Bruce Penhall

[Thischarmingman 18]

Maybe South Africa or Rhodesia, and wasn't there speedway in Brazil and Mexico at some point?

 

I think South Africa and Rhodesia had a short lived boom about a decade before Penhall's time, almost all based on touring riders with the odd home grown talent thrown in.

[heathen79 6]

This was hardly a debate Heathen...

 

That's quite true!

 

 

Hope my feedback is helpful as you acknowledged my comments in my first appraisal. For review purposes id give it ** stars out of ***** stars.

 

Indeed, the full contents of your posts in this thread have at least put your 'review' into some further context and I feel rather better about the criticism now

[dirt 0]

, Carter never got close to winning the world title!

 

Id think he came within inches in 82 and couldnt of possibly got closer to winning than that, unless he lost a run off, even then it could be argued Carters effort in 82 could not be bettered unless he ended up champion. He had it in control before Penhall sneaked through a gap and drove Carter towards the fence, and in effect stole the championship there and then and he was in control after that.

 

Not everyone is only interested in mega money!

 

have you been sniffing glue??? "Money isn't the factor for riders generally" You ask Ivan Mauger, Barry Briggs, Ole Olsen, Ronnie Moore, Peter Collins and Egon Muller if they thought money wasn't a factor! Ivan Mauger and Barry Briggs fought tooth and nail in the 1970's for riders wages to be increased greatly. Many riders even threatened to go on strike in the early 1970's.

 

Yes Ian Chappell fought for pay increases for the players also in the 70s with one day cricket making a lot of money that didnt get filtered down to the players. They threatened all sorts of action to get a fair slice of the pie and what they thought they deserved. It doesnt mean they wouldnt of still played for a lesser amount they just wanted a fairer deal considering ACB or Cricket Australia were raking in tonnes of money compared to the actual stars , the players.

Not all sportsman want mega money and it is mostly just a bonus (hence why amateur: footy,soccer,cricket thrive, EVEN amateur speedway solo bikes) but for the best talents competing in the top level which are semi-personally funded motorsport, it is necessary to strike a good pay deal, to keep machines at the best level, tuned by the best, made by the best and maintained. Penhall didnt stay around long enough to have to bother much about maintenance or much new machinery either!

But i'm not that naive in thinking it's about anything other than money.

 

Why do amateur level sports have record numbers of competitors!!football,cricket,soccer,etc etc,,,do they get paid?

Most sidecar riders in Australia (just as or even more dangerous than solo bikes) and many solo riders for numbers of years going way back rode at tracks whenever they could for nothing, and they still do! and many of these riders especially sidecar teams are far from ordinary infact a lot of them are world class, and they are lucky to get tow or fuel money or travel expenses and still often have to pay for admittance to the events and nomination fees.

 

Bruce Penhall reached the pinnacle of his chosen profession, speedway. You can't go any higher than being world champion! FACT nobody not even Bruce Penhall himself will ever truly know whether he could of won more world titles! FACT.

 

correct, but he is far from the glamour boy who could do no wrong.

[dirt 0]

Was it really a huge sport in the early 80's, I got the impression it had already passed the mini-boom of the mid/late 70's by then?

 

Yes, the crowds in the UK were bigger domestically in those days than they are now, but it was the late 70's/early 80's, not the post war boom we're talking here. I know some tracks pulled in really big crowds at times and Wembley could pull a crowd for the World Finals.

 

Speedway has always been a niche sport in the US, slightly bigger in those days than it is now, and pretty much concentrated in the California area. Why do you think the Coliseum had less than 40,000 there that night when the place held over 80,000? There was probably a regular season baseball game on at nearby Dodger stadium that had a bigger crowd.

 

Other that that it was as popular in Eastern Europe as it is now, possibly more so, but I can't think of anywhere in the world that speedway was hugely popular 30 years ago and has disappeared now. Can you dirt?

Yes , but Im talking popularity in the context to get 100,000 plus in for an event like they got in 81 Wembley and had done for many years previously for World Finals, and prob got for years after 81..... when it was a one off event. USA was an experiment and could never get big numbers because of all their fairy games like gridiron baseball hockey basketball etc.

