Speedway Gp In Tatters !

[norbold]

While it is possible that some kind of "deal" was offered, I agree that nerves simply got the better of him. When one looks at that Heat 19 lineup, Split Waterman could not have been ruled out as a possible winner of the race; at that stage, he had 9 points in the bag, and however unlikely it may have seemed, he was still in contention for the title. Williams had 6, and Lawson 5, going into the race. Biggs didn't have to worry about winning it, but just had to finish in front of one of those two. That's why nerves seem the most logical conclusion. Obviously, he had another bite at the cherry (albeit against much stiffer opposition), but was probably still ruing that Heat 19 disaster...

 

Steve

 

Yes, I agree, Steve. Actually I though after posting my comment that I should have added that Split Waterman still had a chance of becoming World Champion so why should he do Biggs any favours. Also, Lawson was having a bad night (for him) following an injury the week before and on the form Biggs was on that night he must have been confident of beating at least him and, given that, why would Lawson think that he could get Biggs to bribe him because, as you say, Biggs only needed a third place to become world champion.

[waiheke1]

one otherpoint on the subject of old World Finals. Certainly, I think an element of luck was needed to become world champion. To back this up here are incidents off the top of my head, without which, the winner (or other medal winners) may well have been different. Please note again that I am not saying WF were a lottery, or that winners were not deserving, just that luck, as well as skill, played a part. And yes, in GP series luck also plays a part, but over a series of 11 meetings, less significant than in a one off final.

 

73: Controversial incident involving Plech and Chlynovski robs both of a place in run off for title. Mauger falls in run-off gifting Szcazkiel the title.

75: Peter Collins has two wins from first two riders, however just prior to third ride the dusty track is watered by over enthusiastic fans. Collins finishes last and his title hopes are gone.

76: Mauger engine failure while leading hands Collins title.

77: Collins injury week before meeting. Mauger twice trailing in clashes against key rivals (Collins and Olsen/Lee), but races stopped due to other rider’s falling (muller and Boulger). Mauger triumphs in both re-runs.

78: Jessup ef costs him title. Mauger falls/knocked off in his first heat while leading, but race not stopped.

80: Lee randomly checks timing of his bike at a service station, notices broken bearing which would have ruined world final hopes. Gets favourable gate 1 twice, while rival Jessup gets orst gate three twice.

81: Penhalls main rivals on the night, Carter/Gundersen/Jessup all suffer engine troubles

82: L Collins drops two poins in his easiest ride. THAT incident, when at best Penhall would have picked up second (and hence a run off)

83: Nielsen puncture costs him place on rostrum

85: Nielsen crashes in fourth ride, and has to race re-run on second bike. Inside gate a huge advantage in first half of meeting (benefits Sam Ermolenko who finished third)

86: Knudsen controversially excluded in clash with Neilsen

89: Gundersen e/f costs him runners up spot

93/94: Nielsen controversially excluded costing him the title on both occasions

 

I'm sure there are many more examples that exist.

These moments are also perhaps why specific old WF stick in our minds more, as they are defining moments in the destiny of the title, while the many (for example ) Nicki Pedersen incidents are less vivid as they have ultimately not decided the overall GP winner in a given year.

[stratton]

1. So, you agree Jessup was good enough to wint the World title?

2. So you believe that reaching World Finals was harder than winning GPs due to strenth in depth? You think it was that much stronger then? Or is there some other basis on which you think J Crump was better than Pedersen.

 

On the "gate position " issue.

Here's some footage that confirms that riders do see gate postion as asignificant advantage

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=AnoxEvYa4as

Also, I have to say that I do recall Speedway Star etc. commeting on impact of gate postions, so don't think it is anew thing at all.

 

Finally, on the 1980 final, I had my stats wrong. Gate three totalled 18 points over the night (average 0.9 pts per rider), wheras gate 1 scored 47 points (average 2.35 points per ride). So, you have to say that Lee (who had gate 1 twice) definitely had an advabntage over Jessup (who has gate 3 twice) - you could argue a 1.45 pt advantage due to luck of the draw. With finals as tight as they were, I think you have to acknowledge that that's reasonably significant.

wow put me on the spot wont you,gates did have a bearing must of, example Nielsen and Gundersen same ability certain gates on a certain night conditsions played there part as well did influence it. I would like to think the best riders did win it maybe not always the right year but overall.another example Mauger [should of won it in 73 didnt but shouldnt of won it in 72[briggoe,s fall Olsen,s fall. As for Jason yes by far a better rider in my book to Pedersen also i am convinced to compete in the 70s and 80s and be a threat was harder than staying in the gps now.Saying that the gps is hard a different test its just the strength in debth numbers quality wise that sways it for me.Jessup was he good anough? more importantly did he deserve to win it NO.

