New Points System For Gp 2007

[Subedei 0]

So by your crazy logic that's Steve Johnston in one of the 15 spots then...let's hear the other 14.. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I've already given my top fifteen in another thread - it includes neither Steve Johnston nor the vastly over-rated serial failure.

[Biddows 0]

I wouldn't have had Lindback back for 2007. And if BP fails again in 2007, I wouldn't have him around for 2008, unless he qualifies via the qualification tournament. I don't mind people being given a second chance, but come on, Nicholls, who can't even finish above Steve Johnston in the Australian Championships, has had how many chances now?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Johnno is riding far better than anybody could have predicted, so that's hardly fair. It's not like Johnno is better than Nicholls on a day-to-day basis, and you know that. Besides, Nicholls has had all manner of mechanical gremlins that have cost him a few points. (Oh wait, let me guess: your response to this would be that I'm just making excuses for Prince Nicholls. Just once you're going to have to acknowledge that bad luck plays a large part in Nicholls' under-achievement. And yes, I know, all riders get bad luck from time to time, but Scott seems to get more than his fair share.)

[Subedei 0]

Johnno is riding far better than anybody could have predicted, so that's hardly fair. It's not like Johnno is better than Nicholls on a day-to-day basis, and you know that. Besides, Nicholls has had all manner of mechanical gremlins that have cost him a few points. (Oh wait, let me guess: your response to this would be that I'm just making excuses for Prince Nicholls. Just once you're going to have to acknowledge that bad luck plays a large part in Nicholls' under-achievement. And yes, I know, all riders get bad luck from time to time, but Scott seems to get more than his fair share.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Funny thing is, you never really see Jason Crump have mechanical gremlins, do you? So, is it bad luck or poor preparation? I'd say a little of the former and a lot of the latter.

[iris123 21,085]

Funny thing is, you never really see Jason Crump have mechanical gremlins, do you? So, is it bad luck or poor preparation? I'd say a little of the former and a lot of the latter.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Have to say listening to the broadcast from Oz yesterday,it mentioned Jason tested 25 or 26 engines to get 6 for the GP's.That is being totally professional.But you never know when an engine is going to blow.Scott did have 2 go while over in Oz

[Subedei 0]

Have to say listening to the broadcast from Oz yesterday,it mentioned Jason tested 25 or 26 engines to get 6 for the GP's.That is being totally professional.But you never know when an engine is going to blow.Scott did have 2 go while over in Oz

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Maybe so, but how many times last season did you see E/F on the Crump scorecard? Now, perhaps Crump just had an extraordinarily lucky season, but it seems to me that, over the seasons, an E/F in the scorecards of Nicholls and Adams is not uncommon.

Edited January 14, 2007 by Subedei

[iris123 21,085]

Maybe so, but how many times last season did you see E/F on the Crump scorecard? Now, perhaps Crump just had an extraordinarily lucky season, but it seems to me that, over the seasons, an E/F in the scorecards of Nicholls and Adams is not uncommon.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It could very well be that most of those 20 motors that Jason discarded would be acceptable to others.That is the sort of attitude that gets riders to the very top.The sort of attitude that meant Ivan Mauger wouldn't accept his allocated place in the pits.He took the "best" place.

[Biddows 0]

Funny thing is, you never really see Jason Crump have mechanical gremlins, do you? So, is it bad luck or poor preparation? I'd say a little of the former and a lot of the latter.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, perhaps Scott's attitude is not as professional as Crump's - then again, I suppose Crump can afford to spend the whole winter testing and getting his equipment to the highest possible standard. I daresay Scott is not quite as well off as Jason, but that's just speculation.

 

I was referring more to the spate of injuries Scott has suffered in the last few years that have hampered his chances: the collarbone injuries, having his foot run over by TR's mechanical, burning up the back of his left knee. All of these have caused him to miss GPs where he could have scored enough points to qualify. The difference is, a lot of the top boys have been lucky enough to stay clear of such injuries.

[Subedei 0]

Reads more like a list of excuses to me.

[Pollyanna 1]

That seems better I don't think the semi finals without points was the right way.

Saying that I don't think it will make any difference if Jason is in the same kind of form or one of the other riders.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I thought the idea was to reward all the riders who got through to the semi-finals, but in actual fact this system doesn't!

[Pollyanna 1]

Fine, how about his inclusion in 2006, when he received a nominated place?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Agreed, but your previous post suggested that he didn't earn his place in 2005...when he did qualify for that.

I would personally like to see the top 8 go through, with the next 7 having to qualify for the right to be there for the following year.

But, who will listen to me? Nobody!!!!

[Biddows 0]

Reads more like a list of excuses to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, but valid ones.

[Subedei 0]

Yes, but valid ones.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm afraid not. Look at the facts - one GP final in the past three seasons. That tells the whole sorry story. Nicholls isn't half as good as some people make him out to be. I mean, come on, Steve Johnston finished higher than him in the Australian championship.

[Biddows 0]

I'm afraid not. Look at the facts - one GP final in the past three seasons. I mean, come on, Steve Johnston finished higher than him in the Australian championship.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The fact that Scott has not made many GP finals speaks more for his mental strength and confidence than ability, since he is virtually always present in the semis, and not always on just 8 or 9 points, and seems to bottle it at the crucial stage - he even did in Prague last season when he was the best rider in the meeting with 14pts. But with a little more confidence, he could make more finals. The important thing to bear in mind is that his constant presence in the semi-finals (all bar one last year if I'm not mistaken, though I'm sure I'll be put right if I am) not only demonstrates consistency, but also the fact that he is among the top eight riders in every GP.

 

And if you think that this one Aussie championship result makes an iota of difference then you are as deluded as you claim I am. I would contest that Johnno rode well above what we would consider to be his capabilities - and all credit to him - but this demonstrates very little, except that Johnno had a long overdue good result. Johnno also finished above Schlein and Stead - does this make them inferior riders as well?

[Gemini 4,894]

Nicholls isn't half as good as some people make him out to be.

Ey up! I've found a sentence from your usual ramblings that I agree with and the words are slightly different to anything you have said before which is very refreshing. Sorry, but repetition bores me to death. I can't stand the 12 days of Christmas, 10 Green Bottles or Old McDonald's Farm either and your rants about Nicholls have been equally irritating because they are always the same.

Message understood. Nicholls shouldn't be in the G.P's. Over and out.

 

Edit.....I'll leave you to it Biddows, but you might as well give up now because you will never get through to the receptive part of Sub's brain.

Edited January 14, 2007 by Gemini

[iris123 21,085]

I do have a feeling we are going to hear Mr Johnstons name quite a bit from now on,whenever Sub mentions Scott

Edited January 14, 2007 by iris123