238 replies to this topic

[PlatenGlass]

That F1 metrics thing should very much be taken with a pinch of salt and I think Alesi did not live up to his early promise. I think that Tyrrell in 1990 might have just been better than everyone gave it credit for and everything really followed from that, because he wasn't really on Prost's level in 1991 (obviously Prost was world class though) and he didn't deliver much generally, apart from in very specific situations like a couple of wet races in 1995. If we visit the parallel universe where he takes on Mansell at Williams in 1992, my money is very much on Mansell. In the universe where Senna takes on Mansell, my money is very much on Senna, although I can quite imagine in both cases there would be occasions where the other driver was in front.

[wj_gibson]

garoidb, on 05 May 2020 - 09:16, said:

So, ingratiating himself with the fans rather than the team. That is a little short sighted. 

 

Listening to podcasts recently, I have heard Damon Hill acknowledge that he owes a huge debt to Williams for his career (perfectly true), notwithstanding how the relationship ended. Has Nigel ever said anything like that, because without Williams his career would look a lot different?

 

By the way, I am a Piquet fan but grudgingly acknowledge that Mansell brought a lot to that era of F1 and, as I said before, it would have been an injustice if he never won the title.

Mansell has rarely said anything at all about his time in F1 since his retirement, other than in his autobiography. He’s like a recluse when it comes to the sport, having had practically nothing whatsoever to do with it in the last 20 years.

[absinthedude]

Nigel Mansell occasionally pops up to talk about the current scene but he's not any more knowledgeable than most fans. As a WDC he's entitled to be in the paddock at any F1GP (corona notiwthstanding) and does occasionally attend. That's when the cameras seek him out. He's not known as a "rent-a-quote" to whom the press goes whenever there's a story. He's also not popular with the journalists who do things like "Lunch With" or other interview features. Probably for lots of reasons but I do know that Nigel Roebuck refused to interview Mansell for a decade after a spat in the 80s when Mansell got upset over what he perceived to be a mis-quote and for future interviews asked to approve articles before they were published. Roebuck has never operated like that and took offence. I get the impression that Mansell isn't the most interesting character to talk to (though no interviewer ever described him as unfriendly) and he is a bit paranoid about how he's portrayed in the press. After some of the stuff that people like Peter Warr threw at the press about him in the early 80s I can understand...but that was a long time ago.

 

TLDR...Mansell doesn't go out of his way to say things to the press, and they don't often go out of their way to interview him unless he happens to be in the paddock.

[alainsfoot]

Albaforever, on 02 May 2020 - 10:59, said:

In fairness Mansell I think had a contract at Williams in 1992? If Senna had went to Williams in 92 (unlikely) I don't think Senna would have destroyed Mansell yes there would have been fireworks between the two of them.

 

As for Prost v Mansell at Williams. Mansell would have shown Prost who the Daddy was at Williams, 

 

And as for an oversized ego remind me what happened to Prost's career at Ferrari in 1991?      

oh dear, you seem have swallowed nigels cool aid about how he would have bested prost at williams.

prosts and mansells relative speed was on display for the entire season of 1990 at ferrari.  prost wiped the floor with him.

prost and senna were comfortably head and shoulders above the competition, just as prost dispatched mansell at ferrari with ease, he would have done so at williams and senna would have done likewise. 

prost got booted by ferrari as a result the famous political machinations (see 'snakepit' reference on other threads), as is widely known.

if you are unaware of mansells famously precious and fragile ego, try looking for the multitude of interviews with former team members online.  he was a fast and feisty driver but ultimately a prima donna who couldnt match the best of his contemporaries.

[garoidb]

alainsfoot, on 06 May 2020 - 08:49, said:

oh dear, you seem have swallowed nigels cool aid about how he would have bested prost at williams.

prosts and mansells relative speed was on display for the entire season of 1990 at ferrari.  prost wiped the floor with him.

prost and senna were comfortably head and shoulders above the competition, just as prost dispatched mansell at ferrari with ease, he would have done so at williams and senna would have done likewise. 

prost got booted by ferrari as a result the famous political machinations (see 'snakepit' reference on other threads), as is widely known.

if you are unaware of mansells famously precious and fragile ego, try looking for the multitude of interviews with former team members online.  he was a fast and feisty driver but ultimately a prima donna who couldnt match the best of his contemporaries.

