Skip navigation
 
12 February 2010 F1 History 68

February’s audio podcast (part 1) with Mario Andretti

Welcome to a very special Motor Sport audio podcast. This month we’re joined by Mario Andretti and Brian Redman – such a stellar line-up that we’ve had to cut it into two parts!

history Februarys audio podcast (part 1) with Mario Andretti

Part 2 will be online next week, but for the time being sit back and enjoy what one of the most talented racing drivers ever, has to say.

Similar content

MonMS_10

It’s not the first time F1 was ugly

09/02/12

If it looks right, it is right: Renault AK 90CV, Bugatti Type 35, Alfa Romeo Tipo B, Maserati 250F, Lotus …

38DON02

The return of the Silver Arrows

08/02/12

Something quite extraordinary has been announced. An event that no motor racing enthusiast can afford to miss, that nobody ever …

L_036435

Why we’ll miss Patrick Head in Formula 1

25/01/12

Never exactly one to kowtow to convention, Patrick Head. But then great race engineers never are. It’s written in their …

Author

Ed-Foster

Ed Foster

Read Ed's profile and more …

68 comments on February’s audio podcast (part 1) with Mario Andretti

  1. Kenny, 21 February 2010 10:18

    OK Steve and R, you’ve convinced me. I had it all wrong. The man was out of this world good. The number 27 should be retired from all of motor racing. You’ve made it clear to me that any problems that he (and those around him) had were caused by Ferrari and/or Didier Pironi and/or the organizers in Japan and/or some dark conspiracy that has yet to be uncovered but surely existed. Thank you both for getting me straightened out on this. I feel like a new man….

  2. R Tanveer, 21 February 2010 14:17

    Kenny, It’s hard to completely compare Villeneuve to Lauda and Prost given that the Canadian drove only in only a fraction over 4 seasons…and 2 of those seasons were in Ferraris that were inferior to the Williamses, Brabhams, Renaults, even Ligiers.

    Lauda and Prost, on the other hand, had the benefit of 11, 12, 13 seasons.

    If you’re looking only at pure results, of course you have to rate Prost higher…but even *with* the results, most people who saw their careers don’t necessessarily put Lauda ahead of Villeneuve.

    Moss and Peterson, for instance, never won “WDCs”, yet they are rated higher than a number of “WDCs” in the history of F1.

    Prost had the greatest in-team competition of any driver in Grand Prix history and came out largely well against them (Senna, Lauda, Mansell, Rosberg, D Hill, Arnoux, Watson, Alesi).

    On that basis alone I personally have to rater Prost higher than Villeneuve and Lauda.

    Prost, for me, is co-equal Number 1 with Senna ALL TIME.

  3. R Tanveer, 21 February 2010 14:34

    Senna, remember, also only won 6 Grand Prix races and no “WDCs” after 67 races/4 seasons.

    Results are one thing. Talent is another.

  4. Steven Roy, 21 February 2010 16:01

    Your view of Villeneuve has to change if you believed he had top class equipment for his whole career yet for two of the four full seasons he competed in his team mates one of who was the reigning world champion managed a total of 11 points over 30 odd races. That clearly shows the cars were rubbish. Regardless what Villeneuve did or what anyone said about him those facts alone show that for half his F1 career his equipment was garbage. The only other conclusion that is possible from the facts is that Scheckter and Pironi were garbage and no-one believes that.

  5. R Tanveer, 21 February 2010 22:33

    It’s seems only Kenny thinks Villeneuve had ‘first class equipment his entire F1 career’.

    He must be living in an alternate universe.

    PS

    I just dug up an old Motor Sport Magazine from my library…

    …it’s the “75th Anniversary Issue”.

    I’m looking at it in my hands right now!

    Guess who is on the cover?

    Gilles Villeneuve in the Ferrari 312T3!

    Now why would Motor Sport Magazine do that!??!

  6. Kenny, 23 February 2010 09:02

    Steve- I should have said a first rate team, rather than first rate equipment. At any rate, the cars were rubbish by Ferrari standards, which is a bit different from just plain rubbish. Scheckter and Villenueve scored well in cars that were right, and less well in cars that were not so right. Situation normal. If they had scored points in an ATS or an Osella….those cars were rubbish.

    R- you’ve made my point. “Villenueve only raced for a fraction over 4 years”. Why was that? Beacuse he retired? Because he was fired? No, it was because he ran up the back of Jochen Mass an launched himself into oblivion. Was that a one off, could happen to anyone thing? No. In 1977 he ran up the back of Ronnie Peterson and launched himself into a group of spectators (who, as Steve points out, would not have been killed and injured if they hadn’t been there…just as it would be dark if the sun hadn’t risen this morning). Were those crashes the result of mechnical failure. No. Were they caused by Ronnie Peterson, Jochen Mass, Didier Pironi, or the Scuderia? No. Did Lee Harvey Oswald do it? I guess that leaves Gilles…

    He was both superb and flawed. Sadly, the flawed part turned out to be the bottom line.

    All IMHO.

  7. Mario Carneiro Neto, 24 February 2010 02:37

    I’ve always thought this was pretty striking:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EboUm16LsH0

    Enzo Ferrari talks about Gilles Villeneuve.

