788 replies to this topic

[Sakae]

Stewart owns Schumacher appology.

[Kingshark]

Some excerpts:

"There was a while where it just wasn't there. This period, you've got Vettel and Alonso, but you've also got Webber, Hamilton and Button and a few other really top guys. The teams are getting closer too."

Ignoring Raikkonen, placing Hamilton after Webber.

Do you really over-analyze and take everything personal like that?

As stated previously, JYS is a very old man and probably forgot half their names.

You are nitpicking his words to make him seem like the devil.

[aditya-now]

Motorsport Readers' evening with Jackie Stewart

This is a very nice podcast indeed - it allows to understand JYS' thinking much better than the snippets in the articles that we come across or his high pitched voice at the circuits. Interesting to hear the thoughts on Michael Schumacher as well.

[Ross Stonefeld]

I agree.

I'd like to see how many of the current F1 drivers would be prepared to race in the same equipment and conditions as Sir Jackie did in his era.

Like his opinions or not he has definitely earned the right to voice them.

I think that may be part of the problem. People confusing 'earning the right to have an opinion' whatever the hell that means, with the content of the opinions themselves. So if they're not challenged...

[jj2728]

What's the big deal? He's right and the late 60s and early 70s did have stellar grids.

[Raelene]

Motorsport Readers' evening with Jackie Stewart

This is a very nice podcast indeed - it allows to understand JYS' thinking much better than the snippets in the articles that we come across or his high pitched voice at the circuits. Interesting to hear the thoughts on Michael Schumacher as well.

he certainlas a complex re: MSC "I keep a log" on how many times he goes off the track....hmmmm

[man]

JYS has always made it very clear that he tends to respect drivers who make minimal mistakes. He could not praise Alain Prost enough when Prost broke his record for wins in 1987 and throughout the Frenchman's career JYS until today was the Frenchman's greatest fan.

Would have been fantastic to have seen the two driving in the same team together at their peaks.

Interesting to note, he was not a big fan of Senna and Mansell although I believe his opinion of Senna changed from 1991 onwards where Senna's driving was more refined as indicated in various Motorsport podcasts. I don't think he has ever really rated Schumacher as a great mainly because of his driving style, preferential treatment and the number of mistakes he tends to make.

I would be interested to hear what he makes of Lauda.

[garoidb]

he certainlas a complex re: MSC "I keep a log" on how many times he goes off the track....hmmmm

Former champion racing driver interested in racing shocker!

[garoidb]

I think that may be part of the problem. People confusing 'earning the right to have an opinion' whatever the hell that means, with the content of the opinions themselves. So if they're not challenged...

To have the opportunity to effectively challenge JYS's opinions, in terms of engaging with him or equally influential people on them, there is a need to first earn a certain level of credibility. Posting our views here is easier, and of course we all do it. I just don't think it should be done from a perch of superiority.

[SophieB]

JYS has always made it very clear that he tends to respect drivers who make minimal mistakes. He could not praise Alain Prost enough when Prost broke his record for wins in 1987 and throughout the Frenchman's career JYS until today was the Frenchman's greatest fan.

Would have been fantastic to have seen the two driving in the same team together at their peaks.

Interesting to note, he was not a big fan of Senna and Mansell although I believe his opinion of Senna changed from 1991 onwards where Senna's driving was more refined as indicated in various Motorsport podcasts. I don't think he has ever really rated Schumacher as a great mainly because of his driving style, preferential treatment and the number of mistakes he tends to make.

I would be interested to hear what he makes of Lauda.

Yeah, he's always prized smoothness of driving above everything. From all his interviews, it looks like it's the defining yardstick to JYS of just how good you really are. He did raise his opinion of Senna but he was on TV even quite recently comparing his style unfavourably to Jim Clark, stressing how beautifully smooth, almost relaxed Clark's driving looked but how Senna always looked like he was having to rush at all his actions, gear changes etc. (I can't remember where I saw the interview.)

He just has a very firm idea about what a top driver should look like, I think, and judges everyone as to how closely they match this Ideal. So in that sense, I did think some of his remarks about Lewis were meant as a constructive criticism but not criticism that was personal or in any way malicious. I mean, I personally think one of the very best things about Lewis is those sudden magic laps out of nowhere in qualifying but I can understand how to JYS's way of thinking, he'd be wary of such a driver and prefer someone who was more consistent in his laptimes, even if it came at the expense of a bit of speed.

Edited by SophieB, 13 December 2012 - 09:31.

[Sakae]

After reading some post in here I am developing impression, that we could scrap existing scoring system, and just relay on opinions of people around the track who is a season champion. Schumacher is not a racer therefore zero championships for him, Clark on the other hand perhaps should have at least fifteen, Senna maybe less, etc. I can see where that is going, but degrading past accomplishments of others by a former driver..? Perception I have about it is, that some people want to win a lost war even if it includes some late low blows attempts.

