World Champions That Never Were

[BOBBATH]

1937 should have been Cordy Milne-more consistent than Jack or Wilbur!!!!!!!!!!

[ianmartin]

Who's gonna decide 1937 then??

 

All the best

Rob

 

Sunderland won the F.A. Cup in 1937 Rob.

 

Thanx for reminding me.

 

[norbold]

QUOTE (BOBBATH @ Sep 4 2009, 07:23 PM)

1937 should have been Cordy Milne-more consistent than Jack or Wilbur!!!!!!!!!!

Jack was top of the averages in 1937 with an 11+ average. he was by far the best rider that year.

 

I'd go for 1. Jack Milne 2. Bluey Wilkinson 3. Lionel Van Praag.

 

League averages that year:

 

1. Jack Milne 11.09

2. Lionel Van Praag 10.53

3. Eric Langton 10.18

4. Bluey Wilkinson 10.13

5. Bill Kitchen 9.88

6. Jack Parker 9.81

7. Joe Abbott 9.49

8. Cordy Milne 9.38

Edited August 25, 2014 by norbold

[lucifer sam]

Jack was top of the averages in 1927 with an 11+ average. he was by far the best rider that year.

 

I'd go for 1. Jack Milne 2. Bluey Wilkinson 3. Lionel Van Praag.

 

League averages that year:

 

1. Jack Milne 11.09

2. Lionel Van Praag 10.53

3. Eric Langton 10.18

4. Bluey Wilkinson 10.13

5. Bill Kitchen 9.88

6. Jack Parker 9.81

7. Joe Abbott 9.49

8. Cordy Milne 9.38

 

Norbold, how long was Bluey Wilkinson out injured in 1937? He missed the World Final that year through injury. Surely he would've struggled to finish second in the GP series had he had to miss more than one round?

 

I agree with Jack Milne being 1937 GP champion though - it was definitely "his" year. Top bonus point scorer, 15-point max at Wembley, top of the averages - who could have stopped him?

 

All the best

Rob

[BOBBATH]

I retract my comments for 1937-Jack it is,I guess we are all agreed on Bluey for 1938-so what about 1949-don't think it should have been Tommy-how about Jack Parker??

[norbold]

Norbold, how long was Bluey Wilkinson out injured in 1937? He missed the World Final that year through injury. Surely he would've struggled to finish second in the GP series had he had to miss more than one round?

Yes, but if he'd have been riding in the GP that year, he would have missed the meeting in which he got injured, so he'd have been ok.

 

so what about 1949-don't think it should have been Tommy-how about Jack Parker??

I think we should start at 1946. Otherwise we're in danger of doing Vic Duggan yet another injustice!

[lucifer sam]

I retract my comments for 1937-Jack it is,I guess we are all agreed on Bluey for 1938-so what about 1949-don't think it should have been Tommy-how about Jack Parker??

 

Yes, I would go along with Jack Parker, who had a fabulous season in 1949.

 

Stenner's World Rankings were:

1. Jack Parker

2. Aub Lawson

3. Tommy Price

4. Vic Duggan

5. Wilbur Lamoreux

6. Graham Warren

 

A word for Vic Duggan would won have definitely won a GP series in 1947 or 1948. Duggan crashed out halfway through the 1949 season, then his brother was killed during the 1949-1950 winter and he was never the same again.

 

1950 = Graham Warren. Agree or diasgree?

 

All the best

Rob

[lucifer sam]

I think we should start at 1946. Otherwise we're in danger of doing Vic Duggan yet another injustice!

 

Well 1947 and 1948 are definitely Vic Duggan.

 

What about 1946 though? Jack Parker?

 

And what about 1939 - surely any GP series would have been eight elevenths through before the interruption of Mr. A. Hitler and therefore a result could have been called?

 

All the best

Rob

Edited September 5, 2009 by lucifer sam

[BOBBATH]

I agree with Warren for 1950, agree also with 46,47,48 suggestions-wot about 49 tho??

[norbold]

1939, Cordy Milne I would think. His average that year was an incredible 11.29. He was top of the bonus points chart for the World Final and hot favourite to win.

 

I'll go along with the general opinion for 1946-50, though I think Eric Langton would have run Jack Parker close in 1946. I also think Ron Johnson would have been in with a good chance.

