Who is number six?

[norbold]

19 minutes ago, chunky said:

I agree 100%. When you look at his remarkable consistency, he deserves to be included far more than riders like Hancock and Pedersen.

I am also a huge fan of Crump's. We also shouldn't forget that he is the only rider apart from Fundin to gain a top three World Championship place in 10 consecutive seasons. Some achievement!
 

Also, my memory is a bit vague here, but wasn't there one season when he would have added another World title had he not run out of fuel (of all things!) in the vital race?

[customhouseregular]

2 hours ago, norbold said:

And with Stan Stevens.

Mr. Reliable.

[steve roberts]

4 hours ago, customhouseregular said:

As a Hammers supporter I have to agree with Ken McKinlay being the ultimate team rider. His partnership with Simmons produced many valuable 5-1’s for the team.

Ken was one of my early heroes at Oxford. I recall the occasion he let Garry Middleton thru' so that "Cass" could claim a full maximum!

[chunky]

4 hours ago, steve roberts said:

Ken was one of my early heroes at Oxford. I recall the occasion he let Garry Middleton thru' so that "Cass" could claim a full maximum!

He probably threatened Ken to make sure he got the lot!

[Midland Red]

For me, it has to be Ronnie Moore

[Grachan]

On 11/27/2021 at 4:17 PM, customhouseregular said:

There are not many with 4 or more WC titles, which narrows the field somewhat. If we open up the criteria to multiple titles, it gives us more scope.

I'm not saying that it's the be all and end all of it, but it certainly makes Hancock worth considering.

Personally, I agree more with the opinion that he wasn't able to win a title when Rickardsson, Pedersen and Crump were at their peak, so they were probably better riders than him. The only other rider to win a title in that era was Loram. Hancock's longevity does, however, make him worthy.

For me, Crump was better than Pedersen and Hancock. However, Hancock was winning World Titles at 46 years of age, which is about the same age that Jason Crump is now and Hancock was way above Jason at that age.

Or are we just looking at riders at their peak regardless of how short it was? If that's the case, Michael Lee is also worth considering.

 

[fatface]

My pick would be Bruce Penhall. He cleaned up everything there was to win and did it in style too. And if we were talking about being the complete package, I think he has a stronger case than a few of those in the top 5. Crump, Hancock, Olsen, Gundersen all legitimate claims too....but also a couple of questions over whether they were the best in their own eras. Short as it was, Penhall was unquestionably the best of his.

Disastrous it was at the time for the sport, but the timing of his retirement looks smarter and smarter as time goes on. Winning the title at the last ever final at Wembley, including winning two of the sport's most iconic races and defending it in his home city....well, it was never going to get any better than that for him was it? I think he had a few more titles in him, but somehow Norden, Bradford and Vojens just don't seem like the right stage for a rider who was the sport's last superstar. 

[iris123]

34 minutes ago, falcace said:

My pick would be Bruce Penhall. He cleaned up everything there was to win and did it in style too. And if we were talking about being the complete package, I think he has a stronger case than a few of those in the top 5. Crump, Hancock, Olsen, Gundersen all legitimate claims too....but also a couple of questions over whether they were the best in their own eras. Short as it was, Penhall was unquestionably the best of his.

Disastrous it was at the time for the sport, but the timing of his retirement looks smarter and smarter as time goes on. Winning the title at the last ever final at Wembley, including winning two of the sport's most iconic races and defending it in his home city....well, it was never going to get any better than that for him was it? I think he had a few more titles in him, but somehow Norden, Bradford and Vojens just don't seem like the right stage for a rider who was the sport's last superstar. 

I sort of agree with this to some extent

Always difficult to judge how things would have panned out if Bruce hadn't decided to retire. Just like if Ronnie Moore hadn't had that break from the sport at his peak. I would in both cases like to think they could have taken at least another title. Possibly more so even in Penhall's case. But Ronnie had proved he could beat the best of his rivals, whereas you could say a new generation came up when Penhall left the sport. But would they have been such a success if he had stuck around ?

[fatface]

28 minutes ago, iris123 said:

I sort of agree with this to some extent

Always difficult to judge how things would have panned out if Bruce hadn't decided to retire. Just like if Ronnie Moore hadn't had that break from the sport at his peak. I would in both cases like to think they could have taken at least another title. Possibly more so even in Penhall's case. But Ronnie had proved he could beat the best of his rivals, whereas you could say a new generation came up when Penhall left the sport. But would they have been such a success if he had stuck around ?