 

Now, with the benefit of historical hindsight, it is a shame that the top drivers of the time weren't more willing to face each other in the Williams cars of the early to mid 90s. It does look like Williams were prepared to have line-ups of Mansell/Prost and Senna/Prost (and, who knows, even Senna/Mansell if it had come up), but Mansell and Prost were too wary of one another and Senna. Ultimately, it meant relatively unopposed championships for Mansell and then Prost (with Senna possibly in line for some domination too, had he lived through 1995 and 1996). It did mean a somewhat premature end to the era of these guys fighting properly with each other.

[Albaforever]

alainsfoot, on 06 May 2020 - 08:49, said:

oh dear, you seem have swallowed nigels cool aid about how he would have bested prost at williams.

prosts and mansells relative speed was on display for the entire season of 1990 at ferrari.  prost wiped the floor with him.

prost and senna were comfortably head and shoulders above the competition, just as prost dispatched mansell at ferrari with ease, he would have done so at williams and senna would have done likewise. 

prost got booted by ferrari as a result the famous political machinations (see 'snakepit' reference on other threads), as is widely known.

if you are unaware of mansells famously precious and fragile ego, try looking for the multitude of interviews with former team members online.  he was a fast and feisty driver but ultimately a prima donna who couldnt match the best of his contemporaries.

 

That will be Senna and Prost who liked take each other off for the F1 Championship is it?

 

Sell out crowds for the British GP to see mostly Mansell, granted Senna a had big following at the British GP as well.

 

You go on about Mansell  getting beaten by his contemporaries Mansell did beat them as well as you know as they beat Mansell fair play.

 

F1 is not a contest who should be liked or not liked, big deal. 

 

End of the day whether you like it or not Mansell will go down as one the F1 greats and still to this day we see some of the great battles between Mansell and Senna / Piquet  on our TV screens.

Edited by Albaforever, 06 May 2020 - 10:55.

[absinthedude]

Mansell Vs Prost at Ferrari was interesting. I don't subscribe to Nigel's idea that the team was giving him 2nd class equipment (persecution complex?) but I do buy that Prost ingratiated himself so much with the team that they'd go the extra mile for him and perhaps not Nigel. Prost's mechanics would have felt a great deal of loyalty to him. So there probably was a small but perceptible change in the way that Nigel was treated....from the hero "Il Leone" to the team mate of the 3xWDC. And there's no doubt that Mansell suffered more unreliability than Prost. It's very difficult to draw firm conclusions from that one season. And just 12 months later Prost fell out with Ferrari and definitely did start getting 2nd class equipment so how knows?

[F1matt]

absinthedude, on 06 May 2020 - 07:58, said:

Nigel Mansell occasionally pops up to talk about the current scene but he's not any more knowledgeable than most fans. As a WDC he's entitled to be in the paddock at any F1GP (corona notiwthstanding) and does occasionally attend. That's when the cameras seek him out. He's not known as a "rent-a-quote" to whom the press goes whenever there's a story. He's also not popular with the journalists who do things like "Lunch With" or other interview features. Probably for lots of reasons but I do know that Nigel Roebuck refused to interview Mansell for a decade after a spat in the 80s when Mansell got upset over what he perceived to be a mis-quote and for future interviews asked to approve articles before they were published. Roebuck has never operated like that and took offence. I get the impression that Mansell isn't the most interesting character to talk to (though no interviewer ever described him as unfriendly) and he is a bit paranoid about how he's portrayed in the press. After some of the stuff that people like Peter Warr threw at the press about him in the early 80s I can understand...but that was a long time ago.

