Speedway Gp In Tatters !

[Gearhead]

 

 

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,those IF's add something to any meeting,although even themselves over a series usually

[ImpartialOne]

he was unbeaten in all five three years later [my, he must've had GREAT gate positions in all those rides!! ]);

 

Yes, riders no longer score maximums now that gate positions are so vital, unlike the good old days when all gates were exactly the same.

[stratton]

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?

 

 

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?

 

 

 

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’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.

 

 

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.

 

 

 

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?

 

 

 

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.

Great post' well explained unlike me;

 

Yes, riders no longer score maximums now that gate positions are so vital, unlike the good old days when all gates were exactly the same.

Does that show you after what you have just said,to win a one off final was a achievement because everyone was on the same playing field at that time.Gates didnt mean you couldnt win a final just meant it was harder to do from the back.Where now gates are very important ie] in the semi,s and Final.

[ImpartialOne]

Does that show you after what you have just said,to win a one off final was a achievement because everyone was on the same playing field at that time.Gates didnt mean you couldnt win a final just meant it was harder to do from the back.Where now gates are very important ie] in the semi,s and Final.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Yes, riders no longer score maximums now that gate positions are so vital, unlike the good old days when all gates were exactly the same.

Hmm, okay very amusing... But let's face reality: a 20 heat, 16 rider indiv. format means a rider gets FIVE rides and there's only FOUR gate positions. So shock! horror! they all have to get one (just one...) gate position more than once... This COULD be more or less advantegous depending on a range of cirumstances. But in order to WIN such a meeting one needs (basically) a good performance (mainly winning races that is...) in ALL five heats, so actually the significance of the gate you get twice is only of some and not critical importance. Plus as we've shown the likes of Collins and Olsen were incredibly adept at coming from behind anyhow, so though gating is of course important it's not the be all and end all..

 

This debate about gate positions arose because orion claimed that the old indiv. WF was a rubbish format because who won was a lottery due to some issue (he never explained...) about gate positions. Patently that was nonsense..

[stratton]

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.

 

 

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".

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

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.

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

Sad. but true...

 

 

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

 

 

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

Chunky a good response, and your opinion with stats carry good weight, a few points really Nielsen does go down in the pool of greatest riders of all time . .But for me he would only be in the 2nd tier of great riders they cant all be in the top 6 can they.Also you said Lee was on the downward slope, by that time 3rd at norden [nielsen lower i no he had a ef but still lower] and he was third in the B.L.R.C after a duck egg in his first race got filled in.So come 84 no one thought the ban was coming for Lee and as you no that destroyed him and then he was finished.The reason Nielsen would not be in my top six of all time is for me he never proved to me he was better than all of his age group, Generation[ie] Penhall,Lee, and his big foe who in my mind had his number Erik Gundersen .Give him the benefit of the doubt with the Knudsen incident he was still very fortunate to get away with it.So Ole got three titles, Hans four very close but even in your opinion Ole would be up there.

[chunky]

]Also you said Lee was on the downward slope, by that time 3rd at norden [nielsen lower i no he had a ef but still lower] and he was third in the B.L.R.C after a duck egg in his first race got filled in.So come 84 no one thought the ban was coming for Lee and as you no that destroyed him and then he was finished.[

 

Just because he finished 3rd doesn't mean that he was still at the very top of his game, because he wasn't. Honestly, it wasn't so much that the ban destroyed him as the fact that he constantly destroyed himself.

 

The reason Nielsen would not be in my top six of all time is for me he never proved to me he was better than all of his age group, Generation[ie] Penhall,Lee, and his big foe who in my mind had his number Erik Gundersen

 

The problem is that YOU are the one who is limiting the choice to six. If I had to choose six, it would be Mauger, Fundin, Rickardsson, Briggs, Nielsen, and Olsen. Gundersen would be the one to miss out. Still, you keep saying about all these "ifs". If Gundersen hadn't had that terrible crash at Odsal, if Lee hadn't been so hell-bent on destroying himself, if Penhall hadn't decided that acting was where his future lay... Nielsen had a long and truly exceptional career which - for most people - would secure him a place in their all-time top six.

 

The reason I place Olsen above Gundersen is because Ole had to work so much harder to achieve what he did. No disrespect meant to Erik, but the opportunities and facilities were there for him BECAUSE of Olsen. To come from a very minor speedway nation - as Denmark was - and achieve such greatness is testament to the guy's ability and determination.

 

Steve

Edited December 7, 2011 by chunky

[orion]

 

 

This debate about gate positions arose because orion claimed that the old indiv. WF was a rubbish format because who won was a lottery due to some issue (he never explained...) about gate positions. Patently that was nonsense..

