|
Post by donsking on Jul 3, 2007 2:04:30 GMT
I sort of tried this one once before; it got a few reads and no replies, and I wasn't happy with how I'd worded it, so I deleted it, now I'll try again.
Home advantage is the norm, an away win is considered unusual, and so it has been for 80 years of UK speedway.
In the early days, speedway was introduced as a kind of circus attraction, an opportunity to exploit a fee paying public that was hungry for excitement, a diversion from their otherwise humdrum lives.
In those days, it's obvious that the promoters wanted to make the most from their tracks, so winning at home was an absolute given, there would be no point in even getting involved with the sport if there was no money to be made.
Last night, I witnessed a curious thing; all night, Nicki Pedersen was unbeatable at Arlington, not just knicking his heats by a fraction, he won every one by a country mile.
In heat 15, he was looking well beaten by his team mate (strange in itself) but then passed him on the line to take the flag.
We already have anecdotal evidence that at least one WC final was lost because a certain rider didn't ask for help when it mattered, and pubished evidence that 'buying a point' here or there happened, and maybe it still does.
These days, I kinda get the impression that watching speedway is a bit like the World Of Sport Saturday afternoon staple of "Let's hand over to Kent Walton, and Professional Wrestling"; we all knew it was fixed, but it made interesting viewing.
So, have I asked the question that no-one really wants to ask, asked the question that no-one really wants to answer, or been so nieve that everyone but me knows the answer ?
|
|
|
Post by schumi on Jul 3, 2007 7:13:06 GMT
I don't think it's particularly surprising that Davy got in front of Nicki in heat 15 - Davy's been scoring much better this season and has looked good. And to me it looked like Davy made the gate and Nicki let him go. He'd already got his paid maximum, the meeting was already won and there was a (very) slim chance of nicking the bonus if they got a 5-0. Why jeopardise that small chance just to get another point that he would have been paid for anyway?
But that's not really what you're asking. I think to suggest the whole sport is a fix is pushing it, but I do believe average reduction goes on, and there have been a couple of dubious instances when you wonder if there is more to it than meets the eye. A couple of SWC meetings spring to mind, though I can't remember the specifics.
But on the whole I don't think there is anything untoward going on. Maybe I'm being naive, but I think that when a rider is being paid per point in a sport that is widely acknowledged as being expensive to compete in, that they wouldn't want to risk losing their income for the sake of a team who may or may not keep them on the next season.
Though now I've read that back I'm wondering all sorts of things, which might take me a while to answer. ;D Can you narrow down the question and say what in particular you think is the issue? Are we talking about throwing meetings, average reduction or betting here, or something else?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2007 11:17:42 GMT
I don't think the sport as a whole is fixed but as Schumi said there are some things that go on that are not strictly within the spirit of the sport.
Average fixing does go on, it happened at Lynn a few years back. No one will openly admit it, but we all knew it and there was quite a discussion on the then Lynn forum about it. General opinion from memory was very anti.
I think we have all seen instances of races not being won when they should have been simply to allow the use of a "tactical sub" in the following race. That strictly speaking is race fixing.
An interesting comparison, as wrestling at that time was mega, if only speedway had half the coverage ;D If I'm totally honest I no longer look on speedway as a sport, it's an entertainment. The rules are at best a hotch potch and don't necessarily reward the best team, merely the one that uses them to best advantage. The outside influences have more sway than is healthy in sport and the world championship (or GP series cos there is no alternative) is not a true world championship when it's very much a closed shop and not open to all to enter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2007 11:26:47 GMT
We already have anecdotal evidence that at least one WC final was lost because a certain rider didn't ask for help when it mattered, and pubished evidence that 'buying a point' here or there happened, and maybe it still does. If you're talking about the 1951 final I don't think there was any question of money changing hands I think the point was that the others in the final race with Jack Biggs just felt he should have asked them to stay out of the way, but because he didn't they felt he was being arrogant and decided to take him out. Personally, I'm not convinced this was why he lost anyway. Also, it wasn't the case that home teams always won in the early days. In the very first Southern League in 1929 Wimbledon won 5 out of 10 home matches, while in the English Dirt Track League in the same year, Barnsely won 6 out of 10. The following year, 1930, Nottingham won 2 out of 12 in the Southern League and so on and so on. If teams always won their home matches no-one would ever have won the league, they'd have all been equal! On your main point however, it is undoubtedly true that there have been fixed races and matches in the past. See Malcolm Simmons' autobiography. Whether it goes on now I'm not really qualified to say. I would hope not.
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jul 3, 2007 11:28:56 GMT
I don't see a lot of what Star Lady says as being "fixing" - it's just simply taking advantage of very weak rules. Indeed, the rules of speedway, especially as decreed by the BSPA in this country, seem to positively encourage what we might term "sharp practice". Look at the situation down at Newport, where, incidentally, I think it was more luck than sharp practice. Rajkowski at reserve after 6 or so meetings and racking up huge points. It's not as if Newport were alone in benefitting from that. All of a sudden, if you found yourself in need of a guest and the averages were okay, you could enjoy Rajkowski's huge points from reserve yourself. Berwick's attempt at sharp practice this season were, apparently, confounded by the weather leading to the postponement of a home fixture against Birmingham. To me, it's not fixing, it's simply taking advantage of ill-conceived rules - it makes you wonder exactly how much alcohol has been consumed at the BSPA AGM before they make the big decisions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2007 11:36:56 GMT
Dont know about " fixing " so much . You usually only get that in sports where vast amounts of money are gambled on . But i think certain amounts of " helping hands " occur - a la Andersen to Karlsson against Sub's favourite rider in 2004 .
