Chadster

It's worth pointing out that the broadcasters mentioned (all very good) were public service broadcasters. I suspect that people working for Sky, BT are expected to 'big it up', as I believe the expression is to convince viewers that what they're paying to watch is worth the fee.

Was that the meeting when Carter smashed the track record in his first outing and then Morton came out in his first ride and demolished Carter's time?

One I remember at Wimbledon in the late 70s against Ipswich, in the spell when Anders Michanek was riding for them. Larry Ross got out of the gate, Michanek was all over him and Stefan Salomonsson was the same to Michanek. All 3 riders locked together for the race until Salomonsson got through for a 5-1 on the last lap. Terrific stuff and I can remember old Ken Tozer going mad on the PAat the end.

I've just taken a look at 'Seery's statistics' in the Speedway Star from May 1969. He regularly produced a table of riders with over a 9 point average. There were 22 riders in that table. I think we can discount one of them as he'd only ridden three times but the rest had managed double figures in meetings, or close to. After 11 meetings Ivan Mauger had yet to drop a point. 19 teams in the league and lots of riders scoring heavily. If I recall correctly, last season in the Premier League, two riders averaged over 9 in the Star's end of season averages. Of course, it's not just a smaller league but other factors; fixed gate positions, race formulas meaning heat leaders meet each other more frequently and more professionalism. Riders routinely turn up with two or three bikes, so you don't have people withdrawing after a ride because their engine had blown up and, with a much smaller league, they're much more familiar with away tracks.

Of course all teams have three heat leaders, but I suspect that what Sidney meant was teams with 3 good heat leaders. In the early BL years the best teams usually had 4 heat leaders (Simmons for West Ham in the second half of 65, Roper for Halifa in 66 and Kilby for Swindon in 67 are just three examples). But equally, there were some woefully weak teams whose heat leaders would be second strings in most other teams.

Thanks! Interesting that one of the teams with more assets than liabilities (Workington) have closed down. Glasgow seem in a healthy position but there's been a lot of talk of retrenchment there this winter.

Sorry to ask what's probably a really stupid question, but what is the significance of the brackets in the right-hand column?

The standard of riders was obviously better back in the day, with most of the best riders in the world appearing in British racing, but that doesn't necessarily lead to better racing. The best guys were largely full time and filled their boots against riders who might be turning up with only one bike and riding at tracks they saw once a season. Obviously, there were great races but they stick out in the memory and the processions get forgotten about. Speedway seemed better because there were bigger crowds and better presentation. Alan Morrey's two minute button at Belle Vue was legendary, whereas most of the recent meetings I've been to have dragged interminably. Speedway back in the 60s and 70s also benefitted from presenting more races. I've recently been looking at the Speedway Researcher website and the Coventry section for the early BL years has details of the second hald races. Coventry regularly put on 20 races, most tracks 19 and one or two 21. The evening ended with a Rider of the Night final, which certainly in some of the runaway Belle Vue victories I saw was often the best race of the night and cute promoters elsewhere knew to get the riders to put on a show in the last race of the night (none of this should be seen as a plea for the return of the second half as they'd certainly had their day by the time they were got rid of). The other thing was that speedway then was full of confidence; the formation of the Provincial League, the successful amalgamation of the PL and the NL and the formation of Division 2 all took place within a 10 year period and the sport seemed to be going places. Now, the atmosphere seems overwhelmingly negative, with contraction not expansion the chief expectation. It's difficult to see a recovery like there was 50 years ago, but then that recovery could never have been predicted 10 years before it happened. Let's hope history repeats itself.

In the late 60s and early 70s I cut my speedway teeth watching at Hyde Road. There were some great meetings, some good ones, but a lot of poor ones , too, particularly when the Aces were at their strongest and some teams turned up beaten before they started. As has been pointed out, attendances were so much higher so that contributed to a sense of occasion that may have made up for poor racing. When I came to London, I started watching White City and then, on moving house, started going to Wimbledon. The racing at Plough Lane always seemed better because of bigger crowds and a much better atmosphere.

I thought he made some reasonable points and would agree the AGM was a cautious tep in the right direction. I was surprised about his enthusiasm for one big league as the decisions at the AGM actually moved the top two leagues further apart after years of them moving closer together.