Edited by Sakae, 13 December 2012 - 09:45.

[aditya-now]

Yeah, he's always prized smoothness of driving above everything. From all his interviews, it looks like it's the defining yardstick to JYS of just how good you really are. He did raise his opinion of Senna but he was on TV even quite recently comparing his style unfavourably to Jim Clark, stressing how beautifully smooth, almost relaxed Clark's driving looked but how Senna always looked like he was having to rush at all his actions, gear changes etc. (I can't remember where I saw the interview.)

He just has a very firm idea about what a top driver should look like, I think, and judges everyone as to how closely they match this Ideal.

Basically JYS is saying that the smoother you are, the less steering input you give, the more genius you are as a driver. That's why he rates Alonso and Vettel of the present generation the most - you hardly see any corrective action from them on their steering wheels.

That viewpoint comes down to an aestheticism of driving and completely leaves out the standpoint "if it's effective its good". For Jackie its only good if and when it is close to his ideal. So effective drivers like Schumacher and Hamilton will never fare well in Stewart's eyes.

Of course, the point that Joe Ramirez makes in the same podcast about Prost's car and Rosberg's car after the race (in 1985) makes perfect sense: Rosberg's tyres were gone, the brakes were gone, he was out of fuel etc. while Prost's car was in a near immaculate condition....

[ali_M]

IMO, JYS does have a point in that there is a special magic to a driver with the ability to go very quickly, winning many races etc., while driving smoothly without stressing his machinery too much.

However, it's not the only approach that deserves admiration.

I do agree with his assessment of Lewis. It was not purely negative. It was one that reconciles Lewis being the outright fastest driver on the grid at the moment, with his accruing the same amount of points as Button over a 3 yr partnership.

I'll always take exception to the tendency for the notion that when a single driver dominates that it's because the rest of the grid is dry in talent. In the same way, there's the interesting related tendency to claim that there are loads of talent on a grid where there's a ding dong battle for points, with no particular driver dominating.

JYS has pretty tightly defined standards of what makes a great driver and he's quite inflexible about it. Not a problem, really. He does tend to impose it though and never leaves himself out.

[Burtros]

Jackie Stewart's remarks on the 2012 season

Sir Jackie is at it again, and I am once again baffled what problems he has with Lewis Hamilton and indeed, Kimi Raikkonen. Perhaps Lewis and Kimi did not show him the respect he expects, and so he ignores them (Kimi, although he drives for the team Stewart is involved with - Lotus Renault) or downgrades them consistently (Lewis).

What do you guys make of it?



Some excerpts:

"There was a while where it just wasn't there. This period, you've got Vettel and Alonso, but you've also got Webber, Hamilton and Button and a few other really top guys. The teams are getting closer too."

Ignoring Raikkonen, placing Hamilton after Webber.



"Jenson's win in Brazil was beautifully handled. He won the first grand prix of the year and he won the last grand prix of the year - and the last one was by far the most treacherous conditions. Probably not quite as treacherous as when he won in Canada coming right through the field from last position the year before, which was another example of a man keeping his head together and he's very good at that.

"Lewis is very fast. Faster than probably any grand prix driver on the track today, but not consistently at that level and he drives in a fashion that you can't do it consistently. It's same as anything in business; if you get to be super-entrepreneurial you will fall and make a mistake if you go over the top. He often goes over the top."

Praise for Jenson, criticism for Lewis.



Another interesting bit is his disdain for the Senna/Prost/Mansell/Piquet/Berger era:

"I don't think there's been a better collection on the grid than there were maybe in the late 1960s, early 70s when there was Jim Clark, Graham Hill, Jacky Ickx, Mario Andretti, Niki Lauda, Jack Brabham, Denny Hulme and myself for example. There was a real battery in those days and for whatever reason that kind of disappeared for a while. For example, McLaren had Senna and Prost together but there was a little bit of a draft until Schumacher came along, and then there was a real draft of other competitive talent."

Praise for the field at the end of the 60s/early 70s (mixing it all up, as if Lauda and Jim Clark drove in the same era) as well as today's field, ignoring the highly competitive field of the 80s or even of the year 1991 (Senna/Prost/Schumacher/Mansell/Piquet/Berger)


Taken at face value, you can say Stewart has his opinion (rightfully) like anyone else. On the other hand, from a GP icon like him I would expect a more balanced perspective.

Time to take a step back OP I think.

Nothing at all wrong with JYS opinions here, you may not agree with them but frankly to complain about this interview is overly analytical, and I would hope theres a language barrier making life harder for you.

