Jump to content


Photo

Prost-Hill, Senna-Hill


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#1 gold333

gold333
  • Member

  • 124 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 24 December 2009 - 01:43

nt

Edited by gold333, 22 February 2010 - 11:09.


Advertisement

#2 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 2,171 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 24 December 2009 - 08:00

I find it VERY odd to say that Senna drove "around" a chassis shortcoming in 1994! :down:

#3 Paul Parker

Paul Parker
  • Member

  • 1,696 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 24 December 2009 - 08:44

I found it very odd following Senna's demise that Hill was immediately competitive again to the extent that he nearly, and should have, won the 1994 World Championship.

There is no question that Senna was quicker than Hill but then he would be having had much more time and experience in F1, talent notwithstanding. Hill's true pace in relationship to his team mates was much more apparent alongside Prost, Coulthard and Villeneuve.

In my opinion and I do not want to get involved in any fanboy type discussions Senna was not content with merely being faster than his team mates, but demanded a say in who was employed thus (Derek Warwick) and the right to dominate them regardless of talent. This is well recorded as was his insistance that he carried out all or most of the testing at Lotus in 1986, something that terminally undermined the fledgling F1 career of Johnny Dumfries. Other no.2 drivers have suffered this one sided status quo in different teams, being refused data etc., because the 'ace' apparently felt threatened.

It was ever thus but certain individuals took more than full advantage of their no.1 status.

#4 Gabrci

Gabrci
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 24 December 2009 - 09:20

I found it very odd following Senna's demise that Hill was immediately competitive again to the extent that he nearly, and should have, won the 1994 World Championship.


He beat Schumacher on the track one single time in the whole season. What is the base of you saying he should have won the World Championship?

#5 Gabrci

Gabrci
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 24 December 2009 - 09:27

Could it be explained by considering Prost's nature as simply driving at the slowest possible speed to win


I think that's the point, by 1993 Prost certainly was a very, very mature and calculating driver.

I think both of them were able to extract whatever could be extracted from any car, Senna probably being ready to risk more than Prost was.

Edited by Gabrci, 24 December 2009 - 09:28.


#6 JtP1

JtP1
  • Member

  • 753 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 24 December 2009 - 11:18

He beat Schumacher on the track one single time in the whole season. What is the base of you saying he should have won the World Championship?


Hill is English, so the answer must be yes.


#7 rallen

rallen
  • Member

  • 545 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 24 December 2009 - 11:39

He beat Schumacher on the track one single time in the whole season. What is the base of you saying he should have won the World Championship?



Well, he was a point behind going into the last race against a team and a driver that had been cheating all season. Without that they would not have been ahead of Hill in the championship. When it came to the title decider, Schumacher completley lost his cool and was rattled. He wrote off his favourate chassis in qualifying becasue of the pressure, then in the race he again fell to the pressure and drove of the track, he only didn't lose because he then drove into Hill when he rejoined. If he had not crashed into Hill, Damon would have gone on to will the WDC. In 94 Hill completley kept his cool, not only going into the title decider in good shape after an amazing win in Japan in supposedly ideal Schumacher conditions but also at Imola where he was sat on the grid for the restart, knowing his team mate in the same car was either seriously injured or dead and have the mechanics switch off his power steering as they were not sure it was that which caused it.

Edited by rallen, 24 December 2009 - 11:55.


#8 rallen

rallen
  • Member

  • 545 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 24 December 2009 - 11:45

I find that in '93 Hill was reasonably close to Prost in qualifying and in races in what was a class leading car.

In '94 however Hill was very far off Senna's lead in what was essentially a broken car (FW16A) exhibiting odd behaviour in it's new passive role and the questionable rear aero.

I'm a big fan of both Senna and Prost yet I did find this difference odd, especially since Hill had been much more confident about his 2nd season in F1 than he'd been about his 1st.

Could it be explained by considering Prost's nature as simply driving at the slowest possible speed to win, or was it like what Jo Ramirez always claimed that Senna could drive around virtually any chassis shortcoming?


