fatface

Yep. I think you guys are right. It's less about those who didn't quite win the big ones and more those, who never really 100% went for it, despite their obvious ability. Staying with Swedes, I'd pick out Erik Stenlund. Obviously a highly accomplished motorcyclist, winning the World Ice Speedway in Moscow is some achievement, plus also good enough to finish 4th in the World Long Track and be Swedish Champion in speedway. If he'd focussed purely on speedway and came to Britain for more than just some cameo appearances, he could have been a real force. I would have liked to have seen plenty more of this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnBBUn3pbf4

In the GP era, I would say Ryan Sullivan, Mikael Max/Karlsson, Andreas Jonsson might all reflect they could have done better. All were capable. In the 1980s, Dennis Sigalos was at least on a par with Nielsen and Gundersen before a career-ending injury. I'd also pick out Lance King as another who could have done better. Great first season in UK in 82, World Finalist in 83, one ride from the title in 84 and third place, he looked destined to be a major force for years. But I think the averages did for him, when Cradley had to pick between him and Gundersen and his career just seemed to lose momentum after that. I think if he would have had that settled base at Cradley like Penhall before him and Gundersen, Hamill and Hancock, then he would have done a lot better than he ultimately did. At a lower level, I think Mark Courtney had all the ability, but not the application. As for Dave Jessup, I agree with Simmo on the engine failures, it was too frequent on big occasions to be down to pure bad luck (78 WF, 81 WFx2, 82 WF, 81 WTC, 83 WTC). And if he HAD won his first ride in 78, would he have held it together for the rest of the meeting? I don't know...when he did win his crucial first ride in 1980 against Lee, he dropped points thereafter.

True dat. Also, in Sayfutdinov's case, he's had ten cracks at the World Championship and never won it. I don't argue that he is top class, but he's a unlikely World Champion at this stage of his career. Laguta is a more interesting case. Just my opinion of course, but in the year he did win it, he frequently ventured beyond calculated risk and was often outright dangerous. I don't think he could repeat that.

Agree. A lot of hyperbole over this being the "worst line up ever" and the like. It isn't perfect, but it's still very good. With Zmarzlik we have an all-time great, Woffinden and Doyle two highly capable ex-World Champions, hardened contenders and proven GP winners like Madsen, Vaculik, Lindgren....younger contenders for medals like Holder, Bewley, maybe even Lambert? If people are determined to find the weaker GP years, probably 2013 at the end of the Rickardsson/Crump/Pedersen/Gollob era when Tai was able to come in as a wild card and win the whole damn thing. Unimaginable today. And in overall World Championship speedway, then you'd be hard pressed to beat 1989. Injuries and a flawed qualifying system meant we had a World Final missing Ermolenko, Moran, Knudsen, Jonsson, Pedersen, Nilsen...and instead had Tyrvainen, Olsson, Smith, Riss, Butler, Maier, Adorjan, Brhel. Not so good old days.

Can’t argue with that. Saying Woffinden should be gone is like saying Hamilton and Alonso should be out of F1. All time greats, probably past their best, but still comfortably among the elite.

I don’t think he will win it again. But as a three time champion, he’s earned the benefit of the doubt.

“Woke” !? ”Never watching it again!” Jeez, the drama queens are out in force on this one. Let’s see if they are not watching it next year and they back up their big words with action: Of course Laguta and Saifutdinov are among the best in the world. I get that. But the isolation of Russia from international sport (in many cases). I get that too. There are.bigger things than speedway.

Yes, that's true. He really didn't seem to enjoy someone else winning six titles too and couldn't resist undermining the GP system. Then again, being at the very top level in most sports requires a certain level of ego and unwavering self-esteem. It's a big part of what made Mauger who he was.

Also worth noting that Gundersen's World Final average is 11.55. Nielsen's is 11.26.

Maybe. I think in the late 60s/early 70s, it was just about fit for purpose. But by the time of mid 70s onwards, I don't think the Poles, Czechs and the rest were competitive. Jiri Stancl, solid as he was, is a NINE-TIME world finallist. Shawn Moran, Phil Crump, Kelly Moran, Malcolm Simmons all got to just three finals each. There were loads of years where some of the Continental WF qualifiers would have struggled to get through a British Semi Final.

Yes. As well as he has done and as good as he is, he is not going to get any better and is not going to get the better of Zmarzlik. That's obvious enough by now isn't it?

