Jump to content


Photo

Chapman and Clark


  • Please log in to reply
144 replies to this topic

#1 HistoryFan

HistoryFan
  • Member

  • 7,813 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 18 September 2014 - 13:29

I wonder why Chapman and Clark had sooo good relationship. Why? There were so many good drivers at Lotus over years, but no one was so near to Chapman as Clark. What's the reason?

 

I heard Clark should drove his first F1 races with Aston Martin but that project failed. So Clark drove all his F1 races with Lotus, I never heard any stories about he was talking with other teams anytime. Were there some serious talks to other F1 teams?



Advertisement

#2 Blundle

Blundle
  • Member

  • 104 posts
  • Joined: August 14

Posted 18 September 2014 - 14:11

I don’t think it’s anything more complicated than the fact that Chapman worked out very quickly that Clark was a genius and would clean up for Lotus given a reasonably reliable car. Therefore Chapman concentrated his efforts on Clark and made him the undisputed number 1. Clark was easy going on machinery and not very demanding of Chapman in the early days so he was easy for the team to work with. For the bulk of his career Clark had the fastest or equal fastest car so he had no reason to look elsewhere and, similarly, Chapman had no need to find a quicker driver because there wasn’t one.  

 

People say that later on in his career Clark did become more demanding and asked more questions of Chapman, but the Louts 49 would have delivered the championship in 68 and 69 (and maybe even 70 along with the Lotus 72) so it’s unlikely he would have gone to another team.

 

Clark (like Peterson) tended to drive round problems and made allowances for the deficiencies of the car which naturally went down very well with Chapman. In that sense he was very old school and, by all accounts, the concerns about the safety of Lotus cars which played on the mind of many drivers didn’t really concern Clark.



#3 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,698 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 18 September 2014 - 18:37

Put simply, for 1960 Clark was initially signed for Aston Martin in F1 and for Lotus in FJ.  Reg Parnell agrred that he could drive F1 cars for Lotus until the Aston Martin was ready.  Then when Aston Martin withdrew from F1 in mid-season he released Clark from his contract.

 

As to Clark's relationship with Chapman, basically they got on well and understood each other.  Chapman had competed against Clark and appreciated just how good he was.  Once Clark joined the team Chapman found that he could understand the limited feedback that Clark gave and he could understand what Clark wanted from a car, or if you prefer, he knew how to make cars that suited Clark's driving style.  The only other driver to enjoy a similar technical empathy with Chapman was Mario Andretti.



#4 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 7,500 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 18 September 2014 - 22:46

Aston Martin entered two cars for the International Trophy so they could have provided Clark with one before his Lotus F1 debut if they thought he was ready.

Graham Robson, in his Cosworth book, speculates that Keith Duckworth originally conceived the Cosworth car for Jim Clark to drive.

#5 Spa65

Spa65
  • Member

  • 88 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 21 September 2014 - 14:41

I came across a couple of references that Clark had become a bit less trusting of Chapman during the 1967 season. Notably from Surtees comments. Also at the Mexican GP in 67 the Ferrari team manager got wind of this to the extent that he phoned back to the old man in Maranello to say that there might be a chance of getting Clark. Don't know how far that went.

 

When you consider the number of suspension failures suffered by Lotus in 1967 I can understand his concerns.



#6 colinsays

colinsays
  • Member

  • 139 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 25 September 2014 - 09:42

Just found this curious photo of Clark into Bandini´s Ferrari 156 during German GP 1962

Note Colin is also there!!!

277724c7f7b619c508a9e2abc8ee33e8o.jpg


Edited by colinsays, 25 September 2014 - 09:43.


#7 HistoryFan

HistoryFan
  • Member

  • 7,813 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 September 2014 - 10:51

very interesting!



#8 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,512 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 25 September 2014 - 12:11

Wonderful shot of Jimmy and ACBC with the Ferrari - one I have not seen before.  Colin recognised Jimmy's potential very early on, and empathised with/saw potential advantage with his quiet readiness to comply...compared to Innes Ireland, the incumbent No 1.  Hence Innes' abrupt ejection from the team in Clark's favour, something for which Innes never really forgave Colin, or Jimmy himself, although he did mellow towards them both given the passage of time.  Colin's decision was ruthless, relatively harsh, but completely justified. Jimmy was talking of changing teams very late in his life, 1967-68, and even spoke to close friends and one or two of his most trusted mechanics of how they might feel about helping him go it alone, with a private car perhaps provided by someone else...with Ford backing...  

 

There could have been a kind of Tyrrell/Stewart operation pre-Tyrrell/Stewart, but who would have been involved as team principal/chassis supplier and how it might have come about in practice I have no informed idea.

 

By the end of his life Jimmy was a much more sophisticated, worldly-wise and commercially-aware personality than he had ever been pre-1967.  Graham Hill joining him as team-mate made him appreciate just how poorly rewarded financially he had been throughout so much of his previous career. This in turn perhaps altered his perception - and appreciation - of how Colin had performed in suitably rewarding his star driver's immense contribution. The retrospective line "I don't mind being screwed, but it might have been nice to have a kiss afterwards..." springs to mind.

