Kenny Carter Dvd.

[The White Knight]

No one is saying he wasnt a good rider. But in that era where would he rank - just inside thr top 50 riders of the decade?

In comparison, I suspect harris would be top 30 riders of the first decade of the 2000s

And I suspect that Davey would possibly be top 30 these days too. As I said - there simply isn't the Competition around these days.

 

I would grant you that Riders, in general, are more professional these days - though Ivan Mauger might argue with that. But I still believe that most of the top Riders were better then. As I have said before we can't win an argument at International level these days, back in the 'Seventies' it was a different matter. You actually had Riders fighting for places in the Team. Nowadays they largely pick themselves, because - the sad fact of life is - there is nobody else.

 

Finally, there were a good few Riders around who were not International regulars in those days, but were of International class, and were not automatic 'picks'. Nobody like that around now.

[waiheke1]

Twk - your argument seems to be based on tbe standard of british riders and riders in uk. I would agree it is considerably weaker.

But denmark, poland, russia and Australia are all considerably stronger. I disagree that at a global level speedway is weaker gban previously.

By my ranking system, freddie lindgren was 30th best rider in the world in 2014. Was davey as good as lindgren? Personally I don't believe so.

as an example twk: mjj kenny bjerre hans andersen pawlicki brothers gollob zmarzlick are all riders who are not automatic picks for their nations. You cant tell me they are not international class?

[The White Knight]

Twk - your argument seems to be based on tbe standard of british riders and riders in uk. I would agree it is considerably weaker.

But denmark, poland, russia and Australia are all considerably stronger. I disagree that at a global level speedway is weaker gban previously.

By my ranking system, freddie lindgren was 30th best rider in the world in 2014. Was davey as good as lindgren? Personally I don't believe so.

as an example twk: mjj kenny bjerre hans andersen pawlicki brothers gollob zmarzlick are all riders who are not automatic picks for their nations. You cant tell me they are not international class?

I am not saying they are not. What I am saying, and yes I am talking British League here that the British League of the Seventies was way stronger than the Elite League, both in British Riders and International Riders. You could make two reasonably decent seven man British Teams out of the Riders who were eligible to Ride for Great Britain both of which would give a good account of themselves (they may not both win, but they would put on a good display) - we cannot even make one decent four man Team that can be competitive in the SWC these days. On top of that - all of these British Riders were riding against the very top International Riders in the World every week in those days - not 'Doubling Up' Premier League Riders.

 

Yes - I am discussing Britain because that is largely the way the Discussion is going. The comparative state of British Speedway in the Seventies and today.

Edited December 28, 2014 by The White Knight

[waiheke1]

Ok but you stated that davey would be 30th in the world today because the standard is lower. That implies you are talking global standard.

Everyone agrees that british standards are lower now than in the 70s (comparable to world standards).

[BWitcher]

Alright people... just had some weird message, causing me to interrupt my Christmas... someone on here saying that Chris Harris is a better rider than Tony Davey.

 

Come on guys... let's be serious. I know it's the time for fancy jumpers, those Santa hats... it's all a laugh.

 

But.. and I know it was tongue in cheek... Harris better than Davey?

 

It's like saying.. New Year is better than Christmas. The current Band Aid is better than the 1984 version...

 

Carry on....

 

But I'm being kept informed.

 

Ah here comes another deluded one.

Far better Riders then, in general, then though. That is indisputable.

 

You had to be really good to shine in those days. Much easier to shine these days as there is not much competition.

 

No you didn't have to be really good to shine.

 

That has already been proven.

 

An average rider would look like a star in those days, whereas now, even in the weaker set up off the EL, an average rider looks barely average.

 

What has also been proven is that although there were more TOP level riders in the British League in the 70's, due to the format it is actually FAR harder now to obtain a high average than it was back then.

 

The fast track system has muddied the waters somewhat, but prior to that, reserves in the modern EL are of a higher level than in the 70's.

 

On a worldwide basis, the overall standard of rider is higher now than it was in the 70's,

Edited December 29, 2014 by BWitcher

[stratton]

Ah here comes another deluded one.

 

 

No you didn't have to be really good to shine.

 

That has already been proven.

 

An average rider would look like a star in those days, whereas now, even in the weaker set up off the EL, an average rider looks barely average.