 

TLDR...Mansell doesn't go out of his way to say things to the press, and they don't often go out of their way to interview him unless he happens to be in the paddock.

 

 

Nigel Roebuck clearly had his favourite drivers back then and his 5th column back in the day was hardly balanced, though still an absolute must read. Most of the big journalists were the same, people accused Alan Henry of been pro Ayrton Senna in his articles....

[as65p]

F1matt, on 06 May 2020 - 12:54, said:

Nigel Roebuck clearly had his favourite drivers back then and his 5th column back in the day was hardly balanced, though still an absolute must read. Most of the big journalists were the same, people accused Alan Henry of been pro Ayrton Senna in his articles....

 

That's a bit silly. DSJ and Joe Saward, sure, but Henry, not really. Especially with Roebuck and DSJ it was at times quite an amusing (and childish, and petty) battle between Prost and Senna fan, not unlike what takes place on message boards since they were invented.

[Risil]

But unlike in some ways!

[PlatenGlass]

as65p, on 04 May 2020 - 09:51, said:

If you're interested, follow the link in FortiFords post. Basically, Toet explains how they achieved TC in what he thinks was a clever, legal way, but they never revealed or had to reveal what they did to the FIA. If they had to reveal it, it could have been judged legal or not, that's up to debate.

 

Toet however states that it definitely was audible, so Senna and others did not just imagine it.

 

"He [Senna] noticed the Benetton appear to stutter coming out of the slower corners which he though must be traction control (it was). But the way Benetton had achieved it was quite legal. So the controversy starts."

How reliable is this source? Yes, he worked for Benetton but there could be an agenda here. Why is it said that Lehto and Verstappen were not given traction control? What did Senna hear when Verstappen's Benetton went past?

[George Costanza]

This is an awesome thread. Lots of memories here. But I think Ayrton would have left Williams and then go to Ferrari probably after 1995 or 1996. But I believe if he lived, he would have won at least one more or two championships.

Edited by George Costanza, 07 May 2020 - 03:35.

[OO7]

PlatenGlass, on 06 May 2020 - 21:43, said:

How reliable is this source? Yes, he worked for Benetton but there could be an agenda here. Why is it said that Lehto and Verstappen were not given traction control? What did Senna hear when Verstappen's Benetton went past?

Lehto & Verstappen weren't No.1 drivers.  Giving them the system would have likely drawn more attention to it, further increasing the possibility of an investigation and banning of the device.

[BCM]

PlatenGlass, on 06 May 2020 - 21:43, said:

How reliable is this source? Yes, he worked for Benetton but there could be an agenda here. Why is it said that Lehto and Verstappen were not given traction control? What did Senna hear when Verstappen's Benetton went past?

Verstappen Snr has complained to anyone that would listen that his car was always different to Michael's.

 

"People think I'm looking for excuses but I know that his car was different from mine. I always thought it was impossible. I braked at the limit and took the corners as hard as possible, so how could Schumacher do it? There was something wrong."

 

https://www.autoweek...ate-verstappen/

 

Curious what you think Toet has to gain by making up a very detailed explanation of how Benetton's car was using traction control. What they did wasn't illegal. It was loop hole in the rules. As we all know very well no F1 team adheres to the "spirit of the rules" - they adhere to the letter of the law. And use everything they can get around whatever the rules are trying to prevent to gain advantage.

Edited by BCM, 07 May 2020 - 07:16.

[PlatenGlass]

OO7, on 07 May 2020 - 06:14, said:

Lehto & Verstappen weren't No.1 drivers.  Giving them the system would have likely drawn more attention to it, further increasing the possibility of an investigation and banning of the device.

I don't see that at all. The fact that it was only Schumacher that seemed to have the advantage was itself a talking point. It would be pretty naive to think that with only one car running the system, people would only have a 50% chance of noticing it!

BCM, on 07 May 2020 - 07:13, said:

Curious what you think Toet has to gain by making up a very detailed explanation of how Benetton's car was using traction control.

I don't know. Let's think.

