2022 Teams & Points average

[Gazc 7,093]

If you can score up to 45 Points per meeting then that should be the points limit to build to , If clubs want to build lower that is there prerogative continually diluting the product will eventually lead to fans voting with there feet more so than they are now.  

[sparks123 147]

10 minutes ago, Gazc said:

If you can score up to 45 Points per meeting then that should be the points limit to build to , If clubs want to build lower that is there prerogative continually diluting the product will eventually lead to fans voting with there feet more so than they are now.  

Only 42 points per meeting. 

Averages based on 4 rides per rider per meeting.

For heat 15 a riders average is usually divided by 5 (5 races instead of 4). Scoring 8 points from 4 races is the same average as scoring 10 points from 5 races.

 

[gazzac 1,015]

8 minutes ago, sparks123 said:

Only 42 points per meeting. 

Averages based on 4 rides per rider per meeting.

For heat 15 a riders average is usually divided by 5 (5 races instead of 4). Scoring 8 points from 4 races is the same average as scoring 10 points from 5 races.

 

Said years and years ago, 42 points for every league and leave it alone for 3 seasons, everyone can team build at the end of the season knowing what next season will be. Too simple and won't happen though. 

[Gazc 7,093]

1 hour ago, sparks123 said:

Only 42 points per meeting. 

Averages based on 4 rides per rider per meeting.

For heat 15 a riders average is usually divided by 5 (5 races instead of 4). Scoring 8 points from 4 races is the same average as scoring 10 points from 5 races.

 

42 or 45 average for team building should never be below that ceiling it isn’t rocket science for those decision makers.

[Ryan555 144]

4 hours ago, GS550 said:

Nor did I say its every team.  But you clearly did make a point about 4 heat leaders in Championship teams.  I only pointed out that the second placed team Glasgow did not have 4 heat leaders, that until Ostergaard got injured they only had 2 heat leaders and after that only 1, the rest being second strings and reserves.

If you are going to make a point about teams having 4 heat leaders as you did then you would maybe have a point if it was widespread, i.e. not "all" but commonplace throughout the division, and that teams with only 1 or 2 heat leaders e.g. Glasgow were rooted to the bottom of the table but clearly this is not the case.

Your mention of 2 point riders is maybe more where the attention needs to be focused as if teams are only allowed say one 2 point rider then it would discourage teams from assembling 4 heat leaders and the rest all 2 pointers.  I know somebody will say something about an existing rule and that's fine as I gave up trying to follow the ever changing rule book a while ago.

Yeah fair point about 2 point riders as well i agree with you 

[Falcon1983 557]

3 hours ago, Endeavour said:

And who categorises them? There was so many discrepancies in standard of rising stars and the grading. A fair points limit and let the teams build accordingly .

You would need a panel selected unfortunately by the BSPL maybe 3 people minimum and hope it's done fairly with no hidden agendas for their club benefits

Or a rule base of if your average is between 2 figures you're category D for example

I think whole average system to build teams just doesnt work anymore and it's so open to foul play 

[Fortythirtyeight 840]

5 minutes ago, Falcon1983 said:

You would need a panel selected unfortunately by the BSPL maybe 3 people minimum and hope it's done fairly with no hidden agendas for their club benefits

Or a rule base of if your average is between 2 figures you're category D for example

I think whole average system to build teams just doesnt work anymore and it's so open to foul play 

‘Done fairly with no hidden agendas ‘…..that’s the BSPL buggered then.

Only an independent body with no ties to any club can give speedway any credibility back as regards a rule book.

Edited October 24, 2021 by Fortythirtyeight

[Jaizer 2,863]

4 minutes ago, Falcon1983 said:

You would need a panel selected unfortunately by the BSPL maybe 3 people minimum and hope it's done fairly with no hidden agendas for their club benefits

Or a rule base of if your average is between 2 figures you're category D for example

I think whole average system to build teams just doesnt work anymore and it's so open to foul play 

I think all you cause there is a bidding war for the riders towards upper end of said average limits. Do nothing to reduce costs IMO

[Endeavour 681]

22 minutes ago, Jaizer said:

I think all you cause there is a bidding war for the riders towards upper end of said average limits. Do nothing to reduce costs IMO

Oh for a team of Aussies with British parents and 3 strong heat leaders 

[GS550 449]

2 hours ago, Ryan555 said:

Yeah fair point about 2 point riders as well i agree with you 

No worries.  I do also agree with your underlying point, I guess more than one way to skin a cat.

[GS550 449]

4 hours ago, Endeavour said:

And who categorises them? There was so many discrepancies in standard of rising stars and the grading. A fair points limit and let the teams build accordingly .

I agree.  Why "categorise" when you have a self categorising system called averages that's exact to 2 decimal places.  A fair points limit as you say and build to that limit.

[GS550 449]

1 hour ago, Falcon1983 said:

You would need a panel selected unfortunately by the BSPL maybe 3 people minimum and hope it's done fairly with no hidden agendas for their club benefits

Or a rule base of if your average is between 2 figures you're category D for example

I think whole average system to build teams just doesnt work anymore and it's so open to foul play 

Sorry but personally I've never been a fan of "categories" and "grades".  The average self categorises anyway to 2 decimal places.  Simple.

If there has to be greater control than just an overall team build points limit, is it maybe not easier to limit the combined averages of the top 3 as i think used to be the case a while ago, was it maybe 25 or suchlike, although to be honest I've lost track of the various rules.

[Falcon1983 557]

21 hours ago, GS550 said:

Sorry but personally I've never been a fan of "categories" and "grades".  The average self categorises anyway to 2 decimal places.  Simple.

If there has to be greater control than just an overall team build points limit, is it maybe not easier to limit the combined averages of the top 3 as i think used to be the case a while ago, was it maybe 25 or suchlike, although to be honest I've lost track of the various rules.

Well I'm sure say selecting one or two rising stars then it's free for all wont work as clubs cant afford it or may go bust trying 

Someone on this forum came up with a good idea of rounding averages up and down, and when explained it was or at least sounded pretty good

Issue with averages is it doesnt reward those that have a good year and you get riders who drop their averages on purpose

Right now I have no idea what the answer is 

[JanAndersen 822]

Salary cap but build your team as you see fit. Admittedly I haven’t thought about the implications or reasons it might (not) work. 
 

**edit. I’ve thought about it and it’s a ridiculous idea

Edited October 25, 2021 by JanAndersen

[Endeavour 681]

22 hours ago, GS550 said:

Sorry but personally I've never been a fan of "categories" and "grades".  The average self categorises anyway to 2 decimal places.  Simple.

If there has to be greater control than just an overall team build points limit, is it maybe not easier to limit the combined averages of the top 3 as i think used to be the case a while ago, was it maybe 25 or suchlike, although to be honest I've lost track of the various rules.

As in rising star Josh Bates