 

Explain it all ready ..thou to most it's no brainer and needs no one to explain it to them ....i have to say thou on a lighter note i love your sig top class

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Explain it all ready ..thou to most it's no brainer and needs no one to explain it to them ....i have to say thou on a lighter note i love your sig top class

 

Okay thanx. But I do have to say that whatever you think about the significance of gate positions it was a totally over the top response to claim that (1) the old WF was a lottery (it wasn't and all the facts point to it not being so...); and (2) to slate the old system on the basis of gate positions when this is a formula always used in 20 heat/16 rider indivs - including current GPs!

 

You COULD if you wanted to conduct a critique of the old system's arguable shortcomings, mention the various points of controversey and bad luck and ironically that's recently been debated at some length with some vey interesting contributions.

 

Maybe me and you should steer clear of football and Speedway where we always disagree and stick to politics where we're on the same wavelength!!!

[chunky]

You COULD if you wanted to conduct a critique of the old system's arguable shortcomings, mention the various points of controversey and bad luck and ironically that's recently been debated at some length with some vey interesting contributions.

 

Providing we could keep plain bias out of the discussion, that could be an interesting thread...

 

Steve

[stratton]

Just because he finished 3rd doesn't mean that he was still at the very top of his game, because he wasn't. Honestly, it wasn't so much that the ban destroyed him as the fact that he constantly destroyed himself.

 

 

 

The problem is that YOU are the one who is limiting the choice to six. If I had to choose six, it would be Mauger, Fundin, Rickardsson, Briggs, Nielsen, and Olsen. Gundersen would be the one to miss out. Still, you keep saying about all these "ifs". If Gundersen hadn't had that terrible crash at Odsal, if Lee hadn't been so hell-bent on destroying himself, if Penhall hadn't decided that acting was where his future lay... Nielsen had a long and truly exceptional career which - for most people - would secure him a place in their all-time top six.

 

The reason I place Olsen above Gundersen is because Ole had to work so much harder to achieve what he did. No disrespect meant to Erik, but the opportunities and facilities were there for him BECAUSE of Olsen. To come from a very minor speedway nation - as Denmark was - and achieve such greatness is testament to the guy's ability and determination.

 

Steve

Mauger,Briggs,Fundin,Rickardsson, most people i would imagine would say they would be up there.Thats not if,s chunky? the rest for me is peoples own opinion would i put Nielsen in front of Craven Olsen a couple of examples no i wouldnt,Thats me though also you made me laugh, when you said i would just put Ole in front of Erik.You never give me an answer about Erik in my memory Erik got the better of Nielsen on numerous occasions made Nielsen make mistakes [ie]Kelly nicked through and cost him the title.At there best i always felt Erik would beat him exspecially in pressurised positions,there head to head was close , Erik won more if i hazard a guess.F.Williams Collins,Lee,Penhall,Gundersen,j.Crump . Nielsen would be in that group with them.Chunky as i said all about your personal preference.

[orion]

Okay thanx. But I do have to say that whatever you think about the significance of gate positions it was a totally over the top response to claim that (1) the old WF was a lottery (it wasn't and all the facts point to it not being so...); and (2) to slate the old system on the basis of gate positions when this is a formula always used in 20 heat/16 rider indivs - including current GPs!

 

You COULD if you wanted to conduct a critique of the old system's arguable shortcomings, mention the various points of controversey and bad luck and ironically that's recently been debated at some length with some vey interesting contributions.

 

Maybe me and you should steer clear of football and Speedway where we always disagree and stick to politics where we're on the same wavelength!!!

 

It's not a fact that the one off world finals were not a lottery it's your view you need to understand that ...others feel that is was yet again that does mean they are right it's just there view .

[chunky]

Mauger,Briggs,Fundin,Rickardsson, most people i would imagine would say they would be up there.Thats not if,s chunky?

These four all enjoyed LONG careers, and were able to perform on a very consistent basis. That's why they are not "ifs". The same with Olsen. Don't get me wrong, I think that Eric was a legend, and although he did have a relatively long career, I still feel that he had some World Titles left in him. Had he been able to continue, and perhaps win one or two more, then I possibly would include him in a top six. However, he didn't, so that is all conjecture.

 

the rest for me is peoples own opinion would i put Nielsen in front of Craven Olsen a couple of examples no i wouldnt,

I would put Olsen ahead of Craven, although again, had Craven been able to continue, and perhaps added to his brace, I might include him. Again, he didn't, so that is all conjecture.

 

Thats me though also you made me laugh, when you said i would just put Ole in front of Erik.

