Bears v tiggers

[soupy]

1 minute ago, szkocjasid said:

Can someone explain the logic behind the rule. If most heat advantages decide the tie, what's the reasoning behind two 4-2s being better than a 5-1 & a 3-3?

3-3 is a draw

[Fromafar]

24 minutes ago, szkocjasid said:

Can someone explain the logic behind the rule. If most heat advantages decide the tie, what's the reasoning behind two 4-2s being better than a 5-1 & a 3-3?

Speedway and logic.No such thing.

[IanBrannan]

1 hour ago, szkocjasid said:

Can someone explain the logic behind the rule. If most heat advantages decide the tie, what's the reasoning behind two 4-2s being better than a 5-1 & a 3-3?

It is total heat advantages, if they were 4-2 or 5-1 or 5-0 or whatever doesn't matter. The score achieved doesn't matter. It is heat advantages, it cannot be any simpler than that. 

[arnieg]

A familiar tale:

1.  Speedway fans demand clear rule

2. SCB produce clear rule

3. SCB correctly apply regulation

4. Speedway fans winge

🫣

[LisaColette]

8 minutes ago, IanBrannan said:

It is total heat advantages, if they were 4-2 or 5-1 or 5-0 or whatever doesn't matter. The score achieved doesn't matter. It is heat advantages, it cannot be any simpler than that. 

Tbf it is pretty self explanatory. Not sure why people are trying to make it complicated when it is one of the rules that isn't! 

[szkocjasid]

31 minutes ago, IanBrannan said:

It is total heat advantages, if they were 4-2 or 5-1 or 5-0 or whatever doesn't matter. The score achieved doesn't matter. It is heat advantages, it cannot be any simpler than that. 

I'm not denying it's heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

[GM95]

1 minute ago, szkocjasid said:

I'm not denying its heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

The scores over the 2 legs were of ‘equal value’ so they use heat advantages… are you thick ?

[RoundTheBoards]

1 minute ago, szkocjasid said:

I'm not denying it's heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

Of course they're of equal points value.  That's why we need a tie-breaker.     It's very simple that 2 heat advantages are numerically more than one heat advantage, and this ranks teams with a tied score.

Just as simple as an individual meeting where  1,2,2,1,3 =9  is ranked better than 2,2,2,2,1 = 9  even though they're equal value.

Just as simple as in football where until recently a team winning 2-0 and losing 1-3 were ranked better even though they're equal goals.

 

 

 

[redlead]

9 minutes ago, szkocjasid said:

I'm not denying it's heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

Because 2 4-2's are 2 heat advantages, and a 5-1 and a 3-3 is one heat advantage.

[Gambo95]

8 minutes ago, szkocjasid said:

I'm not denying it's heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

Would also cost the club more as there will be bonus points with the 5-1 scenario whereas there wouldn't with 4-2's.

We have a final that should have taken place in June (at the latest), contested by a team that got through because there were more points awarded in their group than the other groups and a team going through because they had 2 x 4-2's and another team had a 5-1 and a 3-3.

Better not tell my fellow work colleagues that in the morning.

[RoundTheBoards]

7 minutes ago, Gambo95 said:

Better not tell my fellow work colleagues that in the morning.

Were your work colleagues ever bothered when in Champions League football a team won 2-0 at home and lost 3-1 away, and went through to the final even though the aggregate scores were 3-3?

[Noelinho]

You know, the rule could be a lot stupider. They could do it based on the fastest heat time. Like they do for some tiebreaker in SGP. That's dumb!

[Gambo95]

8 minutes ago, RoundTheBoards said:

Were your work colleagues ever bothered when in Champions League football a team won 2-0 at home and lost 3-1 away, and went through to the final even though the aggregate scores were 3-3?

That is fine because it makes the team playing away from home try and score so you get a better game of football instead of just defending all game. Speedway is a different sport.

Let's take your points score of 9 from your last post. Basically you are saying a 3 and a 1 is better than two 2's as the heat win will be ranked higher.

Why is a 3 and a 1 better than two 2's but two 4-2 are better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 (surely by your logic the 5-1 should be ranked higher).

[RoundTheBoards]

18 minutes ago, Gambo95 said:

That is fine because it makes the team playing away from home try and score so you get a better game of football instead of just defending all game. Speedway is a different sport.

Let's take your points score of 9 from your last post. Basically you are saying a 3 and a 1 is better than two 2's as the heat win will be ranked higher.

Why is a 3 and a 1 better than two 2's but two 4-2 are better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 (surely by your logic the 5-1 should be ranked higher).

You're contradicting yourself.

If it's OK to rank a football team higher in a 3-3 draw because the team who are about to miss out will hypothetically play harder at the end to get a goal and make more entertainment, then the same thing applies in Speedway.  If the riders are about to tie on 9 points, then the guy who hasn't had a race win will ride harder to get an extra point, and create more entertainment.

You defeated your own point.

 

The fairest result for any drawn contest is always a draw.  But when we need an actual winner we have to invent a tie-break to split two competetors who by all other standards are exactly equal.

It's the same whether it's football away goals, speedway race wins, or Shirley Ballas getting an extra vote.

What was more unfair than Italy winning football's Euros after only being in the final by virtue of winning a dressing room coin toss with Russia?

Edited 17 hours ago by RoundTheBoards

[Beirao]

10 hours ago, Gambo95 said:

Would also cost the club more as there will be bonus points with the 5-1 scenario whereas there wouldn't with 4-2's.

We have a final that should have taken place in June (at the latest), contested by a team that got through because there were more points awarded in their group than the other groups and a team going through because they had 2 x 4-2's and another team had a 5-1 and a 3-3.

Better not tell my fellow work colleagues that in the morning.

May be bonus points should be the deciding factor, rather than heat wins. Afterall in a Golden Heat second and third outweighs a first place. Just a thought 

[Happy Hunter]

12 hours ago, szkocjasid said:

I'm not denying it's heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

As an alternative you could award the extra point to the team that has the least number of last places (including non finishers and disqualified riders). Admittedly you would still need to toss a coin or draw lots if that results in a tie but you would with the present system. 

[Noelinho]

Why not just make sure both mascots are present at all matches and get them to have a rammy if you can’t break the deadlock? You win by removing the head off the other mascot.

Edited 5 hours ago by Noelinho

[mikebv]

Scott "Well ahead of his time" Nicholls had the answer...

Rock, Paper, Scissors...

Sorted.....

[IanBrannan]

14 hours ago, szkocjasid said:

I'm not denying it's heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

Because a 3-3 is not a heat advantage.
This situation I'm told has never happened quite this way before, ever. The rule was there for the day it did. It will probably never happen again.

[Ben91]

15 hours ago, szkocjasid said:

I'm not denying it's heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

The two 4-2s are both heat advantages. A 5-1 and a 3-3 is a heat advantage and a drawn heat. The rule is most heat advantages. Not difficult to comprehend really.