Nellie

Yes, you keep saying this, and yet haven't actually managed to link to one of these documents when asked. Could it be that you know as little as anyone else, but spend the most time reasserting your opinion?

I expect someone looked at the column (B ) that states his average, as it was from 5/9 with 5%, rather than column (D) showing what it was from 19/9 with 5% added.

He can't, unless the averages change. According to the SpeedwayGB website, Fricke is 6.94 (7.29 including 5%) and King is 7.33. Interestingly, I can't find that tweet on twitter, so maybe someone has miscalculated.

Do the averages change before Wednesday? According to the SpeedwayGB website, Fricke is 6.94 (7.29 including 5%) and King is 7.33.

Who is he guesting for?

Wouldn't a reversed heat 9 2-4, produce a four point swing i.e. two more for Poole and two fewer for Wolverhampton, leaving Wolves twelve behind? A four point swing, to gain a possible three points, doesn't make a great deal of sense to me either to be honest

Is that you Macho Man?

Bjarne was signed on 6.55 average, so has increased it by a, not so impressive, 0.35 in four months spent largely at reserve.

Is he? I think Ipswich was his first UK club, and I don't remember seeing anything about Poole buying him.

As we all know, you're only as good as your last appearance at a track. Iversen managed six from five in his last meeting at Poole, so I'm sure r/r won't be too much of a hindrance.

Excellent point. Nothing to do with the discussion, but terrific nonetheless. Whether Swindon benefited from Tungate's absence, on the other hand, is a little more relevant to the thread. Irrespective of whether Swindon pulled a fast one, it's fair to point out no realistically fair parallel can be drawn between his points last visit (scored from second string), and the R/R points (scored from a HL position). It's not really that difficult to grasp.

Yes, he may have scored the same, but he probably wouldn't have. I just pointed out that points scored as a heatleader, are far more difficult to come by than those scored as a second string. You said that he scored the same points previously as R/R this time, so there was no benefit. It isn't really as simple as that, is it.

Hmm, that's a little disingenuous. The seven points he scored last time, were as a second string. This time R/R scored seven points, from the far more difficult heatleader position, so I'm not convinced the scores do suggest Swindon didn't benefit.

Quite. There will also be another winter of riders with artificially high/low averages and, as a consequence, another heatleader list. It was all so avoidable, with a little forethought.

Wise words which, presumably, are as relevant to Jon Cook as anyone else.

Sports teams are better supported when they're more successful? Have you got any insight on the Pope's religion, or where bears go to take a rubbish?

Because Poole would have had last pick in round one, and been left with Steve Boxall or Adam Roynon, so a considerably worse tier 1 rider yet the same tier 2 rider. A far weaker pairing. Do you think the league would have been won with Boxall/Roynon and Starke at reserve? I certainly don't.

I'm pretty sure it was reported that Kyle Newman wanted to ride in the main body of the team. I can't imagine that was ever likely to be considered by Matt Ford though, as it would have shafted Poole in the Elite Draft.

If you think Woz is a Poole fan, you'll get a bit of a surprise when you check which team he supports...

Because it's like ten thousand spoons, when all you need is a knife.

A rider could be declared in a side without having actually made an appearance, but it's a minor point to be discussing Edit: in all seriousness, having just checked the guest eligibility rule, it only says the guest must be in a current team declaration. Unless I'm missing something, if Swindon's re-declaration is accepted before Monday, he could guest.

Never mind hasn't ridden for Swindon, he isn't even in their line up yet! Nicholls' average is too high for an away meeting.

I genuinely had a couple of chuckles to myself last night whilst reading the updates. Hopefully it will work out for him and he'll be back to how he was before, but I guess we'll have to see. He definitely seemed to come off the throttle a few times in the Best Pairs when pre-injury, I don't think he would. It'll be interesting to see how he goes tonight. I suspect if he gates he'll be fine. Two changes would mean re-declaring under 34 points, so would be difficult with Janowski, North and Gomolski all increasing their averages (largely due to the smaller qualifying period for the GSA).

No, you started banging on about how Robson and Watt being there meant Coventry would have definitely won. I just pointed out that it wasn't Watt Schlein was in for, it was Grajczonek, and using your logic of replicating Robson and Watt's prior form at Brandon, JG would have done well. You can't claim Robson was good before and Watt poor, so that would have definitely happened again, but then say JG wouldn't necessarily score similarly to his last appearance there. That's hypocrisy.

Well, not quite everyone, Gavster. Not sure I agree with that. Cov certainly had some exclusions and Andersen's machinery issues, but North fell while ahead of HA in seven, and Holder fell whilst second in thirteen, in addition to the injuries. He's been doing ok so far, so I think he can be excused for a slightly under par meeting at the venue where he had such a bad crash. Unless he can keep his average (which will require a lot of managing), I just can't see how Ward could come back in as there's no benefit in re-declaring and losing the increase from Janowski, North and Gomolski.