Clearly your first complaint about placing Hamilton after Webber is just hilarious! It seems 99.9% certain he isnt listing them in order of ability to almost anyone. Except you.

You see praise for Button and crisicisim for Lewis. I see a failry balanced opinion about both of them, including a part that describes lewis as 'probably the fastest'. I dont agree with all of it, but its balanced IMHO.

As for his view of the 80's/90's - its his and he is entitled to it. Hes right that there was a lack of talent coming in for a few years too.

The OP does occasionally have some valid points about JYS, but its turned into a bit of a vendetta now which is why we have highly tenuous critcisim being made, like all of the latest round. There just isnt the grounds to justify the OP's comments or opinions IMHO. F1 needs people who voice strong opinions, its part of the fun. JYS is a legend of the sport who has done much for it both on and off the track. If anyone is entitled to a controversial opinion, it should be him.

[LiJu914]

JYS is a legend of the sport who has done much for it both on and off the track. If anyone is entitled to a controversial opinion, it should be him.

Opinions should be measured on the basis of their content rather than looking at what the person, who voiced it, did 40 years ago.
...and if i wouldn´t focus on what was said, but who said it, then the first thing, that would come to my mind, wouldn´t be JYS achievements of the past but his kind of reasoning - e.g. that he once obviously thought, he could help Jan Magnussen to become a better driver by giving him a ride in a road car on a race-track. Who did he think, was he talking to ? James May?

Edited by LiJu914, 13 December 2012 - 12:31.

[Glengavel]

After reading some post in here I am developing impression, that we could scrap existing scoring system, and just relay on opinions of people around the track who is a season champion. Schumacher is not a racer therefore zero championships for him, Clark on the other hand perhaps should have at least fifteen, Senna maybe less, etc. I can see where that is going, but degrading past accomplishments of others by a former driver..? Perception I have about it is, that some people want to win a lost war even if it includes some late low blows attempts.

I'd go along with that.

[ali_M]

Opinions should be measured on the basis of their content rather than looking at what the person, who voiced it, did 40 years ago.
...and if i wouldn´t focus on what was said, but who said it, then the first thing, that would come to my mind, wouldn´t be JYS achievements of the past but his kind of reasoning - e.g. that he once obviously thought, he could help Jan Magnussen to become a better driver by giving him a ride in a road car on a race-track. Who did he think, was he talking to ? James May?

Now this is where I think his opinion is worth serious salt and I find it interesting that it's being so easily dismissed.

I do believe that there's some wisdom to the position that a great driver today would likely be a great driver in a future or previous generation. The basic makeup or ingredients seem to be the same. In this way, effective coaching isn't necessarily about how to drive the modern F1 car specifically. It's based on the principle that the general approach and techniques involved in effectively taking an open wheel racing car on four rubber tyres around a circuit as quickly as possible remains the same. There may be more traction, more power, and more speed, but the principles remain the same. The same for racing wheel to wheel, managing race starts etc. JYS could assist many young drivers tremendously in this regard if given the chance and the trust. I agree with him completely about the lack of coaching in F1.

Of course, this 'coaching' comes in many forms, so there is likely significant coaching underway, but not from a focused or official source labelled as such. Vettel had one person to specifically thank publicly after winning his 2011 championship. He thanked all else collectively. He made special mention of his trainer who had a lot to do with his mental application during the season. That amounts to coaching of sorts. So there we have someone who doesn't even drive competitively, contributing significantly to a championship winning driver's performance.

JYS is clearly a proud man who is very much into appearances, i.e., looking good etc., doing things in a refined and dignified way etc. He likes to think that he sets a good example in this way and prides himself in his achievements, and I tend to agree with him. By those standards, he does make for a fine example and I admire him greatly for this. However, I don't find it at all contradictory to his persona when he chooses to speak negatively about an icon who is admired by many, but who doesn't fit into his personal mould of what constitutes greatness. It actually threatens his own personal position since one's position of 'greatness' is always determined on relative terms with others. This is where it becomes merely an opinion and should be treated as such. For instance, Moss will be the first to claim that the number of championships won by a particular driver means little when determining his greatness etc. I couldn't care less about such positions. He can never speak with authority about what it really takes to win multiple championships.

Hamilton has won one and would sure love to win another. Same for Alonso and his third. We can ask them about the challenge involved in winning a championship. There's so much effort being put into winning one while at the same time, those who do manage to win are discredited for having done so etc.

I'll always find JYS's opinions interesting and welcome. He is far from being a half-wit. He is a highly intelligent man. I wish him all the best. He's been a GREAT in the sport. A remarkable driver when one looks closely at his history and how he got into F1. Truly remarkable. But not perfect and with his hangups. I see no reason not to indicate them since these hangups do shine through at times when he opines. However, not so on this sited occasion.

