BWitcher

I'm glad you think GRW made me look like a mug Sidney, if that makes you feel better and helps you sleep at night, that's good. Trying to get my head around the 'are they bothered about the EL'.. 'world class'.. and they 'do their best'... forgive me.. but if a 'world class' rider was 'doing their best' in the EL they'd be better than a 6pt rider. I guess you have a lower definition of World Class. I would class World class as someone at the top of the sport, near the top in the leagues they ride in and succesful at individual level. Greg Hancock, Chris Holder, Darcy Ward, Nicki Pedersen.. Jason Crump before he retired. Those are riders I would class as World Class. MJJ and Magic have the potential to be as good but are someway below them just now. They are not consistent enough to be labelled as 'World Class' at this point in time.

One moment you are telling us how low quality the EL is. The next you are banging on about World Class riders, who just happen to be third heat leader/2nd strings in this 'low quality EL'. One moment you are telling us to forget averages, winning races etc as a way to judge a rider.. you just judge them on what you see 'live'.. The next you're banging on to forget their performance in the EL (which is what you'll have seen) and look at their cv's, their history etc.. which funnily enough is impressive because of the races they've won.. which funnily enough is how I have been saying good riders are judged all along. GRW didn't make me look like a mug, you are the only person who thinks that. He's made a series of ridiculous statements and thrown his toys out the pram, stamped his feet and run off when they were highlighted. My views have remained consistent throughout the entire debate, however I also acknowledge when I learn things. I wasn't aware that Chris Morton was consistently in the top 10 in the BL averages quite as often as he was, I thought he was in the 10-20 bracket. I didn't throw my toys out my pram and call people fools when that was highlighted to me. I didn't claim that it wasn't a fact, just that persons opinion, I took it on board like an intelligent person would. Regarding MJJ, no I don't class him as World Class yet. On his day he can beat the best, but he is not yet consistent enough to be classed as a World Class rider in my eyes. 6.90 average in Sweden, 6.50 in Poland, 6.54 in the UK show he has a way to go yet to enter the top echelon of riders. I'm sure he will get there. Janowski is fairly similar. 5.70 average in Sweden, 6.69 in Poland, 6.13 in the UK.

Sidney, you're tying yourself in knots and defeating your own arguments.

Never mind that, who are the commentators?

No arguments on that score whatsoever Iris.

I've answered this question to GRW, but I will give you the answer again. First of all it depends upon your definition of World Class. Top 5, top 10, top 20? However, why would you decide that Janowski and Jensen are World Class as you claim them to be.. I would state that its NOT from you watching them in the EL and using your perceptive powers of judgement to say "Wow, they're brilliant"... but rather from the races and meetings that you have seen them WIN. i.e. U-21 titles.. GP's. World Cups etc. Which backs up what I have said all along, riders winning races is the primary consideration when it comes to how good they are. However, your insistence on classing them as World Class riders, doesn't back up your own arguments during this thread.. i.e. how low the quality is in the EL now.

