Two brief points if I may. First, a big thank you for the marvellous Jim Clark remembrance (April issue). Instead of sub-titling it “The legend 25 years on”, you could just as well have had “The legend lives on”, because his greatness will still be talked about fifty years from now. Not so long ago, DSJ wrote that, in reply to a question from Ayrton Senna, he (DSJ) thought that a great driver was one who over the long term won 10 per cent of his races. Considering that Jim Clark won slightly better than one in three of his Formula 1 races, does this make him a super-great or merely one of the all-time greats?
Secondly, fresh from watching the European Grand Prix and Donington, I experienced considerable unease watching those drivers unlucky enough to have spun into the gravel. Most of them tried in vain to rejoin the race while those fortunate enough to have spun onto grass were generally able to get going again. Where is the justice in this? Could DJT or DSJ offer some insight?
New Malden, Surrey.