[H2H]

I'll always find JYS's opinions interesting and welcome. He is far from being a half-wit. He is a highly intelligent man. I wish him all the best. He's been a GREAT in the sport. A remarkable driver when one looks closely at his history and how he got into F1. Truly remarkable. But not perfect and with his hangups. I see no reason not to indicate them since these hangups do shine through at times when he opines. However, not so on this sited occasion.

Top post

[jjcale]

Jackie Stewart's remarks on the 2012 season

Sir Jackie is at it again, and I am once again baffled what problems he has with Lewis Hamilton and indeed, Kimi Raikkonen. Perhaps Lewis and Kimi did not show him the respect he expects, and so he ignores them (Kimi, although he drives for the team Stewart is involved with - Lotus Renault) or downgrades them consistently (Lewis).

What do you guys make of it?


.....

Taken at face value, you can say Stewart has his opinion (rightfully) like anyone else. On the other hand, from a GP icon like him I would expect a more balanced perspective.

He explained clearly what he looks for in the podcast ... he likes smooth driving... LH and the others he dislikes are not smooth drivers... simple as.

[LiJu914]

Now this is where I think his opinion is worth serious salt and I find it interesting that it's being so easily dismissed.

I dismissed it as it´s just silly to believe that you improve a driver, who raced since its childhood, by driving him around during a nice afternoon - that has little to do with Steward´s knowledge about racing.

As we could see it didn´t help Magnussen the slightest, which is what every reasonable person would´ve expected as the likely outcome in the first place.

Edited by LiJu914, 13 December 2012 - 13:29.

[aditya-now]

I dismissed it as it´s just silly to believe that you improve a driver, who raced since its childhood, by driving him around during a nice afternoon - that has little to do with Steward´s knowledge about racing.

As we could see it didn´t help Magnussen the slightest, which is what every reasonable person would´ve expected as the likely outcome in the first place.

"You shall know them by their fruits..."

Stewart's idea with driver coaching per se might be good, his ideas about the most elegant and smooth driving are worthy, yet reality shows that his ideas cannot be copied into reality. Magnussen, who won more than Senna in a season in F3 was not groomed into a successful F1 driver, although Stewart has all this ideas what a driver should do and how smooth he should be.

When Stewart brought up driver coaching earlier in 2012, he had a case with Grosjean - yet even in the team that he is involved with (Lotus Renault) he couldn't get his point across - whether Grosjean didn't want to be coached by JYS or Eric Boullier didn't allow it - fact is that with Stewart it's words, not deeds.

The ones who drive admirably smooth with little steering wheel movement (Alonso, Button, Vettel) do so without getting Jackie's training.

[ali_M]

I dismissed it as it´s just silly to believe that you improve a driver, who raced since its childhood, by driving him around during a nice afternoon - that has little to do with Steward´s knowledge about racing.

As we could see it didn´t help Magnussen the slightest, which is what every reasonable person would´ve expected as the likely outcome in the first place.

I still disagree. You can't make authoritative claims off an anecdotal event/experience. It doesn't necessarily mean that the outcome will always be the same. You have no idea what JYS wished to convey to Magnussen in that drive. You don't know if Magnussen was receptive to any points being made to him by JYS or even if he did listen, if he was actually willing or able to make the necessary changes in his driving. We can't tell from outside.

It's by no means silly to think that a single session with a good coach can have lasting impact on any sportsman in need of assistance in improving in his craft. As a skilled person in my own way, I can first hand say that a single session with someone highly experienced can have a lot of impact on one's own skill provided there's something significant conveyed, received and successfully applied. The funny thing is that the more experienced and skilled the person, the more likely it is that not much time is needed by the advisor to make a significant impact, provided the recipient is willing to listen and has the trust to do what he is being advised to.

JYS knows what he's talking about in this regard. Not enough speak about this.

Schumacher alluded to one of the problems with him advising other drivers. The recipient typically thinks there's nothing the other has to offer. The huge egos go with the territory. Only the young ones will probably listen to some advice and this is why JYS quite rightfully focuses on them in his comments.

[LiJu914]

We can't tell from outside.

Well i just use common sense.

If you think, that someone can overcome deficits in driving, that he couldn´t overcome in his whole career up to that point, in one "training session", which is on top of that not anywhere near the actual demands of racing a F1-car, then good luck believing that and unfortunately we will never agree on that point.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Every other sport in the world uses coaches, why not race cars? Which are highly technical.

But I can see why JYS might be a poor coach, especially with 'pro' drivers, his style can come across as patronising sometimes.

[ali_M]

Well i just use common sense.

If you think, that someone can overcome deficits in driving, that he couldn´t overcome in his whole career up to that point, in one "training session", which is on top of that not anywhere near the actual demands of racing a F1-car, then good luck believing that and unfortunately we will never agree on that point.

