szkocjasid

There is no conversion rate, new riders to the Champ will be given a 2.00 ave, regardless on NL ave.

I think the signing of Smith shows, no one is willing to come to Newcastle otherwise they would have signed a stronger rider (8.08 was available to replace Congreave). But I do feel Smith will score more than Congreave so it isn't a waste of time. Even if it means they only lose by 18 points instead of 20 in matches? Not that it matters as I can't see Newcastle using up their spare points, but isn't Jack Smith on a 3.00 ave?

Leicester Lions already lost it? I'm gonna say no!

While Jack Smith for Congreave strengthens Newcastle it's not the change they needed to make to avoid the wooden spoon!

It's better to call it off two weeks early than 2 hours early. If they've tried all avenues to find volunteers, then can't blame them for the early call off!

Very few team managers "think outside of the box" like this, Zagar or Kurtz at 2 would also have protected heat 8, knowing Ipswich were bound to use their strongest r/r in heat 8 (Batchelor). As you say, if you need a heat advantage, giving your strongest rider the best gate isn't a great idea. I've seen it before though, I remember an Ipswich meeting where Tony Rickardsson was given a fresh tyre for heat 15 (r/r in use) he wins the heat & completes a maximum but Ipswich don't get the heat advantage they needed! Just trying to keep their top men happy?

That's because he's not a "big fish" yet lol!

I don't blame Cami for the Berwick decision. People commented that he should have used his heat 13 5-1 pairing in heat 15. But against Poole when he did use his heat 13 5-1 pairing in heat 15, people said should have used a higher scorer (than Ostergaard).

That's my biggest issue with the rule, Sedgmen dropped on transfer deadline day & has no chance of finding a new team. But a rider wants to leave & he gets a 28 day ban!

Totally agree with you, got to put feelings aside & do what's best for Glasgow. Which in this case is giving an unbeaten rider an extra outing!

But did they not drop Rowe as part of a double change to bring in Lewis Kerr? It wasn't a case of replacing him with a 4.00 man because he was underperforming. It only matters now if he's stronger than the outgoing rider (Roynon)

Aces could hand put Kurtz or Zagar at 2, with the other at 5, then use them as a pairing in heat 13 if they wanted to?

Neil Collins wouldn't have liked that rule.

I personally think the current scoring is the worst ever & have not heard a single argument to convince me otherwise. However if they are desperate for the winner to score the most points, it is far easier fixed. 1) A-B-C-D finals with the current scoring in place. Winner would always get the most points & would stop someone finishing in 8th being able to win the meeting, which is better in my view. Would also remove the current situation of splitting 3 riders on 5 points by countback, at least this way their place in the finals decides the points. 2) Final is scored 20-18-17-16, then points scored in heats count for the rest. Winner always scores most for the ones who prefer that. But all the qualifying races count for the rest. This avoids one rider on 6 scoring 3 more points than another on 6. Also avoids one rider on 9 scoring 1 more point than a rider on 6. Both if these are possible with current scoring system.

I would be totally happy with that!

Not necessarily, on Saturday a rider scoring 6 points & missing out on the semis gave them 8 GP points. You could also win 6 races, be 4th in the final & leave with just 14 points.

Not if the object is to secure well in every race, rather than just the last one?

1) Why do 3 riders on 5 have to be split into finishing 11th, 12th & 13th for example. Why can't they all finish 11th= on 5 pts? 2) I never minded the winner not getting the most points, I'd much rather 7 races count towards your score than just 1. 3) If they're desperate to have the winner get the most points, just make the final 20-18-17-16 & everyone else keep their points from the qualifying heats.

I'm starting to think Berwick are lucky Newcastle are so poor, otherwise the Bandits would be in a fight to avoid the wooden spoon!

My biggest pet peeve of the scoring system: Vaculik scores 5 = 6 GP points Doyle scores 5 = 4 GP points Holder scores 8 = 9 GP points Janowski scores 6 = 8 GP points Why is 5 worth 2 more points than 5, but 8 is only worth 1 more point than 6? Worst scoring system ever!

The protected heat 8 rule is pointless when you can put your stronger reserve at number 7 anyway. At least in the Prem it makes more sense as the RS has to be at 7 & gets a protected heat.

Yeah, I didn't proof read my post

He rode very few matches for Berwick, so can't really judge him on that. But I'd certainly sign him to replace Congreve.

Totally agree with that!

I don't think Redcar would drop them to join Leicester lol!