Bruce Penhall

[PHILIPRISING]

HE'S my mate but I don't think I'm being biased when I suggest that Briggo would have won more World titles under a GP system. He qualified for 18 consecutive finals, a remarkable achievement, and often only lost out on the day because he couldn't resist tinkering with his machinery. He would certainly have had many more good meetings than bad over the course of a GP season.

Edited December 19, 2015 by PHILIPRISING

[Grachan]

Grachan, I'm not sure if this is the footage you are talking about

which shows a second angle of the Penhall and Carter incident from the rear which really helps to form a clearer opinion.

 

I believe you can see Penhall making contact with Carters handlebar at 1.19, but it's what runs up to this which gives it context - the way it looks to me is that Carter is already on the way down at that point.

 

The way I see it is this:

 

1.16 Bruce drifts out slightly wider (where his left leg kicks out) - arguably his right as there is space between them so he can still pick his line at this point

 

1.17 (towards the end of 1.17 and into the start of 1.18) Kenny, possibly due to the proximity of Bruce coming under him also shifts line and body position significantly, adopting, for me, the position of a rider who is already coming down, he's already starting to straighten up, and his front wheel is already beginning to tuck underneath.

 

1.19 after Kenny's alignment shift as described above, there then appears, as you mention, the contact between his handlebar and Bruce's rear mudguard / push bar, but by this time it appears, as noted above he's already going down as on a trajectory towards the fence.

 

I'm doing it on my phone so can't state the exact freeze frame times, but if you run it through frame by frame it appears to me anyway, clearly that Kenny is already straightening up and on the way down before any contact. You really do need to do it frame by frame though. I guess it would be arguable he could have stayed on without the contact, but if anything it does look to me he's already falling onto the rear end of Bruce's bike.

 

So if we were to discount contact as the actual cause of the fall (following the train of thought that he's already going down) then the only other question about Bruce being at fault would be whether his riding earlier in the bend is the initial cause (otherwise it has to be Kenny as cause of stoppage) And that's possibly another debate, and i'm out of time to freeze frame through that right now!

 

However I'd say, apart from his line shift at 1.16 Bruce didn't really appear to do much else questionable to me, he's running Kenny wider for sure, but could it be classed as unfair? Having a quick look Kenny appears to be drifting / struggling to hold his line of his own accord a couple of times earlier in the bend, already heading out wider and wider. Bruce is fairly wide though, you can see from his tyre tracks after his line shift at 1.16 how wider he is than the usual line through that bend, but is that in itself unfair? As with that manoeuvre to push Kenny wider, does Kenny have chance to roll the throttle off and tuck back in behind? I personally struggle a bit to see that actual manoeuvre as the cause, it's like the whole incident is just like a perfect storm of circumstances! But in essence perhaps this is secondary anyway, as the main debate with this incident is whether Bruce caused him to fall through contact, and from what I've viewed and described above it would appear not.

 

Anyway, open to further debate no doubt!

Good post. I enjoyed reading that.

 

The footage I was talking about is actually the same, original footage that ITV showed, rather than this one (By the way, it's actually me who put that link on youtube!)

 

Looking at it, yes you make a good point about Carter leaning into Penhall So I guess you have Carter leaning in and Penhall's wheel flicking out at the same time!

 

No wonder it's so difficult to decide who was at fault!

 

The case I argue isn't that it was neccessarily Penhall's fault, but that there was contact between the two.

 

How we miss Gary Newbon's pit interviews by the way!

Edited December 19, 2015 by grachan

[Robert Lee]

Thought I'd have a look here to read about Penhall, as, for various reasons, I never saw him ride. However, it seems to have digressed into who would/wouldn't have won world championships and why. Fascinating debate, so I'll chuck in my 5 penn'orth.

 

People have mentioned Hans Nielsen's occasional desperation moves, and I remember the 1990 final, heat 9. He went under Kelvin Tatum in a distinctly iffy move, but Kelvin somehow hung on and didn't go down, but finished last. If he'd laid it down, odds-on he'd have got a re-run with Hans excluded, and who knows, he could have gone on to win......

