Bruce Penhall

[YerRopes 3,009]

I can't argue with that - mine too.

 

Forgot to mention Sam Ermolenko, I had a bit of a break from speedway when he started to make an impact..

 

I did continue to get the SS though and tried to keep up to date..

 

I would put Sam above the Moran brothers as much as I used to like watching them..

[Robert Lee 128]

I think to be a great rider you need to occasionally be a hard rider, and Nielsen was good enough to pull it off most of the time. I felt that Tatum always did have a bit of a tendency to crumple under pressure, and Nielsen did exactly what required at Bradford.However, Tatum did exactly the same thing to Nielsen in the Intercontinental Final the previous year, so it's difficult to have a lot of sympathy. You win some you lose some.

Well, not exactly what was required; he started as hot favourite and finished 4th

[lucifer sam 3,953]

HE'S my mate but I don't think I'm being biased when I suggest that Briggo would have won more World titles under a GP system. He qualified for 18 consecutive finals, a remarkable achievement, and often only lost out on the day because he couldn't resist tinkering with his machinery. He would certainly have had many more good meetings than bad over the course of a GP season.

 

Not so sure.

 

Fundin seemed to be the more consistent - their respective World Final records certainly suggest that. Between '56 and '63, I think Fundin would have ruled the roost, although I think Briggo may have forced the issue one year and come through - 1958?

 

Briggo, Knutsson, Plechanov and Fundin would have all been trading blows in '64 and '65, while Briggo probably was ahead in '66 and '67, although there is the matter of Briggo's performance in the 1966 WTC FInal (1 point!!), so would he have scored enough points from the Polish GPs?

 

And then Mauger is supreme from '68 to '75.

 

I reckon Briggo would have won somewhere between 2 and 5 Grand Prix championships.

 

All the best

Rob

[Dave the Mic 258]

Isn't it great that most of the people on this forum can agree, or disagree in peace, putting forward well thought out and reasoned arguments to any subject raised, without the need to be abusive or insulting to either each other, or any of the great and the good (and slightly less great) that have entertained us so brilliantly over the years. It's one of the reasons I still love speedway after 40 years of watching it. It saddens me that it is in such a parlous state at the moment and that some people can be so vitriolic towards their fellow fans, or indeed, just patrol these forums to stir things up.

 

I have read every post on this thread since I posted my initial point which caused so much debate & would like to add some thoughts to he overall debate. I will refrain from including riders I never saw race.

 

Firstly on the Americans. Some of them were fabulous riders, some less so. Sam was one of the better ones & his world title win in 1993 alone demonstrates that. It wasn't just the title, but his form throughout the year, which was as dominant in one season as any rider of the modern day. In my view, he was deserving of his title not only for being the best rider on the day, but the stand out rider of that year. That said he was lucky as he should have been excluded in the race referred to by a few people after shedding a chain. However, I don't begrudge him the title, he deserved it. Don't think there is any debate that Hans took him off.

 

Of the Americans, I would say he is in the top 3 of the modern day, behind Penhall, who I feel is the best, despite transgressions, Hancock (it's hard to argue with 3 world titles over such a sustained period) & then Sam. Sigalos & the Morans were great riders, (the latter two as spectacular as you could wish to see) but I feel that for either longevity, commitment & achievement, the other 3 outstrip them easily. Six individual titles between them, compared to none for the others demonstrate that easily. Hamill was an excellent rider also, but I would rate him along with those that are named above that didn't win a title.

 

Special mentions for Bobby Schwartz & Scott Autrey. Boogaloo was a great league rider & team man, but didn't seem to have the drive or edge on the personal front. Autrey was a great rider & I was fortunate enough to see him develop at Exeter, where in the last 3 years he was nigh on unbeatable. He was also a great team man, brilliant on all shapes & sizes of track & a lovely guy. I think many would rate him higher than they do if they saw him race as much as I did, he championed his own cause a bit more & was a bit more of a showman. He was a little unlucky in some ways in both 78, when he rode in the World Final all night with a cracked frame and still placed third & was then prevented from competing in 1979 after a dispute with the AMA, a year in which he would have a great chance of World Final glory as he had few if any equals that year. Had Exeter not dropped down to the NL in 1980, forcing him to move on, his career could have been even better. I rate him above all Americans except the top three I mention.

