chunky

The mid-70's really was a bad period for them. Considering how many good Swedes there were at the start at the decade, it was incredible how they failed to build on that. It wasn't long before we we lost Fundin and Nordin (and Nygren was on a rapid decline), although we did see the emergence of Christer Lofqvist and Tommy Jansson. Of course, they were both struck down tragically early in their careers, and by that time, Michanek, Persson, Bengt Jansson, and Soren Sjosten were all fading. In those two sentences alone, that is a lot of talent to lose in a relatively short period. Jan Simensen was good - although not a world-beater - but he wasn't around long. Had Tommy Johansson and Tommy Nilsson committed to BL racing a little more, they could have perhaps sparked something of a revival, but realistically, Jan Andersson and Richard Hellsen were the two outstanding Swedes to emerge from the 70's. The Christer Sjosten tragedy pretty much sealed a bad few years, but that was followed just four years later by Leif Wahlmann. I was there that night, and it happened right in front of me... We all know speedway goes in cycles, and when Per Jonsson and Jimmy Nilsen came along, they were followed by Rickardsson, the Karlssons, Gustafsson, Jonsson, and a host of others. Steve

I have been saying this for years. It's fine having a points limit - providing it is a realistic limit! Yes, it is - or should be - designed to prevent teams from becoming "over-strong", but all it does now is force out riders for being "too good", and reduce teams (and leagues) to a level of mediocrity. I remember back in the 80's, Andy Grahame was forced out of his team (Oxford, I think) because his average was too high. However, no other BL team could fit him in because his average was too high, and his assessed average was too high to allow him to go NL! Yes, they did resolve the situation, but how is forcing riders out of the sport productive in any shape or form? The idea should not be to weaken the stronger teams (particularly if riders have had the audacity to actually improve during a season), but to help weaker sides come up to the appropriate standard. Steve

Thing is, when we talk about "entertainment", "quality of the product", and "value for money", I don't believe that has anything to do with the standard of rider. The GP's clearly have the world's best riders, but in recent weeks we have apparently (I can't comment myself as I didn't see them) had a couple of very poor meetings. Yes, it is nice to see the top names, but they themselves cannot guarantee close racing, excitement, great atmosphere, and overall quality of product. There is a lot more to it than that, and that is why the overall value for money is so important. Steve

Funny thing is, I honestly don't think that speedway is "too" expensive, per se, BUT it really doesn't seem value for money. It's not that the prices need to come down (then the sport REALLY wouldn't survive), but they really need to work on giving real value for money. As I keep saying, it doesn't matter how cheap it is - or even if it is free - if the quality and entertainment value is not there, people won't go.. Steve

You lot should try being a Brit in the States! Everyone here thinks that they can do an English accent, but I really don't sound like Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins! Steve

So THAT explains it! I always used to watch the live streams here, but this year it has been really annoying to lose that... Steve

Kneeling to Havvy's right. Steve

I think that is Michael Graves back left (on Banger's right). Steve

Not sure about that, but he didn't have a particularly good year; an average of under 8 for King's Lynn, and he didn't reach the British Final. Maybe there was an injury involved, but someone else will have to shed more light on this... Steve

Hmmm... I never knew Gary Havelock rode for England! Personally, I think we should get this thread pinned so everyone can post their favourite photos of Havvy on here... Steve

That really is so true. I've actually had a couple of private conversations (via this forum and on FB) with him, and said that he has so much to offer, but that a lot of the stuff he comes up with does him no favours. Sidney: I am not on edge at all - I just wanted him to answer the bloody question! I have no idea why he is so evasive. I know I can be long-winded at times, but it is because I like to use logic and reason to substantiate my point of view. I loved that recent thread you started about Carter, Simmons, Morton, Louis, and Wilson, and I loved the way there were a bunch of people producing achievements and stats to substantiate their own personal view. He can't - or WON'T do that... Steve

It really doesn't matter how many times you post the same stuff, it really doesn't substantiate anything, but again, you have conveniently chosen to ignore the reason for my comments... Please, answer the question!!! Steve

Fair points, but why - for someone who apparently considers the last forty or so years "meaningless" - are you so keen on a VINTAGE speedway group encompassing the material from just twenty-five years ago? However, yet again you have carefully selected the text to which you wish to - or not wish to, as the case may be - respond. It's actually quite sad that you want others to accept and respect YOUR views, but you constantly refuse to show the same respect to them when all they are doing is asking you a question. I don't get why you won't use logic and reason to substantiate your point of view, unless you genuinely feel that events like the South African Championship ARE a major factor in proving the quality of an individual. Steve

Do you think that all facts should be considered when seeking to substantiate your own personal feelings by NOT responding to a simple and perfectly justified question asked by another forum member? Or do you feel that you, - as an individual - are qualified to issue statements with having to respond? Of course, you have a marked tendency to pick and choose what criteria you use - or ignore - when you feel fit, and I am sure I m not the only one who has noticed the hypocrisy in much of what you write. For instance, you freely admit that that you are still interested in the "history" of the sport, although I am not sure of the historical period of which you speak. Very recently, you stated on this forum that post-70's speedway was "meaningless" to you. If that is the case, how are you such an expert on Gary Havelock and Tai Woffinden? Likewise, if post-70's speedway was "meaningless:, why did you take it upon yourself to change the guidelines of a Facebook speedway speedway group? The owner of the group clearly stated that the timeline to be considered was pre-1990, yet you you started posting post-1990 items, and "justified" that by issuing statements that the group had been founded a couple of years previously, and should therefore now be including items up to 1992! Then again, you posted a photo to the group of an adult Jason Crump, believing it to be from the 1980's... All very interesting when these items are from a time period which for you, was "meaningless"... It just makes it worse when you feel that you are above answering a straightforward question from waihekeaces1. Steve

