|
|
Post by admin on Feb 4, 2009 17:51:00 GMT
Since the inception of the Grand Prix series in 1995 a number of formats have been used for the competition:
1995-1997: The first format used was the tried and tested twenty heat format followed by four addition races to determine points. The bottom four riders would go into the twenty-first race and so on, until the top four riders battled it out for the Grand Prix victory. The circus contained seventeen permanent members, with two starting the season at reserve and then taking the place of the lowest two riders at the second Grand Prix and so on. The sixteenth place in the field was taken by a nominated "wild card", usually, although not always, taken by a rider from the host country.
1998-2001: The second format was a progressive elimination format. The field was expanded to twenty-four riders, twenty-two of whom were premanent members of the circus, with two "wild cards". The meeting started with a series of heats and elimination heats between riders numbered 9-24 to find eight riders to meet the riders numbered 1-8 in another series of heats and elimination heats to find eight riders to compete in the semi finals. The first two riders in the semi-finals went to the "A" final (much loved by Leigh Adams, although he didn't make too many) and the third and fourth placed riders went to the "B" final. These two finals determined points, the GP winner and, of course, the eight riders were numbered 1-8 in the following GP.
2002-2004: The above format was tweaked for the 2002 season, after the riders complained that the top eight riders were materially disadvantaged by not having a run on the track ahead of the main competition, while the lower riders were advantaged by riding in the earlier heats. So, the "B" final was scrapped and two additional heats were introduced to give riders numbered 1-8 an extra run on the track.
2005-2006: The next format tried, was a return to the traditional twenty heat format, with semi-finals and then a final. That meant a return to a field consisting of just sixteen riders; fifteen permanent members and one "wild card" for each GP, usually a local rider. In addition, the points scored in the twenty heats were the points that counted in the world championship, unless you made the final, where the points were allocated as before (1st = 25, 2nd = 20, 3rd = 18 and 4th = 16).
2007- Present: The above format was tweaked for the 2007 season to make it less of an advantage to make the final. Points gained in the semi-finals and final were simply added to points gained in the twenty heats, although points scored in the final were doubled.
So, which format is the preference of our members and why?
|
|
|
|
Post by zonkers on Feb 4, 2009 18:57:48 GMT
Since the inception of the Grand Prix series in 1995 a number of formats have been used for the competition: 1995-1997: The first format used was the tried and tested twenty heat format followed by four addition races to determine points. The bottom four riders would go into the twenty-first race and so on, until the top four riders battled it out for the Grand Prix victory. The circus contained seventeen permanent members, with two starting the season at reserve and then taking the place of the lowest two riders at the second Grand Prix and so on. The sixteenth place in the field was taken by a nominated "wild card", usually, although not always, taken by a rider from the host country. 1998-2001: The second format was a progressive elimination format. The field was expanded to twenty-four riders, twenty-two of whom were premanent members of the circus, with two "wild cards". The meeting started with a series of heats and elimination heats between riders numbered 9-24 to find eight riders to meet the riders numbered 1-8 in another series of heats and elimination heats to find eight riders to compete in the semi finals. The first two riders in the semi-finals went to the "A" final (much loved by Leigh Adams, although he didn't make too many) and the third and fourth placed riders went to the "B" final. These two finals determined points, the GP winner and, of course, the eight riders were numbered 1-8 in the following GP. 2002-2004: The above format was tweaked for the 2002 season, after the riders complained that the top eight riders were materially disadvantaged by not having a run on the track ahead of the main competition, while the lower riders were advantaged by riding in the earlier heats. So, the "B" final was scrapped and two additional heats were introduced to give riders numbered 1-8 an extra run on the track. 2005-2006: The next format tried, was a return to the traditional twenty heat format, with semi-finals and then a final. That meant a return to a field consisting of just sixteen riders; fifteen permanent members and one "wild card" for each GP, usually a local rider. In addition, the points scored in the twenty heats were the points that counted in the world championship, unless you made the final, where the points were allocated as before (1st = 25, 2nd = 20, 3rd = 18 and 4th = 16). 2007- Present: The above format was tweaked for the 2007 season to make it less of an advantage to make the final. Points gained in the semi-finals and final were simply added to points gained in the twenty heats, although points scored in the final were doubled. So, which format is the preference of our members and why? Woah, this hurt my head. Had to read it several times! Unless I'm reading it wrong, the first one seems the fairest and most logical of them all. But why was it changed?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2009 18:58:20 GMT
The current rules are probably the least farcical, but as i have previously mentioned, i would prefer to see an end to the semi's and final, with the gp victor being decided as per the old world championship basis.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2009 19:01:34 GMT
