In the DC Q & A session at the Autosport show
Henry Hope-Frost states and askes DC: You started 193 Grands Prix. You won 13. You have 12 pole positions and 18 fastest laps. And with 499 points, you are the most successful British driver ever. How do you feel about that?
My question is "what is criteria for most successful" I would have thought winning world championships, great races such as Indy Le Mans, not longevity in one of the best teams around. Winning the odd race and scoring points, whilst your partner is winning world championships should not be to much of a problem.
Is there any previous discussions on this topic on who truely is Britians best ever driver. In my opionion it has to be JYS, based on world championships alone.
Greatest ever British driver - DC ?
Started by
zakeriath
, Jan 15 2006 11:32
140 replies to this topic
Advertisement
#2
Gary Davies
-
- 6,460 posts
- Joined: April 01
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 11:36
What do 'world championships' have to do with 'best ever'?
#3
zakeriath
-
- 707 posts
- Joined: October 05
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 11:39
Isnt that the ultimate target each year.
#4
Wolf
-
- 7,883 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 11:43
Gretest? As nice bloke DC might be, he's not even great let alone greatest- he might've, statisticaly, collected more points than any other British driver, but that's as close as he'll get to his claim of the fame.
I'm far from being competent enough to speculate on who indeed is the greatest British driver, but it would have to be one of the usual suspects- JYS, JC, SCM (my vote goes to him- and I consider JC to be one of the greatest, period), &c...
I'm far from being competent enough to speculate on who indeed is the greatest British driver, but it would have to be one of the usual suspects- JYS, JC, SCM (my vote goes to him- and I consider JC to be one of the greatest, period), &c...
#5
Doug Nye
-
- 11,535 posts
- Joined: February 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 11:49
If this wasn't such a sad commentary upon the way in which "success" has become devalued by race frequency the question posed by the heading would be truly hilarious... 
DCN
DCN
#6
David McKinney
-
- 14,156 posts
- Joined: November 00
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 12:01
I'm completely with DCN on this
But even if we look only at world championship F1 Grands Prix, we can see that Coulthard has won 6.7% of those he's started. To the nearest percentage, the comparative figures for some other contenders are Mansell 17, Moss 24, Stewart 27 and Clark 35
If DC wins every race for the next two years he still won't have caught Moss, Stewart or Clark
But even if we look only at world championship F1 Grands Prix, we can see that Coulthard has won 6.7% of those he's started. To the nearest percentage, the comparative figures for some other contenders are Mansell 17, Moss 24, Stewart 27 and Clark 35
If DC wins every race for the next two years he still won't have caught Moss, Stewart or Clark
#7
Ross Stonefeld
-
- 70,106 posts
- Joined: August 99
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 12:08
I've never been convinced by %, what was JV's at the end of his debut season? by the time he won the WC? As of Melbourne 06?
#8
bira
-
- 13,359 posts
- Joined: November 98
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 12:09
Henry Hope Frost was referring to the 499 points - Coulthard's tally puts him 4th overall, with only Ayrton Senna, Alain Prost, and Michael Schumacher having more career points than DC.
(I'm not remarking on whether that makes DC 'greatest' or whatnot, only clarifying what the question is about)
(I'm not remarking on whether that makes DC 'greatest' or whatnot, only clarifying what the question is about)
#9
ensign14
-
- 62,015 posts
- Joined: December 01
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 12:27
Yes, there's no question of "great" in the totting up of points. On that basis James Last, Richard Clayderman and Daniel O'Donnell are greater musical acts than The Beatles, The Who, The Velvet Underground, Altered Images, The Sex Pistols and The Kinks because they've had more original material albums.
#10
VAR1016
-
- 2,826 posts
- Joined: June 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 12:43
Richard Seaman probably.
If not, there are Sir Henry Birkin Bt, Capt. George Eyston, KLG, Mike Hawthorn etc.
PdeRL
If not, there are Sir Henry Birkin Bt, Capt. George Eyston, KLG, Mike Hawthorn etc.