I think the programme was originally set in the 50s but later series saw the period move into the 60s, so I think Geordie's ok to be driving a 1965 car and no doubt having conversations with the new vicar about the merits of Ivan Mauger over whoever is riding for the Grantchester team.

I've recently been looking at the first 3 BL seasons (1965-7). Some things are the same; Fixtures incomplete, arguments over team make-up, new rules introduced mid season and flagrant breaking of rules, but one of the big differences is that most tracks ran the best part of 30 meetings. Given that there were only a maximum of 18 home league matches and one World Championship qualifier, it's obvious that there were a lot of challenge matches, Individual meetings etc. Yet people say they aren't interested in such meetings these days and most tracks, especially in the top two divisions won't put them on. Is this a failure of promotion or is it a wise recognition that in an era where many tracks see teams twice a season, such meeting represent overkill. Is a solution to devise more meaningful competitions, e.g regionalised cup competitions, Fours qualifiers etc?

The air fence hasn't helped Rye House. Last time I was there, there were really only quite limited viewing options. As it stood, I always thought it was a track that didn't need an air fence such was the amount of run off on the bends

My impression of the one big league set up in the 90s was that it didn't work because a significant number of top flight promoters were not convinced it was the way forward and really wanted to retain the two league system. It was different in 1965. The top league had struggled through 1964 with 7 teams (sounds familiar!) and when it was clear Norwich were closing down they had nowhere to go other than amalgamation.

I think you have a point but there have been times in the past when the gap between riders was bigger. In the 60s and 70s there were quite regularly riders averaging above 10 and sometimes over 11 and yet that period is seen as a golden age for the sport. Maybe we need to look at the formula to protect the weaker riders, as was the case back in the day when the reserve rode in heats 4 and 8 programmed with second strings.

One way to end doubling up, I suppose

I feel that Holder was never the same after his bad crash at Coventry (was it the year after he won the world title?).

One big league worked in the 60s but it only lasted two yers the last time it was tried. The big difference I see between now and the 60s is that the element of freshness (Provincial League supporters seeing the big NL stars, NL supporters seeing the PL young guns) no longer applies because doubling up has meant that even in one big league the riders would be largely similar to what we've been seeing recently. Another difference would be that in British speedways last existential crisis, there were promoters about who had the drive, energy and confidence to get through big changes. Are there those sort of people around now? It's a pity because instinctively, as an old-timer, I like the idea of a big league. Variety of fixtures, continuity and one visit by a team per season so ,if you want to see jason Doyle riding you have to go when Somerset are in town and not shrug your shoulders and put it off until their second visit.

I accept that contnuity of fixtures is a good thing, but running from mid-March to the end of October is about 30 weeks and I can't see any league structure that would give that many meaningful fixtures. I'd argue that we should seriously consider starting slightly later and finishing by the end of September, but within that framework try and arrange meaningful fixtures as consistently as possible.

2 years ago it was announced that the future of speedway was promotion and relegation, last year it was fixed race nights. I suspect this year it will be something else and most of us would probably agree that the league structure needs looking at, but it will be like re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic if they don't seriously address issues like; track preparation, slick presentation and better organisation of fixtures. It seems ridiculous to me that after the hottest and driest summer for years that fixtures are being crammed in at the last minute and that some teams didn't complete their fixtures before the deadline.

In the early years of the 13 heat format teams had only one reserve, programmed to have two rides. The change was made to two reserves in 1969. This might have been linked to the insistence on excluding tape breakers and the need for more reserves to cover the extra rides. Now that starting offences can be penalised by putting the offender off 15 yards it might be worth looking again at the need for two reserves. Giving the reserve two protected rides, as used to be the case, might be a way to introduce, or re-introduce, a fast-track system.

I remember Finn Thomsen taking Billy Sanders off quite deliberately after a race at Hackney. Injured him quite seriously as I recall.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/speedway/2018/07/22/speedways-promise-dust-din-danger-crucial-battle-gain-television/

I first started going properly to speedway at Belle Vue in 1967, because my uncle wanted to watch Ove Fundin ride after he signed for the Aces. He averaged over 9 points a match for the Aces so was obviously effective and of course, he won the world final that season.

What a race that was. Never get tired of watching it!