Aces51

Pusey was a very good rider. I think that he could have achieved far more than he did but he lacked the professionalism and dedication.

So he didn't dominate because he didn't win events that weren't held.

He won his qualifying round, the semi final, was 4th in the British Final and won the Intercontinental Final and the World Final.

What are all the things? I've made one point, that Collins's was more dominant in his best years than Woffinden has been. You can disagree with that and put forward your reasons. For example, you might want to look at the quality of the opposition in the different eras, the quality of the machinery available or any other factor you think is relevant. Sensible posters have done that and I consider and respect the points they make. Abusive posts I treat with the contempt they deserve. I believe and have said before this particular discussion, that you cannot properly compare riders of different eras. My sole point throughout this discussion has been that I have not, so far, seen Woffinden ride, dominate, his contemporaries, as Collins did at his best. That doesn't make either of them better or worse than the other because their eras are too far apart and there are so many other factors that could be argued to try to explain why it was easier for Collins to be more dominant. It all comes down to opinion, there are no facts which can prove conclusively who is the best ever British rider. For what it's worth I don't think that either Collins or Woffinden is the best but it's just an opinion and I am sensible enough to acknowledge that fact. I have expressed my opinion. I appreciate that others may think differently but unlike you I don't feel the need to demean myself by using childish abuse to try denigrate their opinions. Far too often you resort to the same tactics when posters disagree with you. In my opinion you try to intimidate and bully people with your abuse but rest assured you will not succeed with me.

Perhaps you can read what I said before your comment.

You really don't understand the difference between an opinion and a fact and now I'm lying because you claim to know what I've seen. I've expressed my opinion and I'm not at all concerned that you disagree. It's a pity you always find it necessary to try to make your point by resorting to abuse but that is unfortunately how you always respond to those who disagree with you. I see now that you have managed to find one example, despite the mass TV coverage available, where Tai did pass one world class rider and leave him for dead. However, as you will have read in my previous posts I was referring to PC doing it regularly during his best years. You didn't see him live as I did and there is relatively little on YouTube, so either you accept what I say or you don't. I shan't lose any sleep about it. Adults having expressed their opinions would agree to disagree but I suspect that is not in your character. We shall see.

I think you've missed the point. I've pointed out that you can't compare eras and that I'm not discussing who is the better rider.

Falcace, I put on a video of the 76 final because that was readily available on YouTube but those races were only examples of his season long dominance. Those who regularly watched PC in 76/77 and I assume you did, saw how dominant he was week in, week out. The British League at that time included the best riders in the world, just as the Polish league does now but PC was not often beaten whereasTai is regularly beaten in that league. My point is that at his best PC dominated his peers to a greater extent than Tai has so far done. That doesn't make him better than Tai because we are back to the point that you can't compare eras, there are too many variables. I think your right, I recall something like that being said but in truth his performance in that final was the way he rode throughout that season and the following year. That's your opinion, not a fact and your comments are ironic when it's usually your supercilious posts that cause threads to descend into farce. Perhaps better you let those who can debate like adults discuss matters.

That's fair enough Chunky, that's a reasonable point of view and your opinion, which I don't happen to share. I don't think you can compare riders from different eras. I think it's impossible to say whether Wyer in 1976 was as good as some of those you mention are today. That's why I don't say that PC was better than Woffinden but that at his best he dominated his contemporaries in a way that I haven't seen Tai do with his contemporaries. I suspect that we can both agree that PC and Tai were/are outstanding riders of their generation.

Wyer was world class in 1976. He finished 6th in the penultimate qualifier for the final, the Intercontinental Final, ahead of Autrey, John Louis, Michanek, Sanders, Olsen and other world class riders. In the final he finished 7th, above Autrey, Morton and Jancarz. Stancl, you have more of an argument but he was good on the Polish tracks and finished 10th in the world, also above Morton and Jancarz. As incredulous and utter nonsense as you may overly dramatically find it, I have not seen Woffinden pass world class riders and leave them for dead as Collins did. Indeed the evidence you put forward shows him not being able to do that. Like you with Collins, I am not disputing how good Woffinden is but I have not seen him in his best years to date dominate riders in the way that Collins did in his best years. That isn't to say that he won't at some stage or that he won't sustain his career at the very top for longer than PC managed to do.

The difference is that Collins passed world class riders and left them for dead. If you had watched PC in 1976/77 you would realise it wasn't that he had better quality equipment than everyone else, others had just as good. He was just that outstanding when given a track with racing lines. At that time he was the best in the world, just as Tai is at the moment.

