In the hours after the Belgian Grand Prix at Spa there was a lot of huffing and puffing down the pub. This is good healthy debate and only to be expected when us fans get a drink or two in on a Sunday evening. Thankfully I can walk to my local hostelry if I think it might be a long debate.
Looking at a list of Formula 1 World Champions there are some common denominators. Natural talent, aggression when needed, dedication, commitment, consistency and being in the right car at the right moment.
And a good brain.
In the aftermath of Spa we – that’s me, who’s supposed to be ‘in the know’, and assorted other fans – decided that it is the last-mentioned asset that is missing from Messrs Grosjean and Maldonado.
Not so much because of what they do, but how many times they repeat the same lack of clear thinking. To win lots of races, and a championship, a driver needs to have a good brain. Look at the list. It is assumed they are all fast, have good judgement and learn, on certain occasions, to think before reacting. It is also assumed they have unusually good reactions and are able to handle many tasks simultaneously.
We are not racing drivers, let alone F1 drivers, and we pontificate in the pub or, in my case, in a magazine. We mean no malice; we simply react to what we see. Now, at just past mid-season, we can see that neither Grosjean nor Maldonado have learnt from their misjudgements. As Alonso gently pointed out, the Frenchman has made rash mistakes in too many races. Now, having mercifully got away without serious injury, the Ferrari driver supports the decision to ban Grosjean for one race.
A race ban is supposed to be a lesson, an unexpected week off in which to consider what has gone wrong, what has led to the errors and how they can be eradicated. In my view Maldonado might benefit from this. Yes, he pays a lot of money to the Williams team, but he also costs it a lot of money. Sir Frank will like the financial help from Venezuela, of course, but I’m damn sure he would like his man to score more points. After all, points also mean money.
Now, of course there are what are known as ‘racing incidents’, and these will always be part of motor racing. It is still a very dangerous sport and accidents are bound to occur. What happened at Spa was not one of these.
Everyone knows that you do not win the Belgian Grand Prix between the grid and La Source. Moreover, you rarely win a Grand Prix on the first lap. We all know the old cliché, to finish first, first you etc, etc, etc.
These are F1 drivers we are debating. The best racing drivers on the planet, and paid accordingly. Therefore I think it is fair to say that Grosjean should have been aware that La Source is a famously tricky corner on lap one. What’s worse is that he probably does know. I do not race a Grand Prix car, I have not made the sprint from grid to La Source, but people like Grosjean and Maldonado are wasting their talent and, worse, their opportunity to be in a good car in Formula 1. Teams do not like big accidents, they are expensive, and what they want is Constructors’ Championship points. If their man is World Champion, OK, that is a big bonus.
Maldonado may win the Italian Grand Prix at Monza and I will look like an idiot. Grosjean will not take part and that is right. Both need to calm down, take stock, and thereby fully realise their potential.
Maldonado felt agrieved at being demoted 3 places on the grid, decided he didn’t want to be in the pack at La Source, hence his jumped start, hoping to be clear after the 1st corner !! Probably thought a drive-thro’ penalty a better price to pay rather than risk being punted off at the 1st corner….
Seriously, I agree Maldonado also needs to be banned for a race or 2…he’s had too many yellow cards, about time he got a red one.
Aside from this, why is the grid BEFORE La Source, not after it on the downhill to Eau Rouge….that’s where races used to start from years ago ??
The grid before Eau Rouge? Imagine the carnage.
I hope Grosjean takes the hint, he seems like a decent guy and seems more open to criticism than Maldonado has been. It is not in the nature of a driver to care what anyone else thinks, just ask Lewis.
I like the breadth of personalities, semi- or perhaps fully-dysfunctional in some cases, in F1. They have always been there. But, and it’s a big but, there are certain factors that exacerbate things nowadays – foremost is the fact that new drivers tend to be given so little time to establish themselves before being given the heave-ho (see Toro Rosso for details)or dismissed as also-rans (Glock, Petrov) and banished to the dead-end teams, meaning they are desperate, really desperate, to make their mark whenever their chance in a half-decent team or car comes along (I notice that Grosjean and Maldo are in cars threatening regular podiums – so near – and I’d fully expect, were the Force India to be a better car, to see Hulk and PdR making the same desperate ‘look at me’ moves).
