The Old Or The New?

[speedyguy 20]

New poll for oldtimespeedway:

 

Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the oldtimespeedway group:

Was the original world championship formula (qualifying rounds to a one-off final) preferable to the present Grand Prix format. To vote, please visit the following web page:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oldtimespeed...veys?id=2091179

 

 

[martinmauger 584]

New poll for oldtimespeedway:

 

Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the oldtimespeedway group:

Was the original world championship formula (qualifying rounds to a one-off final) preferable to the present Grand Prix format. To vote, please visit the following web page:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oldtimespeed...veys?id=2091179

Tricky one as both have their merets. My gripes with the SGP are under the old system every rider in the world had a theoretical chance of becoming World Champion, or at least ridng in the competition and there a very few "pressure races" where a rider simply has to win to ensure an overall victory. By the nature of a grand prix system riders "simply" have to keep scoring well, making the competion more of a marathon, whereas in the old World Final there would nearly always be such a high pressure/high drama "must win" heat. Like I said, tricky to choose....

 

[speedyguy 20]

New poll for oldtimespeedway:

 

Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the oldtimespeedway group:

Was the original world championship formula (qualifying rounds to a one-off final) preferable to the present Grand Prix format. To vote, please visit the following web page:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oldtimespeed...veys?id=2091179

 

 

 

Early results appear to be anti-GPs.

[Jeff. 2]

Early results appear to be anti-GPs.

 

Purely because its on an old time speedway website, put the same survey on the SGP website and the result would be the exact opposite.

 

Take off the rose coloured specs and remember things as they rerally were, not how history makes you think they were.

 

 

Tricky one asunder the old system every rider in the world had a theoretical chance of becoming World Champion,

 

Take that quote fro Martin Mauger, In 1978 Britain could easily have supplied 6 or 8 riders who would grace a world final but no matter how good the brits were or how many top international Brits there were, only 4 could reach Wembley. At the same time the usual 5 Continental no hopers were guaranteed their place.

 

Peter Collins, quite capable of winning that final was sat in the stands thanks to failure in an earlier qualification round.

 

PC himself was champion in a final that didnt contain 2 of the top 4 in the word at that time thanks to bad luck in qualifying.

 

The GP system of part qualification/part selection in the main ensures the best riders contest the world championship, exactly as it should be

[speedyguy 20]

Purely because its on an old time speedway website, put the same survey on the SGP website and the result would be the exact opposite.

 

 

Could also be the voices of experience!

 

See the voting under POLLS now on:

 

http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/oldtimespeedway

Edited September 6, 2008 by speedyguy

[gerry1875 4]

I preferred the old one off system, much better and everyone in the world had an equal chance, and remember our last british World Champ Mark Loram never actually won a GP that season , it was just because he was consistent over a series, no give me the old one off final anytime

[speedibee 3,091]

Both systems have their merits and the gp at cardiff is drawing a bigger crowd than were attending the old one offs , What i miss are the qualifiers for the old one off ,a british final that meant something and all the other rounds were equally dramatic. overseas ,continental ,commonwealth ,intercontental.etc, and of course each of these rounds gave riders a chance at a title even if they never got the chance to be world champion

[Deano 1,318]

Early results appear to be anti-GPs.

 

 

But judging by the amount of people reading and commenting on this thread since it inception.

 

Give me the GP's anytime.

[speedyguy 20]

But judging by the amount of people reading and commenting on this thread since it inception.

 

Give me the GP's anytime.

 

 

Then cast a vote in their favour. That's the objective of this thread.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly 495]

But judging by the amount of people reading and commenting on this thread since it inception.

 

Give me the GP's anytime.

 

You've lost me here...: what comments on this thread have you been reading...!!!!!

 

I'm sorry that some younger people who never saw a World Final think that the GPs are better.

No proper assessment of all of the pros and cons could possibly find in favour of the GPs.

 

There is literally ZERO excitement approaching the climax of this year's World Championship.. That would never have been the case with a one-off World Final. Call me old-fashioned but where would sport be without excitement.

Dying on its ar*e, just like the once-proud World Speedway Championship!!

[speedyguy 20]

New poll for oldtimespeedway:

 

Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the oldtimespeedway group:

Was the original world championship formula (qualifying rounds to a one-off final) preferable to the present Grand Prix format. To vote, please visit the following web page:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oldtimespeed...veys?id=2091179

 

There's still time to cast a vote. The current running is against the GPs.

[ljh 0]

As someone who has watched both live and recorded versions of the two World championship systems I feel educated enough to put this into some kind of perspective.