 

What has also been proven is that although there were more TOP level riders in the British League in the 70's, due to the format it is actually FAR harder now to obtain a high average than it was back then.

 

The fast track system has muddied the waters somewhat, but prior to that, reserves in the modern EL are of a higher level than in the 70's.

 

On a worldwide basis, the overall standard of rider is higher now than it was in the 70's,

Not in the EL they ain't , !

[customhouseregular]

Today's machinery is of a higher standard, as is technical back-up, track preparation and fitness levels. Previous generation riders competed with what they had then, today's riders compete with what they have now. Today's riders have an advantage which lifts the overall standard but if riders from the 60's/70's had the same advantage, their standard would have been higher.

[BWitcher]

Today's machinery is of a higher standard, as is technical back-up, track preparation and fitness levels. Previous generation riders competed with what they had then, today's riders compete with what they have now. Today's riders have an advantage which lifts the overall standard but if riders from the 60's/70's had the same advantage, their standard would have been higher.

 

No, that wouldn't be the case at all.

 

There are countless examples across all sports of athletes/competitors who have a lot of talent, but lack the dedication that is required to succeed in their given sport. Had they been around in an era of 20-30 years ago, they would have been fine.

 

By the same token there will be competitors from bygone eras who simply wouldn't have been able to adapt.. others such as Mauger most certainly would.

 

Besides, your argument defeats itself in that the level of professionalism WAS there in the 70's, but only from a select few of the riders. Now that level is far more widespread.

Not in the EL they ain't , !

 

There are less of the worlds elite riders riding in the EL, but the 'standard' is an ambiguous term.

 

The reality is, the 'standard' of riders in the EL, head to head with those in the BL of the 70's is far higher.

 

The 'standard' compared to other riders of their era is lower.

Edited December 29, 2014 by BWitcher

[stratton]

No, No,No, i went to Hyde Rd and The Shay in the 80s Courtney,Mckinna,Holloway,Glanz also at The Shay Hunter,Willmott,Holloway,Glanz heat 2 races two races often you might of scored zilch and were on your way home.You have a rethink and then get back to me .

[waiheke1]

Bwitcher already acknowledged that ftr reserves may be weaker than their predecessors.

fwiw, glanz was rubbish round hyde rd.

courtney hunter and willmott spent very little time at reserve as they quickly gained/regained second string status. And courtney was part of the strongest (in depth) aces side of that era. You could have named instead crang ayres whittaker graves and it doesnt look so strong.

[Gavan]

Are you being a twit or not? Not a fool and ask Davey fans family and sponsors Ipswich fans whether he was a mug or not,remember what BERRY said he knows more in his left hand than you will ever know.So Iris get off your high horse have a think and maybe you might come up with something i doubt it !!

Im an Ipswich fan and Davey was a greta rider hampered by injury.

 

he wasnt as good as Chris Harris has been though

[E I Addio]

Today's machinery is of a higher standard, as is technical back-up, track preparation and fitness levels. Previous generation riders competed with what they had then, today's riders compete with what they have now. Today's riders have an advantage which lifts the overall standard but if riders from the 60's/70's had the same advantage, their standard would have been higher.

Track preparation is not better today. Apart from the fact that it was not as critical then as it is with modern machinery, the quality lol shale was much better then, but so many of the pits producing good shale have closed over the years. Decent shale is very hard to come by today a nd very expensive. Modern bikes also churn the trades up much more which adds to the problem of decent track preparation.

[Gavan]

No one is saying he wasnt a good rider. But in that era where would he rank - just inside thr top 50 riders of the decade?

In comparison, I suspect harris would be top 30 riders of the first decade of the 2000s

absolutly spot on.

 

Davey was good but hasnt achieved anywhere near the level Harris has done. Maybe without injury he might of.

 

Im an Ipswich fan and also a speedway fan im not deluded about my own riders.

 

I listen to talksport and im sure Adrian Durham is on there to argue things to get more listeners and im thinking certain people on here are continually on the wind up with their comments......starman.........sidney

[moxey63]

Isn't the fact that many are answering the question posed, Davey vs Harris, draws some confusion about a rider (Davey) who was around 40 years ago, had his career ravaged by injury and didn't even make number one in his team, never mind regularly the top 40 of the national averages... how some people are arguing, that Mr Harris is actually better and has achieved more.

