Arch Stanton

Agree about Riss at 2, that’s a waste. Need to stop doing that.

Don’t think you are in the minority now to be honest. I’ve made no secret of the fact I’ve loved watching him at Foxhall over the years and was hoping this year he’d get back to that. But he was miles off it last year and worryingly he’s started this year exactly the same if not worse. Looks completely lost. Problem for us is, if we can’t make changes we’re stuck with the 7 we have for a while. Just gotta hope 4th spot isn’t too far adrift by the time a change or 2 can be made. Belle Vue Monday 6th June could see new faces depending on no rain offs. You’d hope that homework is already being done so that IF riders don’t step up their game, riders can be brought in quickly to replace them.

Don’t think any rider takes that kind of attitude I’m afraid. A 10 point haul in a meaningless fixture pays exactly the same as a 10 point haul in a play off final.

Good point that! Might have a look myself and see what all the fuss is about and see if he can do anything around our track. I see Cam made his comeback at Oxford last night. A win in his first ride, a sign of some improvement? Nope, followed it up with two fat zero’s and was pulled from his 4th ride..

I know tocha I didn’t maybe word that right. I meant that rule should continue to be in place. Wouldn’t be against it being earlier either.

Anyone going?

The first bit in bold is completely irrelevant Mike. Any change that has ever been made at any point during any season, would have still fell within the points limit. This isn’t the point. The second bit in bold, I completely agree with you on, although there should definitely be a cut off point to stop things happening like the Woffinden to Wolves thing a few years ago.

There is a slight difference between the two. Lynn signed and declared a full 1-7, and then lost one of those declared riders (Kildermand) through injury so picked up an injury replacement short term to cover that rider. Belle Vue on the other hand signed 6 riders and then signed a rider on a short term deal from the get go while they continued to either play the waiting game and shop around, or wait for a particular target. Nobody seems to know the full ins and outs of this new 25% rule, and I doubt we’ll ever know. If the rules allow you to declare a full 1-7 by the time of your first league meeting then there isn’t an issue, but if it’s a case of no changes allowed until 25% of league fixtures have been completed once the season in general has started, then signing a rider on a short term deal seems a bit of a cop out. For example, I know for a fact Chris Louis contacted Klindt again during the winter to enquire about his plans, and he wasn’t available, so built a side without him. Now I know Belle Vue have signed Zagar, if they hadn’t and they’d quickly snapped up Klindt now he’s been dropped by his Polish club and is suddenly available, would that be fair? Is it right that a club who signs a temporary rider to play the waiting game, suddenly has a bigger pool of riders to choose from than those who built their sides before the season started? Again I’m not saying Belle Vue have done anything wrong here. The rules might permit any club to change their whole 1-7 if they so wish as long as it’s before the league campaign gets underway. It would just be nice to get some clarity on this rule, and rules in general! As ever, we all seem to be left in the dark.

I totally agree. Would be such a shame to see the fans stay away if the team isn’t competitive after that crowd we saw a couple of weeks ago. The potential is huge here at Ipswich, give the fans a team that can genuinely challenge for the title and they’d be rewarded with gate receipts. I know you could say that about every club, but we remain one of the best if not THE best, supported clubs in the league.

Cheers Baldy. Still think he’ll be at Lynn pretty quickly. Just can’t see Louis changing the team after 3 meetings, even if the rules allow. As things stand, Lynn are the only club that have a vacancy to fill and he fits perfectly. Odds on.

I’ve a feeling Lynn would have been making inroads for a while with this. Coincidence that Klindt has now made himself available with Lynn looking for a rider around that average? Could be putting 2+2 and coming up with 5 but I wouldn’t be surprised if this deal is already done. Especially as I’m convinced Louis wouldn’t have been looking for changes after 3 meetings but we’ll see. If he does go to Lynn, I don’t think they’re any worse off than they are with Iversen, possibly even stronger. They’ll be a contender.

Klindt will surely be Iversen’s replacement at Lynn?

I’ve no idea sorry. Don’t think there was any consistency with the live fixtures last year either, just seemed to be a bit random.

Don’t think Klindt is interested in the UK currently. Sure I read comments from him over the winter saying as much. Things change though I suppose. Edit: ignore that, just read the other thread about klindt’s availability.

Nothing official, but I’d guess Ipswich v Sheffield will be live on Monday 16th May. Not sure why we’d be riding that week on an off night rather than our usual Thursday otherwise.

Crowds make a huge difference. We lost at home to Peterborough, the track and racing were poor, but I still kind of enjoyed it because of the numbers there and the atmosphere. We could go from one extreme to the other on Thursday though! One of the best non bank holiday attendances in years to one of the worst..

No. Any replacement for Heeps up to and including 7.06 So an assessed 7 pointer could be accommodated, or someone from the championship on a converted average. Options there look non existent though. Roll the dice and try someone new?

Never said he was “happy”, he said there was some positives to take from our own riders. Scores from Doyle, Batchelor and King weren’t earth shattering by any means don’t get me wrong, but Lynn away is clearly a difficult fixture this time, they look a good side. Fact remains, 2 guests scored a single point between them, and our rider and former Lynn rider who has started the season in fine form was a big miss, as was our reserve who hit paid 16 there only a few months ago. Chances are, our normal 1-7 would have made the score more than respectable. An awful lot of negativity around at the moment and that’s understandable as we’ve had 3 meetings and lost all 3 with the home defeat a particular concern, but it’s still only 3 meetings in at the end of the day and very early. Having said that, I’d still like to see the club bite the bullet and strengthen if it’s possible before the league campaign starts. Belle Vue suddenly look very strong and and will start favourites in our first league meeting next week, that’s a huge test.

I’m no fan of Hawkins but to be fair to him, what he said was there were positives from our OWN actual riders, and there were as they all scored pretty well for an away meeting. The score looks awful because two guests scored 1 point between them with a single point for Riss’ R/R rides says it all. Starke and Riss in particular were a huge miss last night.

Wasn’t just Heeps missing though was it. Starke hit paid 16 here last season and Riss has started the season very well. Both big misses tonight. Not that it mattered a great deal.

Bit better from Batch. Probably would have gone close with Riss and Starke in there rather than the woeful guests.

I brought a season ticket this year for the first time ever because it represented a bit better value than it normally does, but I’m still not bothering with Thursday which is nothing more than a glorified practice session with nothing riding on the result. Absolutely agree. Should never have been 2.10 under in the first place. Admit the mistake early and do something about it before the league starts next week. Edit: Even more so having just realised it’s Belle Vue visiting next week, a much stronger looking Belle Vue with their change. That looks a home defeat right from the get go!

Oh dear..

Bloody hell if a member of the BSPA can’t get it right then there’s no hope for the rest of us is there? Why do these bloody rules have to be so complex and confusing? It’s like all this 25% fixtures b0llocks before a change can be made, nobody is entirely sure what it means exactly. I give up!

Pretty sure the rule is that your number 8 can replace any rider without the need to re-declare on a match by match basis, just not during a meeting. Knew I’d seen it somewhere. “Or can be named in the team to replace a rider without the need to re-declare”