Humphrey Appleby

Opportunity for another farewell meeting then...

Not suggesting it's the top of the list of issues to address, but the system is broken. The 3-2-1-0 system doesn't encourage team riding, whilst bonus points inflate averages. The casual observer already isn't going to get bonus points and many accepted aspects of the sport. I feel people would get used to team scoring fairly quickly.

I've picked up quite a few Go-Pros off the track. That admittedly was a while back though, so maybe they improved the fixings.

Yes, and how often do they fall off said helmets onto the track?

They should not be included for overall team building, but should be included for the determining the heat-leader/second-string/reserves and guest purposes. The points system should be changed in team speedway so you only score points for finishing ahead of opposition riders. That then solves the problem of bonus points inflating averages and pay packets.

The sports psychology thing is quite interesting. I certainly found there were racing days when I was able to get into a zone and actually won things, but I could rarely replicate it in any consistent way. However, it can be overemphasised. A few ago years our boss in his clueless wisdom hired a psychologist who had supposedly coached the British Olympic rowers. The sessions basically consisted of us being told "we're highly skilled athletes" (actually we weren't, we worked for an Internet organisation), and that "we're big winners" (err.. what have we won or got to win) and "we can achieve anything" (well whatever). Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I couldn't see how anyone could buy into that and I'd question how much use it would be even to Olympic athletes. Of course, all these things get positive reinforcement - the Olympic rowing team did well so ergo it must be the psychology. Nothing of course to do with selecting elite athletes in the first place, and the physical training...

Factored averages as previously used in Sweden would be better. I think it's just a matter of perception and what people are used to. Baseball batting averages are usually between .100 and .300 and quoted to three decimal places, but every baseball fan understands there's a vast difference in ability between the top and bottom of that range.

Yes, but with the 15 heat format the top scorers will regularly score more than 12 in a match yet still have less than a 12-point average. So their CMAs are essentially calculated down, whereas reserve CMAs under the old 13-heat format were essentially calculated up which does not seem quite as illogical.

Makes more sense to me. CMAs are somewhat meaningless where some riders routinely take five or more rides. I suppose it made more sense with the old 13-heat format, and for the points limit as it approximated the match score.

Speedway is the ultimate mercenary sport, and whilst it masquerades as a team sport, team work is not intrinsic to results unlike most other team sports. Riders are competing against other riders for team places and points money, so there's little incentive to help others - at least not until their own careers are over. There also aren't the same opportunities for practice - limited tracks and limited track time available so you just have to make the best of it. In fact, I'd say it's the same with most motor sports, and the best drivers and riders are usually those that have natural ability. If you're the type of person who needs a lot of practice - odds are you won't make it to a high level - same as those flying fast jets for example.

A 3-point should be replaced with another 3-point rider. It completely undermines the 'point' of the system if you're effectively having guests for such riders, or even worse overseas riders.

This idea just keeps coming around again and again, but it's just moving the deckchairs. All grading achieves is to make riders with high averages in their grade more in demand, and those with low averages less so. It's a points limit by any other name, and taken to extreme examples under your scheme, one team could track riders with combined averages of 52.50, and another team only 37.00. Where is the fairness in that and simply leads to even more cheque book speedway as teams chase riders with the right grade, if not encouraging even more blatant average manipulation. Any decent system needs to allow teams to develop and grow up to point, but force rider redistribution if they become overly strong. Teams should not be penalised for finishing just above mid-table, and certainly not because they happen to find a good 3.00 pointer. Indeed, teams should be positively rewarded for having a good 3.00 pointer. Any under-21 rider or in the first three seasons of their career that's started at British track should be given and keep a 3.00 point average during that period, particularly if they stay at the same team. If they're good enough to move up, that should be done on a draft basis with the worst teams getting the preferential picks.

They might be called thick or biased...

Certain approved helmet cameras are allowed - I think they're supposed to be an integral part of the helmet though. It's absolutely lunacy to attach an external camera to a helmet though, whether allowed or not. It's not only potentially weakening the shell, but it creates an impact point.

Yes, indeed...

The reality is that speedway physically allows riders to ride for more than one team, and the sport has evolved that way it's accepted that riders make a living that way. I suppose it's no different to a self-employed contractor working for several clients.

