Ivan Mauger

[Phlipphlopp]

Always(generalisation,but mostly true) a question of when you started watching speedway from reading this forum for 15 years.....

 

For me Ivan was and probably will remain the ultimate speedway rider,the ultimate professional.He was and remains the best ever.But i can understand when someone older thinks Fundin was/is the best or someone younger thinks Rickardsson is the best.You can't really argue against any of them

Just glad i had the privilege of watching him most Monday nights for several seasons. You cant compare riders from different era's , its like trying to compare Pele with Messi. Both greats but you cannot compare. Cant be bothered to check , but didnt he in one season only get beaten 7 times , 2 of those were for engine failures ? 11.8 something average . Crazy. Best in his era , no dangers.

[Sidney the robin]

Just glad i had the privilege of watching him most Monday nights for several seasons. You cant compare riders from different era's , its like trying to compare Pele with Messi. Both greats but you cannot compare. Cant be bothered to check , but didnt he in one season only get beaten 7 times , 2 of those were for engine failures ? 11.8 something average . Crazy. Best in his era , no dangers.

I was a big Briggo fan but all what you say was totally true and he was 30 years ahead of his time so professional took the sport to another level great man proud to have seen him at his pomp.

[coventry1963]

Speaking to Jack Parker many years ago, he always maintained that any of the top riders from any era would have been close to the top in any other era. He said Fundin, Mauger, Briggs, Nielsen et al at their peak would have been formidable opponents to him in his era and, at his peak, he would have been the same to them in their time. He said any of the top riders would have adapted to the era at the time with bikes, styles etc. Any comparison therefore has to be subjective.

[SCB]

Ivan was retired by the time I was old enough to know I was at a speedway meeting. But I was lucky enough to see him do the "final 4 laps" (plus a dozen more!) at Exeter. He come out and took it steady for 4 laps and it was a bit underwhelming, then he got faster and faster. His final 4 laps while not flat out showed that even into his 60s he could still ride a bike, he could have probably scored points in the meeting itself if he had wanted to, he just oozed class. That was just some demo rides from a guy I'd only heard about (and seen on video) up to that point. I was amazed.

 

It's damn hard to argue he was anything but the best speedway rider of all time. As has been said it's hard to compare riders of different eras but having watched and read everything I have about Ivan I've no doubt that with his mind set, his will to win and his methodical approach Ivan would have been a success in whatever he chose and that means he'd have made it as the very best in any era, it may have taken more work, it may have taken a different approach but I'm certain he'd have done.

 

The fact he's been retire 30 years and people still talk about that time he was beat by x, y and z. You clearly didn't get beat very often if that's how you're remembered!!

[Guest]

Sale of Ivan Mauger's bikes:

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/local-hubs/wolverhampton/2017/09/13/speedway-star-ivan-maugers-bikes-for-sale/

[norbold]

 

The fact he's been retire 30 years and people still talk about that time he was beat by x, y and z. You clearly didn't get beat very often if that's how you're remembered!!

That's very true, SCB, but then again, he didn't have the sort of opposition that maybe other candidates for the best ever had. Fundin for example had Briggs, Moore, Craven and Knutson to contend with as well as riders of the class of Gote Nordin and Nigel Boocock. Though there again that might have been because actually Mauger was a class above all other riders (with the possible exception of Ole Olsen). Who knows? As has been said above, it is impossible to compare the top riders of each era with riders from a different era. The number of top class opponents is an important factor in that.

[bigcatdiary]

I first started watching him when I was 14, he was pure and utter class on a motorbike and was the best starter for in the sport by the proverbial mile.

 

Ultra professional with immaculate machinery, just didn't have any weak points at all.

 

Lucky to meet him several times and was always the perfect gentleman with supporters when I saw him.

