norbold

That excellent book, "70 Years of Rye House Speedway", gives the result as 33-38 (raced on 24 May). This is confirmed in that other excellent book, "75 Years of Eastbourne Speedway".

It's a good point, olddon. I think that in the early days the two names were used interchangeably though it is probable that the term dirt track applied to the actual sport, while speedway applied to the venue itself, as it seems to be in the case you quote and was certainly the case in Australia from about mid 1924 onwards. It would seem that in this country at least the term speedway became synonymous with the sport itself when Speedway News, under A J Hunting, became established in May 1928.

I don't think they ever all actually rode together in the Southampton team. 1959: Mardon, Taylor and Bradley 1960: Nygren, Taylor and Bradley 1961: Roger and Bradley

Funnily enough, the original intended venue for Jack Hill-Bailey and the Ilford Motor Cycle and Light Car Club's first meeting was a trotting track at Parsloes Park before it all fell through and they moved it to an old cycle track at High Beech..... I believe Jack Parker was a trials rider before turning to speedway and Gus Kuhn was a road racer. He competed in the Isle of Man TT, coming 5th in the Junior Division in 1926.

The report of the meeting on 15 December shows there were three motor-cycle racing events. The first was a three quarter mile event; the second a two mile event and the third a four mile event. The first two events were handicap events; I'm not sure about the third. No handicaps are shown for the four mile event. I don't know how many riders there were in each race; the newspaper only records the first three. As far as I know the Maitland track was grass. I should add that as well as the motor-cycle racing there was cart racing, bicycle racing, trotting races, athletics events and something called "Threading the Needle" race. In the early days, other Carnival event programmes seem to consist of much the same sort of motor-cycle racing and other events. Thebarton Oval (South Australia) held several similar events from 1921 onwards, also on grass, but by January 1923 (11 months before the Maitland meeting), the surface had been converted to cinders, so was a proper (what we would now call) dirt track. This meeting was held under floodlights.

Sorry, White Knight. I know you are right, but all I ever wanted was to discuss Johnnie Hoskins role in the origins of speedway. BFD made a statement early on that the meeting on 15 December 1923 was the first to be held under the banner of speedway, which, if true, would add to the argument that Hoskins "invented" speedway. I have asked BFD several times what evidence he has for saying this as it will help towards understanding the place of that meeting in speedway history but every time he falls back on some pretext to avoid answering the question. The only first hand evidence I have seen of that meeting is, as I have already said, the report of the meeting in the Monday December 17, 1923 edition of the Maitland Daily Mercury. Nowhere is the word speedway mentioned; it is referred to as motor-cycle racing throughout. In addition the paper adds the information that "several other tracks have been used for this kind of sport on a number of occasions". Now, this seems to me to be pretty clear cut that the meeting on 15 December 1923 was not the first of its kind, nor was it called speedway. All I am trying to get from BFD is more information to support his statement that this meeting was the first to be held under the banner of speedway. As a historian, interested in facts, that's all I am asking. Is it too much?

If it makes you happy to think so, Dave, carry on. (Though, actually, I can't help thinking that people are more interested in furthering the debate on Johnnie Hoskins's role in the origins of speedway than in whether I apologise to you or not and therefore would be much more interested in an answer from you to the question I have asked than in your constant prevarication). Anyway, I did answer your substantive point in my next post which, although much longer than the one you have chosen to reply to, you seem to have somehow overlooked.

This is what you said in your first post: Once I'd actually read the article I said, in post 132: I didn't say that what you said was untrue. What I said was that the article didn't say what you had said in your first post when reporting what Ian Hoskins had said. Nowhere in the article does it say, "Speedway should have a birthdate to be recalled by riders and the public like football and cricket have. Johnnie gave such a date and promoted it boldly. He introduced broadsiding, cinder tracks, safety fences, rules of racing and peronality riders. He followed up by promoting at Newcastle, Sydney and Perth in 1927. He was a promoter in every sense of the word," which is what most of the subsequent discussion on this thread was about. I realise you have the disadvantage of not having read the actual article, but I have and let me assure you again that the article nowhere says, " "Speedway should have a birthdate to be recalled by riders and the public like football and cricket have. Johnnie gave such a date and promoted it boldly. He introduced broadsiding, cinder tracks, safety fences, rules of racing and personality riders. He followed up by promoting at Newcastle, Sydney and Perth in 1927. He was a promoter in every sense of the word." That's what I was talking about. What I said was true, so I see nothing to apologise for.

So, what you're saying is that you can't actually back up your statement that the meeting on 15 December 1923 was the first held under the banner of speedway.

Anyway, Dave, let's do a deal and start again. I promise to keep on topic if you do. To start us off on our new found relationship, perhaps you can explain why you think the meeting on 15 December 1923 was the first to be held "under the banner of SPEEDWAY"?

I just reply to what you write, Dave. If the replies are off topic it must be because your posts are.

There's an industrial estate just off Rigg Approach off Lea Bridge Road in Leyton with a fair bit of open ground that could be used (or at least there was when I last looked). You could call the track Lea Bridge or maybe Clapton....

Just one question, Dave, how do you think Wikipedia gets written?

