220 replies to this topic

[B Squared]

Requiem84, on 03 Oct 2015 - 17:34, said:

The sport was a lot more amateurish those days. Unfortunately heroic stories are invented and legends are created.

That means a lot of motorsports correspondents and historians have been lying to us all as we read of these races, whether in period or in subsequent book writings. I must have been inventing motorsports lore of my own while I've recounted stories from hundreds of races over the past 50 years to like-minded friends and enthusiasts. Thank you for your service, another conspiracy unearthed.

[SophieB]

Hamilton's attitude to it all - should a suitable time machine be found -  seems to be a cheery bring it on, then, Nige.
 

Quote

Hamilton does not want to compare eras, insisting that each one has its own difficulties and demands.
He does believe that Fangio, Lauda, Senna and Jim Clark would be at the top in any era. The cream always rises.
Nigel Mansell, the 1992 champion, is a big Hamilton fan and said a few days ago that he would love to have been Hamilton’s teammate.

“I’m certain Nigel thinks he could beat me now and I think I could beat him,” says Hamilton

 

http://www.thesunday...icle1614839.ece (paywall)

 

Seems pretty good natured and harmless all round, really.

[Marklar]

Up to you Toto than (this would probably be more exciting than this whole season )

[Ross Stonefeld]

B Squared, on 05 Oct 2015 - 19:50, said:

That means a lot of motorsports correspondents and historians have been lying to us all as we read of these races, whether in period or in subsequent book writings. I must have been inventing motorsports lore of my own while I've recounted stories from hundreds of races over the past 50 years to like-minded friends and enthusiasts. Thank you for your service, another conspiracy unearthed.

 

Oh i definitely think they're far better trained today. It's the equivalent of pilots really. Far more intuitive at the start of the skill's history.

 

And yes, there is an insane amount of Mythology to sports history. Especially racing.

 

Not that modern coverage is worth the paper it's printed on...

 

[Lambo]

He has a book to sell.

[B Squared]

Ross - I've mainly learned from period race reports and history from annuals of the various eras and books by gents like the forum's Doug Nye and others of similar stature in the writing world - I don't think these avenues are the source of mythology in motorsports. There are plenty with a loose look at the sport's history though.

Edited by B Squared, 05 October 2015 - 20:24.

[PlatenGlass]

Dan333SP, on 05 Oct 2015 - 14:59, said:

What makes you so confident in that? They were teammates in 1990, if you recall, and Prost outscored him 71-37. Qualifying was much closer at 8-8 for the year, but I don't think it's fair to say Mansell would have clearly beaten Prost 3 years later.

Prost seemed a bit weak in 1993. However, Mansell in 1992 was no doubt flattered to some extent by Patrese's poor form. Prost v Mansell part 2 would have been interesting.

Edited by PlatenGlass, 05 October 2015 - 20:34.

[Dan333SP]

PlatenGlass, on 05 Oct 2015 - 20:31, said:

Prost seemed a bit weak in 1993. However, Mansell in 1992 was no doubt flattered to some extent by Patrese's poor form. Prost v Mansell part 2 would have been interesting.

 

True, and it's only after looking at the season stats that I realized how many points Mansell lost through unreliability in 1990. He really was basically just as quick as Prost throughout the year, but had a lot of bad luck and became the defacto #2 driver at a certain point.

[Tsarwash]

BlinkyMcSquinty, on 05 Oct 2015 - 15:10, said:

Really? The cars did not have power steering, and the tires were heavier and thus harder to crank over. The drivers had to shift manually, many times blistering their hands. And many decades ago, the races were much,

much longer. The drivers did not have water bottles, and they expected to be out there for three hours. There is a good reason why there were no 17 year old racers in Formula One back then, any driver had to be a bear of a man.

 

You take any modern Formula One driver, take away power steering, make them use a clutch and shift manually, and go an hour longer. Then let's see what happens. Oh yea, no radio so they were on their own.

But we're not the ones saying that Vettel et al would excel in that era. It's different. It's the people who actually think that drivers from 30 years ago that would excel in modern F1 that I think are wrong. 

 

Ross Stonefeld, on 05 Oct 2015 - 15:08, said:

 
Ironic that we've forgotten Senna so quickly.
 

 

I'm not *entirely* convinced of that. I'm not sure anyone in F1 got away by driving on reflex, not in modern aero cars.Yeah it helps you from saving a spin but driving fast is about pre-emptive car control. And Schumacher was actually reasonably smooth. They all are really. Even when the wheel is moving around a lot it's pretty supple. Schumacher's hands were never really *fast* IMO and at the risk of inviting a thousand youtube clips to prove otherwise, my memory was that he wasn't noticeably active in the corners. No more than average.

I'm pretty sure I remember seeing some 'live' data (steering, brake, accel, etc) from Schu's car at some point. (And them commenting how smooth his inputs were compared to others.) It would be interesting to compare with other rivers if it's possible. I do remember the telly people commenting how consistent he was at each corner, compared to the other drivers at the time. I can't remember exactly what era it was though. 

