20 replies to this topic

[Gary Davies]

I recently stumbled upon a full length and rather fuzzy film of this race at YouTube.

 

 

From when I first watched the race (in fits and starts, presumably, on BBC Grandstand) I found it riveting. I'm sure I don't need to remind TNFers of how it unfolded. I grabbed Motoring News the following Thursday on the way to school and Motor Sport a couple of weeks later. I read the reports over and over until it seemed I was there. 

 

I recall DSJ reporting that Stewart was close behind Hill in the opening laps and in BRM 3, Doug Nye notes that "Stewart appeared to be following rather too closely, and on the 15th lap was signalled to open the gap slightly." 

 

However, watching the film, I gained the impression that that young shaver Stewart was looking as if he wanted to pass his team leader. He was damn close and it looked as though he was actively sussing out passing opportunities. Certainly, he was driving with some flamboyance, sliding the car when Hill looked very serene at the front. 

 

Passing your established team mate is par for the course for the impertinent youngsters of today but I recall a little more, ah, respect 50 years ago!

 

My recollection of that year is that it was quite apparent right from the first race (in South Africa) that Jackie was quite something and would be challenging Graham Hill (and everyone else!) before too long. I was present at his victory at the International Trophy and was enormously impressed, as I had been when I first saw him in the Cooper-BMC at Silverstone. But watching the Monaco film suggested that he was really pushy from very early in the season.

 

Was he really shaping up to pass Graham Hill at Monaco? I consulted Life at the Limit and Winning is not enough. Graham makes no reference to Jackie during the 'pre-Bob Anderson' part of the race and Jackie only mentions that he made an error in the lead on lap 29. 

 

So perhaps I'm seeing naughtiness in Jackie's driving behind Hill while they were leading where there was none. Mea culpa in that case. I'm wondering if anyone here has spoken to Jackie about his recollections of those early laps. Was he merely following his leader? Was he, perhaps, demonstrating to all and sundry that he could easily live with Hill around this circuit? Or was he, perhaps, looking for a gap?

Edited by Gary Davies, 04 September 2017 - 13:22.

[Barry Boor]

Is it too fuzzy to see me with my Mum and Dad in the grandstand?

[Glengavel]

While on the subject of this race - who and what?

 

http://www.whitewall...co_race_big.jpg

 

I think there are larger resolution images around but I can't find them.

 

It's been the subject of much comment on rec.autos.sport.f1

[Tim Murray]

Here's what DSJ wrote in Motor Sport in his 'Reflections on the Monaco G.P.' article, musing on the apparent lack of team tactics at B.R.M.:

In the opening phase Stewart was following Hill so closely that at times he was almost touching his leader's rear tyres, and while this looked most impressive and convinced everyone that the B.R.M. team were going to run away with the race, it did not seem very wise on a circuit like Monte Carlo with so many blind corners. Maybe Stewart just wanted to show that he was as fast as Hill, or maybe he was getting a tow, and only by getting that close could he keep up, but it would have been better team tactics if Stewart had dropped back and stayed just ahead of the Ferraris, not exactly baulking them or slowing them up, but at least taking their concentration away from Graham Hill, who could have then built up an even bigger lead.

Luckily for B.R.M., Stewart was forced to drop back when lapping Bucknum's Honda, as passing at Monaco is difficult, and obviously Hill nipped by when there was only room for one car and Stewart had to wait, thereby losing ground, and Hill did not slow down and wait for him. Had they been as close as they were on the opening laps, when Hill came upon Anderson in the chicane the result might have been a B.R.M. nose-to-tail shunt as both cars took to the escape road. If your rivals are hard on your heels then both team cars have to go as fast as possible, but when all the opposition is dropping behind it seems pointless for both team cars to go at the same pace and so close.

[2F-001]

While on the subject of this race - who and what?

It's Richard Attwood, isn't it? Presumably in practice.

[Tim Murray]

While on the subject of this race - who and what?

http://www.whitewall...co_race_big.jpg

I think there are larger resolution images around but I can't find them.

It's been the subject of much comment on rec.autos.sport.f1

Here's the earlier thread discussing the photo:

Monaco GP photo to be identified

As Tony suggests, we concluded it was Richard Attwood in a Parnell Lotus 25 in the wet practice session on the Thursday, but no-one could explain why it was carrying number 1T.

[Barry Boor]

Lots of random cutting in the race section of the film but extremely nostalgic to this old codger as I was there watching it all unfold.

[ensign14]

Here's the earlier thread discussing the photo:

Monaco GP photo to be identified

As Tony suggests, we concluded it was Richard Attwood in a Parnell Lotus 25, but no-one could explain why it was carrying number 1T.

