waiheke1

i disagree. morts record in world finals was comparable to harris. however, his performance in ckub speedway was indisputably better. id argue his performances for england were also better, though that is hard to compare as harris has ridden in an era of a much weaker england team and in regular test matches. so looking at their overall records, i think it is hard to argue for anything other than mort being better than harris (realative to their eras). mort i think would be in or close to most peoples list of top 10 riders of the 80s. Could you say the same re harris and the 2000s?

not at all BWitcher. Morton was in the top ten of the BL averages every year from 80-86. Harris has never managed close to thsat in Poland/Sweden. Regardless of the actual average, Morton was consistently one of the to riders in the world in club speedway, Harris has never been. Also, Morton generally rode at three for the Aces, so met the opposing number one twice a meeting under the old format. His average also increased in 1988 (the year the designated heat came in), which makes him very much an anomaly. Of course, had the GP been run under the old one off format, Harris would have been in a run off with Hans Andersen and Nicki P to determine the title, there is no guarantee that he would have won that. Morton won the inter-continental and BLRC finals, both of which at the time had stronger fields than the world final, so to say Mort was never good enough to beat the worlds best is patently untrue. of course, its probably fair to say Mort underachieved on the big night, whereas Harris has performed pretty much to expectations. While the World championship is obviously the sport's main event (and I agree, their records here are very comparable) I think you also need to look at other meetings (club, internationals, other individual evernts) to get a total view. And of course, Mort ranks amongst the greatest ever team riders, something which no stat can really reflect. So, I'd stand by my view that Mort was, by a reasonable though not massive margin, a better rider than Harris. (Relative to standard of world speedway at the time).

in the nz gp - me neither over the whole series - i wouldnt be surprised, id be frigging amazed

My 50 for heat top scorer on lindback

just e-mailed the NZ TAB to see if they would be offering odds on the NZ Speedway GP - I got a very prompt reposnse, saying they would be putting up odds for the Indy Cars on Friday! Phil - next time you see Larry, can you ask him if he remembers getting christmas cards and regular letters from a young kiwi lad who was a regular at Hyde Rd. I remember being gutted when he left the Aces at the end of 84, though at least he didn't move far, itj ust meant I got more regular visits to the Shay and then Odal to watch what bcamse my "second" team to follow. And also, how he got the nickname Rangi (according to a S Star interview, in which he wouldn't reveal why)?

OK, can we justr agree: 1. Elite League now is a much lower standards than the old British League, relative to World Speedway standards 2. It is impossible (though fun to try) to compare riders of different eras in absolute terms. This is because our perception of riders is largely determined by how well they performed against other riders of their own era. So, if we are to say who was best PEter Collins or Tomasz Gollob, we are likely to look at their records to differentiate. This problem is exarcebated if you are to compare second strings, becuase we would likely have seen tehm ride less often (i.e. not in majpor individual meetings against other riders of a similr calibre, they would arguably be more likely to pperofrm well/poorly on particular tracks, less footage avialble of them etc). 3. Averages are useful in comparing riders against their peers. However, they are pretty much useless in comparing riders against riders of different eras, becuase of different race formats and inability (per above) to quanitfy in absolute terms the calibre of riders they were racing against. If you doubt how much race formats can influence riders averages, look at how ALL the top riders averages decreased in 1988 when the designated riders race was intriudced compared to 1987 (same pool of top riders, every single one of them decreased in average). 4. IT is a myth that all BL teams in the 70s/80s had three top notch heat leaders. Some teams did have as many as four world class heat leaders (e.g. BV team of the easly 70s, Cradley team of the 80s) - however some teams had only one (or even no) true world class riders. World Class - I would take as meaning one of the top 10 or s riders in the world at one time - Morton I believe from 80-84 was in that category, Harris I can't think of any year he would fall into that categorym, though he was capable of world class performances. C Morton was consistently in the top 10 averages in a league containing the worlds best rides, harris has never ahcieved that. At their best both could win against world class fields (see his BLRC and inter continental titles) as could Harris (GP title victory), though neither was ikely to be world champion due to their inability to gate. Mort however would have arguably been close to a rosturm place in 83/84 under a GP system, Harris never has been. Personally, I would class Harris as a "poor mans" Morton, with no disrespect intetnded to either rider. Having seen Morton race weekly at Hyde Rd, I also believe he was capable of moves on a speedwa bike which Harris is not capable of. Note, while I believe Mort was wold class, Harris "borderline", that does not mean that in absolute terms, Morton was better than Harris (though my opinion is that he was). Back to the topic, 13 heats vs 15 heats. TO me, the 13 heat format is the classic, its what I grew up with. However, it would be ludicrous (IMHO) to do away with the designated riders heat which is part of the 15 heat format. The key to me is that heats need to be got through quickly, a meeting should last no more than an hour and a half (something to be learnt from cricket here, in that T20 fits the requirements of a mdoern audience for something which is crammed into a shorter time frame to maximise viewing audicneces - the good thing for speedway is that it doesn't need to bastardise itself to do so, it just needs to get rid of the meaningless delays. For something different - perhaps 7 match races (7v7 , 6vs etc) to start the meteeting, each worth a point each, followed by either 14 (classic 13 heat, plus one nominated riders race) or 15 heats (current format) of team racing,I imagine this should still be able to be crammed into 90 minutes. Alternatively, a meaningful second half (points counted toward ELRS qualification?) - the issue I see with this is that come the second half of the year, only a certain number of riders would still have anything worth racing for.

