Speedway Gp In Tatters !

[waiheke1]

The pressure i think on a one night conclusion is a different pressure to say winning over twelve rounds.Also you could now win a world title without winning one gp reaching semi,s and finals all year.Not to say it isnt hard now of course it is,like i said a different test now.

 

I'd suggest if you are the best rider in the world in a parti

cular year, it is easier for you to win the GP than the one-off, as one bad rider/decision/engine failure wouldn't cost you the title. However, for anyone else it is likely to be easier to win in the one-off format.

 

.The only riders i can really think of who were really unlucky i suppose.Were Jessup[who i never thought was good anough to be world champion Knudsen maybe Carter and there are a few others.

Why don't you think Jessup was good enough? Can you name a rider who was better in the world in 1980? I know he's commonly regarded as a bit of a "gating tart", but look at footage from the 1980 World Final, or the 1981 Overseas final, and you'll see he could pass - he just didn't need to at his peak as he was generally first away.

 

Exactly!

The incredible tension of a World Final took a special sort of competitor to come to the fore... And let's look at the FACTS... If the World Final was such a lottery how come between 1954 and 1972 (that's 19 years...) only SEVEN men triumphed on WF night. And listen to their names...: a litany of all-time greats: Moore, Fundin, Craven, Briggs, Knutsson, Mauger and Olsen... And in those 19 years those same 7 achieved between them a further 22 rostrum positions.. In other words the old WF DID prove who the best riders in the world were and being best in the world meant pitching yourself into the ultimate challenge of the one-off World Final.

I don't think anyone has claimed that the one-offs were "a lottery." Also, I'd suggest those riders are considered all time greats precisely because they won multiple world titles.

[Gearhead]

 

 

Exactly!

The incredible tension of a World Final took a special sort of competitor to come to the fore... And let's look at the FACTS... If the World Final was such a lottery how come between 1954 and 1972 (that's 19 years...) only SEVEN men triumphed on WF night. And listen to their names...: a litany of all-time greats: Moore, Fundin, Craven, Briggs, Knutsson, Mauger and Olsen... And in those 19 years those same 7 achieved between them a further 22 rostrum positions.. In other words the old WF DID prove who the best riders in the world were and being best in the world meant pitching yourself into the ultimate challenge of the one-off World Final.

I notice hav you pick your years wisely,the following year in Poland had a surprise Polish winner and another Pole in 3rd place,however during the whole GP system there have been 8 diferrent winners and more impressively of those winners they've achieved 25 rostrom positions

 

I think there is just as much pressure in the GPs,generally the feild has the best of the current riders available,this year the Polish authorities have thrown a bit of the spanner in the works but that's because of goings on a global scale

 

One thing that would have been interesting is a proper GP series held back in those days,I bet it would have been thrilling,those hey days have gone now and the strength in depth isn't as it was

[stratton]

I'd suggest if you are the best rider in the world in a parti

cular year, it is easier for you to win the GP than the one-off, as one bad rider/decision/engine failure wouldn't cost you the title. However, for anyone else it is likely to be easier to win in the one-off format.

 

 

Why don't you think Jessup was good enough? Can you name a rider who was better in the world in 1980? I know he's commonly regarded as a bit of a "gating tart", but look at footage from the 1980 World Final, or the 1981 Overseas final, and you'll see he could pass - he just didn't need to at his peak as he was generally first away.

 

 

I don't think anyone has claimed that the one-offs were "a lottery." Also, I'd suggest those riders are considered all time greats precisely because they won multiple world titles.

1979/80 Michael lee broke his back in the indoor at Birmingham so it took him a while to get back so that year he was behind jessup in the averages.But Lee was for me at a different level to Jessup who although his record speaks for itself was never good anough to be world champion.His record on the big tracks consistently over a long period wasnt great i see him at Hyde rd he was dreadful gate often get picked off one B.L.R.C he was poor cant remember the year?Also Sheffield, Halifax, he wasnt overly impressive.Maybe i am doing Dave an injustice,also Lee said in his DVD how many times D.j borrowed his bike and often was happy to do so in the end it got to be a bit of a joke.

[Humphrey Appleby]

One thing that would have been interesting is a proper GP series held back in those days,I bet it would have been thrilling,those hey days have gone now and the strength in depth isn't as it was

 

There were very few real shocks in terms of winners under the old World FInal system. Given the number of riders starting out in the competition though, the knockout nature of the qualifying rounds, and then the fact that one bad race in the Final would put you out of contention, I think those who did win were just as worthy, if not more so than under the SGP system. Even more so those who won multiple titles.

