Greg Hancock How Good.?

[BWitcher 12,453]

OK, OK!

Olsen was a very good rider, but he didn't make my 10 best riders list - not because I never took to him, but because I rated the others above him - Briggo is in my list although I didn't like him either

If it was a favourites list, then there would be other riders in my top 10

When I said, not in my Bees top ten, yes, that was a favourites list, and you can see I'm not alone in that thinking - a best Bees list would obviously include Olsen - and Hancock!

 

That makes much more sense

[SCB 15]

I suppose it comes down to what you mean by best-ever. Is it who would win a race both being at their absolute best or is it who would win over a series of races? A bit like the difference between the old one off World Championship and the GP

I think thats where this argument always falls to bits. You could take every riders best ever, most close to perfect race. Or you could take their best ever, closest to perfect meeting or you could do the same for a season. Or, do you take it spread over a career. Greg, on a one off race, over a meeting even will be high up. But over a season or a prolonged period I think he dips. While Jason Crump with the same number of World Titles (3 each) wins on the longevity stakes for me (10 consecutive season on a World Championship podium is immense) but I'd also argue that when Crump won, he won it style - his one title he'd won in August (2006) and was so far ahead of the rest if was scary (First 7 GP results were 2nd, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 4th and then he won the title in the 8th) - while averaging 11+ in the EL (possibly the only rider to average 11+ in the "modern" EL? Adams had a few 10.5+ but never an 11 from memory) and blitzing everyone in the Polish and Swedish leagues too. Even Rickardsson never did that well in ever meeting over a season.

[BWitcher 12,453]

I think thats where this argument always falls to bits. You could take every riders best ever, most close to perfect race. Or you could take their best ever, closest to perfect meeting or you could do the same for a season. Or, do you take it spread over a career. Greg, on a one off race, over a meeting even will be high up. But over a season or a prolonged period I think he dips. While Jason Crump with the same number of World Titles (3 each) wins on the longevity stakes for me (10 consecutive season on a World Championship podium is immense) but I'd also argue that when Crump won, he won it style - his one title he'd won in August (2006) and was so far ahead of the rest if was scary (First 7 GP results were 2nd, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 4th and then he won the title in the 8th) - while averaging 11+ in the EL (possibly the only rider to average 11+ in the "modern" EL? Adams had a few 10.5+ but never an 11 from memory) and blitzing everyone in the Polish and Swedish leagues too. Even Rickardsson never did that well in ever meeting over a season.

 

Depends what you mean by 'modern' era..

 

If its after the nominated heat was introduced then Sam Ermolenko was 11+ in 1993. That was the most impressive season I've ever seen from a rider since we had nominated heats. Not only did he average 11+ but his team riding was unbelievable, there were times he nursed Neil Evitts home in times 2-3 seconds slower than the norm... ahead of good quality riders.

 

Prior to the nominated heats then without a doubt Hans Nielsen in 86.

 

In the mid to late 80's, even into very early 90's, Hans Nielsen was the only rider I genuinely 'feared'. By feared I mean that before the race began I really didn't think our riders had a chance of beating him.

[lucifer sam 3,960]

Prior to the nominated heats then without a doubt Hans Nielsen in 86.

 

 

 

As someone who watched Nielsen regularly during his time, I would say Nielsen 87 shades Nielsen 86.

 

The stats may say otherwise, but stats can lie a little. In 1987, Nielsen would have achieved a 11.87 BL average (surpassing the '86 BL average of 11.83), but for a seized engine causing a fall at Hackney in October.

 

Nielsen in 1987 was just supremely confident. He was World Champion throughout the whole season, rather just the end of it, as in '86. His World Team Cup form, form for Denmark in the test series, in individuals, he just seemed to dominate every single meeting he was in.

 

And talking of unbelievable team riding, Nielsen from this era was mind-bogglingly good. He could team-ride Jens Rasmussen to a 5-1.... over Erik Gundersen!!

 

All the best

Rob

 

PS If Sam had continued his '93 form for another couple of seasons, he'd definitely be a contender for a place in the all-time top ten.

Edited February 10, 2015 by lucifer sam

[BWitcher 12,453]

 

As someone who watched Nielsen regularly during his time, I would say Nielsen 87 shades Nielsen 86.

 

The stats may say otherwise, but stats can lie a little. In 1987, Nielsen would have achieved a 11.87 BL average (surpassing the '86 BL average of 11.83), but for a seized engine causing a fall at Hackney in October.

 

Nielsen in 1987 was just supremely confident. He was World Champion throughout the whole season, rather just the end of it, as in '86. His World Team Cup form, form for Denmark in the test series, in individuals, he just seemed to dominate every single meeting he was in.

 

And talking of unbelievable team riding, Nielsen from this era was mind-bogglingly good. He could team-ride Jens Rasmussen to a 5-1.... over Erik Gundersen!!

 

All the best

Rob

 

PS If Sam had continued his '93 form for another couple of seasons, he'd definitely be a contender for a place in the all-time top ten.

 

Very fair points Rob, Nielsen was dominant in that period. ultra dominant.

 

Sam was undone by re-breaking the leg in the penultimate match of the season. A very simple slide off too, but straight into a metal post behind the fence trying to round Tatum on the final bend. Cost Wolves the title that year and he was never quite the same rider again after that. Still good, but not the level he was in 93, his style had changed a lot.