[jimmy jimmy]

It's a different format, but the GP system definitely makes it fairer for those competing. You have to prove you are the best over the whole season, so I like it as a format.

[Guest]

What no-one seems to have mentioned about the old style World finals is that for 20 or so years, nearly half of the line up was made up of qualifiers from the Continental Final.

 

Who can forget the exploits of Robert Slabon & Mickael Starosin who both failed to trouble the scorers. (Trevor Hedge also scored zero in 1970 in the interests of fairness!).

 

Whilst there are a few honourable exceptions (Szcakiel & Muller winning the title, Plech & Jancarz both gaining rostrum positions), it must have made it more straight forward to be in contention if you were a top rider making it through the Intercontinental route.

 

In some respects as many have mentioned, the line-up's for the British, European & Intercontinental Finals were of a much higher calibre. The likes of Briggs in 1971, Olsen in 1976 and Collins in 1978 were at the top of their game and would have definitely improved the overall quality of the line-ups.

[iris123]

Yes, I agree, Steve. Actually I though after posting my comment that I should have added that Split Waterman still had a chance of becoming World Champion so why should he do Biggs any favours. Also, Lawson was having a bad night (for him) following an injury the week before and on the form Biggs was on that night he must have been confident of beating at least him and, given that, why would Lawson think that he could get Biggs to bribe him because, as you say, Biggs only needed a third place to become world champion.

Well here is something off the top of my head,and tell me if it is impossible by all means.If the other two see the chance to make some money out of playing king maker they could do it without Waterman in on the deal anyway.The thing is,if there was then a deal,what has Waterman to gain by not being in it?He could go all out for the heat win,but it wouldn't do him any good as the other two would let Biggs go.So that means Split would have to take Biggs out and he would obviously be out of the deal and the other two would be wary and maybe take him out instead.I don't know all the gate positions,but you have said Biggs was outside so pretty vulnerable.As Ronnie Moore mentioned it wasn't unknown for riders to be fenced at the time.Waterman is then in the position of being in on the deal,getting his heat win and also some extra money.If he isn't in on the deal he could end up on 9 points with nowt.Now Biggs doesn't accept the deal and he knows it is rubbish or bust.He has to make a brilliant gate from the outside and leave the other three for dead.Doesn't matter how good he has been riding in the previous 4 heats,this is the big one and he has to be perfect or he will be fenced........now i reckon there have been less feasable things happen on this earth every day of the week.

But that is just my opinion.I remain open minded about this incident and all others i have heard,including the story of a World Champion who tampered with his bike and won that i heard from a rider/official

[ImpartialOne]

My head is about to burst.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

one otherpoint on the subject of old World Finals. Certainly, I think an element of luck was needed to become world champion. To back this up here are incidents off the top of my head, without which, the winner (or other medal winners) may well have been different. Please note again that I am not saying WF were a lottery, or that winners were not deserving, just that luck, as well as skill, played a part. And yes, in GP series luck also plays a part, but over a series of 11 meetings, less significant than in a one off final.

 

73: Controversial incident involving Plech and Chlynovski robs both of a place in run off for title. Mauger falls in run-off gifting Szcazkiel the title.

75: Peter Collins has two wins from first two riders, however just prior to third ride the dusty track is watered by over enthusiastic fans. Collins finishes last and his title hopes are gone.

76: Mauger engine failure while leading hands Collins title.

77: Collins injury week before meeting. Mauger twice trailing in clashes against key rivals (Collins and Olsen/Lee), but races stopped due to other rider’s falling (muller and Boulger). Mauger triumphs in both re-runs.

78: Jessup ef costs him title. Mauger falls/knocked off in his first heat while leading, but race not stopped.

80: Lee randomly checks timing of his bike at a service station, notices broken bearing which would have ruined world final hopes. Gets favourable gate 1 twice, while rival Jessup gets orst gate three twice.

