Speedway Star Article : 'lindback Adds Up'

[g13webb 4,254]

PRESUMABLY they are asked because they have a format that covers all the bases. And even if they had a pretty good idea who the team was it doesn't that they chang.

 

What we do need is absolute transparency for every such decision. How it was arrived at and who sanctioned their findings.

 

For our sport to have a chance of survival, your second comment is absolutely essential

[Crazy robin 2,966]

 

For our sport to have a chance of survival, your second comment is absolutely essential

It will never happen as even The Speedway Star don't ask the right questions & let the answers be fudged & accept it.

 

Never mind though as crowds are up in Britain & the sport is thriving with so many young fans coming to watch the sport!!

[Steve Shovlar 10,439]

.

Edited September 24, 2016 by Steve Shovlar

[stevebrum 6,829]

I have no problem with Woffy on his average but Lindback on a 7 is my issue - so Jason to be re-assessed down to level the playing field.

7 was and is pathetic. And the logic that Vaculik and Dudek as well would be also 7 is just ridiculous.

No idea how they come up with such crazy logic.

 

How they can judge these riders (by average) are worse than King, Fricke, Lambert, Masters and Thorssell? ???

 

There is no sensible logic. Not one that has an meaning anyway.

[tellboy 3,670]

I have no problem with Woffy on his average but Lindback on a 7 is my issue - so Jason to be re-assessed down to level the playing field.

Don't forget Niels

[BurntFaceMan 413]

7 was and is pathetic. And the logic that Vaculik and Dudek as well would be also 7 is just ridiculous.

No idea how they come up with such crazy logic.

 

How they can judge these riders (by average) are worse than King, Fricke, Lambert, Masters and Thorssell? ???

 

There is no sensible logic. Not one that has an meaning anyway.

 

There are 10 GP riders in our league at the moment (that's not including Lindback), and only 4 of them have an 8pt average or higher. That means only 40% of GP riders in our league at the moment actually attain an 8 pt average.

 

So how is 8pts a fair assessment? And how would a rule like that encourage any team to sign a GP rider when there is a 60% chance he won't achieve his average?

 

The fact of the matter is 7 pts is a far more appropriate assessment than 8 pts. I think the reason people are upset is because this logic seems to have been applied to Poole and nobody else, not that 7 pts is an unreasonable assessed average, because sensible logic says 7 pts is far more reasonable than 8 pts.

Edited September 24, 2016 by BurntFaceMan

[Aces51 2,778]

 

There are 10 GP riders in our league at the moment (that's not including Lindback), and only 4 of them have an 8pt average or higher. That means only 40% of GP riders in our league at the moment actually attain an 8 pt average.

 

So how is 8pts a fair assessment? And how would a rule like that encourage any team to sign a GP rider when there is a 60% chance he won't achieve his average?

 

The fact of the matter is 7 pts is a far more appropriate assessment than 8 pts.

 

There are 8 GP riders in the EL not counting Lindback. Their combined averages total 64.17 which works out at an average of 8.02 per GP rider.

[stevebrum 6,829]

There are 10 GP riders in our league at the moment (that's not including Lindback), and only 4 of them have an 8pt average or higher. That means only 40% of GP riders in our league at the moment actually attain an 8 pt average.

 

So how is 8pts a fair assessment? And how would a rule like that encourage any team to sign a GP rider when there is a 60% chance he won't achieve his average?

 

The fact of the matter is 7 pts is a far more appropriate assessment than 8 pts.

Well 7 isn't fair either. Given that the 5 riders I mentioned are nowhere near that standard.

The average makes no difference to the riders. They aren't keen on coming (unless it's short term) under the current regulations otherwise more of them would be here.

The rule WAS 8 for GP standard riders and there was nothing wrong in that.

Our race format can be testing for the big boys, however Niels, AJ and Doyle don't have trouble reaching that 8 point standard.

[BurntFaceMan 413]

 

There are 8 GP riders in the EL not counting Lindback. Their combined averages total 64.17 which works out at an average of 8.02 per GP rider.

 

My mistake, there are 8.

 

However, there are still only 4 GP riders on an 8pt + average, which means there is a 50% chance that a GP rider will not achieve the 8pt average he has been bought in on, besides actually exceed that average. For a team to win the league they need their riders to exceed their averages. When there is only a 50% chance that a GP rider will even attain that average, there is no incentive to bring the rider into the league.

Based on this years league, each team needs to win at least 46% of their meetings to make it into the play offs. On the assumption that 46pts are required to win a meeting (although obviously this can be higher with tactical rides), you'd need your riders to each increase their average by 0.86pts for 46% of the meetings, just to make the play offs. Let's say this averages out to be 0.4pts per rider, per season.

 

This means that if you were to bring a GP rider into the league, they'd need to achieve an average of approximately 8.4pts to be worth bringing into the league. Currently, only 37.5% of GP riders in the league are actually achieving this average. That means that any promoter who wants to bring a GP rider into the league, on an assessed 8pt average, has a 62.5% chance that their rider will fail to deliver the goods required to warrant that average.

 

Doesn't that logic make sense?

