Speedway Gp In Tatters !

[BigFatDave]

Please be my guest and name the titles he won

Four Australian National Titles and fourteen Australian State titles, Iris.

[HenryW]

...for me Phil rode in a better era the strength in debth i think was amazing.

Sorry to pick on this quote, but it just inspired me to comment on something that has been mulling around in my mind for a while...

 

I'll try to cover myself from abuse here by saying that I might just be putting this out to play "devil's advocate" and encourage debate, but.....Can the claim of "strength in depth" not just alternatively be read as a lack of "a true star"?

 

Hypothetically, if someone stepped up above the level of the rest of their peers and completely owned the sport, would you say that they were the greatest ever or just dismiss them for racing at a time where they didn't have good competition? Similarly, if someone was only just winning in a close competition between them and 2/3/4/5+ others, would you say they were the greatest ever because they fought off their (many?) nearest rivals?

[ImpartialOne]

What i am saying you would of thought Leigh would of got closer to at least the rostrum places.

During his career Leigh was World No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8! So he certainly didn't fall short of rostrum placings. Every year he appeared to get ever closer to his goal and I don't think it was down to nerves as Iris suggests. It just wasn't meant to be. Many thought Gollob would go the same way. Maybe Leigh just needed one more year? We'll never know.

 

Incidentally, Phil Crump's World Final record:

 

1975 - 3 3 1 1 2 = 10 (6th)

1976 - 3 3 2 1 3 = 12 (3rd)

1982 - 1 1 1 1 0 = 4 (14th)

 

Never in the same league as Adams in any way.

Edited December 3, 2011 by ImpartialOne

[iris123]

Four Australian National Titles and fourteen Australian State titles, Iris.

Which sort of proves my point with Phil.A few national titles,but nothing more.Not even an Australasian one

[stratton]

During his career Leigh was World No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8! So he certainly didn't fall short of rostrum placings. Every year he appeared to get ever closer to his goal and I don't think it was down to nerves as Iris suggests. It just wasn't meant to be. Many thought Gollob would go the same way. Maybe Leigh just needed one more year? We'll never know.

 

Incidentally, Phil Crump's World Final record:

 

1975 - 3 3 1 1 2 = 10 (6th)

1976 - 3 3 2 1 3 = 12 (3rd)

1982 - 1 1 1 1 0 = 4 (14th)

 

Never in the same league as Adams in any way.

Did you see alot of Crump senior impartial one? i doubt it those stats are so misleading dosent tell the whole story.To say he wasnt in the same league is a mad comment.Also can you dispute that it was HARDER to qualify for a oneoff final than it is to STAY in the g.pseries now.If you say Crump wasnt in the same league what are you saying about the competition about those days the GREAT Mauger,Olsen,Collins,Lee,Michanek,.I see alot of Leigh Adams too, what a rider was never in my opinion destined to win a word title .But to say Crump senior wasnt in the same league that to me is you questioning the standard of the era.

[ImpartialOne]

Did you see alot of Crump senior impartial one? i doubt it those stats are so misleading dosent tell the whole story.To say he wasnt in the same league is a mad comment.Also can you dispute that it was HARDER to qualify for a oneoff final than it is to STAY in the g.pseries now.If you say Crump wasnt in the same league what are you saying about the competition about those days the GREAT Mauger,Olsen,Collins,Lee,Michanek,.I see alot of Leigh Adams too, what a rider was never in my opinion destined to win a word title .But to say Crump senior wasn't in the same league that to me is you questioning the standard of the era.

I did see a fair amount of Crump and I just don't think he compares to Adams. Leigh was at the very top for 20 years which is an incredible achievement. How long was Crump at the very top of British League averages and the world stage? Not even half that I imagine.

 

Also I would say that if you are a rider such as Rickardsson, Mauger, Nielsen, Jason Crump, etc, it would be as "easy" to make a world final as it is to stay in the GP. If you are someone of the caliber of Andersen, Harris, Tatum, Phil Crump, etc it would be just as hard to stay in the GP as make a World Final.