[ardbeg]

I don't think Mansell seriously believes he has a chance. It's impossible. I mean I know, I know for certain, that I am quite far from my prime and I am quite far away from Nigel in age. One can feel it, it is not much but the reactions are slightly slower, the decision process goes through too many checkpoints and the ability to focus, to  concentrate, is just not what it used to be. Put that together and it does huge damage to your lap times. Unless he suffer from dementia he knows that.

 

No, instead I start to believe it is part of a PR campaign of some sorts. There will be an event.

[Lemans]

Lewis would beat him simply because he has god on his side.

[ardbeg]

Lemans, on 06 Oct 2015 - 00:12, said:

Lewis would beat him simply because he has god on his side.

20.1 The driver must drive the car alone and unaided.

[Lemans]

ardbeg, on 06 Oct 2015 - 00:43, said:

20.1 The driver must drive the car alone and unaided.

 

That's ok. The FIA couldn't prove his existence, anyway.

[teejay]

Sounds like god was on Bennetons side in 1994 as well.

 

But seriously, lets make it happen

[lamo]

I would love for Mercedes to give him a couple of days in the simulator, take a tv crew with him and see how he gets on. Then give him a run in a 2013 car.

[Albaforever]

I saw a really good interview (well if you like Nigel Mansell that is) with Mansell last night.

 

He backs Lewis Hamilton etc and says what a great job Mercedes is doing in F1, plus backs McLaren and Honda.

[Redzone]

New Britain, on 01 Oct 2015 - 20:18, said:

This is the guy who Mario Andretti said was "the worst teammate I ever had."

 

Mario was the worst team mate I ever had.

 

Once he realized how bad I was going to beat him, he started doing all sorts of stuff, like the time he 
"borrowed" my steering wheel, then claimed the accident was all my fault for not realizing it was missing until I was accelerating up pit lane. 

 

 

But at about the same age that Nigel is now, Mario decided to hang it up on racing, before racing hung it up on Mario. 

 

He was around 63 years old, and like many older drivers,  started having problems keeping all four wheels on the road while driving in a straight line.

 

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=kMeE9NAh60I

 

 

 

 

I bet you money and a tootsie roll, that Lewis Hamilton and Nigel will never come close to matching those back flips as their grande finale in a race car 

Edited by Redzone, 06 October 2015 - 11:40.

[B Squared]

Redzone, on 06 Oct 2015 - 11:35, said:

He was around 63 years old, and like many older drivers,  started having problems keeping all four wheels on the road while driving in a straight line.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=kMeE9NAh60I

 

 

You failed to mention the piece of debris that he hit "while driving in a straight line" that launched him skyward.

[BRG]

Tsarwash, on 05 Oct 2015 - 23:33, said:

It's the people who actually think that drivers from 30 years ago that would excel in modern F1 that I think are wrong. 

 

I am positive that the best drivers from previous eras could - with some time to adjust - master modern cars to the point of being competitive.  And I am sure that itf we could put Lewis or Fernando in a 250F or a Lotus 49 back in the day, they would soon be on a par with the best drivers of those days

 

So I think you are wrong. The idea that todays' drivers are inherently better is simply unfounded.

Edited by BRG, 06 October 2015 - 15:37.

[Tsarwash]

BRG, on 06 Oct 2015 - 15:36, said:

I am positive that the best drivers from previous eras could - with some time to adjust - master modern cars to the point of being competitive.  And I am sure that itf we could put Lewis or Fernando in a 250F or a Lotus 49 back in the day, they would soon be on a par with the best drivers of those days

 

So I think you are wrong. The idea that todays' drivers are inherently better is simply unfounded.

You have slightly misunderstood me. I think that today's drivers are better at modern F1, not better in a general sense. I think modern F1 is significantly different from f1 25 years ago, and that is what would make a difference. I'm pretty sure that I said I think modern drivers would increasingly struggle the further back you put them. 

[Dan333SP]

Tsarwash, on 06 Oct 2015 - 19:29, said:

You have slightly misunderstood me. I think that today's drivers are better at modern F1, not better in a general sense. I think modern F1 is significantly different from f1 25 years ago, and that is what would make a difference. I'm pretty sure that I said I think modern drivers would increasingly struggle the further back you put them. 

 

Right, but BRG's point is that drivers are drivers, and with enough time the good ones can adapt to just about anything with 4 wheels on a race circuit. That point is obviously debatable and un-proveable given that we will never see Jackie Stewart suddenly transform himself into 1969 Jackie and spend a week testing the Mercedes with Lewis, but I tend to agree with BRG and I think with enough practice the old heroes would be competitive in modern machinery.

 

I think the skill gap between the best and worst driver on the grid today is much narrower than it was in the mid 50s, for instance, and that's partially a function of the sport being so much more lucrative now, but I think the qualities that made the best of that era the best at their sport are the same as they are now.