PdeRL
#11
D-Type
-
- 9,706 posts
- Joined: February 03
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 13:12
It's the American obsession with statistics again. I had a long correspondence with the owner of another statistics website who maintained that Bruce McLaren was Cooper's most successful driver as he had more points than Brabham. He also steadfastly maintained that messrs Brabham and Moss were team mates as they both drove Coopers. he was clearly a statistician or database geek, not a racing fan.
It's sad that Autosport appear to be losing the plot though.
Ross, I think %age success is a better measure, but you need to temper the results with some interpretation. JV arrived in F1 'fully formed' and was winning almost immediately while Mansell had a long learning curve (or a long time in uncompetitive cars)- his first GP win was in about his 80th GP. Then there are those who stayed beyond their 'sell by' date - NGH for example. So if using %ages , I feel the most appropriate measure is between first and last wins - and even then the likes of JYS are misrepresented.
As a measure for 'greatness' I tend to use 'If my life depended on it, who would i want to drive for me?'
It's sad that Autosport appear to be losing the plot though.
Ross, I think %age success is a better measure, but you need to temper the results with some interpretation. JV arrived in F1 'fully formed' and was winning almost immediately while Mansell had a long learning curve (or a long time in uncompetitive cars)- his first GP win was in about his 80th GP. Then there are those who stayed beyond their 'sell by' date - NGH for example. So if using %ages , I feel the most appropriate measure is between first and last wins - and even then the likes of JYS are misrepresented.
As a measure for 'greatness' I tend to use 'If my life depended on it, who would i want to drive for me?'
#12
ensign14
-
- 62,015 posts
- Joined: December 01
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 13:25
You can't use statistics at all for ranking greatness.
#13
Wolf
-
- 7,883 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 13:27
D-Type, or even reliability of the cars in period... E.g. Clark won 49% of the races his car didn't fail, Moss 43%, Stewart 41%, Mansell 31%, Hunt 15%, NGHill 11%, Culthard 11%, Surtees 10% (from the stat site made by Williams, RC host).
There are no means of determining greatness- it will always be a subjective term. All we can do is lend someone an ear (if we want) when he says so-and-so is the greatest and hear how he tries to argue it, even if he does it with statistics. As per my last post- I'd say that SCM is the greatest British driver ever, but I will not say he was better than Clark or Stewart, now would I like it to be implied in that statement.
There are no means of determining greatness- it will always be a subjective term. All we can do is lend someone an ear (if we want) when he says so-and-so is the greatest and hear how he tries to argue it, even if he does it with statistics. As per my last post- I'd say that SCM is the greatest British driver ever, but I will not say he was better than Clark or Stewart, now would I like it to be implied in that statement.
#14
flat-16
-
- 478 posts
- Joined: December 04
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 13:32
Greatest ever British driver - DC ?
I once had a Britool driver that was pretty good.
Oh, you meant that kind of driver...
Justin
#15
bill moffat
-
- 1,411 posts
- Joined: October 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 13:41
No problems, DC is the most successful British driver of all time.
By the same token, speaking on the evening of July 2nd 1961, Giancarlo Baghetti was the most supreme Grand Prix driver of all time with a 100% G.P. win rate. Lies, damned lies etc..;)
By the same token, speaking on the evening of July 2nd 1961, Giancarlo Baghetti was the most supreme Grand Prix driver of all time with a 100% G.P. win rate. Lies, damned lies etc..;)
#16
WGD706
-
- 956 posts
- Joined: August 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 13:46
Originally posted by D-Type
It's the American obsession with statistics again.
I was just wondering if Henry Hope Frost, the interviewer in question, is an American obsessed with statistics?
#17
David M. Kane
-
- 5,402 posts
- Joined: December 00
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 13:51
I'm American and I think statistics suck. I think you need to win Championships, that why they have them...World Cup, Super Bowl, Olympics...that's why we haven't mention Jenson Button yet.
DC has had an admirable career, is a class act and he will have a few more great days. He has grit, character, and a lot of other great qualities. Currently, he is being a great team leader too.
