waiheke1

obviously was thinking of the year (80) when I meant to type his age (20).

I don't consider that unfair at all. there are others on here who would argue that as the gp winner they should actually get more points than any other rider. to reiterate, I think the current system is the best.

really? so why are they part of the group "I" of the European qualifying rounds? just forr fun? I believe 2006 was the last world cup where reigning champs were seeded.

Not sure you can class a rider who was a British Junior Champ, and peaked at the age of 23/24 (86/7 seasons) as a late developer? He was only 26 I believe when he won his first title, so still quite a bit younger than Mauger, and not really old at all. Interesting case though Nielsen - world team champ at 18, world pairs champ at 19, first world final and equal top of the BL averages at 80 but then... leap ahead to the 81 world final, where you had a superb crop of young talent. Reigning champ Mike Lee still just 21 and already in his fourth final. New champ Penhall just 23 in his second final. Knudsen third on debut at 19. Carter (20) and gundersen (21) both robbed of a medal on debut by engine failures. Hans however finished well down the field. Ultimately it was to take him 5 attempts to reach the podium, and 7 to win the title, I wonder if both of those are records of the World Final era? Yet, hardly a late developer, given he rode in every world final from the time he was 20 until he was in his 30s, and arguably he was the best rider in the world for a decade starting from 83 (age 23).

Not afforded credit by whom? I think he is widely regarded, along with the other PC, as one of the top 2 Brits of all time, generally acknowledged as the most naturally gifted rider of his era and the thrid best rider of the 70s (behind Olsen and Mauger). I'm not sure any/many would disagree with that, and if you had a list of the top say 15 riders of all time he would make most people lists. You also omiitted to mention his multiple pairs titles with multiple partners, his superb domestic record, and of course his team riding and sheer breathtaking ability to pass, which no stats can do justice to. So, with the title now secured, where does Tai rate next to the other Brits who have won the world title in the "moden era" (70s onwards). Personally, I'd say he isn't as naturally talented as PC or Lee, his talent more similar to Loram or Havelock. Cruciallyu, he is probably the bext gater of the lot. PC for me is confortably the greatest modern British rider, as outlined above he added a range of other titles across a sustained period of excellence, he ould probably have on back to back titles under a GP system in 76 and 77 , his runner up performance in 77 is arguably the greatest ever non title winning performance of all time, and his win in Gothenburg was a superb display, albeit with some good fortune around Olsen's failure to qualify and Mauger's engine failure. Lee was probably not the best rider in the wolrd in 80 when he won his title, but under a GP system would likely have won in either 79 or 83, andporbably ended with a similar tally to his one gold and three bronze under the old system. The most gifted rider EVER in all probability, at this stage I thinkTai would still rank behind Lee, though I would rank Tai's world title above Lee's. Loram was superb racer, who had a ,long and distinguished career, although his GP record was reasonably mediocre excepting his title. The tile was under one of the worst GP formats, and of course Loram famously didn't in a GP, so I'd rate Tai's Champiobnship well ahead of Loram's, in terms of all time standing I'd perhaps have Loram ahead by a nose, though that could all change if Tai can finish on the podium next season. Havelock is perhaps the bext comprision with Tai, a rider clearly of immense natural talents, but never realy quite cutting it at the top level, until one season in which everything came together. Havelock is written off by many as a "fluke" winner, but he was superb that season, winning most of the qualifying meetings - however under a GP system, you have the feeling that Nielsen or Jonsson (or both) may have edged him out for the title. It remains to be seen now whether 2013 was Tai's "Havelock season", or if it marks his development as a rider who will be one of THE major force in speedway for the next decade. Personally, I tend towards the latter view, Tai's GP success as backed up by superb league perfromances and demonstarted immense courage and professionalism. Summing up, I'd rank Tai's title second only to PC's 76 Gothenburg triumph in terms of great ttile victory's (and had his in not been overshadowed by the injuries hich derailed the campaigns of Emil Holder and Ward would likely have ranked number one), in terms of standings of the Grea Brits, I'd have him behind PC and Lee, but shoulder to shoulder with Loram and a touch ahead of Havelock. Another vtitle in the next couple of seasons, and the debate would be whether he is the best Brit of them all.

disagrre totally. For starters, this would mean that the semi wouldn't be worth any points, whereas the current system sees championship points up for grabs in every race. Secondly, this means the "rewards" for making the cut off becomes less, and reduces the amount of points a rider can gain in a single meeting. Thirdly, it reduces the number of riders with a chance of making the semis, thereby reducing to some extent the tension in the last 4 heats. Double points or single points for the final makes no difference to me, but please let's not tinker ith anything else, they have found the perfect formula, why change now?

that's true, but it would no doubt be possible to have a league system if they so desired - but could you imagine American football without a superbowl?

