I had just finished reading the Motorsport article on DP "Driven to destruction" when I saw a segment of "Formula One Saga".

Now, in the Motorsport article we have Rene Arnoux watching his good friend Pironi take a test in the 86 Ligier - Pironi's first time in an F1 car since his horrific accident at Hockenheim in 82 -and according to the article we have Arnoux shaking his head sadly with the realization that his friend will never race an F1 car again.

In the F1 saga program we have another man who was at the test (I think Ducarouge) saying of the test "It was typical Didier, fast and consistent. If he were in a top line car there is no question that he could win a WDC" - the program then goes on to explain that DP was impatient to race and rather then wait for an F1 ride, signed on with a boat racing team - the results of which, we all know.

So.

Which was it?

Competitive impatient Didier? or Broken and beaten Didier? I tend to believe that Motorsport article but I'd like to hear from someone who knows a little more on the subject.

Ability is in the eye of the beholder? Whatever, Gerard Larrousse must have been convinced because Didier was due to make his F1 return in a few '87 end-of-season races alongside Alliot in the Lola.

After DP's death this drive went to Yannick Dalmas, the Frenchman impressing on his Grand Prix debut prior to being struck down with potentially fatal Legionnaire's Disease.

Best

That's interesting, Paul, I hadn't heard that (about the Larousse offer). It probably wouldn't have been the best career move for DP as that car was not the sort that was going to take ANYBODY to the WDC. Ya never know, though - he might have impressed enough to have attracted the attentions of a contender.

It was supposed to have been a trial for a full season in 1988. Of course it may have been that Larrousse wanted a name driver in the team to attract sponsorship

Best

About the Pironi Ligier test at Dijon, there was a short movie filmed by José Rosinski.
But I have never find any picture of this test.
It's absolutely impossible there is none ! A lot of journalist where at Dijon, because in France it was an event.

So, Someone can help me ?

Thanks.

The articles and the opinions here in Italy were that, he was surely fast on this test.
But maybe he also realized that he cannot substain the effort of a whole Grand Prix.
I mean his feet and legs cannot substain the work for the distance of a GP.
This only an opinion, a rumor about those days, but I always found that it makes some sense.

MonzaDriver.

I'm sure that MonzaDriver is right. Most doctors will tell you (they certainly told me) that a bad break above the knee is usually going to cause far more long term problems with strength & mobility than a bad break below the knee. It's much easier to break a leg below the knee, so the great majority of broken legs are of this type. In most cases, the sort of injury that M Schumacher suffered at Silverstone isn't going to cause any significant long term difficulty, or even require much time off work. Drivers are particularly susceptible to badly broken ankles though, which can of course cause career-ending problems. Having been unfortunate enough to have suffered all the various types of leg breakages I've mentioned, though quite a few years ago now, I have over the years, taken a slightly worrying amount of interest, or so my friends tell me, in drivers who broke one or both legs, and to take the Didier Pironi example, I wouldn't expect him to have managed anything like a 100% recovery from the injuries he suffered at Hockenheim, even in the longer term. I can't think of a single case offhand, where a driver who suffered anything worse than a simple fracture of a femur (thighbone) was ever quite the same again, legwise. A few F1 examples, Graham Hill, David Purley, Olivier Panis, even Johnny Herbert, and there are plenty more. Because of this, I wouldn't expect a driver at Pironi's level to be anything like as good as he was before a severe leg breakage, even after intensive physiotherapy & fitness training, so I can't really believe that getting back to top level F1 was ever a realistic aspiration in his case. I'm sure there are a few doctors, possibly even orthopaedic surgeons among our number, so what do they think?

The word at the time was that once he realised that if he resumed his career he'd have pay back his insurance settlement, he had a change of heart...

Quite amusing TW, and I can see that continuing as an unemployed F1 driver would probably have been preferable to paying back several millions to his insurers, but I'm still very doubtful that DP ever really had the option of continuing in F1 with a top team. Olivier Panis made as good a recovery as I've ever seen from a single not too badly broken femur, and he's never been quite as much of a racer as he was pre-injury has he?

I have this photo in my collection. Photo by my friend Christophe Morin, which I believe he took at Dijon.

