Vince

In the same way you deviated away from the original subject into a non-stop attempt to analyse figures that were irrelevant as the minority clue is in the title?

Suggest what you like, Trafic 1.9TD - up to date van of the kind used by many riders, cheaper to run than modest 1600cc Megane without a trailer - fact. Poor poppet? get over your arrogant self. Isle of Wight are not going to be saved by any possible miniscule reduction in rider costs, possibly by a large cash injection and finding ways to increase crowds. Spent a great many Tuesdays and Thursdays there and the difference between the school holidays and the rest of the year is incredible. Don't really know what the answer is as it only takes a few rain offs during those important weeks and the season must be trashed. Be a great shame to lose yet another big track from the sport.

My young family were driven everywhere in a van, the kids wanted to race bikes as I did, the missus didn't drive so we used a van as everyday transport for years. The wife now has a car, I still want to race bikes so use a Transit for pretty much everything. When my youngest was riding Speedway I had a Trafic van that was actually cheaper to run than the wife's Megane, hence I can't help but be offended on their behalf when it is suggested that riders could save money by using a car rather than a 'fancy transporter'.

No more expensive to run a van than a big car these days and as most use them as everyday transport you wouldn't save a penny. I am sure most riders would be very happy to run one bike now but the teams and more importantly the fans wouldn't accept it. Fans expectations of professionalism are probably the biggest reason for the cost increases over the years. Once upon a time they would accept that Fred had to work for a living and may not have the finances or time to turn up with immaculate equipment. No such acceptance these days, just look at the posts on here if a rider has a spell of breakdowns or turns up with dirty kit. It's not even acceptable in the NL where everybody has to work (if not the riders then the parents do). It used to be notable for a rider to turn up for every meeting with really immaculate kit (somebody like Jimmy Squibb was well known for it) now it is the norm.

I'll bet that's what those who follow diving, squash, mountain biking etc said about Tai. Whether we like it or not Speedway is a minority sport these days and riders haven't been household names for several generations. Having a World Champion is great and has generated some good press coverage but it won't change much for the sport. So overall I would say better a big fish in the small pond than a little one in the small pond which are the realistic alternatives!

Point out where I said everything is alright and you would have a logical argument! You can moan all you like but the hands the sport is in at the moment are pretty much the only people who are interested in putting their money into the sport. Unless you are in the position to invest in Peterborough or Sheffield and change the way the sport is run from the inside then moaning on a forum and not having any effect is as good as it's going to get.

If these people weren't supposedly running the sport into the ground it would already be dead. You might not like the way they do it but if they didn't put up the money to buy and run the clubs it would all be long gone!

Most businesses reinvest part of their income for the future in one way or another. Quite likely the best investment for the future of British Speedway is to increase the amount of local riders and therefore reduce future costs. It seems logical to me for clubs to cut costs to a level where this can be achieved rather than continue to run at a loss until everybody gets to the point they can no longer survive. However it is easy to see the temptations for Promoters to spend money on top riders, the expectations of their customers mainly.

Just like British Superbikes where the top 6 go into the 'showdown'

I don't think you can count having an accident as failing Marcus. What you do for these kids is a huge undertaking and greatly appreciated, one year of unavoidable cancellation has to be taken in the context of the years you have and will run.

I can't imagine that anybody would listen and take advice from somebody who called them an idiot. That sort of language is common on this forum and therefore breeds resentment rather than respect despite the fact that the majority are able to offer an opinion in a proper way.

Put me down as one against any tactical changes. I would be happy to see every race run to the programme and if a rider is withdrawn from a meeting injured his remaining rides taken by R/R rather than only a reserve. To stop cheating any rider withdrawn injured has to also miss the clubs next meeting. To me Speedway should be all about 4 lunatics racing not a management game.