[lucifer sam]

Ok, so we have:

 

1936 - Eric Langton

1937 - Jack Milne

1938 - Bluey Wilkinson

1939 - Cordy Milne

1946 - Jack Parker

1947 - Vic Duggan

1948 - Vic Duggan

1949 - Jack Parker

1950 - Graham Warren

 

Anyone disagree with the above?

 

We now enter the Jack Young era - how many GP titles would have he won? Jim Stenner has him down as the best rider in the world in 1951, 1952 & 1953, would he have held on in 1954 & 1955, or would the new young brigade, headed by Ronnie Moore have caught him up at the some point?

 

All the best

Rob

[arnieg]

Yes, I would go along with Jack Parker, who had a fabulous season in 1949.

 

Stenner's World Rankings were:

1. Jack Parker

2. Aub Lawson

3. Tommy Price

4. Vic Duggan

5. Wilbur Lamoreux

6. Graham Warren

 

A word for Vic Duggan would won have definitely won a GP series in 1947 or 1948. Duggan crashed out halfway through the 1949 season, then his brother was killed during the 1949-1950 winter and he was never the same again.

 

1950 = Graham Warren. Agree or diasgree?

 

All the best

Rob

I think Parker gets it for 49

 

Top averages (Jackson & Vass) were:

 

1 Duggan 10.65

2 Warren 10.23

3 J Parker 10.13

4 Lammy 9.65

5 Lawson 9.57

 

Top pointscorers (Morrish):

1 J Parker 393

2 Warren 376

3 Lawson 374

4 Oliver 363

5 Gilbert 357

6 Price 348

 

Duggan missed 11 matches due to injury in July which would have lost him a couiple of GP rounds leaving Parker's experience to edge out youthful Warren.

 

I'm, comfortable with the consensus that is emerging around:

 

1936 Eric Langton

1937 Jack Milne

1938 Bluey Wilkinson

1939 Cordy Milne

1946 Jack Parker

1947 Vic Duggan

1948 Vic Duggan

1949 Jack Parker

1950 Graham Warren

 

- let the debate continue

 

[norbold]

Yes, I disagree. 1936 - Bluey Wilkinson.

[lucifer sam]

Yes, I disagree. 1936 - Bluey Wilkinson.

 

OK, we need a few more people's opinions on 1936. Would it have been Eric Langton or Bluey Wilkinson?

 

My argument for Langton is that, with the bonus points system, there was a kind of GP series already taking place, albeit one with a large bias to the final round at Wembley. Langton went into Wembley with 13 bonus points, Wilkinson had 10 - which means Langton would have outscored Wilkinson heavily in the qualifiers.

 

So had there been a full-blown 11-round GP series in 1936, I think Langton would have been the rider with the consistency to take it.

 

And we have gone along with the top bonus point scorer being the champion in 1937, 1938 & 1939.

 

Norbold, what's the argument for Wilkinson?

 

We'll then see what other people think.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited September 6, 2009 by lucifer sam

[arnieg]

Yes, I disagree. 1936 - Bluey Wilkinson.

I think Bluey Wilkinson was the best rider* in 1936, BUT the view that most of the participants in this debate have taken is that by topping the bonus point scorers going into the World Final Eric Langton has made his case. And Wilkinson was only 6th in the list of bonus point scorers going into the final.

 

* edit: actually looking at the 1936 averages I think that a stronger case can be made for Frank Charles

Edited September 6, 2009 by arnieg

[norbold]

Jack Parker actually topped the averages for 1936 and, like Charles, George Newton and Van Praag went in to the final with 12 bonus points, one behind Eric Langton. Sadly he was injured and did not take part in the final. So, barring injuries, he would have to be another strong contender for 1936. Which is interesting seeing as we've given him 1946 and 1949 as well.

 

My reason for going for Wilkinson though is that he was a class performer who rose to the occasion on the big nights, witness the final itself in which he was unbeatable but lost out on the bonus points. In my view if we'd had a GP system in place he would have ridden every round as though it was the final and would have scored more points.

 

1951 is an interesting one because if we are assuming that the current GP system would have been in place, it is highly unlikely that Jack Young would even have been in it as a Second Division rider!

Edited September 6, 2009 by norbold

[lucifer sam]

Jack Parker actually topped the averages for 1936 and, like Charles, George Newton and Van Praag went in to the final with 12 bonus points, one behind Eric Langton. Sadly he was injured and did not take part in the final. So, barring injuries, he would have to be another strong contender for 1936. Which is interesting seeing as we've given him 1946 and 1949 as well.

