norbold

Really, gustix? But he was sponsored by Monster though, surely?

Stan's crowning moment, but actually no, it's not the reason. Stan rode for the two teams I supported in the 60s, New Cross and West Ham, and it was his week in week out dedication and wholehearted trying that made him ny hero. He struck up a great partnership with Ken McKinlay at West Ham and many's the time their 5-1s won us the match. Even if Stan had never managed to beat Briggo, he would still be my unsung hero.

Quoting Huxley as winning nine £100 trophies in 1930 is an interesting one because in 1928, there was a whole series of Grand Prix type events of their time, such as the Golden Helmet, the Golden Gauntlet, the Silver Sash and so on that the top riders rode for throughout the season. There were eight of these altogether and by the end of August, Frank Arthur was leading in seven of them, with Huxley leading just one, the Silver Wheel. Unfortunately, Arthur had to return home to Australia in early September, allowing Huxley to catch up and pass him in three of those Arthur was leading in. But, even with Arthur not taking part in a number of the events, he had still accumulated enough points to finish as champion in the main four trophies. Frank Arthur was definitely the man of 1928 and it would seem before in Australia. Largely forgotten now of course, his reign as top man came too early.

I don't know that you could say Olsen is forgotten exactly. I think he suffers a bit when looking back through being of the same era as Mauger. My opinion at the time was that Mauger was more consistent than Olsen but that if they both rode at their peak, then Olsen was the better rider. I don't know if that's true or not, it's just how I summed them up at the time. What we haven't discussed though is whether Lord Rosebery would have beaten Gladstone at the peak of their careers.....

Sorry, only just seen the last bit. I don't really know, but I think you are right, E I. He just wanted to get out at the top. I think he maybe had lost some appetite for the sport and felt it was the right time to go before he was struck by any serious injuries.

As someone who saw Knutson every week at West Ham in 1964 I don't think that's stretching it at all. He was definitely up there with the best of all time. Remember he was one of the "Big Five", handicapped on a par with Fundin, Briggs, Craven and Moore and quite rightly so. In addition, he was quite a bit younger than the other four and had many years at the top ahead of him had he chosen to continue. I agree that he almost certainly would have won more World titles had he not retired early and it is probably the fact he only had one win to his name that he is somewhat forgotten compared to the others.

Apart from Greg Hancock of course.

Exceptional characters off the track - Lionel Van Praag and Split Waterman spring to mind!

It's absolutely true, E I. No complaint from me! Barry Briggs was another. When I wrote my booklet, "Two Wimbledon Legends", about Ronnie Moore and Barry Briggs for Wimbledon, I asked some former riders their views on Moore and Briggo. Alf Hagon said, "I was Ronnie Moore's partner. He was the best rider I ever partnered...He could ride full throttle, half throttle, change directions, tootle round slowly, ride the inside line, ride the outside line. He would even shout instructions at me as we were going round. Barry, on the other hand, had to go flat out. It was the only way he could ride. He wasn't exactly out of control, but he wasn't always in control either. If he came up on the inside of you and got some grip he was liable to bash into you." Bob Andrews said: "When I first rode with him [Ronnie Moore] he knew I could gate. He said, 'Get to the first bend first, and leave a gap of about a foot from the line, if I need to I will come through.' We got a 5-1. I then had a season riding with Barry - oh my God! I would gate, then leave a foot of room in case he wanted to come through. Usually, by the next bend, he would not just come through, but he would 'hang' me on the fence. Briggo was a selfish rider."

That's not the fault of the riders who were the best though and I think they should be recognised as the greats of their era. When racing started in 1928 in Britain, Huxley, Arthur, Johnson and a few others proved they were amongst the best and proved it against the Brits and Americans - really, even in the 30s that was the limit of the Internationalism of speedway plus the odd rider from other countries, but no real world wide opposition.

There is enough evidence from Australia to show who were the top riders in Australia pre-1928, riders like Frank Arthur, Vic Huxley, Charlie Datson, Ron Johnson, Ben Unwin and Hilary Buchanan for example plus the American Sprouts Elder. Of those the outstanding riders were Frank Arthur and Vic Huxley. Vic Huxley, of course, continued into the 1930s and is a strong contender for any Top 20 of the 1920s and 30s. Frank Arthur's best days were probably in the period up to 1929 and missed out on the 30s, so normally doesn't get a look in in these sort of lists, but I would say he was probably no.1 in the 1920s itself.

