waiheke1

Tbf, bunyan is more competitive than the likes of starostin and ondrasik were in world finals in the 80s. Granted he's unlikely to score more than a point, but he's not been too far off the pace in either of the last two gps.

I posted this on a different thread, but perhaps it is most relavent here waihekeaces1, on 30 Jan 2014 - 2:20 PM, said: If the format is as expected (i.e. reservces entirely protected from heat leaders) then I would expect roughly the following for the “average” rider in each position, expecting a variance of +/- 2 points depending on individual. I’ve given an expected average for each position, and in brackets approximate “starting” average. Number 1: 6 out of 8 points against heat leaders, 4 out of 4 against second strings, two points from heat 15. Expected Average 9.6 (starting 8.30) Number 2: 4 out of 4 points against heat leaders, 3 out of 4 against second strings, one point from heat 15: Average 6.4 (starting 7.3) Number 3: 2 out of 4 points against heat leaders, 3 out of 4 against second strings: Average 5.0 (6.4) Second strings: 0.75 points out of 4 against heat leaders, 2 out of 4 against second strings, 3.5 out of 4 against reserves: Average 6.25 (4.75) Reserves: 0.5 out of 4 against second strings, 4 out of eight against reserves: Average 4.25 (2?) High level assumptions, but not too far off the mark I wouldn’t think? Essentially a three point swing in difficulty between being a third heat leader and second string (i.e. expect thrid heat leader to drop 1.5 from their old average, and second strings to gain the same). This will be most marked for riders coming in on an “assessed” average, as the impact will be immediate rather than gradual under rolling averages. As others have stated, come end of the season there will be an issue with averages not being "like for like". But if you start adjusting for second strings having easier heats, how do you deal with riders ho spent half the season as a second string and half as a heatleader. If you start adjusting for that, do you also need to adjust for riders racing in the tougher heat 15? How will reserves averages be converted for next year, and will the draft reserve system be in place again - and if so, would a rider like Garritty who may average 8 this year become inelgible, and if so what is the cut off for this? The more I look at this, the more I think KL, and to a lesser extent BV and Poole, have got the right set up for the team, with three genuine heat leaders, and two compettive but low averages second strings (orrall the exception). I also think its imperative that any rebuilding during the season be based on 2013 closing greensheets, otherwise it could become farcical.

I have to disagree. If the format is as expected (i.e. reservces entirely protected from heat leaders) then I would expect roughly the following for the “average” rider in each position, expecting a variance of +/- 2 points depending on individual. I’ve given an expected average for each position, and in brackets approximate “starting” average. Number 1: 6 out of 8 points against heat leaders, 4 out of 4 against second strings, two points from heat 15. Expected Average 9.6 (starting 8.30) Number 2: 4 out of 4 points against heat leaders, 3 out of 4 against second strings, one point from heat 15: Average 6.4 (starting 7.3) Number 3: 2 out of 4 points against heat leaders, 3 out of 4 against second strings: Average 5.0 (6.4) Second strings: 0.75 points out of 4 against heat leaders, 2 out of 4 against second strings, 3.5 out of 4 against reserves: Average 6.25 (4.75) Reserves: 0.5 out of 4 against second strings, 4 out of eight against reserves: Average 4.25 (2?) High level assumptions, but not too far off the mark I wouldn’t think? Essentially a three point swing in difficulty between being a third heat leader and second string (i.e. expect thrid heat leader to drop 1.5 from their old average, and second strings to gain the same). This will be most marked for riders coming in on an “assessed” average, as the impact will be immediate rather than gradual under rolling averages.

Usual sequence of scores as coventry number one?

Wasnt Duggan at his peak during the war years and just after - would explain his exclusion? Good thread gustix.

In a gp system yes. In the old world finals, no.Mauger reckons noone practiced gating as much as he and ole olsen -would seem the results of that were obvious.

Norbold -do you know if there is a website which has the results of those meetings?

In john berrys book he observed that ss used to be quite unafraid to challenge the establishment. However, once mr rising was part ofcthe group which purchased the star and went from being just editor to psrt owner, the star became much less wiling to be out spoken. Would be interested if phil thinks there is any truth to this.

Tbh, if format is as expected, I could see him averaging around 5 as a third heat leader, and around eight if he drops to a second string. He's likely to be spend more time as a heat leader, so could see him averaging around 6 this year. I actually think wolves have a decent team, top six but maybe not top 4. Like most id say kl, poole, bv and coventry look the strongest play off candidates.

The most valuable rider isnt neccesary going to be the rider who adds the most to their average. If the new heat format is as expected, id anticipate third heat leaders to on average drop a point off their average, wheras srcond strings should add a point and a half. Excluding draft riders id tip robert lambert to add the most to his average.

It wont be the same for all teams though. Those with riders on an assessed average (e.g. milik) will see a much more marked spike in averages than those with riders on a rolling average.

For team re declarations, the 2013 final rolling averages should be used. avoids all the issues caused by new heat formats and league strength.

