chunky

Only three. He rode in heats 2, 3, 4 (he won all three), then 6, 8, and 9.

That's great; thanks! I'm sure that's the record...

Thanks; I'll check that out!

Interesting... Obviously, we've had different formats which can change the odds, but five seems a lot. Have to look into that!

I'm trying! Thing is, I love stats, and I constantly go through meeting reports and scores looking for weird stuff. As I said, this is one I just stumbled on. Another one I found recently was a rider riding in four successive races in a team meeting. I'm sure there are others, but has anyone done five on the bounce?

My next question is the result of stumbling across an incident in an old Speedway Star. We've gone through cases of riders not meeting a certain opponent during a whole meeting, but what about the opposite? On 24th June, 1976, Sheffield took on Coventry in a BL fixture, and Doug Wyer scored a 15-point max. In FOUR of his five rides he faced Ole Olsen! I know rider replacement and tac subs can increase the chances of that, but four out of five seems excessive! Does anyone know of any similar cases? Has anyone ever faced the same rider five times in an evening? Have any two riders met in every race? Over to you...

I've always said that statistics do not lie - but they don't always tell the true story behind them.

This post is one of the best I have ever seen on here! You sound just like me! I have often got into arguments with people over statistics (particularly averages and probability), and they seem to be offended by me questioning whether samples are large enough. I got into a really heated argument on a speedway group when I suggested that averages could never be considered accurate when they will constantly change over an infinite number of cases. Also, statistics are only a reflection of what HAS happened, and not what is LIKELY to happen. I must admit that I have never heard of Steiner systems (I'm smart, but not an intellectual), but I will definitely look into them, because I am nerdy like that!

I think the bands on the right arm were introduced at the 1982 World Final in L.A.? I didn't think it was a bad idea, particularly when the helmet colours came off. Remember also the large, bright, Polish-style helmet colours that came in for a while at certain meetings... They seemed a better fit.

I already did! In Heat 10!

Your memory must be worse than you thought; it was only 14 months ago when you spoke about it on here! I agree that it is difficult to find reference to it online, but you did state that it was the 1976 Grand Prix final, and Olsen did pack up in Heat 10. He was riding at Number 5, so he would have been in blue. I don't remember Skol sponsoring any series; the only things I remember them doing were the Skol Masters at Birmingham, and the Skol Pairs at Wimbledon (1976). EDIT: Just dug out the Speedway Star with the Grand Prix report, and that was the one. There is a photo of Ole with the caption, "Ole Olsen's hopes in tatters. His blue helmet colour in ruins after jamming the chain."

No. Milton Keynes is in Milton Keynes. They sold the name, but the heart and soul never moved...

"The team" never sold us fans down the river; the owner did... AFC is the reincarnation - the REAL Wimbledon.

I can't believe all the bitterness and hatred from some on here, can you? I lost my speedway, and I lost my football. I got my football back, and now these hatemongers on here are praying for me to lose it again...

That still doesn't explain your attitude towards the new stadium (and homes), and the club.

That was my point. There are a lot of unanswered questions here...

I understand that. As I said, I don't understand why things were done the way they were. Our goal was always to go back to Wimbledon. So, why did Kingstonian sell us Kingsmeadow? Was it just a short-term financial fix? Couldn't they have added a first refusal or rental clause should we move back to Wimbledon? Sadly, while speedway has suffered from a devastating loss of venues in recent years, there have also been some strange goings-on in the football world, particularly outside of the top tier. I used to know all the league grounds - not any more.

For some reason, a lot of people can't get their heads round the fact - as much as I hate to say it - that speedway was never going to come back. Yet they still seem to blame football for it. While I had a strong connection to speedway and the stadium, I had an equally strong one to the football club - my grandad was the groundsman there! When we had to switch the replay against Leeds to Selhurst (heavy rain destroyed the pitch), my grandad actually had his photo in the papers. That's the way I see it. We worked our way to the top once, lost our ground, then lost the club. Started up again from nothing and are doing it all again!

As I said, I dont know everything that went on - and why. The fact that our goal was always to move back to Wimbledon (or somewhere close), I really don't know why things were done as they were, and what the long-term plans were for the K's?

Oh, I get that (I don't know the full details of everything that transpired), but we lost our ground too - before losing everything...

That is really bizarre!

Now look... You are a speedway fan, I get it. So am I. A lot of us speedway fans have lost the teams we love. Over the years, a lot of football fans have also lost the teams they love, but it is clear that you don't give a crap about them. I am one of those who has lost both their speedway team AND their football team. Speedway always was - and still is - my favourite sport. Wimbledon was my favourite team, and I could be found at Plough Lane most weeks. Wimbledon FC was my favourite team, and I could be found at Plough Lane most weeks. How the hell do you think I felt, losing both? I'm not the only one. There are several BSF members who were regulars at both Wimbledon speedway AND football. Yes, it's bittersweet, but speedway was never coming back. Football is not the reason for speedway's demise in Wimbledon. Or London. Or the UK. At least WE have ONE team returning home - which is a lot better than none. There really is no need for you to be such a bitter and spiteful b'stard towards people who have done absolutely nothing to you. Including those of us who have suffered the heartache of losing our team TWICE.

Firstly, the uninitiated don't give a crap! Even many of the initiated don't... Some sports, while not unique, don't conform to convention, and for good reason. Speedway is just one of those, but the key to it is "team". Just because one rider wins a race doesn't mean that they are the best TEAM. If you went by race-winners, then I could be Tai's partner in such an event, and WE could win, even though we aren't anywhere close to being the best TEAM. Now, what about cycling? The Team Pursuit is not decided by the FIRST placed rider on the team, but when the THIRD rider finishes. Biathlon. The TEAM biathlon was decided by where ALL the team members finished. F1. Lewis Hamilton could win EVERY GP, but it doesn't mean that Mercedes would win the Constructors Championship, as it is decided by ALL team members.

You want to talk about Pedants? It's BishopsFORD, not BishopSTOKE! Plus, that is Morden, and not Mitcham! Anyway, I also checked Google Maps which is different to that one you have!

I don't worry about low probability occurrences. I just get annoyed when people claim something is flawed because "that" may happen. That's why I cone on and point out that it was always the case. They just dismiss it because it never did... Thing is, whether you like rules or not, they are are there, and everybody (at least the important ones - the riders) knows them. Look at the stink after the first GP this year! We all knew the rules, and we all knew the possibilities. Why then, does it cause such a problem when something happens? That's the way it is, so they'd better get used to it.