Edited December 3, 2011 by ImpartialOne

[stratton]

I did see a fair amount of Crump and I just don't think he compares to Adams. Leigh was at the very top for 20 years which is an incredible achievement. How long was Crump at the very top of British League averages and the world stage? Not even half that I imagine.

 

Also I would say that if you are a rider such as Rickardsson, Mauger, Nielsen, Jason Crump, etc, it would be as "easy" to make a world final as it is to stay in the GP. If you are someone of the caliber of Andersen, Harris, Tatum, Phil Crump, etc it would be just as hard to stay in the GP as make a World Final.

I see Crump every week for over seven years, to reach the one off final was alot harder no doubt about it.Crump only reached 3 finals Airey only one?numerous others Ashby E.Boocock a few examples who didnt reach as many finals as they should of .Phil Crump would of stayed in the g.ps today no bother as ive said its a easy system to stay in the G.P.S now the strength in debth isnt there now in my opinion.

[iris123]

I see Crump every week for over seven years, to reach the one off final was alot harder no doubt about it.Crump only reached 3 finals Airey only one?numerous others Ashby E.Boocock a few examples who didnt reach as many finals as they should of .Phil Crump would of stayed in the g.ps today no bother as ive said its a easy system to stay in the G.P.S now the strength in debth isnt there now in my opinion.

I would disagree Sidney.Imo(and it is only my opinion of course)Phil would be alongside the likes of Holta,Protasiewiscz and Bjarne.In and out like a fiddlers elbow

[stratton]

I would disagree Sidney.Imo(and it is only my opinion of course)Phil would be alongside the likes of Holta,Protasiewiscz and Bjarne.In and out like a fiddlers elbow

Bjarne?no comparison Pedersen years ago now would of barely been a third heat leader.Opinions and thats what its about ,the main issue for me is.It was harder to even qualify and to win a one off Final than it is to stay in the g.p.series.Is Nicky Pedersen a prime example of that nearly impossible to be eliminated.

[iris123]

Is Nicky Pedersen a prime example of that nearly impossible to be eliminated.

No,no and thrice no Nicki is a very bad example to use for an argument on that particular topic.Multiple World Champ and had a few injuries,but although past his best maybe,he should deffo still be in for the time being

[stratton]

No,no and thrice no Nicki is a very bad example to use for an argument on that particular topic.Multiple World Champ and had a few injuries,but although past his best maybe,he should deffo still be in for the time being

Since the series began, Nicky is the only rider i feel shouldnt of won 3 titles. In my opinion Adams was a better rider and never won it yet Nicky won three titles.Thats what i mean about killer instinct,Nicky had that took no prisoners and i admire him for that when he has retired he can be very proud.Dropping out the series is very hard to do but as we know Nicky is a person people like to watch so i suppose he warrants a place if so so does Holta.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Sorry to pick on this quote, but it just inspired me to comment on something that has been mulling around in my mind for a while... I'll try to cover myself from abuse here by saying that I might just be putting this out to play "devil's advocate" and encourage debate, but.....Can the claim of "strength in depth" not just alternatively be read as a lack of "a true star"?

 

Hmm, well certainly not the case in the decade we suddenly appear to be debating...

By any indicator anyone chooses to take, Mauger, Collins, Olsen and Michanek were great, great stars. Lee was also a great champion though perhaps future events meant history doesn't judge him as high.

As it happens, even though 'Tiger'' Louis was one of my all-time heroes I actually don't think that in the '70s there were any riders who 100% deserved a world title who didn't win one..

Yes Simmo, Crump senior and the likes of Jessup and Sanders went close and certainly in the case of the first two (plus Louis) proved they could win World Final-style meetings, they were just that bit behind the big four of that decade who between them, of course, won every WF save the infamous 1973 one...