 

This was the one where Per Jonsson beat Shawn Moran in a run-off, both on 13 points. What if that had gone the other way? Oh, and Todd Wiltshire was 3rd - remember him? I'd put him above Leigh Adams.

 

Hans was always a love-him-or-hate-him character. I always loved him; that is, when he was at Oxford I loved to hate him, but when he came to Cov (what a coup that was for Martin Ochiltree) I just loved him!

[phillipsr]

Thought I'd have a look here to read about Penhall, as, for various reasons, I never saw him ride. However, it seems to have digressed into who would/wouldn't have won world championships and why. Fascinating debate, so I'll chuck in my 5 penn'orth.

 

People have mentioned Hans Nielsen's occasional desperation moves, and I remember the 1990 final, heat 9. He went under Kelvin Tatum in a distinctly iffy move, but Kelvin somehow hung on and didn't go down, but finished last. If he'd laid it down, odds-on he'd have got a re-run with Hans excluded, and who knows, he could have gone on to win......

 

This was the one where Per Jonsson beat Shawn Moran in a run-off, both on 13 points. What if that had gone the other way? Oh, and Todd Wiltshire was 3rd - remember him? I'd put him above Leigh Adams.

 

Hans was always a love-him-or-hate-him character. I always loved him; that is, when he was at Oxford I loved to hate him, but when he came to Cov (what a coup that was for Martin Ochiltree) I just loved him!

Hans never touched Kelvin though just moved him out always thought Kelvin bottled it a little Edited December 19, 2015 by phillipsr

[iris123]

Averages stats on the brain totally irrelevant, these figures do not show what the level of rider they were up against do they??

It's always your argument sid when confronted with the stats,but just what Is your argument based on then if not the facts???? You've still got a hangover from last night mate.Go back to bed

HE'S my mate but I don't think I'm being biased when I suggest that Briggo would have won more World titles under a GP system. He qualified for 18 consecutive finals, a remarkable achievement, and often only lost out on the day because he couldn't resist tinkering with his machinery. He would certainly have had many more good meetings than bad over the course of a GP season.

Trouble is Phil and I do agree to some extent,is that the friend or fan of Ove will come on and say if there was a GP system back then,then Ove would have won more.Or Mauger would have won more or what about just look at how consistent Leigh Adams was he must surely have won a title or two,but he didn't

Edited December 19, 2015 by iris123

[guitar_art]

I have no idea if anyone has posted this previously. If that is indeed the case please accept my apologies. Its video number thirteen that you are looking at.

 

http://176.32.230.17/brummiesfans.com/gallery.php?cid=30

 

 

And this is Penhall's view.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnATdsDV5L0

[waiheke1]

Averages stats on the brain totally irrelevant, these figures do not show what the level of rider they were up against do they??

The bl in 86 was a least as tough as the early 80s. Yes it was missing penhall carter Lee siglos sanders . But it had also shrunk to 11 teams, which meant a greater concentration of talent.

When I get time I'll add in detail my thoughts on this debate. But in summary if you look at 80s alone I would say S moran siglos ermolenko, but there are valid arguments either way. Over whole careers though there is no doubt that ermolenko comes out top, I think BWitcher analysis shows that. Ermolenko certainly isn't in the top 10 of all time, probably not the top 20, but almost certainly in the top 30 and zero doubt whatsoever top 50. Look at his achievements, and he has to be regarded ahead of the likes of carter S moran siglos etc. It's whether he is above the likes of other one time champs like Lee Jan o and Jonsson which is more Debatable ( I would say no, maybe, yes, but on achievements alone he would be too of those).

[Grand Central]

HE'S my mate but I don't think I'm being biased when I suggest that Briggo would have won more World titles under a GP system. He qualified for 18 consecutive finals, a remarkable achievement, and often only lost out on the day because he couldn't resist tinkering with his machinery. He would certainly have had many more good meetings than bad over the course of a GP season.

I think you are right about Briggs ...

