Are Bjerre And Lindgren Gp Careers In The Balance?

[waiheke1]

I actually agree with Sidney on this one , at least as a valid point of discussion. Both are in the top 15 riders in the world, Bjerre has finished just the right side of the top8 the last three seasons, and Freddie just the wrong side, both have been competitive without threatening to finish any higher than mid-table. And I suggest most on here would pick them to finish between 7th-12^th this season (basically in line with their NZ GP showing, Bjerre’s engine problems not withstanding).

 

Let's face it, in any era there are going to be riders who are good enough to finish 6th-10th season on season, capable of winning the odd GP or at least making a few podium appearances, but not quite good enough for whatever reason to mount a serious push for top3 over a season. There's no disgrace in that, it's just the way it is - for example in the 80s fine riders such as Morton, Andersson, Schwartz and Doncaster would probably fall into that category. At the current time, I would suggest Bjerre and Lindgren are perfect examples of this.

 

So, if such riders should finish 9th/10^th this year, should they be replaced? Surely it depends on the quality of the alternatives from outside the series.

Looking at the current line up, Ward and G Laguta could/should come in next year (for Ljung and the other bottom rider) and definitely strengthen the series. Woffinden for Harris would look a likely swap also. Which would leave 4 of the current GP series finishing 9th-12th (likely, IMHO and at this early stage to include both Bjerre and Lindgren).

So, who could replace them? Maybe the likes of Janowski, THJ, Batchelor, Schlein etc.? But they would have to show over the course of this season that they are at least close to the level of Lindgren/Bjerre, and have greater potential to challenge for a rostrum spot within a couple of seasons. And a lot also depends on who the three riders making it through the GP challenge are (i.e whether Ward/Laguta/Woffinden require wildcard slots) and whether any of the top riders in the current series miss out on top 8 due to injury.

 

It’s also worth considering that they are only 28 and 26 respectively, so potentially have another 15 years of top flight speedway to go – so far too early to start writing them off, even though I personally can’t cannot see them winning world titles ahead of the younger crop of Holder, Emil and Darcy. That said, its worth noting that Hampel, who is 29, has only been a genuine contender for the last two seasons.

 

While Bjerre and Lindgren are borderline for top 8 they are definately in the top 16 GP riders so they have every right to be considered if they drop out of the 8. Should ALL riders be made to Qualify for the next seasons GP? that would solve all the problems.

How many times, the top8 DO qualify, via the difficult task of finishing in the top8, so too do three riders via the easier knock-out system. There are 4 places which are not "qualifying spots", most agree that this is too many, however the debate around why these spots exist has been done to death

What makes you think Janowski or Ward would do better than Bjerre; Kenneth is a proven world class rider.

Ward had a record in domestic leagues last year, a better per meeting record in GP events, and is five years younger.

Janowski is another matter, he'd be being picked largely on potettial rather than being better at the current time

Both Bjerre and Lindgren are good riders, and would figure in most people top 16. But the difference is that neither have shown, the desire, belief or the mentality to totally focus their aim on the SGP. Looking at them competing in these big events, i get the impression that they turn up and expect it to happen. Just look at what happened in New Zealand!!!

 

Thats the difference between, being 'Good' and 'World Class'

On what do you base this? Could it be that simply they are not quite as good? Based on domestic records in 2011, I'd rank them 12th (FL) and 15th (KB) in the world - so, actually they perfomred better in the GP (i.e. big) events.

I'm not sure what you are referring to as happening in NZ? Bjerre's engine failure and puncture?

[fatface]

Quite amazing when you consider that Gollob won his first world title at close to 40, some riders could go 20 years between an u-21 title and a senior title.

On one hand it is amazing. But on another it's not. If we take Ivan Mauger as an exception (and he was very exceptional) 40 odd year old speedway riders would have been long retired. I don't know what the exact reason is for increased longevity now. but it's a definite pattern.