Quote

What they did wasn't illegal. It was loop hole in the rules.

Bingo.

[BCM]

Why would he give a **** 26 years later? Are you saying he's trying to justify what they did? I don't know why he'd bother. It is completely normal for F1 teams to find ways to circumvent the intent of rules. Still happens to this day.

 

I could name any number of examples in the very recent past - Merc and Ferrari playing silly buggers with oil as additional fuel, Redbull's flexi nose and so it goes on. If anything the engineers that come up with these ideas are proud of what they do and want to be able to talk about their ingenuity. Problem is they can't until it's a long time in the past.

Edited by BCM, 07 May 2020 - 10:17.

[as65p]

PlatenGlass, on 07 May 2020 - 08:33, said:

I don't see that at all. The fact that it was only Schumacher that seemed to have the advantage was itself a talking point. It would be pretty naive to think that with only one car running the system, people would only have a 50% chance of noticing it!

 

Personally I'm not that bothered if it was legal or not or half legal, or borderline or whatever. That stuff happens all the time in F1. I was always more interested in the surreal gaps Schumacher pulled over his Benetton teammates during a certain time period, which for me didn't tally with how he compared to teammates before (Piquet, Brundle) and afterwards in his career. There is no doubt that Schumacher was essentially better than all of his teammates, but the extent of it was exaggerated during '94 and '94, which for me this saga about [a form of] TC and generally different cars at Benetton goes a long way to explain.

 

It is also not the first time such happened in history, far from it, but probably one of the few times so many people seem to insist it was all the driver himself, for some reason.

 

For example, the gaps of Senna to his Lotus teammates Dumfries and Nakajima wasn't all driver skills either, as both were dedicated no.2's and often got secondary equipment. IMO something very similar happened at Benetton during MS' two title years. Only that in this case people weren't half as open about it due to those obvious legality questions.

 

Quote

I don't know. Let's think.

 

Keep us posted!

[PlatenGlass]

Well, in reply to the above two posts, this isn't just a normal case of a team trying to circumvent the rules that happens all the time. Many people considered the team to be outright cheating at the time and still do, and I can't actually, off the top of my head, think of another case that's had as much resonance over the years. People barely even talk about the McLaren/Ferrari spygate thing from 2007 any more compared to this. This is as big as it gets.

 

Would the team not have been required to at least explain their system to the FIA at the time? Well, they would have been and the FIA asked to see the engine management system source code  of the top teams. https://en.wikipedia...ing_controversy And when a team exploits a loophole nowadays, the secret's out pretty quickly once it's on the track and out there. And other teams are normally onto it fairly quickly. It doesn't remain shrouded in secrecy for a quarter of a century.

 

And it seems very strange that the "big reveal" was on some obscure LinkedIn post made by a team member most people have never heard of. Why is this not massive news within F1? Why does Verstappen think that Schumacher had some cheat system even though he was in the team himself?

 

I'm not saying that the team were or weren't cheating, but just that the nature of the "revelation" seems rather odd. And by the way, Willem Toet is mentioned in that Wikipedia article: "Willem Toet, the Australian-raised Head of Aerodynamics for Benetton in 1994, believes it was Schumacher’s technique that Senna initially mistook for illegal traction control during the Pacific Grand Prix. He proposed the idea that Schumacher’s technique of braking with his left foot could have fooled Senna into thinking the Benetton was illegal. Left-foot braking was new to Formula One in 1994, but Schumacher was quick to adapt and telemetry traces from later in his career showed how he used his right foot to maintain 10-15 per cent throttle even while braking with his left foot. This method kept the car stable and allowed the aerodynamics to work more efficiently." So he's changed his tune, and I certainly wouldn't take an obscure LinkedIn post from an unreliable witness as gospel.

[Ibsey]

PlatenGlass, on 07 May 2020 - 13:50, said:

 

And it seems very strange that the "big reveal" was on some obscure LinkedIn post made by a team member most people have never heard of. Why is this not massive news within F1? Why does Verstappen think that Schumacher had some cheat system even though he was in the team himself?