Why would that make you laugh?

 

You never give me an answer about Erik in my memory Erik got the better of Nielsen on numerous occasions made Nielsen make mistakes

I have given my opinion of Erik above. Just because someone had a favourable record over another individual doesn't necessarily mean that they were better. In my own sport, there are people who I consider better than me - yet I usually beat them. Then, there are others who I am head and shoulders above, but they usually beat me. So, I'm speaking from experience. What counts is what you do in the long run.

 

Erik won more if i hazard a guess.F.Williams Collins,Lee,Penhall,Gundersen,j.Crump . Nielsen would be in that group with them.Chunky as i said all about your personal preference.

Thing is, it's NOT about personal preference. Choosing your FAVOURITE riders is about personal preference; rating riders is not. Obviously, there will be a little bias, but one should be more objective. I was no particular fan of Mauger, Fundin, or Rickardsson, but I cannot put Ronnie Moore or Bruce Penhall - both favourites of mine - on quite the same level.

 

Steve

[stratton]

These four all enjoyed LONG careers, and were able to perform on a very consistent basis. That's why they are not "ifs". The same with Olsen. Don't get me wrong, I think that Eric was a legend, and although he did have a relatively long career, I still feel that he had some World Titles left in him. Had he been able to continue, and perhaps win one or two more, then I possibly would include him in a top six. However, he didn't, so that is all conjecture.

 

 

I would put Olsen ahead of Craven, although again, had Craven been able to continue, and perhaps added to his brace, I might include him. Again, he didn't, so that is all conjecture.

 

 

Why would that make you laugh?

 

 

I have given my opinion of Erik above. Just because someone had a favourable record over another individual doesn't necessarily mean that they were better. In my own sport, there are people who I consider better than me - yet I usually beat them. Then, there are others who I am head and shoulders above, but they usually beat me. So, I'm speaking from experience. What counts is what you do in the long run.

 

 

Thing is, it's NOT about personal preference. Choosing your FAVOURITE riders is about personal preference; rating riders is not. Obviously, there will be a little bias, but one should be more objective. I was no particular fan of Mauger, Fundin, or Rickardsson, but I cannot put Ronnie Moore or Bruce Penhall - both favourites of mine - on quite the same level.

 

Steve

Out of the riders i named Steve ,Briggs,Lee,Olsen were the only riders i would say were in my favourites .Crump is also there out of the g.p brigade,.Collins and Lee only won a title apiece but they would be on the same level as Nielsen and Gundersen again how you see things on a personel level.Do you go on achievements [ie] titles? i dont myself maybe you do if so can see why you would rate Nielsen so highly.

[iris123]

I think Norbold rates Tom Farndon as one of,if not the best rider of all time.It is of course personal interpretation of facts.But this is all for a different thread in another section surely.And has been done fairly often.This thread is about the GPs and the old World Final system has been brought into it.Basically the fans,press,sponsors etc prefer the GPs.I don't hear any real demand apart from a few old guys and trees for the return of the one day final.It won't happen, and if it does Britain and Parsloes will be treated to it once or twice a decade.1976 has gone and can't be relived apart from on video/dvd.And i don't know how to break it to Parsloes.......but Led Zeppelin have split up

[stratton]

I think Norbold rates Tom Farndon as one of,if not the best rider of all time.It is of course personal interpretation of facts.But this is all for a different thread in another section surely.And has been done fairly often.This thread is about the GPs and the old World Final system has been brought into it.Basically the fans,press,sponsors etc prefer the GPs.I don't hear any real demand apart from a few old guys and trees for the return of the one day final.It won't happen, and if it does Britain and Parsloes will be treated to it once or twice a decade.1976 has gone and can't be relived apart from on video/dvd.And i don't know how to break it to Parsloes.......but Led Zeppelin have split up

You have cracked me up Iris a few old guys hope you dont include me in that?by the way have the Beatles split up no the gps are hear to stay.But the memories are still there from the one off finals sad i know.

[ImpartialOne]

I don't know how anyone can dispute Nielsen's right to be among the top 6 ever. If you can't count achievements to compile the list, what can you include?

 

The fact is Nielsen has won more FIM gold medals than any other rider in the history of the sport. As I've said before, I admit some of that was down to being fortunate to be Danish but the man was like a machine at domestic level and at world level he was always a threat when he didn't win individual titles.

 

He was on the verge of greatness by 1983 and still bowed out in his final year in 1999 as World No. 3 at around 40 years old.

 

Whilst he had his share of luck, he also came desperately close on occasions and could easily have achieved at least 6 world titles but for misfortune.