81: Penhalls main rivals on the night, Carter/Gundersen/Jessup all suffer engine troubles

82: L Collins drops two poins in his easiest ride. THAT incident, when at best Penhall would have picked up second (and hence a run off)

83: Nielsen puncture costs him place on rostrum

85: Nielsen crashes in fourth ride, and has to race re-run on second bike. Inside gate a huge advantage in first half of meeting (benefits Sam Ermolenko who finished third)

86: Knudsen controversially excluded in clash with Neilsen

89: Gundersen e/f costs him runners up spot

93/94: Nielsen controversially excluded costing him the title on both occasions

 

I'm sure there are many more examples that exist.

These moments are also perhaps why specific old WF stick in our minds more, as they are defining moments in the destiny of the title, while the many (for example ) Nicki Pedersen incidents are less vivid as they have ultimately not decided the overall GP winner in a given year.

 

A brilliant post! There were indeed incidents and 'what ifs' of this type aplenty; but I'd argue that is what makes sport the exciting thing it is... After all the greatest sprinter in the world was recently ruled out of defending his world title due to a false start. On such things are the dramatic stories across the generations written... Another example from another sport is the unbeatable Hungary side (who'd thrashed everyone including the Germans earlier in the tournament) losing to West Germany in the Final of the 1954 World Cup. Of course based on performances across the whole year in each case Bolt and Puskas' bunch would be world champs but that's (often...) not how it works...

 

Added to the '77 Final, remember that after Boulger's fall, only Lee made it back on track in time to beat the two minutes with Mauger & Olsen still, one assumes, trying to remove mud from man and machine... I'm fairly certain (though it was in Swedish) that the announcement WAS made that both had failed to make the 2 mins and were excluded. Two things followed. One Lee double-backed towards the pits; and then I guess the ref considered discretion should be applied (they were after all two legends of the sport!) and allowed them back in and all three rode in the rerun.

I often wondered (and once asked Michael about this...) if Lee had carried on to the tapes and waited there IF the other twos' exclusion might have stood... That would've meant a run-off between PC and the teenager Lee...! THAT would have been great!!

 

And as said, these memories are possible all these years on, because hugely dramatic incidents stick in the memory... THAT'S above all what was special as a sporting spectacle with the one off WF..

[stratton]

A brilliant post! There were indeed incidents and 'what ifs' of this type aplenty; but I'd argue that is what makes sport the exciting thing it is... After all the greatest sprinter in the world was recently ruled out of defending his world title due to a false start. On such things are the dramatic stories across the generations written... Another example from another sport is the unbeatable Hungary side (who'd thrashed everyone including the Germans earlier in the tournament) losing to West Germany in the Final of the 1954 World Cup. Of course based on performances across the whole year in each case Bolt and Puskas' bunch would be world champs but that's (often...) not how it works...

 

Added to the '77 Final, remember that after Boulger's fall, only Lee made it back on track in time to beat the two minutes with Mauger & Olsen still, one assumes, trying to remove mud from man and machine... I'm fairly certain (though it was in Swedish) that the announcement WAS made that both had failed to make the 2 mins and were excluded. Two things followed. One Lee double-backed towards the pits; and then I guess the ref considered discretion should be applied (they were after all two legends of the sport!) and allowed them back in and all three rode in the rerun.

I often wondered (and once asked Michael about this...) if Lee had carried on to the tapes and waited there IF the other twos' exclusion might have stood... That would've meant a run-off between PC and the teenager Lee...! THAT would have been great!!

 

And as said, these memories are possible all these years on, because hugely dramatic incidents stick in the memory... THAT'S above all what was special as a sporting spectacle with the one off WF..

Great post, brilliantly put,shows how sport is so exciting the point about Hungary spot on ive always felt the all Blacks have underachieved, also Ronnie Osullivan in snooker.Shows that sport is a hard envireoment and nothing in sport is a certainty .But the one off final was great,but i do think the best riders won at least one title over a period.Dont want to raise this but i better and Parsloes has raised this would Mike Lee, Kelly and several others get there chance right away now in the world championship i think not? ive been looking through my books ect] wondered if anyone new was Mike Lee not aloud in the 1975 world championships because he was only 16?I no he was a reserve for the 1976 british final does anyone no if im correct in this.