 

My reason for going for Wilkinson though is that he was a class performer who rose to the occasion on the big nights, witness the final itself in which he was unbeatable but lost out on the bonus points. In my view if we'd had a GP system in place he would have ridden every round as though it was the final and would have scored more points.

 

1951 is an interesting one because if we are assuming that the current GP system would have been in place, it is highly unlikely that Jack Young would even have been in it as a Second Division rider!

 

Norbold, surely Jack Young won have qualified through the 1950 GP challenge.

 

1951 is a debateable one. I don't think Biggs would have had the consistency over a series, so Young's main contenders would have been Split Waterman and maybe Aub Lawson.

 

1952 & 1953 would have been Jack Young by some margin. Agree?

 

As for 1936, we'll wait for further contributors to the debate. I recognise Wilkinson was a serious class act (his World Final record is almost perfect), but Langton seemed to keep it going right through 1936. Any test averages, etc, from this season?

 

Trust 1936 to prove debatable - if we still can't agree, it may come down to a controversial run-off.

 

All the best

Rob

[norbold]

Norbold, surely Jack Young won have qualified through the 1950 GP challenge.

Was he good enough in 1950?

1951 is a debateable one. I don't think Biggs would have had the consistency over a series, so Young's main contenders would have been Split Waterman and maybe Aub Lawson.

I agree.

1952 & 1953 would have been Jack Young by some margin. Agree?

 

Undoubtedly. Poor Freddie Williams, he's just lost his two World titles!

As for 1936, we'll wait for further contributors to the debate. I recognise Wilkinson was a serious class act (his World Final record is almost perfect), but Langton seemed to keep it going right through 1936. Any test averages, etc, from this season?

Test scores 1936 (for main contenders):

 

1st Test: Charles 13; Parker 12;Langton 12; Wilkinson 11; Van Praag 4

2nd Test: Charles 18; Van Praag 12; Parker 8; Wilkinson 7; Langton 0

3rd Test: Charles 16; Langton 13; Van Praag 11; Wilkinson 6; Parker 5

4th Test: Langton 15; Van Praag 15; Charles 13; Wilkinson 9; Parker 7

5th Test: Wilkinson 16; Van Praag 15; Charles 8; Langton 4; Parker 0

 

And the prize goes to...Frank Charles, England's top scorer in 4 out of the 5 Tests.

Trust 1936 to prove debatable - if we still can't agree, it may come down to a controversial run-off.

 

[lucifer sam]

Was he good enough in 1950?

 

Norbold, Jack Young was the 11th best in the world in 1950 according to speedway's leading journalist at that time, Jim Stenner. And it was more common for top riders to be in the second division around this time - Ken Le Breton was another example. Didn't a THIRD division rider qualify for the World Final at one point? Even if Young had missed out in the 1950 GP challenge, I reckon they would have given him a seeded slot for 1951.

 

Hmmm, Frank Charles and Lionel Van Praag were also up there in 1936, weren't they? Very tricky one to call, especially as neither Langton nor Wilkinson performed well in the 1936 England v Australia test match series, which were huge meetings back in those days and a good measure of form at the very top level.

 

As for Freddie Williams, yes it's harsh, but I don't think he'd have won a GP series. I'm more concerned that we still leave Britain's finest, Peter Craven, with a World title somewhere amongst the Fundin dominated years when we get there.

 

All the best

Rob

 

 

[norbold]

Didn't a THIRD division rider qualify for the World Final at one point?

Geoff Mardon made 2nd reserve in 1951.

 

Going back to 1936 again, I think Lionel Van Praag has always received something of a bad press as maybe being an undeserving champion because of the fact that Bluey Wilkinson got a 15 point maximum on the night and also later because of Eric Langton's dubious story about the run-off. However, Van Praag was most definitely one of the leading riders and not an unworthy champion by any means, though, in fact, his best years were probably 1937-9. He was just coming good in 1936 and maybe, under a GP system, he wouldn't have scored enough in the early rounds to win the title. But he would have given the two Milnes and Wilkinson a run for their money in the subsequent three years.

 

I fear that PC will not win a title...but let's not preempt the late 50s and early 60s just yet!

 

P.S. Actually, it's an interesting point to consider when we discuss old style World Championship v. Grand Prix. Would Jack Young and Geoff Mardon have made the finals they did under the new system? It was all part of the old romance of the speedway.

Edited September 6, 2009 by norbold