Greg Hancock

[SCB]

agree with your point SCB, but your opening statement isn't correct.

For a start, there weren't any truly decent you ng Aussies in the 80s. Baker, Regeling,Davies were probably the pick of the bunch, and they averaged around 4-5 in their first seasons (would have to look at what Wiltshire averaged in his first season at the tail end of the decase he may have met your criteria).

Which is 4 or 5 more than any Aussie or American gets these days! The last 4 Americans to go straight into the EL, Carrilo, Yarrow, Burmeister and Wells all averaged between 1.5 and 2.5! The last Aussies to go straight into the EL were Travis McGowan, Kevin Doolan and Jason Hawkes in 1999 and they averaged about 3.7, 2.5 and 4. The fact most of them can't hit 5 in the PL these days in season suggests that 5 in the EL is a dream some years off!

 

Although I never centred in this discussion on averages - there's too many differences between the eras.

Thats exactly what it is. The claim was that Mauger in 1980 would have only been a 7 point man using todays format. That was disputed.

[Guest]

no offence, but if Jason bunyan is a top rider, larry ross at 54 isn't overly impressive......NZ speedway holds 3rd most

world titles, such a shame for their decline over the yrs

 

Car racing has taken over in New Zealand and also dominates the small oval scene in other once solo speedway hotbeds like USA, Australia, South Africa and Holland.

[lucifer sam]

 

 

Thats exactly what it is. The claim was that Mauger in 1980 would have only been a 7 point man using todays format. That was disputed.

 

 

Had today's format been used in 1980, then yes Mauger would have been on a 7-8 point average that year.

 

But that wasn't the argument. I argued against the fact that the Mauger of 1980 would have been "a mediocre rider" in the 2015 Elite League. That's a flight in fancy in anyone's book. Look back at any video of Mauger, the bloke has brilliant trackcraft (and I mean brilliant). Transport the 40-year-old Mauger of 1980 in a time machine to 2015 and he'd eat the likes of Troy Batchelor for breakfast.

 

In fact, I'd say that he finished fourth in the league averages, behind Darcy, Magic and NKI. Would sort of average would that have given him?

 

All the best

Rob

[waiheke1]

 

I'm still going for Juicey Brucey.

 

Only nine riders have won back-to-back titles... it's extremely hard to do.

 

But yes it's tricky when it's not comparing like with like.

 

All the best

Rob

 

If I'm assessing all time greats, I'd have Penhall in my top ten but not Hancock.

If I'm naming greatest ever American, I'd consider choosing Hanock over Penhall.

Certainly valid arguments either way, similar to if you were arguing between PC, PC or Woffy as greatest ever Brit.

 

Had today's format been used in 1980, then yes Mauger would have been on a 7-8 point average that year.

 

But that wasn't the argument. I argued against the fact that the Mauger of 1980 would have been "a mediocre rider" in the 2015 Elite League. But noone argued that point in the first place!

That's a flight in fancy in anyone's book. Look back at any video of Mauger, the bloke has brilliant trackcraft (and I mean brilliant). Transport the 40-year-old Mauger of 1980 in a time machine to 2015 and he'd eat the likes of Troy Batchelor for breakfast.

 

In fact, I'd say that he finished fourth in the league averages, behind Darcy, Magic and NKI. Would sort of average would that have given him? Surely behind Doyle as well, given that Doyle averaged more than Magic or Puk? But I'd agree he would have sat probably 5th, and on an 8-8.5 average.

 

All the best

Rob

[SCB]

 

Had today's format been used in 1980, then yes Mauger would have been on a 7-8 point average that year.

 

But that wasn't the argument. I argued against the fact that the Mauger of 1980 would have been "a mediocre rider" in the 2015 Elite League. That's a flight in fancy in anyone's book. Look back at any video of Mauger, the bloke has brilliant trackcraft (and I mean brilliant). Transport the 40-year-old Mauger of 1980 in a time machine to 2015 and he'd eat the likes of Troy Batchelor for breakfast.

 

In fact, I'd say that he finished fourth in the league averages, behind Darcy, Magic and NKI. Would sort of average would that have given him?

 

All the best

Rob

No, you disputed BWitchers claim that with todays format, Ivan would have been a 7 pointer.

