norbold

I was at the meeting as well and still have my programme. Sadly, I seem to have missed the significance of what happened as all I have written in my programme is e/f for Olsen!

Ginger Lees rode for Burnley in 1929, but they packed up in June, after (I think) only five meetings. With no English track, he took himself off to ride, as you say, in Germany and Denmark.

Just for completeness, here are the rest of the top averages in Peter Jackson's post-War stats: 1946: Eric Langton 11.13 1947: Vic Duggan 11.75 1948: Vic Duggan 11.47 1949: Vic Duggan 10.65 1950: Graham Warren 10.45 1951: Aub Lawson 10.31 1952: Ronnie Moore 11.36 1953: Jack Young 10.61 1954: Ronnie Moore 10.59 1955: Ronnie Moore 10.86 1956: Barry Briggs 10.53 1957: Peter Craven 11.14

Yes, sorry, I meant to say, but it was getting late! It has been converted to 3-2-1.

1933: 9.79; 1934: 10.26; 1935: 8.74; 1936: 9.95; 1937: 10.73; 1938: 8.13; 1939: 10.44; 1946: 11.57 Those are Langton's home averages only.

Re- of and have, I agree with chunky. I know languages evolve over time, but the use of of instead of have is just plain wrong. As far as the use of the word bottle goes, it has been in common usage at least in the East End for as long as I can remember. Back in the 1960s, when a rider was behind in a race and packed up, we often used to write in the programme "bottle gone" instead of e/f or d.n.f.

Just out of interest, after mentioning Peter Jackson's averages on another thread, I thought I'd just take a look at who topped the averages in the pre-War years (1933-1939). 1933: Jack Parker 10.33, 1934: Vic Huxley: 10.31, 1935: Bluey Wilkinson 10.57, 1936: Jack Parker 10.27, 1937: Jack Milne 11.09, 1938: Jack Milne 10.96, 1939: Cordy Milne 11.50 (The 1939 season was unfinished of course).

As far as I can see, Peter has used a full set of results for 1933-1957. His averages are only First Division though.

Well, you did get an honourable mention in my little diatribe above...

It is fun of course and I love doing it as much as anyone, but it really is an impossible job. The more time goes on the more older greats are forgotten. What the "greatest" really means for most people is the greatest you have experience of. How many these days would put Vic Huxley or Frank Arthur in their top 10? In fact, the only pre-War rider who even gets a mention these days is Tom Farndon and that's only me (and chunky!) What about Bluey Wilkinson, Eric Langton, the Milne Brothers, Lionel Van Praag and so on and so on? There is no-one around now who has any real knowledge of them at their peak, so no-one can really compare them. It's only with Jack Young and the Big Five we begin to get actual memories and, over time, those memories will fade too. "The Greatest" is a movable feast.

So, if you had eight riders on eight points, you would have to have two semi-finals and a final to decide the winner. That sounds like a really ridiculous way of deciding the winner of an individual meeting....oh, hang on a minute....

Peter Jackson compiled complete averages for the years 1933-1957 (at least, as they are the one I have). They have all been converted to the common four ride average system we use today.

Not being a mathematician myself, do you (or anyone else come to that) know what the lowest possible winning score is?

Peter Craven was the wizard of balance, does that mean he was the greatest?

Norwich won the National Trophy in 1955 and 1963.

That's a good point, Sidney. In "my" era, Briggs and Fundin were known for being ruthless and out for no.1 and not really interested in team riding, whereas Moore was known for being a team man who thought more about his team than he did himself. And, although, many would regard Moore as the most gifted rider, he was less successful in individual events than Briggo and Ove. I'm sure there must be a moral there somewhere.....

Most of it can be found on the Speedway Researcher website. It would just be a matter of extracting whatever stats you want from that - closest matches, no. of maximums etc.

All of this does beg the question, why the number of automatic qualifiers was reduced from 8 to 6. Even when it was 8, it was usually the case that numbers 9 & 10 got a pick. With only 6 qualifiers, it makes it even more likely that nos. 7 & 8 are going to be two of those picks.

No, I think you sound like me. Which just goes to show what a fraud you are.

Of course, from 1936-1994, 100% of the rounds were held in one country!

If you weren't such a fraud, chunky, I'd get my programmes out and have a look....oh, ok, I might do it anyway.

Just to keep you happy, I'd argue with it. I'd put Nicki ahead of Greg!

About a month or so after my book, Speedway in London, came out, I looked in on Sportspages (a specialist sports book shop) In Charing Cross Road to see how it was selling. They told me that it was going quite well and that Mark Loram had been in and signed all the copies they had, which had helped sales. I had no idea he had done this. We never spoke about it, he just did it. I thought, as Terry said, what a great bloke. There was nothing in it for him; it just helped me.

No. His started his British career with Wimbledon.

Of course you are right, E I. Rocky Marciano was very lucky to become world champion in the first place. Jersey Joe Walcott outboxed him easily for 13 rounds and then just one sucker punch and he was out. As for speedway, yes I absolutely agree with everything you have said and I agree that we could now be talking about Bjorn Knutson being the greatest rider ever (even better than Tom Farndon!) if he hadn't retired so early. I had the privilege of seeing him every week at West Ham and he was definitely the classiest rider I have ever seen. He could beat anybody and frequently did. I also saw Sverre every week as well and, good as he undoubtedly was, I don't think he was ever quite in that "super" class of Fundin, Briggs, Knutson, etc. Mauger's only rival really was Ole Olsen and Olsen managed to get three World Titles during the period of their rivalry, so certainly not outclassed by Mauger.