Bruce Penhall

[SCB]

 

So you're saying Per Jonsson, Jan O Pedersen and Sam Ermolenko were "piss poor" and "pretty mediocre"? I think some Reading, Cradley and Wolves fans might take issue with those statements.

 

My flabber has been gasted!!

 

Personally, I thought they were all terrific riders. Per Jonsson was a rider with real trackcraft, Jan O Pedersen was the best over-taker I've ever seen, and Sam Ermolenko put one of the most consistent speedway seasons in 1993.

 

There's no way that this lot were mediocre.

 

All the best

Rob

I see the point. I'd argue any 5 year spell where no rider wins a title twice suggests to me that there was not "great" rider around at the time, just a lot of pretty good riders (admittedly there a gaping flaw here as Jan O and Per both had careers ended due to injury) especially as Sam and Havvy never really did a huge amount afterwards. Looking at the numbers (and thats pretty much all I have as memories of Hans are not great until the GP years for me) Hans strikes me as a man who would have won 10 World Titles had the GP series been in place 15 years earlier, he was a model of consistency and all them GP finals he'd have made would have made him close to impossible to beat.

 

 

As for Egon Muller, I remember looking at his stats in the past and deciding he was a higher class version of Smolinksi who fluked a GP win but never really was that good. Muller was a very good rider on his day but if it wasn't his day it seems he could be crap. But also something in the middle. Again, give him a GP series and I'll say very Rune Holta-ish. Would throw in the odd stormer, the odd naff one but always finishing 6th to 10th. I think he's always given a harsh time as he shouldn't have been World Champion and barely rode in the UK but he was a decent rider - just not best in the World. He's not comparable to Szczakiel who had 1 decent meeting in his whole career!

[Humphrey Appleby]

How can they speak ill of the dead in the Case of 'Jack the Ripper'?

They can't even prove conclusively who he is.

 

Numerous dead people have been named as Ripper suspects down the years, many without any foundation whatsoever, including Prince Clarence.

 

Getting back to Penhall and Carter though, was never a fan of either to be honest, but I don't see why Penhall should pull any punches if he despised Carter.

 

Carter always came over as being somewhat unhinged, and whilst madness is often never far away from brilliance, he seemed to be a ticking time bomb. It seems possible he had some sort of personality disorder, which might have been better diagnosed today.

Edited December 17, 2015 by Humphrey Appleby

[Guest]

I see the point. I'd argue any 5 year spell where no rider wins a title twice suggests to me that there was not "great" rider around at the time, just a lot of pretty good riders (admittedly there a gaping flaw here as Jan O and Per both had careers ended due to injury) especially as Sam and Havvy never really did a huge amount afterwards. Looking at the numbers (and thats pretty much all I have as memories of Hans are not great until the GP years for me) Hans strikes me as a man who would have won 10 World Titles had the GP series been in place 15 years earlier, he was a model of consistency and all them GP finals he'd have made would have made him close to impossible to beat.

 

 

As for Egon Muller, I remember looking at his stats in the past and deciding he was a higher class version of Smolinksi who fluked a GP win but never really was that good. Muller was a very good rider on his day but if it wasn't his day it seems he could be crap. But also something in the middle. Again, give him a GP series and I'll say very Rune Holta-ish. Would throw in the odd stormer, the odd naff one but always finishing 6th to 10th. I think he's always given a harsh time as he shouldn't have been World Champion and barely rode in the UK but he was a decent rider - just not best in the World. He's not comparable to Szczakiel who had 1 decent meeting in his whole career!

 

Take a look here if that's what you think about Jerzy Szxzakiel: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Szczakiel

 

As for Egon Muller, I remember looking at his stats in the past and deciding he was a higher class version of Smolinksi who fluked a GP win but never really was that good. Muller was a very good rider on his day but if it wasn't his day it seems he could be crap. But also something in the middle. Again, give him a GP series and I'll say very Rune Holta-ish. Would throw in the odd stormer, the odd naff one but always finishing 6th to 10th. I think he's always given a harsh time as he shouldn't have been World Champion and barely rode in the UK but he was a decent rider - just not best in the World. He's not comparable to Szczakiel who had 1 decent meeting in his whole career!