a true great, an absolute speedway and New Zealand sporting legend. Hopefully he is well enough to get along to Western Springs and enjoy the GP this coming weekend. all the best for the future to Ivan and family

the whole north island is officially a drought zone, you arrive and it rains...typical bloody pom bringing the weather with you ;-) Not complaining mind u, our water tsnk definity needs the rain and rain is all thsts likely to save the kiwi boys in the cricket. Just hope it clears for saturday, after the incredible summer we have had , it would really suck if the weather contributes to a reduced crowd or spectacle on gp day

It wasnt live last year, it was shown in full the following day. Not sure whether sky uk dropping tbe rights affects nz? if it does, then maybe you will now be able to stream on the officicial site? you not making it along to western springs?

odds now up on ladbrokes and someother sites Based on last year's showuing, Hanocok, Gollob and Lindback all look good value. Vaculik looks good odds for an outsider, while KK, Zagar and even Tai look decent odds for an each way bet. DaRCY Ward 9/2 . Chris Holder 9/2 . Nicki Pedersen 5/1 . Tomasz Gollob 8/1 . Greg Hancock 8/1 . Jaroslaw Hampel 8/1 . Emil Sayfutdinov 9/1 . Antonio Lindback 14/1 . Andreas Johnson 20/1 . Niels-Kristian Iversen 25/1 . Martin Vaculik 33/1 . Fredrik Lindgren 33/1 . Krzysztof Kasprzak 40/1 . Matej Zagar 66/1 . Tai Woffinden 100/1 . Jason Bunyan 500

Ladbrokes also have had odds up for a few days, and a little more generous than those on oddschecker

This is an issue faced by all print media these days, even the daily newspapers. I'd suggest that a quarterly magazine runs the risk of being more out of date than a weekly like the Star. Agree - I think quarterly is porbably about right, weekly it would be going head to head with the Star, which would be no good for either publication, and I could only see one winner. I'm another who would be keen on subscribing, i miss the Star but not enough to pay postage to NZ each week. I would think the issue with USD should be very easily resolvable, in fact I can't see how this issue would even come about? Clearly it would be a struggle to make any money on a quartrerly publication charged out at 8 quid for a year. There are overheads and set ups which need to be covered just the same whether there are 4 issues per year or 52 - but if you don't want it, dont buy it. I think the best way to see how the publication is doing is count the number of ad pages in the second issue,. I know people complain about lots of ads, but for publications with a low circulation base, these often contribute more to the publications profitability than the circ revenue, and essentially "subsidise" the cost of the magazine (e.g. a 50 page mag with 10 pages of ads would need to charge far more than an 80 page mag with 30 pages of ads to break even).