 

Improved fitness? Better nutrition? Professional support teams? The bikes are less physically demanding to ride? All these are probably factors. What's certainly true is that for a professional speedway rider times have moved on a lot from driving across the UK and Europe in a Citroen CX relying on motorway service mush for your every meal.

 

If there has been no significant physical deterioration or weakening of their desire in Hancock, Gollob, Crump, then there's no reason why they can't still be the same brilliant riders today that they were 15 years ago. That makes it tough for the younger riders to break through as the elder statesman have the experience and - as they are established winners - the very best backers too. It doesn't mean it's impossible though. Chris Holder, Darcy Ward, Emil Sayfutdinov have all show glimpes and when they get more experience, there's no reason why they cannot be up there fighting too.

 

It's important to remember that speedway is not alone in elder competitors enjoying success well beyond what we previously though possible. Paul Scholes and Ryan Giggs are still cutting it at Premiership Football. The latter has been particularly sprightly in the last year or so! I also follow athletics and boxing quite closely - possibly the most physically demanding sports of all. The Klitchkos are both pushing (if not past) 40 and are still at the top of their game. In athletics, the winner of the women's Olympic marathon in Beijing was 38. Paula Radcliffe and Mara Yamauchi are our top marathon runners and both are 38/39. When Kelly Holmes won double Olympic gold, she was 34. That was in the middle distances - previously the preserve of the young. Ten years earlier, no-one would believe someone would be at their athletic peak at 34, but she was. This a sport where it's purely the body, not part body, part 500cc machine too.

 

I think what I am saying is that, yes 40 is a remarkable age to be World Speedway Champion. But what we previously thought impossible in sport is not anymore. Maybe 40 really is the new 30? Not sure if I am saying that for the purposes of the argument or to console my own ageing body

[Humphrey Appleby]

Improved fitness? Better nutrition? Professional support teams? The bikes are less physically demanding to ride?

 

I think all of these things are undoubtedly true, but I'm not sure that many people are less physically fit when they're 40 as compared to 30 if they make an effort to stay in shape. What tends to degrade are physical reactions and recovery time, and there frankly isn't a lot you can do about that except perhaps manage your workload.

 

I think the likes of Hancock and Gollob are apparently still competitive because the standard of younger riders coming through is not so high. I think a lot of older sportsmen choose to retire when either they can no longer recover sufficiently from injury, or because they realise they're simply no longer sufficiently competitive in comparison to the general level of competition. That obviously hasn't yet happened with either of those two, but whilst both are very good riders, I certainly wouldn't classify Hancock as being an exceptional talent.

 

It's important to remember that speedway is not alone in elder competitors enjoying success well beyond what we previously though possible. Paul Scholes and Ryan Giggs are still cutting it at Premiership Football.

 

They've still got a long way to go before they surpass Stanley Matthews who was still playing top flight football at the age of 50, and likes of Pat Jennings and Peter Shilton played well into their forties years ago. If it's outfield players we're considering, Gordon Strachan and Teddy Sheringham played into their forties.

 

However, the oldest top-flight competitor in any sport must surely be W.G Grace who finally retired from first class cricket at the age of 60 after a 44-year career, although in terms of top-flight success, surely Per Olov-Serenius must be one of the oldest world champions ever.

 

In athletics, the winner of the women's Olympic marathon in Beijing was 38. Paula Radcliffe and Mara Yamauchi are our top marathon runners and both are 38/39.

 

It's actually not surprising as there's significant evidence that endurance improves with age, which is why ultra-marathon runners tend to be older. In addition, a number of female long distance runners have claimed they improved after pregnancy.

Edited April 4, 2012 by Humphrey Appleby

[T.N.T.]

The best riders ahould be allowed to challenge for the World Title

 

 

Bjerre wasn't very good in NZ but qualified as #7 last season whiler Freddie was #9 ..... ahead of Nicki and in NZ at least Freddie made the semi finals despite letting a couple of points slip.