Edited September 15, 2017 by bigcatdiary

[waiheke1]

That's very true, SCB, but then again, he didn't have the sort of opposition that maybe other candidates for the best ever had. Fundin for example had Briggs, Moore, Craven and Knutson to contend with as well as riders of the class of Gote Nordin and Nigel Boocock. Though there again that might have been because actually Mauger was a class above all other riders (with the possible exception of Ole Olsen). Who knows? As has been said above, it is impossible to compare the top riders of each era with riders from a different era. The number of top class opponents is an important factor in that.

Was Briggs better than Olsen? Knutson better than Michsnek? Craven better than PC? Boocock better than Simmons? Or were those riders more successful because they weren't up against Mauger.

I'd say there's much more of a case that Eric and Hans had things easier as they picked up titles in an era shorn of the riders who should have been their top rivals (penhall sigalos carter lee sanders all lost prematurely, and you could arguably add Kelly Moran to that list as a rider who for other reasons wasn't the title contender he could have been).

[Sidney the robin]

I first started watching him when I was 14, he was pure and utter class on a motorbike and was the best starter for in the sport by the proverbial mile.

Ultra professional with immaculate machinery, just didn't have any weak points at all.

Lucky to meet him several times and was always the perfect gentleman with supporters when I saw him.

For all that he achieved he was never a bighead, he had time for his team mates and as you said a superb starter never reared up ever and he could pass if need be.For me he had everything but the greatest thing for me was that when he first came over he failed but he never gave up believed in himself and regrouped and the rest is history great rider and man.Also it is lovely that Mirac, Briggo, Ivan were all close got on well that is very unique in the dog/eat world of sport they all had total respect for each other and those three are all in a top 15 ever.

Was Briggs better than Olsen? Knutson better than Michsnek? Craven better than PC? Boocock better than Simmons? Or were those riders more successful because they weren't up against Mauger.

I'd say there's much more of a case that Eric and Hans had things easier as they picked up titles in an era shorn of the riders who should have been their top rivals (penhall sigalos carter lee sanders all lost prematurely, and you could arguably add Kelly Moran to that list as a rider who for other reasons wasn't the title contender he could have been).

Was so surprised "waihe read up that Briggo in 1967 was a red hot favourite...??? i thought his real peak was the 50s and early 60s .Great point about Hans/Erik would they have dominated if the others had not fell by the wayside also do you think if a peak/Fit Carter would have made the final would he have been favourite to win at Bradford in 85.?

[steve roberts]

For all that he achieved he was never a bighead, he had time for his team mates and as you said a superb starter never reared up ever and he could pass if need be.For me he had everything but the greatest thing for me was that when he first came over he failed but he never gave up believed in himself and regrouped and the rest is history great rider and man.Also it is lovely that Mirac, Briggo, Ivan were all close got on well that is very unique in the dog/eat world of sport they all had total respect for each other and those three are all in a top 15 ever.

Was so surprised "waihe read up that Briggo in 1967 was a red hot favourite...??? i thought his real peak was the 50s and early 60s .Great point about Hans/Erik would they have dominated if the others had not fell by the wayside also do you think if a peak/Fit Carter would have made the final would he have been favourite to win at Bradford in 85.?

Always interesting comparing eras but I think Hans and Erik would have risen to the challenge whoever may have been around during the eighties.

 

Regarding Carter he had three chances after Los Angeles to make an impression but after riding at Norden in 1983 (I was there and he was never really in with a shout of the title) injuries curtailed his later efforts. I personally felt his crash in 1985 at the Inter-Continental Final (?) was of his on doing due to over riding - John Davis has commented on the incident in an interview he gave some years ago in 'Backtrack' who was taken out by Carter and thus ruined his own chances of progressing.

Edited September 15, 2017 by steve roberts

[steve roberts]

Always interesting comparing eras but I think Hans and Erik would have risen to the challenge whoever may have been around during the eighties.