 

His World Final record from 1984 speaks for itself:

 

1984 - 2nd (lost by 1 point)

1985 - 2nd (after run-off for title)

1986 - 1st

1987 - 1st

1988 - 2nd (after run-off for title)

1989 - 1st

1990 - 4th

1991 - 3rd

1992 - didn't qualify (broken foot if I recall?)

1993 - 2nd (lost by 1 point)

1994 - 2nd (after run-off for title)

1995 - 1st

1996 - 2nd (lost over 6 rounds by 2 points)

1997 - 7th

1998 - 4th

1999 - 3rd

 

I was never a Nielsen fan; I found him boring to watch most of the time (usually because he was so far ahead) but you can't deny he was one of speedway's all time greats.

 

[chunky]

Yeah, you're right iris - sorry!

 

Anyway, of course I miss World Final nights, probably as much for the atmosphere as anything. They were more unpredictable, because of one bad race. However class usually told in the end. Here's some food for thought :

 

From 1949 to 1994, we had 46 World Finals. We had a total of 21 World Champions, with 11 one-off Champions.

 

A number of World Finals were won by "home" track riders (I will include Muller, Michanek, and Szczakiel with Williams and Price).

 

Removing these from the mix (totally - unfair advantage) we now have 40 World Finals, 16 World Champions and 7 one-off champions.

 

From 1995 to 2011, we had 17 GP Series. We have had a total of 8 World Champions, with 4 one-off Champions.

 

Hans Nielsen (one GP) and Tony Rickardsson (one Final) won using both formats, so let's reduce that to 6 and 3 one-off champions.

 

That leaves us with :

 

40 World Finals, with 16 World Champions, and 6 one-off Champions.

 

17 GP Series, 8 World Champions, and 3 one-off champions.

 

Looking at it realistically, not much of a difference as far as percentages, eh?

 

I don't know how anyone can dispute Nielsen's right to be among the top 6 ever. If you can't count achievements to compile the list, what can you include?

 

Obviously, we can't base it TOTALLY on medals, because that would put Williams ahead of Collins and Lee, and Szczakiel equal with them), but Nielsen's record is impressive enough to stand on its own. Throw in the incredible brilliance and consistency as far as league is concerned, and there can be no doubts whatsoever.

 

Steve

Edited December 7, 2011 by chunky

[stratton]

I don't know how anyone can dispute Nielsen's right to be among the top 6 ever. If you can't count achievements to compile the list, what can you include?

 

The fact is Nielsen has won more FIM gold medals than any other rider in the history of the sport. As I've said before, I admit some of that was down to being fortunate to be Danish but the man was like a machine at domestic level and at world level he was always a threat when he didn't win individual titles.

 

He was on the verge of greatness by 1983 and still bowed out in his final year in 1999 as World No. 3 at around 40 years old.

 

Whilst he had his share of luck, he also came desperately close on occasions and could easily have achieved at least 6 world titles but for misfortune.

 

His World Final record from 1984 speaks for itself:

 

1984 - 2nd (lost by 1 point)

1985 - 2nd (after run-off for title)

1986 - 1st

1987 - 1st

1988 - 2nd (after run-off for title)

1989 - 1st

1990 - 4th

1991 - 3rd

1992 - didn't qualify (broken foot if I recall?)

1993 - 2nd (lost by 1 point)

1994 - 2nd (after run-off for title)

1995 - 1st

1996 - 2nd (lost over 6 rounds by 2 points)

1997 - 7th

1998 - 4th

1999 - 3rd

 

I was never a Nielsen fan; I found him boring to watch most of the time (usually because he was so far ahead) but you can't deny he was one of speedway's all time greats.

I did class him as a great read the post properly how you can say he was on the verge of greatness by 1983 he hadnt won anything had he then?Great rider i myself see lots of him admire him greatly.Because Collins and Lee only won one title each to me they were his equal.Also Penhall and Gundersen [who had his number] i rated higher. Not bad he,s still in the top 10, examples in other sports Mcenroe i rated higher than Lendl lendl won more osullivan i rated higher than Hendry Hendry won more I dont always go by trophies and medals just my personnel outlook.Impartial one he is still a all time great just a few others in front of him thats all.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

It's not a fact that the one off world finals were not a lottery it's your view you need to understand that ...others feel that is was yet again that does mean they are right it's just there view .

 

No, it's NOT my opinion... The World Final was NOT a lottery... Look up the word, 'lottery'...!!!

 

.And i don't know how to break it to Parsloes.......but Led Zeppelin have split up

 

Trust me mate I have zero interest in Led Zeppelin... Joe Strummer being dead would be a far more valid example..