waiheke1

I think we have three categories of riders being names. Firstly, genuine alltime World greats (PC x 2, Lee, arguably Farndon etc.) Secondly, great British riders (Boococks, Morton, Wigg etc.) - riders who were short of the very top level, but were World Class riders who excelled at both international and domestic levels. Dependent on your ""thresholdd for greatness" someone like Jack Parker may belong to the first group or the second group. Finally, you have a heap of riders being names who were good riders - solid heat leaders, decent at international level, with the occasional higher achievement (e.g. the likes of the Grahame brothers, Phil Collins, Reg Wilson etc.) again - some judgement between who belongs in the second and third categories e.g. Les Collins, Jeremy doncaster some would argue as being in the "greats" other in the "goods." I think most of these type of lists has a biad to post-war, partly because of that being the maximum life-span of most people posting, but also because the World Championship (or World Cup for football) is the key barometer of success - so War time (and pre-wartime where the titles were in their infancy) greats are generally forgotten. So, I wouldn't imagine Peter Craven sliding into the "obscurity" of say Tom Farndon, but he may be to some extent overlooked in favour of more rcent riders - however, Peter Collins is unlikely to suffer the same "fate" becuase the advent of video footage of a decent quality means that fans of future generation will be able to witness him in his pomp. the "youtube" age certainly has its advanytages oin that regard! Personally, I think Collins has to be ahead of Lee. World Final records were pretty equal, however PC had a much better record in the World Pairs,and World Team Cup, a better BL record and was unparallelled as a team rider. Interestingly enough, I think both Collins and Lee underachieved compared to their ability. Compare them for example to Briggs and Maiuger, Olsen and Nielsen, and they were arguably much the greater natural talemts - however achieved considerably less success. Co-incidence, or something in the British speedway rider s mindset? Perhaps having to come over to a foreign country ade the Kiwis and Danes mentally tougher, or they had a better "work ethic" or...? tbh, I wouldn't consider him in the top 20 - possibly beacuse of a bias towards attacking players- but realistically to name all those who might potentially be considered in the top 20 I'd have had to name 200 players! Certainly he'd be in my top 10 British players, and certainly top 50 world, but not my top 20. Interseting you mention Rummenige here,but not in your earlier list of post 1980 players. Again, I could have named Keegan (though his lack of World Cup appearances certainly would count against him) and Charlton but while these I would consider amongst the great British players, I certainly wouldn't rate them top 20 of all time (top 50 probably for Charlton). Ronaldinho is an intersting one - at his best he was absolutely brilliant, twice World player of the year and a World Cup winner- but obviously he then declined in the years when he should have still been at his peak (a Mike Lee of the football world?)

I think the opposite can also be true, and we can underestimate recent sports people. Matthews I would say would not be in the top 20 footballers of all time. Of players since 80, I think you'd have to include Platini and (fat) Ronaldo as well in the top 20, as well as the threee you mention. Additionally, I'd say the likes of Xavi, C Ronaldo, Van Basten, Gullit, Romario, Zico, Ronaldinho, Dalglish, Baresi would not be that far outside it. I'd say there'd be about 11 "nailed on": Pele, Maradonna, Messi, Best , Cruff, Puskas, De Stefano, Garincha, Beckenbauer, Ronaldo, Eusebio. Then the likes of Jairzinho, Zizinho, Yashin, Didi, Muller, Meazza, Hidegkuti, Edwards, Sindelar and a host of others (including the recent player s have names above) wothy of consideration for the remaining places.

So to repeat the question... which of Lee, Louis, Moore or Collins won the world title as an 18 year old? Of course they have a lot to do - they are only teenagers, with their whole career ahead. Sydney - I can guarantee you that some of today's young riders will go on to be world champion, and even some that you haven't yet heard of yet will one day be regarded as starts of the calibre of Lee, Collins etc.

and it would be the same if you had a one-off final now - look at how many different riders finish on the podium in a GP each season - the bulk of the GP field would be capable of finishing on the podium under a one-off final system.

Sidney - can you tell me in what year an 18 year old won the speedway world final, as I must have missed it. Or even a 500-1 long shot did? Emil finished on the rostrum in 2009, was not that far off winning it, so I'm not sure how you can rule out the possibility of a teenager ever winning the GP. Of course, the chances of a 500-1 long shot winning it are very slim (by definition) - but notably the examples you have given won "knockout" compeitions, whereas the chances of an upset in a league style event are much slimmer - not because of "open" or "closed" shop, but because performances are needed to be sustained over a whople year - just as the FA cup has a much greater chance of an upset victor than the Permiership.

the heat by heat results show it to be the classic 18 heat format - however, that doesn't help that much as it could be anyone of 5 riders (Louis, Reg Wilson, Ray Wilson, Betts or McMillan)!