I will admit that in the early 1990's I didn't understand what all the fuss was about Prost (too young to really remember the 80's) however in 93 Hill's first full season he drove well against Prost and would have won in Britian and Germany matching the 5 wins Prost would have taken (he would have lost the 2 Hill won) ontop of that, Prost seemed to really screw up some races, stalling several times and always making bad starts, he stalled at Monaco and made heavy weather of overtaking Senna in a better car when Senna was infront. After he retired and having only seen him be not that great I still wonder how good he was.

#9 Gabrci

Gabrci
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 24 December 2009 - 11:51

Well, he was a point behind going into the last race against a team and a driver that had been cheating all season. Without that they would not have been ahead of Hill in the championship. When it came to the title decider, Schumacher completley lost his cool and was rattled. He wrote off his favourate chassis in qualifying becasue of the pressure, then in the race he again fell to the pressure and drove of the track, he only didn't lose because he then drove into Hill when he rejoined. If he had not crashed into Hill, Damon would have gone on to will the WDC. In 94 Hill completley kept his cool, not only going into the title decider in good shape after an amazing win in Japan in supposedly ideal Schumacher conditions but also at Imola where he was sat on the grid for the restart, knowing his team mate in the same car was either seriously injured or dead and have the mechanics switch off his power steering as they were not sure it was that which called it.


Sorry, I don't think it would make sense for me to respond to that.

#10 HiRich

HiRich
  • Member

  • 386 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 24 December 2009 - 11:55

Could it be explained by considering Prost's nature as simply driving at the slowest possible speed to win, or was it like what Jo Ramirez always claimed that Senna could drive around virtually any chassis shortcoming?

On the first point, I'm going to stand up for Damon, who I feel is often maligned. Whilst certainly at the start of the season he was just the support act, by mid-season he had Alain matched. It is often forgotten that he was just a few laps from winning both the British and German Grands Prix before finally winning in Hungary - what should have been a hat trick, and dropping 20-odd points. The Championship could have been much different.

I would then tend to agree with the latter, though phrase it slightly differently. Damon seemed to excel in a more progressive car with a wider margin on the limit - see the development of the Arrows and the final year of treaded tyres at Jordan. My understanding is that the '94 car started out as a bit of a handful - something Damon would not like but Ayrton could live with. We saw the same when McLaren twice built understeering cars for those tail-out merchants Raikkonen and Montoya (the former just about coping, the latter loathing it).
In time (whether planned, or because Damon led the development that way) the car came to him. Perhaps he would have been closer to Senna as the season progressed. Or perhaps Senna would not have led the car down that route.

#11 RS2000

RS2000
  • Member

  • 2,169 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 24 December 2009 - 12:11

Hill had been testing the car through 92 in what was surely a broadly similar spec to 93. As previously mentioned above, Senna hogged the testing of a significantly different 94 car once he arrived.
Testing can even be vital in other branches of the sport. When Pentti Airikkala won the RAC Rally in 89, new to the Group A version of the Mitsu, there were accusations flying around of local knowledge. He had got faster in relation to others as the event progressed by changing settings. Just before he became terminally ill, he casually mentioned on another forum: "Well, because Ari (Vatanen - well established in the team) refused to let me test before the rally".

#12 Paul Parker

Paul Parker
  • Member

  • 1,696 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 24 December 2009 - 14:23

For the record my comments were nothing to do with Hill's nationality whatsoever.

I am not jingoistic, merely pragmatic and Hill's 1994 campaign should be recognised for what it was, a very good effort in only his 3rd season in F1 and following the unpleasantness and stress of Senna's death.

Incidentally even if you do have a very good car (and this is a necessity to win at all at least in the dry) DH still won 22 GPs plus a World Championship so I think he does deserve a little more credit than some seem willing to give him.



#13 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Nostalgia Forum Moderator

  • 24,057 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 24 December 2009 - 22:04

For the record my comments were nothing to do with Hill's nationality whatsoever.

I am not jingoistic, merely pragmatic and Hill's 1994 campaign should be recognised for what it was, a very good effort in only his 3rd season in F1 and following the unpleasantness and stress of Senna's death.