Sure.... no problemo. Common sense is good and serves us well, but not always so.... This is why we study and we observe then when it doesn't happen as we expect through common sense, we look deeper and we see better. Anyway....

It is never too late to learn something. It's wrong (not merely my opinion) to assume that significant improvement cannot occur for any driver practicing his craft for many years after a short session with someone who can give good advice that the recipient is willing and able to take. However, for that to happen, a deficit, if it exists needs to be recognised and acknowledged. This is the hurdle that few are able to overcome. It takes character to do so, but it's not like it doesn't exist. Additionally, why are we assuming that JYS is referring to deficits recognised by the driver, throughout the driver's career and which the driver has been working at trying to solve?

[ali_M]

Every other sport in the world uses coaches, why not race cars? Which are highly technical.

But I can see why JYS might be a poor coach, especially with 'pro' drivers, his style can come across as patronising sometimes.

This could well be true. But OTOH, for huge ego's, anyone daring to give advice will seem patronising.

[SophieB]

JYS knows what he's talking about in this regard. Not enough speak about this.

Schumacher alluded to one of the problems with him advising other drivers. The recipient typically thinks there's nothing the other has to offer. The huge egos go with the territory. Only the young ones will probably listen to some advice and this is why JYS quite rightfully focuses on them in his comments.

I suspect for coach and pupil to both get something from the experience, ideally the pupil isn't the only one who needs to be open to the possibility of different approaches. A really good coach should, in my opinion, be open to the possibility of more than one way of working and I get the impression that for Jackie it's 'my way or the highway'. I wonder how much someone like, say, Lewis could really get from being coached by JYS, no matter how keen he was to learn. I suspect their approaches to driving might be just too different to usefully incorporate any advice into the existing knowledge/experience but it would be fascinating to see it tried. My guess is that drivers would learn most effectively from coaches who shared their same basic style, though.

Edited by SophieB, 13 December 2012 - 14:47.

[aditya-now]

This could well be true. But OTOH, for huge ego's, anyone daring to give advice will seem patronising.

So I do have a huge ego then. Stewarts "advice" often comes across as patronising.

[Sakae]

Just the fact that Steward went public with his opinion that Grosjean requires coaching (his or anyone else’s) must be highly embarrassing to Grosejan among his peers, and insulting in the sense that he is somehow superior who has anything to offer, a suggestion which was unsurprisingly flatly and promptly rejected. There was nothing in his offer which would come across in some quite way as a friendly, colleague to colleauge help. Just unpleasant manners, that’s all.

Edited by Sakae, 13 December 2012 - 15:04.

[ali_M]

I suspect for coach and pupil to both get something from the experience, ideally the pupil isn't the only one who needs to be open to the possibility of different approaches. A really good coach should, in my opinion, be open to the possibility of more than one way of working and I get the impression that for Jackie it's 'my way or the highway'. I wonder how much someone like, say, Lewis could really get from being coached by JYS, no matter how keen he was to learn. I suspect their approaches to driving might be just too different to usefully incorporate any advice into the existing knowledge/experience but it would be fascinating to see it tried. My guess is that drivers would learn most effectively from coaches who shared their same basic style, though.

Agreed. This is why many good 'whatever' so often do not make good coaches. It would seem that the greater they are/were at their craft, the more they become more inflexible in their recommendations. I'm not at all saying that JYS is the one to do the coaching. That's an entirely different matter. I'm agreeing with his proposal about the value of coaching the drivers as with any other athlete and that this issue is not being adequately addressed in F1, especially with regard to the younger drivers.

So I do have a huge ego then. Stewarts "advice" often comes across as patronising.

Of course you have a huge ego. That's the only way you'd be the way you are on these boards!!!!

Just the fact that Steward went public with his opinion that Grosjean requires coaching (his or anyone else’s) must be highly embarrassing to Grosejan among his peers, and insulting in the sense that he is somehow superior who has anything to offer, a suggestion which was unsurprisingly flatly and promptly rejected. There was nothing in his offer which would come across in some quite way as a friendly, colleague to colleauge help. Just unpleasant manners, that’s all.

Grosjean's situation was unpleasant and potentially destructive to his career. JYS saw a glaringly feasible way out with no established avenues in the sport for it. He's speaking out about this more than against Grosjean. He was using Grosjean's situation as a fulcrum to bring up this bigger issue. Of course, one may take it personally. He never spoke only about Grosjean. Additionally, Grosjean couldn't be deeper in the mire and it would be more an of an indictment on Grosjean if his behaviour was beyond the scope of rectifying.

