BWitcher

100 percent spot on.

You still clearly don't grasp it, it's not a difficult concept. I haven't changed anything at all. I stated that 9pt men under the 1980 format would be 7pt men now and IF they had spent their career riding under the current format as 7pt men they would NOT ever be classed as top riders, which many of them are listed as. That is stone cold fact no matter how you want to twist it. Mauger in 1980 was NOT a world class rider. He averaged 8.79, he was in decline and not great. Still a decent rider, but not a world class rider. There is what I said. No mention of 'Olsen' or 'Mauger' or the current EL league. Those are all fabrications of yours to try and back up your flawed argument. Once again I will try and explain it to you. Rider A.. Spends 10 years riding in the format of the 70's, early 80's. Averages between 8.50 and 9.50 in that period. Rider B. Spends 10 years riding in the current EL format (NOT current EL, but format), or 10 years in Polish League. Averages between 6.50 and 7.50. The riders are likely very very similar in their world standing but I can guarantee you, Rider A will constantly appear on 'top class rider' lists.. Rider B will not. That is the difference a format can make.

You were the only one who ever mentioned Mauger.. using him to obviously try and prove a flawed point. All I ever said was 9pt riders in 1980 would be 7pt men under the current format. You disputed that... now you're agreeing with it. So it seems you've been arguing over something you created yourself...

I stated that 9pt men in 1980 would be 7pt men under the current format. You won't find many 7pt men being viewed as world class riders. Sometimes they can produce, but on a consistent basis the true world class riders are better. Exactly how it was in 1980, except 9-9.5 men are consistently included in lists as being great riders, the reality was they weren't, they were well below the true top men who were 10.5 to 11 in those days. The format makes a massive difference in how good you perceive a rider to be, especially when one rider spent an entire career in one format.. compared to another guy who spent most of his career in another. This is quite easily proven, one only has to look at what happened when the big leagues were in operation in 95 & 96... you had 6pt men become 8.5pt heat leaders.. Had they spent their whole career riding in such a format they'd be viewed as much higher standard riders..

It was a hell of a lot easier to be considered a world class rider back in the day for the reasons I stated earlier. A hell of a lot easier to get into the sport. A hell of a lot easier to ride the bikes. The sport is infinitely more professional now, in particular in Sweden and Poland, it is light years ahead of the standard in the 80's. In no circumstance would you ever, even in the tailored down Elite League, have a rider turn up to a practice for his first ever ride and be in a team within weeks... which happened quite often back in the 70's. Why? Because it's a lot harder.

Agreed, but even so, its no stronger than now. That will be the case for most eras. Exactly Colin!! I 100% agree with you and this is in a way where speedway has gone wrong. With the larger league, the top riders meeting less often and bonus pts included in the averages, it created a situation where almost every team had 3 riders of 8+, sometimes 3 of 9+... didn't mean the riders were better, it was just Maths. There were no heat 15's so it was rare we'd see a teams no 1 rider trailing in last in any race which can happen on such a regular basis now. This meant in our heads there were many more superstars than there are now. Was that a good thing? In a way, yes it was! It was more exciting to see these big names we rarely saw get beat. I'll add to that the fact we see them race in so many places now.. GB (those left) Sweden, Poland, GP's, Euro Championships.. thus we're seeing them all beaten on a far more regular basis than ever before.. so they don't have that 'aura' about them. The standard isn't any different... just our perception.

Ah the benefit of hindsight. Brilliant isn't it. It's easy to match that list now based upon the level of those riders in 1980. Waiheke will no doubt do so. Here's just a rough list of the top of my head in no particular order Tai Woffinden Emil Sayfutdinov Greg Hancock Nicki Pedersen Patryk Dudek Niels Kristian Iversen Maciej Janowski Chris Holder Matej Zagar Jason Doyle Peter Kildemand Martin Vaculik Gregorij Laguta Piotr Pawlicki Bartosz Zmarzlik All 15 of those could win a GP. In your 15, about 5 of them wouldn't get near. Current list is stronger (and its prob not even the strongest).