I don’t think it’s a brain thing, just youthful ‘bounce’. What could we do? Have a min age limit? A min number of years to be served in GP2 or whatever before F1?
Having said all that, Maldo is worse than most, clearly a hot-headed danger to other drivers and their cars. But as long as he spreads it around and doesn’t have a vendetta against particular competitors I can live with it. If I were Frank I’d be more concerned about his odious connection to the even more odious Chavez regime’s even more odious money. It’s like having an F1 team sponsored by Fidel…
Why is the grid before La Source rather than before Eau Rouge?
Gosh if you have to ask that one…
If it is dangerous enough at La Source’s speeds you can imagine the consequences at Eau Rouge / Radillion with today’s acceleration on the F1 cars…
Personally, I think it too easy to get a F1 Superlicense. One should have to show more results in the junior formulas before being “promoted” to F1. Maybe not a minimum age, but definitely a minimum number of results. I believe more experience would produce a better overall group of F1 drivers. I’m probably in the minority on this, but drivers getting younger and younger are beginning to show in a lack of good judgment. One can name a number of current F1 drivers who’d be better with more maturity.
What we do have to do is discourage this tendency from drivers (even gifted ones like Grosjean) of making stupid maneuvers at the startline (especially) as well as in racing in general. The point is, and I’ll willingly get to address to Mr. N. Roebuck’s article on driver’s safety, with the risk of being heavily criticized for this one, but while undoubtedly I agree with the improvement of safety in MR over the years, at some point I do think that this sport has now become ‘too safe’ to even indulge some not so capable young individuals to practice it, for ‘well even if I’m not that good (but have the money for example)’, the chances of getting hurt are quite slim to get away with, and along with that attitude, respect and gentlemanship behavior among competitors inevitably tends to wane. Please do not take me wrong but while, as I said before, I certainly agree with Jackie Stewart’s and all efforts to make this a safer sport, I also agree with Mr. Dennis Jenkinson’s view that like with some other extreme activities) risk and danger are intrinsic to this sport inasmuch as the resulting merit and glory (and Reward$) that excelling in it entail. Now in the midst of all this reaction after the Spa accident I hear all this about enclosed cockpits and rollcages as a possible measure to which I oppose. Let’s be honest with ourselves and think about it, what would the credit be if climbing Mt. Everest is done with a pillow underneath cushioning the dangers of a fall? Would it be an achievement all the same?…
Dear MS mates, I apologize for the bad punctuation. Too hurried.
This is unfair. Grosjean made one mistake in an otherwise outstanding season, to lump him together with Maldonado is unfair.
Let’s stop the pretense that F1 is the pinnacle of driving talent. F1 has always been the pinnacle of nepotism. Over the years, there have been drivers in seats that did not deserve them that were far worse: Ralf Schumacher, Andrea DeCesaris (who actually drove with a neurological tick), Jos Verstappen, the list is far longer than the “greats” in F1.
BTW: I really like the Yellow-Red card idea, and I would like to see a true black flag in a race for stupid behaviour.
After the race, I thought of JYS interview with Senna after the 1990 Japanese Grand Prix (It’s on that video site) where he noted that for a WDC, Senna had been involved in far more crashes than any other WDC. I also remembered Senna’s response.
All of which came to mind because of Hamilton’s involvement in the crash. No, this time he didn’t necessarily cause it, but somehow even when not causing incidents himself he’s involved in them. Somehow he doesn’t seem to have that extra capacity to take on a lot around him and know that the throttle works both ways, that there is a type of situational awareness that the greats have, and he should employ that.
OK, on Sunday maybe he had nowhere to go, but like his idol Senna, Hamilton has been involved or caused so many incidents, from at least as far back at Fuji ’07, when he was playing games behind the safetycar and causing the (relatively) minor mayhem behind him. (easily pawned off on Vettel, but that was down to Hamilton’s jinking back and forth the the extent he was).
To be fair, I think it is the pinnacle of open wheel racing. The guys in Indy, for example, tend to be F1 cast-offs (Franchitti, Rubens, and in older times, more tenuously perhaps, Andretti and Fittipaldi) and F1 never-had-a-chancers. Only the bottom two or three F1 squads would take a pay driver for money only, without a pretty decent record in the feeders.