 

Jimmy's naivete in selecting those who ran his affairs ultimately exposed his surviving beneficiaries to the appalling experience of being defrauded by the lawyer and accountant he would have expected to protect them...and him.

 

DCN


Edited by Doug Nye, 25 September 2014 - 12:15.


#9 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 7,500 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 25 September 2014 - 15:29

I remember the photo of Clark in the Ferrari from a contemporary magazine.  It's not one I've got now so probably The Autocar or The Motor.



#10 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 79,953 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 26 September 2014 - 07:56

Originally posted by Doug Nye
.....Jimmy's naivete in selecting those who ran his affairs ultimately exposed his surviving beneficiaries to the appalling experience of being defrauded by the lawyer and accountant he would have expected to protect them...and him.


I gather this hasn't been widely publicised, Doug?

It sounds pretty ugly...

#11 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,512 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 26 September 2014 - 09:01

It has amongst a certain constituency - and it was...

 

DCN



#12 Glengavel

Glengavel
  • Member

  • 1,300 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 26 September 2014 - 09:19

The 'Bermuda' reference on his gravestone is a consequence of his financial woes, is it not?



#13 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,723 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 26 September 2014 - 13:18

Eric Dymock's book "Jim Clark - Tribute to a Champion" gives a certain amount of detail, while Andrew Ferguson refers to Clark's legal people in "Team Lotus - the Indianapolis Years".

 

Paul M



#14 Seppi_0_917PA

Seppi_0_917PA
  • Member

  • 248 posts
  • Joined: December 02

Posted 26 September 2014 - 13:27

Quentin Spurring has the Clark in the Ferrari photo in his "Grand Prix! Rare Images of the First 100 Years". Per his caption, it was taken at Nürburgring in 1962.

#15 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 7,836 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 28 September 2014 - 14:59

Wonderful shot of Jimmy and ACBC with the Ferrari - one I have not seen before.  Colin recognised Jimmy's potential very early on, and empathised with/saw potential advantage with his quiet readiness to comply...compared to Innes Ireland, the incumbent No 1.  Hence Innes' abrupt ejection from the team in Clark's favour, something for which Innes never really forgave Colin, or Jimmy himself, although he did mellow towards them both given the passage of time.  Colin's decision was ruthless, relatively harsh, but completely justified. Jimmy was talking of changing teams very late in his life, 1967-68, and even spoke to close friends and one or two of his most trusted mechanics of how they might feel about helping him go it alone, with a private car perhaps provided by someone else...with Ford backing...  

 

There could have been a kind of Tyrrell/Stewart operation pre-Tyrrell/Stewart, but who would have been involved as team principal/chassis supplier and how it might have come about in practice I have no informed idea.

 

By the end of his life Jimmy was a much more sophisticated, worldly-wise and commercially-aware personality than he had ever been pre-1967.  Graham Hill joining him as team-mate made him appreciate just how poorly rewarded financially he had been throughout so much of his previous career. This in turn perhaps altered his perception - and appreciation - of how Colin had performed in suitably rewarding his star driver's immense contribution. The retrospective line "I don't mind being screwed, but it might have been nice to have a kiss afterwards..." springs to mind.

 

Jimmy's naivete in selecting those who ran his affairs ultimately exposed his surviving beneficiaries to the appalling experience of being defrauded by the lawyer and accountant he would have expected to protect them...and him.

 

DCN

 

Clark is said to have been surprised so often by his fellow-drivers driving not as fast as he did... it is fitting though bitter at the same time he only realised late in his career how valuable his talents were...



#16 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 06 October 2014 - 14:17

Ciao to all,

to me you can say that the good relationship, was one way only.

Clark has a soft spot a real attachement for Chapman and Lotus.

Chapman, because he was so smart, soon discovered Clark's talent.

So he has an incredible talented driver, cheaper, attached to the team,

easy on the car like no one else, a gentleman, a well mannered person you can introduce to sponsor.

A driver that " drive around the problems" ( Chapman words)

so if the car is so and so, in Clark's hands could be competitive.

Clark loved to know about the various form of racing, so Chapman could send him

to compete in Lotus Cortina, another effective and economical form of publicity for Lotus brand.

And Chapman show his affection in sending him to that fateful F2 race, for sponsorships reasons,

while he was skiing. ( Never heard another time of Chapman passion for snow )

 

We all do mistakes in our lifes,

and Clark's bigger one was this one - way direction relationship with Chapman.

For our great regret.

MonzaDriver

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



#17 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,512 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 06 October 2014 - 20:22

Wrong.

 

DCN



#18 Glengavel

Glengavel
  • Member

  • 1,300 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 06 October 2014 - 20:42

And Chapman show his affection in sending him to that fateful F2 race, for sponsorships reasons,

while he was skiing. ( Never heard another time of Chapman passion for snow )

 

What exactly are you suggesting here?



#19 RS2000

RS2000
  • Member

  • 2,572 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 06 October 2014 - 21:48

Reading (and reading between the lines in) the Alan Mann biography seems to set Walter Hayes up as the root cause of the Brands Hatch vs Hockenheim controversy, by not originally being clear enough as to who had first call on Clark and Hill for that weekend. Mann records a telephone call from NGH well before Brands, effectively warning him that he expected Chapman to find work for him and JC that conflicted with Mann listing them as his drivers - which Mann would never have done if Hayes had not indicated to him he could. 