I'm really unsure of what forum you are reading GRW, because it isn't this one. GRW, you are telling us you are brought up to give people respect, yet you, and a couple of others who are preaching this, are the only ones who are throwing their toys out of their pram and getting personal. You seem fixated that people are 'rubbishing' the old 13 heat format. I haven't seen anyone rubbish it, not once. This is a total figment of your imagination. Yet you have this fixed in your head and regardless what anyone says you ramble on and on about this being the case. With regards to your comments about Simmons and Nicholls, I haven't questioned your opinion, just the reasons you used to justify it. There is a major difference there... again, because you are so quick to look to turn a debate into a petty fight you decide you are being told your opinion is wrong again. You also consistently keep trying to fight the obvious.. that being that winning races is the PRIMARY way of judging how good a rider is. You've tried flinging MJJ and Magic into the debate in a futile way to prove your point.. sadly it backfires.. Why do you believe they are World Class riders? Because they've been winning races elsewhere. Very simple. None of your comments regarding the difficulty of the 13 v 15 heat formula have any validity. Its all supposition on your part... and all incorrect. As has been shown, the very year after the change was made, the averages of the top riders all dropped. So your theory of 'the quality' of the riders involved being the reason is flawed. Also flawed is your insistance of 'quality' riders meeting each other all the time in the 13 heat format and how 'all the races were difficult' etc. If this was the case, the top riders of the time would have found it far more difficult, wouldn't have won so many races and wouldn't have racked up such high averages. Again, a flawed theory. The fact is, they rarely got beaten by anyone other than fellow top line riders, so the so called 'quality' you talk about seems to have been lacking. Finally we come to your last paragraph where once again you've made something up in an attempt to disparage me. Where have I said I believe if we had a 15 heat formula clubs wouldn't close??? I haven't.. nobody has. You've made it up once again... All I ever responded to you was YOUR claim.. which as it seems you have forgotten said... We haven't got 140 riders now, that is the reason why we only have 10 teams....Had we had kept that about of riders then we would still be having the 13 heat format. Your claim. Not mine. Utterly ludicrous claim of course, but there you go.

Parsloes, Unprecedented.. It means it hasn't happened before. Nobody has misread anything. YOU claimed something that wasn't correct, your own error. E I Addio wasn't rude, he simply pointed out that you were wrong. Any civilised adult when they make a mistake would hold their hands up and say, yes you're right, I made an error there, however, this is what I meant. But no, you're still trying to portray that you were correct, even now. It matters not whether you have a degree in English.. just as it mattered not when GRW claimed he had a degree in Advanced Mathematics. You've both been totally wrong on very basic matters and instead of being adult enough to admit it you've chosen to throw your toys out the pram and act the baby. There has been some good debate on this thread, sadly interspersed with childish antics when folk have been shown to be wrong about something. To clarify, definition of 'unprecedented' is.. - 'never before known or experienced; unparalleled.' Now, even throwing in your 'at the time' caveat, are you claiming that in 1975 nobody had ever known or experienced an English rider on the rostrum of the World Championships???

What do you mean this 'new trying to even things up'? They've been using tacs of some kind for a long long time and the fact (yes fact) is that the current tac rules even things up less than the rule of old. It's fine to dislike that aspect of the sport, but don't try and turn it into another then and now battle... As it was worse 'then'.

He actually made the entire community of speedway fans look like mugs, none of us knew the true history of the sport and the reason clubs closed and heat formats were changed. Whilst clubs like Long Eaton, Bradford, Wimbledon, Canterbury, Cradley etc all closed due to houses being built, stadiums being sold etc.. the REAL truth was being concealed.. Until now, GRW has spilled the beans.. there weren't enough riders! Desperately the BSPA tried to take action to save more tracks by increasing the heats to 15 as it became clear there weren't enough quality riders to support a 13 heat format.. but alas it was too late.. and now we're down to just 10 teams.... Meanwhile he made us look like mugs with his explanation that Malcolm Simmons was better than Scott Nicholls because he won the World Pairs.. yep, a competition scrapped when Scott Nicholls was 15.. and a World Cup. May as well argue Darren Ferguson was a better footballer than Steven Gerrard because he won a league title one speedway fan argued.. What a mug he was! He also exposed what could potentially have been a race fixing scandal we never knew about.. the year the 15 heat format was brought in, all the top riders averages fell.. but GRW in his all knowing wisdom told us the old 13 heat format was harder.. so how did this happen? Easier format.. all the top guys averages fall... they can only be have been throwing races.. God Bless GRW for bringing this scandal to the attention of the world!

I'm not disagreeing. The most dangerous part of a speedway is the 1st corner to my mind.. but there are certain riders who would refuse the 15 metre tac sub rides as they deemed them dangerous. Personally I liked that rule and saw some fantastic races where Peter Karlsson managed to get up and take the full 6pts. However, other riders, Jason Crump being one of them.. refused to take them. Short changing the paying customer in my eyes.. but no doubt some will disagree.