First the G.P. series where (1) not everyone involved has to qualify on merit, (2) invitations including wild cards bring it into disrepute, (3) around half the tracks ( not all temporary ones either ) are a disgrace by being improperly prepared and not conducive to real and safe racing. And that's just for starters, we can pick faults all along the line and that's not even mentioning the unaccountability of the ' owners ' of the series, and the fact that appointed referees aren't up to the job in at least 50% of cases. I also maintain that the general costs of equipment everywhere has escalated wildly because and since the G.P.'s started.

I could go on but for those of us who watched many of the old style World finals with the associated dramas played out in around half of the heats in front of packed houses ( yes including Bradford 1990 and Pocking 1993 ) the current method of finding the true champion is completely flawed, how can a guy with the best of machinery but little skill win more than one title ! Discuss that if you will. The F.I.M. finally found the ideal formula between those named finals, it was the simple system of two semi finals that rooted out the many dud Europeans ( plenty of these characters made final day over the decades ) and gave us paying spectators the strongest final line ups possible before dropping the one night final in favour of the circus foisted upon us.

Finally those who never got the chance to see a Wembley final missed out on some of the finest speedway meetings ever staged, I can't say as there was ever an undeserving victor, and although I genuinely felt for Dave Jessup with his engine failure would never have thought of him as the best that year had he won.

Rod Haynes.

[Vince 9,459]

I have seen both systems at work first hand and would take the GP's as the best way of finding the best rider in the world every time. In theory there may have been a chance for every rider to win the World Championship under the old system but as already pointed out you didn't necesarily have the worlds best 16 riders competing then any more than you do now. There was also a chance that one breakdown or bad refereeing decision could ensure that there was no hope at all of winning the title. At least now these things should tend to even out over the course of the series.

The qualification system is there to get riders through to the GP's and I can't think of any rider who is likely to be in contention for the title who isn't involved. Many of the tracks are poor now and that is the worst thing about the GP's in my opinion. However anybody who thinks all the tracks for one-off finals were good is wearing rose tinted glasses (more like welding goggles really). Even the hallowed Wembley finals, terrific atmosphere and all, didn't have the best racing track by far. I went to two Wembley finals and thoroughly enjoyed them but they were far from the best Speedway meetings I have been to with regard to the racing.

Unfortunately bad ref's, poor tracks, super quick engines and so on have always been a feature of the World Championship. As for a rider with good machinery and little skill winning the World Championship GP series that is utter nonsense they don't even get to compete at that level without a huge amount of skill.

[ljh 0]

O.K. Vince you make some valid points, but selectively, the G.P. series as with the old finals has thrown up very few unworthy victors, so we seem in relative agreement about that. The rider I mention as falling short skillwise by the way is clearly unable to handle a roughly rutted track (style badly flawed) without resorting to foul tactics thereby endangering the lives of his fellow competitors. Barring injury what possible reason can there be for not allowing all seven top riders from the final qualifying round into the next series instead of the present wild card system. As I said, the F.I.M. did get the best (fit) sixteen in the final from the two semi finals, you don't get that with the present set up. Time and again people have voiced their opinion both in forumland and in person that more than half the riders finishing below the top eight look jaded, sometimes some thoroughly uninterested in proceedings as well, and ought to be replaced. Now if in the interest of more countries being represented is the reason for some of them being there in the first place then the system is flawed anyway. I note your comments on track surfaces is broadly in agreement with mine and many others, my theory about how this has come about involves the extreme power vested in certain individuals and a Danish influence can't altogether be ruled out, with slick surfaces etc. Ironically though nowadays the roughest, rutted or sopping wet tracks usually produce the best (but more dangerous) racing. Wembley although not to everyone's liking was always prepared correctly for the big night. Effectively the series is dead and buried now with the Italian and German (again) rounds now meaningless, rarely was the old style title in all it's years of running decided before the last FOUR races. Having spectated at Cardiff mid season and final rounds at both Gelsenkirchen and Sydney I have to say both the latter rounds were complete meaningless flops, and the 2007 German G.P. the most boring meeting I ever witnessed in forty six years.

The truth is that the G.P. series probably began with the best of intentions but also as a great money making scheme on behalf of the 'owners' of the staging rights. A couple of years ago the general concensus of those in power was that it had become tired and so it was tinkered with in an attempt to revive it's appeal, and to a certain extent it worked. As others have mentioned it now feels as though the series is too big, the authorities too full of self importance and to hell with the leagues that ultimately train and supply it's riders. Lastly some heats ( Cardiff 2007 for example) seem to have been (badly) manipulated to financially produce the 'required result'. Sad that OUR sport has sunk to such depths to try and keep the series itself popular. It won't be long before the authorities/owners have to reinvent the G.P. series yet again. The problems then might show the 'owners' in their true light as being far from professional in what they do.

Rod Haynes.

[MattK 3,447]

If there was a one-off World Final, how often would it come to Britain? Once every four years, six years, eight years? Even less than that?

 

I reckon we'd be lucky to see it once every eight to ten years.