BWitcher

I get it perfectly. You don't understand maths. That's all there is too it, simple maths. Let's just take the top two riders in the league, who they are doesn't matter.. but these two are the two very best, head and shoulders above the others. Now, what you are claiming is that they would find it easier to get a higher average in the second of the two scenarios: That in a league where their teams will race once at home and once away.. with them racing each other very often just once in a meeting, sometimes twice.. meaning the maximum they're going to race is four times over a season.. Now, in all of those races one of them will finish 2nd. In a league where they race each other twice at home and twice away and meet each other at least twice in a meeting, but most often three times (can even be four!)... that means they're likely racing each other twelve times in a season... not four. Again, one of them is going to lose. Now go to the 10th best rider in the league.. in the old format he's racing the nine riders above him 2-4 times a season... in the current format he's suddenly racing them up to 18 times a season as in some matches he'll be against two of them. For the 20th best the problem is even worse. The number of high average riders is not dictated by the ability of the riders but by the size of the league. The larger the league, the more 'top riders' there appears to be as you simply aren't seeing the real top riders race so often and therefore riders of a lower level of ability look better as they aren't losing so often.

Looks like you were pretty much right Irish... only it's even worse.

OH my god. Is this a serious post? Please tell me it's not... please? It is ABSOLUTE FACT that you would get a FAR higher average 'back in the day' than you would in today's setup. There isn't even any form of debate to be had. Even the absolute best such as Mauger.

It has absolutely nothing to do with their 'ability'.

My argument isn't based upon 'this countrys' leagues at all. It's based upon facts. Facts which you clearly do not understand. Ole, Ivan and PC wouldn't be shaking in their boots in any era as they were the top dogs of there time. However, put the 10-20th best riders in today's format and all of a sudden they're not the stars they were in the 70's. They soon become the Bombers of the league.

This hits the nail on the head. To me Sam Ermolenko is the greatest rider of all time. Although I will say if people come up with 'facts' to say otherwise they're wrong

Dear me. You really can't be this dumb can you? Seriously? You want to go down the 'drug' route now to try and discredit modern speedway compared to how it used to be? Try actually thinking about what you are posting. Come on, you only need to claim there were so many more great heat leaders back in the day and you've have really hit the jackpot.

It's nothing to do with what 'floats my boat'. You questioned the credibility of the GP which is utterly ludicrous as it wipes the floor with the old World Championship in terms of credibility. League racing in Britain is a different matter.

Doing well.. two cases in 16 years so far.

Preferring is a different argument. Almost everyone would prefer back then as it was bigger crowds and better atmosphere. The league format made it seem like there were so many top line stars, reality was still there were just four or five above the others as there is now and pretty much always has been. However, it doesn't make it in any possible way a better way to decide the World Title.

And it was correctly condemned..

Yes it was so credible that riders were regularly 'buying pts' of others in World Championships.. others were letting countrymen beat them in order for them both to qualify.. Indeed it was so credible the national press ran an expose on it and the sport hit a massive down turn ever since with mainstream media turning their backs.

None of which has any relevance whatsoever to the discussion.

They are.. and they're celebrating the THREE TIME BRITISH WORLD CHAMPION. It's bloody brilliant isn't it?

Yep, not taking anything away from Peter Collins at all. Brilliant rider. Just this nonsensical argument put forward about his other titles. Look at the 77 pairs.. on his home track at Hyde Road.. the opposition was mediocre at best. Similarly in 1980.. nothing major in terms of opposition, the Poles on their own track plus the Danes with a yet to fully mature Nielsen the best.. the rest complete also rans. Similar story in many of the World Team Cup Finals. The standard of the teams competing in a World Cup Final now is way above those competing in the World Team Cup Finals of the 70's.

Tai Woffinden has won three. Peter Collins has won one. That is the only thing they can be compared against. The ability of team mates, which are necessary for the other titles, render them redundant to the discussion. Plus the standard of opposition in some of those pairs and team victories was not exactly 'elite'.

Three individual World titles

I understand, you've been up all night celebrating the achievements of Britains most successful ever World Champion.

One gives you the best rider in the world or at the very least very, very close to it every single time. The other allows a random winner who is nowhere near the best rider in the world to win.. as has happened numerous times. It's a no brainer.

Tai Woffinden, Three Time World Champion Britains Finest The ultra professional and a shining example to the youth of today that if you have a dream and work hard enough to achieve it you can do just that.

In the old system a rider can be outscored in all rounds heavily, yet still end up World Champion. Two riders starting out in Commonwealth final. Rider A scores 15 Rider B 6 (you could get through that with 6pts many times) Next round, Overseas Rider A scores 15 Rider B 8 Next round, InterContinental Rider A scores 15 Rider B scores 6 (again you could get through with such a low score often) Final Rider A scores 14 (puncture of final bend for example) Rider B 15. Rider A scored 59pts Rider B 35pts.. yet Rider B is World Champion.. So by your own logic, it's not a point against the GP at all... it's massively points against the old system. There is simply no comparison, the GP is a far better system and is far more reliant on the skill and ability of a rider than luck. The old final had the drama of it being on one night... that's it.

It's always good to see someone totally contradict themselves. You whinge a rider can become World Champion without winning a GP.. even though they've scored the most points over a season. Now you're whinging when a rider wins a GP and hasn't scored the most points. Woffinden won the World Title and he won the GP in the process.

Yawn

Of course.. but people don't see them racing journeymen in 80% of their races and hardly ever losing so don't think there are as many 'stars'.

Tough night for a few xenophobes on here Plenty more tough nights to come