Since the inception of the Grand Prix series in 1995 a number of formats have been used for the competition: 1995-1997: The first format used was the tried and tested twenty heat format followed by four addition races to determine points. The bottom four riders would go into the twenty-first race and so on, until the top four riders battled it out for the Grand Prix victory. The circus contained seventeen permanent members, with two starting the season at reserve and then taking the place of the lowest two riders at the second Grand Prix and so on. The sixteenth place in the field was taken by a nominated "wild card", usually, although not always, taken by a rider from the host country. 1998-2001: The second format was a progressive elimination format. The field was expanded to twenty-four riders, twenty-two of whom were premanent members of the circus, with two "wild cards". The meeting started with a series of heats and elimination heats between riders numbered 9-24 to find eight riders to meet the riders numbered 1-8 in another series of heats and elimination heats to find eight riders to compete in the semi finals. The first two riders in the semi-finals went to the "A" final (much loved by Leigh Adams, although he didn't make too many) and the third and fourth placed riders went to the "B" final. These two finals determined points, the GP winner and, of course, the eight riders were numbered 1-8 in the following GP. 2002-2004: The above format was tweaked for the 2002 season, after the riders complained that the top eight riders were materially disadvantaged by not having a run on the track ahead of the main competition, while the lower riders were advantaged by riding in the earlier heats. So, the "B" final was scrapped and two additional heats were introduced to give riders numbered 1-8 an extra run on the track. 2005-2006: The next format tried, was a return to the traditional twenty heat format, with semi-finals and then a final. That meant a return to a field consisting of just sixteen riders; fifteen permanent members and one "wild card" for each GP, usually a local rider. In addition, the points scored in the twenty heats were the points that counted in the world championship, unless you made the final, where the points were allocated as before (1st = 25, 2nd = 20, 3rd = 18 and 4th = 16). 2007- Present: The above format was tweaked for the 2007 season to make it less of an advantage to make the final. Points gained in the semi-finals and final were simply added to points gained in the twenty heats, although points scored in the final were doubled. So, which format is the preference of our members and why? Woah, this hurt my head. Had to read it several times! Unless I'm reading it wrong, the first one seems the fairest and most logical of them all. But why was it changed? Because it was'nt the fairest or most logical. |
|
|
|
Post by zonkers on Feb 4, 2009 19:14:24 GMT
Woah, this hurt my head. Had to read it several times! Unless I'm reading it wrong, the first one seems the fairest and most logical of them all. But why was it changed? Because it was'nt the fairest or most logical. Oh ok ! ;D What do I know?  I know nothing ! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Feb 4, 2009 19:19:09 GMT
Because it was'nt the fairest or most logical. I have to say that I'm quite drawn to the 1995-1997 format. Everyone got six heats. Five heats to prove their worth and then an additional heat to prove their position in their relative group. The poorest couple of riders in each GP were eliminated from the next GP, although in practice this only happened rarely, due to injuries et cetera. Points were allocated according to position, so the winner of Ht 21 could not score more than the last rider in Ht 22. Now, the points system changed with each year; tweaked to bring about a fairer system after study of the previous season's results. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2009 19:32:01 GMT
Because it was'nt the fairest or most logical. I have to say that I'm quite drawn to the 1995-1997 format. Everyone got six heats. Five heats to prove their worth and then an additional heat to prove their position in their relative group. The poorest couple of riders in each GP were eliminated from the next GP, although in practice this only happened rarely, due to injuries et cetera. Points were allocated according to position, so the winner of Ht 21 could not score more than the last rider in Ht 22. Now, the points system changed with each year; tweaked to bring about a fairer system after study of the previous season's results. To be honest Sub, i did'nt mind the format myself, my comment was merely a little jibe at my favourite poster, to keep her on her toes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2009 19:51:44 GMT
The original format was too predictable, and was deemed to have too many dead heats towards the end of the meeting. The knockout format jazzed things up at the expense of any sort of fairness, but the 24 riders it needed was obviously too expensive for BSI. Going back to 16 riders allowed the individual prize money to increase, but without increasing overall expenditure. However, you're somewhat limited in your choice of formats with that number of riders, and a 16-rider knockout format wouldn't generate enough heats. Unfortunately, a fair system doesn't always equate to exciting. |
|
|
|
Post by zonkers on Feb 4, 2009 23:18:02 GMT
I have to say that I'm quite drawn to the 1995-1997 format. Everyone got six heats. Five heats to prove their worth and then an additional heat to prove their position in their relative group. The poorest couple of riders in each GP were eliminated from the next GP, although in practice this only happened rarely, due to injuries et cetera. Points were allocated according to position, so the winner of Ht 21 could not score more than the last rider in Ht 22. Now, the points system changed with each year; tweaked to bring about a fairer system after study of the previous season's results. To be honest Sub, i did'nt mind the format myself, my comment was merely a little jibe at my favourite poster, to keep her on her toes. Oi !! Cheeky !! ;D That's out of order, that is ! |
|
|
|
Post by zonkers on Feb 5, 2009 13:29:20 GMT
The original format was too predictable, and was deemed to have too many dead heats towards the end of the meeting. The knockout format jazzed things up at the expense of any sort of fairness, but the 24 riders it needed was obviously too expensive for BSI. Going back to 16 riders allowed the individual prize money to increase, but without increasing overall expenditure. However, you're somewhat limited in your choice of formats with that number of riders, and a 16-rider knockout format wouldn't generate enough heats. Unfortunately, a fair system doesn't always equate to exciting. But there must be a way of making it both fair and exciting...? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2009 13:44:11 GMT
Elimination style - wrong but entertaining/
|
|
I know nothing ! ;D