It can be overlooked, but I think its the race where Penhall beats Olsen at Wembley and he gives Nielsen really short shrift on the first turn. And if he hadn't, Olsen could have been gone. It's the sort of move that really lets someone know they are in a World Final. Penhall was quick to learn these lessons...he got similar treatment from Lee the year before. Nielsen took longer to really get to grips with this type of riding in World Finals. But when he did, he started winning.

[False dawn]

On 11/28/2021 at 3:04 PM, E I Addio said:

Its also been mentioned that the so called top 5 had to contend with each other but while we are speculating I think If Tony Rickardson had never been born we would be talking of Jason Crump in the top five. He really was ,to my mind , one of the true greats, more so than Greg Hancock.

This is a great discussion. Riders individual achievements, British Finals, World Championships and so on, are known by many and have been written about endlessly. But team players are really only lauded by their team's supporters. To take up your point with regard to Jason Crump, from the outside he fell into the "I've scored a maximum but the team lost" category. I don't think I've seen a rider consistently finish so far ahead of the field. But in this context, Greg was a quality individual performer but for Bees fans we remember the H&H days with great fondness. 

[lucifer sam]

On 11/27/2021 at 12:13 PM, norbold said:

Over the years we have had a number of threads discussing the "Greatest Ever". Looking back over these, it seems to be that, if we take riders within living memory that many have actually seen or have heard about first hand from those that have seen them, the top five are fairly well agreed as (in roughly chronological order) Ove Fundin, Barry Briggs, Ivan Mauger, Hans Nielsen and Tony Rickardsson.

Two questions.

1. Would anyone disagree with those five?

2. Who is number six?

1. No, they all deserve to be there. 

2. Tricky question. I think I'd go for Bruce Penhall, although IMO the other outstanding candidates (in chronological order) are Bluey Wilkinson, Vic Duggan, Jack Young, Ronnie Moore, Peter Craven, Ole Olsen, Anders Michanek, Erik Gundersen, Greg Hancock and Jason Crump.  As for Tai Woffinden and Bartosz Zmarzlik, I'll decide where they fit once they retire.

Edited November 29, 2021 by lucifer sam

[heathen52]

It really is almost impossible to compare, lets take just 2 riders who i had the pleasure of watching during there entire career both cut short for varying reasons; Penhall and Gunderson by whatever yardstick you may use they were both great riders. Firstly Penhall in my humble opinion a better all round racer than Gundersen, however if Eric was in front in any race I rarely if ever saw anyone overtake him, take the last Wembley final yes Bruce won the Final but Eric took the Track record and didnt finish on the rostrum because if memory serves me right in possibly his easiest race he forgot to turn his fuel on and failed to score a point when just an extra point would have put him on 12 equal with Olsen and Knudsen, however thats all ifs buts and maybe`s, back to Bruce as Eric has recently said he and the Americans gave us a new style of riding away from the old upright sitting style, whereby they threw the bike around and moved around on the bikes during races, Bruce could perform on all Tracks and in all conditions be it from the front or back. Eric liked the big fast Tracks and generally would gate and go however he was known on occasion to grab a handful of throttle and take a big blast around the outside leaving the oposition in his wake. Who was the best? probably Bruce but in a match race I really couldnt say who would win.

[E I Addio]

1 hour ago, False dawn said:

This is a great discussion. Riders individual achievements, British Finals, World Championships and so on, are known by many and have been written about endlessly. But team players are really only lauded by their team's supporters. To take up your point with regard to Jason Crump, from the outside he fell into the "I've scored a maximum but the team lost" category. I don't think I've seen a rider consistently finish so far ahead of the field. But in this context, Greg was a quality individual performer but for Bees fans we remember the H&H days with great fondness. 

Yes, you are right. Not only is the discussion somewhat subjective but our memories play tricks on us .We see a certain rider pull off a particular move once or twice and when we look back years later we have somehow convinced ourselves that he was doing it every week.

Another point is that Speedway is primarily a team sport but we always judge these things ontbe basis of individual performances. For example Fundins record of consistency in the World Final undoubtedly puts him among the greatest of all time, yet there seems to be any number of riders who will say he needn’t care who he knocked off , even his own team mates, as long as he won the race. I suppose the majority of No 1’s were like that to some degree.

Then coming back to your point about Greg , his style made it look like he was never really trying, even if he was winning a Grand Prix. On the other hand Crumpie always had that look of aggression and malevolence about his riding that made one sit up and take notice. 

