Vince

I've seen quite a lot of the bikes this year and do believe they could produce some good racing. As a cheaper way to get youngsters into the sport it just has to be worth a go as what has been happening the past 20 years hasn't got them flooding in.

I think it is a good to question the safety of air fences. Obviously we have all seen some spectacular incidents over the past few years where you immediately think that the air fence has saved a rider from serious injury. However while that may often be the case it is also often the case that you see riders walk away from spectacular crashes involving wooden fences, it is wrong to just assume that every rider who goes into the air fence hard would have been seriously injured had it been another type of fence. There is still a major issue with riders going underneath the fences and this has been a known problem for a number of years and has caused some horrible injuries. My opinion would be that air fences are a very good thing when properly installed and with something solid behind them. However that clearly isn't always the case and there are improvements that really need to be made before it can be automatically considered to be the best option. Again only my opinion that there are other fences, Rye House being my favourite, that are as good if not better than many air fences. Opinions, including mine, are all very well but like the original poster I believe that there needs to be facts to back it up. Just assuming that air fences are the best option because running into a bouncy castle is better than running into a wall is not really common sense at all.

Depends how it's used I think. You do read that somebody won't pay to watch a load of 'wobblers' when they are talking about NL racing. Clearly they haven't watched NL. However when referring affectionately to real novice racers it seems fair enough.

That could be the case if there was absolutely no dispute about the safety measure involved, however given some of the injuries to riders that have gone underneath fences there are still issues to be resolved about where they are definitley the best option.

I can understand why you would say that but clearly all safety is a compromise. If we are really going to put safety at the top of Speedway's agenda then we will see riders on mopeds, with brakes, sweep the dirt off the track and put rubber matting down. Clearly that's nonsense but Speedway is a very dangerous sport and there are huge compromises made with rider safety as there are with any dangerous sport. There seems no doubt that air fences help riders when the crash, however has anybody looked into the 'comfort factor' where riders feel safer so take more chances with an air fence? We keep reading that more riders have been injured this season than ever before (I'm not at all sure that's true) and there are more air fences than ever before so how does that stack up? There are still major issues with the installation of air fences and what is behind them if riders go underneath to be resolved. I have Rye House and Kings Lynn left to race at this season, if I go hard into the fence I would much rather it be the wooden one at Rye than the air fence at Lynn, no criticism of Kings Lynn where they have made it as safe as possible but my opinion is that Rye is about the best fence I know. As ever with these things it isn't straight forward and if clubs are faced with closure because of an air fence can the sport just allow that to happen?

Thanks for the explanation, cleared some things up for me. For sure Speedway looks like (and mainly is) a blue collar sport and I can't see that changing. Presumably C2DE people outnumber ABC1 by quite a margin so is that necessarily a bad thing? Clearly I am no expert but as ever when I read about demographics and advertising I can't help but think that media and advertising types use the 'bulls**t baffles brains' approach to make themselves good money out of common sense

Rye practice cancelled Sunday 25th August due to Bank holiday meetings.

Genuine questions because I know jack about advertising. Do Mercedes pay more for the same time slot than DHS? Which sports attract that apparently preferable demographic? You say Football but I don't believe for one minute that percentage wise their demographic is hugely different to Speedway though clearly numbers of each group would be far higher. I am guessing Tennis, Rugby, equestrian sports but then am struggling. Something like F1 would undoubtedly be on the list live but I suspect armchair viewers are little different to Speedway. Darts and Snooker must be the most obvious case of having the less desirable demographic yet both take up incredible amounts of prime time TV how does that fit in? I am with Grand Central as well in that I am not entirely convinced you are right about the current demographic for Speedway.

I used to work for Jimmy Squibb and he told me that when the Jawa came in it was cheaper to run than a JAP because it only needed servicing every 6 meetings. If I remember correctly he used well known 'tuner' of the time, Mike Erskine although he would sometimes take the head off and lap the valves in himself. I can believe that about Phil Crump, presumably his engine would have been built by Neil Street in those days. Neil was an exceptional engineer and if anybody could put an engine together to last a season it would have been him. The most reliable engine that I have heard tale of was the 897 Jawa which was a 4 valve upright. Certainly my 2v Jawa wouldn't have lasted an entire season and it only went at half the speed of Phil Crump's. However it was also serviced by a first year apprentice truck fitter so didn't really have a chance of reliability

I wonder if the demograph of Sky subscribers matches the apparently desirable ABC1's?