[norbold]

Well here is something off the top of my head,and tell me if it is impossible by all means.If the other two see the chance to make some money out of playing king maker they could do it without Waterman in on the deal anyway.The thing is,if there was then a deal,what has Waterman to gain by not being in it?He could go all out for the heat win,but it wouldn't do him any good as the other two would let Biggs go.So that means Split would have to take Biggs out and he would obviously be out of the deal and the other two would be wary and maybe take him out instead.I don't know all the gate positions,but you have said Biggs was outside so pretty vulnerable.As Ronnie Moore mentioned it wasn't unknown for riders to be fenced at the time.Waterman is then in the position of being in on the deal,getting his heat win and also some extra money.If he isn't in on the deal he could end up on 9 points with nowt.Now Biggs doesn't accept the deal and he knows it is rubbish or bust.He has to make a brilliant gate from the outside and leave the other three for dead.Doesn't matter how good he has been riding in the previous 4 heats,this is the big one and he has to be perfect or he will be fenced........now i reckon there have been less feasable things happen on this earth every day of the week.

But that is just my opinion.I remain open minded about this incident and all others i have heard,including the story of a World Champion who tampered with his bike and won that i heard from a rider/official

er...er...um...

 

Perhaps we should ask Freddie Williams or Split Waterman. They are both still around.

[chunky]

one otherpoint on the subject of old World Finals. Certainly, I think an element of luck was needed to become world champion. To back this up here are incidents off the top of my head, without which, the winner (or other medal winners) may well have been different. Please note again that I am not saying WF were a lottery, or that winners were not deserving, just that luck, as well as skill, played a part. And yes, in GP series luck also plays a part, but over a series of 11 meetings, less significant than in a one off final.

 

Easy to say that, but not necessarily less significant. Remember that Loram won the 2000 GP as a result of a terrible refereeing decision. He lifted and wiped out Rickardsson, who was the inexplicably excluded. Had the decision been different, Rickardsson would have won.

 

Steve

[iris123]

er...er...um...

 

Perhaps we should ask Freddie Williams or Split Waterman. They are both still around.

_{Would be interesting........Looking around it seems one of the sources(maybe he only one)was Graham Warren,who supposedly blamed Aub Lawson("He would run over his own mother"),who offered Biggs a price and was turnd down.....}

 

_{Would also be interesting to know just who was involved in this/these alleged incidents.Unfortunately i don't have the Olle Nygren interview inClassic Speedway mag which this quote refers to}

 

He also talks openly about race-fixing and `doing favours' in World Championship

meetings. He pursued one rider who owed him £50 all the way to Australia! "There

was a

system in Sweden of `covering' races and I understood how it worked," says Olle,

who

revealed that he was in the pits at one World Final when a fellow countryman was

offered

a £1,000 bribe to throw a key race.

Edited December 6, 2011 by iris123

[The White Knight]

one otherpoint on the subject of old World Finals. Certainly, I think an element of luck was needed to become world champion. To back this up here are incidents off the top of my head, without which, the winner (or other medal winners) may well have been different. Please note again that I am not saying WF were a lottery, or that winners were not deserving, just that luck, as well as skill, played a part. And yes, in GP series luck also plays a part, but over a series of 11 meetings, less significant than in a one off final.

 

73: Controversial incident involving Plech and Chlynovski robs both of a place in run off for title. Mauger falls in run-off gifting Szcazkiel the title.

75: Peter Collins has two wins from first two riders, however just prior to third ride the dusty track is watered by over enthusiastic fans. Collins finishes last and his title hopes are gone.

76: Mauger engine failure while leading hands Collins title.

77: Collins injury week before meeting. Mauger twice trailing in clashes against key rivals (Collins and Olsen/Lee), but races stopped due to other rider’s falling (muller and Boulger). Mauger triumphs in both re-runs.

78: Jessup ef costs him title. Mauger falls/knocked off in his first heat while leading, but race not stopped.

80: Lee randomly checks timing of his bike at a service station, notices broken bearing which would have ruined world final hopes. Gets favourable gate 1 twice, while rival Jessup gets orst gate three twice.

81: Penhalls main rivals on the night, Carter/Gundersen/Jessup all suffer engine troubles

82: L Collins drops two poins in his easiest ride. THAT incident, when at best Penhall would have picked up second (and hence a run off)

83: Nielsen puncture costs him place on rostrum

85: Nielsen crashes in fourth ride, and has to race re-run on second bike. Inside gate a huge advantage in first half of meeting (benefits Sam Ermolenko who finished third)

86: Knudsen controversially excluded in clash with Neilsen

89: Gundersen e/f costs him runners up spot

93/94: Nielsen controversially excluded costing him the title on both occasions

 

I'm sure there are many more examples that exist.