Ffs im not disputing your right to include them on your list, jusr explaining why I and many others would exclude them. I ask if you csn provide some statistical basis to justify their inclusion, and you resort to sarcasm, rather than giving a reasoned response. A shame ss you've obviously watched a bit of dpeedway in your time

Gustix - any chance of an answer?

Its not a rule, but most people would base their lists significantly - though not exclusively - on world final performances. You're welcome to include them on your list, but given that I havent seen them ride and readily available stats dont support their claims. If you csn present stats to present a compelling case however id be genuinely interested to see it.

Whoosh

The issue of course would have been that almost all the top riders raced in Britain as there was only one major league - im not sure that would have made for a better champions league. What are your thoughts on tge world club t20 competition, which faces the same issue with regards to players potentially qualifying for multiple clubs - a proper competition?

Based on stats from your site scb, based on returning riders from 2013, janowski is arou d 20th ( slightly higher/lower depending if u include bp) - so a weak second heat leader or strong third hest leader in a ten team comp.

Were u previously "speedy guy". If so u promised to provide such a list but didnt, but did claim bast would be in your top 20.

For most, yes. Just as with football, most would selet their greats from 1930 onwards.

To be prdantic, jessup was the bookies favourite in 80, penhall was second favourite

I guess its relative - there are certainly arguments for it being less fair than the gp system, but lets not open that argument again!

i think i can justify their inclusion Sidney. Collins on just the one title, but as desperately unlucky not to win a second in 77, a performance that still ranks as arguably the greatest world final display of all time. Under a GP system he would have likely won two world titles. He won orld Pairs titles wityh FIVE different partners, achieved an unprecedented three consecutive WTC maximums, won every other major title (British Final, BLRC, Inter-continental etc.), topped the british averages, averaged over 11 on at leeast one occasion - and this despite the fact that he was never the same rider afetr the iinjury he sustained in 1980 at the age of 26. That's all without mentioning that he was arguably the greatest team rider of all time, and without going into the sheer breathtaking manner of some of his victories. Penhall was only 25 when he retired, having won back to back world titles, so who knows how many more he could have won. Under a GP system he would likely have won the same two titles, and possibly added a medal in 1980. Won most other major titles (orld PAirs, WTC, Inter continental, AMerican), and in 1981 as riding as well as any rider in history - hard to think of another season in which a rider was so dominant. The main rivals for those last to spots: Craven, who won two world titles, was one of the "big five", and could have won more but for his tragic death at a young age. Debate on another thread suggests however that he may never have won a title under a GP system, and not having seen footage of him racing I guess I may have some bias against him as I have no vidual evidence to show me ho good he really was. Gundersen won three world titles, and potentially could have won more but for his career ending injuries. Won multiple PAirs, WTC and BLRC titles, and pretty much every other major event. The onyl argument against him really is that even at his peak, he was arguably second best rider in the world to Hans , and under a GP system he may have been less successful. Nicki Pedersen seems to be the most under rated multipe world champion of alll time, especialyl given that all his three titles have been under a GP system so there can be no arguing about them being lucky. Perhaps his "dirty Nicki" person, and the fact that he is arguably not as naturally gifted as his main rivals such as Crump or Gollob, count against him? Mike Lee is generally regarded as the most naturaly gifted rider of all time, but based on achievements I can't find a place for him in the top dozen riders of all time. He had a good world final record - one title and two rostrum finishes - and under a GP system would likely have had a similar record (i'd say 1st in 79, 2nd in 80, 3rd in 83). But in pretty much every other way, i think his record is inferior to the likes of collins and penhall - never won a pairs title, never scored a WTC final maximum, never won the BLRC (netierh did Bruce), never averaged over 11 in the BL, never had a season such as Bruce's 81 season where he was head and shoulders above every rider in the world. So,. I'm happy to stand by my list, but on adifferent day as mentioned already, craven and Gundersen might edege into my top 10. Agree. Had he won say two of the three title run offs he as involved in, i think he would be regarded as the all time greatest rider. As it is, choker would be too harsh, but with the pressure on - in world individual finals only - he did seem to sometimes come up lacking, whereas others such as Mauger always seemed to raise there game on world final night. his head to head world final record with his greatest rival Eric is somethiong like 3-8 against, its stats like that which i think argue against Hans being the greatest of all time. great riders they may have been, but the fact is though that none of those riders on the world title, which is ultimately the key barometer of success. Nivki Pedersen always seems to be underrated in this type of discussion, so intersting to see him finish so high. Surprised to see him ahead of J Crump - 10 seasons in a row on the podicum! - though, so interested as to how you did these calcs? ermolenko finished last in his last race when he on the title, so i presume you're talking about a different ride? the clash with Nielsen, where I would agree he got lucky?

True, but I can't think of any world final - including those where sckaziel and muller won - which were not conventional speedway tracks. Costa mesa is something else. Of course there is the matter of qualification - early 70s bast would likely have been seeded direct to the final, but late 70s would have been competing with autrey and penhall for the spot, so no guarantee he would have qualified. If he had though, he would have had a genuine title chance imho.

Penhall, hancock, ermolenko, milne x 2, laveraux, moran x 2, hamill, autrey, sigalos, schwartz, king. All americans I would rank higher.