God is everywhere, mick.

Brilliant, Jack. Thank you. That explains it all. So Adam named all the various species of dinosaurs as well did he? I've often wondered where they got their Latin names from. Thank you for sorting that out for me.

Ah, Jack, just the person I've been looking for to help me out with a conundrum I've never been able to resolve. But I know a man like you who researches everything thoroughly will be able to at last answer my question. It's this: Did God create animals before man as it says in Genesis Chapter One or did he create man before animals as it says in Genesis Chapter Two? I look forward to your in depth knowledge and research being able to provide the answer for me. Thank you in advance.

You commented on my post that said, "Actually it's quite an anti-climax. It doesn't say what BFD says in the post that started this thread off." What do you think the "it's" in the first sentence and the "It" in the second sentence refer to given that I had already said, "I've just received a copy of the latest issue of Classic Speedway. Did you know there is an article in there by Ian Hoskins about his father, Johnnie. It makes very interesting reading....."?

?

Absolute utter confusion, Jack. The whole thing has now been rendered impossible to follow. I'd be surprised if anyone could now possibly follow anything that's been written on here by my deletion. It was the crux of the whole discussion.

Actually, mick, I deleted it because I misread what Ian had written. He said opening Odsal was "a supreme achievement" for his father. I misread it as "the supreme achievement". My comment was not meant to imply that he didn't open Odsal but that if he considered opening Odsal to be THE supreme achievement he couldn't really think that the invention of speedway was down to his father as surely that would be THE supreme achievement. However, I realised I had made a mistake and deleted it.

Actually it's quite an anti-climax. It doesn't say what BFD says in the post that started this thread off. Actually, I wouldn't disagree too much with what Ian says in his article. In fact, I've already said it above. Firstly that the importance of the West Maitland meeting was that it was the start of "continuity" and secondly that he subsequently promoted speedway at other locations across Australia. The only thing I would say is that when he says, he "left a trail that led to High Beech in England and from there, the world..." of course he had nothing directly to do with the High Beech meeting and, although the role he played as a promoter in Australia was very important, it gives no credit to the other great Australian promoter of the time, A J Hunting, who subsequently had a much bigger influence on the early days of speedway as an organised sport in England. The rest of the article is about how Johnnie Hoskins opened up Odsal and Newcastle and re-introduced speedway to Scotland at Glasgow after the War. All of which, as far as I know, is true. As I keep saying I have the greatest respect for Johnnie Hoskins as a promoter. He was a great promoter, who as Ian says in the article, took great risks. Speedway would have been all the poorer without him. He lived and breathed speedway, no-one has ever denied this. But it doesn't mean that the meeting on 15 December 1923 was any different to dozens of meetings that had already been held in Australia and America and there is no way that Johnnie Hoskins could be said to have "invented" speedway. A great promoter, yes; a great publicist, yes; but not an inventor.

No, I give up, mick. Where did I say that Johnnie Hoskins didn't open Odsal?

I've just received a copy of the latest issue of Classic Speedway. Did you know there is an article in there by Ian Hoskins about his father, Johnnie. It makes very interesting reading.....

Yes, iris, the timescale is all wrong. Also, the bit olddon highlights in red as though it's proof is lifted straight from Johnnie Hoskins' own book, "Speedway Walkabout", so it's not an independent view nor a first hand account by someone else verifying what Johnnie wrote. It's just a straight copy.

No-one has ignored it Dave. But the problem is, it is just not true. you say it is "provable", but the only evidence you have given so far is a plaque put up 80 years later. You have still not pointed to any original research to show that what you have said is actually the case. Some of those "rough and ready bunch of rural rogues and roustabouts" were motor-cyclists who had already ridden at a number of the other meetings and venues I have mentioned before. It was not their first time. It is true that probably the greatest contribution West Maitland made to speedway was not that it was the first but that regular meetings were held there. BUT, after that meeting on 15 December they were not promoted by Johnnie Hoskins. Most of them were promoted by Campbell and Du Frocq under their manager, Billy Dart. And why do you have to use emotive words like "vitriol" "slanted", "jaundiced" in what should be a rational debate? Just because you disagree does not give you the right to say that about what other people say. Why should I not say that your views are "slanted", "jaundiced" and "vitriolic"? What possible reason do you think we could have for saying that Johnnie Hoskins didn't invent speedway other than historical research shows that to be the case? As I keep saying I have the highest regard for Johnnie Hoskins. I certainly have nothing personal against him. Why would I? I didn't know him personally. The nearest I got to knowing him was seeing him every week at New Cross. He was a hero of mine in my younger days. It was him that brought me to speedway by re-opening New Cross, the team I still regard as MY team (see my avatar). But my lifetime as a historian shows me that you cannot ignore proven historical research in favour of something you'd like to be true. Sadly, the fact of the matter is that Johnnie Hoskins did not invent speedway and no-one here so far has given up anything but second-hand writings and anecdotes to back up the claim that he did. Whereas there is a whole body of first hand evidence to show that he did not invent speedway and that the meeting at West Maitland held on 15 December 1923 was nothing new nor particularly special in Australia at the time.