 

The T on the side is smaller than the 1.  But next to it.  Suggesting they hadn't made up their mind whether that chassis was Attwood's or Hailwood's, so just probably sent it out with a T made up of tape as a temporary solution.
 

I assume the numbers had been fully allocated before the event.  There's a gap for 5 and 6, presumably for Lotus, and they did the Monegasque thing of lining up the teams in national alphabetical order (Grande Bretagne, Italie, Japon), factory cars first.  Had they dished the numbers out right before the race they wouldn't have left the Lotus gap.  I think by this time the different numbers in practice to fool the samizdat programme printers had gone. 

 

Also fun to note DW entered two different marques.  Was it a flag of convenience for Hawkeye?  The only time DW had Lotus under their auspices were Hawkins' two GPs for them.

[Michael Ferner]

Were you the one in the Connew T-shirt?

[Gary Davies]

Thanks Tim. Most enlightening. I looked at the race report but I didn't think to check 'Reflections'.

[Barry Boor]

Probably not, in 1965.

The Hawkins Lotus was painted in the same colours as Anderson's Brabham although it ended up a little wetter!

Ensign is spot on. The Lotuses would have been 5 and 6.

[D28]

My coverage of F1 in 1965 came from Road & Track reports. I can't recall the Monaco report, but I do remember gentle chiding of Stewart for putting his team leader under pressure at the Italian GP. This was Stewart's debut win and he took the victory by passing Hill on the penultimate lap. This attitude, prevalent in 1965, was that a rookie should support his veteran team mate and dutifully follow him home. 

I am guessing the reporter may have been Henry Manney. Does anyone know for sure?

[Roger Clark]

DSJ remarked on how forceful Jackie Stewart's driving was during practice. He was either hard on the brakes or had on the throttle with no hesitation in between. When he spoke at the Swift Gallery, Stewart, without any prompting, took exception to this. He prided himself on the smoothness of his driving and said that DSJ had got it wrong. I wondered whether he was less smooth that early in his Grand Prix career. Even Jim Clark was a little wild in his first Monaco Grand Prix.

[Glengavel]

Here's the earlier thread discussing the photo:

Monaco GP photo to be identified

As Tony suggests, we concluded it was Richard Attwood in a Parnell Lotus 25 in the wet practice session on the Thursday, but no-one could explain why it was carrying number 1T.

 

Thanks chaps, after a bit of Googling I was sure it was Attwood in a Lotus despite assertions by others that it was Bandini in a Ferrari...

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by D28
.....I am guessing the reporter may have been Henry Manney. Does anyone know for sure?

I don't recall anyone else doing the Road & Track reports up to at least 1967...

[roamic]

In 1966 Jackie was in the Indy 500 for the first time. In those days it was on closed circuit TV in a local auditorium. When the driver's were introduced, I was the only one applauding when Jackie's name was mentioned. he came close to winning it. Reminded me of Alonso at Indy this year. The only time I ever saw him in person was in the Can-Am Lola at Riverside. 

 

He was quite the driver!

[ellrosso]

I don't have the Car & Driver report of the '65 Italian Grand Prix but I do have Bernard Cahier's from Sports Car Graphic - Graham Hill made a mistake on the last corner and ran wide - Stewart would have been an idiot not to grab the opportunity and take the win. He would have had to wait for Hill to gather himself up and dutifully wait patiently for him to rejoin the track to follow him across the line - hardly!!!

[Tim Murray]

This scenario of course did happen at Monza later that year when Hill slid wide at the Parabolica on the penultimate lap, handing the advantage to Stewart who duly went on to win. I wonder whether Jackie would have dutifully followed his 'team leader' home if Graham had not made that mistake - I suspect that he would have done his best to win.

[JtP2]

Thoughts on watching the video. Hill in the early laps knows what 100 laps of Monaco take, but Stewart has no idea what is involved and is too near the limit of concentration. This probably is reflected in his final result.

 

Really noticeable how much room Surtees and Bandini  give Hill on his overtakes, wouldn't happen today.

 

Doesn't the track look wide compared to today. I know modern cars are bigger, but it still looks really wide.

 

as for Monza. Stewart had set his gearing for a change ino top after the finish line and said that no matter which of them led out the Curva Grand, he always led over the line. I believe this was accidental on this occasion, but used to good effect in future Italian GPs.

[pete53]

Incidentally, this is the first time I have ever heard Richie Ginther speak.

 

Thanks for posting - very enjoyable. I can't imagine this was broadcast on BBC in its entirety given the limited time that was given to the sport at the time.

[Tim Murray]

I can't imagine this was broadcast on BBC in its entirety given the limited time that was given to the sport at the time.

The Beeb gave us an hour's coverage in total - half an hour for the start, ten minutes at around half distance and twenty minutes at the finish. Pretty good for those days, I suppose.

http://genome.ch.bbc...ndon/1965-05-30