 

But one of the funny things about the debate on who could have won more titles under a GP system is that you can convince yourself that they ALL could have done ... Except, of course, they couldn't !

 

Briggs, Olsen, Mauger, Collins, Nielsen ... arguments could be made for all that they may have won more titles in a GP system.

Others who never won it like Jessup, Carter, P Crump and others could have won under a GP where they failed in the one-off.

 

But it can't be true for them all.

Every 'extra' win would have to come at the expense of someone who didn't win.

Makes it a fairly impossible task to really work out.

 

But the unpredictability of the old World Final certainly allows so much more debate donkeys years later that the GP system just can't match. The winters would be quite boring for this sort of discussion if we only had the GPS to rely on for our reminiscing.

[Gavan]

A eleven point average when REALLY his rubbishey 11 point average was in a piss poor era compared to IVAN.11.74???? Forget averages Ermolenko was not that good certainly not over a PERIOD was he better than Penhall, Autrey,Sigalos,S.Moran, no way when i first see him ride he was a rider totally out of control.

You are talking absolute tosh and out of your backside.

 

Penhall yes better than Sam but if you think Autrey Sigalos and Shawn Moran (all world class by the way) were better than Ermolenko than you are a bigger fool than you usually are

History in a poor era up until about 96 onwards speedway was poor at the top echelon.

lol you are a joke

 

I guess you think that speedway in the 80's when 6 at best average riders made the final was a better field then?

 

1993 Final, Ermolenko, Nielsen, Havelock , Jonsson all world champions. field also had Gollob Hamill Hancock and Rickardssn who between them won 10 world titles. Add in 3 x british champion Andy Smith and riders like Henka, Louis and Adams the field was very strong.

 

Yet you stupidly say it was a poor era lol

Oh and in 1994 to more world chamopins to be in Loram and Crump made the final.

 

You really have no idea do you

Not trolling and i am happy with my opinion now you go along and DREAM in your own little World 1993 god what a poor level it was then piss poor.

it wasnt the world final was full of world champions and world class riders.

 

get your facts right before spewing crap

Edited December 19, 2015 by Gavan

[Robert Lee]

Hans never touched Kelvin though just moved him out always thought Kelvin bottled it a little

 

mmm, maybe. I thought they touched, but I thought at the time that Kelvin was a bit short on gamesmanship, rather than bottle. He had nothing to lose by laying down and hoping for a re-run, it's a common ploy.

[martinmauger]

Kelv wasn't too experienced in such things at that time. World Finals v GPs: different eras and mind sets; bit like the play offs v pre play off days. A rider knew, in days or yore, he 'only' needed to make it into the last 16, the World Final (achieving a result for a favourable draw helped also !), then it was really who went good and handled the pressure best on the night who was to be World Champ. As teams today know the 'only' need to make the last 4. Back to the '82 Final, would Carter not have taken Penhall a bit wide had the positions been reversed, think he probably would have (!)....

[Humphrey Appleby]

People have mentioned Hans Nielsen's occasional desperation moves, and I remember the 1990 final, heat 9. He went under Kelvin Tatum in a distinctly iffy move, but Kelvin somehow hung on and didn't go down, but finished last. If he'd laid it down, odds-on he'd have got a re-run with Hans excluded, and who knows, he could have gone on to win......

I think to be a great rider you need to occasionally be a hard rider, and Nielsen was good enough to pull it off most of the time. I felt that Tatum always did have a bit of a tendency to crumple under pressure, and Nielsen did exactly what required at Bradford.

 

However, Tatum did exactly the same thing to Nielsen in the Intercontinental Final the previous year, so it's difficult to have a lot of sympathy. You win some you lose some.

[PHILIPRISING]

KELVIN wasn't the first, nor the last, to experience how ruthless Hans could be even to his friends while still racing within the rules.

 

I can recall walking round a golf course one Saturday morning before a GP with Hans and Tony Rickardsson, who were good mates. Later that evening Hans gave Tony the full treatment and you could picture the look on Rickardsson's face even under his helmet. Once the tapes went up Hans had no friends and that was a trait characterised by many former World Champions as well. Briggs had it, Ronnie Moore did not.