 

He couldn't have finished 4th to them guys, as Doyle was higher so he's have finished 5th if he was behind NK, Magic and Ward! But that would have meant he averaged anything from AJs 7.84 to Wards 8.77 (weirdly nobody averaged anything between them, nearly a points difference. So he could well have been in the 7s today

Edited November 3, 2015 by SCB

[BWitcher]

 

Had today's format been used in 1980, then yes Mauger would have been on a 7-8 point average that year.

 

But that wasn't the argument. I argued against the fact that the Mauger of 1980 would have been "a mediocre rider" in the 2015 Elite League. That's a flight in fancy in anyone's book. Look back at any video of Mauger, the bloke has brilliant trackcraft (and I mean brilliant). Transport the 40-year-old Mauger of 1980 in a time machine to 2015 and he'd eat the likes of Troy Batchelor for breakfast.

 

In fact, I'd say that he finished fourth in the league averages, behind Darcy, Magic and NKI. Would sort of average would that have given him?

 

All the best

Rob

 

I stated that 9pt men in 1980 would be 7pt men under the current format.

 

You won't find many 7pt men being viewed as world class riders. Sometimes they can produce, but on a consistent basis the true world class riders are better.

 

Exactly how it was in 1980, except 9-9.5 men are consistently included in lists as being great riders, the reality was they weren't, they were well below the true top men who were 10.5 to 11 in those days.

 

The format makes a massive difference in how good you perceive a rider to be, especially when one rider spent an entire career in one format.. compared to another guy who spent most of his career in another.

 

This is quite easily proven, one only has to look at what happened when the big leagues were in operation in 95 & 96... you had 6pt men become 8.5pt heat leaders.. Had they spent their whole career riding in such a format they'd be viewed as much higher standard riders..

[lucifer sam]

Nope I said:

 

 

You're saying the likes of Mauger and Olsen would only be mediocre riders in the current Elite League?

 

 

All the best

Rob

 

Around 5th in the EL averages on 8.00-8.50 (we all seem to agree he'd be in this ballpark) is quite a way above 7.00 and hardly "mediocre" ... and mediocre was the word that BWitcher did use for the 1980 9-point men (Mauger was 8.79 that year).

 

All the best

Rob

Edited November 4, 2015 by lucifer sam

[BWitcher]

 

Had today's format been used in 1980, then yes Mauger would have been on a 7-8 point average that year.

 

But that wasn't the argument. I argued against the fact that the Mauger of 1980 would have been "a mediocre rider" in the 2015 Elite League. That's a flight in fancy in anyone's book. Look back at any video of Mauger, the bloke has brilliant trackcraft (and I mean brilliant). Transport the 40-year-old Mauger of 1980 in a time machine to 2015 and he'd eat the likes of Troy Batchelor for breakfast.

 

In fact, I'd say that he finished fourth in the league averages, behind Darcy, Magic and NKI. Would sort of average would that have given him?

 

All the best

Rob

 

You were the only one who ever mentioned Mauger.. using him to obviously try and prove a flawed point.

 

All I ever said was 9pt riders in 1980 would be 7pt men under the current format. You disputed that... now you're agreeing with it.

 

So it seems you've been arguing over something you created yourself...

Edited November 3, 2015 by BWitcher

[lucifer sam]

 

You were the only one who ever mentioned Mauger.. using him to obviously try and prove a flawed point.

 

All I ever said was 9pt riders in 1980 would be 7pt men under the current format. You disputed that... now you're agreeing with it.

 

So it seems you've been arguing over something you created yourself...

 

No, I only disputed your description of the 9-point-men in 1980 as "mediocre", and then pointed out that Mauger (8.79) was amongst the riders around the 9.00 mark.

 

Stop changing the discussion halfway through, because you've started to talk yourself down a cul-de-sac.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited November 4, 2015 by lucifer sam

[BWitcher]

 

No, I only disputed your description of the 9-point-men in 1980 as "mediocre", and then pointed out that Mauger (8.79) was amongst the riders around the 9.00 mark.

 

Stop changing the discussion halfway through, because you've started to talk yourself down a cul-de-sac.

 

All the best

Rob

 

You still clearly don't grasp it, it's not a difficult concept.

 

I haven't changed anything at all.

 

I stated that 9pt men under the 1980 format would be 7pt men now and IF they had spent their career riding under the current format as 7pt men they would NOT ever be classed as top riders, which many of them are listed as.