Does anyone else think that SEC missed a great opportunity here. Instead of a series hich is essentially a "GP Lite", what if they had fgone for an old style World Individial Chanmps style tournament. 4 regional based quarter finals (Overseas final hosted in UK, Nordic Final hosted in Sweden/Denmark, and two continental semi finals). Followed by an inter continental and continental final (8 qualifiers from each), and the a grand final (perefer the old 20 heat format, but if neccesary have a final in which points add to the cumulative total - none of this winner takes all nonsense). You'd have strong line ups for all meetings, be able to spread them round geographically, ould be offerring something slightly different for the fans - and certainly appealing to the traditionalists- and arguably then woyuldn't be seen as a threat by BSI. Also re the Pairs torunament - surely it ould have been woth outlaying a few extra sheckels in order to be granted "world" status, or do BSI have exclusive rights to any "world titles.:?

How are riders being robbed? They know to make the GP they need to finish top 8in the series, or top 3 in the qualifieres. If they don't achieve that, then they can't feel hard done by iof they don't get a pick surely? TWK - is there any sport in which you believe this Utopic qualification system exists? One in which there is an equal opporunity for all regardless of nationality or ability? Agree 100% Can't see any issue with NZ VISA. Would you say Olsen was one of the top 16 riders in 1976. Collins in 78? Mauger in 80? Gundersen in 82? Morton/Carter in 84? Carter in 85? Wigg/S Moran/Doncaster in 86? You would? But how could they possibly have failed to qualify? Ebngine troubles pah. Sugar in the fuel tank - surely soyuldn't make a difference? Broken leg, irrelavent? One bad meeting in horrific conidtions - clearly not top 16 material? agreed re the first bit - essentially a 50/50 split beteen intercontintnetal and continental riders would work, and obviosuly earlier rounds woyuld need to ensure sufficient spots for the top nations. However, would it really be a better system than we have now. If you got rid of the wild card slots, you'd need to have a qualifying series to avoid the risk of one fall/injury/engine failiure/bad meeting ending someones chanes. And tbh, I can't see how such a series would be viable, commercially or in terms of impacts on league speedway. I think they have the method spot on, in terms of covering perforamce over the year (8 spots), opportunity for rank outside to qualify via knock outs (3 spots) and ability to ensure places fo rriders affected by injury, outstanding but missing out for othe rreasons, top young talent or ensure split of nationalities (4 spots). Note for 2014, it looks like they have given spots to three best riders over the whole season not already qualified - two of whom wsould have likely qualified bt for injury), plus one swede to maintain the split of nationalities you referred to (and ho could argue with it being given to the swedish champ?) Re spread of nationalities:Essentially thats what we have now, with a guaranteed spot for the Danes, Poles, Swedes and Brits should any not qualify, and a reluctance to have more than three riders of any nationality (unless securing spots via qualifiers) to thereby ensure a better split of representatives. As others have pointed out, many motosports do this, also many Olympic events. Not really true - it's performances over a roughly 2 year period leading into the tournament. Of course, some countries have easier qualifying routes than others by virtue of coming from a eaker confederation (I don't disagree with the approach at all, but you can hardly claim it is a "fair" system). What about the Olympics. Doesn't each country get given a number of places, and then it is up to them how they allocate the spots (provided mimimum qualifying criteria are met). I remember the 2008 Olympcis, the best two single sculler sin the world were both Kiwis (Waddell and Drysdale), but NZ were only allowed one slot. It was down to the national body to decide how to make a selection, they ended up doing this by using the national championships as a "race off" to decide. This upset reigning champ Drysdale, who although he won and qualified said it stuffed up his preparation for the Olympics by having to "peak" too early. The SGP has dubious local riders as wildcards, as did the old World Championships (Hnery Kroeze in 87 springs to mind) - but I agree it's a neccesaity and i dont see it as an issue.

Ok, instead as a comparison. The worlds best basketball competition, the NBL has play offs. So does the best Rugby League compeition the NRL. So does the Super 16 Rugby and the Heineken Cup. So too does Ice Hockeys show piece. The NZ and Australian cricket comps all have play offs, so too the IPL. There's a small event called the Super Bowl which is guess what, a play off final. In fact, I think pretty much all major club sports do except for football, but football also has prestigous knock out events alongside such as the FA Cup, the Champions LEague etc. Also, the qualification for Euro spots and promotion/relegation system means interest is retained to the last day even hen the winner is already known. So, dislike the playoff system by all means, but don't try to pretend that Speedway is alone in using such a system, nor that it adds interest, as well as commeercial benefit, to the end of season.