 

I'm not saying that the team were or weren't cheating, but just that the nature of the "revelation" seems rather odd. And by the way, Willem Toet is mentioned in that Wikipedia article: "Willem Toet, the Australian-raised Head of Aerodynamics for Benetton in 1994, believes it was Schumacher’s technique that Senna initially mistook for illegal traction control during the Pacific Grand Prix. He proposed the idea that Schumacher’s technique of braking with his left foot could have fooled Senna into thinking the Benetton was illegal. Left-foot braking was new to Formula One in 1994, but Schumacher was quick to adapt and telemetry traces from later in his career showed how he used his right foot to maintain 10-15 per cent throttle even while braking with his left foot. This method kept the car stable and allowed the aerodynamics to work more efficiently." So he's changed his tune, and I certainly wouldn't take an obscure LinkedIn post from an unreliable witness as gospel.

 

Willem Toet changed his mind in 2018 (a couple of years or so after he wrote that Linkedin post) because he saw the findings within this book: https://www.performa...-f1-season.html 

 

It's the most conclusive book on all of the 1994 Benetton accusations and explores both sides to the argument, thereby allowing readers to decide for themselves. Autosport reviewed the book last year which can be found here: http://www.1994f1.com/sample-page/

[FortiFord]

PlatenGlass, on 07 May 2020 - 13:50, said:

Well, in reply to the above two posts, this isn't just a normal case of a team trying to circumvent the rules that happens all the time. Many people considered the team to be outright cheating at the time and still do, and I can't actually, off the top of my head, think of another case that's had as much resonance over the years. People barely even talk about the McLaren/Ferrari spygate thing from 2007 any more compared to this. This is as big as it gets.

 

Would the team not have been required to at least explain their system to the FIA at the time? Well, they would have been and the FIA asked to see the engine management system source code  of the top teams. https://en.wikipedia...ing_controversy And when a team exploits a loophole nowadays, the secret's out pretty quickly once it's on the track and out there. And other teams are normally onto it fairly quickly. It doesn't remain shrouded in secrecy for a quarter of a century.

 

And it seems very strange that the "big reveal" was on some obscure LinkedIn post made by a team member most people have never heard of. Why is this not massive news within F1? Why does Verstappen think that Schumacher had some cheat system even though he was in the team himself?

 

I'm not saying that the team were or weren't cheating, but just that the nature of the "revelation" seems rather odd. And by the way, Willem Toet is mentioned in that Wikipedia article: "Willem Toet, the Australian-raised Head of Aerodynamics for Benetton in 1994, believes it was Schumacher’s technique that Senna initially mistook for illegal traction control during the Pacific Grand Prix. He proposed the idea that Schumacher’s technique of braking with his left foot could have fooled Senna into thinking the Benetton was illegal. Left-foot braking was new to Formula One in 1994, but Schumacher was quick to adapt and telemetry traces from later in his career showed how he used his right foot to maintain 10-15 per cent throttle even while braking with his left foot. This method kept the car stable and allowed the aerodynamics to work more efficiently." So he's changed his tune, and I certainly wouldn't take an obscure LinkedIn post from an unreliable witness as gospel.

 

 

- It seems like it is a case of letter of the rule vs spirit of the rule. It has a high amount of resonance because it involves a very high profile driver in the history of the sport, but not sure how you are measuring resonance on this compared to other controversies in the sport (other than your own perception which may be skewed). It is no different to Red Bull's hole in the floor vs slot in the floor or flexible front wing. There was a lot of talk about the latter in 2010 and 2011. 

 

- The car would have to pass scrutineering checks, just like any other car. It really depends how visible the loophole exploitation is. The DDD was visible and other teams copied it. On the other hand, Ferrari's increase in HP in Hockeheim 2018 was shrouded in secrecy and the details have never been revealed. 

