Kevin Meynell

I think the problem with staging support races during the main meeting is that they need to be sufficiently interesting to watch, and the meeting needs to be run swiftly. These days, matches are run so slowly that it's no wonder fans get annoyed by even longer delays. I would put (say) three support races between blocks of heats (e.g. Heat 4, 7/8, 11 and 14) to give riders a bit more time between their programmed rides, and then run the whole meeting much more quickly. This would also allow the interval to actually be held at the half-way point, rather than 2/3rds or more of the way through the meeting.

I think it can only be a deliberate decision to slow-up the racing, otherwise it would be embarrasing if the 15 regulation heats were over in little more than an hour. When I started going to speedway in the early-1980s, I'm pretty sure the policy was to sound the two-minute warning as soon as the previous race had finished.

It should be possible to run 12 heats per hour (1 every five minutes), so yes 23 heats in two hours is feasible timewise, if perhaps not affordable. Obviously you have to accept delays if there are serious accidents, but under normal circumstances there's no excuse for 15 heats to take longer than about 1.5 hours.

Steve, I've some conversations with a former promoter who told me that second-halves were popular with most riders when they were paid the same for second-half races as those in the main match. However, riders started losing interest around the time they started getting less for the second-half. Apparently, there was some plan to revive interest in second-half racing by linking up the various 'Rider of the Night' events into some sort of national competition, but this never happened for whatever reason.

Mylor, I think 2) offers a good solution, but unfortunately the old junior leagues were never a great success. Riders riding against others of the same ability does not seem to bring talent through, and the BCL has shown that you seem to need the involvement of old hands to provide a decent level of competition. Furthermore, the BCL gives riders experience of riding in a proper match in changing conditions, and with plenty of rides.

Jill, In the days when meetings consisted of 20 heats or more, they used to take the same time as 15 do now. These days, things have to be unnecessarily strung-out to disguise the fact that a meeting would otherwise be over in one-and-a-quarter hours!

In recent years, it's become apparent that domestic meetings have become increasingly less value for money. Up until the early-1980s, meetings were comprised of a 13-heat match and a 7-heat second-half. For various reasons, the second half was replaced by a junior match, but after these were abolished, the number of heats has been progressive reduced. For example... 1987 - 20 heats (13-heat main match + 7-heat junior match) 1988 - 20 heats (15-heat main match + 5-heat junior match) 1989 - 21 heats (15-heat main match + 6-heat junior match) 1993 - 18 heats (18-heat match) 1994 - 16 heats (16-heat match) 1997 - 15 heats (15-heat match) In other words, the second-half has never really been satisfactorily replaced, even if the main match has been slightly extended. Some tracks do organise a second-half of sorts with junior riders, but this varies from place-to-place. I therefore wonder what people think would be the best meeting format these days: 1) Return to 13-heat match + 7-heat second half 2) Keep the current 15-heat match with 5-6 heats of junior racing 3) Increase the match to 16 heats 4) Increase the match to 18 heats (would probably require 8-rider teams) 5) Keep the status quo? 6) Something else?

I believe the FIA only held the television rights. The other commercial rights were/are owned by FOCA who have sold them on Bernie Ecclestone in exchange for a guaranteed income.

That's certainly true, but the overall package created by Bernie Ecclestone is sufficient to make companies want to sponsor individual teams.

I'll be surprised if the Slovenian Embassy knows anything about the event. However, the organising club has a website at: http://www.amdkrsko-drustvo.si/

Mylor, Your analogy between FOCA (F1 Constructors Association) and BSI is not quite correct. Firstly, FOCA abrogate the rights to Bernie Ecclestone's company for a guaranteed sum per year, and he then sells the rights on for whatever he can get. Whilst he's been extraordinarily successful in doing so, he makes millions of pounds in profit and it could well be claimed he is skimming off the cream, which is of course what some of the F1 teams are currently unhappy about. Secondly, FOCA (or more correctly Bernie Ecclestone) manage to generate sufficient revenue to fully fund the whole travelling circus, and to pay drivers to more or less race exclusively in the F1 series. Whilst Ecclestone has his critics, it's fair to say that he doesn't do things by halves, and indeed he's actively worked to make F1 exclusive. BSI on the other hand, are doing things on the cheap. The SGP does not generate sufficient revenue to have full-time riders, so BSI employ the FIM regulations to use riders at no cost to themselves (except the rather low prize money which is allegedly paid by the FIM anyway). However, they do not give a toss how it affects the teams that *still* pay the bulk of the riders' wages that allow them to ride in professional speedway in the first place. Nor do they care when staging promotions lose money so that they can pay their CEO a GBP 350K salary. If BSI want to make the SGP a full-time series, I have no problem with that, but until then they must realise that they need co-exist with the national leagues. As for going to 20-30 countries, well in their dreams! They're having enough problems to find ten venues for their series, so where they'll find another ten, I have no idea.

