Mauger Better Than Rickardsson?

[Custom House Kid 45]

personally im on the fence on this one..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Asleep on the air fence!

[sandman 0]

personally im on the fence on this one..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Asleep on the air fence!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

man,.. but what a dream! after a bit of thought i'd go for mauger by a nose,... so far.. if tony can win his final one at 40 years old he got my vote.. he's great too though, but great and a bit greater can be a wide divide my friend. i think mauger, if he was young and hungry with nothing but determination and drive, no money and a young wife and family to support, loads of talent, cleaning the bathrooms at wimbledon for some extra money to survive like he did do, against the extremely talented tony, today in the here and now, the macavallian character would have an edge..mauger is unlike any, that todays racers have ever faced. noooo disrespect to trick, who really is something special.. time will tell. at the moment, no contest... Ivan..the later world champions may not have been, had the race against time not caught up with the great one., no mike, no bruce no eric etc etc..

Edited November 1, 2004 by sandman

[Chris Brown 542]

There is no argument here Tony is far superior rider wise, Ivan was a master at trapping but from the back was nowhere near as good as Tony,although Ivan was a fantastic rider in  his day and has six ind titals, for sheer riding ability and guts it has to be Tony for all round ability.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And for me Nielsen beats the pair of them !

 

The GP argument is blown away with Nielsen. NOBODY else would have won a World Title between 1985 and 1995 had the GP format been in during those years. For sheer consistency Nielsen was the absolute master, was it 4 wins and SIX 2nd's in his time.

 

The other thing Nielsen had that Rickardsson certainly has NEVER had was the ability to team ride, apart from Bobby Schwartz nobody was in his class in this. Nielsen also done it at Longtrack level. His ability to help his team mates was 2nd to none.

 

Add to that the fact that when Nielsen was at his prime so were Gundersen, Jan O Pedersen and Tommy Knudsen. The strength in depth at the top was far far higher than today.

 

For me Nielsen stands out as the greatest all round speedway rider. Mauger is up there with him but sorry, Rickardsson is a great rider but not even in the remote same class as Hans

[sandman 0]

There is no argument here Tony is far superior rider wise, Ivan was a master at trapping but from the back was nowhere near as good as Tony,although Ivan was a fantastic rider in  his day and has six ind titals, for sheer riding ability and guts it has to be Tony for all round ability.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And for me Nielsen beats the pair of them !

 

The GP argument is blown away with Nielsen. NOBODY else would have won a World Title between 1985 and 1995 had the GP format been in during those years. For sheer consistency Nielsen was the absolute master, was it 4 wins and SIX 2nd's in his time.

 

The other thing Nielsen had that Rickardsson certainly has NEVER had was the ability to team ride, apart from Bobby Schwartz nobody was in his class in this. Nielsen also done it at Longtrack level. His ability to help his team mates was 2nd to none.

 

Add to that the fact that when Nielsen was at his prime so were Gundersen, Jan O Pedersen and Tommy Knudsen. The strength in depth at the top was far far higher than today.

 

For me Nielsen stands out as the greatest all round speedway rider. Mauger is up there with him but sorry, Rickardsson is a great rider but not even in the remote same class as Hans

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

all due respect to Hans which he obviously deserves.. Mauger was much tougher mentally. Nielsen learned from Ole, who learned from Ivan, who didnt teach his all, he was too smart for that, and kept some back for himself. Chris, did you see all of the three greats at their peaks? I did. Mauger has those two easily beat, although, admittedly great, they werent Mauger. I think with all due respect, Hans won a couple of his when the weakness in the calibre of racers was a bit down from previous years. you cant say that about Ivan. Respect your opinion though, and i surely could be wrong.. just my thoughts after seeing those three at their best..

[fatface 2,552]

I've never heard anyone before ever praise Nielsen for his long-track skills. To my mind that was his biggest weakness, he never got anywhere near being the best in that discipline. As for team riding skills, Morton and Collins weren't too bad at that either.

 

To my mind it's also not certain that Hans would have won all those world titles between 85 and 95 in a GP format either. I always thought he was prone to being a little nervy on the big occasion, whose to say he would've been different in GPs.

 

Just for fun, you could flip the argument around with Leigh Adams. Let's say the one-offs had replaced an old GP format. I'd bet there would be loads of people who now be saying "if it wasn't for these one-offs, Leigh Adams would have won about five World Titles by now"

[Shoddy 1]

Mr Shoddy

 

Perhaps I am missing something but in your analysis of Tony Rickardsson you note that he only finished in the "...top two" twice but was champion four times. As I read your analysis, Tony Rickardsson finished in the "...top two" five times, winning four and being runner-up once.

As I said, perhaps I am missing something.

 

Regards

 

BilaHora

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes and no!!!