All ideas which have been either actually tried, or soon refused by the riders who deem it 'unsafe'.

13 is better but we can't have it, there aren't enough riders.

Many of them had average world final records because they weren't as good as you make them out to be. They appeared to be so good because they spent most of their careers beating up on lesser riders in the easier league format of the time, but when it came to the crunch, they weren't as good as the true top level riders of the time. i.e.. Olsens, Maugers, Fundins, Michaneks, Penhalls etc. The same applies to every era of the sport. There's always a group of perhaps 4-5 riders above the rest. Another group sitting just below them.. Then a big bunch of riders who on their day can beat the top guys, but don't do it consistently. However, spread that bunch out in a big league, they'll win most of their races and appear to be almost as good as the 'true' top guys.. Condense them into a smaller league, the gap will appear to be bigger. You only have to look at the Polish/Swedish leagues to see that in operation.

Well according to GRW, if there were more riders of Jack Parkers standard around we'd still have a 13 heat format! And if there were only more riders, we'd have more than 10 teams So it all links in...

Whilst not doubting the quality of the field in the inter continental final Morton won, it bears no comparison to winning a gp.. One is a qualification meeting, the other is a gp. Was it eleven of the 16 riders that progressed to the world final? I have no doubt most of the field simply had qualification at the forefront of their minds, once that was secured no need to take any extra risks that you may do in a world final or a gp. I know you haven't, it was a reference to those that have. A mathematical fact? So your claim is its easier to finish in the top 8 than outside it? Takes the shine of Chris holders world title last year somewhat if it was so easy. Peter Ljung, what a star he was in the gp. Much harder to finish where he did...

Ok, so what we've got here, is a comparison between someone who is claimed to be in the top 10 of the 80's.. against someone who perhaps ranks 20-30 in the 2000's.. There's some conjecture about it.. I've already stated that I believe Morton was better than Harris, but not by a massive margin. It seems you pretty much agree.. So.. where does that take us, a rider in the top 10 of the era where we are being told the standard was far far higher, is a little bit better than rider ranked 20-30 in an era we are told is much weaker.. One thing Mort did have in his favor was riding at Hyde Road. It was a track that obviously suited him down to the ground. Of course, he could ride away tracks very well also, but having a home track that you are a master of will always keep your confidence high for away meets. The BLRC that he won, was of course, at his home track. Harris is the kind of rider that would likely have thrived also at a racers track like Hyde Road. Before Sidney or GRW start, this isn't an attack on Morton, he was a damn good rider.

You haven't offended anyone, but you've given us a damn good laugh. So much wrong with your post, including an attempt to rewrite speedway history. It has illustrated that there is absolutely no point trying to have a rational conversation/debate with you. If only we had more riders, all those teams who have closed would still be running.. I'm off to scour all the lists of the sports best riders and see how many I can find that weren't regular race winners with high averages.. after all, thats not what's important.. its the 'quality'.. Got to be a few career 4pt riders who were 'quality' amongst the sports greats.

Indeed. Its just one of example of how there were a raft of riders consistently averaging 8.5-10 in the old format that were perceived to be world class, when the reality is they were about the level of 7-8 pt riders now and in terms of Polish/Swedish league perhaps even 6-7 pt riders. It's why the vast majority of them never consistently achieved anything on the World stage, compared to the big hitters of the day.. as it has been in every era of the sport.

Looking at their respective international records, not a lot of difference. Best Morton managed was World no 9, in 1980, and again in 1986. Pretty similar to what Harris has managed. Yet Morton will be remembered as being a far better rider than Harris I have no doubt, primarily because the format he rode in at the time allowed him to clock up a 9-10pt average consistently. For the record I believe Morton was better than Harris, but not by that bigger margin.

