Carter Where Does He Rate With The Great British Riders?

[stratton]

On what grounds? imho none of those riders were even close to Carter. Carter's standing is diminished by the manner of his death ( and the lives he took with him both literally and figuratively ) and his apparent failure at World Final level. But he had something (and not just great machinery) which was not necessarily quantifiable. For those of us who had the privilege ( and yes it was a privilege ) of watching the Dukes at Shay and around the country, KC was the jewel in the crown. Good machinery, great rider. I just don't get the " not a natural on a bike " arguments.

I agree totally was a privilege to see him ride didnt see him as much as id like.Im also amazed about natural talent comment also Screen had 20 times more ability?Na dont think so.

[ImpartialOne]

I agree totally was a privilege to see him ride didnt see him as much as id like.Im also amazed about natural talent comment also Screen had 20 times more ability?Na dont think so.

I know so.

[stratton]

I know so.

You are not on the same planet as me [i know so?]ring of arrogance about that comment .That Halifax chap has seen Carter more times than you and i ,and his opinion stands up to yours no end for me.How many times did you see carter ride?[on world of sport]maybe?Even if you are negative about Carter underachieving his cv is still better than screens.As for the natural talent arguement its not even worth thinking about you dont ride to carters level by not having natural ability.Before he started having laps around the shay its not like he had a background in speedway.Started from a novice and crammed alot into his career up until his death.

[ImpartialOne]

You are not on the same planet as me [i know so?]ring of arrogance about that comment .That Halifax chap has seen Carter more times than you and i ,and his opinion stands up to yours no end for me.How many times did you see carter ride?[on world of sport]maybe?Even if you are negative about Carter underachieving his cv is still better than screens.As for the natural talent arguement its not even worth thinking about you dont ride to carters level by not having natural ability.Before he started having laps around the shay its not like he had a background in speedway.Started from a novice and crammed alot into his career up until his death.

Well you clearly know nothing about me with talk like that. To be honest, your last two sentences actually back up what I say. And it's not arrogance, it's just the truth. Carter was not a natural on a bike in the same way that Screen, Morans, Loram, etc are/were.

 

As for planets, well, I'm in agreeance with you on that one. I'm surprised you're even getting a signal up there

Edited October 25, 2011 by ImpartialOne

[stratton]

Well you clearly know nothing about me with talk like that. To be honest, your last two sentences actually back up what I say. And it's not arrogance, it's just the truth. Carter was not a natural on a bike in the same way that Screen, Morans, Loram, etc are/were.

 

As for planets, well, I'm in agreeance with you on that one. I'm surprised you're even getting a signal up there

The truth,? your opinion only,and you do seem to have a high opinion of yourself.Have noticed on most of your posts ,is your way or nothing.I admit im wrong prob most of the time live and learn off others my motto.The guy from Halifax, who watched carter alot agrees about the talent issue, which he was amazed with as well .Which his knowledge on carter is greater than yours,also you didnt say how many times you see carter ride?.opinion is a word you need to learn, respect others i certainly do.

[ImpartialOne]

The truth,? your opinion only,and you do seem to have a high opinion of yourself.Have noticed on most of your posts ,is your way or nothing.I admit im wrong prob most of the time live and learn off others my motto.The guy from Halifax, who watched carter alot agrees about the talent issue, which he was amazed with as well .Which his knowledge on carter is greater than yours,also you didn't say how many times you see carter ride?.opinion is a word you need to learn, respect others i certainly do.

I saw him many times and admired him greatly, particularly his performance in the 1984 British Final which will live long in the memory as an amazing achievement. Not only did he win it with a broken leg but he put the likes of Peter Collins, Chris Morton and John Louis to shame with their whining by proving the track was raceable.

 

However, one advantage I have is that I'm not biased by team loyalties and any Halifax or Bradford fan is understandably going to see him in a way that clouds the fact that he didn't possess the same natural ability on a bike of those I mentioned.