Terrific
Thanks a lot, Hieronymus

I am not a doctor of any kind; but I do know that Hermann Maier won the downhill skiing World Cup - after having nearly lost his leg in a motorcycle accident.

You do not think that you generalise a bit too much here ?

Mick Doohan dominated in the 500cc Grand Prix motorcycle arena after a fairly serious leg injury. Admittedly, the demands on his legs will have been far less than for a racing driver or ski racer, especially after he adopted a thumb activated rear brake control, but even so a significant achievement.

How much hard braking did Hermann Maier have to do? No I'm not generalising too much here, drivers like Johnny Herbert who have experienced bad leg breaks all agree that it's their braking performance that suffers most afterwards, they can cope OK for a few laps, but not for a whole race.

And that would presumably fit in with skiing, which is a lot of effort for a few minutes only, not drawn out effort over 90 minutes. Maybe that's the difference.

After his leg-shattering accident at Watkins Glen, Graham Hill was never the same again, and he never came close to winning an F1 race. He kept racing with second-leaguers (in those days) Brabham and then in his own cars because he enjoyed it, but he was always quite realistic about his reduced abilities. He said that he looked forward to Monza each year, as the lack of heavy braking meant that he was handicapped much less than at some other circuits.

Perhaps you mean Grand Prix; Graham won the 1971 International Trophy in the BT34.

Well the International trophy was a 2 heat race in 71 which no doubt helped the fatigue levels and of course Hill continued to be a leading force and a race winner in shorter F2 races against the likes of Peterson and Stuck so he definately hadn't lost he speed at around the 71-72 seasons .

Of course Hill and Herbert both won the longest race of all - le Mans - post-accident but the braking effort required in an endurance race at a track with long straights (especially in Hill's case, before the Mulsanne chicanes) would not be as consistantly heavy as 200 miles in an F1 car I would imagine.

Simon Lewis
Transport Books
www.simonlewis.com

I remember seeing pictures of Johnny after Le Mans; at that point in his career he normally looked rough after any session in a car but after Le Mans he looked like he'd done five years in a forced-labour camp.. I think for sheer commitment to the act of becoming a racing driver again Johnny will always get a lot of respect from me.

Ah, and there's a what-if. Didier pitches up at Ligier and has to race that monstrosity of a car... I think his career would've been over as soon as he sat in it!

Agreed. He's a brave chap and let's not forget, a multiple GP winner despite those fragile legs! My hat off to him, a genuine hero in an age when the word is used far to cheaply.

I remember many years before seeing David Purley clamber painfully from his Lec at Brands Hatch in his come-back race. The magazines had documented his incredible fitness regime - cycling about 70 miles a day or something similar- in he efforts to return to the cockpit. But after about 3/4 of the race, when the car packed up, he looked in absolute agony and totally shot.

I sometimes think we mere mortals will never completely comprehend the physical demands of racing an F1 car.

Simon Lewis
Transport Books
www.simonlewis.com

I remember him saying in an interview that he had been afraid at the prospect of having another shunt with all those nut and bolts nailed in his legs, since they could have acted as sort of levers, causing a real havoc with the bones they're supposed to keep together: he regained confidence only after a surgery to remove all the "metal in excess" but , sadly, at that time Prost/Ligier had lost his momentum.

This might make you sick to know but it was even on German TV for a few minutes.
Recently I discovered that fragment (short!) on a videotape. But there wasn't much to make out of other than some footage of him driving the car.

Henri

Mohican:

I think Hermann is the exception, not the rule.

As someone who had their left hand "detached" in a racing accident; and who had some fairly good
"bonks" in American football. I can assure you that you are never the same. You're never as strong, never as quick on the reflex. Then there is the Pyschological baggage.

It is well documented that I think that Didier Pironi was one of the biggest buttheads to ever walk this planet. Having said that I would not wish his injuries on anyone. They were massive! That he even tried to race again is to be admired and that he drove off-shore racers with such spirit is also to be greatly respected.

Imagine how good Johnny Herbert would have been IF he hadn't had his accident! I'm amazed how he adapted and worked around his extremely limiting injuries. Says a lot about his mind and his massive resolve.