 

 

 

Both should be in there unless there are better riders out there ...... at present only Darcy Ward and Tai Woffinden are close and they both said No

[waiheke1]

I think all of these things are undoubtedly true, but I'm not sure that many people are less physically fit when they're 40 as compared to 30 if they make an effort to stay in shape. What tends to degrade are physical reactions and recovery time, and there frankly isn't a lot you can do about that except perhaps manage your workload.

I think the likes of Hancock and Gollob are apparently still competitive because the standard of younger riders coming through is not so high. I think a lot of older sportsmen choose to retire when either they can no longer recover sufficiently from injury, or because they realise they're simply no longer sufficiently competitive in comparison to the general level of competition. That obviously hasn't yet happened with either of those two, but whilst both are very good riders, I certainly wouldn't classify Hancock as being an exceptional talent.

They've still got a long way to go before they surpass Stanley Matthews who was still playing top flight football at the age of 50, and likes of Pat Jennings and Peter Shilton played well into their forties years ago. If it's outfield players we're considering, Gordon Strachan and Teddy Sheringham played into their forties.

I'd suggest that (unless you crash) speedway is perhaps less physically demanding than say a game of football, hence why riders can race serval times a week i.e recovery time is less. So, this may not be much of an issue even for older speedway riders

Also, i'd suggest that any slowing of reactions by the age of 40 can be compensated by the benefits of experience i.e. in not getting into situations where quick relfexes are needed to avoid injury. It's worth noting that goalkeeper is arguably the football postion where quick reflexes are mnost important, yet also the postion where players tend to reach their peak at a much later age, I'd suggest therefore that there's no reason why speedway riders can't ride as well or better at 40 as they did at 30. I'd be interetsed to know Humphrey if you do believe Hancock is a wose rider now than he was 10 years ago, and if so, on what basis?

I doubt we'll ever see footballers playing into their 50s like Mathews did though, the speed and intensity of the game is so much faster now than it was in his day.

[BigFatDave]

 

 

However, the oldest top-flight competitor in any sport must surely be W.G Grace who finally retired from first class cricket at the age of 60 after a 44-year career, although in terms of top-flight success, surely Per Olov-Serenius must be one of the oldest world champions ever.

 

 

Boxer Price played first grade Rugby for Penarth while in his sixties.

[Humphrey Appleby]

I'd be interetsed to know Humphrey if you do believe Hancock is a wose rider now than he was 10 years ago, and if so, on what basis?

 

Hancock is one of the few long-serving riders that I've been able to watch throughout his entire career, or at least since when he came over to ride for Cradley at a young age, and he's also ridden for my own team. However, it's a bit difficult to answer the question as I only see him ride in the SGP these days.

 

Nevertheless, I do think he's a rider who has improved greatly with age as I seem to remember him crashing a lot in the early years. From that he seemed to develop a style that tended to minimise risk, and whilst he looked comfortable if gating and getting in front early, I never felt was someone who'd go out and win a race to save your life. I think the fact that his world championships have come 14 years apart reflect that he's a very consistent rather than spectacular rider, but then again he's still riding after many others have fallen by the wayside.

 

His first world championship was arguably won in better company than his second (finishing ahead of both Nielsen and Rickardsson), but I think he probably is a better rider now than in 1997. I'm not sure if he's a better rider than say 10 years ago - I just think he's maintained a consistently high standard, which becomes more impressive the older he gets.

[Sprog1]

On one hand it is amazing. But on another it's not. If we take Ivan Mauger as an exception (and he was very exceptional) 40 odd year old speedway riders would have been long retired. I don't know what the exact reason is for increased longevity now. but it's a definite pattern.

 

I think what I am saying is that, yes 40 is a remarkable age to be World Speedway Champion. But what we previously thought impossible in sport is not anymore. Maybe 40 really is the new 30? Not sure if I am saying that for the purposes of the argument or to console my own ageing body

 

I don't think that's necessarily correct. The first post-war World Champion. Tommy Price was 37 when he won the title and runner-up Jack Parker was 42. The title was then won for the next 4 years by Freddie Williams and Jack young who were in their mid-twenties. It was then dominated by Moore, Fundin Briggs and Craven who were all around 21 or 22 when they first won but such was their talent that for 14 years, there was nobody to touch them except Bjorn Knutsson, although in 1957-1959 Aub Lawson had a remarkable run of 4th, 3rd and 5th between the ages of 43 and 45. It is not that there was a lack of talent coming through in this period because one of the younger riders unable to break the Moore/Fundin/Briggs/Craven grip on the title was Ivan Mauger who didn't take his first title until he was nearly 29 (ie older than Bjerre or Lindgren are now) and Fundin and Briggs were well into there thirties (around Crump Pedersens age now).

