Poole 2018

[poolebolton 464]

1 hour ago, Starman2006 said:

And do you know that for sure ? If you dont you really shouldnt make accusations like that mate.

It’s on there instagrams! They seemed to be having a good time. 

[B.V 72 1,054]

10 hours ago, poolebolton said:

Is Holder riding in Best Pairs tomorrow!!! 

 

I guess not!! He is out tonight with Jack getting smashed on a Bottle of JD! And a big bottle at that!!  

 

Also Visa 

When most top riders these days seem to be on strict diets and exercise plans to help them be the best they can be,if this is true perhaps its part of the reason why Chris is not the same rider he used to be.

Edited March 24, 2018 by B.V 72

[poolebolton 464]

Just now, B.V 72 said:

When most top riders these days seem to be on strict diets and exercise plans to help them be the best they can,if this is true perhaps its part of the reason why Chris is not the same rider he used to be.

It was Jacks birthday!!! 

[Agrotron 955]

Just now, B.V 72 said:

When most top riders these days seem to be on strict diets and exercise plans to help them be the best they can,if this is true perhaps its part of the reason why Chris is not the same rider he used to be.

I was about to say something on those lines and you took the words right out of my mouth.

[Agrotron 955]

Just now, poolebolton said:

It was Jacks birthday!!! 

 

Doesn't matter if it was Jacks Birthday does it season is on us.

[poole keith 911]

37 minutes ago, Pinny said:

You talk absolute f@cking nonsense. Did before your brain surgery and you definately do now.

 

what an embarrasement you are to your club

pinny not sure i agree with with your tone,but you are 100%correct starman is a total embarrassment  to poole speedway and its supporters.he is a volunteer(for which matt like all promoters appreciates) and performs several menial tasks on racenight but is in no way connected to the promotion and certainly not track prep(he would know as much about track prep as me, basically nothing)he made a mistake re "rideable/raceable" just needed to say oops sorry not proceed with ludicrous posts

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,706]

Starman didnt make a mistake as such

I understood what he meant

He missed the word 'just' in the post thats all

He said it was 'raceable not rideable' when he meant 'raceable not just rideable'

His point was the damage was all done by the late and heavier rain - until that it was raceable and not just rideable

[Gavan 5,050]

Im confused.

If a track is raceable then its rideable yes?

If a track is rideable doesnt mean its raceable

You cant state a track is raceable i.e meaning riders can race and overtake without it being rideable surely?

Belle Vue v Poole a few years ago in the rain when Poole forced the meeting to heat 10. Track was rideable but the riders couldnt race on it.

 

 

[Najjer 2,890]

4 minutes ago, Gavan said:

Im confused.

If a track is raceable then its rideable yes?

If a track is rideable doesnt mean its raceable

You cant state a track is raceable i.e meaning riders can race and overtake without it being rideable surely?

Belle Vue v Poole a few years ago in the rain when Poole forced the meeting to heat 10. Track was rideable but the riders couldnt race on it.

 

 

Nail. Hammer. Hit.

[stevebrum 6,821]

2 hours ago, Gordon Pairman said:

I used the phrase “in most instances” because BSPA Management Committee have the final say on averages for individual rider averages - think Andreas Jonsson when he returned to Lakeside on a lower average as his historic CMA was thought to be too high.

I am not aware where the suggestion that there was a “9 point rule” came from and have never seen anything in writing saying it had been agreed.

 

59 minutes ago, Steve Shovlar said:

Gordon. Thanks for clarifying there is and never was a 9 point rule. Sounds like a case of ‘if it’s repeated enough times on the forum it will become fact’.

A real shame about the rain coming along at the wrong time. All that time and effort wasted. Hope the 70th dinner tonight is a huge success.

 

So why we're Wolves and Belle Vue, and Poole presumably told that Zagar, Piotr and Woffy were reassessed to 9 when they were planning to be used on their old averages from 2014-2016?

Seemingly what was a rule suddenly no longer applies. Yes folks,  you really cannot make some of this stuff up.

[ray c 2,299]

18 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

Starman didnt make a mistake as such

I understood what he meant

He missed the word 'just' in the post thats all

He said it was 'raceable not rideable' when he meant 'raceable not just rideable'

His point was the damage was all done by the late and heavier rain - until that it was raceable and not just rideable

It never came across how he meant it to be i get it as well 

[MattK 3,447]

2 hours ago, Gordon Pairman said:

I used the phrase “in most instances” because BSPA Management Committee have the final say on averages for individual rider averages - think Andreas Jonsson when he returned to Lakeside on a lower average as his historic CMA was thought to be too high.

I am not aware where the suggestion that there was a “9 point rule” came from and have never seen anything in writing saying it had been agreed.

Matej Zagar claims he has been re-assessed to a 9:

http://www.speedwaygp.com/news/article/6430/zagars-british-blow

Are you suggesting he is wrong and could have been signed on his 2016 average of 7.48?

[Gordon Pairman 457]

 

14 minutes ago, stevebrum said:

 

So why we're Wolves and Belle Vue, and Poole presumably told that Zagar, Piotr and Woffy were reassessed to 9 when they were planning to be used on their old averages from 2014-2016?

Seemingly what was a rule suddenly no longer applies. Yes folks,  you really cannot make some of this stuff up.

I can’t tell you who was told what by whom. You need to ask each team’s promoters. I do know that one of the teams you mention was trying to sign one of the riders you mention and they believed that the rider would return on his historic average. The stumbling block would appear to have been financial rather than numerical. 

[ray c 2,299]

1 hour ago, Pinny said:

You talk absolute f@cking nonsense. Did before your brain surgery and you definately do now.

 

what an embarrasement you are to your club

If you are referring to starman you are out of order 

[ouch 1,191]

The fact there is no rule now makes sense. 

Zagar tweeted he wanted to return and shortly after, this 9 point rule surfaced. Zagar (and Belle Vue) was informed of his inflated average, thus ending his proposed route back to the UK.

Rival promoters started discussing the “rule” with fans to lend weight to its existence.  Both at the time and subsequently I’ve been at a loss why Woffinden and the Pole were mentioned as being ruled out due to this reassessment when neither were ever coming back. 

Like I said as the top it now makes sense. 

An elaborate ruse to stop us including Zagar but a ruse never the less. 

Leason learned for us to check the paperwork next time rather than take things at face value. 

What has this “sport” finally come too?