 

Also individual events got huge crowds over europe and well generally when Penhall was riding 78-82 it was attracting way bigger crowds in England which is where Penhall rode and the big World Finals got big crowds almost anywhere they staged them, there were some huge individuals and the potential for the top riders was huge $$. World Champion was even another stratosphere, with a million dollars (big back then) easy to rake in after winning it as was the demand to see the best!

 

Perths Claremont speedway in OZ got 35,000 fans in the mid 70s to see Mauger for the first time and although that figure may not have been beaten since im not sure Australia could still produce worthwhile crowds id imagine in the early 80s late 70s. Carter came over numerous times to Claremont so basically it must have been viable and a World Champion could have made in excess of a million pounds in 1 year if they desired to make the most of it.

Edited December 6, 2010 by dirt

[dirt 0]

Indeed, since when did taking up speedway and becoming World Champion commit you to carry on with it until you're seriously injured or old, past it and living on former glories? Returning to California rather than living half the year in the UK, what a crazed madman.

 

I must admit I didn't start following speedway until a couple of years after he quit, but going out as double World Champion has a certain style about it, though no doubt a huge shock to the sport at the time.

 

Dirt, do you even remember Bruce Penhall as a racer, I have my doubts? I can't imagine such rage building up against someone, based on a book you have read about a subject. Most bizarre.

Charmer...I certainly seen Penhall race from the comfort of my living room on old DVDs. well old footage converted to DVDs.

 

Not a bad rider, and would have liked to see more...

 

No better than he thinks he is, and no better than heathen79 thought he was.

 

Would get a thrashing riding against todays riders. at his peak I mean. He was a bit lucky when he was at his peak, Lee had dropped off and there werent many talents around.

 

edit: (Besides Carter) who had bad luck in 81 and 82 and deserved 1 of those titles IMO but it wasnt to be.

Back to Penhall,

In his best years put him against todays best and he'd get flogged. IMO!

 

cheers.

Edited December 6, 2010 by dirt

[fatface 2,554]

 

Yikes!

 

I can't compete with those kind of arguments. We must be working on some different logic. I'm going to 'do a Penhall' and quit on this debate!

...and you do so with your dignity very much in tact, despite some grossly unfair provocation. Writing a book - any book - takes a great deal of commitment and at the very least you deserve credit for the time and effort you have undoubtedly put in. Other people clearly have the time to rant on the internet endlessly, I'd suggest they use that energy more productively and perhaps write their own book that would - no doubt - spellbind all of us.

 

Anyone doing down Penhall's ability on a speedway bike can only be based on prejudice and not his quite incredible talent. He won everything there was to win in a very short space of time. As well as winning two World Finals out of three finals, he also led the US to their first-ever World Pairs and World Team Cup victories. To suggest he is anything but an all-time great is utter nonsense.

 

Had he chosen to prolong his career, I have no doubt he would have continued to win at the very highest level. Hans Nielsen managed the transition from 70s machinery through to late 90s supertuned motors, I fail to see why Penhall (arguably the greater talent) couldn't have managed it?

Edited December 6, 2010 by falcace

[Humphrey Appleby 13,960]

Id think he came within inches in 82 and couldnt of possibly got closer to winning than that, unless he lost a run off, even then it could be argued Carters effort in 82 could not be bettered unless he ended up champion. He had it in control before Penhall sneaked through a gap and drove Carter towards the fence, and in effect stole the championship there and then and he was in control after that.

 

Such is the way it goes. In the top flight of any sport, the difference between winning and losing is small margins, but true champions have a way of making luck go their way.

 

It doesnt mean they wouldnt of still played for a lesser amount they just wanted a fairer deal considering ACB or Cricket Australia were raking in tonnes of money compared to the actual stars , the players.

 

I think the problem was actually that the cricketing authorities weren't making tonnes of money when they should have been. They were not exploiting commercial opportunities, particularly with respect to television rights which were cosily handed for peppercorn sums to public broadcasters.