clearly you never buy a book? Amazing that some people would pay decent money for what is just printed paper. The publishers would be better off putting a pdf up on the net and charging people 50p to print it off. Pass on that business model to to JK Rowling, I'm sure she'll be very grateful... Perhaps it says more about your ability to interpret information? If you think the game shown here is anything like Top Trumps then I can only take it that either a) you have no idea what Top Trumps is or you are not very bright or c) both I remember as a kid my favourite board game was Speedway Scene, I played that for hours, and that consisted of a laminated carboard board, about 50 "grading cards", three dice and four counters. The likes of top selling board games like Risk hardly have a lot in the way of sophisticated pieces - some cardboard and some mass produced plastic figures. Agree though that this is very much a niche product - i would think online would be the way to sell, perhaps a few copies in trackshops/games shops also. Advertising in likes of speedway star and online (targeting say facebook users who "like" particular speedwa groups). I think if the game is godd enough the target market would have no issue paying 15-20 quid.

i think it is a good idea in theory but.... i cant see how say a darcy ward or holder would fit it.into their schedule, nor whete the money would come from to pay there costs as they would no doubt want a decent sum if they were to treat it setiously

does that inclide countries like nz where over a year, excluding the nz gp, you might get to see highlights of three meetings shown months after the meeting?

I had Peter Collins ahead of Craven for a numbe of reasons: 1. Personal bias - COllins is one of my favourite all time riders 2. For both PCs (and also Lee) the stats alone do not truly reflect what brilliant riders there were - however while there is ample evidence of Collins' brilliance (77 inter-contrinetal final, world finals of 76/77 etc) available to view (and of course i saw him regularly around hyde Rd) to see jnust how good he was, there isn't similar footage available for a young un like me to see how ggod the other PC was 3. Collins may have one world title less, but picked up multiple world pairs titles, the consecutive maximums in WTC finals etc,which i think tends to even things out 4. Under a GP system, I think Collins may have "out titled" Craven 2-1. 5. Craven did have his career tragically cut short, but remember Collins "retired" from British speedway at the age of 26. He was still world class when he returned, but never again lookedd likely to add to his individal title. Them's my reasons Sidney, I appreciate that many would place them in a different order. On John Louis - dond't get me wrong , he was world class. The reasons I rated Simmons/Jessup/Carter higher was: Jessup - 2nd in the World in 80, and but for engine troubles could have added a world title in 80 and another runners up medal in 81. Under a GP system would have arugably been world champ in 1980 and runner-up in 81. (just finished reading Mike Lee's autobiography and he mentions how cheap DJ was - makes you wonder if those critical engine probklems could have been avoided if he'd spent a little bit more?) Simmons- multiple world pairs titles with different partners, as well as runner up in the individual in 76. Carter - has an inferior record in world finals to Louis,BUT there were obviously extenuating circumstances in both 81 and 82, and he would have been a hot favourite in 85 had injury not intervened. Add to that his back to back BLRC titles (look at the other riders to have done this, there are only the all time greats) and British titles (one on one leg), as well as the fact that I beklieve he was the last Brit to top the BL averages - and I think he has to rank ahead of tiger Louis. Agree - after the top three I think there is a group of riders (likes of Williams, Parker, Loram etc) who would likely rank above the likes of Carter/Jessup etc.

harris finished top 8 once in how many attempts? the chances of him doing it in this years line up would be minimal. Im sure tai will be top 8, maybe even top 3 , one day, i just cant see it being this season (though can see him making a couple of semis and maybe a final). if you do see him making top 8- which 7 riders do u see him finishing above? dont get me wrong, i would love to see him finish top 8 this year - but i'd also like to take maria sharapova and angelina jolie home for a cup of tea and a lie down...

True, my bad!

in his home country, not the nz gp. i'd be surprised if he makes the semis in auckland, but the beauty of this year's line up is that all of the 15 are capable of making the final

collins, craven,lee for me. I can see valid arguments for and against ranking carter above/below simmons and jessup, but think you'd certainly have to rank him ahead of crash, louis and wilson, none of whom (imho) were ever really genuine world title contenders.