 

On Hans Nielsen, I can't believe any would doubt his credentials. You don't win four world titles by accident, plus a host of team & pairs titles (among a host of other honours), plus run a huge average in the BL for four different clubs over almost 20 years without being a bit special. Personally I rate he & Erik about similar of these two. Had the GP been run in Hans' era, I feel he would have won more titles, he was by light years the most consistent rider of his day. Erik was more suited to the one off final I feel & had his career not been cut short would have won more titles in that format.

 

Olsen was possibly a better all round rider than both, but Hans and Erik probably won more titles as they were by some margin the two stand out riders of their day, whilst Olsen had many more peers to contend with. Jan O Pedersen was a good rider, spectacular as they come & one of the best "racers" of is day. I accept he was unlucky with injuries, but I don't feel he was quite in the same league as the other 3 here. Knudsen was good, but not great, although he was unfortunate in '86, when there is no doubt Nielsen should have been excluded for taking him off. Nicki Pedersen is also in the mix here, & although his three world titles speak very loudly, I feel he would have won less had he raced in a different era. No other Danes are worthy of significant mention.

 

Ivan I feel is the best there has ever been & had there been a GP series when he was racing from the mid 60's to late 70's he would have been a ten time champion. He had it all, the best machinery, organisation, racing brain, team spirit, business acumen, planning, gating, speed, cunning, consistency, focus, sponsorship, just everything oozed professionalism, class, discipline, focus on winning total single mindedness on winning every race - the superlatives could fill a dictionary. Some could argue that I am biased as I watched my speedway at Exeter, but let me tell you Ivan was never a favourite of mine - quite the opposite as PC was always my favourite - but you simply cannot argue with all he achieved, he has no equal.

 

Briggo was a great rider, as was Ronnie Moore, although I only saw each of them at the end of their careers, but they don't match Ivan in many, if any, of the attributes above.

 

Rickardsson comes fairly close to Mauger, if only for his 6 titles & how much better he was than all of his peers, although I feel Ivan had more peers at the top level & would have outstripped Tony had they raced at the same time. None of the other Swedes in "my era" come close. Michanek was good, but couldn't be bothered half the time, Per Jonsson was an excellent racer whose career was sadly cut short, as we know, but I don't think he compares to any mentioned above.

 

I never saw Fundin race, so any comment is heresay, but I know enough to know that he is in the same league as Ivan & better than Rickardsson & possibly all the Danes.

 

Of the Aussies, there are only four worthy of mention. Phil Crump, Billy Sanders & Leigh Adams were all excellent riders. Phil didn't want to win badly enough and he has said as much, Adams is probably the best rider of the era I am looking at to not win a title, but wasn't ruthless enough & Sanders career was cut tragically short & as such is difficult to quantify, although I am not sure, without wishing to appear unkind, he would have challenged the really top guys.

 

Jason Crump is the best of them all, better than all the single title winners mentioned in this post, and many of the others. Ten years in a row in the top 3 of a ruthless & demanding GP series with three titles to boot, plus uber consistent over an even longer period in world cups & the 3 top leagues is too much to ignore his claim to be one of the greats.

 

Of all the others that have scaled the heights - Gollob, Wiltshire, Plech, Nilsen, Muller, Szczakiel, Hamill, and others. Good riders, great even, but not in the same league as those already discussed.

 

So the English. John Louis was better than Chris. Mark Loram is probably the best "racer" of the modern day, not sure anyone came close. A great rider, but not a true great, in my opinion, not consistent enough. Micheal Lee? Possibly the most talented of them all & that galls me as he was PC's main challenger to be top Englishman. In terms of ability on a bike, I think he had few equals. He was remarkable as a speedway rider. His flaw was his wayward personality that ruined his career. Had he not been a flawed genius & been able to keep his nose clean like Ivan, he would have won a hatful of titles.

 

Havvy? My modern day favourite, fully deserved his title - he was the stand out rider internationally in '92 blew most away wherever he rode, I just think he peaked to soon & wasn't as driven as he could have been. His serious back injury ruined his career at the top level & he was never even close after that.

 

PC? A truly great rider, even without my bias. Between 74 & 78, he was one of the top 3 in the world & could easily have won three tiles in that time had the fates smiled on him. I would argue easily on a par with any other English rider & many of those named above who won more than one world title.

 

Tai Woffinden could easily turn out to be the best ever if he stays fit & as focused as he currently is. Some of the moves he makes are sensational, he has a good racing brain, a good team , great machinery, the right attitude etc. He reminds very much of Ivan, it's just a different era. personally I feel he is likely to end up the best of the Brits & there will be more titles to come.