Neither does inventing things.. Try sticking to the debate and answering the question waihheke has asked you three times now instead of your childish posts. You know exactly what you're doing. No, it's when you change what is being debated to suit your purpose and invent what has been said, despite being corrected numerous times you continue with it. As regards the skill level of the modern rider... In the past you could pop along to a practice, have your first ride on a bike and be in a team within weeks, happened many times as riders have said in interviews in backtrack. Absolutely NO chance of that happening now. None at all.

I haven't insulted you. I've quite rightly stated you are making things up and posting like a child, spoiling what could be a good debate. Whatever floats your boat I suppose.

Final confirmation that you're trolling, sad you have to be so childish, but it really does show you have nothing to back up your original statement, Glad you've accepted you're wrong though, we can move on now,

For about the fifth time, I've never said anything of the sort, you've invented it. Now you can either discuss the topic at hand, or you can troll for a reaction. There's a good debate that could be had here and waihheke is providing some brilliant analysis, sadly you seem hell bent on acting like. Child, very sad!

The reality is, due to league size and race format plus bog standard riders at the bottom end of teams it was rare you saw heat leaders drop more than a couple of pts in a meet. Hence you consider them as world class, Throw in the fact bonuses were included in averages too. The worlds best riders are now far more condensed into teams in Poland and Sweden. As a result those riders who are good, but not world class get beat far more often so are judged to be of a lower standard compared to similar riders in past eras.

are you living in some alternate universe rob? Nobody has said the current EL is tougher than the BL in 1980. I stated that there weren't many more world class riders in 1980 than there are now. Your way of proving that is how many 9 pt men there were, which is ENTIRELY format dependant. As for Emil he would be nowhere near 11 in the current EL. 10 at best.

This isn't even the argument. You're desperately trying (and failing) to prove your point there were more world class riders in that period by introducing something totally different. I have made no comparisons to the current elite league, only the format. Take the group of riders in the 80's, place them into a league with 8 teams and the current format and that's what you watch season after season you wouldn't think there were anywhere near as many world class riders. If you want to make a comparison compare with the polish league where the teams are miles stronger.. As in Sweden.

No,that is something you've made up. Usual when you can't argue the actual point. You totally agree with a made up point? Brilliant. And yet more made up nonsense!

No there wasn't. Absolute and utter nonsense to suggest there was. Peter Kildemand can make GP finals, but he couldn't qualify for the GP's on merit, in a field not containing most of the Worlds best. You only think they were all stars because of the format you saw them race in. That's all. Throw them into a format such as the Polish or Swedish League or even more so, stick them in an EL format and 50% of those 9pt men you thought were 'stars' become 7pt men and you think they're mediocre.

There was no more 'genuine' world class opposition around in the 80's than there is now.

Probably not technically true that.. What Emil is or isn't interested in is of little relevance. He does as he is told.

Although not racing regularly, Sam Ermolenko still takes part in a few meetings a year. If it weren't for the accumulation of injuries he suffered he'd almost certainly still be racing full time. He'll be 55 in 3 weeks time. Darcy Ward and Maciej Janowski two of his scalps in his 50's

With the right manager, Klindt would be. However we don't have the right manager. As Wolfie says, we don't have a reserve likely to move up... we'll have to see what the 'draft' brings.

He didn't and even if he did, that would actually suggest he wasn't 'knocked off'.

So, finally an admission. Hancock jumped of his bike. However, as you have mentioned it, please list just some of the 'plenty of ways a rider can be taken out without contact'.

Except he wasn't taken out. Wasn't even touched.

Someone explain to Dekker, the one apologising is Masters. The ones needing to apologise for his behaviour are his supporters. He does seem a tad confused.

Another delusional post. What you fail to grasp is that when Nicki crosses the line, hardly anyone, if anyone, defend him. Whereas when Hancock, Monster crew, Sam Masters etc cross the line, the fanboyds/girls are full of defense, praise, excuses. You yourself are a prime example.. I even notice you've adopted the same childish style with your little digs that you no doubt consider to be amusing. The reality of this situation is that there are no actions of Nicki to defend, he did nothing wrong.. yet here you are proving my point for me.