 

Regarding Carter he had three chances after Los Angeles to make an impression but after riding at Norden in 1983 (I was there and he was never really in with a shout of the title) injuries curtailed his later efforts. I personally felt his crash in 1985 at the Inter-Continental Final (?) was of his on doing due to over riding - John Davis has commented on the incident in an interview he gave some years ago in 'Backtrack' who was taken out by Carter and thus ruined his own chances of progressing.

 

As a postscript one shouldn't forget Shawn Moran who many regarding as a favourite to win in 1985 having won previous rounds at the circuit.

Edited September 15, 2017 by steve roberts

[Sidney the robin]

Always interesting comparing eras but I think Hans and Erik would have risen to the challenge whoever may have been around during the eighties.

 

Regarding Carter he had three chances after Los Angeles to make an impression but after riding at Norden in 1983 (I was there and he was never really in with a shout of the title) injuries curtailed his later efforts. I personally felt his crash in 1985 at the Inter-Continental Final (?) was of his on doing due to over riding - John Davis has commented on the incident in an interview he gave some years ago in 'Backtrack' who was taken out by Carter and thus ruined his own chances of progressing.

 

I was never a fan of Hans Steve, but for three seasons myself Hagonshocker and others went to Oxford nearly everyweek then i got to realise just how good a rider he was he was a great team rider to,He was good with the likes of Rasmussen,Lausch,Dugard,Sorensen( brought him on) Butler ect) my point is would Hans/Erik have won seven titles between them with a peak Lee,Carter,Sanders,Sigalos,Penhall around very hypophetical i know but worth a thought. Edited September 16, 2017 by Sidney the robin

[steve roberts]

I was never a fan of Hans Steve, but for three seasons myself Hagonshocket and others went to Oxford nearly everyweek then i got to realise just how good a rider he was he was a great team rider to,He was good with the likes of Rasmussen,Lausch,Dugard,Sorensen( brought him on) Butler ect) my point is would Hans/Erik have won seven titles between them with a peak Lee,Carter,Sanders,Sigalos,Penhall around very hypophetical i know but worth a thought.

Hi Sid...it's all subjective I know but Hans was registering a high BL average back in the late seventies and early eighties and was more than a match for the riders you list during that period.

 

Although his Individual World Championship record was still in its infancy during that period (he first qualified for the World Final in 1980) he progressively improved his standing and the 1983 World Final was the turning point. He had the beating of Egon Mulller when they met during the meeting until a snapped chain stopped him in his tracks...otherwise he would have ended up on the rostrum ahead of the likes of Sigalos (a favourite to win in some people's eyes that year), Carter (who never looked liked winning that afternoon) and possibly Lee and/or Sanders. Can't remember the exact scores now...memory and all that...but Hans would have finished on twelve (?)

 

Purely academic but I think Hans (and later Erik...who had a storming 1981 Final) would have more than held their own whoever the opposition.

 

Billy Sanders was an enigma when it came to World Finals. I think his best finishes were in 1979 (third) and 1983 (second). However he had a poor 1984 Final (I was there) when Hans and Erik really began to dominate.

 

An interesting debate nevertheless but one shouldn't forget Shawn Moran during the early middle eighties and Tommy Knudsen who was there or thereabouts based on his league and international form.

Edited September 16, 2017 by steve roberts

[norbold]

Was Briggs better than Olsen? Knutson better than Michsnek? Craven better than PC? Boocock better than Simmons? Or were those riders more successful because they weren't up against Mauger.

 

We'll never know is the real answer to that. Does a rider dominate his era because he is [one of] the greatest of all time or is it that the opposition is not so good at that period. Who knows?

 

Is Greg Hancock a case in point here? Four Times World Champion, the last at the age of 46? Must be an all-time great. But where was he when Tony Rickardsson, Jason Crump, Nicki Pedersen and Tomasz Gollob were the dominant riders? After winning his first World Championship, did he have to wait so long for his next because he wasn't actually that great and had to wait for his rivals to disappear? Is it just that over the last few years there has been a dearth of really great riders that has allowed him to come good? Does that apply to Mauger, Nielsen, Gundersen? Probably not, but who knows?