 

Carter was brave, confident and fearless. He had the focus and ambition that Screen and the Morans lacked at times. He worked hard for what he achieved because he couldn't rely on abilty alone to carry him. Screen is and was very much the British Moran. Their natural ability had to do most of the work because of their lifestyle. The bottom line is that Screen can read a race without thinking about it; it's pure instinct. He can do things on a bike that Carter could only dream of.

[stratton]

I saw him many times and admired him greatly, particularly his performance in the 1984 British Final which will live long in the memory as an amazing achievement. Not only did he win it with a broken leg but he put the likes of Peter Collins, Chris Morton and John Louis to shame with their whining by proving the track was raceable.

 

However, one advantage I have is that I'm not biased by team loyalties and any Halifax or Bradford fan is understandably going to see him in a way that clouds the fact that he didn't possess the same natural ability on a bike of those I mentioned.

 

Carter was brave, confident and fearless. He had the focus and ambition that Screen and the Morans lacked at times. He worked hard for what he achieved because he couldn't rely on abilty alone to carry him. Screen is and was very much the British Moran. Their natural ability had to do most of the work because of their lifestyle. The bottom line is that Screen can read a race without thinking about it; it's pure instinct. He can do things on a bike that Carter could only dream of.

your opinion,and i respect it but what ive learned from people involved in speedway. How many times people have said he only won that because he had quick bikes.You have got to be really talented to ride quick bikes there is a talent in it.That grit and determination you talked about, wouldnt of been anough without talent not anough.Mike lee said as much on his dvd asked a question about carter you have got to have skill to ride at speed.Did say without being nasty that carter would have to win at any cost.i liked joe screen very much still do,even thou as a youngster i preferred martin dugard.But if there was a poll with 100 people, who was the better rider [talent accomplishments whatever combined]Carter or Screen i think i no who would get more votes.only my opinion thou.

[ImpartialOne]

your opinion,and i respect it but what ive learned from people involved in speedway. How many times people have said he only won that because he had quick bikes.You have got to be really talented to ride quick bikes there is a talent in it.That grit and determination you talked about, wouldnt of been anough without talent not anough.Mike lee said as much on his dvd asked a question about carter you have got to have skill to ride at speed.Did say without being nasty that carter would have to win at any cost.i liked joe screen very much still do,even thou as a youngster i preferred martin dugard.But if there was a poll with 100 people, who was the better rider [talent accomplishments whatever combined]Carter or Screen i think i no who would get more votes.only my opinion thou.

You keep misquoting me. I never said Carter didn't have talent.

[chunky]

You keep misquoting me. I never said Carter didn't have talent.

 

I think that sidney is having trouble understanding what you are saying; I'm with you.

 

Sidney : Kenny Carter WAS a brilliant and talented speedway rider. However, his success came largely as a result of hard work, and an incredible determination. Joe Screen was much more of a "natural" motorcyclist, but never had that little extra mentally to achieve the same sort of success. That's not being disrespectful to either Joe or Kenny in any way, but a simple fact. Carter's determination brought him incredible success on tracks that others considered "unrideable"; Screen could be untouchable on a track that suited him, but had trouble adapting to others.

 

If you look at any sport, you will find that determination/effort/confidence will eventually bring more success than natural talent and potential. Simply put, it doesn't matter how good you are if you can't handle the situations that are thrown at you.

 

Steve

 

 

 

[waiheke1]

I'd say he rates below all time greats Craven, Peter Collins and Mike Lee.

I'd put im in the same category of great British riders such as Havelock, Loram,Louis, Simmons, Jessup, C Morton etc.

You could put equally valid arguments (IMHO) for him ranking above or below any given rider in that category.

And I'd rank him above very good British riders such as Tatum, Les Collins, Doncaster etc.

 

In terms of the discussion on natural ability. The great Ivan Mauger himself points out that he (MAuger)didn't have the same natural talent of someone like Peter Collins, but that noone did more practice than he and Ole Olsen, and that's why they achieved more World titles than someone like PC, who because he could rely on natural ability never put in as much work as they did. You could apply the same to the likes of the Moran brothers who were as talented as the grear Danes of the 80s, but achieved nowhere near as much.