JYS is a triple world champion. Look at the race starts in his day and you see the same thing underway as today. The man has tons of advice to potentially give to Grosjean. The writing is there on the wall. His reading it as it is doesn't amount to bad manners really. I'd more call it harsh, but needed criticism. IOW's, there's nothing innately wrong with Grosjean. The guy has a lot of talent and speed, but he needs some guidance. I'd propose that this public outcry likely benefitted Grosjean. We are way too much into pleasantries. Not into effective and constructive commentary. The platitudes are boring!!

[LiJu914]

There are many very succesful professional footballers, who were poor choaches later on. So Stewarts achievements as a driver say little about his ability as a coach.
And one can´t even really compare the circumstances of training between F1/racing and most other sports.

The Stewart/Magnussen story is like Pele would´ve told Mr. X "I will show you how to become a better striker in a session of table football".

The only way to see, what Magnussen or someone else does/did wrong, is looking at the telemetry and not how fast he drives around Donigton in a Fiat Panda o.t.l. And for the same reason you can´t just demonstrate a driver how he could go faster in an F1 car.
"The principles of driving" might be the same in every car, but that´s just theoretical bla bla. Otherwise there wouldn´t be excellent Touring-car or GT-Car drivers, who were rather poor F1-drivers; vice versa. And as we all know racing drivers have different styles and Stewart would only ever suggest to use the style, he thinks is the best - which would be like forcing a left hander to write with his right hand. It just won´t help anybody.

Edited by LiJu914, 13 December 2012 - 16:51.

[Sakae]

Agreed. This is why many good 'whatever' so often do not make good coaches. It would seem that the greater they are/were at their craft, the more they become more inflexible in their recommendations. I'm not at all saying that JYS is the one to do the coaching. That's an entirely different matter. I'm agreeing with his proposal about the value of coaching the drivers as with any other athlete and that this issue is not being adequately addressed in F1, especially with regard to the younger drivers.



Of course you have a huge ego. That's the only way you'd be the way you are on these boards!!!!



Grosjean's situation was unpleasant and potentially destructive to his career. JYS saw a glaringly feasible way out with no established avenues in the sport for it. He's speaking out about this more than against Grosjean. He was using Grosjean's situation as a fulcrum to bring up this bigger issue. Of course, one may take it personally. He never spoke only about Grosjean. Additionally, Grosjean couldn't be deeper in the mire and it would be more an of an indictment on Grosjean if his behaviour was beyond the scope of rectifying.

JYS is a triple world champion. Look at the race starts in his day and you see the same thing underway as today. The man has tons of advice to potentially give to Grosjean. The writing is there on the wall. His reading it as it is doesn't amount to bad manners really. I'd more call it harsh, but needed criticism. IOW's, there's nothing innately wrong with Grosjean. The guy has a lot of talent and speed, but he needs some guidance. I'd propose that this public outcry likely benefitted Grosjean. We are way too much into pleasantries. Not into effective and constructive commentary. The platitudes are boring!!

Setting aside judgement about Stewards qualifications as a coach, manner it was "offered" was in some cultures downright insulting. I can understand it, and I also understand if some others don't.

[Gag� Bueno]

Only because it's being discussed right now: Isn't it so that Stewart never offered himself as a coach to Grosjean? As reported here , there was an invitation to 'come one day for lunch and have a bit of a chat'... No Fiat Panda at all and praise for Williams hiring Wurz as coach. I really don't know in which culture it can be considered an insult, and Stewart remained rather polite after been proven more than right, post-Japanese GP, if we believe the BBC reporting on it.

And I can't see how Stewart shouldn't be entitled ( or is it exclusive to Mr Cordero di Montezemolo? ) to an opinion, as a multiple champion of the past who also succeeded as a team founder / principal and businessman he will be asked as long as he is around, and anybody is free to agree or not. I don't know how, but this thread always looks a little bit like a vendetta for a certain ( a masterful one, IMO ) interview and for showing, at least for a couple of minutes, what's behind the so-called 'greatness'...

Edited by Gag� Bueno, 13 December 2012 - 16:49.

[Slartibartfast]

There are many very succesful professional footballers, who were poor choaches later on. So Stewarts achievements as a driver say little about his ability as a coach.
And one can´t even really compare the circumstances of training between F1/racing and most other sports.

The Stewart/Magnussen story is like Pele would´ve told Mr. X "I will show you how to become a better striker in a session of table football".

The only way to see, what Magnussen or someone else does/did wrong, is looking at the telemetry and not how fast he drives around Donigton in a Fiat Panda o.t.l. And for the same reason you can´t just demonstrate a driver how he could go faster in an F1 car.

If Pele were to claim that he could improve someone's playing by using table football and a football fan on the internet said it's impossible, I would be inclined to believe that Pele knew something the football fan didn't.

