are still inferior to the NSS so therefore could be better.

To survive in the 21st century you have to get away from the perception (and actually the reality) that there is very little racing/passing at most tracks and first out of the start wins.

For any newly built tracks the rules should be changed so the minimum size is 300m and also changes to minimum widths on straights and bends to that of something approach NSS dimensions, I can't give a dimension for that as I don't know the relevant widths.

For existing tracks, efforts should be made to increase dimensions, bend radii, etc. where possible.  There are currently too many fundamentally flawed tracks.

may be you should go and read last weeks Speedway Star.

Nicholls / Harris and King review various Tracks, looks like they are going to do an A - Z.

All Class riders and all saying the same thing broadly.

There is a place for all types of track, the ones where you stick you backside on the back guard and throttle full on (often boring and processional in my opinion as there is only 1 line) and the ones that are far more technical and require throttle control and rider to turn the bike (can be equally boring as the riders who have the ability to do that are often head and shoulders above the rest and a dying breed)

Converse thinking is you can and do have great racing at big fast and technical tracks. I've seen great racing at most tracks and equally boring racing at those tracks, 

Generalisation is easy.

If every track was built like NSS which I think is a good track but over-rated wouldn't racing be boring in general as the vast difference in types and skills required would be nullified.

The greats could ride anything, from Crayford to Crewe, they never moaned and complained. Look at the 10 point average riders in those days, cream rose to the top, look now, there aren't any basically, as all much of a muchness.

We have a generation of riders (those that came after Nicholls / Harris and King who can ride anything) who only know one way to ride, very few have actually learned proper throttle control and the engines are revved to destruction.

De-tune, limit revs, bring onus back on to throttle control not throttle bashing and the sport would improve overnight.

I did Trials and Road Racing,  I learned how to ride fast and how to ride the bike properly. I didn't have the natural ability to excel at either but I'll tell you this, anyone can ride a bike flat out, takes a rider to learn throttle control!

[DC2 11,150]

1 minute ago, Grachan said:

It doesn't even need to be expensive. Just numbers on a board would do it. It frustrates me a bit that they don't do this.

 

I don’t think chalk on a board will cut it though.

From my experience of shop fascias, a two metre by three metre illuminated plastic board with a LED display would cost at least £10,000.

[HGould 2,213]

3 minutes ago, Grachan said:

It doesn't even need to be expensive. Just numbers on a board would do it. It frustrates me a bit that they don't do this.

Berwick have a great one. 

 

Made of wood

Teams names and scores updated after every heat bit like an old cricket scoreboard.

 

 

[Grachan 7,360]

2 minutes ago, HGould said:

Berwick have a great one. 

 

Made of wood

Teams names and scores updated after every heat bit like an old cricket scoreboard.

 

 

Perfect.

They have an electronic one at Swindon. For a while it showed the match score, then it changed and they stopped showing the match score and went for riders in the heats instead. My guess is programme sales dropped.

Then they stopped using it completely.

Edited April 21, 2020 by Grachan