 

When I quantify the career of Egon Muller O predominantly regard him as a long track and grass track topliner who won the world speedway championship. It has been pointed out many times - recently by PHIL - that overall Muller was not especially interested in speedway racing and much preferred the other two motorcyle racing track disciplines. Speedway-wise this Link highlights Muller on speedway - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egon_Müller

[Humphrey Appleby]

When Penhall,Lee,Sigalos, Gundo,Sanders was about he was never top dog and if Penhall/Lee,Sigalos,Sanders had not disappeared no way would he have won four titles.

 

Nielsen was in the early part of his career when all those riders were around, but still managed to share three titles apiece with Gundersen before he was forced to retire. So he was clearly at least as good as Gundersen by any measure.

 

Lee is I think a similar age to Nielsen, but despite his undoubted talent, Lee's career petered out through lifestyle choice. There's little evidence to suggest Lee would have gone on to greater and better things.

 

Sanders was a few years older than Nielsen, and had not won a World title by the time of his death. Sigalos - forced to retire too young and too early, so can't say one way or the other.

 

Nielsen also rode against Per Jonsson and Tony Rickardsson for the significant part of his career, who were absolutely amongst the best riders of all time. Ermolenko, Knudsen, Pedersen and even Tatum were also not rubbish either, although I'd not quite put them in the same league.

[SCB]

 

Take a look here if that's what you think about Jerzy Szxzakiel: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Szczakiel

TBF, that only confirms my point. Weeks after winning the titles failed to score in the WTC. The following year failed to score in the Continental Final. He was a second division rider in Poland most of his career too, at a time when the Polish first division was nothing to get excited about!

[Humphrey Appleby]

Not World Champ in 92.

 

Nielsen had a rare injury in 1992 which meant he didn't qualify for the World Final for the first time since 1980. I seem to recall he might also have been riding with an injury in 1994 as well.

[BWitcher]

 

 

Then with the title won Sam proceeded to miss the gate by a mile in his last heat and poodle round at the back showboating a la Penhall.

The only difference was it didnt really matter

 

Sam didn't miss the gate in his final race at all, he actually made the gate and led into turn 1. He soon went to the back.

 

I agree he was lucky in the re-run of the Nielsen race but often to win World Titles you needed luck. 1993 was a year when he was the best rider in the world by some distance, whereas normally that honour fell to Nielsen.

[Reviresco]

TBF, that only confirms my point. Weeks after winning the titles failed to score in the WTC. The following year failed to score in the Continental Final. He was a second division rider in Poland most of his career too, at a time when the Polish first division was nothing to get excited about!

 

Exactly, and not just low scoring but Nil Points. And if you look at the 1971 World Pairs Final that Szczakiel won alongside Andrzej Wyglenda when they both scored 15pts, it was held in Rybnik, Poland and had Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia & Austria 'qualified' from one semi-final and Scotland qualified from the other semi-final ahead of Great Britain & Australia. The Final was effectively a contest between the seeded host nation, New Zealand & Sweden.

At that time in the '70's, the semi-final splits for the World Pairs were about as lop-sided as they could get.

Maybe there was a good reason that the Polish authorities didn't let Szczakiel ride outside of Eastern Europe much. If he did beat Mauger six times between 1971 and 73, we know that at least three of them were in Poland. (Having travelled to the 1976 World Individual Final on the Warners train, I remember how difficult it was to simply get in and out of Eastern Europe at the time.)

As for Herr Muller, I saw him get 6pts in the Pairs Final at Ullevi in the June of 1983 and thought that maybe he wouldn't be so much of a threat in the Individual Final later that year, but home advantage, track preparation and a super fast engine changed that around.