 

If Leigh Adams had possessed that ruthless streak he would more likely have won a World title but it didn't make him a lesser rider or person. Think Tommy Knudson was in that mold as well.

[YerRopes]

As a youngster Scott Autrey was one of my favourite riders..

 

Used to dislike Steve Gresham immensely despite watching him ride every week for the Bulldogs, but then I've always been a Robin..

 

Dennis Sigalos was probably my latter day favourite although Kelly and Shawn Moran were the best to watch when they could be bothered (ie not distracted by life outside of the sport)..

 

Penhall was a great rider brilliant in attracting publicity for the sport - I still wanted KC to win in LA..(oh dear)..

 

Lance King, Boogaloo, Billy Hamill, John Cook etc although good riders were always outside the top tier of American riders for me..

 

I must admit it would be brilliant for the sport today if the Yanks were as strong as they used to be..such a shame..

[The White Knight]

As a youngster Scott Autrey was one of my favourite riders..

 

Used to dislike Steve Gresham immensely despite watching him ride every week for the Bulldogs, but then I've always been a Robin..

 

Dennis Sigalos was probably my latter day favourite although Kelly and Shawn Moran were the best to watch when they could be bothered (ie not distracted by life outside of the sport)..

 

Penhall was a great rider brilliant in attracting publicity for the sport - I still wanted KC to win in LA..(oh dear)..

 

Lance King, Boogaloo, Billy Hamill, John Cook etc although good riders were always outside the top tier of American riders for me..

 

I must admit it would be brilliant for the sport today if the Yanks were as strong as they used to be..such a shame..

I can't argue with that - mine too.

[YerRopes]

I can't argue with that - mine too.

 

Forgot to mention Sam Ermolenko, I had a bit of a break from speedway when he started to make an impact..

 

I did continue to get the SS though and tried to keep up to date..

 

I would put Sam above the Moran brothers as much as I used to like watching them..

[Robert Lee]

I think to be a great rider you need to occasionally be a hard rider, and Nielsen was good enough to pull it off most of the time. I felt that Tatum always did have a bit of a tendency to crumple under pressure, and Nielsen did exactly what required at Bradford.However, Tatum did exactly the same thing to Nielsen in the Intercontinental Final the previous year, so it's difficult to have a lot of sympathy. You win some you lose some.

Well, not exactly what was required; he started as hot favourite and finished 4th

[lucifer sam]

HE'S my mate but I don't think I'm being biased when I suggest that Briggo would have won more World titles under a GP system. He qualified for 18 consecutive finals, a remarkable achievement, and often only lost out on the day because he couldn't resist tinkering with his machinery. He would certainly have had many more good meetings than bad over the course of a GP season.

 

Not so sure.

 

Fundin seemed to be the more consistent - their respective World Final records certainly suggest that. Between '56 and '63, I think Fundin would have ruled the roost, although I think Briggo may have forced the issue one year and come through - 1958?

 

Briggo, Knutsson, Plechanov and Fundin would have all been trading blows in '64 and '65, while Briggo probably was ahead in '66 and '67, although there is the matter of Briggo's performance in the 1966 WTC FInal (1 point!!), so would he have scored enough points from the Polish GPs?

 

And then Mauger is supreme from '68 to '75.

 

I reckon Briggo would have won somewhere between 2 and 5 Grand Prix championships.

 

All the best

Rob

[Dave the Mic]

Isn't it great that most of the people on this forum can agree, or disagree in peace, putting forward well thought out and reasoned arguments to any subject raised, without the need to be abusive or insulting to either each other, or any of the great and the good (and slightly less great) that have entertained us so brilliantly over the years. It's one of the reasons I still love speedway after 40 years of watching it. It saddens me that it is in such a parlous state at the moment and that some people can be so vitriolic towards their fellow fans, or indeed, just patrol these forums to stir things up.