 

That is stone cold fact no matter how you want to twist it.

 

Mauger in 1980 was NOT a world class rider. He averaged 8.79, he was in decline and not great. Still a decent rider, but not a world class rider.

 

 

 

You only think they were all stars because of the format you saw them race in. That's all.

 

Throw them into a format such as the Polish or Swedish League or even more so, stick them in an EL format and 50% of those 9pt men you thought were 'stars' become 7pt men and you think they're mediocre.

 

There is what I said.

 

No mention of 'Olsen' or 'Mauger' or the current EL league.

 

Those are all fabrications of yours to try and back up your flawed argument.

 

Once again I will try and explain it to you.

 

Rider A..

 

Spends 10 years riding in the format of the 70's, early 80's. Averages between 8.50 and 9.50 in that period.

 

Rider B.

 

Spends 10 years riding in the current EL format (NOT current EL, but format), or 10 years in Polish League. Averages between 6.50 and 7.50.

 

 

The riders are likely very very similar in their world standing but I can guarantee you, Rider A will constantly appear on 'top class rider' lists.. Rider B will not.

 

That is the difference a format can make.

[waiheke1]

 

 

 

Throw them into a format such as the Polish or Swedish League or even more so, stick them in an EL format and 50% of those 9pt men you thought were 'stars' become 7pt men and you think they're mediocre.

 

was actually what he said. He didn't say they would be mediocre. He's saying the perception of them would be that they were medicocre.

Nore also that he said in an EL format not today's EL.

Apply the EL format to the old BL, and they would be 7 point riders. Of course Mauger you wouldn't think of as mediocre because of his world titles, but the likes of say the Grahame brothers who were perennial 8-9 point men at their peak would be regarded as medicore.

[BWitcher]

was actually what he said. He didn't say they would be mediocre. He's saying the perception of them would be that they were medicocre.

Nore also that he said in an EL format not today's EL.

Apply the EL format to the old BL, and they would be 7 point riders. Of course Mauger you wouldn't think of as mediocre because of his world titles, but the likes of say the Grahame brothers who were perennial 8-9 point men at their peak would be regarded as medicore.

100 percent spot on.

[waiheke1]

you can actually see the impac on averages t in 1985, when the BL shrunk from 16/17 teams to about 11, and a number of "heat leaders" significantly dropped their average - Andy Campbell, Mark Courtney, Andy Grahame, Peter Ravn off the top of my head. The top riders averages were largely unaffected (noting also that a number of those had lower than normal averages in 84 due to the tape touching rule), but the weaker HL certainly dropped, as in a condensed league they were now only second string standard.

Then more notably in 1988, when the heat 15 rule came in, almost instantly 8 pts became the new threshold for being a top rider (rather than 9), and i think only Hans averaged over 10.

[lucifer sam]

you can actually see the impac on averages t in 1985, when the BL shrunk from 16/17 teams to about 11, and a number of "heat leaders" significantly dropped their average - Andy Campbell, Mark Courtney, Andy Grahame, Peter Ravn off the top of my head. The top riders averages were largely unaffected (noting also that a number of those had lower than normal averages in 84 due to the tape touching rule), but the weaker HL certainly dropped, as in a condensed league they were now only second string standard.

Then more notably in 1988, when the heat 15 rule came in, almost instantly 8 pts became the new threshold for being a top rider (rather than 9), and i think only Hans averaged over 10.

 

Yes, I'd already mentioned the 1985 British (Super) League.

 

Again, look back, it was BWitcher who brought in averages, I believe he was recycling his argument from another thread and it wasn't entirely appropriate here when no-one had actually mentioned averages until he popped up with it.

 

My argument was the riders that Bwitcher said could be perceived as mediocre.

 

Let's look at the Grahame brothers. Andy Grahame won the British Final at a time that was mega-difficult to win and pushed Hans Nielsen for top spot at Birmingham in 1981 and 1982. While Alan Grahame was the rock of the so-successful Cradley Heathens. When the Heathens won the league in '81, their top scorer that season wasn't Penhall or Gundersen. It was Alan Grahame, who never missed a match.

 

There's nothing even slightly mediocre about those sort of riders. Nothing at all.

 

And yet I probably would call Troy Batchelor mediocre. His performance in the Swindon vs Belle Vue meeting was all the evidence you need.