Plus the team's seeming not to trust his judgement as a driver (even after all that testing experience) and essentially undermining his position by re-engaging Mansell for those races which Noige could fit into his CART schedule. As I recall, Damon was asking for improvements to the car, but it was only when Mansell made the same criticisms that anything got done.

Incidentally even if you do have a very good car (and this is a necessity to win at all at least in the dry) DH still won 22 GPs plus a World Championship so I think he does deserve a little more credit than some seem willing to give him.

:up:

#14 rallen

rallen
  • Member

  • 545 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 25 December 2009 - 18:14

Sorry, I don't think it would make sense for me to respond to that.


So you agree he and Benetton cheated then or do you deny it?

#15 rallen

rallen
  • Member

  • 545 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 25 December 2009 - 18:16

For the record my comments were nothing to do with Hill's nationality whatsoever.

I am not jingoistic, merely pragmatic and Hill's 1994 campaign should be recognised for what it was, a very good effort in only his 3rd season in F1 and following the unpleasantness and stress of Senna's death.


I agree, it is completley frustrating when you try and have a discussion about something and people try and reduce it down to - 'oh he is English blah blah blah' such a lazy argument and very dispiriting and not what we need!

#16 Chezrome

Chezrome
  • Member

  • 1,218 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 25 December 2009 - 18:28

I agree, it is completley frustrating when you try and have a discussion about something and people try and reduce it down to - 'oh he is English blah blah blah' such a lazy argument and very dispiriting and not what we need!


I could ad to that: 'Oh, he only registered three years ago, I was already on this Forum when this newbie was still in his diapers, blahblahahah'

#17 alfredaustria

alfredaustria
  • Member

  • 237 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 28 December 2009 - 11:32

DH still won 22 GPs plus a World Championship so I think he does deserve a little more credit than some seem willing to give him.
[/quote]
Totally agreed. Neither Alonso, Häkkinen, Button nor Hamilton or Räikkönen have reached Damons records. Damon ist still in 10th spot in the all-time-record-list: GP wins and Pole Position. He shares the 11th spot in Fastest laps ex aequo with Ayrton Senna and Sir Stirling Moss. But in the lastest AUTOSPORT-poll you find him in 46th place of the best drivers of the century...

#18 Aloisioitaly

Aloisioitaly
  • Member

  • 272 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 28 December 2009 - 12:58

I find that in '93 Hill was reasonably close to Prost in qualifying and in races in what was a class leading car.


You are wrong pal, in the first 3 races of the season, the gap in qualifying beetween Prost and Hill (93) and Senna and Hill (94) was roughly the same. Quite uncanny, since Senna was clearly more committed than Prost in getting the pole.

Could it be explained by considering Prost's nature as simply driving at the slowest possible speed to win

Frank Williams said exactly this thing.


As for Prost having a bad season in 1993, i don't agree at all. He scored 77 out of 100 points in the fisrt ten races. Williams had the best engine and yet the chassis was not as good as McLaren's, furthermore Williams dealt with clutch problems that was never cleared throghout the season.
In Brazil Prost spun out beacuse of box bad strategy (there were also radio problems) about when to change tyres: Prost was caught by haevy shower with slick tyres.
At Donningotn, Williams had a dry asset (it ran all the time) and once again they had a wrong strategy in tyres changing (Patrick Head confirmed it in a recent interview in an italian magazine).
At Monaco Prost jump started, then stalled at the box. Anyway, if you deal with a clutch too hard to manage, it can happen.

Anyway, after ten races the championship quest was over. Not bad, i guess... :wave:

Edited by Aloisioitaly, 29 December 2009 - 11:12.


#19 John B

John B
  • Member

  • 6,288 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 28 December 2009 - 19:23

Hill had his share of inconsistent stretches with Williams that carried over into 1995 (great at the start, problems thereafter) and even the second half of 1996, so I wonder if the first 3 races of 1994 isn't too small a sample.

Certainly with the loss of Senna he had the pressure of having to match him suddenly lifted, which probably helped focus to get the job done. As mentioned having the #1 attention of Williams couldn't have hurt.