I would disagree with just about everything you say :-) A 2 valve engine is very little, if any, different to maintain than a 4 valve. There is a perception that 2 valve engines ran on forever but in my experience that just isn't true. If you took a 60's Jawa 2 valve and tuned it to the levels that riders want/ need these days it wouldn't last half as long as the current engines. If they were still run at 9000rpm then they would last longer but a 4v would last longer still. Riders could maintain a 4 valve engine in the same way many used to (many used to use tuners then as well) but as I said in a previous post expectations of equipment are very much higher from riders, promoters and fans alike. Racers in any motor sport are subject to feeling the need for the very best equipment and Speedway is no different. If rider A has the latest all singing all dancing parts then rider B feels he needs the same to be competitive. Whether he actually does or not may be a different matter but the fans will never forgive him if he loses them a trophy because he didn't have the best equipment. Increased wage demands? I think that in real terms riders of the past earned more from Speedway than they do today. However promoters could afford more and whether the demands of todays top riders can be met might be a different story. I have followed Speedway since 1967 or 1968 and believe that the racing I see today is better than any I saw in my youth. The atmosphere has gone with the crowds but the racing and the skill level of todays riders is brilliant imo. Is a Speedway engine today really more expensive than it was in the 60's? Just from memory I would say that there were less injuries in the 70's but more were very serious. Riders today seem to be on the edge the whole time and need to be to win so there do appear to be a lot more crashes. However that is just an opinion and I have no facts to support it.

The tracks where their survival is in doubt, if the rumours are true. If those tracks were to break away would others follow if it made their financial position more sustainable? So much depends on what changes are or have been agreed for next season but it is something I have thought a possibility for a while.

Probably not but that very likely means the sport is going to lose some tracks. I'm not so certain as you they will just accept that.

If you bought in a rule tomorrow stating that everybody had to use 2 valve uprights and ignored the redundant equipment and need for a completely new set up for every rider it still wouldn't save a penny. Speedway is an expensive sport but that's because of a combination of things and little to do with the basic engines. Compared to years ago travelling is far more expensive. The job market has changed significantly so it is harder to find a job that fits in with Speedway commitments, the chances of having an employer who is a Speedway fan so willing to allow time off for the sport has more or less disappeared. Plenty of riders hold down a job as well, many need to in order to subsidise their Speedway. The standard of equipment expected by promotions, fans and riders has increased greatly. We often see comments on here about how great it was that riders turned up with a bike on a rack on the back of their car. See how fans react these days when a rider turns up with scruffy equipment or even worse if mechanical problems cost their team a win and you'll realise those days are long gone. Just read through any team thread and you are likely to come across somebody saying that rider a would be ok but he has really slow bikes and needs to invest in his equipment! That's just rider costs, when it comes to stadiums and tracks H&S, utility bills, cost of transporting track materials, medical cover and a never ending list of other essentials that are getting ever more expensive all take their toll. Cost cutting isn't as easy as it might seem. I would suggest a standardisation of carburrettors, ignitions and clutches along with a rev limiter to increase reliability to cut equipment costs for riders. The saving from that in terms of reduced admission would probably be pennies rather than pounds. In reality the operating costs of Speedway are probably already pretty near the bone.

I can imagine that the BSPA might bring in a 'gentlemans agreement' not to use riders from a non affiliated league. However like most such agreements they make it wouldn't be too long before somebody desperately needed a rider or a really promising rider came through the new set up and a reason was found to use them. There might be a spell where young riders find it difficult to make the break through but it wouldn't be very long before the supply of new riders dried up for the higher level clubs. I'm not suggesting that this is the way forward for the sport but just wondering if it might happen given the rumour that the requirement for air fences will see tracks closing.

Insurance wouldn't be an issue, any of the current motorcycle federations are already set up to provide cover. International meetings not a problem either. It was decided in court many years ago that riders could hold licences in different affiliations so they could take out an ACU licence in addition to whatever licence any breakaway league required if they wanted to compete internationally. I really can imagine something along the lines of the current NL being run without the involvement of the ACU/ BSPA.

