Grand Central

Interestingly, I do remember more than one thread in early 2017 did indeed involve a discussion on some people's feelings that early season crowds were quite encouraging. The last 2017 post on this thread was on June 2. BT Sport started their 2017 coverage on June 19. I make no claim that the two are directly connected. But you did ask.

No I do not think it is solely because of TV coverage. But I do think it is a big reason. And for me, personally, definitely THE biggest reason for the overall number of meetings I attend being significantly reduced. On a side note .. I gave up Sky Sports when GPs left them and went without the Eite League coverage for the time they retained the UK rights. I never felt it worth continuing the subs for that alone. Until it went to BTSport when I got GB Speedway 'free' with my Virgin deal and then I watched every Monday meeting. Speedway fan for 40 years, attended probably 2000 plus meetings in that time ... But having it regularly on TV and I really do stay home more often. And every time I do the promoters lose the best part of £20. They are right to be more worried about this aspect than people here give them credit for.

mea culpa Clearly I am totally in the wrong. My view was born of spending my entire working life either eating before or after work and paying myself for all my meals and snaks whilst at work. Even when I workied unusal shifts.> This is a very different world, clearly. Can I suggest that we all club together to support a 'fighting fund' for those poor deprived souls who worked for BTSport in 2017. Now I understand their plight of being denied catering facilities I empathise with their cruel and unusual working conditions much more keenly.

Hilarious £30 plus a head for grub at work. I'll have have the lobster, darling!

NO Regulation 9.2 states that in the race-off heats and the Grand Final where it ends 3-3 the winner of the race is actually the loser. It is the second and third that win. This problem is inherent in a pairs event settled by single races rather than overall points score. And yet we are told that it is the TV people who need a deciding final. I bet the TV bods don't realise this gem of a rule they have been landed with and it's potential consequences. I know the 4320 scoring often used (but not here) has this effect and other pairs events run with the second and third winning, but really is that consistent with an event having a a deciding single race? I have certainly hated its use over the years. Surely any method where the guy that wins the Grand final may be deemed the loser of the championship, is bloody bonkers as a crescendo to a 4 day international tournament on TV, especially to outside viewers.

You are right in so much of what you say. We just come to different conclusions on the effect Speedway on TV may have on attendance. Yes I am a neutral in some respects because of where I live. An Aces supporter in London is not ideal. But that has been the case since 1984 so it's nothing new. In the last few of years i have attended around 10-15 UK meetings plus a couple of GP/SWC per annum and all have been a separate choice rather than ritual to a nearby hometrack. This is massively reduced from my high spot of the eighties and nineties when I averaged 80 plus meetings a year. The last time did over 50 a year must have been the early 2000s. Many things have influenced my choice to attend (of course) from the weather, to Aces fixtures, to team absences, to changes of race nights, track closures and even marital status. As it always did back in the day. But I'm afraid that having the luxury of some TV coverage always being available within the next few days has been the single biggest reason for making the choice to stay at home than anything else, when push comes to shove. Especially after i have a paid the monthly fee i feel 'justified' in making that choice to get my 'money's worth'. Sundays watching Polish league matches online actually quite a factor too now. There are only so many hours that one can devote to Speedway and with so much of that being 'used up' inside the home it is really just inevitable that would reduce the time devoted to live attendance. Isn't it? I have no idea how representative this is of others. And I know It says some sad things about me. But it is the truth.

I find it quite interesting how some are using examples from other areas of sport (?) and their TV marketing success. And yet I don't have the faintest idea of what they are talking about. Clearly the marketing has been good enough to engage many many people who like that kind of thing ... but it has passed me by, totally. Perhaps that shows the mountain Speedway would have to climb to be effective at getting through to folk anything like me. I was wondering does this UFC have a UK league of system of twenty odd venues running March to October that I can attend regularly on Monday nights? And if so, how do they go about getting all the other venues running that night filled, with (say) 1500 spectators or so, whilst one of them is also being televised Live at the same time? Their experience at making that a success may be useful here.

To be honest Halifax Tiger you are a very special case, yourself. Living in Elland and attending 50% of Workington fixtures as well as several visits to Isle of Wight must make you the most fervant and most travelled Speedway Supporter here. Which is brilliant and makes many of your posts informative to many. From my own perspective, as a northern exile in the South East, I can say with certainty that in 2017 (and previous years) I watched every League meeting on TV and didn't attend any meeting Live on those nights. And over the course of the last few seasons my general attendance has gone down as a direct result of having Speedway (incl GPs) on the TV. Whilst I do not consider myself representative of all supporters I believe I may be a LITTLE more so than yourself who must be the UK's No1 attendee. The various bizarre and irrational reasons that other fairweather fans use to make a choice NOT to attend must be quite impossible to imagine for the ultra-commited. But we do. And I do think TV is a real factor that is quite a bit bigger than some here seem to be aware of.

The famous Belle Vue training schools were on Monday nights at Hyde Road. Bizarre really that the in those days the league meeting went on prime Saturday evening and the training school on a dead Monday. Whereas today the team has to race on in the Monday graveyard.

As I made clear. I offered no criticism of TR.

This is not accurate surely. I thought Terry Russell was very much involved in negotiating when Sky decided they wanted out on their deal last year. And was also involved in cobbling together last year's arrangement to salvage the half year arrangement with BT. Actually not criticising TR here ... Just didn't think the sequence of events you state is quite right.