Advertisement

#20 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 10 October 2014 - 14:29

Wrong.

 

DCN

I think every article,  every book, included " Jim Clark at the wheel"

wrote by Clark himself, tell us what I wrote here before,

if you know more or differently, I am here to learn.

( Sorry if I reply so late excuse me)

MonzaDriver 



#21 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 10 October 2014 - 14:33

What exactly are you suggesting here?

 

Nothing specific,

maybe Chapman really loved skiing,

And I've heard form other sources that this Lotus F2,

in witch Clark found his death, were really a mess.

( I am sorry if I reply so late, excuse me)

MonzaDriver



#22 Spa65

Spa65
  • Member

  • 88 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2014 - 16:47

MonzaDriver,

 

You give every impression of being one of those people who assume there is more to any story than meets the eye. Worse still you invent cynical scenarios to match your twisted interpretations. Conpiracy theories abound in your version of reality.

 

I really think that Doug Nye in particular should be listened to attentively. He is a respected writer and commentator from that period and knew the people involved personally. Do a Google search and have a think. He is probably now keeping a respectful silence, not wishing to lower himself to your tone.

 

So Chapman gave Clark a dud old car and went off skiing because he was a complete chancer. Just to get a bit cheap publicity for the Lotus brand. Yeah right.

 

I also came across an interview with Chapman years later where he said that Clark was his very best friend, and I do not see any reason to doubt him. Hell, they used to share hotel rooms. Not exactly the picture you conjured up.

 

I've said enough. Going to the pub early tonight. Must make a point of not opening my computer when I get home - I have a habit of waxing lyrically at the keyboard (at least in my temporarily distorted eyes). But I'll be OK in the morning.



#23 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 9,571 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 10 October 2014 - 19:58

MonzaDriver, the only thing you omitted from your latest anti-Chapman diatribe was a grassy knoll, but I'm mystified as to why you single him out for such irrational hatred. I worked for Colin Chapman, and got to know him fairly well, he had numerous faults, but there was nothing wicked about him, and I don't believe that he would ever have sent one of his drivers out to race in a car that he thought was in any way unsafe, he had total if occasionally misplaced trust in his own abilities, and drivers like Jim Clark trusted him. To pick on just one flaw in your Hockenheim accusations, in what way was Chapman responsible for a failed Firestone tyre?



#24 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 10 October 2014 - 20:38

MonzaDriver,

 

You give every impression of being one of those people who assume there is more to any story than meets the eye. Worse still you invent cynical scenarios to match your twisted interpretations. Conpiracy theories abound in your version of reality.

 

I really think that Doug Nye in particular should be listened to attentively. He is a respected writer and commentator from that period and knew the people involved personally. Do a Google search and have a think. He is probably now keeping a respectful silence, not wishing to lower himself to your tone.

 

So Chapman gave Clark a dud old car and went off skiing because he was a complete chancer. Just to get a bit cheap publicity for the Lotus brand. Yeah right.

 

I also came across an interview with Chapman years later where he said that Clark was his very best friend, and I do not see any reason to doubt him. Hell, they used to share hotel rooms. Not exactly the picture you conjured up.

 

I've said enough. Going to the pub early tonight. Must make a point of not opening my computer when I get home - I have a habit of waxing lyrically at the keyboard (at least in my temporarily distorted eyes). But I'll be OK in the morning.

Well, I have to admit that conspiracy theories are something that fascinated me.

Problem is few of them are wrong.

My scenario is not invented it came from a lot of reading and in those years a lot of YouTube,

where you can see the interviews and you judge by yourself: the tone of voice and the faces expressions of people talking motor racing.

For example look at the footages of people speaking of Colin Chapman, you heard every kind of defect, stingy, sparing of praise, difficult to deal with, mechanics always working close to miracle,

typical Londoner ( I am not sure if it is good or bad ) Used cars salesman. Witch has the same sinister hint just like in Italian language.

Smart, fascinating, a person that use his charme to persuade people about his reasons. He enchanted people.

A trait he surely has in common with the other great british of F1: Bernie Ecclestone. They both are magic in this art's form.

Rules were an exercise in finding loopholes for Chapman. Also here he was the wordsworth, not only in chassis.

I've learnt in this forum the british expression " operating on shoes strings" look at the footages of team Lotus, their normality was to operate on shoe strings.

Many times I've seen them here at Monza also.

The factory for Team Lotus was a deconsecrate church....... well an unusual choise for a top team also in the 70's. 

Lotus single-seaters were sent to clients splitted in spare parts, I often wonder why.

 

Instead about Jim Clark, I have the opposite problem,

I cannot find someone speaking badly about him, you have difficulty in find just some negative words.

And I think: that's not possible.