 

I think the strength of the old system though, was that it was less predictable than the SGP and did spring surprises in terms of shock qualifiers from time-to-time. Usually the best rider that year still won, but it was not guaranteed.

 

In these more televised times, quite clearly a SGP series is more attractive to corporate markets, but I disagree that the old style system couldn't be marketed. After all, the FA Cup is a knockout competition whereby the best teams can go out in the first (third) round, and there's no guarantee at all that the two best teams will be in the Final. Moreover, who'd have believed a game played over 5 whole days but where there's no guarantee that it'll run that distance, nor that the best performers will bat or bowl on every day, could be sold to television for vastly more money than speedway can dream of?

[stratton]

There were very few real shocks in terms of winners under the old World FInal system. Given the number of riders starting out in the competition though, the knockout nature of the qualifying rounds, and then the fact that one bad race in the Final would put you out of contention, I think those who did win were just as worthy, if not more so than under the SGP system. Even more so those who won multiple titles.

 

I think the strength of the old system though, was that it was less predictable than the SGP and did spring surprises in terms of shock qualifiers from time-to-time. Usually the best rider that year still won, but it was not guaranteed.

 

In these more televised times, quite clearly a SGP series is more attractive to corporate markets, but I disagree that the old style system couldn't be marketed. After all, the FA Cup is a knockout competition whereby the best teams can go out in the first (third) round, and there's no guarantee at all that the two best teams will be in the Final. Moreover, who'd have believed a game played over 5 whole days but where there's no guarantee that it'll run that distance, nor that the best performers will bat or bowl on every day, could be sold to television for vastly more money than speedway can dream of?

Good post Humphrey the best riders did win it,and going back the strength in debth was unbelievable.i think there were about thirty to fourty riders on a given night were good anough to win a title.People like Eric Boocock Martin Ashby Ray Wilson, who are examples all really underchieved at world level on a given day and luck were good anough.But thats maybe what makes a champion that little bit extra.

[ImpartialOne]

1979/80 Michael lee broke his back in the indoor at Birmingham so it took him a while to get back so that year he was behind jessup in the averages.But Lee was for me at a different level to Jessup who although his record speaks for itself was never good anough to be world champion.His record on the big tracks consistently over a long period wasnt great i see him at Hyde rd he was dreadful gate often get picked off one B.L.R.C he was poor cant remember the year?Also Sheffield, Halifax, he wasnt overly impressive.Maybe i am doing Dave an injustice,also Lee said in his DVD how many times D.j borrowed his bike and often was happy to do so in the end it got to be a bit of a joke.

Jessup was a superb little rider and definitely capable of becoming world champion. Unfortunately his biggest downfall was always equipment. I've never known another rider of his caliber have so many silly breakdowns. Bad luck doesn't strike that often and in one case, I believe 1981 at Wembley, his carb fell off because the jubilee clip wasn't tightened properly. That just isn't good enough in a world final I'm afraid.

[stratton]

Jessup was a superb little rider and definitely capable of becoming world champion. Unfortunately his biggest downfall was always equipment. I've never known another rider of his caliber have so many silly breakdowns. Bad luck doesn't strike that often and in one case, I believe 1981 at Wembley, his carb fell off because the jubilee clip wasn't tightened properly. That just isn't good enough in a world final I'm afraid.

Good point,s having a good team around you is like a couple of extra points.Look at Lee his dad was a master also we know Michael was also mega talented on the mechanical side.Where as D.j never really had that ,he was good no doubt about it was unlucky but was that because he never had the overall team around him who knows.

[WIE-JA]

Jessup was a superb little rider and definitely capable of becoming world champion. Unfortunately his biggest downfall was always equipment. I've never known another rider of his caliber have so many silly breakdowns. Bad luck doesn't strike that often and in one case, I believe 1981 at Wembley, his carb fell off because the jubilee clip wasn't tightened properly. That just isn't good enough in a world final I'm afraid.

 

If I remember right the clip in question broke. Also I believe he got in trouble for calling it a Jubilee Clip when it was actually made by another company, Terry or something.

[Marmite]

WHAT utter tosh.