  8. Steven Roy, 24 February 2010 04:04

    The Ferraris of that period were rubbish by any standard. The two drivers who finsihed first and second in the 1979 world championship scored a total of 8 points in 1980 and finished behind Arrows and Fittipaldi in the constructors championship.

    Jochen Mass’s version of the accident that killed Villeneuve is that he expected Gilles to pass him on one side and move to give him more room on that side just as Gilles moved to the other side. In effect he went for a gap that was closed as he went for it. No fault on Mass and no fault on Gilles.

    Jim Clark died in an accident as did Jochen Rindt as did Ronnie Peterson etc. It happens. You can’t say that because a driver made contact with another car twice it was somehow his fault. I seem to remember a spectator dying as the result of his son making contact with the back of another car but no blame can be attached to him for that.

    You may view Gilles as flawed but he was a genius behind the wheel and he did things no-one else could do. If as you suggest that he was somehow to blame for the Peterson accident and his own fatal accident do you not find it odd that none of his rivals ever crticised him for it. Racing drivers are not known for holding back in these situations.

    Keke Rosberg is a man known for speaking his mind and he has made comments to the effect that he hated to hear Gilles and Senna being compared because while Gilles may have put himslef at risk he never put anyone else at risk. No doubt you will bring up the Peterson accident but I have never seen that incident but I find it hard to believe that he somehow chose to launch his car at another for no reason. Given the treatment Hunt and co dished out to Patrese it seems reasonable that if there was anything suspect in Gilles’ behaviour that none of them once complained about him.

  9. Kenny, 24 February 2010 05:17

    Throughout this discussion both of you have ignored many of the things I’ve said that do not jive with your views on the matter. Now you are putting words in my mouth and expressing opinions about events that you have not seen. R has even resorted to name calling, something I never expected to see here.

    Steven, I would be happy to continiue this discussion with you- I am always glad to hear what a fellow enthusiast has to say. I would ask that you re read the thread, paying close attention to what I have said- for example, I have not said or implied that Villenueve chose to launch his car at another car- then we can carry on. Or not. Up to you.

  10. Kenny, 1 March 2010 14:56

    That’s what I figured…..

  11. R Tanveer, 2 March 2010 13:45

    Kenny, how do you see the coming season?

    We have four, perhaps even more, cars capable of winning and about 9 or 10 drivers who are proven race winners.

    How do you see things shaping up.

    I’ll be pulling for Vettel.

  12. kenny, 3 March 2010 18:03

    I’m backing Red Bull and Webber, and hoping that Jenson does well.

    It’s a tough call…I think that Mercedes have been sandbagging a bit, and all of the other usual suspects are looking good, with Renault and Sauber just behind. Williams are a mystery to me right now…don’t know what to think about them.

    I always get my predictions wrong, so…………….

  13. R Tanveer, 3 March 2010 21:41

    Here is my prediction:

    1. Vettel to beat Hamilton for the title.

    2. Massa to prove faster than Alonso.

    3. Schumacher to finish about 9th in the championship after retiring before the season ends.

    4. Hulkenberg to be seen as one of the two great Germans – alongside Vettel – for the future.

  14. r. pebworth, 17 March 2010 19:51

    a poor start to the season with a very processional race thought the new regs were
    designed to make the racing more exciting and encourage overtaking when in fact drivers will slow down to conserve engines etc
    and the whole race will be tactics by the teams lets go back to the 70s with big slicks back and front and no driver aids that would sort out the men from the boys

  15. r. pebworth, 17 March 2010 20:06

    you have to respect mario and nigel how many other drivers have raced at the top level both in F1 and indy racing with any level of success not many they were both worthy F1 world champions

  16. Paul Cherrington, 26 March 2010 18:43

    To Michael Spitale I say – I’ve always a huge Mario fan, and was lucky enough to see him race in both F1 and Indycars – one of racings rare, genuine Superstars. No question. But Michael, please, when you ask “Mario did not beat anyone good for the title in ‘78? “….even Mario, in his heart, knows he won that title PURELY because of the sheer class & professionalism of Ronnie, his team-mate, who simply couldn’t bring himself to break his contract – but so often shadowed him to the line, sometimes mere feet behind his gearbox.

  17. António Posser, 30 April 2010 21:37

    Hey guys. ALOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
    Most versatile?
    Jacky Ickx for sure.
    Motorbikes, Rally, F2, F1, Endurance, Touring cars, Can-Am.

  18. Simon O'Donovan, 13 December 2010 01:36

    R Tanveers opinion is highly respected.

    I had a bet with a guy who believed MS would win the championship & I took him up on it. I don’t bet, but it appeared quite simple in my head. I am now surprised he has not been able compete at the level….Three years is a nice rest, so I also felt it had much to do with the analogy Mercedes have spoken of on tyres. That may sound rubbish, but remember who monopolised the testing of BRIDGESTONE tyres during the days of his success.

    Vettel: I thought he was brilliant in adversity, but could never agree Felipe would lead Ferrari once Fernando started to drive there (My driver of the year).

    Hulk did well, but Rubens is one of the best drivers in F1 (who cares how old).

Add your comments