Golden Joker! - Poll And Discussions…

[crazysue 613]

I'm awake....but very,very confused

[Sloop 0]

I'm awake....but very,very confused

Me too

[lupus 1]

Well, I voted "no" fairly early but I don't think I appreciate being labelled a sheep, or even worse, a Sun reader, because of this 

 

I've now read all the opinions posted here and can see why some may be in favour of the GJs, although I'm still in the "no" corner.

My comment wasn't particulaly aimed at those with good arguements against the new rule but there have been an awful lot of 'this is crap' comments with no substance.

 

I was also annoyed at RacerX's holier than thou attitude...his comments were completely unwarrented and stepped over the mark!!!

 

You and others may well be right about the new rule Sloop...(I just get annoyed when people jump on a bandwagon just so they can have a moan or slag someone off)... As rabbit said, I'll be one of the first to say it if you're proved right but until now the EL fans haven't experienced the new rule so are probably more willing to try it out next season.

 

I DO however, think Nigel Pearson's 'positive' slant is laughable - who the hell does he think he's kidding?!!! Mind you, this is the guy who writes a whole match report for the local paper by just using the scorers from the BSPA site because he's been doing the commentary on SKY from another match 200 miles away!!! You couldn't make it up........

Edited November 21, 2003 by lupus

[SCB 0]

One thing does puzle me though. It has been said that all riders must now take 4 rides. Since they are all programmed to take 4 rides, if one misses out because of the GDTS, say in heat 14, does that rider then have to go in heat 15 ? Of course, he may not be eligible to go in heat 15. So the GDTS would, more often than not, be of no use in heat 14.

I promised myself I would not comment on the rules any more but here goes!

 

What has been said is that by using GD (not GDTS) that all rider woudl have 4 (or 5) rides but obviously there will be instances where rider have 3 (and obviously 6) rides but these should not be veyr often as manager don't like paying for the GDTS.

[Custom House Kid 45]

until now the EL fans haven't experienced the new rule so are probably more willing to try it out next season.

Perhaps the PL fans may see some of the pitfalls then!

 

As I posted previously, as a born again supporter the rules today do not encourage a new supporter as they are too confusing !

 

Also this is my first season watching speedway since 1971 and I have chosen to go to my local track ! I do not for the life of me get this us and them thing between leagues ! good speedway is good wherever you ride!

 

Lets look at this as our sport not our league!

[Sloop 0]

Well, I voted "no" fairly early but I don't think I appreciate being labelled a sheep, or even worse, a Sun reader, because of this 

 

I've now read all the opinions posted here and can see why some may be in favour of the GJs, although I'm still in the "no" corner.

My comment wasn't particulaly aimed at those with good arguements against the new rule but there have been an awful lot of 'this is crap' comments with no substance.

 

Yes, I know, Lupus. Hence the wee smiley thing

 

I do agree with you. Some of us, maybe myself included, are a bit too resistant to change and too ready to criticise without thinking things through.

 

 

And thanks SCB. I now understand that it is still possible for a rider to have only 3 rides if replaced by a GDTS.

[Merlin 0]

There are some issues with the new rules that are worthy of perhaps a little more consideration.

 

Firstly - scrapping tactical substitutes: introduced in an attempt to keep the scores close because that is seen to be the essence of an exciting meeting (not always the case). I have seen matches during which the use of two or three TS rides has resulted in a side coming back from the dead to win a match where, without them, they had very little chance. Exciting? maybe; Fair? certainly not! Advantageous to teams with a strong top end? certainly. Acceptable? yes but more by familiarity than a sense of fair play. Necessary? not really with aggregate bonus points at stake.

 

Secondly - double-pointing: fairer than tactical subs because only two can be used during the meeting and no longer allows teams to replace second strings and reserves. This means that the scoring of the second strings and reserves is more important than before thus surely encouraging teams to build more solidly than in the past. To some extent compensates for the scrapping of tactical substitutes.

 

Thirdly - golden double tactical substitute: a piece of utter nonsense. There were a number of occasions last year where its complete unfairness was exposed. For example in the Isle of Wight v. Arena Essex match at the end of last season Isle of Wight had a faller in heat 14 and an engine failure in the rerun gifting an 8-0 to Arena Essex who then took the final heat 5-1 to win a match they scarcely deserved to. The earlier efforts of the lower order in the Isle of Wight team to build up a good lead counted for nothing. In the Arena Essex v. Edinburgh match, Edinburgh had built up an 8 point lead after heat 13 only to lose Heat 14 8-1. They won the match but it would only have taken an engine failure in the final heat for them to have lost. How unfair would that have been given the efforts of the whole team to build up the lead in the first place? Had Arena Essex won the match there would have been no honour in victory - or does nobody bother about that these days? (the fact that Arena Essex were involved in both these matches is purely coincidental).

 

Scrap the tactical substitutes by all means and replace them with double-pointing (although it smacks of 'It's a Knockout') and let's see how it works out. But, please, don't add the golden double into the mix. The two combined makes the sport look utterly ridiculous.

Edited November 22, 2003 by Merlin

[Custom House Kid 45]

There are some issues with the new rules that are worthy of perhaps a little more consideration.

 

Firstly - scrapping tactical substitutes: introduced in an attempt to keep the scores close because that is seen to be the essence of an exciting meeting (not always the case).  I have seen matches during which the use of two or three TS rides has resulted in a side coming back from the dead to win a match where, without them, they had very little chance.  Exciting? maybe; Fair? certainly not! Advantageous to teams with a strong top end? certainly.  Acceptable? yes but more by familiarity than a sense of fair play.  Necessary? not really with aggregate bonus points at stake.