 

I have read every post on this thread since I posted my initial point which caused so much debate & would like to add some thoughts to he overall debate. I will refrain from including riders I never saw race.

 

Firstly on the Americans. Some of them were fabulous riders, some less so. Sam was one of the better ones & his world title win in 1993 alone demonstrates that. It wasn't just the title, but his form throughout the year, which was as dominant in one season as any rider of the modern day. In my view, he was deserving of his title not only for being the best rider on the day, but the stand out rider of that year. That said he was lucky as he should have been excluded in the race referred to by a few people after shedding a chain. However, I don't begrudge him the title, he deserved it. Don't think there is any debate that Hans took him off.

 

Of the Americans, I would say he is in the top 3 of the modern day, behind Penhall, who I feel is the best, despite transgressions, Hancock (it's hard to argue with 3 world titles over such a sustained period) & then Sam. Sigalos & the Morans were great riders, (the latter two as spectacular as you could wish to see) but I feel that for either longevity, commitment & achievement, the other 3 outstrip them easily. Six individual titles between them, compared to none for the others demonstrate that easily. Hamill was an excellent rider also, but I would rate him along with those that are named above that didn't win a title.

 

Special mentions for Bobby Schwartz & Scott Autrey. Boogaloo was a great league rider & team man, but didn't seem to have the drive or edge on the personal front. Autrey was a great rider & I was fortunate enough to see him develop at Exeter, where in the last 3 years he was nigh on unbeatable. He was also a great team man, brilliant on all shapes & sizes of track & a lovely guy. I think many would rate him higher than they do if they saw him race as much as I did, he championed his own cause a bit more & was a bit more of a showman. He was a little unlucky in some ways in both 78, when he rode in the World Final all night with a cracked frame and still placed third & was then prevented from competing in 1979 after a dispute with the AMA, a year in which he would have a great chance of World Final glory as he had few if any equals that year. Had Exeter not dropped down to the NL in 1980, forcing him to move on, his career could have been even better. I rate him above all Americans except the top three I mention.

 

On Hans Nielsen, I can't believe any would doubt his credentials. You don't win four world titles by accident, plus a host of team & pairs titles (among a host of other honours), plus run a huge average in the BL for four different clubs over almost 20 years without being a bit special. Personally I rate he & Erik about similar of these two. Had the GP been run in Hans' era, I feel he would have won more titles, he was by light years the most consistent rider of his day. Erik was more suited to the one off final I feel & had his career not been cut short would have won more titles in that format.

 

Olsen was possibly a better all round rider than both, but Hans and Erik probably won more titles as they were by some margin the two stand out riders of their day, whilst Olsen had many more peers to contend with. Jan O Pedersen was a good rider, spectacular as they come & one of the best "racers" of is day. I accept he was unlucky with injuries, but I don't feel he was quite in the same league as the other 3 here. Knudsen was good, but not great, although he was unfortunate in '86, when there is no doubt Nielsen should have been excluded for taking him off. Nicki Pedersen is also in the mix here, & although his three world titles speak very loudly, I feel he would have won less had he raced in a different era. No other Danes are worthy of significant mention.

 

Ivan I feel is the best there has ever been & had there been a GP series when he was racing from the mid 60's to late 70's he would have been a ten time champion. He had it all, the best machinery, organisation, racing brain, team spirit, business acumen, planning, gating, speed, cunning, consistency, focus, sponsorship, just everything oozed professionalism, class, discipline, focus on winning total single mindedness on winning every race - the superlatives could fill a dictionary. Some could argue that I am biased as I watched my speedway at Exeter, but let me tell you Ivan was never a favourite of mine - quite the opposite as PC was always my favourite - but you simply cannot argue with all he achieved, he has no equal.

 

Briggo was a great rider, as was Ronnie Moore, although I only saw each of them at the end of their careers, but they don't match Ivan in many, if any, of the attributes above.