Holder Jonsson Pedersen Gollob

Sydney - you haven't answered the question though - how is what you are proposing an "open shop." i think ideally there would be a qualifying series - perhaps 64 riders, randonly drawn into 4 meetings, then seeded for a seconfd round of meetings based on perfomance in the first round). Points system as per GPs, after two meetings, the bottom 16 riders would drop out. Same again for another two meetings, another 16 riders drop out (i.e. the 16 with the least points over the preceing 4 meetings), and so on until a final meeting for the top 16. From this I'd say the top two riders straight through to the GP, next 8 meet 9-14 from the GP, with two spots for the top 2 in the world under 21s all meeting in a two day GP challenge - top 3 to qualify. Of course, from a practical point of view this would never work, two much disruption to domestic leagues and the cost would be too great. So, back to the drawing board...

Sidney, you say that the current system is a closed shop, and that that is a failing of the current system. Currently there are 3 slots for riders from outside the series, open to pretty much any rider in the world, with a knockout system in place. Your proposal is to remove these qualifying spots, replacing them with nominated riders (akin to the wildcards which you have railed against) - leaving precisely "zero spots" for automatical qualifying from outside the series. Can you explain how this is more of an "open" shop? You've made mention of the current system having no "romance" - can you explain how under your proposal there is a chance for a shock qualifier (say someone from outside the top leagues) to qualify? You seem to be contradicting yourself! That's not to say that your proposal is without merit, certainly the 8 riders you list (if we substitute G Laguta for Kennet) is stronger than the top 8 in the GP qualifiers last year. What does that tell you ? That selecting riders based onsubjective criteria (but based on results in things like domestic league, WTC etc) is more effective in getting a high quality field than a knockout qualifying system. And that's what the GP organisers have realised too - hence why they have 4 "permanent wildcard slots" as this allows them to make sure the standard of the field is high (i.e. not missing any genuine title contenders) which a) makes it a true world championship and is arguably a commercial neccesity. Also, you seem to be doing away with the "local wildcard" spot. I think there is no way that that is going to happen, nor do I believe it should - let's face it, the extra permanent slot is unlikely to be going to a title contender, and if you are doing away with the moermanent nominated riders, it makes the local wildcard spot even more important (otherwise you could very likely end up with the British GP with no British rider) - and lets face it, almost all major world sporting events have a spot for the host nation. I suggest that watching a lot of speedway, or being able to reccite random facts, does not neccesarily equate to speedway knowledge... but neither does an inability to formulate coherent written arguments preclude speedway knowledge either.

My top 5 that I've seen: 1 Peter Collins 2 Mike Lee 3 Loram 4 Simmons 5 Carter and that I didn't: 1 Craven 2 Farndon 3 Parker 4 Williams 5 Price Havelock, Loram, C Louis, Harris... at a push Screen and Andy Smith. Tai I am sure will eventually merit inclusion. Pretty thin compared to yesteryear. Edit: Also, add Tatum to the list of top Brits from the 80s. I'm not sure anyone would claim Britain has as much strenth in depth now as it did in the 70s/80s.

To add to those alreay mentioned, Peter Collins (amazed not already mentioned!), Kenny Carter, Tommy Knudsen, Jan Anderson ] wrong thread - they belong to a thread on those who had lots of different clubs

So Janowski didn't get to compete in the qualifiers last year? Ohthat's right, he did. Say, they had only the top 3 riders from GP stayed in and gave the top 13 qualifiers the remaining places - a totally open shop- - guess what, he wouldn't have qualified either as he didn't make the last 16 in a field without the worlds's top riders (and neither did Ward). guess what, he gets to compete in qualifiers this year too! As has been pointed out repeatedly, young talent actually has a better chance as if they don't qualify they aremuc more likely to be offsrred a wildcard if good enough than you r "journeyman" rider - I'd be very surprised if Janowski isn't in the field by 2014.

Philip, my post above is referring to Sam's upset 3rd place at Odsal in 85, not his World title winning performance (which was no great surprise)in Pocking 93. And yes, Jonsson did win at Odsal in 90.

