Bruce Penhall

[stratton]

Not sure sindey.Thought Mauger had a great season in 1976 and won in 1977 and also 1979.So he could of won from 1968 through to 1979.Probably wouldn't have,but could possibly

So consistent Iris you could well be right for me after 73 Olsen,Michanek,PC,Crump(for a season or two) maybe Jansson (if not killed ) Lee would all have been mighty challengers to Ivan.But if the format had been the same say as when Mark Loram won it he had every chance saying that most years he entered he had a great chance.

[iris123]

 

Mauger won have been hard to stop from 1968 to 1975, although Olsen might have just about achieved it in 1972, and Michanek had an exceptional season in 1973.

 

Around 1976, it would have become a bit more open, PC was flying by then and Olsen also had some very good years. And then Lee came along and would have been a very serious contender in 1979.

 

IMO I think Ivan would have won around 7 to 9 titles.

 

All the best

Rob

I thought Ivan himself said he had a great season in 76,but PC won the title and although PC had a great 77 season Ivan won.I think it is quite possible Ivan could have dominated a decade rather than 5 years as sid say's.Not likely,but possible

 

Wasn't PC injured when he won?Injury would obviously play more a part in a GP series than a one-off title meeting

Edited December 22, 2015 by iris123

[stratton]

I thought Ivan himself said he had a great season in 76,but PC won the title and although PC had a great 77 season Ivan won.I think it is quite possible Ivan could have dominated a decade rather than 5 years as sid say's.Not likely,but possible

 

Wasn't PC injured when he won?Injury would obviously play more a part in a GP series than a one-off title meeting

Over a twelve round series with the format say the same as when Mark won the crown yes Ivan he could of won more the same with Hans i suppose.

[lucifer sam]

I thought Ivan himself said he had a great season in 76,but PC won the title and although PC had a great 77 season Ivan won.I think it is quite possible Ivan could have dominated a decade rather than 5 years as sid say's.Not likely,but possible

 

Wasn't PC injured when he won?Injury would obviously play more a part in a GP series than a one-off title meeting

 

Ivan's great season was '75 rather than '76. There was no one rider massively ahead in 1976, although PC won both the Inter-Continental Final and the World Final.

 

It was in 1977 when PC was injured, just before the World Final. Ran over a drain cover at Belle Vue, He finished second in Gothenburg, in agony with his leg. Before that, he was on awesome form.

 

All the best

Rob

[iris123]

Like I said,it is unlikely anyone would absolutely dominate a decade,but if anyone could have,of the riders I have seen then that is Ivan

 

funny font and I can't be bothered to change it!!!!

[stratton]

Olsen is often forgotten often because he won three titles, he would of been a threat most years great rider.

[lucifer sam]

Olsen is often forgotten often because he won three titles, he would of been a threat most years great rider.

 

"Would of"? No, he never "would of" Sid. Would have, maybe.

 

Olsen was a fantastic rider at his peak, no doubt, but Mauger - apart from at Wembley - tended to have his measure. Olsen's record away from Wembley: one win, one third (both in Gothenburg). Never finished on the rostrum in Poland. Mauger was a real force in every country - two titles in GB, two titles in Sweden, two titles in Poland.

 

Mauger would have won over 12 rounds most years.

 

All the best

Rob

[stratton]

"Would of"? No, he never "would of" Sid. Would have, maybe.

 

Olsen was a fantastic rider at his peak, no doubt, but Mauger - apart from at Wembley - tended to have his measure. Olsen's record away from Wembley: one win, one third (both in Gothenburg). Never finished on the rostrum in Poland. Mauger was a real force in every country - two titles in GB, two titles in Sweden, two titles in Poland.

 

Mauger would have won over 12 rounds most years.

 

All the best

Rob

If the scoring was the same as when Mark won it certainly, Ole was capable of winning alot of rounds though and if the scoring was like today's that would of really suited him. Edited December 22, 2015 by sidney

[Robert Lee]

If the scoring was the same as when Mark won it certainly, Ole was capable of winning alot of rounds though and if the scoring was like today's that would of really suited him.

.........would HAVE really suited him.

[The White Knight]

.........would HAVE really suited him.

Is your Grammar perfect? :nono:

[Robert Lee]

Is your Grammar perfect? :nono:

No, but I am willing to learn and be corrected where necessary. By the way, that's not a grammatical mistake it's misuse of a word.

[Pinny]

Pretty good thread, ruined at timea by that tosspott sidney.

 

Offering people out for a fight yet again then when someone offers, he backs off!

 

When i next visit home from Australia ill happily meet you and strap one hand behind my back and still put you to sleep! Tosser

[g13webb]

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.

 

Thoroughly enjoyed your post and can reflect on all that you wrote. Makes one realise how good speedway once was. Don't always agree with your positioning of various riders, but that always the case when opinions are aired. Nevertheless, a really good posting.

 

Ps Have always acknowledged, to me Mauger was the best of the lot......... so no arguments there......

[R87]

Been away from the forum for a bit, but have enjoyed reading this thread.

 

On the Sam v Shawn debate. Obviously as a Wolves fans I'm a tad biased, but Sam was a better rider. Shawn was obviously a very talented rider and he had some great battles with Sam at Monmore, but Sam reached a better level both domestically and at International level.

 

Sadly for Sam, his racing style was always going to leave him prone to injuries which would limit his time at the very top (I'd say the same with Billy Hamill too). Sam was never the same after he broke his leg against Bradford in 93 - that was one injury too many I think. Hancock is a steady rider than both Sam and Billy were, but that's why he's stayed at the top for so long.

 

I would have to say Tony Rickardsson is the best I've seen. His longevity over a period of time and his professionalism in appearance and his racing stood him apart. OK Hans had a brilliant record in the 80s, but I think that early 90's period ( I started watching speedway in 1990) saw him kind of lost his way a little bit - though he was still good enough to win in 95 and have four other appearances on the rostrum.

 

Jan O Pedersen and Per Jonsson would have continued to be a danger had injuries not ended their careers. Per I think would have won in 1994 given his form at the time he got injured.

[ch958]

Is your Grammar perfect? :nono:

have you been away TWK?

[BWitcher]

Sam was never the same after he broke his leg against Bradford in 93 - that was one injury too many I think.

 

100% spot on. He was so dominant that year that another world title or two would have been possible.