Fast Track Riders

[manchesterpaul 447]

Fascinated by ManchesterPaul's stats. Have been thinking about this quite a lot so took his stats and then produced a table showing the averages combined for all the pairs of reserves and then compared that to the positions of each team in the League (as of Saturday morning's SCB table)

 

The figure in brackets shows the position of the team in the Elite League at time of writing!

1). Kings Lynn 14.33 (2)

2). Eastbourne 13.06 (4)

3). Coventry 12.02 (6)

4). Lakeside 11.94 (1)

5). Poole 11.35 (3)

6). Wolverhampton 10.95 (5)

7). Birmingham 9.10 (10)

8). Swindon 8.80 (9)

9). Belle Vue 8.71 (7)

10). Leicester 8.45 (8)

So, whilst the top 5 places are filled by teams in the top 6 for reserve averages, the bottom 4 in the Elite League are also the four teams with the lowest averaging reserves.

I know that there are "Statistics, Statistics and damned statistics" but it does seem clear that the way to success is via strong reserves.

 

One other area, and I apologise if this has been covered elsewhere, is the impact the development has upon those riding at 2 and 4. If they do badly then they'll probably get the chop anyway, but if they do well then their average will be grotesquely inflated and they'll be out of a job next year. Over the years there have been quite a few riders who have worked so hard in one year that they've become unemployable in the following - this year I suspect that quite a few more will fall into this trap.

Good observation and looks to be the case on the whole, although i dare say there is room for a promoter to pick a couple of ringers or dark horses as second strings. I had an idea Belle Vue weren't doing well as their duo are pretty much a one man band.

 

Don't you think that the BSPA will downgrade their averages appropriately, I do, it wouldn't be right not to!

Which will bring in the 'opinion' factor as to what percentage to downgrade etc and whilst normally everyone having their own opinion is a good thing it might not be in this case.

 

 

You really want the BSPA "re-assessing" riders averages at the end of the season. Lordy!

Wonder if they'll show it on Fight Night

[waiheke1 4,295]

Just increase the team building limit to a sensible figure!!

Even with a hefty team building limit, would anyone really sign say porsing or palm toft on a 6+ average?

[MattK 3,447]

Even with a hefty team building limit, would anyone really sign say porsing or palm toft on a 6+ average?

 

Not when you could sign a Larsen, Sundstrom or Madsen for similar.

[SCB 0]

Even with a hefty team building limit, would anyone really sign say porsing or palm toft on a 6+ average?

Not if Harris is on a 5!!

[manchesterpaul 447]

Waiting to see if this week's Speedway Star will be finally publishing team averages and if so whether the fast track riders details are included. If they don't have them it will be very displeasing and concerning. One of the best features in the Speedway Star is that you can see every team's rider averages in a single issue, every rider in the leagues.

 

 

If they follow the BSPA site's listings and exclude fast track riders from them it will be a farce. it would be strange if the races they are involved in were were to be treated as not having taken place for them, yet the other riders in the race who aren't fast track have the race included in their averages! Or would they be ignoring any race with a FT rider in, which i doubt. It's a bit of a mess the way it stands. The race either counts or it doesn't, it shouldn't count for some and not others in a race. It seems silly to make the data for FT riders not for public consumption! by publishing team averages with their averages excluded.

[g13webb 4,254]

 

Waiting to see if this week's Speedway Star will be finally publishing team averages and if so whether the fast track riders details are included. If they don't have them it will be very displeasing and concerning. One of the best features in the Speedway Star is that you can see every team's rider averages in a single issue, every rider in the leagues.

 

 

If they follow the BSPA site's listings and exclude fast track riders from them it will be a farce. it would be strange if the races they are involved in were were to be treated as not having taken place for them, yet the other riders in the race who aren't fast track have the race included in their averages! Or would they be ignoring any race with a FT rider in, which i doubt. It's a bit of a mess the way it stands. The race either counts or it doesn't, it shouldn't count for some and not others in a race. It seems silly to make the data for FT riders not for public consumption! by publishing team averages with their averages excluded.

 

 

Once the CMA was an exact indication of a riders ability. Now they are nothing more then figures at the end of the name that could mean a multitude of things. I appreciate your post, but asking for the sport to be run in an open manner is like asking for the world.

I fail to see any advantage that is gained secrecy or from running the sport in this way. This is one of the many reasons why speedway is looked at as a second division of sport. Why can't everything be done in the open, Lets get rid of the 'them and us' attitude its about time they realise we're in this boat together.

[greyhoundp 990]

It may be worth considering at the end of season averages to include Draft riders races against 2nd strings etc, but not to include Heats 2 & 9, then there average would give a slightly truer indication of there ability for team building purposes in 2015.

[g13webb 4,254]

I would give riders some kind of discount on their average, a bit like the British rider discount.

 

Riders at 2 and 4 would get -1.5% and riders at 6 and 7 would get -3%, or something along those lines.

 

Keep the limit for the top 5 and introduce a limit for the draft of say 8 with a new draft rider coming in on 2.

 

If a current draft rider is to be included in the top 5, his discounted average is used. If a team want to use a current draft rider at 6 or 7 then his actual average is used.