 

You can argue or or against the natural abiliy of Carter, but one point to note is that while his form tailed off after 82, that could be linked (according to both his biograpghy and his brother's autobiography)to both injury and that he didn't have a proper mechanic from 84 onwards I think. To be World Champion, you need the blend of natural talent, hard work, good equipment, to stay injury free and a bit of luck at the right times - I don't think Kenny ever had all of those at once , but that's not to say he would never have been World Champion if not for his untinely demise .

In 85, he was racing almost as well as ever (British Champ, overseas runner up, dropped only 1 point in world Pairs final, 10pt+ average)- so I certainly don't think he could have been written off.

 

on the 81 World Final, as seems to have been some discussion on that. If n-one had suferred engine troubles, then heading into the final 4 heats standings would probably have read Penhall 12, Jessup 11, Carter 10, Gundersen 9, Knudsen 9, Olsen 7. All speculation from there, but I suspect Jessup (who had only beeen beaten from the gate by Penhall all night) would hav beaten Knudsen, and needing to win the final I think Penhall would have beaten Carter. Which would likely have left Carter facing Gundersen in a run off for 3rd, which would very much have been 50/50 who would have won (though given gundersen's later record in run-offs I'd lean towards him).

 

And, around Hyde Rd I would rate Kenny Carter as the best British rider I saw in the 80s, just edging out Chris Morton (the two had about a 50/50 head to head record in league matches, but I'd go Kenny on the basis of his two BLRC). Was he as good as Mauger/Olsen/Collins at their peak, impossible to say, I supect not, but given we are talking absolute all time greats on a track which would rank amongst their favourites that is hardly a criticism. For what its worth, PC was still pretty handy around Hyde Rd in the 80s, but I don't recall ever seeing him beating Kenny in my time (81 onwards), possibly once the Northern League Riders Champs.

[stratton]

I'd say he rates below all time greats Craven, Peter Collins and Mike Lee.

I'd put im in the same category of great British riders such as Havelock, Loram,Louis, Simmons, Jessup, C Morton etc.

You could put equally valid arguments (IMHO) for him ranking above or below any given rider in that category.

And I'd rank him above very good British riders such as Tatum, Les Collins, Doncaster etc.

 

In terms of the discussion on natural ability. The great Ivan Mauger himself points out that he (MAuger)didn't have the same natural talent of someone like Peter Collins, but that noone did more practice than he and Ole Olsen, and that's why they achieved more World titles than someone like PC, who because he could rely on natural ability never put in as much work as they did. You could apply the same to the likes of the Moran brothers who were as talented as the grear Danes of the 80s, but achieved nowhere near as much.

 

You can argue or or against the natural abiliy of Carter, but one point to note is that while his form tailed off after 82, that could be linked (according to both his biograpghy and his brother's autobiography)to both injury and that he didn't have a proper mechanic from 84 onwards I think. To be World Champion, you need the blend of natural talent, hard work, good equipment, to stay injury free and a bit of luck at the right times - I don't think Kenny ever had all of those at once , but that's not to say he would never have been World Champion if not for his untinely demise .

In 85, he was racing almost as well as ever (British Champ, overseas runner up, dropped only 1 point in world Pairs final, 10pt+ average)- so I certainly don't think he could have been written off.

 

on the 81 World Final, as seems to have been some discussion on that. If n-one had suferred engine troubles, then heading into the final 4 heats standings would probably have read Penhall 12, Jessup 11, Carter 10, Gundersen 9, Knudsen 9, Olsen 7. All speculation from there, but I suspect Jessup (who had only beeen beaten from the gate by Penhall all night) would hav beaten Knudsen, and needing to win the final I think Penhall would have beaten Carter. Which would likely have left Carter facing Gundersen in a run off for 3rd, which would very much have been 50/50 who would have won (though given gundersen's later record in run-offs I'd lean towards him).