It would seem that there are more than a couple of tracks who are going to really struggle to be able to install air fences in time for next season. Given that will be a condition of entry to league racing under the FIM, ACU, BSPA are we likely to see a group of tracks running under a different authorising body next year?

Because they have found a place to 'grind their axe' anonymously and if they do so repeatedly it gives them a voice out of all proportion to their numbers?

Rye House practice cancelled this Sunday - 11/8/13

Closest to you are Rye House, Sittingbourne and Lydd. I have no idea about Lydd as never been there, Sittingbourne is a nice little set up, I think contacting clutchplate on here will get you all the info for that one or they have a website. Rye House is the one I have most experience of and I have seen that Andrew Silver is keen and willing to help young kids. You can get Andrew or Mia on 07821660695 for more information. Be worth a trip to Rye at the end of the month when they have the kids there, saw a couple of them practicing last week and they looked very promising. The final round of the youth championship is at Sittingbourne on 22nd September as well so another local meeting worth a look and I am sure the people at these meetings can fill you in on the finer details if you decide to get into Speedway properly.

I love motorcycle noise as well but unless all motorsports combine under a single umbrella to insist on their right to exist and make noise the anti's are going to keep making life harder for all of us. What I have seen of the likes of the FIM and the ACU over the years the anti everything brigade are going to have a pretty easy time of it!

Overpriced? http://www.sportsbik...content_cat/104 Suggests that current Speedway silencers are pretty well priced for such a limited market, you can't really expect them to be priced like a Ford Fiesta. Of course you could just bury your head in the sand and pretend there are no noise issues effecting motorcycle sport but the truth is that noise limits will continue to reduce in the years to come. You could get all the riders together and tell the FIM to shove it, would be perfect for any council wanting to close a Speedway track to be able to go to court and say that they are refusing to follow the rules laid down by the sports own governing body. Within ten year riders wouldn't need to defy the FIM any more as they wouldn't have tracks to race on. For good or bad times change and ways will have to be found to make the bikes work at new noise levels. As for the price of dirt deflectors and parts for them - I can't argue with that.

How about? Cheap entry for any youth competition licence holder into Speedway. Speedway clubs backing local events. Putting up a few trophy's for the local club to call one of their meetings 'The "speedway team name" Challenge' wouldn't be expensive but it would make a connection. Free Speedway try out days for youth competition licence holders. One of the things the BSPA really should have is a van and a few bikes that can be used for try out days and static displays. Needn't be expensive to run a couple of pitbike engined bikes and a couple of Jawa laydowns. Chuck a TV and generator in the van and show great racing at motorcycle events or big crashes at Tesco's and it should generate some interest. My favourite is for clubs to form or tie up with local Grasstrack clubs.

Whilst it is true that numbers of lads riding bikes on the road has sharply declined I would be amazed if the number of kids racing motorcycles isn't at an all time high. there have never been so many motocross clubs running meetings or so many proper mx practice tracks open in my lifetime (which is nearly forever!). Motocross is seen as being a cool thing for kids to do by their peers, Speedway most of them have never heard of. What has changed is that there is hardly any place for kids to take a rough old field bike and have a play. Nowadays their parents have to be interested enough to outlay for a bike,a means of transporting it and the time to do so. The days of a group of kids chipping in to buy an old road bike to thrash around a local woods have pretty much gone. Nowadays the only people doing that are bike thieves who don't care if they have to leave the bike and do a runner. When young kids show an interest in bikes all they want to do is ride them every hour of the day and that is something Speedway in the UK just can't offer them. The sport has to look at being part of whatever type of motorcycling kids are doing from when they start with the idea of Speedway being something you progress into at 14 or 15.

I agree that you should not dismiss the forum out of hand and that it could be a useful tool for the BSPA but I can understand how it has come about when you read some of the stuff on here. As far as only posting what you would say to somebody's face I can see nothing antiquated about having a discussion in an adult and reasonable manner on this forum. That is how the vast majority of the people who post on here would carry out a conversation 'face to face'. The majority would not be abusive to somebody stood in front of them, not because they are scared but because most people don't behave that way in normal life. There is nothing wrong with considered criticism and everything wrong with anonymous abuse in my opinion. Nobody ever took criticism well from somebody that was personally abusive, lied or had no idea of the facts behind their criticism. Of course it is about earning respect, both ways, posters on here by making their points in a sensible way and the BSPA by responding to that properly.