Incidentally would be interesting to see the top of the averages in the years '70 to '79..: I wonder how many outside that big four achieved that distinction..

Does anyone have those details?

[stratton]

Hmm, well certainly not the case in the decade we suddenly appear to be debating...

By any indicator anyone chooses to take, Mauger, Collins, Olsen and Michanek were great, great stars. Lee was also a great champion though perhaps future events meant history doesn't judge him as high.

As it happens, even though 'Tiger'' Louis was one of my all-time heroes I actually don't think that in the '70s there were any riders who 100% deserved a world title who didn't win one..

Yes Simmo, Crump senior and the likes of Jessup and Sanders went close and certainly in the case of the first two (plus Louis) proved they could win World Final-style meetings, they were just that bit behind the big four of that decade who between them, of course, won every WF save the infamous 1973 one...

Incidentally would be interesting to see the top of the averages in the years '70 to '79..: I wonder how many outside that big four achieved that distinction..

Does anyone have those details?

Averages TOP.RIDERS AVERAGE of that year. . 1969.MAUGER.11.74. 1970.mauger.11.31. 1971.MAUGER. 11.33. 1972.mauger.11.42. 1973.MICHANEK. 11.55. 1974.olsen. 11.32. 1975.MAUGER. 11.45. 1976.LOUIS. 11.10. 1977.LEE. 10.64. 1978.simmons.10.78. 1979.AUTREY. 10.91. 1980. COLLINS. 10.70. 1981. PENHALL 11.08. AVERAGES WHEN WINNING TITLE. MAUGER.1969.1970.1972, HAD TOP. AVERAGE. 1977.was 2nd.10.62. 1979.was2nd.10.53. OLSEN.1971.was3rd 10.96. 1975.was 5th 10.78. 1978 was 2nd.10.71. MICHANEK 1974.gothenburg ban? NO BL. COLLINS 1976.was 4th.10.98. LEE.1980. was 6th 10.17. PENHALL.1981. was 1st.11.08. so out of those years only 4 riders were top of the averages and won the title in the same year.

[iris123]

Yes Simmo, Crump senior and the likes of Jessup and Sanders went close and certainly in the case of the first two (plus Louis) proved they could win World Final-style meetings,

Hmmm,so you are saying the old style World Final wasn't so special after all as there were "World Final-style meetings" that were held?.What you mean i guess but are afraid to say because it highhs the problem with the old system is there were meetings that had a stronger line-up more often than not to the Old World Finals.Trouble is,it is hard to use them as any argument apart for against the old system,because they were not World Finals,not on World Final tracks and without that pressure that comes with the old World Final(which we all agree was special)

Actually it was s often said about certain meetings that the line-up was stronger than the World Final,that that should be proof of the big failure of the system.I don't often hear that said about the GPs and many open meetings.Do you Parsloes?

Edited December 3, 2011 by iris123

[Humphrey Appleby]

In my opinion Adams was a better rider and never won it yet Nicky won three titles.

 

Adams was the equivalent of Tommy Knudsen. Fairly unbeatable in league racing, but never cut it when it came to the World Championship.

 

Similarly, Nicki Pedersen is perhaps the equivalent of Erik Gundersen who was never the better of Hans Nielsen in league competition (or indeed most competition), but who had the ability to pull something out of the bag in World Finals.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Hmmm,so you are saying the old style World Final wasn't so special after all as there were "World Final-style meetings" that were held?.What you mean i guess but are afraid to say because it highhs the problem with the old system is there were meetings that had a stronger line-up more often than not to the Old World Finals.Trouble is,it is hard to use them as any argument apart for against the old system,because they were not World Finals,not on World Final tracks and without that pressure that comes with the old World Final(which we all agree was special)

Actually it was s often said about certain meetings that the line-up was stronger than the World Final,that that should be proof of the big failure of the system.I don't often hear that said about the GPs and many open meetings.Do you Parsloes?

