iris123

I don't know quite what speedyguy is basing this on.I don't have much info at hand unless i dig deep in my cellar for records.How did he do in the US league meetings for instance?And there must have been a good few open meetings at the time with international line-ups.online you can see the test series from 1971 which was earlyish in his career.But apart from a good meeting at Costa Mesa(where else....)he looked decidely average at the big Ascot Park track where he could only beat Dave Gifford + George Hunter.Hardly world class riders.I would like to see more records of Basts meetings from his peak.And particularly how he did away from Costa Mesa at places like Ascot Park over a period and not just the one meeting Having looked further he does seem to have had some impressive scores in US v Rest of the World meetings in that 74-79 period up against riders like Mauger,Michanek,Plech and Collins.But the scores at Ascot are definitely much weaker

Not so sure about this idea,but i guess it might make some money for the clubs?And will it be held at a neutral venue or the track of the team with most points from the 56 meetings?Is a little strange to have a league with 6 man teams and pairs riding for 56 meetings,then a completely different format for one meeting.But this is speedway folks

Keep up Parsloes old boy.Don't you read the threads any more?Look at one of the first posts on this thread for an explanation

Think a number of us saw him at White City.I certainly did.Also saw him at Wimbledon beforehand and got his autograph.But like it has been said it is impossible to judge him on that display.Just like it would have been with Panhall if that was his one and only meeting in the country.It is all speculation based on his performances in the States against the best that they had plus his performances with the Ivan/Briggo troupe etc abroad

Exactly.Don't know how many times it has been posted on here,but if i had a tenner for every time i think i could afford the trip to NZ

Did Laguta wear a Latvian jacket when he was the Latvian wild card even though he is Russian?

Facebook mate.Told you everyone is on there Thought you might know that.Apparently he has been getting abuse on websites and guest books and even abusive sms' and seeing as you speal Swedish i thought you would have seen some of the abusive posts.And of course the main factor for the abuse was the problem with Posa.But it seems like as elsewhere in speedway he hasn't been getting the proper backing and been taking flak for a while.But as i don't speak Swedish and Sweden or should i say Swedish Ice Racing isn't a main point of interest for me i might as so often be talking bowlaks

wajust going by what Karina Flyktman posted elsewhere.i.e "you cannot get a WC if you don't qualify.read the regs".Now i took that to mena "if you don't enter the qualis" because if you qualify you don't need a WC But i didn't and have no intention of reading the regs.....ever!!!!

From what i have seen,you can only choose a wild card from the riders who have entered the qualifying rounds.So if Posa has pulled out then he doesn't stand a chance.Which is only right and fair on the others

Nice one sidney.Not often someone here admits to being wrong.It is all opinions of course,but no way could i see how you were getting your figures on the other threads

Well the latest one,to send Posa + Svensson into the hardest qualifier for the World Championships and the weaker riders into the easier qualis was the straw that broke the camels back.Once Posa disagreed and pulled out it was always likely to cause some problems.The fans generally stand behind the riders and not a team manager in these things.Jacqueline was hoping Posa would get a WC for the Swedish GP,but i couldn't see how that was possible after his decision.In a way i agree with Jansson's idea.It is risky of course,but you hope maybe if it comes off you end up with 3 Swedish guys through instead of two.A manager has to be tough and stick by what he thinks is right,but shouldn't be upsetting his best riders either

Well he rode on very big tracks in Australia with Ivan + Briggo.Who knows?But it just wasn't for him being away from California

Well in his own words “It was cold, miserable, the food was bad and there was no money,” he said. “I was making 50 to 60 thousand a year in America living at the beach. So I never really rode British League. I kind of thought I was the world’s best at one time, but since I never competed in Europe on a regular basis, I never had a real shot at winning the world title.” He was one of if not the most talented US rider of the 70s,but didn't need British speedway to make a comfortable living.Just like Egon Müller.If either or both had really got stuck in and shown dedication to really become the best rider in the world i do think Egon could have done it and quite possibly Mike Bast would have been right up there as well.Imposible to say though for sure.But like i have mentioned on another thread if the world championship hadn't been so based around British tracks back in the 60s and 70s and before then why couldn't he have been.It is another point that shows how it was not really fair on riders who didn't want to be based in GB

