Golden Joker! - Poll And Discussions…

[Star Fever 274]

When you think about it, theres not really a lot of difference between the new and old rules - they both help a losing team to catch up - BUT if a losing team actually manages to WIN using the NEW rules, then they will have deserved it, as it is a lot harder to do so from programmed rides IMO. Even the nominated GD has merit, as the rider has to come from a handicap, and rely on his team-mate to do the business as well.

 

After the initial outbursts by the "what a daft name for a TS" and " I can't add numbers bigger than 5" factions its now good to see a lot of people on here willing to give the GTs a chance after thinking it over.

 

Oh and RacerX, yes I was wide awake during the KOCup thank-you, and most enjoyable it was too, as I did indeed mention in my post. And yes, both NORMAL and GT type tacticals served Lynn well throughout the season (as surely they did for most teams), so....what was your point again?

[Racer X 0]

When you think about it, theres not really a lot of difference between the new and old rules - they both help a losing team to catch up - BUT if a losing team actually manages to WIN using the NEW rules, then they will have deserved it, as it is a lot harder to do so from programmed rides IMO. Even the nominated GD has merit, as the rider has to come from a handicap, and rely on his team-mate to do the business as well.

 

After the initial outbursts by the "what a daft name for a TS" and " I can't add numbers bigger than 5" factions its now good to see a lot of people on here willing to give the GTs a chance after thinking it over.

 

Oh and RacerX, yes I was wide awake during the KOCup thank-you, and most enjoyable it was too, as I did indeed mention in my post. And yes, both NORMAL and GT type tacticals served Lynn well throughout the season (as surely they did for most teams), so....what was your point again? 

I agree about the Golden Double Tac Sub - the extra points won there (inevitably from heat 2 or 14) will be justified, the rider would have had to work hard to get from last to first.

 

I realise there is opposition to GDTS as well - but I like these.

 

I do not like Golden Jokers because suddenly a rider gets double points for no extra effort.

It makes meetings artificially close especially on fair tracks and will hand a huge and unfair advantage to team with good top ends.

 

It is patently un fair for a team being well beaten to come back and even win a meeting courtesy of having three very good heat leaders.

This will happen next year if the rule goes ahead.

Teams will be able to come back from a big deficit as they have big heat leaders.

 

All round teams normally fearful of heat 13 could face losing the race 8-1 and then lose heat 15 5-1 and lose a meeting they led by ten points due to the performance of two good opposition riders.

 

If you think that this is fair Star Fever the fair enough, I don't think its fair and I feel the average fan will end up feeling cheated.

 

Seen the poll latey Star Fever - no amount of rolling eyes will ever make up for a bankrupt arguement.

Edited November 21, 2003 by Racer X

[BritPete 625]

BUT, skysports just love that old joker!!

[Ace_of_clubs 0]

I agree about the Golden Double Tac Sub - the extra points won there (inevitably from heat 8 or 14) will be justified, the rider would have had to work hard to get from last to first.

 

I realise there is opposition to GDTS as well - but I like these.

 

I do not like Golden Jokers because suddenly a rider gets double points for no extra effort.

I agree with you entirely RacerX.

Personally I don't like the Golden Tactical and would probably do away with that too, but at least I can see some logic behind it.

Fans get the added value of seeing a rider come in and have to work for the extra points and the entertainment of seeing him come from behind.

 

The golden joke has no added value, no extra entertainment. Its exactly the same race as programmed, just that some extra points are gifted to the losing side for no reason at all except to make the score artificially closer.

 

Make no mistake. There is no added value, no added entertainment, nothing for the paying fans at all, nothing for the armchair sky fans either.

 

IT IS PURELY AN ATTEMPT TO CUT COSTS. (and a flawed one at that - as the riders will just demand increased points money to compensate for the missing tac sub ride which they're not getting).

 

When Belle Vue visit an away track will the locals say "Oh goody we get to see Neil Collins take his full rides rather than watching Jason Crump once more. And its OK because BV were given 3 extra points for nothing when Crump had his last ride."

Will fans enjoy watching an extra ride from Ales Dryml instead of a Tony Rickardsson T/S when Poole come visiting?

Rather watch Jason Bunyan than Andreas Jonsson? Magnus Karlsson instead of Peter Karlsson?

[Grachan 7,362]

I am completely horrified that they are doing this, though not completetly surprised as I felt a pang of fear last year after reading in Speedway Star how 'delighted' they were with it's 'success'.

 

It's unbelievable. Did they not notice the groans that went through the crowds whenever it was used? I just can't see any reason why they think it is a good idea. For a while there I was quite tempted to pop over to Swindon a few times to have a look at the EL Robins, but my enthusiasm has rapidly taken a dive again. I really am pissed off about this. It's idiocy like this that dampened my enthusiasm for speedway in the first place and they've done it again.