[Sidney the robin]

Hi Sid...it's all subjective I know but Hans was registering a high BL average back in the late seventies and early eighties and was more than a match for the riders you list during that period.

 

Although his Individual World Championship record was still in its infancy during that period (he first qualified for the World Final in 1980) he progressively improved his standing and the 1983 World Final was the turning point. He had the beating of Egon Mulller when they met during the meeting until a snapped chain stopped him in his tracks...otherwise he would have ended up on the rostrum ahead of the likes of Sigalos (a favourite to win in some people's eyes that year), Carter (who never looked liked winning that afternoon) and possibly Lee and/or Sanders. Can't remember the exact scores now...memory and all that...but Hans would have finished on twelve (?)

 

Purely academic but I think Hans (and later Erik...who had a storming 1981 Final) would have more than held their own whoever the opposition.

 

Billy Sanders was an enigma when it came to World Finals. I think his best finishes were in 1979 (third) and 1983 (second). However he had a poor 1984 Final (I was there) when Hans and Erik really began to dominate.

 

An interesting debate nevertheless but one shouldn't forget Shawn Moran during the early middle eighties and Tommy Knudsen who was there or thereabouts based on his league and international form.

Carter i believe was very very unlucky in 82 the poor rule in place cost him the title 83 i think on most tracks all over the world Lee would of took all the beating.Going back to Norden i was there Muller i think would of beaten Nielsen at any time but in there meeting he only needed a second place also Sanders before his death was flying at his peak for me he would of been a threat in the late 80s.

[steve roberts]

Carter i believe was very very unlucky in 82 the poor rule in place cost him the title 83 i think on most tracks all over the world Lee would of took all the beating.Going back to Norden i was there Muller i think would of beaten Nielsen at any time but in there meeting he only needed a second place also Sanders before his death was flying at his peak for me he would of been a threat in the late 80s.

Sid how do you rate Sanders and Phil Crump when both were at their peak?

 

Personally I thought that Crump was a better league man and Sanders the international version. Billy seemed to loose his way when he moved away from Ipswich but came back stronger when he returned to 'The Witches'.

 

Phil I felt was consistently better in the British League but despite his third place in Poland in 1976 he generally disappointed in World Finals and appearances (three ?). He was awesome around Cowley during the seventies but my best memory of Sanders at Oxford was riding thru' the tapes in disgust for being excluded for an infringement!

[SCB]

That's very true, SCB, but then again, he didn't have the sort of opposition that maybe other candidates for the best ever had. Fundin for example had Briggs, Moore, Craven and Knutson to contend with as well as riders of the class of Gote Nordin and Nigel Boocock. Though there again that might have been because actually Mauger was a class above all other riders (with the possible exception of Ole Olsen). Who knows? As has been said above, it is impossible to compare the top riders of each era with riders from a different era. The number of top class opponents is an important factor in that.

You could equally argue that mayve Briggs, Moore, Craven, Knutson were not "that" good, and around that time in reality there was not great speedway rider, just a lot of good ones? This is a fun argument I say argument but I think we agree. You can only compare people to their peers and riders of their day, its impossible to compare riders unless their careers overlap and even then it's difficult if one is just started as one ends.

 

Greg Hanocks wins/career for me show how good TRick and Crump where though for this reason, he won a title before they got going (I know TRick had won one at that point) and won a few after TRick and Crump were gone but what did he do while they were around? Throw in Nicki over the same period and it was only when he had suffered a few injuries Greg got going again. So while Greg with 4 titles is one of the greats, Crump and TRick were something else.

Always interesting comparing eras but I think Hans and Erik would have risen to the challenge whoever may have been around during the eighties.

 

Regarding Carter he had three chances after Los Angeles to make an impression but after riding at Norden in 1983 (I was there and he was never really in with a shout of the title) injuries curtailed his later efforts. I personally felt his crash in 1985 at the Inter-Continental Final (?) was of his on doing due to over riding - John Davis has commented on the incident in an interview he gave some years ago in 'Backtrack' who was taken out by Carter and thus ruined his own chances of progressing.