I suspect he is even a little embarassed by this headline...
DC has had an admirable career, is a class act and he will have a few more great days. He has grit, character, and a lot of other great qualities. Currently, he is being a great team leader too.
I suspect he is even a little embarassed by this headline...
#18
bira
-
- 13,359 posts
- Joined: November 98
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 14:07
Originally posted by David M. Kane
I'm American and I think statistics suck. I think you need to win Championships, that why they have them...World Cup, Super Bowl, Olympics...that's why we haven't mention Jenson Button yet.
Yes, we only measure success in championships here. Stirling Moss? Gilles Villeneuve? Who?;)
#19
bira
-
- 13,359 posts
- Joined: November 98
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 14:08
Can I just ask where the adjective "greatest" came from? I don't think saying that Coulthard is "the most successful British driver" (which is arguable, of course) is the same as saying he is the greatest British driver.
Advertisement
#20
Ross Stonefeld
-
- 70,106 posts
- Joined: August 99
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 14:35
The thread topic and thread starters interpretation of 'most successful'
#21
Stephen W
-
- 15,587 posts
- Joined: December 04
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 14:50
Originally posted by Doug Nye
If this wasn't such a sad commentary upon the way in which "success" has become devalued by race frequency the question posed by the heading would be truly hilarious...
DCN
Could not agree MORE!
If you look at his average points per race tally and compare it to Clark or Stewart it is pathetic!
Mind you comparison to Fangio puts most in the shade!
#22
Stephen W
-
- 15,587 posts
- Joined: December 04
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 14:53
Originally posted by bira
Henry Hope Frost was referring to the 499 points - Coulthard's tally puts him 4th overall, with only Ayrton Senna, Alain Prost, and Michael Schumacher having more career points than DC.
(I'm not remarking on whether that makes DC 'greatest' or whatnot, only clarifying what the question is about)
Correcto mundo! HOWEVER how many races did it take? 193! That's 2.58549222797 points per race approximately!!!
#23
Stephen W
-
- 15,587 posts
- Joined: December 04
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 14:54
Originally posted by ensign14
You can't use statistics at all for ranking greatness.
Remember there are lies, damn lies and statistics!
#24
Graham Gauld
-
- 1,221 posts
- Joined: September 04
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 14:57
David is a good guy, a good competitor but not even he would put himself in the same bracket as his compatriots Stewart and Clark. What a crazy concept.
#25
David Lawson
-
- 968 posts
- Joined: November 03
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 15:05
As there was no mention of category and If it is judged by race victories then it has to be Gerry Marshall.
David
David
#26
zakeriath
-
- 707 posts
- Joined: October 05
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 15:15
With regards to Bira`s question and comment
Henry Hope Frost was referring to the 499 points - Coulthard's tally puts him 4th overall, with only Ayrton Senna, Alain Prost, and Michael Schumacher having more career points than DC.
(I'm not remarking on whether that makes DC 'greatest' or whatnot, only clarifying what the question is about)
In ready the Autosport article I was supprised by HHF statement about DC as being the most successful ever in point scoring. I had rightly or wrongly put greatness or most successful to be meaning the same.
My original idea in starting this thread was to possibly come up with ideas on establishing a set criteria which could then define and possibly rank Britians greatest driver. My own thoughts were that world championships would rank highly in setting up this list, followed by win rate, longevity, etc
In no way am I questioning DC ability, personality in anyway.
Henry Hope Frost was referring to the 499 points - Coulthard's tally puts him 4th overall, with only Ayrton Senna, Alain Prost, and Michael Schumacher having more career points than DC.
(I'm not remarking on whether that makes DC 'greatest' or whatnot, only clarifying what the question is about)
In ready the Autosport article I was supprised by HHF statement about DC as being the most successful ever in point scoring. I had rightly or wrongly put greatness or most successful to be meaning the same.