If I get time I’ll update to reflect Polish first division performances, though don’t think it will result in major changes – THJ I imagine would move into the top 50, Danny King probably drop out of top 30. I’ll also try to reflect performances in national individual championships as well, though prob just for the major nations (Denmark, Sweden, England, Poland). Absolutely agreed. I’m reasonably happy with the basic weighting I did, but it was also done within the constraints of limited time. Obviously some competitions are tougher for top riders to score in but easier for weaker riders (SWC is an example). Similarly EL the ideal weighting system would have reflected the number of heat 15 riders a rider took, and also number of heat 2s. If this information was readily available I could have reflected it in the rankings, but as it is I spent enough time on the EL as the lazy bugger who hosts the only site (that I am aware of) that contains the EL averages for current year stopped updating it in July, so I had to manually calculate the rest of the season. Consequently riders who were in the top two of their team in the EL are probably slightly disadvantaged, those such as Smolinski/Hougarrd who had spells at reserve are favoured. That said, I don’t think adjusting for this this would have made any major changes to the top 30. On the contrary, Zagar’s performance in Poland actually was better than his performance in the EL (when weighted). It was his poor performance in Sweden (where he averaged only 6.4) that really brought down his score. I too was a little surprised at Zagar’s ranking, hich is lower than one would intuitively expect, but a quick look at those who leapfrogged him from his GP position of 7th. Holder and Ward clearly no surprise, and G Laguta as the best rider outside the series is probably no surprise to see higher either. ( 6th best performer in the leagues and runner up in SEC ) Gollob ranked fractionally behind Zagar in the GPs, but Zagar’s poor Swedish performance saw Gollob achieve a slightly higher league “score” and his performances in Sec further boosted his score. Miedzinski league rating was also a little higher than Zagar , and his one win from one attempt in GPs saw him have a fractionally higher GP score also. Bjerre was probably the big surprise, but his SWC performance earned him a high rating, as did his SGP Challenge performance (had Zagar ridden in the Challenge final and scored well he would have ranked higher than Bjerre). Depending on the assumptions used in the ranking system, Zagar could have easily rated above the latter three under a different system

tbf , the riders they have selected are the best three in the world not already qualified (according to my ranking system anyway) plus the token swede . Id be against a pure ranking system method though purely because past performance is not the only guide to future performance and such a system may inhibit rising talent from joining the series.

Brilliant, thanks Steve !

yes they would

while it soun ds great that highlights packages are going to 100 other countries, of course that doesn't mean that they are neccesarily screened. In NZ they typically show the highlights package a couple of months after the event (which is an improvement on last year when it was with sky) - is that really something worth them boasting about? how many people interedted in speedway are going to not have already watched the meeting at that point?

Many thanks again Steve

Dave out of interest - do you have all these results electronically archived, or just a very well filed set of speedway stars that you can scan and pdf?

Belatedly, many many thanks for the above info. You wouldn't happen to have the heat details also would you?

Congrats to wheelsI nline. and many thanks to rr for running this , definitely my favourite of the picking competitions.

Many thanks for running this robbie , hope u do the same nextcyear

Congrats tai deserved world champion 2013! thanks for proving us wrong! and what a way to win it as well. no, magic beans...

Ward Hampel Miedzinski Kasprzak

Ward 520 more hampel 300 more miedzinski 475 more

ward 46m hampel 45m miedzinski 15m KK 15m Heat 1 Miedzinski 7/5, Heat 2 Kasprzak 9/4, Heat 3 Ward 5/4, Heat 4 Pedersen 9/5, Heat 5 Hampel 6/5 Heat 6 Ward 4/5 Heat 7 Vaculik 7/4, Heat 8 Pedersen 11/5 Heat 9 Hancock 8/5, Heat 10 Kasprzak 11/4 Heat 11 Jonsson 7/4 Heat 12 Hampel 7/5 Heat 13 Zagar 7/4 Heat 14 Hampel 8/5 Heat 15 Pedersen 12/5 Heat 16 Hancock 8/5 Heat 17 Miedzinski 11/4, Heat 18 Zagar 11/4 Heat 19 Lindgren 7/2 Heat 20 Kasprzak Evs

Where do people rank him amongst the great Swedes ? clearly behind ove and t rick . but above or below knuttson and Michanek ?