One name that is often forgotten is Maxine Hill (now Beck). Maxine had a few outings for the Hackney juniors without making a huge impression. When it came to grasstrack however, she was so different, and was able to compete with the men on an equal basis. I saw her do well at a meeting in Caterham, which was Tony Primmer's first outing on the grass. I actually worked with Maxine at Merton Council (we were in different departments, but worked in the same building), and we used to go down and play darts at lunchtime. She retired after sustaining a couple of nasty injuries. Really nice girl. Steve

Fair enough, but are you going to answer the question? Steve

Hello????? Anybody there???? Steve

Well, it's being South African Champion that has secured his place as an all-time great! You know, you have me checking this thread on a regular basis looking for gustix's response... I think he is just doing this for dramatic effect! Steve

The important thing to remember about American sports - certainly with both football and baseball - is that they don't compete against the others in an equal amount of matches. Therefore, there is a slightly greater value to playoffs. As far as baseball, the number of divisions within a league (and remember that all divisions run parallel) can also lead to another anomaly; the fact that if the two best teams in the league happen to be in the same division, then the team with the second best record in the entire league could miss out on a spot in the playoffs! That is why it is structured the way it is. In speedway, and British footy, that can't happen. Steve

Again, like I said earlier, it seems that PC "overshadowing" Mort was more in the minds of the supporters than on the track itself. Really, PC was a little ahead of Chris - partly because of the World Final, of course - but looking back, they were perhaps a lot closer in ability than we realised at the time. Steve

Okay, you didn't say that, so I apologise. However, I still find it sad that because you don't think of someone as a "team man", that you totally allow that feeling to negate all ability and achievement. You know in your heart that it isn't true, but I realise you are entitled to your opinion. Still, we've had others on this forum who thinks Carter's name should be expunged from speedway completely... Steve

Because he has freely admitted that it is not based on ability and achievement - which is what this whole thread is about - but on personal hatred. Had Bruce Penhall been on that list, he would be rated even worse. Sad but true... Steve

Excellent post. I agree about the longevity versus ability, which is why I placed Carter second on my list. Similar to your mention of Jessup's 1980 season, 1976 is the reason I gave Simmo the edge over Carter. Again, while Jessup wasn't on Sidney's list, nor was Kennett, Betts, Ashby, etc, so I don't think it was meant to be an all-encompassing comparison, just between those five. You say about meetings being more meaningful, the 70's and early 80's was an extremely difficult period for any rider, with Collins, Mauger, Olsen, Autrey, Crump, Penhall, and a host of other quality riders engaged in battle, in addition to those mentioned here. What a great era it was... That can certainly happen. However, I think it is worth noting that this fact appears to have had more affect on those who don't rate Mort as highly as the others on the list. We have already proven his worth by achievement alone, yet he never got the recognition he deserved - and still doesn't... And can you imagine how good he would have been had he been able to trap!!! Steve

You keep saying you are surprised by Morton being rated highly by others, but when you look at his achievements, you shouldn't be. The fact that he achieved more than others generally rated above him is an indication of that. Thing is, you also mention his longevity in the sport, but he really wasn't around that long. He retired at 34 before having that one season with Sheffield. Simmons, Jessup, Kennett etc were all around a lot longer. Steve

You know, I don't go to speedway any more (not easy here in the United States), and while I am one of the older generation - remembering the great times of the 60's, 70's and 80's - I retain a keen interest and watch it when I can. For me, it is about the entertainment, and the value for money. Yes, there are some strange rules (as there always have been), but I can live with those if I am getting pleasure from watching. I don't like guests, but like many others on here, I feel that they are a necessary evil. Having said that, there should NEVER be a need for a guest for a non-heat-leader, and certainly no more than two guests in any team. I have no problem with allowing extra r/r rides, as they at least taken by members of "your" team. I am fine with a limit on team averages, as long as the averages are realistic; you should never have to dump a long-time team member to stay within the limit, or worse still, see a rider forced out of a league because they are "too good", and nobody can fit them in. Not all the possible solutions are easy to implement, but these two SHOULD be. I was a lifelong Dons supporter, and it still hurts that they are gone. Like iris, I see little value putting a bunch of individuals together and calling them a "team" just to keep the name alive. As fanatical as I was about my team, I still loved travelling around as a neutral and taking in several meetings a week. Good racing and enthusiastic (and large) crowds were just as important to me as watching my team. Now, when I watch British speedway online, one - if not both - of those factors are missing. Like other forum members, I often prefer watching racing from Poland or Sweden, and that makes me sad. I have said it before, and I will say it again; it is easy to complain about the cost of going to speedway, but I feel that "value for money" is far more important. Struggling to afford a night out is one thing, but struggling to afford a night out that fails to entertain is a bigger issue. It doesn't matter how cheap a product is if the quality is not there, which means that even if it were free, people wouldn't go - and therein lay the main problem. Okay, I don't like double points OR playoffs, but they are not - and should not be - the deciding factors in whether or not people attend speedway. We should go to watch great racing, and when appropriate, support our teams. THAT is what speedway should be about. Steve