[lucifer sam]

TBF, that only confirms my point. Weeks after winning the titles failed to score in the WTC. The following year failed to score in the Continental Final. He was a second division rider in Poland most of his career too, at a time when the Polish first division was nothing to get excited about!

 

SCB, a few points:

 

1. Szczakiel also won the 1971 World Pairs Final, scoring a paid maximum. The New Zealand pair who finished second were two legends in Mauger and Briggs. You said he only had "one decent meeting in his whole career". I would say he had, at the very least, two utterly outstanding ones and has the FIM certificates to prove that!

2. 1973 World Team Cup Final. Szczakiel had a big crash three days beforehand, which affected his performance.

3. In the following year's Continental Semi-FInal (1974), he crashed out injured in his opening ride.

4. He wasn't a 'favourite' with the Polish authorities. However, they set the criteria for their five representatives for the 1973 final, and Szczakiel went out and made sure he got one of the places.

 

Szczakiel was not consistent, but clearly could beat the very best on his day.

 

It's often forgotten that he didn't just beat Ivan in the run-off for first place - he beat him earlier in the meeting too! Mauger did not consider him a fluke winner at all - he knew what the guy was capable of.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited December 17, 2015 by lucifer sam

[BWitcher]

I see the point. I'd argue any 5 year spell where no rider wins a title twice suggests to me that there was not "great" rider around at the time, just a lot of pretty good riders (admittedly there a gaping flaw here as Jan O and Per both had careers ended due to injury) especially as Sam and Havvy never really did a huge amount afterwards. Looking at the numbers (and thats pretty much all I have as memories of Hans are not great until the GP years for me) Hans strikes me as a man who would have won 10 World Titles had the GP series been in place 15 years earlier, he was a model of consistency and all them GP finals he'd have made would have made him close to impossible to beat.

 

 

 

 

For Ermolenko to come back and win a world title after his injuries in 1989 were remarkable enough as it is. You say he didn't do much after that, correct, he didn't really challenge for the title (he got a bronze in the GP) but that was again down to injury. In the penultimate meeting of 1993 he crashed and re-broke his leg. He was never quite the same after that, when he came back he had a different style and wasn't as exciting.

[lucifer sam]

 

As for Herr Muller, I saw him get 6pts in the Pairs Final at Ullevi in the June of 1983 and thought that maybe he wouldn't be so much of a threat in the Individual Final later that year, but home advantage, track preparation and a super fast engine changed that around.

 

What a bunch of sour grapes. Muller was far and away the best rider on the day, which is what counted in a World Final. He fully deserved the title.

 

All the best

Rob

[BWitcher]

 

 

Nielsen also rode against Per Jonsson and Tony Rickardsson for the significant part of his career, who were absolutely amongst the best riders of all time. Ermolenko, Knudsen, Pedersen and even Tatum were also not rubbish either, although I'd not quite put them in the same league.

 

Interesting points.. how do you quantify Jonsson being a league above Ermolenko?

 

He was a brilliant rider, no doubt about that but I would say at best he was only on par with Ermolenko.

 

As Rob alluded to earlier, Ermolenko put together one of the best seasons of all time in 1993, achieving a very rare feat of averaging 11+ in the nominated rider era.

 

As for the comments that Nielsen wasn't that good... I'm staggered.

 

Hans was the only rider who as a fan I genuinely 'feared'. i.e. I thought, we've got no chance of beating this guy. He was simply a machine.

Edited December 17, 2015 by BWitcher

[Reviresco]

 

What a bunch of sour grapes. Muller was far and away the best rider on the day, which is what counted in a World Final. He fully deserved the title.

 

All the best

Rob

 

I didn't say that he didn't deserve it on the day, simply that he didn't look an Individual Title winner in the Pairs Final three months earlier and that, IMO, home track advantage assisted the transformation.

 

I also remember seeing Muller score 4pts in the 1980 World Individual at Ullevi and 3pts in 1984.

 

Simply, IMO, Muller would not have won the 1983 Individual Title if it hadn't of been staged in Germany that year.