But when it comes to other kinds of racing, well, we only have to look at Coulthard in DTM, oftentimes trailing Susie Wolff, or JV or JPM in NASCAR, or Kimi in rallying. It seems that, when we look at the likes of sportcar gods – Elford, Ickx, Bell, etc, right up to Kristensen and McNish – or touring success stories – Ekstrom, Paffett, Priaulx (and Di Resta so far) – the exact same is true, in reverse, i.e. little crossover success, and more often than not a crossover isn’t even considered.
Which is one reason I hold G Hill in higher regard than most – Mr Monaco’s win at Le Mans (when it was still a two-driver event) is very impressive indeed. I know Andretti went close, but I would love to see MSC have a few cracks at it before he really gets too old (with the added bonus it’d free up a seat at Merc F1 for LH…)
To be honest, comparing sportscar drivers to F1 pilots to rallyists is like trying to compare Usain Bolt to Ed Moses – same thing, but very much not the same. Perhaps words like ‘pinnacle’ should be used more judiciously, or with more qualification.
Senna is probably the greatest F1 driver ever. Certainly of his own era and those immediately preceding and following it. His name will be remembered long after those of the others have been forgotten. Enough said.
As for how anyone who actually saw Sunday’s race could twist what happened at the start around to an opinion that amounts to ‘Hamilton should have seen it coming and avoided it’ – i.e. blame him for not being clairvoyant – and, even worse, utter that opinion in public, well, words fail – but it speaks for itself. Maybe poor Perez and Kobayashi should have seen it coming too? And Fernando could have put on an extra thick helmet in anticipation too…
Senna. Hamilton. Both great drivers and champions. Super, charitable people. Some people, it seems, however, are just born to hate.
There are many drivers I’m ambivalent about, and a couple I actively dislike (much as I try to be fair), but I tend to shut up about them. Littering forums with critical comments about them, if I ever stooped to it, I’d recognize as a sign that I’d descended into a very negative mental state, perhaps a personality disorder, let’s call it ‘troll-itis’.
Some people, perhaps, don’t realize they’ve succumbed and just keep on churning it out. Not that I’m singling anybody out. There’s nobody like that on the MS forums, is there? Just sayin’…
John Saviano’s point about licences is spot on. However, let’s be frank here, it’s not just the preserve of rookies and low experience drivers. Some of the old hands have been pulling similar stunts for years, and they themselves learnt it from previous generations who got away with it because the authorities were too scared to come down on them. In an era where safety levels are so high (and who’d want anything else?), drivers have thought they can’t hurt themselves for decades, and knew no action would be taken. I’m curious to see if anyone with a championship to their name gets similar treatment to Grosjean in similar circumstances. My guess is they won’t, as previous generations weren’t, even though the Grosjean ban is totally justified in my book. It also strikes me that this type of driving is only considered dangerous if an accident actually happens, which presumably fosters the belief that they’ll get away with it, and thus the circle begins again… And i also wonder how much of the authorities’ sudden willingness to take action is due to title contenders being innocent victims in this case. Can’t have that, can we…
Difference is that Grosjean clearly has the potential to be a great F1 driver, has produced some wonderful moments this year, and, unlike Maldonado, not all the incidents he’s been involved in have been of his instigation. We, the fans, loose out on not seeing Grosjean race at Monza. But I do agree he needs to improve his judgement considerably before he can fulfil his (considerable, I believe) potential.
While I do appreciate Carlos Sanchez’s comment, there has always been a romanticism associated with danger, speed and racing cars, I do not want to see anyone killed. The ban for Grosjean is right. It will send out the right message to the rest of the field, that they must drive with care and integrity. We must not forget that another foot to the left and Alonso would have been killed. However, please don’t bring in closed cockpits.
For all that though, I don’t think Grosjean is a bad driver, in fact this might be the making of him. It’s reasonable to believe that if he hadn’t have been involved in so many first lap accidents, he may well have won races in the Lotus. Hopefully this will be the lesson he needs.
Maldonado is a tricky one, very very quick, already a winner and lots of sponsorship! Lots of silly mistakes, but the big two incidents, Hamilton and Perez, I don’t really think much of. Both probably 60/40, but generally racing incidents. The jump start, while unusual these days, is hardly a major crime, and has been punished. I quite like there being a few villains in F1!!!
Thanks very much to all. Good debate.
But hang on. Grosjean has been involved in SEVEN incidents in TWELVE races. This too many. Maldonado not scored a pint since May. This is red card time.