These moments are also perhaps why specific old WF stick in our minds more, as they are defining moments in the destiny of the title, while the many (for example ) Nicki Pedersen incidents are less vivid as they have ultimately not decided the overall GP winner in a given year.

 

Cracking Post.

 

How about 1972. IF Persson had not taken out 'Briggo' and put him out of the Meeting - I think that Briggo would have won another World Title. If I remember correctly - he had already beaten Mauger earlier.

 

That's one of the beauties of Speedway - lots of IF's.

[stratton]

Cracking Post.

 

How about 1972. IF Persson had not taken out 'Briggo' and put him out of the Meeting - I think that Briggo would have won another World Title. If I remember correctly - he had already beaten Mauger earlier.

 

That's one of the beauties of Speedway - lots of IF's.

He did Briggo i think would of won his fifth title not to be though.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Cracking Post.

 

How about 1972. IF Persson had not taken out 'Briggo' and put him out of the Meeting - I think that Briggo would have won another World Title. If I remember correctly - he had already beaten Mauger earlier.

 

That's one of the beauties of Speedway - lots of IF's.

 

Indeed. Though the bigger story in '72 was surely the first ride fall by Olsen. After that he reeled off four straight wins in one of the greatest performances ever seen at the Empire Stadium (and actually make that nine in a row, as he was unbeaten in all five three years later [my, he must've had GREAT gate positions in all those rides!! ]); and that's certainly another example of one duck egg on the score card denying a rider the world title...

[stratton]

Indeed. Though the bigger story in '72 was surely the first ride fall by Olsen. After that he reeled off four straight wins in one of the greatest performances ever seen at the Empire Stadium (and actually make that nine in a row, as he was unbeaten in all five three years later [my, he must've had GREAT gate positions in all those rides!! ]); and that's certainly another example of one duck egg on the score card denying a rider the world title...

YES maybe he would of he had come from the back,when he fell challenging loftqvist. Just that Briggoe,s time i think was fast,when he defeated Mauger. Briggs, my favourite ever rider, and Olsen was certainly the best danish rider i ever saw both legends.

[chunky]

that's certainly another example of one duck egg on the score card denying a rider the world title...

 

...along with :

 

Graham Warren (1950), who fell attempting to pass eventual champion Freddie Williams. Had he stayed in second, the two would have a run-off for the title.

 

Jack Parker (1951). While everyone talks about Jack Biggs, the English Jack emerged pointless from his first outing, on paper, his easiest of the night, A win would have seen him champion, and a second place would have meant a four-way run-off.

 

YES maybe he would of he had come from the back,when he fell challenging loftqvist. Just that Briggoe,s time i think was fast,when he defeated Mauger. Briggs, my favourite ever rider, and Olsen was certainly the best danish rider i ever saw both legends.

 

Sorry, but while Olsen was one of the all-time greats, there's no way that I would put him above Nielsen...

 

Steve

Edited December 7, 2011 by chunky

[stratton]

...along with :

 

Graham Warren (1950), who fell attempting to pass eventual champion Freddie Williams. Had he stayed in second, the two would have a run-off for the title.

 

Jack Parker (1951). While everyone talks about Jack Biggs, the English Jack emerged pointless from his first outing, on paper, his easiest of the night, A win would have seen him champion, and a second place would have meant a four-way run-off.

 

 

 

Sorry, but while Olsen was one of the all-time greats, there's no way that I would put him above Nielsen...

 

Steve

i would,if Penhall and Lee,hadnt of gone from the sport,Nielsen would not of won four titles,he was also very very lucky to get away with the Knudsen incident.Penhall certainly had the measure of Nielsen up until his retirement, there was no reason to suggest to me he would of got the better of Bruce over a long period.Olsen to me is in the top bracket of legends Briggs, Mauger,Fundin ,Craven, Rickardsson Nielsen for me would be in the second bracket.And people tend to forget Erik Gundersen for me had Nielsens number i see him beat Hans numerous times and around Oxford.Respect Nielsen i do but he wouldnt be in my top 6 of all time.

[waiheke1]

As for Jason yes by far a better rider in my book to Pedersen also i am convinced to compete in the 70s and 80s and be a threat was harder than staying in the gps now.Saying that the gps is hard a different test its just the strength in debth numbers quality wise that sways it for me.