 

Of the rest, the Louis' Andy Smith, Simmo, Ray Wilson, Chris Morton, Les Collins, Rico, rest his soul, all good racers but not great. Likewise Wiggy & Tatum, Very talented, but more like good all round track racers than great speedway riders & their long track titles confirm that. For charisma, Wiggy was probably almost on a par with Penhall & he is still missed.

 

Finally Carter. This might be controversial but he was good because of his passion, I don't think he was a "great". Sadly he actually never achieved a great deal, although you could argue he was unlucky in two of his three world finals, and did suffer from injuries, but a lot of that was about he raced. He was always very committed & dedicated, but in some ways I feel that was his undoing on the track sometimes. sadly we will never know if he could have become a great, maybe he would have, who knows?

 

So, in my humble opinion, who is the best.

 

Ivan Mauger - so far.

 

I appreciate some, maybe all of you will disagree with some or maybe all I have said. Again, that's the beauty of this forum.

Edited December 19, 2015 by Dave the Mic

[The White Knight 9,039]

A VERY fine Post Dave the Mic.

 

I totally agree with you on just about everything you have written.

 

One point of interest to me is that when you are talking about top Riders. I find it incredible how many British Riders in the Seventies, who would probably be classed/considered as great, and yet how few there are today.

 

A sad reflection on the state of our Sport these days.

Edited December 19, 2015 by The White Knight

[Dave the Mic 258]

A VERY fine Post Dave the Mic.

 

I totally agree with you on just about everything you have written.

 

One point of interest to me is that when you are talking about top Riders. I find it incredible how many British Riders in the Seventies, who would probably be classed/considered as great, and yet how few there are today.

 

A sad reflection on the state of our Sport these days.

Thanks TWK. Agreed. You could also add (& I probably should have) Bettsy, Jessup & Crash to name 3. Who from the latter periods? Very few.

[BWitcher 12,453]

Brilliant post Dave the Mic, really enjoyed reading that and I pretty much agree 100% with it!

 

The only rider I would perhaps give a bit more credit too is Billy Hamill who was one I feel had injuries curtail his effectiveness earlier than some. I think he topped the Elite League Averages 3 years running for 3 different teams? That said, he'd still rank behind the other American World Title winners, so perhaps not too much of a difference to your analysis.

Edited December 19, 2015 by BWitcher

[waiheke1 4,295]

Agree a very good post Dave, don't agree with it all, but well reasoned

[HenryW 1,178]

Any others for the at least 1 World Title, 1 BLCR and 11pt average club?

So we have

 

Barry Briggs

Ivan Mauger

Ole Olsen

Peter Collins

Hans Nielsen

Sam Ermolenko

I think Erik Gundersen would get into that list.

He was just over an 11 average from all official matches with Cradley in the 1986 season, won the BLRC in (I think) 1983 and 1986 and obviously took his 3 individual speedway World titles in 1984, 1985 and 1988.

[HenryW 1,178]

Rickardsson comes fairly close to Mauger, if only for his 6 titles & how much better he was than all of his peers, although I feel Ivan had more peers at the top level & would have outstripped Tony had they raced at the same time.

A good post, I enjoyed reading your views, but the thing that stood out most for me was this comment.

 

You rate Ivan better because he had more peers "at the top level" during his career. Given the fact that it impossible to compare across eras, could you not argue that Tony was actually better because there were fewer peers able to get close to his level?

 

I admit I am kind of playing devil's advocate with that comment, but I thought it was worth throwing out to see what people think.

 

Personally, I rate Rickardsson as the best ever, but I only really saw Mauger at the end of his career and that obviously brings in a bias. Despite having seen plenty of videos of Ivan at his prime, the sport changed so much between their respective eras that I find it really hard to appreciate his ability in the same way as I can with Rickardsson.

 

Olsen was possibly a better all round rider than both, but Hans and Erik probably won more titles as they were by some margin the two stand out riders of their day, whilst Olsen had many more peers to contend with. Jan O Pedersen was a good rider, spectacular as they come & one of the best "racers" of is day. I accept he was unlucky with injuries, but I don't feel he was quite in the same league as the other 3 here. Knudsen was good, but not great, although he was unfortunate in '86, when there is no doubt Nielsen should have been excluded for taking him off. Nicki Pedersen is also in the mix here, & although his three world titles speak very loudly, I feel he would have won less had he raced in a different era. No other Danes are worthy of significant mention.