Anyway, on we go. Monza such a wonderful place to be racing.
Last GP in Europe this year. UGH!
RW
I think the Grosjean penalty is perfectly fair.
To bad they’ve waited 25 years too late to start handing out penalties for dangerous driving.
What a vastly different sport we’d likely have if Senna had been severely punished for trying to put Prost in the wall at Estoril.
Thanks Rich Ambroson,
I think Fuji 2007 was the wet race I was trying to remember. Wasn’t that the race where some unhelpful footage taken by a spectator or ‘citizen journalist’ from a stand appeared online and made the newspapers and Dennis or Whitmarsh bemoaned 24 hour news culture and the power of the Internet? 5 years later Hamilton is Tweeting team data to the world?
Monza 2000, Schumacher backed up the traffic behind the Safety Car. It caught out a younger and less experienced Button causing him to take to the grass, bash the barrier before coming off and hitting the barriers at a right hander. Was it last year Schumacher squeezed Barrichello between a pit wall?
The Spa aftermath has led to discussions about enclosed cockpits. Isn’t it like road car safety? The biggest safety factor is the person behind the wheel.
I would say Fangio, Clark, Prost, and Moss would be much higher on any list of F1 greats than Senna (I see it has been posted here that Senna was the greatest ever…). For me, it’s a very small margin between Fangio and Clark, and frankly they’re equal in my eyes.
Senna had a lot of talent, but he wasn’t on par with the greats noted above, as he caused far more incidents than someone of his talent needed to. As well, his style of driving which has been emulated these last 25 years has decreased the on-track action almost as much as aero has. Nigel Roebuck had a fantastic “Reflections” column about this earlier in the year, I’m not sure which specific issue it was off the top of my head.
I have one question about closed cockpits/canopies: what happens if a car ends up upside down?
Ahhh, and here we go again Rich. I’d rather have Racing Drivers like Senna and Villeneuve, and now Hamilton, and Alonso than mere (just Drivers) a la Prost and playstation like, some win for themselves the former win for them and the fans. Though I agree with Fangio and Clark, I do not with Alain (with all due respect for him as a driver – Jet Pilots Vs. Jet fighter pilots according to me .Thanks
Carlos, I would not put Senna and Villeneuve in the same sentence, that is insulting to Gilles. Look up what Keke Rosberg had to say in comparing the two.
I am a huge fan of Gilles’ style of racing, and Ronnie Peterson’s (RIP, 35 years ago today, sadly taken from us), as well as their off track demeanor. Both were fair men on track, unlike Senna or Hamilton. Gilles and Ronnie expressed respect for their opponents, while Senna and Hamilton most often seem to express (or expressed, in Senna’s case) contempt for their opponents. Vast difference.
Prost could be quite an exciting driver to watch when the moment called for it. He and hard but fair racer Alan Jones had a nice battle at Hockenheim, was it in ’81? As well, it was a thing of beauty to see the smoothness of his style and the times he’d set. But to call him “playstation” is to diminish his racing (not just driving) skills. A shame, as he was (is still, in other forms) a Racer.He didn’t get 51 wins by being “playstation”, or a mere “pilot” vs. “fighter pilot”… the man Raced.
Fangio, Moss and Clark were too long ago for most to go on anything other than received wisdom from ‘authorities’ (i.e. journalists and old men who listened to races on the radio or maybe stood on one corner at Brands once a year and saw them fly past). Not good enough for Galileo, not good enough for me. So they all have question marks attached to their records – and, for me, that goes right up to the Stewart/Emmo and even Lauda/Hunt eras. Anybody saying ‘Moss was the greatest’ needs a) to be very old part of the entourage that saw him race week-in week-out, or else b) to stop swallowing so gullibly what received wisdom says about things they haven’t seen with their own eyes…
It’s only from the ’80s that we have enough film and TV footage to properly judge for ourselves (i.e. pretty much every race being viewable from more than one or two angles). I’d call pre-80 the Classic era (or Mythical era – reputations based on what the likes of Jenks reported) and post-80 the Modern era (reps based on what we see with our own eyes, with the ‘church’ authorities, i.e. journalists’ opinions, relegated to being increasingly irrelevant lobbying voices).
In the Modern era Senna, warts and all, is so far ahead of the rest he’s more or less defined what being a top driver is.