Sorry, Sydney I meant of course Phil crump (who we had been discussion), not Jason (who I agree is better than Pedersen). So confirming, you believe PHIL was better than N Pedersen? You keep saying this is because its easier to stay in GP than to qualify for the old final (which I’d dispute anyway), but are you actually saying you believe it was harder to qualify for the old WF than it is to WIN the GP?

Note, someone like Billy Sanders in the same era had exactly the same qualifying route as Phil, but managed 5 world finals, and two rostrum appearances.Who do you think was better out of Phil and Billy?

 

.Jessup was he good anough? more importantly did he deserve to win it NO.

Of course, being good enough to win, and deserving to win, are two entirely different things. Do you think Jessup was good enough to win, and can you name a rider who was better in the world in 1980?

 

 

Easy to say that, but not necessarily less significant. Remember that Loram won the 2000 GP as a result of a terrible refereeing decision. He lifted and wiped out Rickardsson, who was the inexplicably excluded. Had the decision been different, Rickardsson would have won.

The point being that it is a rarity for one incident to have determined the overall GP winner in a particvular year, wheras roughly every second year under the old one-offs such an incident had a significant bearing on who took out the title.

 

Dont want to raise this but i better and Parsloes has raised this would Mike Lee, Kelly and several others get there chance right away now in the world championship i think not?

I’d say Lee would certainly have either qualified or been wildcarded to the 78 GP series. Peter Collins similarly for the 74 series.So, a year later than they actually made a final under the old system, hardly a significant delay. And in the case of Lee, who’s to say that he wouldn’t have actually benefitted from success coming slightly later.

I don’t buy the argument that its harder for young riders now – Emil and Tai for example were hardly waiting for ever to join the series. If a British talent like Lee emerged in 2012, I think you could practically guarantee he’d be offered a spot in the 2013 GP series.

 

What no-one seems to have mentioned about the old style World finals is that for 20 or so years, nearly half of the line up was made up of qualifiers from the Continental Final.

I don't blame you for not having read every page of this topic, but this has actually been covered off in a fair amount of detail

 

Of course, Sydney, you've alreayd expressed your opinion on Nielsen on another thread.

 

Erik always had Nielsens number,forget the 22 medals did he do it when Penhall was about[no].He got lucky when Lee,Sigalos,Sanders Penhall Carter went.Lee and Penhall were better than Nielsen the others i named were on a par at least. Olsen well he was a master, he rode with legends like Briggs,Mauger,Michanek, a mega era and Lee and Collins were awesome after that. Who was the threat to Nielsen 1?Erik and Erik mastered him. Dont get me wrong Hans was good,it was just the opposition wasnt as strong.

 

yeah forget the medals, forget that season he went undefeated away from home in the BL, forget the number of consecutive seasons he topped the BL averages (including the two best ever season averages), forget the 3 BLRC titles , forget the many test series he topped the averages, forget the 6 Danish Championships, forget the numerous other World Final qualifying titles. Because, lets face it, apart from those, he didn't really do much did he?

 

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.

 

Ok, so that’s a 12 year period you’ve listed, and quite a few of those riders (e.g. N Boocock, Jonsson, Rickardson) were nowhere near World class in that period. You’ve then asked us to look at a 9 year period of GPs as a comparison?

 

Anyway, I’m not sure looking at a list of riders over a 12 year period of time is the best way to compare relevant strength in depths, rather pick a particular year and look at the quality.So, I’ve picked 1982 (just because its one of the seasons I feel most familiar with), and compared to the current situation.

 

I've then split riders into three groups.1) those who would have been good enough to challenge for a spot on the rosturm, 2) those who would have been good enough to challenge for the top8, 3) those who would have performed respectably, probably around 4/5 points a GP, but capable of making semis, or even the final, on a good day and a track which suited them.

Note, this is obviously highly subjective, I realize different people may have very different bvies on which category different riders should fit into:

 

Champion/rostrum:

1982 Penhall Carter Sigalos L Collins Gundersen Jessup

2012: Gollob Hancock Crump Emil AJ Hampel Holder

 

Top 8:

1982: M Lee S Moran K Moran C Morton J Andersson H Nielsen O Olsen B Shwartz B Sanders

2012: N Pedersen Lindgren Harris Bjerre Ward Holta G Laguta

 

Respectable

1982: Knudsen Muller Nieme Ross Mauge Petersen Andy Grahame Alan Grahame Kennett Cook Erixen Preston Peter Collins Crump Autrey Davis

2012: PP Batchelor Andersen Lindback Nicholls Woffinden Zetterstrom Schlein Pavlic Walasek Sullivan THJ Janowski Zagar Miedzinski Kolodziej KK

 

IMHO I don’t think there’s a huge difference in the strength of those two lists, though I do think the 82 list is slightly stronger. Would appreciate other’s thoughts.

