BSI reinvent the Wheel

[crazysue 613]

You mean to say, that after finally working out how it all worked, and starting to like it, they are thinking of changing it all. Also speedway cannot be compared to Formula 1, they have qualifying stages in the two days prior to the race and then the race is over a long distance, not 4 laps, although I am still undecided on the changes they have made to qualifying this year.

 

It was the current (speedway) gp format that initially got my notice (after a very long absence from speedway). I (personaly) thinks it works quite well and does give an exciting viewing point for the spectator....but then I'm no speedway purist...anything that gets the punters in, then why not do it.

[tomhaines 68]

Eureka I've got it lol!

 

Regular 20 heat format. (Backwards so that riders seeded 1-4 meet in heat 20 instead of 1)

 

Then a B final (5th to 8th) with riders scoring points 4,3,2,1 to add to their totals.

And then an A Final with points 8,7,6,5.

 

I ran it with speedway meeting and it works lol

[fatface 2,554]

Don't know why, but I'm getting extrememely wound up by this topic. Most strange. I really think this is such a bad move. Maybe I'm just a negative kind of guy, but it seems to me a few Speedway purists will wallow in the glory of a return to the old system, the crowds will drop in the GPs due to the rather uneventful nature of them, Sky will pull out, even less people will go, War will be declared, the World will end.

 

And a few guys will study their programmes, work out the finer details of the qualification, and barely notice the GP's return to Coventry and care even less about the carnage around them.

 

God help us all! Or maybe I'm over reacting!

 

I am totally with you on this Grachan. They are not everyone's cup of tea (especially the speedway purists) but BSI have taken our sport and made it far more appealling to the wider masses. In the current format - every race counts. in the old one, it wouldn't.

 

Just another point, but if we went in for 20 heats plus final with 4-3-2-1 points as well or some similar suggestion. Isn't there a danger that quite often two or more riders will emerge as joint top scorers from a GP? Or the winner of the final isn't necassarily the overall winner of that particular GP? :roll:

 

I don't think Joe Public would buy that. People want clear results, were we have a 1st -2nd - 3rd result. Not a winner of the final, but two other guys who have scored the most points .

[Grachan 7,362]

It was the current (speedway) gp format that initially got my notice (after a very long absence from speedway).

 

Me too. The sport was, how to say, dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age and I started to go to meetings after a (shortish but significant) break from the sport. I really think it works well, and while there may be a bit of a problem with gate positions, it can hardly be called an unfair system as it goes on form over a whole season.

[stevehone 3,430]

but there are people saying that Pedersen isn't the best rider in the world yet he won a GP series...

so maybe there is the 'Jerzy Szczakiel Syndrome' available still even in the current format.

 

 

my biggest problem with the current GP format is the gate positions.

when you ride a 2nd half race, there is a box with 4 coloured balls (sorry if that got Peter excited) that gets a shake and drop into the gate positions... primitive but fair.

[fatface 2,554]

In the current format - every race counts.

 

It doesn't!

 

Going into the last GP 4 rider could be World Champion and posisbly 1 or 2 had a chance of 10th. That means 6 riders were intrested in the meting so any race witout these 6 was pointless, surely? NO beacause riders wnat to win every race and that woudl be the same wit the current or the old/future format!

 

It does!

 

Winning a GP means a lot. To Greg Hancock every race certainly counted last week.

[stevehone 3,430]

every race counted to most of the riders.... especially N Pedersen as he could intentionally lose a race so he avoided the better riders later on :evil:

a big problem in this format is knowing who you will meet in your next race up front... Jason Crump just went out to win each race, where Pedersen knew he had to get in weaker races.

 

if the format is the 16 rider, 20 heats, there is no coming 4th rather than 3rd just to avoid so-and-so as your rides are programmed and you need to get as many points as possible to get to the respective finals.

[salty 2,202]

My previous posting on this thread was a load of tosh as I was not aware that the plans were for '05 onwards.