 

You wrote ironically " So Chapman gave Clark a dud old car and went off skiing because he was a complete chancer. Just to get a bit cheap publicity for the Lotus brand. Yeah right"

sorry but the great Jim Clark wrote in " Jim Clark at the wheel"  about a close situation another dud old car he call it a " starting money special "

 

I know Doug Nye is someone you have to listen to, unfortunately I dont have his book " Jim Clark" but I have Eric Dymock's  and Graham Gauld's ones.

I have " Stirling Moss my cars, my career" I read it plus than once, so I know who he is.

But I dont think my tone is lower than his.

 

Well I presume the relationship Clark - Chapman was better than Dennis - Alonso I know that, but if you share a room it means cheaper.

Now that I am writing I remember this thing, I remember ( here at Monza ) people at Lotus team address to Chapman saying Colin.......... 

ad also Ecclestone likes people address to him Bernie.......... both of them didn't care about too much reverence. Another common trait.

MonzaDriver.



#25 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,966 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 10 October 2014 - 20:46

MonzaDriver, I understand fully that English is not your native language, as Italian is not mine, but, and to be kind, what you insinuate is pure poppycock and better suited to the antics that take place at RC.



#26 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,512 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 10 October 2014 - 21:00

Monza - your impressions of Chapman and of Clark are not totally wrong, but they are certainly not totally right. The way you judge the Chapman/Clark relationship is not correct at all.  It is too difficult to describe more correctly without using English language words which are probably too difficult for you to translate fully and precisely into Italian.

 

How you characterise both Chapman and Ecclestone is not totally wrong, but again it is not totally right, nor justifiable.  Is there an Italian phrase meaning "neither black nor white, but a shade of grey"?

 

DCN



#27 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 79,953 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 10 October 2014 - 21:07

Originally posted by MonzaDriver
Well, I have to admit that conspiracy theories are something that fascinated me..... 

.....Lotus single-seaters were sent to clients splitted in spare parts, I often wonder why.....


Simple... and fancy making a 'conspiracy' of this...

The British tax laws meant that a complete car attracted a lot more sales tax than three boxes of parts that would make up a car.

There have been some recent posts in the 'Lotus dealers in Australia' thread about assembling these cars, perhaps you'd learn a little from that?

#28 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 10 October 2014 - 21:08

MonzaDriver, the only thing you omitted from your latest anti-Chapman diatribe was a grassy knoll, but I'm mystified as to why you single him out for such irrational hatred. I worked for Colin Chapman, and got to know him fairly well, he had numerous faults, but there was nothing wicked about him, and I don't believe that he would ever have sent one of his drivers out to race in a car that he thought was in any way unsafe, he had total if occasionally misplaced trust in his own abilities, and drivers like Jim Clark trusted him. To pick on just one flaw in your Hockenheim accusations, in what way was Chapman responsible for a failed Firestone tyre?

Kayemode, based on the fact that you knew him,

what about my thought that he use his charme to enchante people and he persuade everyone about his reasons ?

No Chapman responsability if it was a Firestone problem. But I doubt it was. 

MonzaDriver.



#29 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 10 October 2014 - 21:25

Monza - your impressions of Chapman and of Clark are not totally wrong, but they are certainly not totally right. The way you judge the Chapman/Clark relationship is not correct at all.  It is too difficult to describe more correctly without using English language words which are probably too difficult for you to translate fully and precisely into Italian.

 

How you characterise both Chapman and Ecclestone is not totally wrong, but again it is not totally right, nor justifiable.  Is there an Italian phrase meaning "neither black nor white, but a shade of grey"?

 

DCN

Dear Doug dear all,

I am sorry if my English is not fully comprehensible, my excuse is that I have to write fast without looking at the dictionary and find the right expression.

 

And yes Doug your question is one of the main teaching of my late mother, one of their usual phrase, she usually said to me:

" When you are 16 years old things in life are black or white....... as you grow old they became a shade made of thousand greys" 

Is that what are you meaning?

MonzaDriver



#30 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 10 October 2014 - 21:36

There have been some recent posts in the 'Lotus dealers in Australia' thread about assembling these cars, perhaps you'd learn a little from that?

Dear Ray,

I have heard about this spare parts sending, in an old Italian article,

I presumed it was cheaper but I didn't know the reason why.

Thank you.



#31 Spa65

Spa65
  • Member

  • 88 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 11 October 2014 - 00:23

Well I just got back rom the pub and as I expected there are a few comments since my last posting. Despite my comment to the effect that I would not participate further until more compos mentis, I feel like commenting on some of the posts at this late hour.

 

I am very encouraged about the rational and restrained comments  It seems to me that everyone, with one noteable exception, has been making knowledgeable and lucid descriptions about the situation regarding Clark/Chapman, based purely on facts.

 

But here is one telling comment from MonzaDriver:

"Well, I have to admit that conspiracy theories are something that fascinated me.

Problem is few of them are wrong."

 

Christ, is that the level of logic we should adhere to?

 

I guess that MonzaDriver thinks Lee Harvey Oswald had nothing to do with JFK's assasination. Or that man ever landed on the moon. I guess he would be disinclined to visit the Bermuda Triangle, given his superior insight into these matters.

 

I think that it is very sad that a good forum like this can be potentially ruined by some idiot. However let us not despair and give in to such nonsense. Keep speaking the truth and keep reminding us of the days we remember and like to celebrate.