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jul 3, 2007 11:47:01 GMT
Dont know about " fixing " so much . You usually only get that in sports where vast amounts of money are gambled on . But i think certain amounts of " helping hands " occur - a la Andersen to Karlsson against Sub's favourite rider in 2004 . Okay, young fellow, but which of the dastardly Danes was responsible for the mysterious red light? But sometimes you know, this sort of thing is celebrated - who can forget the bemusement and general acclaim that greeted Tomasz Gollob's weird attempt at team riding with the Russians during the SWC of 2003?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2007 11:52:59 GMT
Dont know about " fixing " so much . You usually only get that in sports where vast amounts of money are gambled on . But i think certain amounts of " helping hands " occur - a la Andersen to Karlsson against Sub's favourite rider in 2004 . Okay, young fellow, but which of the dastardly Danes was responsible for the mysterious red light? But sometimes you know, this sort of thing is celebrated - who can forget the bemusement and general acclaim that greeted Tomasz Gollob's weird attempt at team riding with the Russians during the SWC of 2003? ;D aye - couldn't even blame the red light on Ole Olsen .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2007 13:11:27 GMT
I don't think the sport as a whole is fixed but as Schumi said there are some things that go on that are not strictly within the spirit of the sport. Like SKY offering incentives to 13 overseas riders to ensure a British GP winner maybe .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2007 13:32:29 GMT
But reading quotes from those days and not this incident in particular it does seem that it was the done thing.I'm fairly sure i have read a number of interviews where riders have suggested this sort of thing went on in big meetings.Mainly the World Final.I wouldn't be surprised(or should i say i would be surprised)if the same things happened today
|
|
|
Post by donsking on Jul 3, 2007 18:38:48 GMT
I suppose my original post was prompted by a number of questions, firstly, why is it so difficult for speedway teams to win away?
I don't buy the idea that there is a massive home advantage to riders; yes, I imagine there are some tracks that some riders do better at than others, but the truth is these guys are professional motorcycle racers who have usually been riding since they were kids, many of them multi discipline riders even now.
Just this weekend, Joonas Kylmakorpi and Paul Hurry finished 2nd and 3rd in a round of the Longtrack WC, and Hurry also has a successful Grass Track record; taking JK as the example, he's ridden successfully at several different home tracks, plus he's top 3 at Longtrack and I've seen him score maximums at the much smaller Arena.
Unless they're all total duffers at bike set up (which we know isn't true, a lot them are very capable spannermen), I really don't see how a few yards or some extra dirt, or less, makes a vast difference to these riders; these guys are meant to be highly skilled and specialised motorcyclists.
Quick example: Friday April 6th, Lakeside V Ipswich, round 1 a closely fought draw, drive down the road for the evening at Arena, exactly the same lineups and Lakeside totally spank Ippo; how does that happen?
Secondly, I asked a certain highly experienced team manager what was it that increased crowds, was it just winning? He was saying yes almost before I'd finished talking, as far as he was concerned there was no other significant influence on audience numbers, so winning at home is super critical, and, in his view, absolutely essential.
Now obviously, as Norbold says, there will always be exceptions to the rule, not every team can always win at home otherwise there'd be no champion, but I seriously wonder how many matches are won in the pits, rather than on the track, and I don't mean by judicious work with a spanner!
That got me thinking about the BSPA; they make the rules, but they are also the people who benefit directly from those rules, and their money is basically being redistributed amongst themselves the whole time.
They have their AGM, supposedly to hammer out next year's rule changes and, generally, the net result is not much happens, they maybe tinker around a bit, but everything stays fundamentally the same, which I would imagine is how they like it.
So, is it possible that what they actually do is have a five minute chat about what they can do to the rules that won't upset the status quo too much, and spend rather more time working out the basic outcome of next year's league?
Sounds a bit cynical I know, but what happens in the EL has no real bearing on anyone but the promoters, it certainly isn't of any import to any of the other leagues.
I used the example elsewhere of comparing speedway to wrestling; the US has a multibillion dollar industry built around what is essentially two blokes rolling around on the floor in a highly choreographed manner, it's spun, it's hyped, it's rigged and, as a sport, it's totally meaningless.
Surely it would be possible to map out the likely outcome of a few speedway meetings in three or four days?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2007 18:41:02 GMT
So Berwick are actually not that bad then - just raking in a fortune in bribes ;D
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jul 3, 2007 18:54:50 GMT
Would explain the Mercedes, I guess. But, sorry Donsking, I think you're barking up the wrong tree on this one.
|
|
|
Post by donsking on Jul 3, 2007 19:16:07 GMT
Would explain the Mercedes, I guess. But, sorry Donsking, I think you're barking up the wrong tree on this one. Maybe, but if I'm anywhere near half right, it starts to explain some of the more, shall we say, idiosyncratic decisions that are made about the EL.
|
|
|
Post by jimblanchard on Jul 4, 2007 7:55:36 GMT
My thoughts exactly Ian I have often thought about that aspect. Plus the fact that the away riders are switched about and many of the away team have ridden for the home at some time or other and then guests riders etc. Its not that often that a rider in an away team has never ridden there ever in the past. They would all have their own historical data for setting the bikes up too. That has always puzzled me that one. That is I guess another reason why I simply prefer classy high profile individual speedway events for my speedway fix .
|
|