 

The answer is simple: Davey had a lot more reputable names to fend off to get to number one, in days making a British Final was actually as difficult as actually lifting the title nowadays. Scott Nicholls is good... but half-a-dozen times as good as, say, Peter Collins (who won the British crown once).

[iris123]

Scott Nicholls is good... but half-a-dozen times as good as, say, Peter Collins (who won the British crown once).

Your skewed way of looking at things is showing you up.If we(sensible people) judge PC and Nicholls careers we would not just use British Final performances.It would help your argument if you kept it real.If you judge a rider you use his career as a whole.I won't say Nicholls is a better rider than most english riders of the 70s because he has won the Czech Golden helmet and they didn't because that would be a rather childish way to look at things.Similar to your way in fact

Edited December 29, 2014 by iris123

[moxey63]

Your skewed way of looking at things is showing you up.If we(sensible people) judge PC and Nicholls careers we would not just use British Final performances.It would help your argument if you kept it real.If you judge a rider you use his career as a whole.I won't say Nicholls is a better rider than most english riders of the 70s because he has won the Czech Golden helmet and they didn't because that would be a rather childish way to look at things.Similar to your way in fact

 

That's alright. I am used to being shown up. The end of the day, there's is no answer to the question - Davey v Harris - and your need to post over 15,000 times on various topics, surely by now, tells you it's all about opinions.

 

I saw Mr Davey at his peak... and have witnessed Mr Harris.

 

I know who I class as the better rider, based on who they were up against at the time and what obstacles - opponents and injury-wise - lay before them.

 

Please, there is no need to answer.. as there is no answer.

 

Happy New Year!

[waiheke1]

Isn't the fact that many are answering the question posed, Davey vs Harris, draws some confusion about a rider (Davey) who was around 40 years ago, had his career ravaged by injury and didn't even make number one in his team, never mind regularly the top 40 of the national averages... how some people are arguing, that Mr Harris is actually better and has achieved more.

 

The answer is simple: Davey had a lot more reputable names to fend off to get to number one, in days making a British Final was actually as difficult as actually lifting the title nowadays. Scott Nicholls is good... but half-a-dozen times as good as, say, Peter Collins (who won the British crown once).

but noone is using the british final to argue why harris is better thsn davey. The key reasons are that harris has won a gp, finished 5th in the world, and regularly qualified for gp series. None of those are due to britain being weaker now thsn thrn.

fwiw, id rank both nicholls and harris below the likes of morton,louis, jessup etc. But ahead of davey who I would rank similarly to the likes of phil collins and thr grahame brothers.

[The White Knight]

 

No, that wouldn't be the case at all.

 

There are countless examples across all sports of athletes/competitors who have a lot of talent, but lack the dedication that is required to succeed in their given sport. Had they been around in an era of 20-30 years ago, they would have been fine.

 

By the same token there will be competitors from bygone eras who simply wouldn't have been able to adapt.. others such as Mauger most certainly would.

 

Besides, your argument defeats itself in that the level of professionalism WAS there in the 70's, but only from a select few of the riders. Now that level is far more widespread.

 

There are less of the worlds elite riders riding in the EL, but the 'standard' is an ambiguous term.

 

The reality is, the 'standard' of riders in the EL, head to head with those in the BL of the 70's is far higher.

 

The 'standard' compared to other riders of their era is lower.

I can't agree as a lot of the Riders that you are talking about are 'doubling up' Premier League Riders. Jason Doyle reached Number One for his Premier League Club and was able to do exactly the same for his ELITE League Club.

 

You/He could not have done that in the 'Seventies'.

[waiheke1]

Bwitcher is talking about absolute standards here, not relative standards. Relative to world standards you are correct, but you are missing his point.

 

Just as in relative terms the 70 Brazil footbsll team is the greatest of all time, but would be played off the park by an average 2014 premier league side.

 

id also add that doyle was in the top 15 riders in the world last year. A top 15 rider in the 70s would have ridden only bl, but had they ridden in the national league also would have likrly been number one for both teams.

Edited December 29, 2014 by waihekeaces1

[BWitcher]

It should also be remembered, bikes are a lot harder to ride these days and it takes more skill to become a decent rider.

 

This alone would have scuppered the hopes of a number of riders in the 70's... but again, the best would have adapted.