My original idea in starting this thread was to possibly come up with ideas on establishing a set criteria which could then define and possibly rank Britians greatest driver. My own thoughts were that world championships would rank highly in setting up this list, followed by win rate, longevity, etc
In no way am I questioning DC ability, personality in anyway.
#27
VAR1016
-
- 2,826 posts
- Joined: June 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 16:13
Originally posted by Stephen W
Remember there are lies, damn lies and statistics!
Yes and then there was the statistician who drowned in the river with the average depth of six inches.
PdeRL
#28
rwhitworth
-
- 145 posts
- Joined: January 06
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 16:49
Originally posted by VAR1016
Yes and then there was the statistician who drowned in the river with the average depth of six inches.
PdeRL
Most people have more than the average number of legs.
#29
2F-001
-
- 4,245 posts
- Joined: November 01
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 16:58
Er... they don't, actually! 
That's being a little unfair to the science(?) of statistics. For that particular analysis you would calculate a modal average (rather than a mean) and that would show the average to be precisely two!
That's being a little unfair to the science(?) of statistics. For that particular analysis you would calculate a modal average (rather than a mean) and that would show the average to be precisely two!
#30
David Holland
-
- 166 posts
- Joined: May 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 17:39
In defence of Henry who did a fine job interviewing DC and others on the Autosport stage, he was simply referring to DC's total number of world championship points, which are higher than any other British GP driver. It was just a simple upbeat intro and David himself knows he's not the greatest British driver of all time.
Anyhow the point scoring system has been totally screwed since the FIA gave points away to lower placings and upgraded second place - they prove very little today.
On the other hand, stats are there to be used - number of wins, poles etc obviously bear a lot of relation to a drivers greatness. It's more fun to be subjective about this and let the heart rule the head, but statistics do have a place as an objective way of measuring achievements as long as they are not taken too seriously.
Anyhow the point scoring system has been totally screwed since the FIA gave points away to lower placings and upgraded second place - they prove very little today.
On the other hand, stats are there to be used - number of wins, poles etc obviously bear a lot of relation to a drivers greatness. It's more fun to be subjective about this and let the heart rule the head, but statistics do have a place as an objective way of measuring achievements as long as they are not taken too seriously.
#31
Wolf
-
- 7,883 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 17:54
Originally posted by 2F-001
Er... they don't, actually!
That's being a little unfair to the science(?) of statistics. For that particular analysis you would calculate a modal average (rather than a mean) and that would show the average to be precisely two!
Well, that claim does not look wrong, IMHO. Just consider the fact that most people have exactly 2 legs, and that the average number of legs should be less than two (I know of no examples where person had three legs, and a number of people have lost legs &c)...
#32
bira
-
- 13,359 posts
- Joined: November 98
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 18:03
Originally posted by David Holland
In defence of Henry who did a fine job interviewing DC and others on the Autosport stage, he was simply referring to DC's total number of world championship points, which are higher than any other British GP driver. It was just a simple upbeat intro and David himself knows he's not the greatest British driver of all time.
I thought Henry did a fantastic job, standing on stage for four days and interviewing dozens and dozens of drivers and racing personnel, getting his facts straight and asking relevant and interesting questions.And I think presenting DC in the way he did, for the crowd that was there, was correct.
#33
Alan Lewis
-
- 1,038 posts
- Joined: December 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 18:18
Originally posted by zakeriath
...My original idea in starting this thread was to possibly come up with ideas on establishing a set criteria which could then define and possibly rank Britians greatest driver...
And there's your problem; no such criteria exist.
APL
#34
WHITE
-
- 1,498 posts
- Joined: July 05
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 18:24
Originally posted by Alan Lewis
And there's your problem; no such criteria exist.
APL
Perhaps we could even say that there are as many criteria as fans
#35
VAR1016
-
- 2,826 posts
- Joined: June 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 19:12
And "criteria" is plural; the singular is "criterion".
PdeRL
PdeRL
#36
Ross Stonefeld
-
- 70,106 posts
- Joined: August 99
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 20:02
You will someday. Eventually everyone becomes part of history.