To Hermann I say "Rock on!"

How about Rudolf Caracciola's comeback in 1935? We've all seen that wince-inducing photo of him being carried in a chair after his crash at Monaco in 1933. Braking demands may have been less heavy back then, but still...

I have done both sking and racing. Skiing is VERY demanding...not to be snide, but how many of you have actually done sport? You don't seem to remotely understand the dynamics involved. Sorry, but your logic is extremely shallow and naive when it come to grasping the physical demands of these two sports at full chat.

.... it affected him greatly. A lot of the newsreel shots depict a man with a very bad limp when out of the car and his ocassional lacklustre performances, as at Donington in 1937 were attributed to the 'effects of his Monaco injuries' in contemporary reports.

Donington was a fairly short, narrow, physical track compatred to Avus, Pescara or Tripoli - no long straight to take the strain from his legs (was it his brake or clutch leg that was affected?). The scenario of injury-related fatigue coming into play?

Obviously Rudi suffered a great deal for the rest of his days and one wonder how good he would have been without the Monaco crash?

A 1930's Johnny Herbert, but with THE plumb drive at his disposal for most of his peak years (unlike Johnny).

Simon Lewis
Transport Books
www.simonlewis.com

Simon:

You are absolutely spot on!

Yes you're right, I was thinking of proper GP's, but although Graham was never exactly an embarassment, he was never the same after his accident either was he? Two GP circuits requiring the least braking effort are possibly Silverstone & Monza, which are the two GPs that Johnny Herbert won, not exactly a coincidence. Although JH, a hell of a guy but very much the number two at Benneton in 95, fully deserved both wins especially Monza, I think even he would admit that there was a considerable element of luck in both of them.

David M Kane has it exactly right, you're never as strong, never the same after really bad breaks, and that's what Didier Pironi suffered. I don't believe he was ever going to achieve much in F1 post-accident, even if he had managed to con his way into a top drive.

If I was unfortunate enought to hurt my legs, and having done both sports, I'd definitely rather drive a racing car than go skiing!!

I thought, and I might well be wrong, that Herbert's troubles were with the amount of pressure he could apply, not with how often. That would make Monza, with its two or three big stops, more difficult than most. Happy to stand corrected on that one, though. I believe he was also helped out later in his career by all the electronics which stopped the driver having to 'dance' on the pedals quite so much.

I heard a story that Didier's F1 plans were also cut short because of insurance reasons. Words are out that he had received a hefty insurance refund, based on the fact that he was likely never to drive within F1 anymore but that this insurance money had to be returned had he indeed got back into F1 again.

But I don't know if it is the truth, there are a number of rumours about Didier and I know that not all of them are valid and true.


Henri

He seems to be one of those slightly mysterious figures in F1 history with rather a lot of stories, publishable and otherwise, surrounding his career and private life.....

Simon Lewis

I think Didier would have been a brilliant politican.

Two of the three, of course, although one might say he also lucked into the third too.

Isn’t this proved by his role in the 1982 drivers’ strike?

I know exactly what you're saying, but - at the end of the day - you have to be there in the first place in order to pick up the pieces.

Rindt at Monaco and Brands [both] in 1970 being previous, and prime, examples that spring to mind immediately. Senna did likewise too.

Yes, that can't be denied, and I admit I was expecting that type of comment too. Like the majority here I have nothing but the greatest respect for Johnny, but I think it is fair to say that the three races he won were down more to luck that an proportionate levelling of any physical disadvantage he might have had.

Let us not forget Herbert's first Formula One Grand Prix - fifty-something degrees in Rio, a mid-grid car, yet he still managed to not only go the distance but also take fourth place. The masses would never give him the plaudits because he wasn't on the top step spraying the champers, but that performance must go down as one of the most gutsy and couragious drives in recebt times.

Couldn't agree more.

Agreed, and he could barely even walk at that point. Remarkable.