What I was of Hans, looking at the stas etc. clearly a damn good rider but I'm not convinced he'd have won as many title in another era. He lacks that big occasion mentality and others who had it would have chewed him up and spat him out.

 

We'll never know is the real answer to that. Does a rider dominate his era because he is [one of] the greatest of all time or is it that the opposition is not so good at that period. Who knows?

 

Is Greg Hancock a case in point here? Four Times World Champion, the last at the age of 46? Must be an all-time great. But where was he when Tony Rickardsson, Jason Crump, Nicki Pedersen and Tomasz Gollob were the dominant riders? After winning his first World Championship, did he have to wait so long for his next because he wasn't actually that great and had to wait for his rivals to disappear? Is it just that over the last few years there has been a dearth of really great riders that has allowed him to come good? Does that apply to Mauger, Nielsen, Gundersen? Probably not, but who knows?

How funny you should post this after my response to you last post!

[iris123]

You could equally argue that mayve Briggs, Moore, Craven, Knutson were not "that" good, and around that time in reality there was not great speedway rider, just a lot of good ones? This is a fun argument I say argument but I think we agree. You can only compare people to their peers and riders of their day, its impossible to compare riders unless their careers overlap and even then it's difficult if one is just started as one ends.

 

 

You could use the example of Knutson to maybe prove the others weren't that good.I mean he started riding speedway in 1957 i think and by 1961 was 2nd in the world behind Fundin

 

John Louis is one of the other riders who had a rapid rise to the top finishing 5th only 2 years after taking up the sport

 

Even if we are going through a period without many greats,it is hard to imagine anyone doing that sort of thing at the moment.Dudek has taken 8 years so far...quite possibly riding a few years as a junior on smaller bikes like a lot of Poles,Swedes and danes do before they make their senior league debut

Edited September 16, 2017 by iris123

[norbold]

 

 

How funny you should post this after my response to you last post!

 

? After?

[steve roberts]

You could equally argue that mayve Briggs, Moore, Craven, Knutson were not "that" good, and around that time in reality there was not great speedway rider, just a lot of good ones? This is a fun argument I say argument but I think we agree. You can only compare people to their peers and riders of their day, its impossible to compare riders unless their careers overlap and even then it's difficult if one is just started as one ends.

 

Greg Hanocks wins/career for me show how good TRick and Crump where though for this reason, he won a title before they got going (I know TRick had won one at that point) and won a few after TRick and Crump were gone but what did he do while they were around? Throw in Nicki over the same period and it was only when he had suffered a few injuries Greg got going again. So while Greg with 4 titles is one of the greats, Crump and TRick were something else.

What I was of Hans, looking at the stas etc. clearly a damn good rider but I'm not convinced he'd have won as many title in another era. He lacks that big occasion mentality and others who had it would have chewed him up and spat him out.

 

How funny you should post this after my response to you last post!

Some good points but totally disagree with your views over Hans. He struggled early on adjusting to the big occasion but after he won his first final he was as good as any other competitor and if the Grand Prix had been running during the eighties he would have achieved more Championship wins as he was the most consistent rider of that era. Whether he would have won titles within a different era? Who knows but personally I would say a very definate yes.

 

Remember reading an article when Olsen was grumbling to Ivan Mauger about what Nielsen had done to him in a race during one of their encounters on track so I have no hesitation in saying that Hans would have been up to anyone's measure whatever the era.

 

Erik was a different rider all together. Less consistent but was able to raise himself on the big occasion and having Olsen in his camp helped him tremendously from a mental point of view...although Olsen's presence was ethically wrong (as Erik later admitted) as it compromised the role Olsen had at the time as Danish Team Manager.

 

All very speculative at the end of the day but good debating all the same.

Edited September 17, 2017 by steve roberts