Well it was you that said if everyone doesn't get a chance to qualify;so i assumed once it was pointed out this wasn't the case in previous years surely you would admit the old system also had many faults and couldn't be called a proper world championship in your opinion also.But i know you wiggle and squirm out of things you say,like a wiggly squirmy thing,so am not surprised you try to ignore your own rules for what a proper world championship entails As has been pointed out by me and at least one other the Australian championships are used as a qualifier for the riders that the MA choose to go through to the GP qualifiers.Is that too hard for you to understand that it is a step on the road to qualifying for the GPs.......i.e a GP qualifier in effect.The fact that GB do not have meetings which include NL novices and such like is the choice of the BSPA and doesn't in any way bring the quality of the GPs down a level. Already been answered Parsloes or are you reading the Braile version of the forum?Surely it can't be spurious that riders were not included into the qualifiers?After all it was you making all the fuss about the fact that riders weren't allowed to qualify.But when pointed out how many riders in the past were not allowed,you ignore this fact.But to no surprise to me.

I refer the gentleman to the answer given previously which clearly states this was not the case

But there has been a continual line of youngsters that have come in and generally stayed in.Or if not at least been given a chance....Jonsson,Hampel,Lindgren,Bjerre,Sajfutdinov,Holder.Others that couldn' stay the pace like Chrzanowski,Kasprzak,Woffinden,Laguta.I think talent is never constant anyway,in that there was never a period when a potential world champion per year was produced.Some periods might have been better than others,but i don't think we are in such a bad state at the moment.And potential GP stars of the future are on their way in Ward,Janowski and hopefully one or two of the Danish kids.And oops,but i forgot Lindbäck as well.......in one of those groupings

Sidney can we not put a stop at least to this idea that there was ever a system that was fair to all.How many times does it need to be posted that in previous years you had to ride in Britain and of course had to agree to the Promoters wage terms to be allowed into the World Championship.The fact that Briggo was threatened that if he didn't sign the deal on offer he wouldn't be allowed to defend his title shows clearly the system wasn't fair at all.I give you yet again a chance to tell me which years it was open to everyone and fair.Hope this time it wasn't a tongue in cheek comment

I and others have absolutely defended the GP system.The best rider in the world wins every year unless injury plays a part.And you can't stop that in any system can you?I want a system where the best rider becomes speedway world champion.This one fits the bill.I repeat for the umpteenth time as have others that neither this nor any other system is completely perfect.You have in your own words already condemed the previous system from the 30s through to the 90s.I can't really see what your beef is and why you keep going on and on.I point out yet again that i didn't start this nor any other thread in defence of any system.But i have the right to point out facts,even if you don't like them and even if they make your words about a "proper" world championship look rather silly I doubt there has ever been a single year when the championship was open to all riders.At the moment there is an Australian championship going on whith a number of riders i have hardly heard of.All are in what is in effect a qualifier for the GPs.But i think what you really are talking about when you say everyone is any British rider right down to the NL.Because i doubt you have the knowledge to know if all continental European riders had the chance to qualify every year.In the 30s did all riders have the chance?Did East German riders always get the chance?And i have already made you look rather silly in stating that Australasian riders based at home didn't get the chance and neither did American nor South American riders.I guess the same would go for African based riders too....

I have answered all of sidneys point one by one in the other thread.We are in the years gone by section as you point out.And Australasian qualifiers started mid 70s.So for all those years up to the mid 70s you then agree it wasn't a in your words "proper" world championship.What about pre war Parsloes?What do you think of the case in 1936 for instance when the man who got a 15 point maximun at Wembley only managed to finish with a bronze medal?I guess we must write off the pre war world championships because of the strange case of points other than those scored on the night also counted?Rather like a GP system wouldn't you say? As i have already pointed out,i am not the one posting all this stuff to make a point + i wasn't the one bringing in "current" riders like Michael Lee + Jack Young into a discussion about GPs