I agree Prost's 1993 season often gets too much of a bad rap. Had he not had the problem at Monaco he would have had a 7 race winning streak into the second half of the season. There was no pressure after the first few weeks, when rain gave Senna a shot at the points lead, and from August on he was preoccupied with figuring out retirement and his future anyway.

Advertisement

#20 Aloisioitaly

Aloisioitaly
  • Member

  • 272 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 29 December 2009 - 11:15

Lets' not forget that in the first two races of 1994 Hill scored 6 points and Senna 0.
Wasn't Hill slower than Senna? Of course he was, but he was also less mistake-prone.
In order to get points you can't count only on raw speed, but mostly on brain.

#21 john t

john t
  • Member

  • 186 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 29 December 2009 - 15:14

Lets' not forget that in the first two races of 1994 Hill scored 6 points and Senna 0.
Wasn't Hill slower than Senna? Of course he was, but he was also less mistake-prone.
In order to get points you can't count only on raw speed, but mostly on brain.


Quite right and well said. :)
Regardless of my nationality i believe that Hill drove fantastically well throughout 1994 and would have been a deserving champion. I do not wish to get into an argument about the Schumacher incident in Australia nor the Benetton traction control as these detract from Damons achievements. He's kept his dignity over these issues to this day. A genuine sportsman and an underrated driver in my opinion.

Edited by john t, 29 December 2009 - 15:15.


#22 wepmob2000

wepmob2000
  • Member

  • 709 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 30 December 2009 - 05:51

But in my opinion doesn't detract from the fact that in their first race together in Brazil, in equal cars Hill was lapped by Senna around halfway through the race.


Without wishing to sound like a 'fanboy', I believe Hill had a nasty dose of the flu in that first race of 1994, making any points scoring finish that little more creditable.

Although I'm an unashamed fan of Hill, he really does seem to have been the most criminally underrated driver in recent F1 history, often having the best car he was damned whatever he did. What marks him out for me was his ability to raise his game and not cave in under pressure. Niki Lauda commented at the time that his winning the Italian and Portuguese GP's in 1994 was incredible, he had to win them to keep his WDC hopes alive and he did. Its a similar story at Suzuka in 1994 and 1996, and at Adelaide in 1994.

No other driver (to my knowledge), has ever had so many really strong team-mates in such a short time - between them his team-mates won 9 WDC's. Just compare Hill's performances with those of Frentzen in 1997, I've no doubt that had he stayed at Williams, Hill would have won the 1997 WDC, and probably a lot sooner than Villeneuve......

Edited by wepmob2000, 30 December 2009 - 05:52.


#23 lustigson

lustigson
  • Member

  • 4,767 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 30 December 2009 - 08:31

For the record my comments were nothing to do with Hill's nationality whatsoever.

I am not jingoistic, merely pragmatic and Hill's 1994 campaign should be recognised for what it was, a very good effort in only his 3rd season in F1 and following the unpleasantness and stress of Senna's death.

Incidentally even if you do have a very good car (and this is a necessity to win at all at least in the dry) DH still won 22 GPs plus a World Championship so I think he does deserve a little more credit than some seem willing to give him.

Hear, hear!

#24 sherer

sherer
  • Member

  • 145 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 30 December 2009 - 12:03

I always felt Hill was an underrated driver. A bit like comments attributed to his dad in that he wasn't the most naturally talented but he managed to make up the difference anyway.

Didn't he have to stay behind Prost in France when he was quicker and a few other races too ?

No one knows about 94 as he was racing a car with launch control and a few other things plus ever pit stop Benetton could turn the car around quicker too so who knows how well he really did

#25 Paul Parker

Paul Parker
  • Member

  • 1,696 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 30 December 2009 - 16:23

The only other comments I can add to my earlier post is that Hill had no control or say over who his team mates were or what they drove. As wepmob2000 noted he really had to prove his worth and also bear in mind that he started his F1 career rather late in life.

One way of measuring a driver's full potential is to see how he compares to his team mates assuming they are given equal opportunity and equipment. In Senna's case the only time he was ever racing against someone of arguably equivalent, if rather different, talent with equal machinery was at McLaren with Prost. Thereafter his team mates were all of a lesser calibre although Hill's initial 1994 form was undoubtedly disadvantaged with Senna in charge. The most obvious factor here being that by the middle of '93 Hill was able to challenge Prost and following Senna's death was immediately back on the pace.