 

MonzaDriver, please go away and try not to infect some other forum. Your poisonous comments serve only to detract from the reality of a better age.



#32 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,512 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 11 October 2014 - 09:01

That was hardly necessary - surely? Monza - what your Mama told you was exactly right.  Colin/Jimmy's relationship was NOT a love affair, but it was one very much based upon a high level of genuine respect and mutual admiration, tempered by realism which - in Jimmy's case - was very much highlighted when Graham Hill joined Team in 1967, and effectively pointed out to JC that Colin and Esso had woefully underpaid him for years...  Talking with Colin about Jimmy in around 1978 left me in no doubt about his genuine regard for his long-lost star driver.  Colin was hardly the kind of man whose eyes would readily fill with tears of barely controlled emotion.  But he came close to it, and was embarrassed that our mutual friend Geoff Goddard and I were with him in his office to notice it. I should point out that I am a Clark and Chapman fan, and have been so since the era, but I think I also have a pretty realistic recollection and grasp of their respective shortcomings and what can be characterised as character defects. Colin's vanity, ambition, egocentricity, impatience with criticism or perceived lack of support, and perhaps background materialistic greed, frequently surfaced. Jimmy's private inconsistencies, indecisiveness (out of the car), perhaps readiness to duck responsibility, preference for easy options, all diminished with the passing of time. By the end of the 1968 Tasman Championship a new, tougher, world-class superstar Clark was perhaps beginning to emerge. Too late - some might say.

 

But any notion that Colin maliciously sent Jimmy to Hockenheim - without the Scot's compliance - in a fundamentally unsound car just to earn the company a few bob and further to promote 'the Lotus brand' is just total bollocks.

 

Does this translate?    :cool: 

 

DCN 



#33 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 79,953 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 11 October 2014 - 09:24

Isn't it also the case that he went to Hockenheim to comply with his tax haven limitations?

#34 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 2,325 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 11 October 2014 - 09:33

Strong and conflicting views on Chapman will probably rage on until this generation of fans have all passed away.

 

I never met Chapman but I will admit to being a fan. I have, however, been fortunate enough to talk to four team members who worked for him. All the stories about insane workloads and ever changing plans/ideas come across from those people. They also said the cars were designed to be highly stressed and , as a consequence, needed intensive maintainance, but I never heard one of them ever imply any deliberate or cavalier attitude to safety from Chapman. That is actual ex-employees.

 

In 1953 Lotus built its first production racecar, five years later it was in F1 and designing the revolutionary road Elite. Five more years and it had won the F1 world championship and was building several thousand road cars per year. For any boss to do all that requires both an obsessive determination to succeed and the abilty to motivate people not just bully them

 

I asked one of the ex Lotus people why they worked such insane hours , his reply was so simple " we wanted to win"


Edited by mariner, 11 October 2014 - 09:51.


#35 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 11 October 2014 - 11:34

That was hardly necessary - surely? Monza - what your Mama told you was exactly right.  Colin/Jimmy's relationship was NOT a love affair, but it was one very much based upon a high level of genuine respect and mutual admiration, tempered by realism which - in Jimmy's case - was very much highlighted when Graham Hill joined Team in 1967, and effectively pointed out to JC that Colin and Esso had woefully underpaid him for years...  Talking with Colin about Jimmy in around 1978 left me in no doubt about his genuine regard for his long-lost star driver.  Colin was hardly the kind of man whose eyes would readily fill with tears of barely controlled emotion.  But he came close to it, and was embarrassed that our mutual friend Geoff Goddard and I were with him in his office to notice it. I should point out that I am a Clark and Chapman fan, and have been so since the era, but I think I also have a pretty realistic recollection and grasp of their respective shortcomings and what can be characterised as character defects. Colin's vanity, ambition, egocentricity, impatience with criticism or perceived lack of support, and perhaps background materialistic greed, frequently surfaced. Jimmy's private inconsistencies, indecisiveness (out of the car), perhaps readiness to duck responsibility, preference for easy options, all diminished with the passing of time. By the end of the 1968 Tasman Championship a new, tougher, world-class superstar Clark was perhaps beginning to emerge. Too late - some might say.

 

But any notion that Colin maliciously sent Jimmy to Hockenheim - without the Scot's compliance - in a fundamentally unsound car just to earn the company a few bob and further to promote 'the Lotus brand' is just total bollocks.

 

Does this translate?    :cool:

 

DCN 

Yes Doug this translate perfectly without using too much refined english words.

And I thank you a million for your Chapman's office episode, like the words on Clark's personality. That probably, like you tells us, was going to change at the beginning of '68.

Thank you a lot from a Clark's fan and a Chapman detractor.

Now I would like to invite you and all the Clark's fan of this forum to watch this footage on You Tube.

It's in Italian but the people interviewed are English, and they speak English with Italian subtitles.

Just a few patience will be rewarded.

Doug my intent is far from to have right anyway, I just like that you and everyone here listen all the foootage and Forghieri's words;

that I am going to translate as good as I can.

https://www.youtube....h?v=gcPpVKAwyhg

( In case it doesn't work the footage is titled:  jim clark.avi)

 

At minute 11:09 Forghieri says.