All right, this meeting is now just a fortnight away, I am really looking forward to this, my thoughts on how the riders line up: Favourites Reigning World Champ Chris Holder had a poor meeting last time around, however I think that was more down to the birth of his son that morning then any dis-like for the Western pring track. The old boys Gollob and Hancock were comfortably the best riders at the last NZ GP, and both will be wanting a good performance this time around if they are to push to add a afurther world title to their collection. Contenders: Nicki P arguably the best rider in the world last year (when taking into account the WTC and domestic leagues) and will be looking to go one better this year. A finalist at Auckland last time around. Young brigade Darcy and Emil are both highly fancied to do well this year, and if the surface is as conducive to racing as last year it should suit them both. Emil was involved in the best race of the evening and made the semis last time around, Darcy I can’t see being dis-advantaged by the fact he hasn’t ridden there before. Antonio Lindback was very impressive in Auckland last year, unfortunately he then failed to reproduce that form until the second half of the season. Seems to be strongly tipped as an outside this year. Hampel had back-to back podium finishes in 2010/11 and looked on track to do the same last year before injury halted his season. Finished second in Auckland last time around, and will be looking to show he is fully recovered from injury with a similar performance this time around. Outsiders: Andreas Jonsson was arguably the biggest disappointment last year, both in the Auckland GP and the GP series as a whole. This seaons will show whether last season was an aberration, or if 2011 was a “one off” rostrum finish. NKI was superb in domestic speedway in 2012, this is his chance to show he can cut it at GP level. Martin Vaculik showed in Hampel’s absence last year that he is one rider who can cut it at this level, but this year he will have a lot more pressure on him and the line up is much tougher. Freddie Lindgren scraped into the semi finals in Auckland last year without ever looking totally convincing, will be looking for a convincing season opener in his quest to establish himself as a top 8 rider. Tail enders: KK and Zagar are both very decent riders, but I’d ve very surprised to see ether making the semis, much as I would like to see the new Aces number 1 do well. Tai Woffinden I can see being more impressive than Chris Harris was last year, but also likely to score less points in what is a much stronger line up. The local wildcard: Jason Bunyan brought the house down by picking up a point in his final ride last year, he’ll be doing very well if he can repeat the same score this year. My picks: Top three of Holder, Gollob and Hancock, being joined in the semis by Emil, Ward, Pedersen, Lindback and Hampel.

Thanks for the replies, as a bit of a stats geek myself I found it interesting. Just a few thoughts. I think in determining "greatness" to look at World Final perfrmances only is a bit limiting. Not considering for example Barry Briggs consecutive BLRC titles, Hans Nielsen’s dominance of the BL, or Peter Collins team riding and World Pairs titles with 5(?) different partners, does them a disservice. But I do appreciate that in depth statistical analysis of all competitions would be incredibly time consuming! With a statistical approach focusing on World Finals only , I think you need to have some sort of “bonus” system to reward world titles and rostrum finishes. A 13 point display which earns a third spot is surely not equivalent to one such as Gunderrsen’s title winning display in 1985 . Also seems ludicrous that Lee (one world title, two third places) could finish behind Carter (5th placed highest finish) I like the idea of adjusting for engine failures and crashes which were not purely rider error. However, rather than excluding these, perhaps a better approach would be to take the riders position at the time of the incident. So carter would get a second place for his e/f in 81 and a third for his fall in 82. If you are adjusting, I think you do need to adjust for the Collins fall you mentioned too. Personally, I think a better approach would be to look at rider’s top 5 world finals, rathe r than three consecutive, and perhaps adding 2 points to the meeting score for winning the event, 1 point for second and 0.5 points for third, or something like that. I think this allows reward of performance over a period of time, and doesn’t unfairly penalize riders who may have consistently made world finals but had the odd “off” meeting. Carter vs Lee is an interesting one, in that their peaks didn’t really overlap. Lee was great 1977-80 and 1983, Carter from 80-85 (but missed large chunks of 84/85 with injury), so only in 1983 were they both world class at the same time – in that year I believe Lee’s performances outstripped Carter’s. Personally, at the time (I started going in 81) I always ranked Carter above Lee, I guess because for most for that period KC was the better rider of the two, and bvecuase I watched most of my speedqay at Hyde Rd (and also the Shay) both tracks where Carter excelled I also did some statistical analysis a while back (using a method similar to what I outlined above with best 5 performances in each stage evaluated with bonus points for rostrum finishes and qualification) on the world finals (and qualifiers ) of the 80s, Lee I think I had being eliminated at overseas final stage, while Carter made the final and finished 6th. However, using the same system I also had Lee placing fifth in a best of the 70s final. . However, looking back at their careers I think you have to rank Lee ahead of Carter, certainly in terms of pure talent but also in terms of achievement. As a footnote, I was at Odsal when both rode their final world chsmpionship meetings, and what a sad way for two English greats to bow out. It was the British semi final 1986, Lee started with a last and then failed to finish any of his remaining rides. Carter had only two points at the interval (on his home track!), but won his last two rides and a run-off to qualify for the British final – which of course he wouldn’t ride in, as less than a week later he was dead. If you want a defining moment in the deline of English speedway, that particular emeting stands out for me (even if England did end with a healthy number of finalists that year, none of them were nearly as talented as Lee and Carter, the two Englishmen of the generation genuinely good enough to have been world Champ.