 

The difference with cricket compared to many other sports is that it takes a lot of time to play, and international players are touring during the close season. Except for England, top flight cricketers generally got paid pitiful sums of money and were either forced to have other jobs or hawk their wares around club cricket.

[westhamboy66 599]

"I challenge anyone to find a worse book than Penhalls offering! What a pathetic disgraceful attempt at producing a readable book. I now have mixed feelings but certainly a lot of hate for the man who by writing a book should have been gaining admirers, not creating enemies. you have to laugh at how anyone could publish this thing. Anyone off the street could have written a better book on any subject. I dont know how he managed to do so poorly, on a subject that I love. This book should be called Mission Impossible. 0/10, the few pictures are even poor. and who the hell would want to read about his power boat racing and how he won a world championship at that. I couldnt care any less.

Thank god ive got some better offerings arriving soon to get this over rated gutless yank out of my system.

cheers."

 

A quick search finds this diatribe, which I would hesitate to call a review, that you posted last December. I'm sure the author was delighted to read such well written constructive criticism. You still didn't actually explain what you didn't enjoy about the book.

 

I've got the book by the way, no classic granted, but tells the Penhall story well enough. Also as a Biography I reckon it's important to talk about Penhall the person, not just what he achieved on the track.

I fear that vey few Speedway books written about a life in the sport are worth reading, For me notable exceptions are Len Silvers Book. Tommy Janssons book and the Ivan Mauger effort which is not only well written but factually fantastic. If you really want to read rubbish then I can endorse Hammerin' Around by Brian Belton

Edited December 6, 2010 by westhamboy66

[liverpool chad 2]

 

 

Id think he came within inches in 82 and couldnt of possibly got closer to winning than that, unless he lost a run off, even then it could be argued Carters effort in 82 could not be bettered unless he ended up champion. He had it in control before Penhall sneaked through a gap and drove Carter towards the fence, and in effect stole the championship there and then and he was in control after that.

 

How the hell do you get to the conclusion that Carter was inches away from winning the world title? When Carter fell off, he was in third position and would of taken 1 point from that race. Not enough to take the title outright. And before anyone say's Penhall knocked Carter off, i suggest they have a look at the footage from the CBS cameras that were set up on that bend (footage released after world final) The footage clearly shows that not only did Penhall not touch Carter in the bend but he also left him enough room to cut back under Penhall. But Kenny being Kenny, he chose the wrong option and paid the price!

The only person that was robbed of the world title that night after the incident, was Leicesters Les Collins, the reigning intercontinental champion.

 

 

 

Why do amateur level sports have record numbers of competitors!!football,cricket,soccer,etc etc,,,do they get paid?

Most sidecar riders in Australia (just as or even more dangerous than solo bikes) and many solo riders for numbers of years going way back rode at tracks whenever they could for nothing, and they still do! and many of these riders especially sidecar teams are far from ordinary infact a lot of them are world class, and they are lucky to get tow or fuel money or travel expenses and still often have to pay for admittance to the events and nomination fees.

 

Your missing the point, dirt. All these amateur sportsmen that you talk about all have other jobs, and participate in there chossen sport as an hobby! The top amateur sportsmen certainly will get paid, have you ever heard of boot money? In the 1970's some of Englands top RU players were earning more money in "boot money" than most of their RL "professional" counterparts.

When Bruce Penhall finised his speedway career, speedway was his main source of income!

 

 

 

he is far from the glamour boy who could do no wrong.

 

Don't get me wrong, dirt. Bruce Penhall wasn't the complete package. But at the time he was the closest thing speedway had to one! Fantastic riding skills, great warm personality, good looks, in effect just about everything speedway needed to boost it's profile. But as with most things where the sports leaders are concerned, the opportunity was lost.

[liverpool chad 2]

Dirt, do you even remember Bruce Penhall as a racer, I have my doubts?

 

 

Charmer...I certainly seen Penhall race from the comfort of my living room on old DVDs. well old footage converted to DVDs.

 

 

So you never saw him race? It would be like me having an opinion about Lionel Van Praag or Eric Langton!

 

 

Not a bad rider, and would have liked to see more...