 

And, around Hyde Rd I would rate Kenny Carter as the best British rider I saw in the 80s, just edging out Chris Morton (the two had about a 50/50 head to head record in league matches, but I'd go Kenny on the basis of his two BLRC). Was he as good as Mauger/Olsen/Collins at their peak, impossible to say, I supect not, but given we are talking absolute all time greats on a track which would rank amongst their favourites that is hardly a criticism. For what its worth, PC was still pretty handy around Hyde Rd in the 80s, but I don't recall ever seeing him beating Kenny in my time (81 onwards), possibly once the Northern League Riders Champs.

Great post,i didnt no about Kenny and not having a mechanic but everything else spot on really.Talent/natural,a hard subject really speculative.after craven,collins, lee, in a group in which you place at your choice [ie] simmons, louis,morton, wilson ,boocock, ashby,ect but in front of tatum doncaster screen ect] .only see carter in his 2 b.l.r.c wins which he was terrific at hyde rd but to place him with chris high praise indeed because morton was terrific there.

[ImpartialOne]

Great post,i didnt no about Kenny and not having a mechanic but everything else spot on really.Talent/natural,a hard subject really speculative.after craven,collins, lee, in a group in which you place at your choice [ie] simmons, louis,morton, wilson ,boocock, ashby ect, but in front of tatum doncaster screen ect. Only see carter in his 2 b.l.r.c wins which he was terrific at hyde rd but to place him with chris high praise indeed because morton was terrific there.

There you go, reading words that are not there again.

Edited October 26, 2011 by ImpartialOne

[stratton]

There you go, reading words that are not there again.

[/quote To make it simple for you only in my opinion] screen wouldnt make the top 30 best british riders of all time.Thats even if he had [natural ability] talent,commitment whatever you like.Carter certainly in top 20].Impartial one in your opinion, who was the better rider SCREEN or CARTER? quite simple i think.

[chunky]

[quote

There you go, reading words that are not there again.

[/quote To make it simple for you only in my opinion] screen wouldnt make the top 30 best british riders of all time.Thats even if he had [natural ability] talent,commitment whatever you like.Carter certainly in top 20].Impartial one in your opinion, who was the better rider SCREEN or CARTER? quite simple i think

 

Sidney : You are now giving me a headache. Why do you persist in twisting everything people say? NOWHERE does ImpartialOne claim that Screen was better than Carter. The only claim is that Joe was a far more naturally-gifted motorcyclist, a fact with which most people - myself included - will agree. No, that doesn't mean he was better.

 

Barry Briggs was perhaps the most ungifted rider as far as natural talent and ability, but he worked hard at making the best of what he had. Joe Screen had more natural talent in his little finger than Briggo had.

 

Steve

[stratton]

Sidney : You are now giving me a headache. Why do you persist in twisting everything people say? NOWHERE does ImpartialOne claim that Screen was better than Carter. The only claim is that Joe was a far more naturally-gifted motorcyclist, a fact with which most people - myself included - will agree. No, that doesn't mean he was better.

 

Barry Briggs was perhaps the most ungifted rider as far as natural talent and ability, but he worked hard at making the best of what he had. Joe Screen had more natural talent in his little finger than Briggo had.

 

Steve

chunky

Not twisted it once he said natural ability, then it was talent[same in my eyes] no matter.You said most people,? i have spoken to at least 30 people and alot of them are older and wiser than me. Most of them didnt agree with you,but its all about opinions isnt it. The Briggo comment well is laughable,i no someone who see Briggo everyweek coming from behind what a rider.Making out he only got there through hard work, ask mauger, olsen,moore,fundin,what they thought of briggo.i am still laughing now about that comment.A bit of a slur on briggo i think ,would you tell him to his face that he was ungifted? Iam not twisting this you said ungifted .How could a 4 times world champion have ungifted even mentioned about him.

[chunky]

The Briggo comment well is laughable,i no someone who see Briggo everyweek coming from behind what a rider.Making out he only got there through hard work, ask mauger, olsen,moore,fundin,what they thought of briggo.i am still laughing now about that comment.A bit of a slur on briggo i think ,would you tell him to his face that he was ungifted?