Well ... The trouble is they MAY have a point. If I look through my own diary from the last few years then my speedway attending does seem to vary quite bit along with the TV schedules (as it does for GP and SWC attending). Much more than I thought before checking back on the true data. Fewer meetings attending in the couple of weeks after the SWC , most often after a GP Saturday it is Monday on TV rather than live attending that week and there is no doubt I went to more meetings before June last year and fewer whenev the BT regular Monday's started. In addition, I have avoided going to ANY league match that is being televised for years and years. And I have hardly attending any league meetings on a Saturdays, largely due to TV on alternate weeks. It is quite plausible that some people may forgoe a night at Derwent Park to watch a GP from (say) Poland on the same night combined with a league match from Belle Vue on the following Monday. I would!

I think you are absolutely right. But if I were in some promoters shoes, with my own money on the line i would FEEL quite a bit different and I would be 'bitching' like mad i would imagine. The prospect of running many meetings on (say) graveyard-Monday against TV Speedway elsewhere or (worse still) at my track with no adequate guaranteed compensation if it is unprofitable would give me the real colly wobbles. And all the (correct) talk of the greater good, sponsorship opportunities etc etc would do very little to ease my night's sleep. But then I am not a Promoter. And nor are most of those here who are deriding those poor buggers (whose gonads are on the line) who have misgivings.

I appreciate that. But it would have been preferable to remove the third meeting of the SWC ( or come up with another work-around) to deal with that problem. Rather than this. Although the race off has produced brilliant TV; if it has not been viable to run then it would have been reasonably straightforward to have found three qualifiers going to the SWC Final against the hosts., without a race-off, somehow. Either an extra qualifier (somewhere other than Poland) or highest scoring second team. Perhaps a little innovative thinking could have been used. Similarly, the two-day final of this hodge-potch is unnecessary if there really is any doubt about the viabilty of the first day. Two rounds and a final. Wham bham. Why didn't they just try to tinker with the brilliant SWC a little just to get it to work a little better. Instead of putting it on hold whilst creating a tournament that may have some of the very same issues inherent from the start and (as I believe) introduce other issues that they don't seem to have given much thought to as yet.

Actually that would have been a far superior and more innovative competition. Though not as good as the SWC, admittedly. But be careful, many here feel we are are supposed to find no fault with the ideas of our betters in authority. We must look at them with worshipful positivity. And certainly never ever criticise no matter that our views are only intended to be for the betterment of the sport.

Mr Pairman speaks from genuine experience; and that could be repeated by many other promoters going back decades. And still people here are not prepared to listen. I have lost count of the number of times I have personally taken up a one-off offer to sample something new or different at reduced price. Cinema Tickets, Rugby, Cricket, Football, Local and London Theatre, Restaurants and many more things over many many years And yet I count up very few where I have ever returned to the same venue or event when it is full price on the back of that offer-visit.. Even when I really enjoyed the experience immensely. In fact, the knowledge that a cheaper offer may one day appear in my inbox is reason enough to wait until it does Or take up a totally different offer from somewhere else. I cannot really expect other people to do differently to what I have done myself, often. So why are so many people here convinced otherwise just because it is Speedway

You may be right on that. But we were actually discussing the 'climax' element demanded by TV. Which the SWC managed without for many years producing exciting Speedway that came across brilliantly on TV and seemed to satisfy the media people as well as fans. Of course by having a two day event the organisers are actually ensuring that the first meeting ends with no climax at all. Which is strange if the TV people need it so much

Jos Vaessen must feel vindicated. It has taken thirty years for the FIM to resurrect his failed Amsterdam experiment on real Speedway. I bet it will be another 30 years again before it is repeated. '

Well. The SWC managed very well for over 15years without succumbing to the Grand Final pressure from TV. The team with most points won. And it seemed quite successful.

So the final is not a winner takes all. The guy that wins this final doesn't necessarily get top position in the podium It is really just a final chance for the second places team to it, even if they were miles behind after forty two races and two days ...But only if they get a 4-2.I I know that all makes some sort of sense here. But On TV it will look way too complicated and contrived for the casual viewer.

The TV schedulers would love it.

Perhaps they have not had enough time to think these things through. It has taken them months to get this far, after all. It being such a small, unimportant matter ... Of just how the winner is decided. Can't expect them to have that covered straight away.

Everyone understands that TV wants a decisive final race. We are not stupid. But a Grand Final that may easily end 3-3 is not consistent with that, is It?

I actually agree with you. The 3-2-1-0 system is well suited to a 21 heat meeting where all pairs meet each other once and they final positions are decided on total points scored. Even doing tha twice over successive days (bonkers though that seems) and it would still work fine. But why the hell spoil it by having 'shoot outs' and Grand Finals that, unlike GPS, do not work well with that scoring with pairs to produce decisive results. Quite the opposite. After all this delay and a major flaw seems so obviously at the heart of their big new idea. The combined brainpower applied to this over months .... And negligable results to show for it. Nonsense, it was done on the back of a fag packet in about twenty minutes last night whilst watching Eastenders. It makes Keith Chapman look like MENSA material.

In a more sensible world people would be offended by the grotesque sugar content of the drinks being 'pushed' to kids. Rather than the young women who choose to parade around in their panties for a living harming no one.