 

Not the part about forcing riders who reject a place to not allow them to participate again unless they qualify.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

I notice hav you pick your years wisely,the following year in Poland had a surprise Polish winner and another Pole in 3rd place,however during the whole GP system there have been 8 diferrent winners and more impressively of those winners they've achieved 25 rostrom positions

 

I think there is just as much pressure in the GPs,generally the feild has the best of the current riders available,this year the Polish authorities have thrown a bit of the spanner in the works but that's because of goings on a global scale

 

One thing that would have been interesting is a proper GP series held back in those days,I bet it would have been thrilling,those hey days have gone now and the strength in depth isn't as it was

 

Hmm, well the Pole in third in'73 had a name you know! It was Zenon Plech and he later finished second in another WF! One of the best riders ever NOT to have been World Champ.

 

Yes I did stop at '72 but I could've continued on and the stats would've been little different.

 

I wasn't btw trying to show that the WF produced more consistent winners than the GPs, what I was showing that those who appear to think that the one-off WF system was a total lottery, all down to luck on the night, subject to brown envelopes of cash deciding winners etc. is just NOT the case.

And this was because it took a certain quality of being able to cope with the huge tension and excitement of the WF to claim the ultimate prize. Many great riders from that era couldn't cope with that... The GP system replicates very little of that and to win under the current system requires excellence yes, but of a slightly different type...

[iris123]

And this was because it took a certain quality of being able to cope with the huge tension and excitement of the WF to claim the ultimate prize. Many great riders from that era couldn't cope with that... The GP system replicates very little of that and to win under the current system requires excellence yes, but of a slightly different type...

I give as evidence.....Leigh Adams

[stratton]

I give as evidence.....Leigh Adams

You could say that about alot of riders, i just dont think Leigh had that killer instinct like say Crumpy.To me Leigh was still a great rider twice the rider in my opinion to Nicky Pedersen.It just wasnt meant to be for Leigh i dont think it was nerves or anything,

[iris123]

You could say that about alot of riders, i just dont think Leigh had that killer instinct like say Crumpy.To me Leigh was still a great rider twice the rider in my opinion to Nicky Pedersen.It just wasnt meant to be for Leigh i dont think it was nerves or anything,

Of course i will disagree.If a rider was ever theoretically suited to a GP season it was Leigh Adams.Mister consistent throughout the year.Over so many seasons he was bound to win one at least.The only reason he didn't must surely be down to nerves when it came to the crunch.And in a GP season it does come to the crunch,just as it does in the old World Final .

[stratton]

Of course i will disagree.If a rider was ever theoretically suited to a GP season it was Leigh Adams.Mister consistent throughout the year.Over so many seasons he was bound to win one at least.The only reason he didn't must surely be down to nerves when it came to the crunch.And in a GP season it does come to the crunch,just as it does in the old World Final .

Phil Crump after breaking his thigh at Sheffield in 77,was destined not to win it and he for years and years was as consistent as Leigh if not more so.What i am saying you would of thought Leigh would of got closer to at least the rostrum places.Also league racing is like chalk and cheese compared to individual racing.

[iris123]

Phil Crump after breaking his thigh at Sheffield in 77,was destined not to win it and he for years and years was as consistent as Leigh if not more so.What i am saying you would of thought Leigh would of got closer to at least the rostrum places.Also league racing is like chalk and cheese compared to individual racing.

Even though i saw Crump help Australia win the World Team Cup at White City,i don't really see him as a World Title contender(not on any sort of consistent basis at least).Apart from that team championship how many titles did he win?I mean things like the Australasian Title or Commonwealth etc?Leigh proved he had the bottle to win GPs,but i think lost his nerve if he got into contention.Whereas Crump never won even a decent title from memory and didn't qualify for that many Finals either.To me ,hard to compare the two

Edited December 2, 2011 by iris123

[stratton]

Even though i saw Crump help Australia win the World Team Cup at White City,i don't really see him as a World Title contender(not on any sort of consistent basis at least).Apart from that team championship how many titles did he win?I mean things like the Australasian Title or Commonwealth etc?Leigh proved he had the bottle to win GPs,but i think lost his nerve if he got into contention.Whereas Crump never won even a decent title from memory and didn't qualify for that many Finals either.To me ,hard to compare the two

Phil Crump was a class rider, won numerous titles in my opinion was a better rider than Leigh Adams.I see both regular as i watched swindon every week.Different era,s i no both class but Phil to me was a legend. Worth paying just to go and watch Phil he often carried the robins home and away.1974,75,76 Crump was a world force and was one of the few who could live with Peter Collins and then Collins was hard to beat.As for Leigh i never ever thought he lost his nerve but dont get me wrong i admire both men.