 

Secondly - double-pointing: fairer than tactical subs because only two can be used during the meeting and no longer allows teams to replace second strings and reserves.  This means that the scoring of the second strings and reserves is more important than before thus surely encouraging teams to build more solidly than in the past.  To some extent compensates for the scrapping of tactical substitutes.

 

Thirdly - golden double tactical substitute: a  piece of utter nonsense. There were a number of occasions last year where its complete unfairness was exposed.  For example in the Isle of Wight v. Arena Essex match at the end of last season Isle of Wight had a faller in heat 14 and an engine failure in the rerun gifting an 8-1 to Arena Essex who then took the final heat 5-1 to win a match they scarcely deserved to.  The earlier efforts of the lower order in the Isle of Wight team to build up a good lead counted for nothing.  In the Arena Essex v. Edinburgh match, Edinburgh had built up an 8 point lead after heat 13 only to lose Heat 14 8-1.  They won the match but it would only have taken an engine failure in the final heat for them to have lost.  How unfair would that have been given the efforts of the whole team to build up the lead in the first place?  Had Arena Essex won the match there would have been no honour in victory - or does nobody bother about that these days? (the fact that Arena Essex were involved in both these matches is purely coincidental).

 

Scrap the tactical substitutes by all means and replace them with double-pointing (although it smacks of 'It's a Knockout') and let's see how it works out.  But, please, don't add the golden double into the mix.  The two combined makes the sport look utterly ridiculous.

It was a 8:0 at IOW by the way!

 

and yes i dont think its fair

[Merlin 0]

It was a 8:0 at IOW by the way!

Thanks - you're quite correct. I've edited the post.

[Custom House Kid 45]

In the Arena Essex v. Edinburgh match, Edinburgh had built up an 8 point lead after heat 13 only to lose Heat 14 8-1.  They won the match but it would only have taken an engine failure in the final heat for them to have lost.  How unfair would that have been given the efforts of the whole team to build up the lead in the first place?  Had Arena Essex won the match there would have been no honour in victory - or does nobody bother about that these days? (the fact that Arena Essex were involved in both these matches is purely coincidental).

I stood with ML and Pammie that night, and I must say it made it quite exciting!

We all predicted to move about 2 races earlier which added to the excitement

and kept Pammie quite

[21st century heathen 220]

OK it must be my turn by now.

 

I'll leave out the expletives to save our mods the hassle of editing.

 

WHAT THE **** WERE THEY SMOKING/DRINKING/SNIFFING WHEN THEY CAME UP WITH THIS ****!!!!!!!!!!

 

THERE'S REASON THEY TELL YOU TO STAY OUT OF THE MIDDAY SUN!!!!!!!!!

 

Right I feel able to type freely now. If you hadn't guessed I'm not 100% behind this one I totally respect the opinion of those that say give it a chance but...we are talking about a rule that just gives away points for absolutely no reason whatsoever. I do believe tha t/s it's former incarnation was generally just accepted because that's just the way it was. It was a little unfair on the lesser riders, particularly in heats 8 and 14. So why not introduce rule that says t/s can only be used in a race that's original line up includes at least one opposition heat leader. That way you wouldn't have Leigh against Jason B, and Robo (for eg) However if he fancied his chances he could come in against Billy in heat 10 (for eg) It still give the chasing team a chance to catch up without making it too easy.

 

I like the GDTS because there is at least some extra worl involved that deserves the extra points. As we all know Greg/Billy are the only riders who should ever atempt it . Greg is a great team rider who can hold things up, and Billy in full flight will chase down anyone. If a pair can actually manage to get the rider from the back to the front, and the other rider still hangs on to second place...worth the extra points for me.

 

Oh yeah, just in case I didn't make it clear...

 

JOKER=PANTS

 

[DW 11]

Having thought about it for a few days,I still don't like it!!! The promoters wanted to save money so this is their way of doing it.Why pay your top man extra money to replace a reserve when all you do is double his points in one heat at no extra cost!!

Their official reason seems to be that they would have to change the race format,something that hasn't bothered them before. What was wrong with just increasing T/S after being 8 points down(I know they tried this before and was equally unpopular but...)? It will be interesting to see why they voted for it.

[Lioness 1,455]

Confirmation of the Committees contempt and lack of respect for the paying fan.

 

All last season everywhere you looked, speedway star, internet, club programmes etc there was an avalanche of opinion AGAINST this ludicrous idea.

 

Naturally they listen to the paying public and think 'sod 'em, lets really p... them off' Well can anyone else think of a reason they have been so bull headed?

 

Either that or they live in planet cuckoo.....or wait a mo perhaps they really represent other sports and want to sicken us off with speedway so much we jump ship?

 

Why not just be done with it and draw straws every week to see who wins?

 

[Peter 0]

Bringing the Golden Joker into league racing will probably mean most clubs will produce a slick track, which often leads to boring racing. It can be difficult enough at Poole to come from the behind when you start from the tapes, let alone 15 metres back. Too often, team managers will think 'it's too slick to do a Golden Joker', and as a result, the team losing won't claw back the defecit.

[Grachan 7,362]

Peter,

 

The Golden Joker (I'm cringeing even writing the name of the damn thing) doesn't start from 15 yards back but from the tapes. To get his double points takes no extra effort whatsoever.