From the mid -1950's to the about the mid-to late 1970's the average age of world champions increased as Fundin, Mauger etc grew older. It then dropped again through most of the 1980's and has tended to increase again during the GP era.

 

I think the only lesson one can really draw is that world titles are more to do with talent than age although other factors come into it, The big change that has come about since the 1970's is that modern speedway is very much about tuners and set-ups whereas Ivan Mauger for example has said the in his day the six fastest bikes in a WF were all as fast as each other so there was more emphasis on rider skill then set-ups.I don't think this necessarily demeans the modern stars because it takes a lot of skill to be able to jump off a bike and tell a mechanic exactly what changes need to be made for the next race. That is an aspect at which Gollob for example seems to excel at but the more erratic Bjerre and Lindgren seem to struggle with at present.

 

So in summary I would suggest that age as opposed to talent is not a particularly important factor (subject to injury) but mechanical skill ie set-ups ets do give a slight advantage to the more experienced and therefore older riders. I think Bjerre and Lindgren are still learning their trade at world level but they deserve to be were they are. I can't see either of them becoming World Champion, especially with the likes of Emil and Noddy breathing down their necks but it is too early to say with any certainty. They both still have potential and I would keep them in. Bomber has had enough chances though and Tai, at the moment should only go in if he qualifies on merit.

[T.N.T.]

With the quality of riders around today, I feel that the Top 10 should qualify automatically and the other five get seeded into the GP Challenge final to face the 11 Qualifiers ...... the top 4 then qualify from that meeting and the one remaining place goes to a Wild Card

[Vince]

People are claiming there is less talent around than in the past, I really believe the opposite to be true and think there is a huge depth of talent out there. The gulf between the top few and the rest is so wide because over a GP series experience of tracks and set up's is far more important than for a one off final. Same reason older riders are at the forefront I believe, after all it would be quite possible for Sayfutdinov or Lindback for example to pull of a win at a winner takes all World Final.

If there is lack of ability spread through the ranks how is it possible for a sub 5 point PL rider to be all but on the pace at a GP? I don't believe it's because the GP riders are less talented than their forebears rather that the standard in modern Speedway is extremely high throughout the leagues. The likes of Briggs and Mauger would be at the top in any era but I honestly believe that if you take a step back to the 'average' rider the standard today is vastly improved

Edited April 6, 2012 by Vince

[Humphrey Appleby]

People are claiming there is less talent around than in the past, I really believe the opposite to be true and think there is a huge depth of talent out there.

 

To be honest, I'd struggle to believe that. In the 1980s you had the likes of Hans Nielsen, Erik Gundersen, Per Jonsson, Jan O. Pedersen, Tommy Knudsen, Sam Ermolenko, Jan Andersson, and Jimmy Nilsen and Kelvin Tatum were no slouches either. Then along came Tony Rickardsson, Billy Hamill, Greg Hancock, Tomasz Gollob in the early 1990s amongst others.

 

Going back to the 1970s and umpteen excellent riders featured in the World Finals, including Mauger, Olsen, Collins (Peter), Lee, Simmons, Louis (John), Michanek, Sanders, Crump (Phil) and I'm sure many others.

[stevebrum]

Freddie needs to step up to the plate this year or else his place could be in jeopardy.

In fairness in the last 2 seasons he has spent a chunk in the top 8 so its unfair to say he isnt GP standard.

This year tho he really has to qualify of right i reckon to be sure.

That said i dont see many better Swedes that would get a pick ahead of him.