to be far, a rider who chokes every time in the semis probably doesn't deserve to be world champion, conversely a rider who wins every semi and final can hardly be said to be "getting lucky" each time... you don't win those races thanks to luck. happy with your second proposal if this was in additon to the GP series good to see some creative thinking, though I don't agree tbh. And in reality, a rider finishing in the top3 of the averages in any of the major leagues is almost certain to be offerred one of the permanent wildcard slots (if not qualified already). I also disagree on the points - I think the current scoring system is the one aspect which they have exactly right at present While I agree, I'm not sure about your examples. Havvy I would say was only second best to Per Jonsson in 92 if you look at their records that season. Jonsson had a relatively poor '90 in the BL, but finished on the podium in all the qualifying rounds, so was hardly an outsider. Hans of course was a strong favourtie (especially after Jan O injured himself go-karting causing him to be ruled out of the final), but behind him I would say Shawn Moran and then Jonsson would have been the next favourites. Less Collins was a bit of a surprise, but did win the inter-contyinental final (arguably a tougher meeting) in the lead up and similarly Handberg was in great form in the qualifiers in 92. Personally I think the likes of Wiltshire (90), Jan O(86 only), Rickardsson (91 only) were bigger surprises. Sam Ermolenko was certainly a big surprise though, each round he was one of those tipped to go out, but made it through and was excellent that afternoon at Odsal (albeit helped by a favourable draw). Dave Jessup I feel would have been world champ in 80 and runner up in 81 had the GPs been in effect - I'm not sure that there were any year's prior to that when I would have expected him to nhave finished on the podium, though he may have come close.

Personally I think 10-12 is about right. That said, you could add an Australian and a US GP to the start of the season without any impacts on domestic leagues (note: I woould expect in future years the NZ GP to be run earlier than this year's.) I'm guessing that this year will see some negotiating between BSI and the POles to see the one GP rider dropped - possibly the outcome of that would determine whether long terms there is an increase or decrease in the number of GPs. Also, I think you are oversstating the rate of increase - in 2002 there were 10 GPs - in 2012 there will be 12. If the series increases by another two events over the next 10 years I don't see a major issue, especially if these are accomodated before the domestic seasons start. Elite league play-offs - for them or against them, please discuss.

interesting that you praise Carter for being patriotic, yet condemn Penhall for putting his compatriots first (surely the very definition of partiotism). Can't imagine Carter EVER giving up a title for the benefit of fellow Englishman. Yes it was blatant, but how often do we criticize our sportspoeple for lack of honesty - he could easliy (and probably should have) just faked an engine failure. I'm not sure he should be criticized for being open about what he was doing (and let's face it, many others have done the same). Have to disagree to be honest, Billy probably performed above himself in world Finals, but can't think of a year I would actually have expected him to finish on the podium in a GP series. Perhaps 83, but as falcace points out, he didn't win any big individual meetings (though he did almost win the world pairs single handedly for the Aussies).

If you disagree with Hammer that speed into the first bend is the area where kiwi riders are perhaps lacking, what do you think is the main area that they need to improve on to be more competitive with international riders?

To agree with the other posters, I found this an excellent preview, insightful and well written (and I also agree with a lot of your predictions!) For what it's worth, my one suggestion would be to reduce (or remove) the usage of phrases such as "in my opinion" or "i think". The reader should be aware that what they are reading is an opinion, and that renders (in my view) these phrases redundant. So for example, rather than saying for example "his inconsistency will cost him a top8 place in my opinion" I'd say "his inconsistency is likely to cost him a top 8 place." Feel free to ignore this if you disagree. Would also be interesting if Philip Rising could give his thoughts, as he obviously has a degree of experience with this sort of thing.

speeway 4 eva- i don't understand why you registered to post, only to attace "the hammer" who has said nothing disparaging about NZ speedway, and in fact has seemed to be one of the most informed people on this thread about the state of speedway in NZ. I would have thought anyone with the most basic speedway knowledge would be aware of a range of reasons why Darcy Ward was unlikley to be given the wildcard for this GP. So, you don't think Jason Bunyan has done anything for NZ speedway simply because he's been paid when he's done training shcools in the South Island? Who would you have given the wild card spot to, and how/why would this have improved the GP and/or been better for NZ speedway?

Speedy guy, where are you? Pehaps to make it easier, you could justify for starters why you think he was one of the top 20 riders of the 70s (and name the others)

AAAARGGGGGGGHHH!!!!!! Its an indisputable FACT thatnthe old one was better because every rider had a chance every year to be world chamion, it was a proper world championship. also, because the standard was so much higher then, you had riders on 9 point averages who were only 23rd in the standings... (do i need to add an emoticon to this?)

the most naturally talented speedway rider ever - Rickardson, Crump, Pedersen wouldn't have won a GP between them if only he'd had the proper backing from sponsors

Sydney, I understand what you're saying, and happy to agree to disagree on Sam over-achieving, but its this line which I really struggle to comprehend. Some of the other Americans from the 80s: Kosta, Ingels, Miller, Faria, Pyeatt, Lucero, Rooney, Pfetzing, Christian, Correy, Preston, Oxley, Gresham. Some decent riders in that list, some pretty mediocre ones as well. Do you still stand by your claim above?

ah, so you're basing your opinion of him on his performances in his first season in the British League...

so you consider both Ermolenko and Autrey an unimpressive riders ?