#37
David Beard
-
- 4,997 posts
- Joined: July 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 20:04
Originally posted by MCS
This is utter nonsense and I can't believe I've read (most) of this thread.
David who?
I'm not even sure how to pronounce his surname - and do you know why?
I really don't care enough to be bothered to find out.
Just a little harsh?.....
#38
ensign14
-
- 62,015 posts
- Joined: December 01
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 20:30
But there's different types of average - mean, median and mode...the mean average of legs per person is under 2 but the others would be exactly 2.Originally posted by Wolf
Well, that claim does not look wrong, IMHO. Just consider the fact that most people have exactly 2 legs, and that the average number of legs should be less than two (I know of no examples where person had three legs, and a number of people have lost legs &c)...
#39
2F-001
-
- 4,245 posts
- Joined: November 01
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 20:49
So it's you and me against the world, Ensign!
Not sure about the median though - wouldn't that be just as inappropriate in this case as the mean?
Oh Lord, this is soooo far O/T...
Not sure about the median though - wouldn't that be just as inappropriate in this case as the mean?
Oh Lord, this is soooo far O/T...
Advertisement
#40
ensign14
-
- 62,015 posts
- Joined: December 01
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 20:53
No, cos the only deviations from the median would be well outside the middle percentile, surely? Even if you cound Siamese twins as one person, which would be controversial, but sometimes is the only way to exclude them from three-legged races.
#41
Mal9444
-
- 1,292 posts
- Joined: December 05
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 21:08
It's an old saw this, really - but David Couthard: you gotta be joking. Did anyone in TNF hear his fatuous comments about the W196 when he was given the chance to drive it a a Goorwood Revival a couple of years ago. What a plonker!
When it comes to driving, and deciding upon the greatest driver (am I confusing 'greatest' with 'best'?) one must look at driving, pure and simple. And has there been anyone who was better, in any sort of car, in any sort of event, on any sort of circuit, than Stirling Crauford Moss? The man could drive ANYTHING better, quicker, neater than anyone else in his period, with the acknowledged exception of JMF in open-wheelers only. Having said that, and remaining an unreconstructed Moss fan through and through, I must say that mature reflection (prompted in great part by reading recent TNF posts about him) gives me a renewed and re-appraised appreciation of the talents and abilites of John Michael Hawthorn. But if you look at the wide variety of driving skills all those guys - SCM. JMH, Brooks, etc - displayed, the performances of modern drivers pale. Even by the time Jim Clark - such an artist, and one whom SCM greatly respected and is on record as wondering how the two would have fared had SCM not had his crash - was on the scene, type-forming and specialisation had taken hold and general driving skills, in the wide sense, were no longer on display.
So for my money - SCM, for ever and always.
But Davis Couthard?
Give me a break!
When it comes to driving, and deciding upon the greatest driver (am I confusing 'greatest' with 'best'?) one must look at driving, pure and simple. And has there been anyone who was better, in any sort of car, in any sort of event, on any sort of circuit, than Stirling Crauford Moss? The man could drive ANYTHING better, quicker, neater than anyone else in his period, with the acknowledged exception of JMF in open-wheelers only. Having said that, and remaining an unreconstructed Moss fan through and through, I must say that mature reflection (prompted in great part by reading recent TNF posts about him) gives me a renewed and re-appraised appreciation of the talents and abilites of John Michael Hawthorn. But if you look at the wide variety of driving skills all those guys - SCM. JMH, Brooks, etc - displayed, the performances of modern drivers pale. Even by the time Jim Clark - such an artist, and one whom SCM greatly respected and is on record as wondering how the two would have fared had SCM not had his crash - was on the scene, type-forming and specialisation had taken hold and general driving skills, in the wide sense, were no longer on display.
So for my money - SCM, for ever and always.
But Davis Couthard?
Give me a break!
#42
2F-001
-
- 4,245 posts
- Joined: November 01
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 21:11
Ensign -
Ah, I see what you mean.
