Subedei

I'd be astonished if Leigh Adams rides for Leszno.

It could, of course, be pointed out that Mark Loram didn't win a single GP the year he became champion - consistency did it for him, not winning.

And Gollob defeats Balinski to claim the silver medal. Now, if the Poles followed Britain's example for determining the "wild card" for their Grand Prix, Desperate Damian Balinski would be heading for Bydgoszcz and everyone else would be heading for cover.

Fair play to Jeleniewski - he said he was out to prove his Rybnik win the semis was no fluke and I rather think he's done that. And maybe he'll find himself onto bigger and better things next season, since I understand these are troubled times for Lublin.

Let's hope the weirdness of Jacek Rempala confounds and engulfs the rest of the field. Tomasz Gollob may have been the winner last year, but the Weird Wonder defeated him.

One person who must, on no account, be allowed in the GPs next season is Antonio Lindback. Surely we can all agree on that at least?

And maybe that's why the former British champion decides not to bother with the qualifiers - harder to argue for his nomination if he fails in the GPs and in the qualifiers. As for Hampel, to be honest, I'm not that inclined to argue for his nomination if he slips outside the top eight, regardless of how many GPs he makes. He just managed to qualify for this season and did rely on a nomination the season before. If it came to a straight choice between Hampel and Kasprzak, I'd be inclined to go for Kasprzak. But I'm waiting to see the outcome of Vojens before starting to ponder the nomination process. There could be some very big names in the nomination hat.

All this talk of a nomination for Wieslaw Jagus is something of a red herring. Wieslaw Jagus isn't going to be offered a nomination, so he won't have the option of accepting it or turning it down - that's my opinion. He's the wrong nationality. And until we know the result of the qualification final, we won't be able to make any judgement on likely nominations. This qualification final could prove to be something of a spanner in the nomination works, I fancy. Ideal scenario for the FIM and IMG would be, I suggest, be Lindgren, Kasprzak and any one of Bjerre, Iversen and BP filling the qualification process. A clean sweep for the Danes would put a real squeeze on the scope for manoeuvre of the FIM and IMG when it comes to nominations. It's looking a tough task for Andreas Jonsson to qualify in the top eight, but he's won a GP this season and has been solidly in the top eight for several seasons now. He's a certainty for next season. Zagar's another that looks unlikely to make it on merit and looks like being another who could be seeking a nomination. And it is not beyond the realms of possibility that Tomasz Gollob and Jaroslaw Hampel will be looking for nominations, although I suspect Gollob will call it a day if he doesn't get there on merit. Lindgren did very well in his two outings this season and a double nomination as "wild card" surely suggests that the Swedes want Lindgren in the GPs in 2008. If it doesn't happen at Vojens, he's another in the nomination mix, together with Kasprzak. Depending on the final configuration of the top eight and the qualifiers from Vojens, the nomination process could be very interesting indeed. And what does the future hold for Leigh Adams and Greg Hancock? Early season suggestions that this would be Adams' last hurrah seem to have gone quiet and I'd hope that he'd hang around for at least another season. Hancock, on the other hand, started like a train but he's hit the buffers recently and may decide to call it a day.

But I fancy, young Turner, you already know the answer to that, don't you.

No, Hans Andersen wasn't counted as being in the top eight, thus Hampel, who finished 9th was deemed to have been 8th. The seeded places went to the former British champion, BP, Lindback (God alone knows why, since he's worse than the former British champion) and Harris, who is the only one actually proving his worth.

I'm certainly impressed by your foresight. You say that "Hampel and Jagus will take it next year...but I guess that's ok because they missed a GP", which seems to suggest that you know that Jagus will miss a GP and since he hasn't missed one yet, you must be able to see into the future. Should Hampel be in the GPs next season if he fails to hit the top eight? Yes, he deserves a second chance. He qualified for this season and should be allowed a second chance. Wieslaw Jagus? I think he's done okay this season and like Hampel he qualified for this season, so, yes, give him a second chance as well. Although I suspect that if he finishes outside the top eight he won't get one. How many chances has the former British champion had? Failed to qualify for 2005, failed to qualify for 2006 and failed to qualify for 2007. A long and miserable list of failure that you seem satisfied with.

The answer will be certainly, as long as everyone accepts that the former British champion is of a low standard.

No, I just have higher standards than the terminally deluded.

But he didn't, did he? No, he finished, once again, outside the top eight, but swallowed his brave words of earlier in the season and begged for his place. And he's outside the top eight again, in spite of Hampel having missed a round. His favourite GP and all he could manage this season was fourth. That's truly shocking.

The former British champion wasn't level with Hampel though, was he? No, he wasn't and that makes all the difference in the world.

Ah but Ulamek will ride for Czestochowa, if he wants to keep his licence. That, I gather, was the threat hanging over Chrzanowski's head if he hadn't complied with Gdansk's request regarding last Saturday.

Level with Hampel who has missed a round and Jagus who missed two rides after Nicki P clattered into him when he was flying in Eskilstuna. True, only six points, but a yawning chasm between the two when it comes to talent and ability - Gollob has talent and ability to squander, the former British champion is bankrupt by comparison.

A rider of rare and unmatched genius, compared to the obvious limitations of the former British champion. On a fair track, Gollob will always cruelly expose the limitations of such lesser riders.

Make your mind up, will you. Say whether you have integrity or don't mind the corruption that sees this serial failure beg his way into the series year after year after year.

No it isn't important to finish in the top eight. Well, not if your name is Scott Nicholls, anyway. When was the last time he finished in the top eight? I've argued for years that if he can't make the top eight he should be kicked out. I take it from your comments that you agree with me and as such believe he shouldn't be in the series this season anyway.

And Tomasz Gollob: World No 2 in 1999 World No 3 in 1997, 1998 and 2001 1995: Polish Grand Prix winner 1997: Swedish Grand Prix winner 1998: Polish Grand Prix winner 1999: Czech Grand Prix winner 1999: Polish Grand Prix winner 2001: German Grand Prix winner 2002: Polish Grand Prix winner 2003: Polish Grand Prix winner 2004: Polish Grand Prix winner 2005: Polish Grand Prix winner Polish champion in 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 2001, 2002 and 2006. Led Poland to the SWC in 1996, 2005 and 2007.

And Tomasz Gollob has been Polish champion seven times and this time next week it could be eight (the Polish final is on Wednesday). God alone knows how many times Leigh Adams has been Australian champion, or Greg Hancock American champion. Now, let's bang GP titles on the table. Gollob has ten, Hancock seven (I think), Adams five and the former British champion has none.

Yes, he does. And not just his little finger, but a clipping off the nail of his little finger. You bigged up the former British champion, he didn't deliver. Did he? No, I disagree, he hasn't anywhere near the trackcraft of Gollob, just relies on charging around and bullying lesser riders, or taking advantage of shocking track conditions. They met twice and Gollob made mincemeat of him on both occasions, just as Gollob left him for roadkill in the SWC final.

Have I ever questioned his effort, save for when it comes to actually entering the qualification process? Effort on its own only brings rewards on death-trap tracks like Prague in the last GP, or against mediocrities such as Stead in the Elite League. When you get to a track in decent condition, like tonight, you need a hell of a lot more. And Nicholls hasn't got a lot more.

Five thirds from six rides is a "good effort"?