I only ever talk about the old system,because it is brought into the discussion by a number of forumites who try to belittle the GPs.I am not the one who keeps mentioning Michael Lee or even for godsake Jack Young!!!!!You will notice i think if you pay attention here Parsloes that i am not the one who started a thread listing all these riders from days of oldwhen knights were bold But now we are here just answer the questions put to you.....Parsloes:Do you agree that because riders like Ivan Mauger,Langfield,Airey couldn't enter the qualifiers when not riding in Britain that the old system was not a(your words) "proper world championship".Or put it another way.....would you say that as they knew the consquences,that by not riding in Britain they had made the choice not to ride in the world championships?Riders from America not being allowed to ride in the world championships meant it couldn't in your opinion be worthy of the title world championship? Sidney please tell me which years and who was not a worthy world champion if you think your listed riders would have won another 20 world titles between them?I'll let you off a little bit as i guess you might have worked out by doing the maths that it is impossible for them to have hit that number......but make it 15 titles and years please?

You were the one who was saying the GPs aren't in your words "proper world championships" because not everyone gets a chance to qualify,presumably like in the old days.I am showing you that even in the old days not everyone had a chance to qualify.Any Aussie or New Zealanderhad to ride in the British leagues to get a chance.Surely you must see that your opinions are very faulty if a rider like Ivan Mauger was excluded from the world championships if he didn't have a British team.What sort of championship is that?What sort of world championship is it that the world champion is threatened into signing a contract with a British team or he wouldn't be allowed to defend his title.And here is another for you to answer in defence of your "proper" world championship.What about the Americans?They were excluded from the qualifying process from mid 50s through to mid 70s weren't they?Didn't Rick Woods go back to the States in '73 once he learnt that he wouldn't be allowed to qualify?It took Scott Autrey a couple of years of campaigning before he was allowed into the qualifiers.So all those years i guess you would agree were not "proper" world championships?

Still waiting again for an answer from sidney on the sentence he wrote and which years........ But here is something.....sidney writes that Ronnie Moore was active 22 years and got to 15 world finals.What he doesn't say is in those active years Ronnie spent 57,64,65, 66,67 + 68 away from the sport.stats look pretty good when you remember that little fact Also look at Maugers stats.24 years active.But come on 1957+58 Ivan was a complete novice who could hardly break into the Wimbledon team,and then spent 59,60,61 + 62 on the other side of the world where it was impossible for him to qualify.Shows the downfall of the old system where a rider like Ivan was shut out of the world title challenge because he didn't ride in Britain at the time.So there straight away is 6 out of the 24 years where he stood basically no chance

I guess it backs up sidney's statement from yesterday "The ones they rode in FINALS, they all got there on merit wasnt given to them on a plate had to qualify every year different test.What did briggo ride in 19 finals? legend, Dont get me wrong Gollob Crumpy Hancock i admire greatly and am privaliged to have seen all 3ride.. The only difference is WIE JA is come OCTOBER every year they Know they have qualified for the next year.If that had been the case for Briggo Fundin Mauger Olsen they would of had another 20 world titles between them. " I am really interested to find out which 20 world championship wins sidney thinks were unfair and these chosen few would have won instead if there had been a GP system.Doesn't matter really though,because that is obviously evidence from sidney just how poor the old world finals were if approx 20 titles were won unfairly.It means in the yeasr these riders were active i.e from 1951-1984(that is 33 years),20 years were compromised!!!!!Pretty damning stats those......

No.We keep hearing about Michael Lee + even Jack Young who were around a bit further back than 16 years ago.......

Again i say to your questions both YES +YES.It most certainly is better than what we had before and it most certainly has made progress and moved into the 21 century.It is a far fairer way of deciding a world champion.very hard to either fluke or buy a title in the GP series.Much much harder than the previous system.And just look at the presentation at for instance Parken or even Gelsenkirchen the first year and i imagine Cardiff as well.I find it far far better than anything i have seen at league level.It is a great atmosphere and moves along at a good pace until the latter stages at least(which tend to drag imo) and is visually very colourful and exciting.You just can't compare it to any league venue,which still tend to be more 1950s than 2012.So please tell us who you have talked to that was unfairly left out of the qualification rounds?