Peter Craven

[jimblanchard]

Received my copy of the Vintage speedway mag this morning. They reproduce an interview with George Hunter that he gave in 1998.

Now, a voice from the grave says “Belle Vue gave us 10 yard start that night because it was a challenge match. It was a tragedy because Peter Craven was a brilliant rider and I remember seeing him win his first world final on black and white television”.

Where did the 10 yard start come from? No one has mentioned that at all to my knowledge before.

[admin]

This one just seems to rumble on and rumble on: was Craven off scratch or was he handicapped and if handicapped was that the cause of his tragic death?
I didn't realise until quite recently that George Hunter, the so-called "Ladybank Express" was involved in Craven's fatal accident. I remember watching George Hunter at Berwick in the latter stages of his long and distinguished career. He was well into his forties by then and used to bring his young daughter onto the centre green to watch the final heat with him. She'd be heading towards her thirties now, I guess. How the time flies. Some say, perhaps with good reason, that Hunter was never quite the same after that fateful night when speedway lost Craven.
At the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863, the forces of General Pickett were slaughtered in their thousands while trying to capture Cemetery Ridge from the Unionists under George Meade. The assault was ordered by the legendary Robert E Lee. Years later, after visiting Lee, Pickett bitterly turned to a colleague and said "that old man had my division slaughtered at Gettysburg." "Yes," came the reply, "but it made you immortal." The same is true for Craven - his fame would've endured had he lived, but his tragic death brought him immortality.
I don't know whether Craven was under a handicap or not and maybe Hunter's memory or the memories of those who maintain he was have been clouded by the passage of time.
However, whether off scratch or not, Craven was a racer. It's one of the reasons his popularity endures. He made his living, just as a later PC did, by thrilling the crowds with a daredevil style and extravagant passes of the less gifted. Thus, I don't believe the argument, if you want to call it that, is either called for or valid.
As I sit here writing this, I'm wondering if Craven was the only world champion to die on track? I can't immediately recall another example.

[stuartroad]

not sure whether this helps or not,but the programme for the match that i have,has no mention of the races being handicapped,but does contain a cartoon with 4 riders at the start,and peter craven sitting on a tractor, well behind the line,the caption reads "i don't mind being handicapped but this is positively ridiculous".
the track record at edinburgh at the time was 65.6 held by ivan mauger.prior to the crash,craven had three races winning all,in times of 68.0/67.0/67.2 (the time of 67.0 in heat 7,was the fastest time of the night)

ps george hunter was excluded from the rerun,willie templeton could not ride and was replaced by dudley mckean and peter craven was replaced by norman nevitt,bill powell won the rerun in(71.2)

[Deleted]

I was at the match and can assure you that there was no handicap.

It had been suggested that Peter Craven should give the other riders a 10 yard start but this was howled down by the crowd so the idea was abandoned.

George Hunter made the gate in that fateful race but on entering the first bend on one of the subsequent laps (memory fails me which one!) George suffered a seized engine and stopped dead in Peter Craven's tracks. Craven avoided the crash by heading to his right. Unfortunately he went through the wooden safety fence and, I think, struck a metal pole at the other side. He died in hospital shortly afterwards.

Tragic.

[donsking]

merlin said:

I was at the match and can assure you that there was no handicap.

It had been suggested that Peter Craven should give the other riders a 10 yard start but this was howled down by the crowd so the idea was abandoned.

George Hunter made the gate in that fateful race but on entering the first bend on one of the subsequent laps (memory fails me which one!) George suffered a seized engine and stopped dead in Peter Craven's tracks. Craven avoided the crash by heading to his right. Unfortunately he went through the wooden safety fence and, I think, struck a metal pole at the other side. He died in hospital shortly afterwards.

Tragic.

This will run and run.

Without wishing in any way to denegrate your recollection, you say you remember the start and the exact circumstances of the accident, but you don't recall when it actually happened in the race; this goes against the recollection of the other rider involved and other people who also say they were there on the night and say Craven started on a handicap.