Being old I can remember the helmet law coming in, what I can't remember are examples of riders being badly hurt because they were wearing them rather than the previously accepted safety equipment. That argument could only hold water if there were previously no fences in place. The arguments against introducing helmets were all based on individual freedom, there was never any dispute about them being safer. However riders like Chris Holder and Luke Priest are there as examples that all is not right with the air fence and both would very likely have received far less serious injuries with a solid or mesh fence. To my mind there is absolutely no doubt that in the majority of cases an air fence provides increased safety for riders, however there are also circumstances where other fences are likely to be at least as safe and quite likely better. Air fences at their best are brilliant, poorly installed they can be bloody dangerous.

Depends whether the air fence stays there or decides to jump out of the way and reveal some sharp objects pointing in my direction!

You called somebody else cynical then make a crass comment like that. There might be riders like that but there are also many more who will take huge risks to gain an extra point for their team and not even think of the money. If they only raced for the money they would never take the risk of hurting themselves or writing a bike off at a cost of dozens or even hundreds of points.

Apparently he has already offered to do it for free but nobody took him up on it. Perhaps if he worked on his own customer relations skills instead of telling them how stupid they were for not doing things his way they would be a little more keen. I think he has some decent ideas but some unrealistic expectations of the results. As for his saying that anybody is getting personal he really needs to go back through this topic and see how many times he has called people fools and stupid. Perhaps this IT expert could work for a percentage of the gate increase compared to last year, if Synalikes got it right they would be on a decent screw.

The main protection is offered by under-suits with armour anyway, I only know 2 people who make Kevlar suits and have to say that the idea they are uninterested in rider safety is nonsense in both cases. I personally believe that leather offers better protection but then I generally wouldn't be riding more than once a week, for Speedway riders the option of being able to chuck a set of kevlars in the washing machine several times a week while you work on the bike must seem unbeatable.

I find it difficult to imagine that somebody completely new to the sport gives a toss about guests, R/R, riders racing elsewhere. After all unless somebody tells them they wouldn't realise a lot of this for a while, explain that guests and R/R are a necessary evil because of the extreme danger of the sport and it would probably become an attraction! The only real exception being the joker in the SWC which is so blatant and even has a silly name to make the sport look bad. In my experience newcomers either love or hate Speedway within a couple of heats and it's little to do with anything other than their personal opinion of seeing four blokes flat out. In the long term all those other things may start to grate but not for newcomers in my opinion.

So despite the sport in this country not being good enough for you to watch you are still able to guarantee to market it more effectively than anybody in the past 60 years? Perhaps some are sceptical because they have dealt with marketing and business consultants over many years and have yet to find anybody capable who would make such a guarantee. However I should imagine that with your marketing ability there must be enough money in your kitty to allow you to invest in Sheffield and/or Peterborough and demonstrate how you can turn the sport around with your own business at risk. You make a lot of good points but they will always be overlooked because of your 'know all, everybody else is stupid' attitude. If you really want Promoters to use your services recognising their abilities rather than insisting that their knowledge and experience counts for nothing compared to your superior intellect would be a start. Telling everybody about what you have actually already achieved with your marketing strategies should be the clincher.

To be fair a lot of us thought we knew it all when we were young!

I already know enough see that this is potentially the most positive thing to happen to the sport in decades, only potentially because unfortunately I don't have access to your crystal ball. I am also obviously out of my mind because I believe that if the format is changed so that we aren't seeing reserves out against heat leaders that means we will see more heat leader vs heat leader races. Clearly I don't have the in depth knowledge of the sport that you do but I would expect that to result in closer, better racing more often. To me it doesn't matter if riders are half a second or a second a lap slower than the top guys, if they are of similar ability and can race each other I would prefer to watch them. The very best riders are fantastic to watch in full flight but I mainly watch Speedway for the racing and some of the best races I have seen have been at NL level.

Each to their own but I would much prefer to see 4 riders line up with every one of them having a realistic chance of scoring decent points.

Considering that we don't actually know exactly what has been agreed to at this years AGM yet that is a stroke of pure genius on your part!

With a team strength of 38 points they won't come up against too many top riders at second string.