 

- Toet might not be as well known as someone like Newey or Brawn, but he is a known name amongst people who follow the technical side of the sport. He's certainly not an obscure observer, since he was heavily involved in the design of the car. Generally speaking, highly technical articles do not make massive news in F1, especially regarding things that happened years ago. F1 news is dominated by what is going on in the sport currently.

[PlatenGlass]

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 15:44, said:

Willem Toet changed his mind in 2018 (a couple of years or so after he wrote that Linkedin post) because he saw the findings within this book: https://www.performa...-f1-season.html

 

It's the most conclusive book on all of the 1994 Benetton accusations and explores both sides to the argument, thereby allowing readers to decide for themselves. Autosport reviewed the book last year which can be found here: http://www.1994f1.com/sample-page/

So Willem Toet who worked for the team and supposedly gave a definitive answer based on this had to read a book by an outsider to find out what was going on? It's all very strange!

 

I find it funny that the Autosport reviewer felt compelled to mention the swearing in the book!

[Risil]

I feel like I need more information! Is it swearing in quotes and reported speech, or is Ibrar Malik just throwing in f-bombs to underline the points he's making?

[PayasYouRace]

Toet's an interesting one, especially on a personal level because he's one of the few F1 techincal people that I've had the pleasure of speaking to, and on a professional basis at that. But anyway, I've had a chance to read the linkedin article again, and it's fascinating that it was essentially a passive form of traction control, which in some ways isn't traction control at all. It couldn't react to a spinning rear wheel and cut power like a fully blown traction control system.

 

He says, "During a race the conditions would change rendering the system more or less useful. If the tyres went off badly or it became wet the system would not control traction. If the track got better and better, the system would cut too much power - the grip available would allow more "engine" acceleration."

 

Which reveals a lot about the system. So yeah, at an Aida that was rubbering in and improving, it's likely Ayrton could hear this dynamic rev limiting system. It's also, by my understanding, legal since it's not strictly traction control and would not save a driver who was being too heavy on the throttle.

 

 

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 15:44, said:

Willem Toet changed his mind in 2018 (a couple of years or so after he wrote that Linkedin post) because he saw the findings within this book: https://www.performa...-f1-season.html

 

It's the most conclusive book on all of the 1994 Benetton accusations and explores both sides to the argument, thereby allowing readers to decide for themselves. Autosport reviewed the book last year which can be found here: http://www.1994f1.com/sample-page/

 

 I was wondering if you'd be along to plug your book. Would you care to share your opinion on this or do we have to buy your book to find out?

[Ibsey]

PlatenGlass, on 07 May 2020 - 15:54, said:

So Willem Toet who worked for the team and supposedly gave a definitive answer based on this had to read a book by an outsider to find out what was going on? It's all very strange!

 

I find it funny that the Autosport reviewer felt compelled to mention the swearing in the book!

 

No Willem Toet was a major contributor towards the book and worked closely with me to work out what happened. He changed his mind, after I pointed out something that did not make sense within that Linkedin article. In it Willem stated:

 

Quote

A good driver would use the system to learn how to apply the throttle. Driving flat out everywhere would be find except that it wasted fuel and made a more detectable sound.  

 

 

Given the bolded bit of text above, we both therefore thought it should have been Verstappen’s car making the funny noises at Aida, given the Dutchman was a lesser driver than Schumacher. The left foot braking theory is discussed extensively within the book (supported by telemetry traces and other images like that of the Benetton’s exhaust blown diffuser). This is what Willem Toet said within the book:

 

Quote

“I think it was the use of left foot braking combined with the throttle which would have made the strange noise (on Schumacher’s car). There won’t have been any engine cutting at all in those circumstances because the engine will not have been accelerating with brakes applied as well. But it would have been strange to hear the engine working in those places on the track (i.e. the braking zone into turn 1 at Aida). That’s what I believe is the most likely scenario.”

