chunky

Of course, it's always different when you have a horse in the race...

Thanks for that. I said early '70's, but I was thinking 1969!

Ah, I have the Morrish edition...

I don't actually remember it being used (or at least designated) much past the early '70's.

I love "The History of British League Speedway 1946-1964", but I really wish it had averages as well as just the points scored...

I loved my times at Plough Lane, but old videos seem to tell a different story to the one I remember... I don't know about you, but I think I know part of the appeal. Shiny black leathers and gleaming chrome were spectacular under lights. The kevlars and bike covers don't do it for me. I was a kid, watching these he-men wrestle their bikes through deep heavy tracks was fantastic. These he-men called Arthur, Norman, Bert, and Fred... Now, I'm the old fart, watching these snotty-nosed, tattooed little kids called Tai, Dakota, Jordan, and Jaimon... Where did we go wrong?

1969 was my first, and quite honestly, I don't remember anything special, other than Toby breaking his leg, and Mauger letting Sjosten beat him. 1972 is best remembered for Briggo's accident. 1975 is best remembered for the dust bowl, and the idiots watering the track and costing PC the title. 1978 is best remembered for Kennett's performance, including Mauger's fall. 1981 is remembered for TWO races. I fear that, like everyone else, you are remembering the occasion and the Wembley atmosphere, rather than the actual racing. Let's not forget the other, even more underwhelming World Finals like Amsterdam, Munich, Norden, and Ullevi underwater in '77. There was some great racing in the '76 final. Speedway fans are like amateur golfers. World Finals were mostly crap, but like that one chip onto the green that lands inches from the pin, you have one good race which makes everything worthwhile!

Judging by most of the comments on here, you could have fooled me... Loads of 'em, apparently - mostly from the BSF... British speedway fans clearly prefer standing on mud and broken concrete, covered by corrugated iron and a tarpaulin...

Quite honestly, leaving the "occasion" out of it, most World Finals have been underwhelming.

Tthat's irrelevant...

I hate to pick holes in what Ove said, but remember that when someone dies, people say things without thinking, just in order to build someone up.

The World Final may have had drama - sometimes. It also had a relatively weak field based on nationality. Wembley had magic. Can't argue that, but why do we hang on to something that's been dead for 40 years? Even if we had a new Wembley track, it wouldn't get close to the old one. Did you see the Wroclaw GP in 2019? Racing-wise - and drama-wise - it was the greatest meeting I have ever seen. And I'm not the only one on here to say that.

Yeah; when they missed the corner, and ended up in the Serpentine...

That is a point I have repeatedly made on here. I think in some of the following years, there were several finals that were equally weak.

I'm sorry, I haven't a clue...

It's a great sport when the winner doesn't score most points... "Oh, I won every GP, but I didn't even finish in the first three..." This is why I have a problem with mixed formats. Have round-robin OR knockout; combining the two leads to problems.

Is it fair that a rider could win the GP and drop further behind the guys he just beat? Is it fair that a rider could win every GP and not even finish in the Top 8 at the end of the year?

Collins 1977...

If you're really worried about that, just give everyone the same number of points...

What I said...

Depending on nationality (and seeding), riders competed in different numbers of meetings. Some qualified after one or two meetings. I'm not saying that the riders who qualified for the final didn't deserve to be there, but it was quite possible for riders to scrape through with some mediocre performances. Having said that, one bad night - even one fall or e/f - and it was easy for a rider to get screwed. I'm nor exactly sure how the European qualification works these days, but there are still qualifying rounds. What people forget is that EVERYBODY still has to qualify these days. With the top eight (now six) from the previous year qualifying from the previous year's GP series, that to me is still the fairest way of qualifying. A rider is not going to lose out because of bad luck;; everybody has a full year to qualify. It doesn't matter that it was done the previous year. How many riders currently outside the GP's would you say are better than those in it? The lower placed riders in the last few years have tended to be those who have qualified from the GP challenge - which people probably feel is the fairest way of qualifying. People weren't happy to see Kasprzak in this year - but he qualified on merit. How many British and Australasian riders are there these days? Not even enough to have qualifiers at the few tracks we have left! Like most, I preferred the old system. However, again I will ask: 1) Is it fair that the winner of a GP gets the most points? Previously, you could win the GP, and lose ground on those riders you just beat. It was possible for a rider to win every GP, and not even get enough points to finish in the Top 8 at the end of the year!

Is it fair for the winner of the GP to get the most points? Is if fair for riders in the final to get fewer points than those who didn't reach the final? To be honest, the system IS fair (the same for everyone), and you just have to remember that 20 heats are just a qualifier for the semis, where everyone starts from scratch.

Which part(s)?

Can I also include Yarmouth and Hastings? Speedway had long since ceased, but I have been there...

Sad, when you think of the amount of Austrians racing years ago. The Funks, Pilottos, Schatzer, Eder...