I'd be surprised if he makes much of a difference to the crowd tbh, maybe put a max extra couple of hundred if that on the gate I would have thought. However That said, he was pretty heavily involved in the pre-meeting media coverage last time around,, so maybe I am underselling him. I wouldn't argue with Buckleys right to influence the wildcard choice, but as a speedway fan (and a kiwi) i personally would rather the spot had gone to Batch. No different though to the guaranteed host entry into the old one off world finals, Henry Kroeze springs to mind, and of course the wildcard for the Italian GP has often been an uncompetitive local rider. It's not a phenomenom particular to speedway either, plenty of sports have guaranteed spots for the hosts. Agree - I think every NZ speedway fan is very grateful that he has done it. Sports i guess is an area in which a lot of otherwise savvy business men are willing to lose money to fulfil their love of sport (or egos). Buckley clearly falls into the first cateogry (i.e. doing it because he loves speedway) , however clearly he was unhappy with how much money he lost last year and i'm sure would not be willing to pump endless money into the GP. Prices have gone up this year, so on the same crowd he'd be pulling in approx an extra $150-200k, and I guess potentially costs could be lower this year. Weather will be a big factor, if it rains i'd imagine the attendance could fall as low as 10,000 people? I haven't seen whether the government or Auckland council are coming to the aprty this time around, tbh i think its a disgrace if they don't. I believe there was a similar issue with the A1 where the benefactor behind NZ's entry and event put in large amounts of money and was disillusioned with the lack of support from NZ government.

Not your best post Sid - as others have pointed our hardly recent, and been done many times since. I'd also disagree that he was "very lucky" - you needed luck to go with you on the night to be World Champ under the old system and while luck did go with Penhall (Les Collins dropping points in his easiest ride, Carter falling off when Penhall was in second denied Les a run-off, and f course the ref getting the decision correct - always a chance he could hav emade the wrong call) - but no more so than many other world champs. i would have thought it would be more common under the gp system than the old system (don't know if either is an easier feat than the other), but that doesn't seem to be the case. Also - look at this year. Holder is the rider - IMHO- the most likely to win the title. However, the chances are that he won't . IF that seems contradictory - Holder I would say has a 1 in 4 or 1 in5 chance of being the champion (if you were to set odds). So, there is a 75 or 80% chance that the winner will be someone else. a bit simplistic to say holder would have been elminated. Firstly, there didn't used to be qualifiers in March, so he wouldn't have been racing the day his son was born. Secondly, the standard of the field for an early qualifying round would have been lower than the NZ GP, so a similar performance could easily have seen him secure enough points to qualify. are you a kiwi in disguise

interesting reading. one small point - i think there is something wrong with the way the percentages are calculated for questions which allowed multiple answers. For exampe, question 10 says 70% of people have been to Cardiff and 30% have been to another GP. Which comes to 100%. This would imply that no-one who has been to Cardiff has been to another GP, and noone who has been to another GP has been to Cardiff - and I would be very surprised if that was the case.