 

No better than he thinks he is, and no better than heathen79 thought he was.

 

 

Dirt, I can't believe you are spouting all this rubbish, and it is rubbish, about a rider that you never even saw ride! It's no wonder your opinion of him as a rider and as a person in general, is so bizarre!

At the time of Bruce Penhall's retirement from the sport, he was the best rider in the world, bar none! you don't win back to back world titles unless you are at the very top of your profession! FACT

 

 

Would get a thrashing riding against todays riders. at his peak I mean. He was a bit lucky when he was at his peak, Lee had dropped off and there werent many talents around.

 

Weren't many talents around!!! YOU CLEARLY DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT!

Ole Olsen was still a formidable rider, and one of the best in the world! Tommy Knudsen was a rider that could beat anyone on any track! Dennis Sigalos was a top rider! Peter Collins was back in '82 and was a hard rider to beat! Dave Jessup was a top rider at the time! Billy Sanders was a top rider! Kenny Carter was a top rider! Les Collins was a top rider! Hans Nielsen was a top rider!

 

edit: (Besides Carter) who had bad luck in 81 and 82 and deserved 1 of those titles IMO but it wasnt to be.

 

Kenny Carter was never in with a shout in either world final after the interval, whether it was a lack of nerves or ability, nobody only Carter himself will of known.

DAVE JESSUP had bad luck in 1981, more so than Carter as DJ was leading the race with yards to go when his engine blew!

ERIK GUNDERSEN had an engine failure in what on paper looked his easiest race!

OLE OLSEN had his best bike damaged by a photographer in the pits, and had to use his second bike!

In 1982 in Los Angeles, LES COLLINS would of had the opportunity to have a run-off for the title against a rider he had already beaten that night, Bruce penhall!

 

 

Back to Penhall,

In his best years put him against todays best and he'd get flogged. IMO!

 

never in a month of sundays. IMO

 

cheers.

 

 

...and you do so with your dignity very much in tact, despite some grossly unfair provocation. Writing a book - any book - takes a great deal of commitment and at the very least you deserve credit for the time and effort you have undoubtedly put in. Other people clearly have the time to rant on the internet endlessly, I'd suggest they use that energy more productively and perhaps write their own book that would - no doubt - spellbind all of us.

 

Anyone doing down Penhall's ability on a speedway bike can only be based on prejudice and not his quite incredible talent. He won everything there was to win in a very short space of time. As well as winning two World Finals out of three finals, he also led the US to their first-ever World Pairs and World Team Cup victories. To suggest he is anything but an all-time great is utter nonsense.

 

Had he chosen to prolong his career, I have no doubt he would have continued to win at the very highest level. Hans Nielsen managed the transition from 70s machinery through to late 90s supertuned motors, I fail to see why Penhall (arguably the greater talent) couldn't have managed it?

 

Good post, falcace.

At last we agree on something!

[dirt 0]

QUOTE:How the hell do you get to the conclusion that Carter was inches away from winning the world title? When Carter fell off, he was in third position and would of taken 1 point from that race. Not enough to take the title outright. And before anyone say's Penhall knocked Carter off, i suggest they have a look at the footage from the CBS cameras that were set up on that bend (footage released after world final) The footage clearly shows that not only did Penhall not touch Carter in the bend but he also left him enough room to cut back under Penhall. But Kenny being Kenny, he chose the wrong option and paid the price!

 

That is correct he payed the price, but he was the man to beat and looked the goods after 3 of 5 rides. Even reportedly on Dunlop rear tyres too, which if you read and believe Carters book were much slower and worse preforming than the American tyre which was used by all other riders as it had more grip and I think was wider also, anyway Carter was on the slower British made Dunlop and was still the quickest fastest looking rider on show up to the interval.

