Grand Central

Absolutely. I was just pointing out that the fortunes of Speedway Star will have matched those of the sport itself. Its dwindling circulation probably mimicing those reduced numbers through the turnstiles; creating the same issues. And it has only (very recently) increased it's price to its current £3 which is still less of a rise than the inflation figure you quote. Speedway promoters have taken a different path with their admission charges.

WAY, WAY OFF. According to the Speedway Star Preview for the 1999 season Workington were £7.50 for Adults. Make of that what you will. Edit: Over that 18 year period Worlkingtons entry fee has increased by 106% If Speedway Star had increased their cover price by the same proportion (instead of their actual 58%) it would be nearly £4 an issue not £3. I wonder (doubt) if Philip Rising would regard that a viable price for his business model.

40 odd years. ha ha

They(we) still do. It's really no different that calling a mic' a Mike...

I dont think ANYONE has ever said that the old tac sub rules were changed because of any distate on the part of the paying public. It has been stated time and again that the only reason it was changed was to save money. Personally I think it was a very sad change at the time as it changed the tactical element of a meeting drastcally, and detrimentally. By amending the regulations slightly at the time the 'cost' and 'Heat 8' issue could have been easily ameliorated. But the BSPA threw the baby out with the bath water and gave us the defective 'double point' bunkum in its place. Today it would no doubt be ridiculously expensive to reinstate the old ruling. But with the match point system now in place the need for atactical ride is hardly an issue. And lets face it the double up, guest, rider replacement clap trap we have today FAR EXCEEDS this entire TR thing anyway.

Daft example. In that particular case neither a tactical ride or old tac subs is going to make a match of it. .

Yes, i was being facetious (as usual) about him. There are many times when criticism of promoters here is seen by some here as excessive. But they are so often ones who reinforce, by their own actions, the negative view of them as being really quite reasonable.

It seems almost inconceivable that any promoter is getting enough people through the turnstiles to hold that view. In fact, if there is a promoter in such an enviable position. That would surely mark the guy out, wouldn't it?

I don't think Wednesday is an option for the PL is it?

I did not say that I wanted the old tac sub rules reinstated today. It's time has passed. I did not say that I wanted the fans interests to override everything else. The double point tactical ride was a ridiculous invention at its point of creation. And it still is today. The introduction of the match points system was a brilliant way of dealing with the issue of keeping interest in matches going. The 'Joker' should never have had a place in a serious sport.

How trite. And so representative of exactly the attitude that has got to where we are today.

All correct. 1. For the promoters benefit. 2. For the riders benefit. Which are the only people to consider. No one else counts.

It was a good idea. Until it was superceded by an even better one. The current match points system. This keeps interest going in both first and second matches brilliantly. Irrespective of the aggregate score which may be very one sided; and only ever really came into play in the second meeting.

You were on safer ground arguing against the double point TR. Which is an abomination. Not the match points issue Which is a one of British Speedway's few modern-day advancements. Whilst I think there is almost unanimous support to eradicate tthe double point nonsense. It just needs a couple of dozen promoters to actually listen and respond.

They are just as up to date as far as I can see. The difference in figures is because yours include Cup and Trophy matches whilst his are only for standard league fixtures.

Peter Oakes says 526. I do hope he is right. We have learned how he hates folk who spread misinformation.

Unfortunately, as the season has gone on that figure is NOT staggering at all. There had to be an average number greater than one guest per match. That was obvious. But it has 'felt' an awful lot more than that in recent weeks. If you told me it was a couple of hundred more, I would not have been surprised.

You are probably right. But here we are a couple of months later potentially facing up to the same issue. No one wins, do they?

What is just as infuriating is that the original fixture was cancelled first thing on Sunday morning. When the forecast was much better than it is today. And on that original date we only had a shower later in the day when the racing would have been all but over. Sometimes we keep digging a bigger and bigger hole for ourselves to clamber out from.

At a guess. There must have been somewhere around 500 matches. So around 550 to 570 guests.

How strange. That sounds so primitive/ Bearing in mind the importance of their role. You would think it worthwhile some attempting to improve that situation.

I know that we all have different opinions. But this is more different than most. I cannot BEGIN to work out how you have come to that ranking

I am still to be convinced on just how good Simmons was in 1976. He won the Internationale and all British rounds of the World Championship; and the Pairs with John Louis. And of course second in Katowice ... because Ivan had his ef !! But otherwise, was it that special, surely quite a few others had a better 76 than him ... Olsen, PC, Mauger even Louis Crump and Jessup had better league seasons that him. And to even compete with KC in 1982 or DJ in 1980? that was way below them? They were head and shoulders above just about everyone in those years. Simmons was never close to that. Or am I wrong ? I am open to persuasion.

It is hardly surprising that the five riders we are discussing should be difficult to separate. With the exception of Carter they had long careers as heat leaders in the BL in overlapping years. They all had strong international records over a variety of competitions in an age when those sorts of meetings seemed quite meaningful. And yet none of them won the top prize. So it really comes down to our own judgement and that does tend to be guided by our subconscious prejudices. And therefore opinions vary so widely. Being a northern boy I saw Carter at his peak. I don't think any of the others were as good as him at their comparative peak. That gives him top spot for me. But if we have to make longevity at the top more if a priority then then others have better claims. To me Jessup was quite brilliant in 1980 I think he shades it over the other non World Champ Brits who were never quite that good at their best. But he wasn't mentioned in the OP. Morton was so much better than Simmons or Louis that he has runners up spot nailed for me. 1 Carter 2 Morton 3 Louis 4 Simmons 5 Wilson

A reasonable thought. But do they not have a screen showing them the pictures we are receiving at home? On Saturday it was obvious something was amiss with that; as has been been confirmed by Philip Rising. But for a couple of races the 'calling' of positions and judgement was so awry that I thought he was doing the job blindfold.