This modus operandi was not unique to Senna as we know and it is ironic as he hardly needed to seek any internal advantage by dominating testing or by any other means given his fantastic talent.

#26 dom180

dom180
  • New Member

  • 7 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 01 January 2010 - 17:28

Lets' not forget that in the first two races of 1994 Hill scored 6 points and Senna 0.
Wasn't Hill slower than Senna? Of course he was, but he was also less mistake-prone.
In order to get points you can't count only on raw speed, but mostly on brain.


Senna didn't exist to finish second or get points though - only winning mattered to him. Eddie Irvine was passed by Schumacher and Senna in Brasil and (no fan of Senna's at the time) said Schumacher's car was glued to the track on rails (in all probability running some form of traction control...) but Senna's was right on the edge with Senna giving 100% commitment, the car looking very unstable over the bumpy circuit. Although Senna did spin it was still a fantastic drive by any standard. If the Benetton's fuel stops had been longer (viz. the removed fuel filters) Senna might well have won a commanding victory.

Benetton cheated throughout '94 - the FIA found traction control on the car, fuel filters were removed.... The team should have been thrown out of the championship - same team that bought you crashgate with young Piquet incidently....

Edited by dom180, 01 January 2010 - 17:30.


#27 CSquared

CSquared
  • Member

  • 621 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 02 January 2010 - 02:17

Lets' not forget that in the first two races of 1994 Hill scored 6 points and Senna 0.
Wasn't Hill slower than Senna? Of course he was, but he was also less mistake-prone.
In order to get points you can't count only on raw speed, but mostly on brain.

Senna and Hill were both out in Japan through no fault of their own. Sure, Senna made a mistake in Brazil and Hill, more than a lap down, benefitted, but to conclude from a single data point that Hill was less mistake-prone and had more brain is quite a stretch.

#28 stuartbrs

stuartbrs
  • Member

  • 685 posts
  • Joined: September 02

Posted 02 January 2010 - 08:33

I have a video of Adelaide 94 which is great to watch. Lots of in car footage and it is clear how hard Hill is working to keep up with Schumacher, very impressive... possibly my favourite in car footage.

This was before we got those awful vibration free in car camera`s that make everything look so serene and in my opinion wrecked one of the best parts of Formula One coverage.

#29 JtP1

JtP1
  • Member

  • 753 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 02 January 2010 - 10:37

Senna and Hill were both out in Japan through no fault of their own. Sure, Senna made a mistake in Brazil and Hill, more than a lap down, benefitted, but to conclude from a single data point that Hill was less mistake-prone and had more brain is quite a stretch.


Senna was not exactly faultless in Japan. He actually gets sideways under braking for the first corner attempting an inside lunge at MS and hakkinen taps him turning it into a spin into the gravel trap. Hakkinen doesn't even break his front wing the tap is so light. Hill then completes the double by hitting Hakkinen trying his own lunge up the inside a few laps later and spinning.

This brings up the question, has anyone ever totalled the number of front wings Hill knocked off in his F1 career?

Edited by JtP1, 02 January 2010 - 10:37.


#30 CSquared

CSquared
  • Member

  • 621 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 05 January 2010 - 08:39

Senna was not exactly faultless in Japan. He actually gets sideways under braking for the first corner attempting an inside lunge at MS and hakkinen taps him turning it into a spin into the gravel trap. Hakkinen doesn't even break his front wing the tap is so light. Hill then completes the double by hitting Hakkinen trying his own lunge up the inside a few laps later and spinning.


Well, I disagree. I don't see that anything Senna did made it any more likely for Hakkinen to hit him. In fact, it looks like Hakkinen got more out of shape under braking than he did.
But for this argument, I'll give it to you. The point I was making would still stand; that with a data sample of just two races, where Senna had two spins and Hill one, it's silly to conclude that Hill was less mistake-prone and had more brain.