Simon Lewis

Dear Dave your post, give me the start in telling this little episode.
I dont remember the year, but surely it was after this test and before his offshore racing,
for work I've made a lot of time Milan-Paris and viceversa with the plane.
In one of those trips, Didier Pironi was on the same plane. I was sitting two rows ahead of him.
I was very happy, maybe I could have the opportunity to change some words with him.
Well, just before to take-off he had an argument with another person becasue he was sitting near the window and it was not his place. Then he had an argument with all the hostess because he did not want to put his briefcase into the box over his place, and he kept it all the journey outside.
Then he had an argument with the captain always for the briefcase's problem.

In my opinion he was wrong all the times. So I start wondered if this man was not only broken in his legs but also inside himself............ and I start wondered that on that afternoon in Germany
he already has the pole position on dry and also on wet before his accident................

No one else on the plane, recognized him. And I really did not have the courage to introduce myself to him.

After his death, an Italian magazine right on the following issue, made some really strange comments on him. No friends, impossible character............... even in the words printed behind the commemorative poster there were some nasty comments !!!!!!!!!!!!!
I remembered the airplane episode but anyway I took the time to write to the magazine, saying that even if the things they printed were true, it was not the case to published them right after his death. And why during his years like Ferrar's driver they gave him the nickname of " CiccioBello"
a very nice puppet here in Italy, if their opinion about him was so nasty.
Obviously they did not reply me.

Your comments.

MonzaDriver.

MonzaDriver:

I've told the story here before, so I wouldn't bore everyone again; but at the first Grand Prix and he was the head of the GPDA he took the same attitude with Jackie Stewart over safety issues.

I think he was jerk, and jerks are rarely self-made, they are raised that way.

The less said about this type of person the better.

Mionzadriver,


the bad press Didier got even after his death maght have been a result of his contribution to the killing of the `all time favorite adopted Italian: Gilles. Many, the most staunch (obsessed????) Gilles fans in particular, have blamed Didier far too severe for his share in this tragedy.
I am a big Gilles fan myself but I don't think Didier can be blamed for everything a number of people blame him for. partly responible at worst, but certainly not guilty.

As for his behaviour as you described, maybe that the many surgery he had gone through and for which he musst have had quite a lot of narcotics and other painkillers may have caused some brain effects and something of a change in personality????



Henri

Henri

OT on this thread, but it is a total indictment of the "disciplinary" procedures of FISA as was that Gregor Foitek was ever allowed back into a car after the Brands Hatch incident. It's not even as if he didn't have form, he had done the same to Herbert at Jerez.

Didn't he also put Roberto Moreno into the barriers at Paddock that very same afternoon???

Foitek's one of the two worst drivers I've seen at international level - the other was Laribiere who ran a McLaren in GT1 back in the late 90s and seemed to have no appreciation of the concept of a racing line. But at least Laribiere was merely slow, rather than being an active danger to everyone around him.

If it wasn't for Foitek's father's money, I doubt he would've ever got beyond F3. That he did was a travesty. (What were the circumstances behind his one F3000 win at Vallelunga? Was it a race of attrition, or just one of those odd days when all the cards fall just right for a driver who's not been touched by greatness?)

Henri:

Unfortunately Didier behavior pattern was well established before his accident. All the stuff mentioned probably only enhanced the basic person.

OK, I wasn't too aware of that yet and at least want to give Didier the benefits of the doubt because of that instead of instant badmouthing.

Henri

No, not again :\

My opinion doesn't necessarily have to be shared, and it might not matter much anyway, but I would rather not see this thread evolve into another Pironi-bashing one as we have had too many in the past. It is obvious that Didier was a very controversial character, David you seem to have precise personal reasons to dislike him, which you are perfectly entitled to, and Monza Driver's experience in the plane doesn't shine a very favourable light either.....However we should remember that some members of this forum are of a different opinion, and that one in particular that I'm thinking of was a close personal friend of Didier, so it might be appropriate to be just a little softer with some terms......

One thing I'd like to see most is that someone, finally, write a decent biography of Didier. One that I have is, to be generous, a bit amateurish and doesn't give anything like a full picture. (It isn't a bashing one, though, but written but admirers.)

I never thought Foitek was slow, he was often at the sharp end in F3000 and was not entirely disgraced in F1. Like de Cesaris without the brain.