If you were a promoter, would you risk bringing one of the top 15 riders in the world into our league, when there is a 62.5% chance that they will not score enough to warrant their average?

[Aces51 2,778]

 

My mistake, there are 8.

 

However, there are still only 4 GP riders on an 8pt + average, which means there is a 50% chance that a GP rider will not achieve the 8pt average he has been bought in on, besides actually exceed that average. For a team to win the league they need their riders to exceed their averages. When there is only a 50% chance that a GP rider will even attain that average, there is no incentive to bring the rider into the league.

 

What has there being an incentive to bring in a GP rider got to do with it. If you want to replace a rider it has to be on a like for like basis. Taking the example of Andersen it had to be someone on 7.15 or less otherwise, it is against the rules and would be unfair on every other team. GP riders have previously been assessed at 8 and lo and behold the current averages for GP riders currently in the EL is almost exactly that figure. If they want to create an incentive to encourage GP riders then the rules have to be changed prior to the beginning of the season so that every team has the opportunity to take advantage of it, not virtually at the end of a season when only one team can bring in a rider on a falsely low assessed average.

[heathen chemistry 660]

exactly brummie kev thats why fans are so peed off with the bspa and are lea in in droves . one rule for oneclub and a new different one for another club . it stinks of corruption , back handers , or just plain fear

[Gemini 4,894]

.

I bet that post was interesting. Not like you to think twice about something and then delete the comments. You've got me wondering now.

[Aces51 2,778]

I bet that post was interesting. Not like you to think twice about something and then delete the comments. You've got me wondering now.

He's trying to join the silent majority.

[BurntFaceMan 413]

 

What has there being an incentive to bring in a GP rider got to do with it. If you want to replace a rider it has to be on a like for like basis. Taking the example of Andersen it had to be someone on 7.15 or less otherwise, it is against the rules and would be unfair on every other team. GP riders have previously been assessed at 8 and lo and behold the current averages for GP riders currently in the EL is almost exactly that figure. If they want to create an incentive to encourage GP riders then the rules have to be changed prior to the beginning of the season so that every team has the opportunity to take advantage of it, not virtually at the end of a season when only one team can bring in a rider on a falsely low assessed average.

 

Because the rules should be there to strengthen the sport, not to bottleneck it. There needs to be plenty of incentive for world class riders to race in our "so called" Elite League.

 

GP riders HAD previously been assessed at 8pts, but that rule was made when our league was stronger, when our reserves weren't in protected races and when heatleaders have an extra 0.5pts on their average to what they do now.

 

The problem isn't the 7pt assessment, the 7pt assessment is the most sensible option for our league and the level of the riders competing in it. The problem is that this has all happened behind closed doors, that no such reasoning has been passed on to the fans and one club appears to be benefiting whereas others are not. It's not the 7pt average, its the complete lack of transparency within our league that leaves regular fans like you and I feeling disparaged and unable to have any faith in the leaders of our sport.

[HenryW 1,178]

My mistake, there are 8.

 

However, there are still only 4 GP riders on an 8pt + average, which means there is a 50% chance that a GP rider will not achieve the 8pt average he has been bought in on, besides actually exceed that average. For a team to win the league they need their riders to exceed their averages. When there is only a 50% chance that a GP rider will even attain that average, there is no incentive to bring the rider into the league.

So...what you are saying is that there were 8 riders racing in the GP and 50% of them had an average in excess of 8 points.

 

Going for really basic arithmetic, that suggests that anyone in the top half of the GP standings should have an average in excess of 8.

 

Antonio Lindback is in the top half of the GP series.

 

Interesting.

 

Based on this years league, each team needs to win at least 46% of their meetings to make it into the play offs. On the assumption that 46pts are required to win a meeting (although obviously this can be higher with tactical rides), you'd need your riders to each increase their average by 0.86pts for 46% of the meetings, just to make the play offs. Let's say this averages out to be 0.4pts per rider, per season.

What now? This makes no sense at all...Do you not know how averages are calculated or do you just not understand basic arithmetic at all?

 

This means that if you were to bring a GP rider into the league, they'd need to achieve an average of approximately 8.4pts to be worth bringing into the league. Currently, only 37.5% of GP riders in the league are actually achieving this average. That means that any promoter who wants to bring a GP rider into the league, on an assessed 8pt average, has a 62.5% chance that their rider will fail to deliver the goods required to warrant that average.

 

Doesn't that logic make sense?

As suggested above...NO.

 

If you were a promoter, would you risk bringing one of the top 15 riders in the world into our league, when there is a 62.5% chance that they will not score enough to warrant their average?

Ignoring everything I said before, let's remember that we are not talking about a rider being brought in for the season, we are talking about an injury replacement being brought in only for the play off matches, so not exactly the same thing as building your entire season around this rider.

 

Looking at it that way, does it make any sense that a rider who isn't even good enough to be in the GP series can be replaced by someone who is in the top half of the GP standings based on the idea that the rider he is replacing is better than him??

 

Or, to put it another way...Do you think that Hans Andersen is a better rider than Antonio Lindback?

Edited September 25, 2016 by HenryW