 

What happened after that in his 4th ride could have gone either way, with it ending up a nightmare conclusion for Carter, but if he had the best tyre that everyone knew gave better grip, he probably would have smoked Penhall, you'd have to agree? as there was nothing between them all race, and Penhall had the much better tyre, against the old british made Dunlop Kenny decided to stick with, or his old man insisted on? much to the dismay and disbelief of his manager Ivan Mauger who knew the difference was massive. WOULD CARTER OF DRIFTED SO WIDE ALLOWING PENHALL A HOLE TO GO THROUGH, IF HE HAD MORE GRIP? THAT IS THE QUESTION YOU SHOULD STUDY BEFORE BLAMING CARTER FOR NOT WINNING THAT RACE. CARTER DID LITTLE WRONG IMO, JUST HAD TOO MUCH SPEED AND HIS DUNLOPS COULDNT HANDLE IT. That enabled Bruce to sneak the inside pass line he did.

 

Dirt, I can't believe you are spouting all this rubbish, and it is rubbish, about a rider that you never even saw ride! It's no wonder your opinion of him as a rider and as a person in general, is so bizarre!

At the time of Bruce Penhall's retirement from the sport, he was the best rider in the world, bar none! you don't win back to back world titles unless you are at the very top of your profession! FACT

yes that could be regarded FACT, I agree.

 

Would get a thrashing riding against todays riders. at his peak I mean. He was a bit lucky when he was at his peak, Lee had dropped off and there werent many talents around.

 

Weren't many talents around!!! YOU CLEARLY DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT!

Ole Olsen was still a formidable rider, and one of the best in the world! Tommy Knudsen was a rider that could beat anyone on any track! Dennis Sigalos was a top rider! Peter Collins was back in '82 and was a hard rider to beat! Dave Jessup was a top rider at the time! Billy Sanders was a top rider! Kenny Carter was a top rider! Les Collins was a top rider! Hans Nielsen was a top rider!

 

OK there were some good competition but the fact remains we will never know how he Penhall would have ended up on the scale of good-great riders?? ever...because he wanted to do some hollywood thing.

 

Just for interests sake did he repay his contract with CH after he nicked off for hollywood, or at least refund some of his agreement as it wouldnt of included or they wouldnt of expected such a manouvure by Bruce?

Edited December 9, 2010 by dirt

[billywamill 32]

maybe your sense of humour wasnt particularly funny to Kenny? It seems you have a problem with him if anything. My hate of Penhall was manufactured from reading his 'book', and being none the wiser about why he did what he did. I have come to the conclusion that Penhall was scared of something happening to him on the track and thats why he suddenly retired. He managed his ambitions and wanted to get out before he got hurt. That is my opinion and Bruce you brought it on yourself. If you are going to sell a book, at least make it good to read, and not painful to read as this crud was. For him to approve or not evan read it before being published is hideous. The worship and praise that the author heaps on Penhall is beyond a joke, it made me physically sick, and that's the only reason I have questions regarding his character.

 

Hate ? You don't even know the man you idiot.

 

Retired because he was scared ? He had achieved all he wanted to and had nothing else to prove.

 

The man was a legend in the sport - one of the FEW riders the general public would have heard of - the only time Carter was well known were for reasons we all know too well - at least Bruce won't be meeting him when he passes on - he'll be going upstairs.

[The White Knight 9,039]

Hate ? You don't even know the man you idiot.

 

Retired because he was scared ? He had achieved all he wanted to and had nothing else to prove.

 

The man was a legend in the sport - one of the FEW riders the general public would have heard of - the only time Carter was well known were for reasons we all know too well - at least Bruce won't be meeting him when he passes on - he'll be going upstairs.

 

GROW UP!!!

 

I'm not keen on Carter OR Penhall as Riders - but - your last statement is pathetic and childish. :angry:

 

Who appointed YOU judge and jury???

[KevtheRev 122]

QUOTE:How the hell do you get to the conclusion that Carter was inches away from winning the world title? When Carter fell off, he was in third position and would of taken 1 point from that race. Not enough to take the title outright. And before anyone say's Penhall knocked Carter off, i suggest they have a look at the footage from the CBS cameras that were set up on that bend (footage released after world final) The footage clearly shows that not only did Penhall not touch Carter in the bend but he also left him enough room to cut back under Penhall. But Kenny being Kenny, he chose the wrong option and paid the price!