[waiheke1]

To be honest, I'd struggle to believe that. In the 1980s you had the likes of Hans Nielsen, Erik Gundersen, Per Jonsson, Jan O. Pedersen, Tommy Knudsen, Sam Ermolenko, Jan Andersson, and Jimmy Nilsen and Kelvin Tatum were no slouches either. Then along came Tony Rickardsson, Billy Hamill, Greg Hancock, Tomasz Gollob in the early 1990s amongst others.

 

Going back to the 1970s and umpteen excellent riders featured in the World Finals, including Mauger, Olsen, Collins (Peter), Lee, Simmons, Louis (John), Michanek, Sanders, Crump (Phil) and I'm sure many others.

 

Lets compare today's GP line up with the World Final line ups in 89/90.

 

 

1.Hans

Nielsen

2.Simon

Wigg

3.Jeremy

Doncaster

4.Erik

Gundersen

5.Kelvin

Tatum

6.Mitch

Shirra

7.Andy

Smith

8.Tony

Olsson

9.Gerd

Riss

10.Roman

Matousek

11.Karl

Maier

12.Troy

Butler

13.Olli

Tyrväinen

14.Ronnie

Correy

15.Zoltan

Adorjan

16.Bohumil

Brhel

 

 

 

1.Per Jonsson S

Shawn Moran

3.Todd Wiltshire

4.Hans Nielsen

5.Jimmy Nilsen

6.Henrik Gustafsson

7.Kelvin Tatum

8.Armando Castagna

9.Rick Miller

10.Richard Knight

11.Martin Dugard

12.Roman Matousek

13.Zdenek Tesar

14.Ronnie Correy

15.Antonin Kasper

16.Zoltan Adorjan

 

 

Now, there is no doubt in my mind that the current GP field is much stronger than either of those, though I do appreciate that owes a lot to the vagaries of the qualifying system in those days...

 

but the 2000s did see the emergence of Nicki Pedersen, Emil, Hampel etc. and 2010s we are seeing the likes of Ward and Holder.

 

And while the 90s saw riders like Ermolenko, Pedersen and Havelock win world titles - had the sport not lost prematurely three of the genuine greats of the 80s in Penhall, Lee and Gundersen, we may very well have viewed the late 80s early 90s as a period where no riders emerged to challenge these three (plus Nielsen) - just as we have seen a period where no riders have been able to challenge the Gollob/Crump/Pedersen/Hancock strangle hold - a period which I believe is coming to an end, with the likes of Hampel, Emil and Ward strong contenders to dominate the next few years.

[Humphrey Appleby]

Lets compare today's GP line up with the World Final line ups in 89/90.

 

1989 is not a good year to compare anything with because there were a lot of injuries that robbed the World Final of the best riders. From memory, Sam Ermolenko, Jan O. Pedersen and Per Jonsson (and maybe Jimmy Nilsen as well) got injured during the season, and Tommy Knudsen was injured prior to the start of it. They were all top riders capable of winning the World Championship.

 

Wigg, Donkey and Tatum were probably also at the top of their form in 1989, and Shirra and Smith were no numpties at that time either.

 

It's debatable whether the 1990 World Final line-up was stronger or weaker. There was maybe only two out-and-out world champions in the line-up, but much of the rest of the field was solid riders, most of whom were already or became No.1 riders in teams. Todd Wiltshire and Henka Gustafsson had also just hit the scene and I'd suggest both at the time were better than Ljung and Bjerre...

Edited April 11, 2012 by Humphrey Appleby

[stratton]

I think from 1988 till about 2000? the level was poorer, now it has got stronger i am not sure about strength in depth wise?Who replaces the old guard in the future are the numbers there.I think from 1963 till 1988 it was the strongest its ever been i dont know how strong it was before Cravens death.Like i said the series is strong(often with the same old faces) but riders coming through i dont see lots banging the door down.

[PHILIPRISING]

HOPEFULLY a new batch of young riders will be ready to step up to the plate sooner rather than later... Ward, Woffinden, both Pawlicki brothers, Sundstrom, Jepsen Jensen and a number of young Aussies to name but a few.