 

Compare it with the photo of Big Al from 1980, plastered head-to-toe after giving his all to triumph in the Grand Prix Final at Wimbledon.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited November 4, 2015 by lucifer sam

[lucifer sam]

 

You still clearly don't grasp it, it's not a difficult concept.

 

I haven't changed anything at all.

 

I stated that 9pt men under the 1980 format would be 7pt men now and IF they had spent their career riding under the current format as 7pt men they would NOT ever be classed as top riders, which many of them are listed as.

 

That is stone cold fact no matter how you want to twist it.

 

Mauger in 1980 was NOT a world class rider. He averaged 8.79, he was in decline and not great. Still a decent rider, but not a world class rider.

 

There is what I said.

 

No mention of 'Olsen' or 'Mauger' or the current EL league.

 

Those are all fabrications of yours to try and back up your flawed argument.

 

Once again I will try and explain it to you.

 

Rider A..

 

Spends 10 years riding in the format of the 70's, early 80's. Averages between 8.50 and 9.50 in that period.

 

Rider B.

 

Spends 10 years riding in the current EL format (NOT current EL, but format), or 10 years in Polish League. Averages between 6.50 and 7.50.

 

 

The riders are likely very very similar in their world standing but I can guarantee you, Rider A will constantly appear on 'top class rider' lists.. Rider B will not.

 

That is the difference a format can make.

 

And what is the relevance of the above to this thread? Absolutely nothing.

 

You've come on here with your own pet subject that higher averages are harder to achieve in a more condescended league. Which I believe was on another thread, and indeed I backed up the point, from what I recall.

 

The way the discussion has been developing on this thread is whether the quantity and depth of world class riders has gone up or down or stayed the same since 1980.

 

All the best

Rob

 

PS And Mauger was still world class in 1980. He finished third in the Commonwealth Final... which might not sound much, but look at the line-up... he beat Michael Lee (World Champ that year), Peter Collins and Billy Sanders. He dragged Larry Ross along to fifth in the World Pairs (he scored the bulk of NZ's points in the comp, and his 17 points in the semi went a long way to eliminating the US pair of Penhall & Autrey). He wasn't the superlative Mauger of old, but once he got past of the worst of his health issues in the early part of the season, he still could still beat any rider in the world. It's an insult to say he simply "decent" by this time. He wasn't. He was still world class.

Edited November 4, 2015 by lucifer sam

[Ben91]

So, after the huge tangent, Penhall or Hancock?

 

Hancock for me, has been at the sharp end of the sport for the best part of three decades. That takes some doing and he doesn't look like he's going to stop any time soon. In my opinion it is harder to win a World Title in a GP series than in a one off meeting too, you have to be good across a whole season. Luck plays a huge part in individual meetings.

[BWitcher]

 

And what is the relevance of the above to this thread? Absolutely nothing.

 

You've come on here with your own pet subject that higher averages are harder to achieve in a more condescended league. Which I believe was on another thread, and indeed I backed up the point, from what I recall.

 

The way the discussion has been developing on this thread is whether the quantity and depth of world class riders has gone up or down or stayed the same since 1980.

 

All the best

Rob

 

PS And Mauger was still world class in 1980. He finished third in the Commonwealth Final... which might not sound much, but look at the line-up... he beat Michael Lee (World Champ that year), Peter Collins and Billy Sanders. He dragged Larry Ross along to fifth in the World Pairs (he scored the bulk of NZ's points in the comp, and his 17 points in the semi went a long way to eliminating the US pair of Penhall & Autrey). He wasn't the superlative Mauger of old, but once he got past of the worst of his health issues in the early part of the season, he still could still beat any rider in the world. It's an insult to say he simply "decent" by this time. He wasn't. He was still world class.

 

It is entirely relevant.

 

Riders are only as good as we perceive them to be.

 

The format in which we see them racing entirely dictates that.

 

Every single post you are making shows that to be true.

 

You've picked out the 'Commonwealth Final' again waxing lyrical about the line-up... yet much of that field are riders that are perceived to be better than they were purely because of the format.

 

Is Chris Harris a world class rider this year? He came 3rd in the GP Qualifier which was just as tough a line up. You won't 'perceive' it to have been because the riders involved don't all have 9pt averages.. why? Because of the format they were in.

 

If you're having Mauger as being World Class in 1980, then Harris is World Class in 2015. Seems you're setting a low bar.