 

That is correct he payed the price, but he was the man to beat and looked the goods after 3 of 5 rides. Even reportedly on Dunlop rear tyres too, which if you read and believe Carters book were much slower and worse preforming than the American tyre which was used by all other riders as it had more grip and I think was wider also, anyway Carter was on the slower British made Dunlop and was still the quickest fastest looking rider on show up to the interval.

 

What happened after that in his 4th ride could have gone either way, with it ending up a nightmare conclusion for Carter, but if he had the best tyre that everyone knew gave better grip, he probably would have smoked Penhall, you'd have to agree? as there was nothing between them all race, and Penhall had the much better tyre, against the old british made Dunlop Kenny decided to stick with, or his old man insisted on? much to the dismay and disbelief of his manager Ivan Mauger who knew the difference was massive. WOULD CARTER OF DRIFTED SO WIDE ALLOWING PENHALL A HOLE TO GO THROUGH, IF HE HAD MORE GRIP? THAT IS THE QUESTION YOU SHOULD STUDY BEFORE BLAMING CARTER FOR NOT WINNING THAT RACE. CARTER DID LITTLE WRONG IMO, JUST HAD TOO MUCH SPEED AND HIS DUNLOPS COULDNT HANDLE IT. That enabled Bruce to sneak the inside pass line he did.

 

Dirt, I can't believe you are spouting all this rubbish, and it is rubbish, about a rider that you never even saw ride! It's no wonder your opinion of him as a rider and as a person in general, is so bizarre!

At the time of Bruce Penhall's retirement from the sport, he was the best rider in the world, bar none! you don't win back to back world titles unless you are at the very top of your profession! FACT

 

yes that could be regarded FACT, I agree.

 

Would get a thrashing riding against todays riders. at his peak I mean. He was a bit lucky when he was at his peak, Lee had dropped off and there werent many talents around.

 

Weren't many talents around!!! YOU CLEARLY DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT!

Ole Olsen was still a formidable rider, and one of the best in the world! Tommy Knudsen was a rider that could beat anyone on any track! Dennis Sigalos was a top rider! Peter Collins was back in '82 and was a hard rider to beat! Dave Jessup was a top rider at the time! Billy Sanders was a top rider! Kenny Carter was a top rider! Les Collins was a top rider! Hans Nielsen was a top rider!

 

OK there were some good competition but the fact remains we will never know how he Penhall would have ended up on the scale of good-great riders?? ever...because he wanted to do some hollywood thing.

 

Just for interests sake did he repay his contract with CH after he nicked off for hollywood, or at least refund some of his agreement as it wouldnt of included or they wouldnt of expected such a manouvure by Bruce?

Hate ? You don't even know the man you idiot.

 

Retired because he was scared ? He had achieved all he wanted to and had nothing else to prove.

 

The man was a legend in the sport - one of the FEW riders the general public would have heard of - the only time Carter was well known were for reasons we all know too well - at least Bruce won't be meeting him when he passes on - he'll be going upstairs.

 

Think you'll find it is Carter that is the legend and Penhall was nothing by an American fly boy. At the time there was much more interest in Carter and today more people talk about Carter than Penhall.

 

Have to agree with Dirt about the 82 final. Not sure what footage you've watched but it's very clear that Penhall took out Carter and should have gone. Certainly no room was left.

Edited December 1, 2011 by KevtheRev

[stratton 1,491]

Charmer...I certainly seen Penhall race from the comfort of my living room on old DVDs. well old footage converted to DVDs.

 

Not a bad rider, and would have liked to see more...

 

No better than he thinks he is, and no better than heathen79 thought he was.

 

Would get a thrashing riding against todays riders. at his peak I mean. He was a bit lucky when he was at his peak, Lee had dropped off and there werent many talents around.

 

edit: (Besides Carter) who had bad luck in 81 and 82 and deserved 1 of those titles IMO but it wasnt to be.

Back to Penhall,

In his best years put him against todays best and he'd get flogged. IMO!

 

cheers.

I wasnt a fan but Penhall but would have been good in any era,get flogged i think he would of been more successful now .The quality in depth is nowhere near as high now.