 

Not sure where you think I differ from what you've posted!?

By 'World Final-style" meetings I was referring to the likes of the Wills Internationale (actually an FIM meeting created to be staged in London because the capital had lost the WF in '61..) and the Spring Classic - which the likes of Simmo and Crump won. And I agree with you, though high quality fields, these meetings were NOT the WF.

You appear to be contradicting yourself as you're admitting (as I also argue) that such meetings did not have the same sort of pressure attached to them that the WF had. Which was indeed my point in the first place!

And the weakness of 'big' indiv. sometimes called 'open' meetings now..? Well, yes that's sad biut true - but frankly has nowt to do either way with the SGP system...

[orion]

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.

 

 

Never proved anythink ..the old one off final was lottery and was won on the draw most of the time ...it's reminded of a fishing match when the person who drew a bad peg had no chance of winning .

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Averages TOP.RIDERS AVERAGE of that year. . 1969.MAUGER.11.74. 1970.mauger.11.31. 1971.MAUGER. 11.33. 1972.mauger.11.42. 1973.MICHANEK. 11.55. 1974.olsen. 11.32. 1975.MAUGER. 11.45. 1976.LOUIS. 11.10. 1977.LEE. 10.64. 1978.simmons.10.78. 1979.AUTREY. 10.91. 1980. COLLINS. 10.70. 1981. PENHALL 11.08. AVERAGES WHEN WINNING TITLE. MAUGER.1969.1970.1972, HAD TOP. AVERAGE. 1977.was 2nd.10.62. 1979.was2nd.10.53. OLSEN.1971.was3rd 10.96. 1975.was 5th 10.78. 1978 was 2nd.10.71. MICHANEK 1974.gothenburg ban? NO BL. COLLINS 1976.was 4th.10.98. LEE.1980. was 6th 10.17. PENHALL.1981. was 1st.11.08. so out of those years only 4 riders were top of the averages and won the title in the same year.

 

Well yes, but out of the averages-toppers only three (Autrey, Simmons & Louis) never won the WF and all three of them made the rostrum...

Sticking with averages what's been the position then with the average-toppers since the inception of the SGP in '96 then?

 

Never proved anythink ..the old one off final was lottery and was won on the draw most of the time ...it's reminded of a fishing match when the person who drew a bad peg had no chance of winning .

 

Please keep up.There is literally no way the old WF was a lottery. We've already gone over this...!!! For god's sake look at the evidence before you make a comment as patently daft as this!!

[iris123]

Not sure where you think I differ from what you've posted!?

By 'World Final-style" meetings I was referring to the likes of the Wills Internationale (actually an FIM meeting created to be staged in London because the capital had lost the WF in '61..) and the Spring Classic - which the likes of Simmo and Crump won. And I agree with you, though high quality fields, these meetings were NOT the WF.

You appear to be contradicting yourself as you're admitting (as I also argue) that such meetings did not have the same sort of pressure attached to them that the WF had. Which was indeed my point in the first place!

And the weakness of 'big' indiv. sometimes called 'open' meetings now..? Well, yes that's sad biut true - but frankly has nowt to do either way with the SGP system...

I don't think anyone has disputed that there was something special due to pressure etc of the old World Final.If you look back i think you will find many posters admitting that.But,most agree that the Gps are an improvement for the sport and an improvement in finding a worthy World Champ I think you will find that a decent enough summary of mst of the posters on here

[WIE-JA]

I don't think anyone has disputed that there was something special due to pressure etc of the old World Final.If you look back i think you will find many posters admitting that.But,most agree that the Gps are an improvement for the sport and an improvement in finding a worthy World Champ I think you will find that a decent enough summary of mst of the posters on here

 

Yeah I'll agree with that.

 

1936 to 1994, World Championships were difficult to win.

1995 onwards, World Championships are difficult to win.