 

Both Briggo and Ronnie Moore were good friends with my mother; we once spent the weekend at Briggo's place in Southampton. Do you really think that I would disrespect a family friend?

 

When Barry started racing in the UK, many were calling for him to be banned, as he was considered a danger to others! His style was awful, and he had trouble controlling the bike. Did people feel the same about Ronnie Moore, or Mark Loram, or Joe Screen? Fortunately, Briggo worked hard to learn his trade, and did so very quickly. It was that effort and confidence in his own ability that made him an all-time great.

 

You are still not getting it. A person can be much more naturally gifted at something, without ever achieving anything like the success of others less talented. Success in sport is all about effort. determination, and confidence, and as I said earlier, I am speaking from experience.

 

Steve

Edited October 26, 2011 by chunky

[ImpartialOne]

chunky

Not twisted it once he said natural ability, then it was talent[same in my eyes] no matter.

Yes, natural ability/talent is much the same. But you read into it that I said Carter had no talent. I didn't.

 

You then read that I said Screen was/is better than Carter. I didn't.

 

You then added names to a previous poster's list (which I highlighted in bold) and said you agreed with him on those names.

 

So, although you may not realise it, you are changing what people have said to validate your argument.

[stratton]

Both Briggo and Ronnie Moore were good friends with my mother; we once spent the weekend at Briggo's place in Southampton. Do you really think that I would disrespect a family friend?

 

When Barry started racing in the UK, many were calling for him to be banned, as he was considered a danger to others! His style was awful, and he had trouble controlling the bike. Did people feel the same about Ronnie Moore, or Mark Loram, or Joe Screen? Fortunately, Briggo worked hard to learn his trade, and did so very quickly. It was that effort and confidence in his own ability that made him an all-time great.

 

You are still not getting it. A person can be much more naturally gifted at something, without ever achieving anything like the success of others less talented. Success in sport is all about effort. determination, and confidence, and as I said earlier, I am speaking from experience.

 

Steve

I am getting it think your a bit muddled ,forget your saying naturally talented thats where you are confused. Ungifted would not even be mentioned near briggs. 18 world finals, 4 world titles, 6 british titles,6 b.l.r.c, 3.m.r.c endless other titles. Not bad for someone who was ungifted? you dont win all that stuff by effort and determination alone.i will never get it as you said ungifted but won it only because he worked hard.Your opinion so fair play i respect it.I am sorry if you thought i thought you were disrespecting Barry i. no you wasnt can tell your a big fan like me.

[fatface]

Some very muddled thinking on this thread.

 

The one point I have to zoom in on is the one that suggests Kenny Carter had a lack of natural talent. Utter garbage.

 

He was the youngest rider ever to be selected for England (1979 v Australasia). Only a postponement prevented him being the youngest England international ever. This was only his second year in the sport. So if he was not a natural, then had he spent years and years honing his ability to reach this level so quickly? No.

 

Unlike guys like Loram, Screen, Dugard and others, he had not spent a large proportion of his schoolboy days with his leg over a speedway or grass-track bike. He had only been riding speedway for less than two years when he was deemed good enough for England. No natural talent? Think again.

Edited November 2, 2011 by falcace

[stratton]

Some very muddled thinking on this thread.

 

The one point I have to zoom in on is the one that suggests Kenny Carter had a lack of natural talent. Utter garbage.

 

He was the youngest rider ever to be selected for England (1978 v Australasia). Only a postponement prevented him being the youngest England international ever. This was only his second year in the sport. So if he was not a natural, then had he spent years and years honing his ability to reach this level so quickly? No.

 

Unlike guys like Loram, Screen, Dugard and others, he had not spent a large proportion of his schoolboy days with his leg over a speedway or grass-track bike. He had only been riding speedway for less than two years when he was deemed good enough for England. No natural talent? Think again.

Falcace, i thought i must be going mad in my old age,agree with everything said as much .Started as a novice really old second halves at the shay progressed at a rate of knots. I see him score 2 pts at reading for the dukes looked a prospect within 2years see him get his first cap at swindon v australasia.Talent loads of it.