 

You are right but I mean consecutive finishes. He as only been in the top 2 twice in a row during that period. Fundin and Nielsen are down as 6 because they were in the top two for 6 finals in a row and Mauger the same for 7.

 

Should have explained what I meant better!

 

Also spotted a glaring error in the 4 years in the top 3 theory which I'm about to correct - how could I have missed Crump?!?!

[stevehone 3,429]

I always thought he was prone to being a little nervy on the big occasion, whose to say he would've been different in GPs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

especially if Gundersen was still around and riding

[Shoddy 1]

To my mind it's also not certain that Hans would have won all those world titles between 85 and 95 in a GP format either. I always thought he was prone to being a little nervy on the big occasion, whose to say he would've been different in GPs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

He won the first GP series as he was the most consistent rider and he was getting well past his peak when he did it. Was also the best rider in my opinion the year after but Hamill nicked it with a couple of great performances. I think the one offs suited Gundersen but a GP series would have been much better for Nielsen. Without Gundersens injury I think these two would have dominated through the early 90's aswell (with Pedersen and perhaps Per Jonsson being up there?) but Hans seemed to lose a bit of edge for a few years after.

 

 

Just for fun, you could flip the argument around with Leigh Adams. Let's say the one-offs had replaced an old GP format. I'd bet there would be loads of people who now be saying "if it wasn't for these one-offs, Leigh Adams would have won about five World Titles by now" 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Tomasz Gollob aswell on that one!

[Jeff. 2]

There is no argument here Tony is far superior rider wise, Ivan was a master at trapping but from the back was nowhere near as good as Tony,although Ivan was a fantastic rider in  his day and has six ind titals, for sheer riding ability and guts it has to be Tony for all round ability.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And for me Nielsen beats the pair of them !

 

The GP argument is blown away with Nielsen. NOBODY else would have won a World Title between 1985 and 1995 had the GP format been in during those years. For sheer consistency Nielsen was the absolute master, was it 4 wins and SIX 2nd's in his time.

 

The other thing Nielsen had that Rickardsson certainly has NEVER had was the ability to team ride, apart from Bobby Schwartz nobody was in his class in this. Nielsen also done it at Longtrack level. His ability to help his team mates was 2nd to none.

 

Add to that the fact that when Nielsen was at his prime so were Gundersen, Jan O Pedersen and Tommy Knudsen. The strength in depth at the top was far far higher than today.

 

For me Nielsen stands out as the greatest all round speedway rider. Mauger is up there with him but sorry, Rickardsson is a great rider but not even in the remote same class as Hans

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That is a post from someone who obviously wasn't around when Ivan was in his prime, mid sixties to mid seventies. In that era there were lots of riders capable of beating each other in world finals, the eastern europeans were especially dominant when riding on their own tracks, add to them Briggs, Olsen, Michanek, Collins etc ets and you can imagine the difficulty of winning finals back then.

 

In Hans era the world final generally was about 1 race, Nielsen v Gundersen, the winner the likely champion.

 

That said I believe Hans to be almost the equal of Ivan and with just a little more luck on the nights could easily have been champion in 1984, 1985, 1988, 1994 and 1996

[SCB 0]

That is a post from someone who obviously wasn't around when Ivan was in his prime, mid sixties to mid seventies. In that era there were lots of riders capable of beating each other in world finals, the eastern europeans were especially dominant when riding on their own tracks, add to them Briggs, Olsen, Michanek, Collins etc ets and you can imagine the difficulty of winning finals back then.

 

 

In Hans era the world final generally was about 1 race, Nielsen v Gundersen, the winner the likely champion.

 

 

Which proves what? There were more good riders in the earlier era and more naff riders but maybe no great one where as in the later era there were 2 exceptional talents and maybe hundreds of great talents?!

 

You CANNOT compare two eras!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IT CANT BE DONE!

 

Whats better? Bannanas or Beans?

Edited November 3, 2004 by SCB

[stevehone 3,429]

You CANNOT compare two eras!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  IT CANT BE DONE!

 

Whats better?  Bannanas or Beans?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

i think the point is that the number of real challengers for the title differed from era to era ....

when it was Gundersen/Nielsen there were those two as hot favourites ... after that there was maybe two or three that could be considered good enough to win.

 

when you look back a few years, there was possibly 10 that could have gone and won a world final

[SCB 0]

But could it have been that there were 10 who could have won the title then as there were not 2 stand out men (like Nielsen and Gundersen) to make it a 2 horse (man) race (title)?

[sandman 0]

But could it have been that there were 10 who could have won the title then as there were not 2 stand out men (like Nielsen and Gundersen) to make it a 2 horse (man) race (title)?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yer missin the point son..

[iris123 20,972]

what beans are we talking about?Black eyed susies,mung or just the whole lot

[stevehone 3,429]

what beans are we talking about?Black eyed susies,mung or just the whole lot

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

with what he's said after, i reckon Mung