Great piece of work BL. It's interesting to compare your Top 10s for the early years with the Stenner Rankings for those years. 1949: Jack Parker, Aub Lawson, Tommy Price, Vic Duggan, Wilbur Lamoreaux, Graham Warren, Jack Biggs, Norman Parker, Bill Gilbert, Dent Oliver 1950: Graham Warren, Jack Parker, Aub Lawson, Tommy Price, Ken Le Breton, Fred Williams, Cyril Roger, Norman Parker, Cyril Brine, Eric French 1951: Jack Young, Split Waterman, Aub Lawson, Ronnie Moore, Olle Nygren, Fred Williams, Jack Parker, Eddie Rigg, Alan Hunt, Jack Biggs 1952: Jack Young, Split Waterman, Ronnie Moore, Fred Williams, Aub Lawson, Bert Roger, Alan Hunt, Eddie Rigg, Dick Bradley, Cyril Brine 1953: Jack Young, Ronnie Moore, Split Waterman, Fred Williams, Olle Nygren, Aub Lawson, Geoff Mardon, Arthur Forrest, Alan Hunt, Basse Hveem

I agree with that. It would have been a big surprise if Persson had won and he would probably be ranked quite low in the all-time list of World Champions, but I don't think it would have been seen as anything like as big a shock as Jerzy S winning it. Persson was a good rider and could beat the best on his day.

It wasn't meant as a "criticism" as such, just my take on your list. I don't think any of us would agree on the Top 20. It is a subjective thing and everyone will have their own opinion. The problem of riders who only rode for one or two years in any period is always a problem in lists like this. When Tony Mac asked me to compile a list of the top 20 British riders of the 60s for Classic Speedway, I had a real problem knowing where to place Peter Craven. In the end I placed him third behind Nigel Boocock and Ken McKinlay on the grounds that they were top riders throughout the whole decade. But if anyone argued that Craven should be top I would fully understand their point. Similarly with Lamoreaux and Warren in your list. Just my opinion that the whole decade/period should be taken into account.

Your 1949-68 list seems a bit biased towards the earlier part of the period I would say, gustix, though strangely, Ivan Mauger gets in at no. 2. I think I would definitely include Nigel Boocock and Ken McKinlay in that list, possibly Sverre Harrfeldt. I would be a bit unsure about including Wilbur Lamoreaux and Graham Warren, good as they were, they only had a very limited time at the top. Dick Bradley would probably be the other one I'd leave out for Harrfeldt. Also I think I'd put in Ron How rather than Alan Hunt. Oh yes, and I agree Plechanov rather than Mardon. Oh yes, and how could anyone leave Jack Young out!?

OK, let's go back a bit...my top 5s (not in order!): 1920s/30s: Vic Huxley, Tom Farndon, Bluey Wilkinson, Jack Milne, Eric Langton 1940s: Vic Duggan, Jack Parker, Ron Johnson, Tommy Price, Aub Lawson 1950s: Ronnie Moore, Jack Young, Ove Fundin, Barry Briggs, Peter Craven

Maybe, yes, I was going from memory.

I think Jim Kempster, Roger Frogley and Jack Parker were the first to challenge the dominance of the Australian riders. Harry Whitfield was good, but not really that good! I'd go for Frank Charles for the last place. In fact probably above Joe Abbott. There's also Colin Watson, Jack Ormston, Tiger Stevenson and Arthur Atkinson to consider. I've already covered this. #49 above.

I have Tom's leagueaverages: 1929: 7.52 1930: 8.30 1931: 6.80 1932: 8.08 1933: 9.56 1934: 10.06 1935: 9.74

OK, if you two would care to move here, we can leave the other topics free for those of us who are interested in their subject matter.

This was such a good thread once.....

As an old time representative I'd have Vic Huxley rather than Sprouts Elder. And then Vic Duggan instead of Freddie Williams, who would move to reserve along with Split Waterman.

1937: George Newton 1949: Wilbur Lamoreaux

Yes, Wilkinson scored a maximum in the final, but lost out as bonus points were carried through from the previous round. According to John Chaplin it was even more controversial than that. He says that Eric Langton told him that he had an agreement with Van Praag that whoever reached the first bend first would be allowed to go on and win and the other wouldn't overtake. As you say, Van Praag broke this agreement by passing Langton. I'm not sure I believe this. Why would you make an agreement like that? I think it's a bit of sour grapes from Langton myself. Though John believes it to be true. Anyway, good story and adds to that controversial first World Final.

It's not quite fair on Farndon to compare him to Lee or Jansson or Ward and say we can all say what might have been. Farndon actually was not might have been. At the time of his death he had already won the Star Riders' championship (and was favourite for the 1935 title because of his form that year), he was unbeatable in the British Match Race Championship and had beaten all-comers for two years and he held the track record at every track in the National League. He had proved his greatness in his all too short career.