"The principles of driving" might be the same in every car, but that´s just theoretical bla bla. Otherwise there wouldn´t be excellent Touring-car or GT-Car drivers, who were rather poor F1-drivers; vice versa.

Stewart was a successful touring car and GT driver.

And as we all know racing drivers have different styles and Stewart would only ever suggest to use the style, he thinks is the best - which would be like forcing a left hander to write with his right hand. It just won´t help anybody.

How do you know what Stewart would "only ever suggest" and how do you know better than him how much it would help his student? What did he teach you and why do you think it didn't help you?

[LiJu914]

If Pele were to claim that he could improve someone's playing by using table football and a football fan on the internet said it's impossible, I would be inclined to believe that Pele knew something the football fan didn't.

So?

Stewart was a successful touring car and GT driver.

You missed the point.

How do you know what Stewart would "only ever suggest" and how do you know better than him how much it would help his student?

I already said why.

[aditya-now]

Just the fact that Steward went public with his opinion that Grosjean requires coaching (his or anyone else’s) must be highly embarrassing to Grosejan among his peers, and insulting in the sense that he is somehow superior who has anything to offer, a suggestion which was unsurprisingly flatly and promptly rejected. There was nothing in his offer which would come across in some quite way as a friendly, colleague to colleauge help. Just unpleasant manners, that’s all.

The thing that puzzled me was that Stewart offered his "coaching" to Grosjean via the world media - not very flattering or encouraging for the trainee. IMHO it is a poor coach who makes his offerings public - to achieve what for the trainee?

[aditya-now]

Of course you have a huge ego. That's the only way you'd be the way you are on these boards!!!!

Thanks!

[Sakae]

Embarrassing a pupil is a method probably accepted only in a Ninja secret training camps high in the mountains of old China, but nowhere else. (On second thought, I would add era of the Samurai).

Edited by Sakae, 13 December 2012 - 18:36.

[Slartibartfast]

So?

So...what?
Did you not understand? Was the inference unclear?

You missed the point.

No, I didn't. Really, I didn't.

I already said why.

If I missed it, then my apologies, perhaps you could post a link?

[LiJu914]

So...what?

Dunno. You tell me. That part was as useful as saying that you like spaghetti.

No, I didn't. Really, I didn't.

Yes you did.

If I missed it, then my apologies, perhaps you could post a link?

It´s in the post you quoted before. You´re welcome.

[jjcale]

Embarrassing a pupil is a method probably accepted only in a Ninja secret training camps high in the mountains of old China, but nowhere else. (On second thought, I would add era of the Samurai).

you obviously didnt go to my high school...

[Slartibartfast]

Dunno. You tell me. That part was as useful as saying that you like spaghetti.

Do you really have trouble understanding, or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Yes you did.

No, I didn't. That this has escaped you suggests that you have not understood me.

It´s in the post you quoted before. You´re welcome.

Really? Where? Please bear in mind that you have made a claim to understand what Stewart can and cannot do. You have not made it apparent what grounds you have for making this claim. In case I need to clarify further:

"Stewart would only ever suggest to use the style, he thinks is the best - which would be like forcing a left hander to write with his right hand"

How do you know what Steward would "only" suggest? How much experience have you got of Stewart's teaching methods in order to be able make such a bold statement?
It would ease matters if you even clarified what conditionals you use for determining "the best".

[LiJu914]

Do you really have trouble understanding, or are you being deliberately obtuse?

You simply said, you prefer the opinion of Person X over the opinion of Person Y, without explaining, why you do that. You might think it´s self evident, but it isn´t. I already mentioned that issue briefly here
If it would´ve been the other way around and hypothetically Pele would´ve said you can´t improve by playing table football and the fan would´ve claimed the opposite, which opinion would you have followed then?
If it would´ve now been the fan´s opinion, then your argument would be obsolete.
If it would still be Pele´s instead, then you obviously didn´t give anything about the content of the opinion, but only about the person, who voiced it.
So do you follow every opinion, that is voiced by a person involved in F1? Or is it just JYS? And if so, why? Because he´s a WDC? MSC for example once made clear, that he finds the idea of giving another pilot driving lessons quite silly. So whom should I believe?

No, I didn't. That this has escaped you suggests that you have not understood me.

I´m afraid, it´s the other way around. Stewart´s success beyond F1 has little importance for what I said. How does that change the fact, that the vast majority of drivers (even very successful drivers, who obviously know what they are doing) can´t just keep up their performance level for every single type of car, especially if they completely differ? Do you think JYS could´ve helped Raikkonen to improve in Rallye as well? That´s about as close to modern F1 cars as the cars 40 years ago were…not at all – not to speak of some garden variety road car, which was the tool JYS chose to “help” Magnussen.
Niki Lauda also once thought he had so much insight about driving modern F1 cars, which eventually tempted him to say, that even an ape could drive these modern cars (around 2001)…until he tried it himself and spun like 13 times or so.