 

Rickardsson comes fairly close to Mauger, if only for his 6 titles & how much better he was than all of his peers, although I feel Ivan had more peers at the top level & would have outstripped Tony had they raced at the same time. None of the other Swedes in "my era" come close. Michanek was good, but couldn't be bothered half the time, Per Jonsson was an excellent racer whose career was sadly cut short, as we know, but I don't think he compares to any mentioned above.

 

I never saw Fundin race, so any comment is heresay, but I know enough to know that he is in the same league as Ivan & better than Rickardsson & possibly all the Danes.

 

Of the Aussies, there are only four worthy of mention. Phil Crump, Billy Sanders & Leigh Adams were all excellent riders. Phil didn't want to win badly enough and he has said as much, Adams is probably the best rider of the era I am looking at to not win a title, but wasn't ruthless enough & Sanders career was cut tragically short & as such is difficult to quantify, although I am not sure, without wishing to appear unkind, he would have challenged the really top guys.

 

Jason Crump is the best of them all, better than all the single title winners mentioned in this post, and many of the others. Ten years in a row in the top 3 of a ruthless & demanding GP series with three titles to boot, plus uber consistent over an even longer period in world cups & the 3 top leagues is too much to ignore his claim to be one of the greats.

 

Of all the others that have scaled the heights - Gollob, Wiltshire, Plech, Nilsen, Muller, Szczakiel, Hamill, and others. Good riders, great even, but not in the same league as those already discussed.

 

So the English. John Louis was better than Chris. Mark Loram is probably the best "racer" of the modern day, not sure anyone came close. A great rider, but not a true great, in my opinion, not consistent enough. Micheal Lee? Possibly the most talented of them all & that galls me as he was PC's main challenger to be top Englishman. In terms of ability on a bike, I think he had few equals. He was remarkable as a speedway rider. His flaw was his wayward personality that ruined his career. Had he not been a flawed genius & been able to keep his nose clean like Ivan, he would have won a hatful of titles.

 

Havvy? My modern day favourite, fully deserved his title - he was the stand out rider internationally in '92 blew most away wherever he rode, I just think he peaked to soon & wasn't as driven as he could have been. His serious back injury ruined his career at the top level & he was never even close after that.

 

PC? A truly great rider, even without my bias. Between 74 & 78, he was one of the top 3 in the world & could easily have won three tiles in that time had the fates smiled on him. I would argue easily on a par with any other English rider & many of those named above who won more than one world title.

 

Tai Woffinden could easily turn out to be the best ever if he stays fit & as focused as he currently is. Some of the moves he makes are sensational, he has a good racing brain, a good team , great machinery, the right attitude etc. He reminds very much of Ivan, it's just a different era. personally I feel he is likely to end up the best of the Brits & there will be more titles to come.

 

Of the rest, the Louis' Andy Smith, Simmo, Ray Wilson, Chris Morton, Les Collins, Rico, rest his soul, all good racers but not great. Likewise Wiggy & Tatum, Very talented, but more like good all round track racers than great speedway riders & their long track titles confirm that. For charisma, Wiggy was probably almost on a par with Penhall & he is still missed.

 

Finally Carter. This might be controversial but he was good because of his passion, I don't think he was a "great". Sadly he actually never achieved a great deal, although you could argue he was unlucky in two of his three world finals, and did suffer from injuries, but a lot of that was about he raced. He was always very committed & dedicated, but in some ways I feel that was his undoing on the track sometimes. sadly we will never know if he could have become a great, maybe he would have, who knows?

 

So, in my humble opinion, who is the best.

 

Ivan Mauger - so far.

 

I appreciate some, maybe all of you will disagree with some or maybe all I have said. Again, that's the beauty of this forum.

Edited December 19, 2015 by Dave the Mic

[The White Knight]

A VERY fine Post Dave the Mic.

 

I totally agree with you on just about everything you have written.

 

One point of interest to me is that when you are talking about top Riders. I find it incredible how many British Riders in the Seventies, who would probably be classed/considered as great, and yet how few there are today.

 

A sad reflection on the state of our Sport these days.

Edited December 19, 2015 by The White Knight