But the mode would surely give an exactly correct 2, regardless of limits or ranges, and even if one included halves.
(may have the wrong phraseology, but hey, I'm an artist not a mathematician).
(Whatever, the mean is inapproprate - although I fully appreciate rwhitworth was joking, this isn't a useful example with which to pillory 'statistics'! )
Ah, I see what you mean.
But the mode would surely give an exactly correct 2, regardless of limits or ranges, and even if one included halves.
(may have the wrong phraseology, but hey, I'm an artist not a mathematician).
(Whatever, the mean is inapproprate - although I fully appreciate rwhitworth was joking, this isn't a useful example with which to pillory 'statistics'! )
#43
Ross Stonefeld
-
- 70,106 posts
- Joined: August 99
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 21:15
Originally posted by Mal9444
It's an old saw this, really - but David Couthard: you gotta be joking. Did anyone in TNF hear his fatuous comments about the W196 when he was given the chance to drive it a a Goorwood Revival a couple of years ago. What a plonker!
*shrug* he's driven a W196, have you? I sure havent. I disdain for the attitude of "today's drivers dont have it" as much as "yesterday's drivers dont have it"
#44
Ross Stonefeld
-
- 70,106 posts
- Joined: August 99
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 21:31
What im saying is, this isnt the most pleasant environment for new members/uneducated members. I have flashbacks to my High School caste system sometimes.
#45
David Beard
-
- 4,997 posts
- Joined: July 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 21:34
TNFers all know who was the best, greatest, most versatile, most householdly named, stylish, professional, most respected by his peers, etc, etc, etc. British driver.
No debate necessary. Anyone who thinks it is necessary has got the wrong bloke.
No debate necessary. Anyone who thinks it is necessary has got the wrong bloke.
#46
Frank S
-
- 2,162 posts
- Joined: September 02
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 21:40
Double shrugg.Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
What im saying is, this isnt the most pleasant environment for new members/uneducated members. I have flashbacks to my High School caste system sometimes.
Hang in there; we all eventually either outgrow it or forget it.
Mean time, median time, mode time, couldn't this thread be lock-ed in the interests of... well, anything?
--
Frank S
"We become just by the practice of just actions,
self-controlled by exercising self-control,
and courageous by performing acts of courage."
--Aristotle
#47
giacomo
-
- 6,977 posts
- Joined: December 05
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 21:52
This would mean to delete the years 1998 - 2005 in Jacques Villeneuves case. With only 1996/97 remaining...Originally posted by D-Type
Ross, I think %age success is a better measure, but you need to temper the results with some interpretation. JV arrived in F1 'fully formed' and was winning almost immediately while Mansell had a long learning curve (or a long time in uncompetitive cars)- his first GP win was in about his 80th GP. Then there are those who stayed beyond their 'sell by' date - NGH for example. So if using %ages , I feel the most appropriate measure is between first and last wins - and even then the likes of JYS are misrepresented.
Does not look too fair for me.
#48
Ross Stonefeld
-
- 70,106 posts
- Joined: August 99
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 21:54
Why cant we talk about this? Its history, but our understanding of it doesnt have to be so entrenched. A new guy comes in and asks an innocent question, wonders allowed how we could possibly determine who is the best, and no less than Doug Nye mocks him. And you wonder why fans of contemporary racing have no desire to understand the history of it...
#49
D-Type
-
- 9,706 posts
- Joined: February 03
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 22:13
Well, I've now read the interview and I wonder whether Henry Hope-Frost was serious when he used the term 'most successful'. DC's reply suggests not.
#50
Mal9444
-
- 1,292 posts
- Joined: December 05
Member
Posted 15 January 2006 - 23:19
Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
What im saying is, this isnt the most pleasant environment for new members/uneducated members. I have flashbacks to my High School caste system sometimes.
Missing something here, I think. Because I'm a new member I'm an uneducated member - is that it? Or not entitled to a view? Or to express it?
Or maybe he's not refering to me at all. After all, just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean everyone's always talking about me.