[chunky]

i would,if Penhall and Lee,hadnt of gone from the sport,Nielsen would not of won four titles,

We've been here before... You can't include all these "ifs". Besides, Lee was already on the downward slide before Nielsen emerged as a true contender.

 

he was also very very lucky to get away with the Knudsen incident.

Loram was very lucky to get away with the Rickardsson incident, which is how he won the title. Lucky or not, that's the way it is. Crashes are often viewed differently by different people; rules that are blatantly ignored by referees aren't. Nielsen should have won in 1993 as Ermolenko shouldn't have been allowed in the rerun. Again, that is all "ifs".

 

Penhall certainly had the measure of Nielsen up until his retirement, there was no reason to suggest to me he would of got the better of Bruce over a long period.

 

I cant argue that point at all, but Nielsen didn't win his first title until four years after Penhall's retirement; who's to say that Penhall would still have been at the top of his form? He may have been, and he may not.

 

Olsen to me is in the top bracket of legends Briggs, Mauger,Fundin ,Craven, Rickardsson Nielsen for me would be in the second bracket.And people tend to forget Erik Gundersen for me had Nielsens number i see him beat Hans numerous times and around Oxford.Respect Nielsen i do but he wouldnt be in my top 6 of all time.

 

Four World titles and a long spell as THE dominant rider in domestic competition is enough for me to put Nielsen above Olsen. However, I would still include Olsen in that elite group - along with Gundersen.

 

Note, someone like Billy Sanders in the same era had exactly the same qualifying route as Phil, but managed 5 world finals, and two rostrum appearances.Who do you think was better out of Phil and Billy?

That was always something that perplexed me. I was a great fan of Sanders, but I rated Crump the much better rider. It's a pity he couldn't - or didn't - do it when it really counted.

 

Of course, being good enough to win, and deserving to win, are two entirely different things. Do you think Jessup was good enough to win, and can you name a rider who was better in the world in 1980?

Can't argue with that assessment at all...

 

The point being that it is a rarity for one incident to have determined the overall GP winner in a particvular year, wheras roughly every second year under the old one-offs such an incident had a significant bearing on who took out the title.

I never queried the frequency of such incidents compared to those in the GP, merely that they were - or could be - of equal significance.

 

If a British talent like Lee emerged in 2012, I think you could practically guarantee he’d be offered a spot in the 2013 GP series.

Sad. but true...

 

yeah forget the medals, forget that season he went undefeated away from home in the BL, forget the number of consecutive seasons he topped the BL averages (including the two best ever season averages), forget the 3 BLRC titles , forget the many test series he topped the averages, forget the 6 Danish Championships, forget the numerous other World Final qualifying titles. Because, lets face it, apart from those, he didn't really do much did he?

My point exactly. To not include Nielsen in a list of the GREATEST riders of all time baffles me... (see above)

 

Champion/rostrum:

1982 Penhall Carter Sigalos L Collins Gundersen Jessup

2012: Gollob Hancock Crump Emil AJ Hampel Holder

 

Top 8:

1982: M Lee S Moran K Moran C Morton J Andersson H Nielsen O Olsen B Shwartz B Sanders

2012: N Pedersen Lindgren Harris Bjerre Ward Holta G Laguta

 

Respectable

1982: Knudsen Muller Nieme Ross Mauge Petersen Andy Grahame Alan Grahame Kennett Cook Erixen Preston Peter Collins Crump Autrey Davis

2012: PP Batchelor Andersen Lindback Nicholls Woffinden Zetterstrom Schlein Pavlic Walasek Sullivan THJ Janowski Zagar Miedzinski Kolodziej KK

 

IMHO I don’t think there’s a huge difference in the strength of those two lists, though I do think the 82 list is slightly stronger. Would appreciate other’s thoughts.

I would basically agree with everything there, particularly when one considers that you didn't even include riders like Simmons, Shirra, and Phil Collins from the 1982 list.

 

Steve

Edited December 7, 2011 by chunky