 

Someone a bit cleverer than me, like Cook or Van Stratten can come up with the actual numbers to give their own teams an advantage and hey presto.

 

Oh so complicated, Once the new heat format was introduced with protected riders, the averages were always going to end up like this.

[SCB 0]

I would give riders some kind of discount on their average, a bit like the British rider discount.

 

Riders at 2 and 4 would get -1.5% and riders at 6 and 7 would get -3%, or something along those lines.

 

Keep the limit for the top 5 and introduce a limit for the draft of say 8 with a new draft rider coming in on 2.

 

If a current draft rider is to be included in the top 5, his discounted average is used. If a team want to use a current draft rider at 6 or 7 then his actual average is used.

 

Someone a bit cleverer than me, like Cook or Van Stratten can come up with the actual numbers to give their own teams an advantage and hey presto.

It's too late now but every heat should have been given a weighting based on the opposition.

[SCB 0]

I suppose we could look at the averages and race statistics over a representative period of say 20 years, calculate the theoretical average of a rider in races against reserves, and then an average against second strings and then one against heatleaders. Apply a moving median to the first quartile to define the average increase coefficient. Go back to the 20 years stats and produce a theoretical set of results but this time either adding or subtracting the median average coefficient to test the results and if required repeat the process until a satisfactory outcome is achieved.

 

That could then be applied retrospectively to give a weighting to each heat by the higher derivative and produce a theoretical average to be used for team building purposes, within the constraints of the new points limit, which would need to be abstractly calculated taking account of the improper rational expression to produce an accurate figure.

 

I could be wrong but there may be some fans and maybe even some managers who may struggle to get to grips with the nuances and obvious loopholes which could be exploited and we would just end up with a load of moaning again.

You're clearly mad but I do agree You could take this to mad degrees. Where do you stop? I just think a simple 10% weighing for/against for the heatleader only heats and the non-heatleader races. Might not be enough (I don't think it would be, I think nearer 30% would be better)

[waiheke1 4,295]

interesting article in today's speedway star.

Manchester Paul will be pleased to see a list of the averages for each draft rider.

a couple of minor gripes for me:

- labelling this an "exclusive statisctical survey" is overhyping somewhat providing averages, by individual and team, for the draft riders

- saying that in 9 of the 11 away victories this season the resserves have had a "major impact on the result" is mis-leading. In only two of those victories would the result have been different if the reseves on each side had scored equal points (obviously the KL in this morning would be another one).

But still a good read

[speedibee 3,091]

interesting article in today's speedway star.

Manchester Paul will be pleased to see a list of the averages for each draft rider.

a couple of minor gripes for me:

- labelling this an "exclusive statisctical survey" is overhyping somewhat providing averages, by individual and team, for the draft riders

- saying that in 9 of the 11 away victories this season the resserves have had a "major impact on the result" is mis-leading. In only two of those victories would the result have been different if the reseves on each side had scored equal points (obviously the KL in this morning would be another one).

But still a good read

I think the draft is working for riders who had previous experience at a higher level , Newman , garrity , Starke .blackbird, kerr, . but those who were chucked in at the deep end it seems to have had the opposite effect ,

[stevebrum 6,821]

I think the draft is working for riders who had previous experience at a higher level , Newman , garrity , Starke .blackbird, kerr, . but those who were chucked in at the deep end it seems to have had the opposite effect ,

 

Only really Newman has had any `fair` EL experience. Cant recall any of the other ones you mention having had any real EL experience other than the odd guest appearance.

Several have already beaten true EL riders which shows that many are finding rewards in the experience.

If anything id say it was the opposite that a few of them have struggled or are out of their depth (compared to other draft riders)

[SCB 0]

I think the draft is working for riders who had previous experience at a higher level , Newman , garrity , Starke .blackbird, kerr, . but those who were chucked in at the deep end it seems to have had the opposite effect ,

James Sarjeant seems to be doing just fine. As does Lewis Rose. I'd say it's not the higher league experience that is helping but the fact the better riders are more likely to have higher league experience because they're better riders. It doesn't matter what format you have and what riders you have, there will always be strugglers.

[manchesterpaul 447]

interesting article in today's speedway star.

Manchester Paul will be pleased to see a list of the averages for each draft rider.

Hee Hee, great news although not if it's a one-off. Haven't got my Speedway Star yet as it always arrives one day late after a Bank Holiday so i was unaware.

- labelling this an "exclusive statisctical survey" is overhyping somewhat providing averages, by individual and team, for the draft riders

That's a little pathetic and very annoying if it means they aren't including them with all other riders on a weekly basis.

I had actually just come online to update all the fast track rider averages and didn't realize i had already beat the Speedway Star to an earth-shattering 'exclusive statistical survey' lol lol.

- saying that in 9 of the 11 away victories this season the resserves have had a "major impact on the result" is mis-leading. In only two of those victories would the result have been different if the reseves on each side had scored equal points (obviously the KL in this morning would be another one).

But still a good read

 

That's an impressive observation to have made and not a conclusion a lot of people would have come to.