 " I was there at Hockenheim , the day Clark found his death in the wood along the straigh before the turning back bend. And it was a very particular day,

because we all know he was driving a car, that was a disaster from evey point of view. When the news of the accident came,we couldn't believe it, and a cloud of sadness fallen all over all the boxes,

because Jim Clark was for us then, a flag, even if only for Lotus, 

he was that because he identified our idea of what a racing driver must be.............."

 

I repeat my intent, if I connect this words with the  " starting money special " I could be wrong yes,

but it's not totally unfair. 

And if you tells me are bollocks, I reflect on this.

MonzaDriver.



#36 Glengavel

Glengavel
  • Member

  • 1,300 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 11 October 2014 - 12:32

Looking at the 48's history, it hardly seems to have been a "disaster from every point of view". It was suffering from engine problems (fuel feed?) on the day. Perhaps Forghieri's words are also 'lost in translation'?



#37 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 11 October 2014 - 12:40

Looking at the 48's history, it hardly seems to have been a "disaster from every point of view". It was suffering from engine problems (fuel feed?) on the day. Perhaps Forghieri's words are also 'lost in translation'?

Not that part Glengavel, I am sure are the same words in English.

MonzaDriver.



#38 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,512 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 11 October 2014 - 17:44

"And it was a very particular day, because we all know he was driving a car, that was a disaster from evey point of view."

 

In competitive terms, that particular day, Jimmy's Lotus was indeed 'a disaster' - its engine popping and banging, cutting in, and cutting out. Read too much into Forghieri's relative exaggeration and that's how the true story gets distorted.  And the version MonzaDriver offers is indeed distorted.  Forghieri, notably, did not campaign the 1967-spec Dino 166 into the 1968 season, because - in competitive terms - it would have been 'a disaster'.

 

DCN


Edited by Doug Nye, 11 October 2014 - 17:44.


#39 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 7,836 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 11 October 2014 - 17:53

That was hardly necessary - surely? Monza - what your Mama told you was exactly right.  Colin/Jimmy's relationship was NOT a love affair, but it was one very much based upon a high level of genuine respect and mutual admiration, tempered by realism which - in Jimmy's case - was very much highlighted when Graham Hill joined Team in 1967, and effectively pointed out to JC that Colin and Esso had woefully underpaid him for years...  Talking with Colin about Jimmy in around 1978 left me in no doubt about his genuine regard for his long-lost star driver.  Colin was hardly the kind of man whose eyes would readily fill with tears of barely controlled emotion.  But he came close to it, and was embarrassed that our mutual friend Geoff Goddard and I were with him in his office to notice it. I should point out that I am a Clark and Chapman fan, and have been so since the era, but I think I also have a pretty realistic recollection and grasp of their respective shortcomings and what can be characterised as character defects. Colin's vanity, ambition, egocentricity, impatience with criticism or perceived lack of support, and perhaps background materialistic greed, frequently surfaced. Jimmy's private inconsistencies, indecisiveness (out of the car), perhaps readiness to duck responsibility, preference for easy options, all diminished with the passing of time. By the end of the 1968 Tasman Championship a new, tougher, world-class superstar Clark was perhaps beginning to emerge. Too late - some might say.

 

But any notion that Colin maliciously sent Jimmy to Hockenheim - without the Scot's compliance - in a fundamentally unsound car just to earn the company a few bob and further to promote 'the Lotus brand' is just total bollocks.

 

Does this translate?    :cool:

 

DCN 

 

Nice, short but still 'complete' description of the complex relationship between Clark and Chapman. Not to brown-nose you, mr. Nye, but you are the only F1 writer who has done the complex character of Chapman, well... 'justice'... and with that, I mean both sides of justice (innocence and guilt).

 

Regarding the indecisiveness of Clark; I recently (in a documentary?) head a priceless story. Jim Clark and Jacky Stewart were driving away from Jimmy's farm. They arrived on an intersection. Four roads. No car to be seen for a country-mile, except for that of Jim and Jacky. Minutes went past. Stewart started thinking: 'Does Jimmy want to tell me something or... what?' Then, after again a minute or so, Jimmy says to Jacky: 'So... what do you think? Is it safe to proceed?'



Advertisement

#40 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 11 October 2014 - 19:28

 

"And it was a very particular day, because we all know he was driving a car, that was a disaster from evey point of view."

 

In competitive terms, that particular day, Jimmy's Lotus was indeed 'a disaster' - its engine popping and banging, cutting in, and cutting out. Read too much into Forghieri's relative exaggeration and that's how the true story gets distorted.  And the version MonzaDriver offers is indeed distorted.  Forghieri, notably, did not campaign the 1967-spec Dino 166 into the 1968 season, because - in competitive terms - it would have been 'a disaster'.

 

DCN

 

Yes Doug probably I read too much into Forghieri's words,

or I read what I would like to read.

But if you add this to all the other things people say about Colin........ even only in this footage.

Jim Clark was also a peace-maker a bridge from Colin to the mechanics...................................