Perhaps I can take the discussion a step further and ask who were the best all round team men at league level.It would have to be a powerful heat leader , but one who could team ride and inspire his team by his mere presence in the pits.That makes him more difficult to pick. Over to you guys.......

[norbold]

2 hours ago, lucifer sam said:

1. No, they all deserve to be there. 

2. Tricky question. I think I'd go for Bruce Penhall, although IMO the other outstanding candidates (in chronological order) are Bluey Wilkinson, Vic Duggan, Jack Young, Ronnie Moore, Peter Craven, Ole Olsen, Erik Gundersen, Greg Hancock and Jason Crump.  As for Tai Woffinden and Bartosz Zmarzlik, I'll decide where they fit once they retire.

As far as Bluey Wilkinson and Vic Duggan go I was really looking at riders of recent memory. Otherwise, surely Tom Farndon would be no.1!

[chunky]

8 hours ago, iris123 said:

I sort of agree with this to some extent

Always difficult to judge how things would have panned out if Bruce hadn't decided to retire. Just like if Ronnie Moore hadn't had that break from the sport at his peak. I would in both cases like to think they could have taken at least another title. Possibly more so even in Penhall's case. But Ronnie had proved he could beat the best of his rivals, whereas you could say a new generation came up when Penhall left the sport. But would they have been such a success if he had stuck around ?

The problem is that everyone is convinced that they KNOW what would have happened. What we have to do is judge things by what happened, and not what might have happened. Take Tommy Jansson. Everyone says that he would have been a world champion, but he would still have been facing Collins, Lee, Mauger, Olsen etc, and then Penhall, Gundersen, and Nielsen. Nobody can say for certain...

Edited November 29, 2021 by chunky

[lucifer sam]

18 minutes ago, norbold said:

As far as Bluey Wilkinson and Vic Duggan go I was really looking at riders of recent memory. Otherwise, surely Tom Farndon would be no.1!

Well, you'd gone as far back as a rider who rode in UK Speedway in 1952 (Briggo), so I just went back a tiny bit earlier   But, yeah, going pre-war does open up a different kettle of fish, so maybe we should restrict it to post-war.  I rescind Bluey Wilkinson and add Anders Michanek  

   

[lucifer sam]

On 11/27/2021 at 12:17 PM, PotteringAround said:

Patrick McGoohan wasn't it?

No, he wasn't a number, he was a free man.

[norbold]

1 minute ago, chunky said:

The problem is that everyone is convinced that they KNOW what would have happened. What we have to do is judge things by what happended, and not what might have happened. Take Tommy Jansson. Everyone says that he would have been a world champion, but he would still have been facing Collins, Lee, Mauger, Olsen etc, and then Penhall, Gundersen, and Nielsen. Nobody can say for certain...

Not everyone chunky, because I absolutely agree with that. It has always seemed to be some sort of heresy to doubt that Tommy Jansson would have been world champion, but for the reasons you say, I have always had severe doubts that he would have been.

[jrs]

1 hour ago, E I Addio said:

Yes, you are right. Not only is the discussion somewhat subjective but our memories play tricks on us .We see a certain rider pull off a particular move once or twice and when we look back years later we have somehow convinced ourselves that he was doing it every week.

Another point is that Speedway is primarily a team sport but we always judge these things ontbe basis of individual performances. For example Fundins record of consistency in the World Final undoubtedly puts him among the greatest of all time, yet there seems to be any number of riders who will say he needn’t care who he knocked off , even his own team mates, as long as he won the race. I suppose the majority of No 1’s were like that to some degree.

Then coming back to your point about Greg , his style made it look like he was never really trying, even if he was winning a Grand Prix. On the other hand Crumpie always had that look of aggression and malevolence about his riding that made one sit up and take notice. 

Perhaps I can take the discussion a step further and ask who were the best all round team men at league level.It would have to be a powerful heat leader , but one who could team ride and inspire his team by his mere presence in the pits.That makes him more difficult to pick. Over to you guys.......

Surely it's easier to start a new thread if you want to change the matter under discussion, rather than hijack a thread. 

[iris123]

4 hours ago, chunky said:

The problem is that everyone is convinced that they KNOW what would have happened. What we have to do is judge things by what happened, and not what might have happened. Take Tommy Jansson. Everyone says that he would have been a world champion, but he would still have been facing Collins, Lee, Mauger, Olsen etc, and then Penhall, Gundersen, and Nielsen. Nobody can say for certain...

You quote me stating it is difficult to KNOW, then say the trouble is everyoone is convinced they KNOW