My all time favourite rider is still Erik Gundersen, and I still believe we would have seen more World titles from him if he hadn't had that terrible accident at Bradford in 1989.

Possibly strangely, I also think Hans Nielsen would have won more World titles if Erik hadn't had that crash. Maybe I just imagine it, but it seemed like a little something was lost from Hans after that day.

[martinmauger 584]

Some good & interesting posts, I also much prefer it when everyone 'plays nicely' and just discusses speedway. That way we all get more from the forum as we both learn stuff we never knew and / or consider a view or angle on the sport we probably never considered before. Back on topic: riders of any era perform better when they have someone they really (really) want to beat and cannot abide losing to: Briggs / Fundin, Mauger / Olsen / Collins, Penhall / Carter, Nielsen / Gundersen, Rickardsson / Crump / NickiP, etc, etc. Doesn't always follow that they aren't on at least speaking terms though. Nielsen defo appreared to lose some of his edge with Gundersen missing from the equation following his awful accident else their battles could have gone on and on....

Edited December 20, 2015 by Martin Mauger

[Dave the Mic 258]

Henry, I can see your thinking on Trick & Ivan. My logic is based on the fact that during Ivan's reign, not only did he have the likes of Olsen, Collins, Mich, Briggo, Fundin, Lee, to contend with, but others like Louis, Simmo, Sjosten, the Poles in the their on back yard etc, but he also almost single handedly took NZ to a WTC win, was a real mainstay of the GB team when Kiwis raced for GB, topped the BL averages more often than not & raced at a near 11 point average (or more) for many years, won 3 individual titles in a row, including one in Poland, where it was always hard to achieve anything, won a title at 37 & again at 39, won three BL titles ina row with Belle Vue & then turned unfashionable Exeter into title winners with an average team & almost did the same with Hull. I was lucky enough to see both over many years & I simply think Ivan was the complete package, on & off the track. He was something of a winning machine.

 

Agree with both you & Martin re Hans & Erik, their intense rivalry spurred them both on to great things & I do believe Hans lost a little something after Erik's crash.

 

The point I made about GP v one off wins was based on the fact that Hans was more consistent over time & I feel his mindset was more suited to a GP series, in that he was a little bit like Ivan in some ways, a points scoring machine, whereas Erik seemed to be able to raise his game for the big day as he did when needed for example in 84 & 85.

Edited December 20, 2015 by Dave the Mic

[iris123 20,997]

Couple of good posts Dave.Don't agree with a lot of it,but you have put your points out thoughtfully

 

One thing I would disagree with is your bit about Nicki that you think he would have won less in another era.It is hard to tell in one way,but in anther if you started swapping riders around eras then it is obvious that some would win less.If you put Rickardsson in the same era as Fundin and Briggs then obviously someone must win less.The same if Mauger was in the same era as Rickarsson.Nicki didn't win his titles by luck.In some years he totally dominated,just like Crump and then stragely in some years he looked a shadow of himself as did Crump

[ColinMills 1,728]

there are those riders that noticeably raise their game for big occasions. david ruud had a stormer when Sweden

won the world cup, I believe peter ljung did in the same year against the odds, and Sweden did so yet again this year

[lucifer sam 3,953]

Couple of good posts Dave.Don't agree with a lot of it,but you have put your points out thoughtfully

 

One thing I would disagree with is your bit about Nicki that you think he would have won less in another era.It is hard to tell in one way,but in anther if you started swapping riders around eras then it is obvious that some would win less.If you put Rickardsson in the same era as Fundin and Briggs then obviously someone must win less.The same if Mauger was in the same era as Rickarsson.Nicki didn't win his titles by luck.In some years he totally dominated,just like Crump and then stragely in some years he looked a shadow of himself as did Crump

 

Yeah, Nicki totally dominated in 2007 and 2008 - completely deserved.

 

He was fortunate that Crump lost points to engine failures in 2003 - Crumpie was not a rider who had sub-standard machinery, he just had e/fs at the wrong time. Especially the one in the semi in Slovenia, which put Crump out of the final and Nicki into it. Huge swing of points there.

 

But Nicki still had to go out there and get the points, and kept his cool in the decider in Norway.

 

And maybe the luck went the other way in 2012. With one single refereeing decision being made another way, Nicki might have nicked it from Chris Holder at the death.

 

All the best

Rob