Agree. There are a lot of contenders who are really on the downward curve of their career....Doyle and Lindgren are in that pack, Woffinden too. Zmarzlik could get to 8 or 9 titles in the coming years unless Holder or Bewley step up.

Hmmm. World Final head-to-head record was 8-3 to Erik, including two run-offs for the title. You can make a valid case for Nielsen having a better career record. But I think its pretty clear Erik was better when it came to crunch-time between the two. As for Zmarzlik's place in history, I think he's one of the greatest ever. There are no mugs in the GPs, as there were in many World Finals. There's no Petr Ondrasiks or Robert Slabons. I don't think there many - if any - World Finals where you could make a valid case that all the world's best were present. He's proved himself the best of the era and not just in what he has won, also the way he does it. He can win from the front, win from the back, on any type of track and in pressure situations. And you honestly can't say that of a lot of all-time greats. He's a tremendous rider.

No chance. The last one killed me....and millions of others. Honest.

Yep, definitely the late 80s were a great era for the National League and Gordon Kennett at the absolute forefront of that. Not just Eastbourne, but clubs like Mildenhall, Middlesbrough, Hackney, Wimbledon, Poole all in the mix too. A great mix of gnarly vets like Kennett, Les Collins, Simmo, Jessup, Wyer and rising stars like Dugard, Silver, Havelock, Loram. Scottish tours, Southern tours, lots of local derbies. It would be easy to say that Gordon Kennett was easing down in his career, but couldn't be further from the truth. He was always fully committed on any track on any given day. Also one of the great inside line riders..

A further thought...when he dropped into the National League in 1985, that coincided with the NL actually becoming a more entertaining league than the BL. Much more teams, less predictable, it's own stars and their own big occasions like the NLRC, Fours and Pairs packing them in. Gordon Kennett was probably the biggest NL star of that era.

That’s sad news. Always gave full value wherever and whenever he rode.

I also think Bruce Penhall was on it. I think they did quite well too. Again, shows that fitness is a real factor in speedway. Really liked Superstars and what a theme tune! But like a lot of older shows, when you watch them back on YouTube, they are never as good as you remember them.

I tell you now I would love to see that again. Love it

True. But I wouldn't fancy Lance Armstrong's chances in the world's strongest man either... There's a nice wee anecdote around 1970s British Athletics which saw Geoff Capes and Brendan Foster (5k/10k runner) having a race over 200m. You'd probably favour the runner, but Capes won because he had the explosive power.

I agree. You need strength to ride a speedway bike. So, the stronger and fitter you are, the easier it is to ride a bike. So if folk are gaining strength through performance enhancing drugs, that's giving them an unfair advantage. That's why Mike's post is wrong. Furthermore, even in sports where being athletic is not the be all and end all, overall fitness and strength is still a factor. The better physical condition you are in, the sharper you will be mentally and less likely to fatigue. It's no coincidence that when Tiger Woods* was dominating golf, he was also the fittest bloke on the course or Ronnie O'Sullivan's passion for running has kept him at the peak of the game for longer than we might have predicted. *that said, I wouldn't be amazed if Tiger Woods had dabbled in a few PEDs back in the day

Was at a sports conference this week and I got talking to some guys from British Fencing....and I said that they would have more luck engaging kids if they called it sword-fighting. Anyway, got me thinking about the names of sports and I don't remember ever actually hearing how speedway got its name. Why is is not called dirt-track racing? I prefer the name 'speedway', but just curious....

I'd have the Emirates, Spurs and Twickenham all above it. Many also prefer the Olympic Stadium...and it certainly has a better shape for speedway.

Absolutely. Too much romanticism on this thread. As for Wembley having great transport links....well, laughable to be honest. Any Londoner or anyone who has been to an event of any size there and been stuck in a huge funnel of people trying to get to a train station or on the tube afterwards knows that. God forbid, there might be some Welsh men in the same funnel. Wembley is a good stadium, but er, that's it. It's pretty underwhelming for a national stadium. It might sneak into the top 5 of London stadiums, but that's it.

I hope those dreadful Welsh men were not using such language. Awful primitive people. You deserve the mocking, your really do. The sentiments are almost stereotypically SO pearl-clutching middle England it's untrue. It's exactly why Celts and many others ridicule us English. At times, it's utterly deserved.