 

Will someone point the fools in charge in the direction of this thread so they can see what people really think, or do they not care?

 

How can you explain this one to a first time supporter?

 

I think I saw two matches last year where this was used, and in one of them I had the wrong score for a couple of races having missed the announcement. These were two leg matches where the ONLY justification I could think of was that at least it evened out over two legs. Now we're talking about league points I can't even use that excuse on myself.

 

Has this been approved after consulting a few dumb team managers without the brain power to work out good tactical moves? Tactical substitutes were always a bit of an odd one, but at least it was fun looking through a programme and trying to pre-empt tactical moves and use a bit of tactical thinking. Now it's just 'ooops. 8 down, double the points'.

 

I hate this decision.

 

Oh God, somebody call me a doctor. (Posts of 'You're a doctor' will be summararily ignored). Aaaaaaargghhhh!!

[Guest chicken george]

So grahan do you think it's a good idea

[Grachan 7,362]

Yeah, pretty good decision in my book. Good on 'em I say. Gawd bless 'em.

[Racer X 0]

Yeah, pretty good decision in my book. Good on 'em I say. Gawd bless 'em.

Pleased to count you amonst the opponents of this rule Grachan, we may not (and certainly will not!) agree on everything but I respect your opinion and yours is one I would have looked for in voicing opposition to this.

 

I wonder whether the supporters of the golden mess up will take any notice of the NINE TO ONE opposition to the rule, or whether they will continue to claim that support is growing.

[Phil 303]

Racer X – You have made your point now let everyone else make theres in peace!

[lupus 1]

I've let the dust settle before offering my opinion so here goes....

 

I really think RacerX is a bit out of order with some of the things he has said to rabbit and others. I can't see anything in Rabbit and Lanzilla's post's that say they're in favour of the new rule - just that they'll wait until they've experienced it before passing judgement. I have to say, I agree with this - it's nothing to do with EL fans being superior or whatever - just that some people refuse to be 'sheep' and slag off something they have no experience of. I call it the 'Sun Reader Syndrome' - ie "I have to moan about something because the 'majority' tell me to!!!"

 

RacerX - I think you should get the doc to check that chip on your shoulder - you really will be getting a stiff neck with the size of it!!!!

 

I understand that PL fans HAVE experienced the rule and, in general, didn't really like it but they need to be having a go at their promoters in that case, not other fans. After all, it wasn't the 'EL fans' who were in Tenerife voting on these rules!!!!

[shazzybird 10]

god forbid..royals running round our centre greens!!

Hmmmmm well there are a few Queens out there

 

I'd have to vote no on this subject, I can't see how you can win a meeting from a Golden Joker, if the team had rode better to start with there would be no need for them to have to do this in the first place.

Edited November 21, 2003 by shazzybird

[Trevor 270]

Seeing as the BSPA are going down the 'It's a Knockout' route. Surely a better idea is this; when a team is eight points behind they can bring out onto the track obsticles for the winning team to ride around. You know buckets of crazy foam, custard pies etc. If the team falls futher behind they can bring out onto the track a man dressed up in an enomous suit, an Eagle or Pirate for example and try to knock the rider off with a foam mallet.

I need a lie down, it's getting to me!

[TonyM 0]

Well finally got to the end of the thread and at present the pros are way behind but perhaps there is a silent majority out there (perhaps not )

 

I am in favour of dropping tac subs and have no real problem with the golden doubles as the rider still needs to score points in a programmed ride which has to be better than placing a heat leader in a totally mismatched heat against a second string and a reserve

 

Agree with Star Fever (for once) that the rules helped to provide two exiting meetings between Lynn and Sheffield keeping both alive till the end

 

Just one point Phil (sorry havent worked out how to copy yet) - yes it would encourage the team mate to slow down but what the hell are the opposition riders doing letting this happen this may well provide for some great tactical racing rather than the pin your ears back stuff that so dominates modern speedway. Just the thought that it might encourage some riders to realise that speedway is a team sport and not a first past the post heat is enough for me to support it for at least a season or two

[rob 0]

What an appalling new rule.

 

We, as spectators, will be the ones who suffer. At Exeter for instance there are loads of teams with riders who are hopeless, and riders who are excellent. Now next year we'll have to put up with 4 rides from Mark Courtney, who doesn't even bother to ride, and won't be able to enjoy an extra appearance from Nigel Sadler, who is excellent. In one sided meetings we look forward to the opposition top riders being out on track, we don't really care how the opposition No. 7 is developing. That's not what we pay our money to see. I reckon this is a pathetic new rule, at least send them back 15 meters, but no, it'll be just the same, but they'll score double for doing nothing extra.

 

Bring back the tac subs, quickly.

[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.

 

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.

 

Even if a rider was replaced by a GDTS earlier in the meeting, he would still have to take an extra ride to make up his 4 rides (anyone still awake ? )

Edited November 21, 2003 by Sloop