[SCB]

So, after the huge tangent, Penhall or Hancock?

 

Hancock for me, has been at the sharp end of the sport for the best part of three decades. That takes some doing and he doesn't look like he's going to stop any time soon. In my opinion it is harder to win a World Title in a GP series than in a one off meeting too, you have to be good across a whole season. Luck plays a huge part in individual meetings.

But Penhall won 2 of 3 World finals. Does Hancock have a 66% sucess rate in the GPs?

 

I guess it comes down to what you consider best. Are we talking the best on the that one day when they rode the best they had ever raced? Their best season? Or streched over 5 years? Or a whole career?

 

For example, Danish GP last year. Batchelor was amazing. On that one meeting alone you've probably got one of the top 15 meetings ridden by anyone of all time. But over the season he was just ordinary and over a career a bit less than that.

 

 

Over their whole careers Penhall for me by a long way. I can't comment on based no best ever meeting but I've certainly seen Greg ride like a man possessed at times and look like he could ride 100 times and not be beaten (the last GP and the GP last year where Puk wiped him out) as for longevity, then Hancock surely goes down as best ever, he must have the longest time span between World Titles?

Edited November 4, 2015 by SCB

[BWitcher]

But Penhall won 2 or 3 World finals. Does Hancock have a 66% sucess rate in the GPs?

 

I guess it comes down to what you consider best. Are we talking the best on the that one day when they rode the best they had ever raced? Their best season? Or streched over 5 years? Or a whole career?

 

For example, Danish GP last year. Batchelor was amazing. On that one meeting alone you've probably got one of the top 15 meetings ridden by anyone of all time. But over the season he was just ordinary and over a career a bit less than that.

 

 

Over their whole careers Penhall for me by a long way. I can't comment on based no best ever meeting but I've certainly seen Greg ride like a man possessed at times and look like he could ride 100 times and not be beaten (the last GP and the GP last year where Puk wiped him out) as for longevity, then Hancock surely goes down as best ever, he must have the longest time span between World Titles?

 

Good points, but then did Penhall win all of his qualifying rounds?

 

Hard to compare GP's to a world final in that respect as its part of a longer competition. 3 World Finals is a very small sample to go off too, things have to fall your way.. and as we know they did fall Penhalls way. He could, if luck had gone the other way, had won neither of them.

 

That doesn't diminish his achievements or his ability.

[waiheke1]

 

It is entirely relevant.

 

Riders are only as good as we perceive them to be.

 

The format in which we see them racing entirely dictates that.

 

Every single post you are making shows that to be true.

 

You've picked out the 'Commonwealth Final' again waxing lyrical about the line-up... yet much of that field are riders that are perceived to be better than they were purely because of the format.

 

Is Chris Harris a world class rider this year? He came 3rd in the GP Qualifier which was just as tough a line up. You won't 'perceive' it to have been because the riders involved don't all have 9pt averages.. why? Because of the format they were in.

 

If you're having Mauger as being World Class in 1980, then Harris is World Class in 2015. Seems you're setting a low bar.

in fairness, Mauger in 1980 was still one of the top 20 riders in the world, which isn't something Harris could claim to be.

And the commonwealth final did include 5 of the top 10 riders in the world, most of the rest were top 30, and all in the top 50. A stronger line up than the GP challenge by a decent margin.

 

I agree with the ealrier parts of your post though.

 

Good points, but then did Penhall win all of his qualifying rounds?

 

Hard to compare GP's to a world final in that respect as its part of a longer competition. 3 World Finals is a very small sample to go off too, things have to fall your way.. and as we know they did fall Penhalls way. He could, if luck had gone the other way, had won neither of them.

 

That doesn't diminish his achievements or his ability.

Penhall in 81 won the american and inter-continental finals, both with maximums iirc. missed out in the overseas final after a crash with Carter! he also won the world pairs. Penhall in 81 was by a considerable margin the best in the world, and that season IMHO surpassed anything Greg has produced.

Put Penhall in GP series, and I think he would have been 2nd in 80, champ by a huge maring in 81, and probably just pipping Carter to the title in 82.

at the same time i think some diminish Greg's world titles by assuming his latter titles are due to weaker opposition, whereas in fact I think he's actually just riding as well or better than in his younger days.

Edited November 4, 2015 by waihekeaces1