It's amazing how those phrases of great admiration, for Jim, came from people who worked so closely to them.

We heard a lot of time, Chapman tailored Lotus 25 for Jim Clark, yes, but it seems to me Clark was important for Team Lotus, not only for his driving.

Anyway Doug thank you a lot for your recollection of the time.

If you have any other gem to offer we are here to listen.

Thank you; MonzaDriver.



#41 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 7,124 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 11 October 2014 - 19:28

Well I just got back rom the pub and as I expected there are a few comments since my last posting. Despite my comment to the effect that I would not participate further until more compos mentis, I feel like commenting on some of the posts at this late hour.
 
I am very encouraged about the rational and restrained comments  It seems to me that everyone, with one noteable exception, has been making knowledgeable and lucid descriptions about the situation regarding Clark/Chapman, based purely on facts.
 
But here is one telling comment from MonzaDriver:
"Well, I have to admit that conspiracy theories are something that fascinated me.
Problem is few of them are wrong."
 
Christ, is that the level of logic we should adhere to?
 
I guess that MonzaDriver thinks Lee Harvey Oswald had nothing to do with JFK's assasination. Or that man ever landed on the moon. I guess he would be disinclined to visit the Bermuda Triangle, given his superior insight into these matters.
 
I think that it is very sad that a good forum like this can be potentially ruined by some idiot. However let us not despair and give in to such nonsense. Keep speaking the truth and keep reminding us of the days we remember and like to celebrate.
 
MonzaDriver, please go away and try not to infect some other forum. Your poisonous comments serve only to detract from the reality of a better age.


Amen to that.

#42 RS2000

RS2000
  • Member

  • 2,572 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 11 October 2014 - 20:23

Quote facility seems to have disappeared for me.

 

In reply to Post #34, I have seen somewhere (Alan Mann biog again?)  that JC had actually allocated some of his permitted "UK tax days" to the Brands weekend well in advance. So it was not the reason for not going there, although not coming to UK then would have obviously given him 2 or 3 extra days in UK later in the year.

As I posted earlier, it seems Brands was never a realistic possibility once Chapman learnt of it and Walter Hayes seems the prime candidate responsible for the confusion that caused Mann to nominate JC and NGH for his car.

What most forget is that spectators were expecting JC and NGH at Brands and the silly games being played out ignored them.  



#43 jeffbee

jeffbee
  • Member

  • 114 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 15 October 2014 - 11:51

Re:  Why am I thinking "don't feed the trolls"?

 

Excellent point, but I think we all know individuals that talk complete nonsense to provoke a response.  Perhaps it's down to a lack of attention as a child, who knows.............

 

Back on topic:  I remember a tv programme many years ago when one of the employees in the Lotus design office described what became known as Chapman's albatross routine, i.e. he would bust into the office, make a lot of noise, crap over everyone and then leave as quickly as he came.  Must have been fun to work there though!

 

I have always thought that Chapman was what we Brits tend to refer to as a "chancer".  Old habits die hard and let's remember he had built the business up from nothing with a philosophy of building it lighter and faster.  But to suggest that he would knowingly send JC out in a car that was inherently dangerous, simply to rake in the starting money, is absolute bovine excrement.



#44 kayemod

kayemod
  • Member

  • 9,571 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 15 October 2014 - 12:18

Re:  Why am I thinking "don't feed the trolls"?

 

Excellent point, but I think we all know individuals that talk complete nonsense to provoke a response.  Perhaps it's down to a lack of attention as a child, who knows.............

 

Back on topic:  I remember a tv programme many years ago when one of the employees in the Lotus design office described what became known as Chapman's albatross routine, i.e. he would bust into the office, make a lot of noise, crap over everyone and then leave as quickly as he came.  Must have been fun to work there though!

 

I have always thought that Chapman was what we Brits tend to refer to as a "chancer".  Old habits die hard and let's remember he had built the business up from nothing with a philosophy of building it lighter and faster.  But to suggest that he would knowingly send JC out in a car that was inherently dangerous, simply to rake in the starting money, is absolute bovine excrement.

 

All pretty much true, working at Lotus was "interesting", but mostly in a good way. Chapman would arrive unannounced, look at what you were doing, and either tell you you were wasting your time and on the wrong track, or approve suggesting ways of doing something even better. Nobody seemed to mind, as he almost always got it right, he was the cleverest, most intuitive engineer I ever met. Those who didn't like this approach soon left, but others learned more in a shorter time than they could have done anywhere else. TNF's "éminence barbu" told me that rather than regretting their loss, ACBC was actually proud of the number in the industry that had started with Lotus and left to go on to greater things, in my own modest way I'm very proud to have been one of them, I'll never forget "The Old Man" as almost everyone at Lotus referred to him.

 

On Colin Chapman being "a chancer", that's undoubtedly true, but I think you could say much the same about any individual who created a legend in the way he did, an entrepreneur in the truest sense of the word, and I couldn't agree more with that final line. As others have said in this thread and others, he had more faults than you could shake a stick at, but I've never met anyone who had got to know him even a little who thought there was anything at all bad or evil about him.