Rich, I’d like to ask you a question. Did you ever see Fangio or Moss race live? If so, how many races and from what vantage point(s)? And if you didn’t, how much film footage of their driving have you seen? Hours? Minutes?
I can guess the answers. So on what basis can you honestly be sure? Because of the record books? (Ah, but Schuey has the best on-paper record, and you don’t think much of him, do you?) Or because Jenks said so? This is where it gets interesting. Nowadays we have Nigel Roebuck (or the Autosport guys for comparison, Brundle and Hill and Herbert on Sky too). I’ll stick with NR to make my point – about a third of the time I agree with his race reports/driver opinions entirely, another third I kind of agree, and the other third I’d say he’s completely wrong. Because I see the races/performances too – all, with in-car cameras and multiple replays. I see as much as him, which could never be true in the old days. If all I had was his written reports, then I’d probably take on his opinions as ‘fact’. But that’s not the case any more, is it?
So again, on what real evidence do you base your reverence for Moss, Fangio and Clark?…
LL,
Upside down? On fire? A driver will die or be maimed for life.
Then there’ll be calls for open cockpits. On safety grounds.
Hamfan, regarding closed cockpits/canopies – for once we appear to br thinking the same way, sir.
No doors to allow medical access or assist an exit on a single seater, at risk of stating the bleedin’ obvious… I’d like to think all possibilities have been thought through if it goes ahead.
As Gordon Murray said last month, enough with the penalties! Let the drivers sort it out, like they did with Scheckter way back when. Drivers need to respect and be aware of each other, not just sit back and wait to see if they’ve gotten away with something!
Over officiating, along with orchestrated passing, is gonna be the death of F1.
So you adore Senna, hamfan; good for you. Another take: Senna was a great charger early on, then he found himself in an unbeatable car so he won a lot; he had a strange personality, and drove into people a lot. Sadly he was killed; then, like Elvis, he became perfect in the eyes of many.
The difference between Stewart, Clark, Lauda, Villeneuve, Fangio and the modern era of Senna onwards is that a) they were sportsmen and not spoiled children, and b) they knew that, even if they were inclined towards car to car contact, they would just as likely be the ones in hospital. I got the chance to look at Villeneuves 81 Ferrari 126C recently – and it looked like something I might have made in my garage over a rainy weekend. You certainly wouldn’t contemplate hitting another car, or anything else, with it! Senna, Schumacher and those that followed in the current era realised that, with modern “safe” car design, other cars were “in play” and if that was what was needed to get the result then, well, thats what you do when you believe winning is your right. Maldonado and Grosjean may lack the brilliance of Senna/Schumacher but they have the same cavalier approach to the wellbeing of their colleagues and are the inevitable product of the failure to clamp down on dangerous driving in the last couple of decades.
Hello Rob,
We don’t all live in Europe.
In years to come with good health (and finances) I have hopes of going to Japan, Singapore, Malaysia (not Korea) in addition to my annual Melbourne pilgrimage.
regards from Dow Nunda.
Zanti,
The point I was trying to make to Rich was simply that it’s wrong to make sweeping statements such as ‘Moss and Fangio were better than Senna’ when there simply isn’t enough real TV/film evidence to make those judgments. They may have been better drivers. But perhaps not. I, certainly, do not believe he was definitely better than them, for the same reason. I respect his opinion on Prost (there’s plenty of footage), though I disagree with it. I suspect his view is based on personality as much as driving talent, which is fair enough, but being ‘nice’ isn’t a major criterion I’d use to judge a driver any more than I’d use it to judge a politician’s or footballer’s relative greatness/legacy.
I tend to think it’s like that ‘dog owners like The Beatles, cat owners like The Stones’ kind of things. I’d modify it to ‘Dog-Beatles-Prost’ and ‘Cat-Stones-Senna’ (and you could probably add Jenson and Lewis to those lists, respectively). I wonder if Rich owns a dog, or a Sgt Pepper outfit?…
Frank,
Far from perfect (I did say warts and all), but boy, could he drive…
PS Zanti,
So if the young Moss and Clark and Stewart were driving in an era of (relatively) much safer machinery and circuits and better medical tech, you still think they’d be driving around like gentlemen, avoiding contact and risk at all costs to maintain a clean image and probably sacrificing wins and championships in the process? I certainly doubt it. I think they were probably just as hungry for success as later generations of greats – I think they’d be doing exactly what Schuey and Senna and the rest did in their pomp. But if you don’t, then let’s agree to disagree…
John Saviano, while I don’t disagree with your comments, I think every case should be judged on its merits. Consider Kimi: Only 23 car races before he scored a point for Sauber in his first F1 race. Should talent like that be allowed to stagnate in the lower formulae while waiting to pass a presupposed threshold of ‘maturity’?