Really? Where? Please bear in mind that you have made a claim to understand what Stewart can and cannot do. You have not made it apparent what grounds you have for making this claim.

Yes I did. I said, it´s extremly unrealistic to expect that one can suddenly improve a driver, who competes since his childhood, for the demands of F1 by driving him around in an ordinary car one or two times. That has little to do with JYS himself.

In case I need to clarify further:
"Stewart would only ever suggest to use the style, he thinks is the best - which would be like forcing a left hander to write with his right hand"

How do you know what Steward would "only" suggest?

He constantly voices his opinion about the style of certain drivers and always makes clear, that he rates certain approaches over others. That´s why. And yes, that´s just an assumption, but it´s also quite secondary for my whole argument.

Edited by LiJu914, 13 December 2012 - 22:00.

[rijole1]

The thing that puzzled me was that Stewart offered his "coaching" to Grosjean via the world media - not very flattering or encouraging for the trainee. IMHO it is a poor coach who makes his offerings public - to achieve what for the trainee?

You have a point there, quite a bad start for a coach-trainee - relationship

[Tommorris747]

The thing that puzzled me was that Stewart offered his "coaching" to Grosjean via the world media - not very flattering or encouraging for the trainee. IMHO it is a poor coach who makes his offerings public - to achieve what for the trainee?

Now Stewart is offering his advice to the Austin race organisers who arranged one of the most popular races of the year. What next?
http://www.autoweek....12/F1/121219960

[ali_M]

Now Stewart is offering his advice to the Austin race organisers who arranged one of the most popular races of the year. What next?
http://www.autoweek....12/F1/121219960

He's talking about access roads for cripes sake. The man remains active in the sport. What's wrong with it?

[black magic]

whoever said the jackie stewart way was the fastest and best way of driving.

arent there many different styles , each with their strengths and weaknesses

[aditya-now]

The Stewart/Magnussen story is like Pele would´ve told Mr. X "I will show you how to become a better striker in a session of table football".

Very good analogy, it hits the nail on the head!

The only way to see, what Magnussen or someone else does/did wrong, is looking at the telemetry and not how fast he drives around Donigton in a Fiat Panda o.t.l. And for the same reason you can´t just demonstrate a driver how he could go faster in an F1 car.
"The principles of driving" might be the same in every car, but that´s just theoretical bla bla. Otherwise there wouldn´t be excellent Touring-car or GT-Car drivers, who were rather poor F1-drivers; vice versa. And as we all know racing drivers have different styles and Stewart would only ever suggest to use the style, he thinks is the best - which would be like forcing a left hander to write with his right hand. It just won´t help anybody.

The point here is that simply Jackie Stewart never proved that he could improve someones driving - "you shall know them by their fruits". Stewart might well be inclined to offer his opinions, here, there and everywhere - yet the prove of the pudding is in the eating.

As Schumacher stated, giving another driver driving lessons is silly. Each driver has his unique inimitable style, and JYS takes a very strong position as to what he thinks is the "right" driving style. The true teacher does not want to imprint on the student his own style (which is in fact the egotistic teacher who just wants to produce carbon copies of himself) but seeks to help the trainee how to make the best of his own potentials.

As it stands, the great drivers find their own inimitable style, and, if they feel the need to, hire a coach of their liking on their own, without having to be told by a former 3xWDC.

[aditya-now]

Now Stewart is offering his advice to the Austin race organisers who arranged one of the most popular races of the year. What next?
http://www.autoweek....12/F1/121219960

"Getting in and out of the track wasn't fun,” Stewart said. “It's not finished, you see, so they haven't got their access roads. In fact, I am going to write to them about that because I don't want them running away thinking they got away with it. They didn't.”
Off-site parking and a system of shuttle buses was available to the 265,499 spectators who visited the track over the race weekend. This minimized traffic jams but led to the somewhat long wait times getting in and out.
That said, COTA boss Bobby Epstein pointed out recently that “normal traffic in Austin is worse than what there was on race day.” Local authorities seem to agree.
Race traffic was so trouble-free that the Travis County government decided earlier this month not to proceed with a planned road-widening project which was expected to cost between $9 million and $10 million. Completed improvements to roads around the circuit have already cost a reported $5.6 million.


I am amazed that nobody from FOM or indeed Bernie have voiced forth this issue. Apparently COTA organized it well to a) get so many visitors and b) have a functioning shuttle bus system in place.

In comes Stewart demanding a road widening project that costs between $9 million and $10 million, so he can get to/fro the circuit a little bit faster. The COTA organizers won't get away with this.

[goldenboy]