Seems to me that the only way anyone will know what actually happened is if there is film evidence; there isn't, so the 'Wizard of Balance' is dead, and all that really matters is that we didn't see the fulfillment of that potential.

[Doug]

You would have thought that somewhere is photographic evidence,one way or the other.Even in those days as well as the professionals,fans were filming and photographing meetings.And the arrival of PC and the famous Aces would have had a few dusting off their box brownies

[Deleted]

donsking said:

merlin said:

I was at the match and can assure you that there was no handicap.

It had been suggested that Peter Craven should give the other riders a 10 yard start but this was howled down by the crowd so the idea was abandoned.

George Hunter made the gate in that fateful race but on entering the first bend on one of the subsequent laps (memory fails me which one!) George suffered a seized engine and stopped dead in Peter Craven's tracks. Craven avoided the crash by heading to his right. Unfortunately he went through the wooden safety fence and, I think, struck a metal pole at the other side. He died in hospital shortly afterwards.

Tragic.

This will run and run.

Without wishing in any way to denegrate your recollection, you say you remember the start and the exact circumstances of the accident, but you don't recall when it actually happened in the race; this goes against the recollection of the other rider involved and other people who also say they were there on the night and say Craven started on a handicap.

There are some things that stick more firmly in the mind than others. The reason I am so certain that there was no handicap is that I discussed this meeting at some length with Ian Hoskins, the then Edinburgh promoter, during his stay with me a couple of years ago and he, too, was adamant that Peter Craven did not start off a handicap.

This whole issue was discussed some time ago on the BSF and the same disagreements occurred then.

[donsking]

And therein lies the problem; various eye witnesses are equally vociferous in their accounts of the night's events.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but equally, as someone who wasn't there, I can't say that anyone else's story is wrong either.

In the absence of hard evidence, ie pictures or film, it seems the definitive answer will never be known, although, as Doug says, it's hard to believe that evidence doesn't exist somewhere.

[admin]

I agree, in the absense of concrete evidence one way or the other, people are going to continue to argue about it. Positions are too entrenched.
I accept your word, merlin, but I've never been on one side or the other of the argument (guess I am now). Those who believe (and they do believe) that Craven was handicapped that night, will continue to believe.

[donsking]

The problem runs even deeper than that though Sub; not only can eye witnesses not agree on whether Craven started on a handicap, those that are convinced he did can't agree on what handicap it was!

In my life, I've been proved wrong about events I was absolutely and passionately convinced took place 15 years ago, with respect to anyone here or on the BSF, without at least a picture, who can be sure of the exact details of something that happened nearly 50 years ago?

This thread began with a quote from the only person (other than Craven himself) close enough to the action to be considered to have the definitive answer, and, at the time of that quote, he was 10 years closer to it than we are now.

[jimblanchard]

What I would really like to know is why the 'self styled Scottish speedway historian'; Jim Henry, totally dismisses George Hunter's explanation in his interview just before he died in 1998, yet he swears by his testimony from the event from the time in 1963?

[donsking]

Was Hunter's account the same in 1963 as it was in 1998 Jim?

[jimblanchard]

Actually Ian , he never said about the starting procedure in 1963 for the fatal last heat. He did not declare it until 1998 which goes against the grain of the likes of Jim Henry.

Just the rest of his story, about his bike seizing and all that stuff which was only corroborated by his mechanic, (no official machine examination as such by an independent body) and how all the records 'have been lost' from the official Scottish records office for the incident of someone losing their life at their place of work.

[donsking]

To be fair, in 1963 speedway riders being killed were a pretty routine occurence (even if it was Peter Craven); I'd be quite surprised if any 'official' investigation ever took place.

[jimblanchard]

donsking said:

To be fair, in 1963 speedway riders being killed were a pretty routine occurrence (even if it was Peter Craven); I'd be quite surprised if any 'official' investigation ever took place.

Your wrong, it did. Its is required by law in Scotland even in 1963. Those records relating to the fatal accident of Peter Craven are now subsequently officially 'lost or mislaid'.