Re. the comments about a ‘minimum’ standard before graduation to F1. Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t both Maldonado and Grosjean GP2 champions, with multiple seasons in the lower formulae, which rather negates that argument?
Hi Hamfan
Yes I disagree. Of course those “old” drivers had just as greater desire to win, to say otherwise is ridiculous….but it is a question of intent. Contact with another car wasn’t a justifable risk because they knew the consequences (and many suffered those consequences). Senna, MSC calculated such risks were worthwhile – the chance of winning being far greater than the risk of injury. Maldonado, Grosjean, Vettel are just emulating the recent “masters” they watched as they grew up. Its a mindset issue and it is, to my mind anyway, unfortunate. But, as you say, no doubt everyone’s opinion is different – but Button, for example, has my respect because he fights hard but fair.
Sorry Hamfan – I missed your primary point. Do I think Clark, Stewart, Moss etc would be driving exactly like Senna and Schumacher if they were driving now? – no,I absolutely do not (and I still think Clark or Moss would win!)
…and dog, Stones, Button, Mansell (Senna over Prost if pushed)
Over and Out
Rich, I completely agree with you about Great Drivers (Clark, Stewart, Prost, Andretti) versus Great Idiots (Senna, Schumacher).
I will remember Senna as a profoundly dangerous driver, and not great by any means. Same with Schumacher.
hamfan, yes I did have the privilege of seeing Fangio “live” though not in a race, but an exhibition. He could still blast the W154 around at 80 years old, and he still had presence, the presence of a humble yet confident Champion.
I’ve also been watching regularly since the 80s, and did not ever find Senna to be the best. I respected his innate talent, but not his tactics. It is because of him that we have many of the problems in racing we have today, as noted in Nigel Roebuck’s “Reflections” column earlier this year. Further, I had the pleasure of doing trackside photography for motorcycle and some automobile racing in the 90s, and spoke and interacted with many racers, but not F1 folks at an F1 race. IndyCars, IMSA, and such.
Anyhow, I’ve been around racing enough and in depth enough to put forward more than a random guess/shot at whose greatness is impressive. Folks will always have differences of opinion, but there will always be all time greats. Not many have combined the greatness of spirit with their ontrack actions as Fangio and Clark did. Villeneuve may be one of the more recent, but he was taken from us before he had the chance to gain the WDCs that were surely coming to him. (and he didn’t complain about following Jody home at Monza in 79, as more recent drivers might…)
To play along with a big more of hamfan’s “interrogation”, yes, I’ve seen likely hours of footage of Fangio, and have a couple on VHS and other media at home. I’ve read many sources, not just Jenks (although “The Racing Driver” is still a real primer for racing fans) but Paul Frere, and others who participated at the time.
Regarding Schumi, yes, statistically he is ahead of them all including your guy Senna. And while I still think Prost and Clark were better, and Prost at least as good, I am what might still be considered a Schumi “fan”, “warts and all”, though not to the same level as I am a fan of those mentioned, or even of such as Jean Alesi, who is one of my favorite “modern” drivers. I also am a fan of Damon Hill, though some might see that as a contradiction. Anyhow…
Like youreself, though I see NR as the supreme authority on F1 matters for the last many years, I too at times find my position to not quite line up with his. He and I see Schumacher from different perspectives, though I am in no way blind to Schumacher’s “warts” (Hungary against Rubens a couple years ago was terribly wrong. As bad as Portugal 1988…)
Finally, as well as having seen Fangio blast the W154 around Laguna Seca fast enough to have the chase/camera car spin trying to keep up, I’ve seen Moss there many times racing the hell out of vintage machinery at an age well past what most F1 drivers would consider getting into a motorized competition. Clark was sadly killed when I was an infant. I know many people who personally saw him race, one friend who was at Riverside Raceway when Clark was testing some machinery there, and back in the days when one could speak to one’s racing idols human being to human being. My friend has many stories to tell about how Clark was able to do incredible things, and yet still be a very humble and human person.