 

All The Best Rob.

[Humphrey Appleby]

Interesting points.. how do you quantify Jonsson being a league above Ermolenko?

I didn't actually say he was league above.

 

I'd agree that Jonsson and Ermolenko had fairly comparable World Final records, and from memory, Ermolenko may even just shade the two when they rode together. I'd also fully agree that Ermolenko was outstanding in 1993 and was a deserved winner that year.

 

Conversely though, Ermolenko had twice as many bites at the cherry as Jonsson, although I'd also accept he missed a couple of World Finals through injury at the peak of his career.

 

I think what it comes down to for me, is if I needed someone to win a race to save my life, I'd probably pick Jonsson. Jonsson is one rider who could beat Nielsen regularly when he was at his peak, whereas I don't think the same could be said with Ermolenko.

 

Ermolenko also somehow sticks in my mind as a home track specialist, although obviously 10-11 point averages would suggest he must won quite a few races elsewhere!

[fatface]

 

Sid, you've failed to grasp what Humph has actually said.

 

He's said Knudsen did seem to be able to mix it at times with Nielsen at a domestic level (a big compliment, since Nielsen is one of the best riders, it not the best rider, at a domestic level), but couldn't mix it on the biggest stage.

 

And the facts back that up. After finishing third in 1981 at the age of 19, Knudsen failed to finish in the top three again. He always somehow managed to mess it up. In '86, he did a Carter and left a major rival (Nielsen) with a gap on the inside - fatal error. In 1991, he won the supposed winners-takes-all Heat 1, but then threw other points, and ended up getting passed by Nielsen in the run-off for third. In 1992, he won his opening two rides, then fell apart when it started to rain. He again won his opening two rides in 1994... and again finished off the rostrum.

 

Time and time again, Knudsen blew his chance in the World Championship. Performances such as his maximum in the 1985 World Team Cup Final showed how good he could be on the world stage, but when the pressure was really on in the individual event, he couldn't pull it off. He's in good company, there's a lot of good riders who couldn't quite win a World Final.

 

All the best

Rob

Then again, if Nielsen had been able to beat Knudsen in 85, he would've won that one too. He slipped up though didn't he?

[BWitcher]

I didn't actually say he was league above.

 

I'd agree that Jonsson and Ermolenko had fairly comparable World Final records, and from memory, Ermolenko may even just shade the two when they rode together. I'd also fully agree that Ermolenko was outstanding in 1993 and was a deserved winner that year.

 

Conversely though, Ermolenko had twice as many bites at the cherry as Jonsson, although I'd also accept he missed a couple of World Finals through injury at the peak of his career.

 

I think what it comes down to for me, is if I needed someone to win a race to save my life, I'd probably pick Jonsson. Jonsson is one rider who could beat Nielsen regularly when he was at his peak, whereas I don't think the same could be said with Ermolenko.

 

Ermolenko also somehow sticks in my mind as a home track specialist, although obviously 10-11 point averages would suggest he must won quite a few races elsewhere!

 

 

Sam debuted in England at tail end of 83 with a few meets, but first full season was 84.. same as Jonsson so not sure about bites at the cherry.. they both had same opportunities.

 

Sam had a higher average than Jonsson every single season throughout their parallel careers until 1994, the year I alluded to earlier when Sam was coming back from a broken leg suffered at end of 93...

 

1984 Ermolenko 6.71 Jonsson 6.52

1985 Ermolenko didn't ride (but came 3rd in World Final after run off for title) Jonsson 6.33

1986 Ermolenko 9.72 Jonsson 7.36

1987 Ermolenko 9.86 Jonsson 9.34

1988 Ermolenko 9.40 Jonsson 8.98

1989 Ermolenko 9.85 Jonsson didn't ride in UK

1990 Ermolenko 8.87 (again coming back from major injury) Jonsson 8.39

1991 Ermolenko 10.74 Jonsson didn't ride

1992 Ermolenko 10.25 Jonsson 10.04

1993 Ermolenko 11.12 Jonsson 10.34

1994 Ermolenko 9.83 Jonsson 10.41

 

I can't agree Sam was a home track specialist. Indeed at Monmore Green, of the Wolves 'legends' I'd place Ronnie Correy, Peter Karlsson, Mikael Max all ahead of him as 'track specalists'. He was brilliant on all shapes and sizes.. from Arena-Essex to Kings Lynn/Bradford.