Malcolm, But you would still have disruption every two years, and in many respects that's worse than annual disruption which is easier to plan around. As for BSI - when will people realise that they have no interest in promoting anything except the SGP? This the only competition which enables them to skim-off the cream at minimal expense to themselves, and without investing a penny at the grassroots or intermediate levels. I do agree with your point about a lack of heats in domestic meetings though.

The duration between World Cups wouldn't make a huge difference if the competition, and to a greater extent the whole sport, was promoted better. The World Team Cup has always been held every year, and I think a long duration between competitions would not be beneficial. The reason World Cups in other sports are held four years apart is because they need time to run qualifiers, and there are other international competitions to fill the intervening years. In speedway, not only are there only a handful of countries that can track full teams, but there is no European Championship either (Thank God).

I think the question being asked by the poll is meaningless. Yes, most of us wish to see the abolition or reduction of guests, but adequate alternatives must be made available. I do believe that fans have become too conditioned to thinking that teams should not be weakened by injuries, when this is usually the case in every other sport. However, the loss of a heat-leader is arguably far more devasting for a speedway team than say a star midfielder is for a football team. What are teams going to do if they lose 3 or more riders in the lower order (i.e. Nos. 2 to 7), as the rules only seem to make provision for two doubling-up riders and R/R? I can't see that using BCL riders is going to be acceptable. I fully agree that last season was farcical, but this would have been an ideal time to introduce a proper squad system, perhaps still allowing guests if two or more heat-leaders were missing. The additional riders could be a combination of those doubling-up in the BPL and a number of substitute foreigners.

Quite frankly, I think CVS is a weak chairman who simply goes with the prevailing opinion, but then recants whenever the daft idea that he supported goes wrong. He's done it on so many occasions now, what with the half-baked restrictions on GP riders, doubling-up/down riders, and now the jokers. No doubt he'll be telling us next year what a bad idea they were. Moving onto comparisons with cricket, at least the game itself has been played according to the same rules for more than 100 years. I think the last significant change in the laws was a modification of the LBW rule in the early-1970s, and it's only the duration of the games (i.e. number of overs) that tends to vary. You certain don't have joker batsman coming out and scoring double runs when their team is behind!

I think you only have to look at the financial disaster that befell SVEMO over the abortive Scandinavian GP last season to find the reason. I don't think there's any spare money left in the kitty to bankroll the SWC.

BSI are about making as much money as they can for themselves. I suspect they're starting to regret taking on the SWC, as they're having enough problems with the SGP.

Tsunami, As someone once said, there are lies, damned lies and statistics, so I don't pay much attention to what's published in the Speedway Star. The magazine's management is close to the 'powers that be' and I'd be wary of the manner in which they present the balance of opinion. They might be getting only one letter for the changes and ten against, but if they only publish one of each, it gives a quite misleading impression of prevailing opinion. With respect to the voting, it always depends on how you ask the questions. Simply asking 'Do you think the proposed new rider grading system for team building purposes is a good idea?' without providing any details on how the system actually works, is a laughable and highly flawed way of conducting an opinion poll. Having asked some of my more casual speedway acquaintances, I've found every one of them to be against the changes.

I remain far from convinced that grading is a sensible way of controlling team strengths, but I don't really care about diluting the strength of the BEL if it means more teams and variety, and reduces costs to ensure the league has a long-term future.

Carlos, Everyone (and I literally mean everyone) speaks English in Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Most people in Prague, particularly young people, also speak English to a decent level. In Poland, English is generally less well understood, although young people usually know some. It's probably an idea to learn a few basic words and phrases if you go there.

That's the flaw with grading. Under the old system, you effectively had the same number of grades as there were riders, and it therefore had granularity at an individual level. Now you're effectively encouraging the manipulation of averages as riders at the top of each grade will be in huge demand.

Lioness, I think you spotted they're trying to disguise the fact that a low points limit has been set. Whilst a redistribution of riders is certainly necessary with two new teams, I don't know why they have to try and confuse everyone. Unfortunately, the grading system is nothing like American Football who don't force teams to redistribute players. They rely on the weaker teams to have the pick of the new players whom they hope will eventually come good (and it seems to work).

No, it would be fairly easy to make watertight rules in speedway since it deals known factors such as finishing positions and averages. Provided you don't allow special dispensation, and if you must have it, specify in the rules when it's allowed, you could reduce the manipulation to almost nothing. The reason speedway has been trying in vain for so long, is because the rulebook is always drafted by clueless committee. Get people who have a good understanding of the current rules, have a good idea of what works and what doesn't, and then someone with good writing skills to put it into text. It could be done if the will was there.

People in any sport will attempt to manipulate the rules as much as possible. They therefore have to be written in a watertight manner to prevent this.

You're about 15 years too late for the EEC, and I don't know why joining the EU will make prices go up in the Czech Republic! That country has always had two-tier pricing - if you go to the touristic areas it certainly isn't bargain basement, but just find a local bar and enjoy the ridiculously cheap beer.