If you wish to perceive Senna as the greatest, clearly nothing I or anyone will say will change your opinion, and since we are fortunate to live in democratic nations, you are of course free to that opinion. It just happens to be an incorrect one.
Cheers!
Carlos, regarding Prost:
THE most exciting Grand Prix (for me) that I watched on the day it happened was the Mexican GP of 1990. Prost won from 13th on the grid, passing such as Mansell, Piquet, and Senna. Not bad for a “Playstation Pilot”, eh? (though of course, the move/lap of the race was the penultimate lap for Mansell/Berger, with THAT pass in the Peraltada, which overshadowed Prost’s magnificent win.)
Hammy, if we’re talking pop/rock music, I like both the Beatles and the Stones (though after “Some Girls”, the Stones, lost it for me). Howlin’ Wolf is the real guy for me in that sort of thing.
These days though, I prefer Bach, Vivaldi, and a bit of Ludwig van.
Enjoy parsing that one out. I’ve left out a lot of material, so like that lacking footage from the pre-1980s, I’m sure you’ll appreciate that your assessment of my musical (and racing tastes) is not as exact is it could be?
Jeff Beck… now there’s a talent from the 60s…
W196, the slipper bodied one. I knew as I typed and posted it that the W154 was prewar, but I was in stream of conscious mode again. I also have “Prost” instead of “Fangio” in one of those posts as well.
Apologies, but as Dr. McCoy might say, I’m a (fill in the blank), not a copyeditor. (and God Bless the copyeditors, they’re a rare breed these days.)
Rich,
Thanks. Your stories of seeing them only as post-career demonstrators of vintage machinery and hearing stories about them from older acquaintances illustrate make my point perfectly.
Ditto your point about ‘humble and human’ – as if that matters when judging driving talent.
I’ve said before, and I’ll say it again, the US is a strangely disconnected place – opinions, including those on F1, get warped too easily over there…
hammy, your response further illustrates how out of touch you are. Thanks though, for the incorrect and biased remarks about the U.S. though. At least you’re not partial to just slamming Europe…
How the sharing of my experiences emphasizes your point escapes me, but then, I’m not altering my mind the way you seem to have done. At least I am in good company with other folks who do see Senna’s malevolence on track for what it was.
You enjoyed the Zanardi article, and noted what an extraordinary man he is. How is it that you can separate sport from one’s actions in Senna’s case, but acknowledge the true Champion that Zanardi is? It’s confusing to say the least. Humble and human when combined with supreme driving talent as in Fangio’s case (and most certainly NOT in Senna’s case—view the interview with JYS from Oz in 1990…) is what makes the ideal Champion. Arrogant, dismissive, and playing unfairly (Portugal 88, so many other times) no matter how much innate talent one has, reduces one to a person who was good at what they did, but not a great Champion.
Enjoy your no rules worldview. Have you ever actually lived in a place where such lack of consideration for one’s peers or basic etiquette pervades? Your championing of such an approach might change if you have. Some would see the results of such a macro “no rules” approach and see that that approach is detrimental to a good life. Or, perhaps you’ve “gone over to the dark side” as a result of such experiences, I wouldn’t know. It seems so, with your championing of Senna, and continual debasement of the west.
Anyone who has seen Stirling Moss racing at a historic event knows he’s not merely “demonstrating”…
As for the whole “Beatles/Stones, dogs/cats” post, hammy here does seem to operate from a binary mentality. A shame for him, as the universe itself is actually analog. We only use binary processes for machines…
One final question for hammy.
Were you there with Che Guevara when he was enjoying witnessing the executions of those who opposed him, or do you just wear the t-shirt because your friends told you he was cool?
Rich,
Let me get this clear. Anyone preferring Senna over Prost (or any of those earlier greats from eras when, as I’ve tried to explain, clear evidence is hard to get hold of) has gone over to the ‘dark side’?
Sorry, I just don’t get the Che G reference (I doubt many will), but I’m guessing it implies I’m some kind of mass murderer or suchlike. For admiring Senna?..