 

Having grown up in awe of Nielsen, then seeing Sams domination in 93, its why I never gave Tony Rickardsson the plaudits he perhaps deserved. To my mind he didn't live up to either Nielsen in the 80's or Sam in 1993.

 

Regarding Sam, for him to have come back from the injuries he suffered in 89, and reach the levels he did is staggering. It's very rare for riders to do that.. there are countless cases of riders who after the 'big one' (or even less major injuries) aren't the same rider again.

[fullbore 129]

A World title at 23 is always going to put you quite high up IMO. Especially when you win it with many injuries. But he still has 20 years left if he does a Greg and could win many title in that time - I see no reason why he can't win at least one more.

Time will tell, but if Tai wins another 3 or more in his career he'll have to be right up there.

 

Niamh

[bruno 1,793]

talking of bad luck for olson was there a meeting on tv in the 70s where a helmet cover got stuck in his chain. think it was at white city or am I dreaming

[theflyingkiwi 136]

Unfortunately and I would loved to be proved wrong on this one I don't think the likes of Woffinden, Holder Sayfutdinov et al will still be competing at 44. I think that Hancock's ability is the fact that he rarely gets injured unlike many of his colleagues, for me that puts him an all time great list.

[BritPete 625]

talking of bad luck for olson was there a meeting on tv in the 70s where a helmet cover got stuck in his chain. think it was at white city or am I dreaming.

 

I remember that.Maybe it was against Gordon Kennett? Not sure.

[Gavan 5,067]

Did i say that please about 81,i did not but they were more than as you say just PROMISING back down my memory i think is better than yours. Nielsen/ Gundersen were more more than just PROMISING riders in 81,not that you watched Speedway that much then?.Simple question even for you were Nielsen/gpGundersen greats yes or no ? a simple question even for you as Lucifer said you are tying yourself in knots the two riders YOU brought up you are making yourself look foolish.Admit defeat you are talking crap about Nielsen/Gundersen did you ever see them at there PEAK.?

No Gundersen and Nielsen were promising riders in 1981.

They became legends later on.

 

I dont get why you cant actually grasp what people are saying and just resort to abuse.

 

Kelly Moran in 1979

Tommy Knudsen 1981

Lance King 1984

Kelvin Tatum 1986

Todd Wiltshire 1990

Gert Handberg 1992

Chris Louis in 1993

 

All the above (Moran was 4th) were promising riders same as Hans and Erik were in 1981 and all did better in the respective finals.

 

It could very much easily be argued Knudsen was ahead of both of them in 1981 at the age of 19 i believe.

 

So to start having a pop when quite clearly you are missing the point is just daft.

 

Gundersen and Nielsen went on to be legends nobody is disputing that, but in 1981 they were good with potential but did anyone expect them to be better than Knudsen??

[waiheke1 4,295]

I agree with your point, but in 81 most would have stil rated hans and eric ahead of knudsen. But equally many would have tipped carter to be world champ before any of the danes.

tatum I dont think was ever really considered a future world champ, and the same could be said of handberg, louis and arguably even king.

but go back 5 years, who would have tipped tai to become world champ before emil and darcy.

[Grachan 7,365]

I agree with your point, but in 81 most would have stil rated hans and eric ahead of knudsen. But equally many would have tipped carter to be world champ before any of the danes.

Hans, certainly. The guy looked like a future World Champion from the moment he arrived, and it seemed to take an eternity for him to actually achieve that. People were, at one time, thinking of him as one of the best riders never to win a world title before he finally achieved it.

 

Erik, for me, kind of snuck in there a bit unexepected just as it seemed like Hans' time had arrived.

[waiheke1 4,295]

Not sure I agree grachan.

Up to 80 hans was clearly ahead.

but eric was far better than hans in 81 and arguably 82 as well.

83 hans probably regained the lead, and was certainly one of the favourites for that final. But eric won the blrc that year, and you had to be quality to do that - id day they were the top two riders in the world.

84 the favourite was prob Shaun moran followed by hans then eric.

a long winded way of me saying I think both were picked as potential future world champs, though I doubt anyone foresaw how dominant they woulf be, albeit helped by thelloss to the sport of penhall sigalos lee carter and the lifestyle choices of the morans.

[Grachan 7,365]

Not sure I agree grachan.

Up to 80 hans was clearly ahead.

but eric was far better than hans in 81 and arguably 82 as well.

83 hans probably regained the lead, and was certainly one of the favourites for that final. But eric won the blrc that year, and you had to be quality to do that - id day they were the top two riders in the world.

84 the favourite was prob Shaun moran followed by hans then eric.

a long winded way of me saying I think both were picked as potential future world champs, though I doubt anyone foresaw how dominant they woulf be, albeit helped by thelloss to the sport of penhall sigalos lee carter and the lifestyle choices of the morans.

Maybe I overlooked and under estimated Erik slightly in his early career then, but that's how it seemed to me. When Erik became World Champion first time it was a surprise to me as it really seemed to be Hans' time in 1984.

[g13webb 4,254]

When you start talking about all-time GREATS, I think we need a starting point of qualification of those riders who have won the WORLD CROWN at least a min of 3 occasions. This would eliminate quite a few GOOD riders.

 

It is not my intention to rubbish the achievements of riders like Lee, Collins, Muller, Loram etc. but when considering the mantel of 'All time Greats', It is my opinion you need to have been successful over a longer period of time........