BWitcher

The same place most riders go in those circumstances. The same place Woffinden went when Hancock shut the door. The same place Kasprzak went when Pedersen shut the door. You roll the throttle off. He went for a gap that wasn't ever going to be there, his own fault.

So no doubt those (the few) who believe Zagar was right to be excluded feel Hancock should have been excluded in Heat 1? After all, if Woffinden hadn't backed off, he'd have been wiped out too.

Terrible decision to exclude Zagar. Heat 1 was similar, Hancock made the same move, but Woffinden shut off as there was no room.

Good old ADHD. Another multi-billion pound/dollar industry for the drug companies.

Someone must have issues if they're posting on a forum regarding a sport they regard as 'totally boring' 99% of the time... What has 'getting into the GP series' got to do with this thread? In case you noticed, there were qualifying meetings taking place last week, so no, the GP is not a closed shop.

You're insulting yourself by refusing to accept what is a FACT. That's your problem, not mine. It's not an opinion. Until you learn what is and isn't an opinion, there's little hope. Now I see you even claim you think 'evidence' proves your point. Let's see hear your evidence then, show to me how the old tac sub rule was fairer and I will quite gladly say you were right. You see, there's the difference, if I'm shown to be wrong I'll gladly admit it and most importantly LEARN from it. In this case however, you won't... quite simply because you can't. Spot on SCB, those were the sports I was thinking off. Tennis being the most obvious example.. 6-0 6-7 6-0 6-7 6-7 You've won 30 games, your opponent 21. Your opponent wins. Its the nuance of the scoring system used, just how the tac rides are a nuance of the scoring system used in speedway. You could probably throw cricket in there too once they go into the Duckworth-Lewis mode!

What was unprofessional of him?

Sigh, you don't even know what you're arguing against do you? What hope is there of you having a debate if you don't know what it's about? NOBODY has questioned that. What you were corrected on was your assertion the old rule was fairer. It doesn't matter whether you say you are wrong or not. That comment WAS wrong. Oldace has it spot on.. he too, like yourself AND myself prefer the old system. However, it wasn't 'fairer'.

It isn't an opinion. You stated that the current Tactical rules are more unfair than the old Tactical sub rules. That is mathematically incorrect. Its like you saying you have an opinion that 4 is more than 5. It is wrong and there is no debate. Your argument is the equivalent of someone doing their GCSE Maths, getting Grade E and claiming they should have had an A because in their opinion they got all the answers right! I have no issues with your overall views about tac rides etc and indeed agree with many of them. All I did (and others) was point out the old rule was not fairer or better as you'd claimed... why you choose to get all worked up about that.. who knows.

Live in ignorance, no skin of my nose. If you're not adult enough to accept when you are wrong, so be it. It's obviously escaped your attention that many others on the thread have also confirmed you were wrong. I understand what you mean, but its not strictly true. A number of sports where you can amass more pts/games/Legs however you want to call it and still lose.

I'm a Wolves fan, but based on that rule, Ludvig shouldn't be allowed to double up it seems.

I can see both sides of the story. As per the rules (as they are written) SCB is correct. Common sense tells us that the right thing has taken place.... but herein lies the problem.. rules are enforced one moment, ignored the next. There needs to be consistency.

Fair enough Tsunami.. Be better to have just posted that perhaps?

That's the usual educated response thats usually given from those running the sport and their lackeys when fans raise concerns. Then they bleat about losing money at the end of the year.

95% of the time. It also denied lower order riders track time and an opportunity to race against riders of a more equal ability. It also denied the paying public the spectacle of seeing a more evenly matched race. It also cost more and put more money in the pockets of the big guns and widened the gap between the have's and the have not's. It was also, as discussed, a lot more unfair to the team busting a gut to get ahead. Despite all this, most people prefer it as that's what we grew up with and were used too.

Absolutely spot on SCB. There was a lot of pressure in that final. Emil had chosen gate 2 as it was the best gate.. however, he also knew that Tai was getting out of the starts quicker than him (except of 4 of course) and if Tai hit turn 1 first from gate 1 it would be pretty much game over. Thus Emil knew he had to make a near perfect start in order to get over Tai into turn 1. It's that pressure I believe that made him touch the tapes. Plus of course, there is a lot more pressure involved when you know you're live on Eurosport.

Not really true, as you would most often be replacing a rider likely to finish last under the old tac sub rule. So the result would go from a 2-4 against to a 3-3. Net gain of 2pts.

No it isn't, as I have pointed out, results are LESS 'concocted and contrived' (in the last 2 seasons) than they have been in approx the last 50 years (since tac subs were introduced). Aboloshing Tac's won't add anything to the gates of a speedway meeting. The only hope for the sport is to begin to promote it and find an angle to make it 'the place to be' and 'cool'. Fans drift away from many sports as they grow older, even football you will find thousands who used to go, but no longer do.. the difference is, other sports have had new fans to replace those.. speedway hasn't (in sufficient numbers).

WK, the 'concocted and contrived results' as you call them have been in existence for decades... In fact, the less 'concocted and contrived' they have made the results... the more crowds have dropped Old tac sub rule when 6pts behind, the most concocted and contrived system there has been.. big crowds... That was changed to 8pts behind, a bit less concocted and contrived.. crowds fall (they had already started falling to be fair). Change to Double pt rule, a bit less concocted and contrived again.... crowds fall Make the pts you have to be behind to use the Double pts larger, so a bit less concocted and contrived again... crowds fall Then stop the use of the Double pts after heat 12, making the results less concocted and contrived than in the past 50 years... crowds fall alarmingly! We've found the way to reverse the decline! Concoct and contrive results as much as possible

Relax Sidney, I agreed with your point it wasn't a great GP (racing wise) and simply stated that unlike the old one off system, we haven't got long to wait for another one. You really do need to calm down, no good for your blood pressure

Rather like many World Finals then wasn't it Bonus is, we don't have to wait 1 year for the next one. I must congratulate Eurosport on Tai Woffinden's achievements. It just goes to show when a tv station presents the show correctly, as Eurosport do, then British riders can succeed.

It's the case all over.. people tell us that tracks like Peterboro, Scunthorpe, Somerset etc produce amazing racing.. they don't get amazing crowds though.. Also, teams who are winning with average racing get bigger crowds than teams who are losing with great racing.. Great racing would be brilliant, but it's not the sole answer.

Intelligent adults accept when they get something wrong and they are corrected. It's becoming apparent you don't fall into that camp.

This has always been the case however... In addition,do tracks that are renowned for 'exciting racing' get bigger crowds than those that aren't? Not from what I have seen... Of course we all want to see exciting racing, but it doesn't appear that is what pulls the crowds in. Look at F1.. you can have a 90 min borefest in terms of exciting racing, doesn't effect it though.

The only person who hasn't understood throughout this entire thread is yourself. Nobody has argued against your right to an opinion. What was pointed out was your opening post was wrong. You claimed the old Tac Sub system was fairer. That is wrong. Absolutely spot on. A winning tac ride can inspire the rest of the team and make them think they have a chance of gaining something from the meeting. There will have been many, many exciting meetings that were kept alive by the Tac rides that would otherwise have seen one team roll over and meekly accept defeat.. hardly good from an 'entertainment' point of view. I'm not referring to the score here either, teams will naturally put more effort in if they believe there is something to race for.