#31 Der Pate

Der Pate
  • Member

  • 624 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 05 January 2010 - 12:39

I often thought about the fact, that Damon had and has so little respect from some F1-admirers...

For me the main reason was, that I was totally surprised to see him in the Williams in 1993, after he had made no impression in 1992...because of the departure of Mansell at the end of 1992 he got this silly "Zero" on his car, which made him a bit like a clown in my eyes...

His wins were rated less than Schumacher´s, because Schumacher and the media didn´t get tired of repeating, that Hill has the best car and the German not...every win of Schumacher from 1994 on was said to be sensational, while the wins of Hill were wins of the car...

#32 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 8,047 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 05 January 2010 - 12:45

In general terms, Hill was team mate to three of the four greatest drivers of the time: Mansell, Prost and Senna. Even though he was at the start of his Grand Prix career he was most certainly not eclipsed by any of them. Certainly there were isolated occasions when he was well behind, which could be put down to his lack of experience, but overall he was on their pace.

#33 alfredaustria

alfredaustria
  • Member

  • 237 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 17 September 2012 - 08:16

Today Damon celebrates his birthday. :wave:
In my opinion still one of the most underrated F1-drivers.
Regards
Alfred

#34 arttidesco

arttidesco
  • Member

  • 5,662 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 17 September 2012 - 08:51

Today Damon celebrates his birthday. :wave:
In my opinion still one of the most underrated F1-drivers.
Regards
Alfred


:up:


#35 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,513 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 17 September 2012 - 10:45

Definitely the most underrated World Champion - by a long way. And now maturing into a real elder statesman of the sport. Maybe a knighthood will come in time, but with Surtees still waiting, and several hundred Olympians to service, probably not for quite a few years!

Happy birthday, Damon.

#36 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Nostalgia Forum Moderator

  • 24,057 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 17 September 2012 - 11:00

And, I would venture to suggest, the last real gentleman to race in EffOne.

Happy birthday, Damon.

#37 jeffbee

jeffbee
  • Member

  • 58 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 17 September 2012 - 11:50

And, I would venture to suggest, the last real gentleman to race in EffOne.

Happy birthday, Damon.


Yes, I agree. And probably the best Prime Minister we've never had!

Happy Birthday Damon.

#38 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Member

  • 14,307 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 17 September 2012 - 11:51

Let's not forget the other great British driver whose birthday is today.

Happy Birthday Damon and Stirling. :clap:

#39 simonlewisbooks

simonlewisbooks
  • Member

  • 2,118 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 17 September 2012 - 15:21

Today Damon celebrates his birthday. :wave:
In my opinion still one of the most underrated F1-drivers.
Regards
Alfred

Agree with you there Alfred :up:

Advertisement

#40 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 8,047 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 17 September 2012 - 20:32

Let's not forget the other great British driver whose birthday is today.

Happy Birthday Damon and Stirling. :clap:

I hadn't realised they share a birthday. Happy birthday to both.

#41 Gold

Gold
  • Member

  • 167 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 18 September 2012 - 20:41

I hadn't realised they share a birthday. Happy birthday to both.


True, I love Damon Hill for remaining the gentleman he is. Ok so he had bad days like being lapped by Senna midway through Brazil '94, but that year found the strength of mind to challenge Schumacher for the title.

It always amazes me that the people who's driving talent we discuss so easily are people who truly have an amazing talent.

Hill's gentlemanly demeanor hid a truly vicious driving talent.

Here is Hill driving an SL55 and popping up the anti flip rollbar driving with one hand.


Edited by Gold, 18 September 2012 - 20:45.


#42 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 7,180 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 18 September 2012 - 22:09

Definitely the most underrated World Champion - by a long way. And now maturing into a real elder statesman of the sport. Maybe a knighthood will come in time, but with Surtees still waiting, and several hundred Olympians to service, probably not for quite a few years!

Happy birthday, Damon.


Yes indeed, Damon has been consistently underrated by far too many who should know better, and sadly he's not the only one. In the eyes of many, bad hehaviour, controversy, and even outright cheating, seem to boost public profiles, in most cases quite undeservedly.