 

In addition Sam won 3 BLRC/ELRC's to Per's one.

 

I am trying to remember and for the life of me can't if Sam rode in the 1993 BLRC that Per won... not sure if it was before or after Sam's injury?

 

As for Per's World Final win in 1990, Sam of course missed that as didn't recover from his serious injuries in time and the Americans wouldn't seed him through the US Final. At Bradford he would have been a MAJOR threat for the title that year.

Edited December 17, 2015 by BWitcher

[Grachan]

For me Jonsson was better than anyone on his day but Ermolemko was more consistent.

 

Per was prone to the odd poor meeting, but watching him stalking riders and passing on the run in to the chequered flag was one of the finest sights I've seen in speedway.

 

I'd pick Per over Sam, but maybe I just saw more of him.

[lucifer sam]

Then again, if Nielsen had been able to beat Knudsen in 85, he would've won that one too. He slipped up though didn't he?

 

Yes. And it made him all the more determined to win the following year. The difference between, say Hans Nielsen or Jason Crump, and for example Tommy Knudsen or Kenny Carter, is that Hans and Crumpie took bitter disappointment and came back all the stronger from it.

 

Having lost out narrowly twice, Hans Nielsen had the mental toughness to go into a head-to-head showdown with Jan O Pedersen in Heat 20 in 1986, where he could have missed out yet again, and this time make sure he came out the winner.

 

All the best

Rob

[BWitcher]

For me Jonsson was better than anyone on his day but Ermolemko was more consistent.

 

Per was prone to the odd poor meeting, but watching him stalking riders and passing on the run in to the chequered flag was one of the finest sights I've seen in speedway.

 

I'd pick Per over Sam, but maybe I just saw more of him.

 

Seeing them more will affect an opinion for sure and no doubt I am biased towards Sam for those reasons.

 

However, at their best Ermolenko was head and shoulders above as well as being more consistent. in the period of 90-93 he rarely made the gate, even in 93 when he averaged 11+ much of it was from the back. Not only that he had an incredible number of bonus pts that year, team riding riders such as Neil Evitts who was way off the pace that year.

 

Basically in every category you can look at Sam outperformed Per... despite the very severe injuries that for most riders would signal their end of their peak abilities.

 

Edited to add:-

 

Found the answer to my earlier question.

 

Sam didn't ride in the 1993 BLRC that Per won. PK rode for Wolves and scored 10. The form he was in that year, Sam would have been red hot favorite for that meeting.

 

So it appears Pers two major titles were only achieved because Sam was out injured

Edited December 17, 2015 by BWitcher

[lucifer sam]

For me Jonsson was better than anyone on his day but Ermolemko was more consistent.

 

Per was prone to the odd poor meeting, but watching him stalking riders and passing on the run in to the chequered flag was one of the finest sights I've seen in speedway.

 

I'd pick Per over Sam, but maybe I just saw more of him.

 

I'd probably pick Jan O slightly above the other two for a similar reason - we always seemed to be riding against Cradley, so I saw a lot of him.

 

Jan O was the one rider who could beat Hans from the back around Cowley - well apart from Carl Blackbird, but that was a one-night only event.

 

From around 1988 onwards, Jan O became Hans' toughest opponent at domestic level. I thought Jan O was a brilliant rider - the amount of speed he could generate, even around the smaller tracks, was simply breath-taking.

 

I feel he would have also been World Champion in 1990, but for the freak off-track injury that ruled him out of the final.

 

All the best

Rob