Edited by kayemod, 15 October 2014 - 12:21.


#45 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 2,538 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 15 October 2014 - 12:39

I have always thought that Chapman was what we Brits tend to refer to as a "chancer". 

When I read old race reports and magazine articles about Lotus, I get the same feeling. Chapman was an outsider and did not always have the resources available to other teams. In order to catch up or to win, he had to try something different. In the early single seater days, some cars were fragile -- and progressively, those cars became safer. However, Clark's F2 car was based on an F1 design which history records as stable and straightforward.



#46 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 15 October 2014 - 12:48

Re:  Why am I thinking "don't feed the trolls"?

 

Excellent point, but I think we all know individuals that talk complete nonsense to provoke a response.  Perhaps it's down to a lack of attention as a child, who knows.............

 

Back on topic:  I remember a tv programme many years ago when one of the employees in the Lotus design office described what became known as Chapman's albatross routine, i.e. he would bust into the office, make a lot of noise, crap over everyone and then leave as quickly as he came.  Must have been fun to work there though!

 

I have always thought that Chapman was what we Brits tend to refer to as a "chancer".  Old habits die hard and let's remember he had built the business up from nothing with a philosophy of building it lighter and faster.  But to suggest that he would knowingly send JC out in a car that was inherently dangerous, simply to rake in the starting money, is absolute bovine excrement.

Well, you can say what ever you want to,

but the expression, the concept  " starting money special " it's not mine.

It's from Jim Clark himself, 

Now I dont have the book with me, but if you like, later,  I can give you the page and the book, where this concept is written down.

And if I remember correctly iìt's not about once in a lifetime.

MonzaDriver



#47 jeffbee

jeffbee
  • Member

  • 114 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 15 October 2014 - 13:02

Kayemod:  When I referred to Chapman as a chancer, it was wasn't a criticism, simply an observation of the way he operated.  I don't believe anyone could fail to admire the man for what he achieved, despite the flaws. 

 

Charlieman:  The Lotus 48 was generally regarded as a sound car although in 68 it wasn't as competitive as the year before.  i don't recall anyone suggesting at the time that JC had been sent out in a car that was unsafe.

 

MonzaDriver:  I believe you are at odds with the general concencus  in this thread, primarily because you take your information from snippets in books as opposed to first hand experience.  There have been contributions to this thread from people who knew JC and Chapman.  Do you think it might be possible that they may have more of an idea of what went on, than you?



#48 Dipster

Dipster
  • Member

  • 572 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 15 October 2014 - 13:30

I think the idea of cobbling up a starting money special calls into question the integrity of the Lotus mechanics who would have been tasked with doing so. I think it highly unlikely that they would ever have agreed to do so particularly if it would have put Clark, or any driver, in any danger.


Edited by Dipster, 15 October 2014 - 13:33.


#49 MonzaDriver

MonzaDriver
  • Member

  • 424 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 15 October 2014 - 13:36

Kayemod:  When I referred to Chapman as a chancer, it was wasn't a criticism, simply an observation of the way he operated.  I don't believe anyone could fail to admire the man for what he achieved, despite the flaws. 

 

Charlieman:  The Lotus 48 was generally regarded as a sound car although in 68 it wasn't as competitive as the year before.  i don't recall anyone suggesting at the time that JC had been sent out in a car that was unsafe.

 

MonzaDriver:  I believe you are at odds with the general concencus  in this thread, primarily because you take your information from snippets in books as opposed to first hand experience.  There have been contributions to this thread from people who knew JC and Chapman.  Do you think it might be possible that they may have more of an idea of what went on, than you?

I am not here to gain as much approval as I can dear Jeffbee.

And even if not in the manner I am usual myself,  a lot of people have some doubts about Colin Chapman, in this thread.

If Doug told us about his talking in Chapman's office we all have to thanks him.

But I am not  " snipping" at books, I am speaking about " Jim Clark at the wheel "  a book that I feel ( I presume) ( I hope)

really Jim Clark worked on. I mean I have the impression that he didn't told to Graham Gauld, wrote down something,

based on my results, and my general interviews.

I was not there yes, but to me there is a lot of Jim Clark, in that book.

MonzaDriver



#50 Graham Gauld

Graham Gauld
  • Member

  • 1,221 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 15 October 2014 - 14:43

Monza Driver

 

I am afraid I do not understand the last paragraph but I can assure you that Jim Clark more than worked on the book. We talked through it for hours and I have the tapes to prove it so anything he said was from him. As a plug, next month Reinhard Klein in Germany is publishing a boxed coffee table book he commissioned on Jim Clark. In this I have gone back to some of those tapes and quoted exactly what Jim Clark had to say in a number of different situations mentioned in the book.

 

Essentially what Doug said about the Chapman-Clark relationship is correct. Sure, they worked like Siamese twins, but behind it all Clark was not averse to telling Chapman what he thought. A good example is when he got tired of having his cars break down so he started to go to the press room after the race to tell the journalists exactly what had gone wrong much to the annoyance of Chapman. Indeed it was probably Jim Clark who started what we call today a drivers press conference.

 

Jim Clark was not always the compliant easy going driver that he is sometimes described.