It's impossible to compare riders of different eras and the number of titles won is no more than a guide because it all depends on the quality of the opposition at the time and various other factors. My favourite rider and the one I believe to be the best ever British rider is Peter Craven but I can't prove that to be true and nobody can disprove it. For those not privileged to have seen the other PC, Peter Collins, at his best, just watch and enjoy heats 3 and 7 of this video of the 1976 world final. I've never seen Tai race like that but Tai may have longevity on his side. We can better judge him when he retires.

You may be right but I can see opportunities in the GP's. A rider in the running for a top 8 spot needing a point of two to get into the semi finals and facing riders already out of the running or similarly, in the semi finals and wanting to get into the final. There will always be those prepared to help a friend or team mate, if it doesn't harm their chances and a very small number, prepared to help for money. I don't think it was or, is now, a major problem. I suspect that the number of times it happens are few and far between.

There have always been stories of points being bought. There are dishonest people in every wallk of life, fortunately a small minority and it would be naive to think that speedway is any different or that the situation today is any different than it was in years gone by.

A good story but unfortunately, the facts don't support what you say. It was the 1949 final. Norman and Jack had both won their first 2, not 3, rides. They met in heat 13 and Jack won with Norman second. However, Norman dropped another point to Louis Lawson in heat 15 and finished last in heat 19, behind Price, Longley and Kitchen. Price won the title with a 15 point maximum, Jack Parker was second with 14 and Lawson third with 13. Norman wouldn't have won it even if he had beaten Jack. He would have scored 11 and still finished 4th. In any event, Price wouldn't have accepted money to lose to Norman because a second place in heat 19 would have put him in a run off for the title with Jack and nor would Lawson because he still had a chance of the title when he and Norman met in heat 15 and he could also have lost his eventual podium place to Norman if he had let him beat him. The whole story lacks credibility.

No, it wasn't. There is no supplementary rule that amends the original rule under which his average was too high. People in authority apparently agreeing to break the rules doesn't alter the fact that the rules were broken. It simply reflects on their integrity and the credibility of the sport. Having said that Poole are no more or less guilty than the rest of those involved.

That particular rule isn't difficult to understand.

There is no supplementary regulation on the SCB website that would confirm that to be true. Wasn't it just an agreement reached between the 2 teams, BSPA and SCB, which is unfortunately, typical of the way the sport is run and why it lacks any credibility. The 5% at home can be argued as justified because most riders have a higher home average than their GSA but the opposite is true of away averages and makes adding 5% ridiculous.

No he wasn't eligible for the away meeting. The official averages to include the Swindon v Belle Vue meeting on the 27 September have not yet been issued according to the SGB website and those in force were those shown in issue 27 on the SGB website. That is in accordance with the following; 16.2.1.4 Updated MA’s will be calculated monthly on a rolling basis on all eligible meetings, up to and including 23rd of the month to become effective from the 1st of the following month.

There are many changes that need to be made but as I have said previously it would be a significant step forward and cost nothing for them to devise a sensible rule book that is applied impartially and without exception. That would at least ensure that the various competitions, league, KO Cup etc., have a greater degree of credibility. Unfortunately, I have little confidence that we shall ever see it considering that the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the BSPA and the SCB were involved in the farce we witnessed involving the guests for the play off final. They obviously thought that the best solution to the problem was to ignore the rules.

You don't half talk some rubbish. The better team did win over the two legs and Poole deserve to be congratulated but you seem to have forgotten that at the end of heat 11, the heat before Palm-Toft was injured, the Stars had reduced your lead from 18 points to 8.

That might entail Buster asking Andy Meredith for advice on how to prepare a track to provide entertaining racing. I can't see it happening though.

I just hope that Swindon are running next year. I have many happy memories of trips to Blunsdon dating back to the Briggo days and hopefully will be there again next year.

Anybody with even a basic knowledge of the sport could see that the guests available were far from guaranteed to make us any stronger and I can certainly understand, even if you can't, that a rider suffering a lack of confidence after an injury and a series of falls wouldn't want to add to the mental pressures by riding in the play offs. Apologies tellboy but certain posters sometimes need to be reminded of what they have said when they criticise others for doing the same. Hopefully, now back to the post topic.

I don't agree at all with g13webb's comments but what did you say about Belle Vue when Mark Riss told Ipswich, who then told Belle Vue, that he was going to end his season and return home to Germany. You went into meltdown calling us cheats and saying we should race with one reserve.