Sidney. Chris Morton and Chris Harris. Was/Is either a world class rider? If so, which one and why?

If Mauger had averaged 2 pts less throughout his career it would have MASSIVELY changed your perception of him. He wouldn't have won 6 world titles if his ability was 2pts lower in that era, so again Sidney your comment makes absolutely no sense. All these world stars you claim, yet how many of them really achieved consistently on the world stage? No more than consistently achieve on the world stage now. In any era you will have your elite group of 4-5 riders, another set of perhaps 6-8 just below them who on their day can be at the same level as the top few, but not so consistent.. and so the tiers continue. That has been the case in every single era of the sport. An example.. a big league format can make a rider like Chris Morton appear to be not far off a rider like Ole Olsen. The reality is it's like comparing Chris Harris to Nicki Pedersen. They're not even close. Its also interesting Sidney, that you keep telling us to ignore averages.. yet the only riders who you keep mentioning are, funnily enough, the ones with the high averages. I wonder why that is...

That's a start, but how about simply forbid it? Pit gate remains closed, unless there is a crash then its understandable.

Of course he does TWK, nobody disputes that. It's when he confuses opinions with facts that things get muddled. Nobody disputes that the 70's was a great era for speedway, or that the top riders of the 70's weren't the equals of the top riders of today, or other eras (compared against their peers). What has no substance is claiming that Simmons was a better rider than Nicholls for example because 'you've seen them both race'. All you can compare is their records and achievements. They were riding different bikes, different tracks, so vastly removed from the sport now you can't compare. Throughout these debates its actually been Sidney who has been dismissing others opinions with his claim that 'we didn't seem them race'. Some of us have tried to point out that has no real relevance. I will try and explain the 'averages' comment I made... Firstly, lets consider what makes us judge how good a rider is. I would suggest the most important thing is winning races? The more races a rider wins the better we will think he is.. seems a fairly common denominator as a rule of thumb. Averages are simply an extension of that. The higher the average, the more they win and the better you perceive the rider to be. I don't think anyone can disagree with that surely? The point where some understanding goes out the window is when you throw in the formats operated. The format in the 70's, with a large league, fixed gate positions, no heat 13 and 15 meant that the top riders met much less often than now. It also meant many always had the favourable gate position, unlike now. A larger league meant the best 2 riders in the league might clash twice over the course of a season, compared to a possible 12 times over a course of a season now. What it adds up to is a far greater number of riders who you are seeing consistently winning races, achieving a high average and therefore establishing themselves in your mind as being a legit top line rider. That would be the case regardless of who the contesting riders were. Some take this to be 'belittling' riders from that era, it isn't at all, its just putting a mathematical slant on things is all. Let's put it this way.. imagine you had the top 70 riders in the 70's riding in a 10 team league, as per the current format. You never saw them in any other format but that, by Sidneys reckoning he'd still identify 60 heat leaders.. I say he wouldn't.. he'd think 40 of the riders he thought were superstars were pretty average. By the same token, take 140 riders from now, put them into the format of the 70's, if you never saw them in any other format, you'd think there were 60 damn good riders. There's no question that the BL was stronger then in terms of its world standing than the EL is now, thats obvious, but even then you still can't prove the standard was better (head to head). That's all the debate is about, its not an attack of older riders which for some reason some take it to be... its simply explaining perception plays a major, major role in our judgement

And your list was also selective with the benefit of hindsight. Chris Morton was simply a rising rider in 75, yet you have him listed there because of what he went on to achieve. That's just one example. An opinion isn't a fact, neither is a fact an opinion. Sadly Sidney, you can't seem to distinguish between them. I like your examples though.. Because I can tell you this, Transport the riders you list into the present day format, i.e. 10 team league, fixed gate positions, current heat format.. and the third rider in those clubs you list, they'd be averaging around 7. Wouldn't appear to be so fantastic then would they?