[iris123]

Phil Crump was a class rider, won numerous titles in my opinion was a better rider than Leigh Adams.I see both regular as i watched swindon every week.Different era,s i no both class but Phil to me was a legend. Worth paying just to go and watch Phil he often carried the robins home and away.1974,75,76 Crump was a world force and was one of the few who could live with Peter Collins and then Collins was hard to beat.As for Leigh i never ever thought he lost his nerve but dont get me wrong i admire both men.

Please be my guest and name the titles he won.And i am talking about on the World Championship trail,not individual open meetings at Swindon or somewhere.We are discussing the World Championship here.Leigh won GPs on the quest to win a World title.How many titles did Phil win and how many World Finals did he qualify for?I consider Leigh to have regularly been in the World top 5,can't say i can say the same about Phil over a similar period of time

[stratton]

Please be my guest and name the titles he won.And i am talking about on the World Championship trail,not individual open meetings at Swindon or somewhere.We are discussing the World Championship here.Leigh won GPs on the quest to win a World title.How many titles did Phil win and how many World Finals did he qualify for?I consider Leigh to have regularly been in the World top 5,can't say i can say the same about Phil over a similar period of time

Please be my guest and name the titles he won.And i am talking about on the World Championship trail,not individual open meetings at Swindon or somewhere.We are discussing the World Championship here.Leigh won GPs on the quest to win a World title.How many titles did Phil win and how many World Finals did he qualify for?I consider Leigh to have regularly been in the World top 5,can't say i can say the same about Phil over a similar period of time

I think Phil was unlucky on the individual front ,but so were loads of others,for me Phil rode in a better era the strength in debth i think was amazing also reaching the one off finals were far harder than now.A point Parsloes has made it is hard not to fall out of the series the way it is odviously Leigh was that good he wouldnt of anyway.So your stats,are a bit false i feel for me Phil i would say was in the top 20 riders in the world from 74 til 85.The telling point for me the standard of competition then was far higher you could name at least 30 or 40riders.who were top class if not more.

[iris123]

I think Phil was unlucky on the individual front ,but so were loads of others,for me Phil rode in a better era the strength in debth i think was amazing also reaching the one off finals were far harder than now.A point Parsloes has made it is hard not to fall out of the series the way it is odviously Leigh was that good he wouldnt of anyway.So your stats,are a bit false i feel for me Phil i would say was in the top 20 riders in the world from 74 til 85.The telling point for me the standard of competition then was far higher you could name at least 30 or 40riders.who were top class if not more.

Like i say.I never thought of Crump as one of the elite top riders.Just one of those very good other guys like Simmo for instance.Maybe just my opinion,but i was never a great fan of his....team man ok but never thought of him as a World Champ in the making

Although thinking about it that one season when Street developed the 4 stroke and he and Phil had a head start he was amazing for a few months until others caught up.I remember seeing him at Newport.......but that was atechnical advantage....and others did catch up and left him back where he started

Edited December 2, 2011 by iris123

[stratton]

Like i say.I never thought of Crump as one of the elite top riders.Just one of those very good other guys like Simmo for instance.Maybe just my opinion,but i was never a great fan of his....team man ok but never thought of him as a World Champ in the making

Although thinking about it that one season when Street developed the 4 stroke and he and Phil had a head start he was amazing for a few months until others caught up.I remember seeing him at Newport.......but that was atechnical advantage....and others did catch up and left him back where he started

Olsen,mauger,jessup,Collins,T Jansson,Michanek,simmons wilson E,boocock N.Boocock betts sjosten airey sanders crump boulger persson briggs moore lee lofqtvist morton lovaas autrey,plech, muller,b,jansson penhall,s.moran k.moran sigalos carter king gundersen nielsen knudsen jonsson richardsson j louis [missed a few]im sure 1974 till 85. The level immense.i totally agree what you said about the Streety 4 valve he did have a advantage but you look at that standard over a 11 year period.Then you look from 2003 till 2011 the gp series nowhere near as strong and Phil Crump would not of fell outside the 16 if the gps had been run then.