 

There does also appear to be some genuine efforts, belated though they may be, coming from the FIM to help new talent but, of course, there is never any guarantee that another Hancock, Gollob, Crump or indeed Nielsen and Rickardsson will emerge. If only ...

[Humphrey Appleby]

There does also appear to be some genuine efforts, belated though they may be, coming from the FIM to help new talent but, of course, there is never any guarantee that another Hancock, Gollob, Crump or indeed Nielsen and Rickardsson will emerge. If only ...

 

It's a matter of putting enough resources in the right place, and in the case of speedway, ensuring there are sufficient incentives to attract a broad base of riders in the first place. If you don't, prospective Nielsens and Rickardssons may likely be lost to other motor sports, or even other sports entirely.

 

One problem is that the top of the speedway pyramid is quite small these days. I accept the nature of the sport means that you can realistically only have 16 riders in the SGP, but fewer riders are riding in top level competitions as well, and ultimately that reduces the possibility of exceptional riders coming through.

 

There probably needs to be more lower-level competition to attract the riders in the first place, and more incentives for professional tracks to support and bring through promising riders.

[waiheke1]

1989 is not a good year to compare anything with because there were a lot of injuries that robbed the World Final of the best riders. From memory, Sam Ermolenko, Jan O. Pedersen and Per Jonsson (and maybe Jimmy Nilsen as well) got injured during the season, and Tommy Knudsen was injured prior to the start of it. They were all top riders capable of winning the World Championship.

 

Wigg, Donkey and Tatum were probably also at the top of their form in 1989, and Shirra and Smith were no numpties at that time either.

 

It's debatable whether the 1990 World Final line-up was stronger or weaker. There was maybe only two out-and-out world champions in the line-up, but much of the rest of the field was solid riders, most of whom were already or became No.1 riders in teams. Todd Wiltshire and Henka Gustafsson had also just hit the scene and I'd suggest both at the time were better than Ljung and Bjerre...

and you could add Shaun Moran to that list of 1989 riders as well. However, look at today - under a one-off sytem, there'd be at least 9 riders with a genuine chance of being world champion (Gollob, Hancock, ward, Emil, Jonsson, holder, Hampel, Crump, Pedersen), as well as others capable of making the rostrum depnding on venue (Lindgren, Lindback, Laguta, Bjere even Harris).

I'd agree there is perhaps no-one currently riding at the standard of an 89 Gundersen/Nielsen, however think the rest of the field would be comparable.

 

I'd also suggest the likes of Butler, Adjoran, Tesar etc. were far worse than anyone in the current series (even Ljung).

 

One way of increasing depth - if there is a current lack- may be to bring back old full team test matches - I realise squeezing these into the calendar may be impossible) - that gave exposure to top class racing to riders not yet quite good enough to make the WTC/WC teams - England particularly benefitted, but so too did the Danes and Americans.

[dabbsjoe]

For me the same applies to Freddie Lindgren as it does for Chris Harris, until they learn to gate better and consistently they'll never achieve anything on the world stage.

 

As for Bjerre i can't really say as i don't go out of my way to watch him but i've seen his performances in the last few seasons in the Elite League Play Offs which weren't great

[waiheke1]

ok, admittedly its still early stages, but at this point its quite possible that Lingren and Bjerre will miss out on GPs next year.

The three Danes Bjerre, Andersen and B Pedersen are all struggling, and if there is to be a Danish WC next year, you'd have to think that if he can continue his current form NKI would be in with a strong chance of getting it ahead of Bjerre (can't see B Pedersen or Andersen being offered a WC for next year).

The three swedes Jonsson, Lindback and Lindgren are all hovering around the top 8, I can see one qualifying, one getting a WC, and one missing out. At this point in time, I'd tip Jonsson to make the top 8, Lindback to finish 9th and get the WC, leaving Lindgren to miss out.

no watch bjerre and/or lindgren make a fool out of me this weekend...