In fairness to the BSPA (and others), I think the efforts to develop speedway riders actively started in the late 1990s, but the real problem was the retain-and-transfer system. Riders moving between British teams attracted a transfer or loan fee, whilst riders from abroad could be signed for nothing. There were financial disincentives to sign British riders, and also little done to encourage the inclusion of developing riders in teams. Whilst many riders did come through grasstrack, I think a lot also came from motocross encouraged by the better earnings possible in speedway. I seem to remember John Berry writing that he thought motocross skills were easier to adapt to speedway than grasstrackers could, and I think there's some truth in that.

Why are you conflating the Polish League and OneSport? They've no more in common than the BSPA and BSI.

The American Civil War was fought by the southern states to free themselves from the tyranny of potentially not being allowed to maintain slavery. It can dressed up any which way, but that was the root cause. I think history has been overly kind to Lincoln and it's certainly true that slave states remained in the Union, but the heralded 'southern way of life' was based on legalised oppression of others - both before and after emancipation.

To be honest, I don't really have a problem with what the Polish leagues do, even if they are now killing their own golden goose by living well beyond their means. They do at least run tracks, provide proper employment for professional riders, and have some commitment to developing new riders. The real insidious developments are all these private promotions cropping up that are running 'prestige' events - using the riders developed by others, not having to pay a living wage, taking prime dates for themselves, and all the while skimming off television and sponsorship money. And what's worse, this is all endorsed by the sport's governing bodies who are seemingly happy with this state of affairs provided they get their guaranteed euros. The reality is there are three maybe four truly professional leagues in the world (plus maybe Russia if you want to deal with them) that have something of a symbiotic relationship, and should be working together for their mutual benefit and survival. Yes, I think it would be accepted that Poland followed by Sweden would be top of the pecking order, but as f-s-p points out, Britain also provides valuable employment and experience to riders as well. It's absolutely ridiculous that the professional speedway leagues allowed, and continue to allow the limited revenues coming into the speedway to disappear off into the pockets of private promoters without any obligation to support the rest of the sport. It might even be justifiable if their investment really was expanding the sport, but the reality is that it's actually contracting - raced regularly in fewer countries than it ever was, and dying a slow death in most of its former strongholds. I think you'd also have to attribute it to a new breed of money men that started to inhabit international sporting bodies - realising there was money in television rights and associated sponsorship, but that third parties were actually willing to pay to do all the work and assume the risks. It didn't matter to them whether the sports had an established structure, and of course because the new money benefitted a handful of elite performers, there's the illusion that it's good for the whole sport. The density of fixtures also required it. You can't stage weekly home meetings if every track rides on the same night, and Britain used to offer riders at least two if not more earning opportunities per week. The Swedish League (as least in its open era) relied on its professional stars being able to supplement their earnings elsewhere, hence the original one night per week model. I heard that Tuesdays were originally selected because there were either none, or few BL teams riding that day. Sundays were always no issue with Britain as there had long been a tradition for BL riders to go off and ride in Continental meetings that day.

There's a shortage of riders because that situation has been allowed to develop. In fact, it's a shortage of riders of a particular standard - I'm sure there are actually 150 riders in Britain, and you need even fewer if you allow doubling up. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy that if you limit team opportunities then potential riders will find other things to do. Then perhaps the British leagues needs to be run on a semi-professional basis. Riders turning-up when they feel like it, and teams putting out cobbled together line-ups week-in week-out is I think the single biggest reason why the sport has become a farce and not taken seriously.

If it comes down to a choice, then riders will choose who pays them then most, which will likely be Poland. Nigh on time that British promoters only sign riders who can commit to every meeting.

Or is that that the SGP is getting worried that Poland might start affecting their plans? I don't recall you expressing much concern when riders were going absent for GP practice in the past. You know as well I as do that Polish teams always get their own way because they pay the piper. All this says though, is that Britain should run at an affordable level with riders committed to every meeting.

As long as you weren't black of course... Ben Jones did of course also go by the handle 'Crazy Cooter' in the DoH.

And yet Briggo imposed the dirt deflector on the sport...