One thing that does worry me is the doing away with qualifying rounds. Although they are a pain in the neck, it does mean that riders earn their position in the series. With 7 seeded places out of 16 the series will become a bit of a closed shop. Particularly if they use the seedings to ensure a wide range of nationalities are included.

[ezekiel 0]

I was only talking about this with Tom Thumb a few weeks ago, and that the GP series should revert back to the old formula and cut it down to 16 riders. If u don't believe me u can always ask TT! 8)

 

Great idea in my opinion, it'll be better for the series, better for the riders competing (which rider wants to travel around Europe for just two heats of speedway?), and better for the domestic leagues.

[fatface 2,554]

Great idea in my opinion, it'll be better for the series, better for the riders competing (which rider wants to travel around Europe for just two heats of speedway?), and better for the domestic leagues.

 

Its a nice sentiment to be concerned for riders having to travel so far for two rides. But this is our big showcase event, and I think it has to be geared toward spectators. That means every race meaning something.

 

Some Formula one drivers crash at the start of GPs, Some 100m athletes are eliminated in the first round of the Olympics, Some Footballers go to the World Cup and don't get a game. That's sport. Its tough, but as a spectator I wouldn't want it any other way.

[ezekiel 0]

I take your point falcace, but with the field being reduced to 16 riders it'll mean that you get rid of, without sounding harsh, those that are just making up the numbers. If you keep the current formula then you have to watch several heats containing sub-standard GP riders until they are eliminated and you get to the main event. It would be better if you could just cut out the pre main event and keep the current formula, but would spectators be willing to watch a GP if there were only about 15 heats? I don't think that I would.

 

So in order to make the series more competitive thorughout the field I see no other alternative than to cut the series down to 16 riders and revert back to the 5 rides per rider system...

[fatface 2,554]

Or possibly a 16 rider formula in which the first few races see elimination heats which get rid of just one rider (4th), give two another chance (3rd and 2nd) and one goes through? That might be a way of keeping around 20 heats? Or is that too complex?

[Kevin Meynell 2]

Or possibly a 16 rider formula in which the first few races see elimination heats which get rid of just one rider (4th), give two another chance (3rd and 2nd) and one goes through?

 

The problem with the 24-rider format is not so much the knockout aspect, but too many crap riders and having to endure the Pre-Main Event. It's also an issue for staging GPs outside Europe due to the costs of transporting all the riders.

 

16 or even 20 riders would be better, but unfortunately it's not possible to devise a good knockout format with sufficient heats. I think a return to the 16-rider, 20-heat format is sensible, but perhaps the top eight should qualify for knockout semi-finals as now, with the highest scorers having first choice of gate positions.

 

The old format with A-B-C-D Finals was reasonable, but I always thought the C and D Finals were a bit of waste of time.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

I loved the old World Finals but how many meaningless races were in a one off final.

 

I would say that the whole Pre-Main Event is meaningless in the current format. Ultimately though, it doesn't matter what format you use if the event is well promoted, and the racing sufficiently exciting. The 'boring' 16-heat, 20-heat format still managed to attract 100,000 fans to past World Finals, which is three times the number of the best attended GP to date!

[fatface 2,554]

I loved the old World Finals but how many meaningless races were in a one off final.

 

I would say that the whole Pre-Main Event is meaningless in the current format. Ultimately though, it doesn't matter what format you use if the event is well promoted, and the racing sufficiently exciting. The 'boring' 16-heat, 20-heat format still managed to attract 100,000 fans to past World Finals, which is three times the number of the best attended GP to date!

 

Don't really agree. Riders from the Pre-Event Main can win the GP - I know Nicki Pedersen is one who has certainly done this. I also think the format does matter - GP organisers have to appeal to people outside the sport not just those within, that means an easy-to-follow system in which every race counts.

 

Also, I do think harping back to "Wembley-100,000-one-off" is nothing more than a pleasant trip down memory lane. Like it or not, those days are gone. We live in a multi-media world where people's choice of entertainment has increased ten-fold. We have to change, the world won't change for us.