And for clarity, the point I say your reply illustrates is the one I make about it being so hard to judge old era drivers based on such scant film evidence of them actually driving. Like you, I too have seen many oldies driving (at Goodwood FOS in my case) but I wouldn’t use that as any basis for an opinion on how they’d cope, driving in anger, against the likes of Senna (or Prost)…
I do respect your views – I’ve said so before, and I say it again in this very thread – they make me question my own – and although we tend to disagree, I enjoy debating with you. Really. Though I do think you’re taking this Senna vs Prost thing too seriously – if you were to go re-read the Senna/Prost thread from a couple of months ago you might be surprised by what I said about the two (unless I’ve mis-remembered).
PS. ‘Slamming Europe?’ For anyone who doesn’t know, tomorrow the German Constitutional Court decides on ESM. If it goes through, that’s it, Italy, Spain, France and all the rest belong to Germany. For if you control a country’s budget, you control everything. Read the wording of the ESM treaty. Nobody wishes more strongly than I that the southern Europeans would rise up and save their democratic institutions. Slamming Europe?…
America. Be honest. America’s never cared about F1. A brace of champions in 60 years – both in machinery by far the class of the field in those years – both had teammates who died in the title deciders too, oddly (no, I’m not going to blame the CIA). One team, Gurney and Jim Rockford’s, which lasted – ooh, how long? On and off races that provide nice holidays for the jaded European hacks. I will believe America is serious about F1 when they put up a few teams and drivers.
NASCAR is fun to watch though. I’ll not mention Indy, for fear of upsetting people…
Fangio’s efforts at the Nurburgring in ’57 (which there is some footage of) really speak for themselves.
The Che Guevara reference was a play on how you do sometimes seem to come across as some of the youthful “revolutionaries” who wear the Che shirts w/o knowledge of his history. The “dark side” comments were referring to what seems like a preference for drivers who are unforgiving, take no prisoners, and flat out dangerous on track.
You’re right, off track demeanor may not be as important in referring to a racer’s talent. I would say that just viewing the on-track body of work, that Senna is a flawed talent, in that he resorted to pushing his rivals off track far more than had been acceptable before, or that his talent merited. He most often could have gained the same final results w/o the destruction.
Regarding the Europe/America “bashing”, it seems a consistent trend in your posts, not just on this thread. Perhaps I’m misinterpreting them, but it would seem I’m not unique in that. No matter, I’ll leave it for now with one last (extended) question about America’s influence in F1.
With whom did McLaren have their first carbon fiber chassis built? Which sportscar racer/constructor influenced some of Colin Chapman’s aero ideas?
Anyhow, glad you do note that you respect my opinions. I do share yours regarding the great Alessandro Zanardi. I also appreciate that the debate does inspire some thought, and if at times the “red mist” might color some of my posts, well think how Mansell felt at Spa, 1987…
Cheers, and if I ever make it over to Goodwood, I’ll buy you a pint.
Don’t sweat it Rich. Comments from all of us come out blunter than intended – it’s the nature of the medium. The best defence is to take nothing too seriously (even ‘Who’s the best?’)
Regarding the Mastermind questions you’ve set, off the top of my head, I have a vague recollection that NASA or Hercules or Northrop helped Barnard with CF in the early days. As for the influence on Chapman, probably a bit from everyone, but I’ll go with the wings thing and guess, as a big fan of the white cars, Jim Hall.
But, come on, I know what you’re saying, but a couple of instances of F1 designers borrowing American tech, this is hardly evidence of America embracing F1, is it? If Austin or NYC can hold on to a race for a decade, say, and certainly if another team emerges, I’ll change my opinion on it…
You got Jim Hall, as well as Hercules.
BCE had a lot to do with Watkins Glen not being on the calendar still, same with Long Beach, both very successful events here in the U.S.
As for Austin/NYC, I’ll quote Kimi, “wewillsee”.
It’s great that no one has been injured and although safety has been improved considerably, perhaps luck has come into the equation . Jody Scheckter caused a huge shunt in the British Grand Prix. Michael Schumacher has had his days of poor judgement. What about some of the Senna/Prost battles. The issue is the hypocritical nature of the sport and creating and applying a drivers standard that is fair. Ask drivers from those dangerous years in the sixties for their opinion and i imagine they would tell you they would never pull those type of stunts. If Maldonado or Grojain win a Championship these incidents wil be looked at as heroic bold moves. Does Gilles come to mind for some readers. They need to raise the bar and be consistent. Champion or not, you do something stupid you should sit out. The more audacious the move, the more time at their apartment in Monaco to think it over.