 

 

 

Mark Blundell was also a contributor towards the book, and he was also taken out of turn 1 at Aida (just like Senna). Whilst Blundell didn’t recall any strange sounds on Schumacher’s car himself (he walked straight back to the pits) I did ask him whether the sound Senna heard could have been left foot braking. Blundell responded:

 

Quote

“In terms of your description on what the inputs, outputs and benefits (all detailed in the book) that would all make a lot of sense. Left foot braking was something that became a trend at that stage again…It, left foot braking would have made a different sound in that it would have RPM carried into a corner.”

 

 

Another interesting point, look where Senna was standing that day at Aida. He was stood in the braking zone and about 50 meters from the acceleration zone out of turn 1.   

[as65p]

PlatenGlass, on 07 May 2020 - 13:50, said:

Well, in reply to the above two posts, this isn't just a normal case of a team trying to circumvent the rules that happens all the time. Many people considered the team to be outright cheating at the time and still do, and I can't actually, off the top of my head, think of another case that's had as much resonance over the years. People barely even talk about the McLaren/Ferrari spygate thing from 2007 any more compared to this. This is as big as it gets.

 

Would the team not have been required to at least explain their system to the FIA at the time? Well, they would have been and the FIA asked to see the engine management system source code  of the top teams. https://en.wikipedia...ing_controversy And when a team exploits a loophole nowadays, the secret's out pretty quickly once it's on the track and out there. And other teams are normally onto it fairly quickly. It doesn't remain shrouded in secrecy for a quarter of a century.

 

And it seems very strange that the "big reveal" was on some obscure LinkedIn post made by a team member most people have never heard of. Why is this not massive news within F1? Why does Verstappen think that Schumacher had some cheat system even though he was in the team himself?

 

I'm not saying that the team were or weren't cheating, but just that the nature of the "revelation" seems rather odd. And by the way, Willem Toet is mentioned in that Wikipedia article: "Willem Toet, the Australian-raised Head of Aerodynamics for Benetton in 1994, believes it was Schumacher’s technique that Senna initially mistook for illegal traction control during the Pacific Grand Prix. He proposed the idea that Schumacher’s technique of braking with his left foot could have fooled Senna into thinking the Benetton was illegal. Left-foot braking was new to Formula One in 1994, but Schumacher was quick to adapt and telemetry traces from later in his career showed how he used his right foot to maintain 10-15 per cent throttle even while braking with his left foot. This method kept the car stable and allowed the aerodynamics to work more efficiently." So he's changed his tune, and I certainly wouldn't take an obscure LinkedIn post from an unreliable witness as gospel.

 

You chose to believe claims from a Wikipedia article with no direct quotes from Toet, but call an article the man wrote himself "obscure"?

 

Strange choice. Besides, for some reason I have a hunch who wrote that specific part of the Wikipedia piece...

 

Also, aside from a conspirative marketing ploy to sell a book, I see no reason why Toet wouldn't update his Linkedin article with his alleged "change of mind", especially as he has updated his original post before.

[Ibsey]

PayasYouRace, on 07 May 2020 - 16:12, said:

Toet's an interesting one, especially on a personal level because he's one of the few F1 techincal people that I've had the pleasure of speaking to, and on a professional basis at that. 

 

It's also, by my understanding, legal since it's not strictly traction control and would not save a driver who was being too heavy on the throttle.

 

 

 

 I was wondering if you'd be along to plug your book. Would you care to share your opinion on this or do we have to buy your book to find out?

 

I don't actually give my opinion in the book, because I am an "outsider" or nobody so didn't think readers would care. Instead it collates the opinions of F1 insiders like Mark Blundell, Frank Dernie about Aida 1994 as well as all the period reports, driver quotes etc from the time. The latter was at Benetton in 1993/94...but is actually more of a Williams man, having worked for them between 1979 - 1988 & then again in 2013 as a consultant and Frank' gives some great insight. If you do want my opinion you can find it in this thread https://forums.autos...humacher/page-3 from I think post 127 onwards. Pretty much all that I was posting about here between 2016 - 2019 was about the 1994 accusations. 

 

Toet is a lovely man isn't he. About 1,000 F1 insiders ignore my request for them to help with the book, Toet was one of the few exceptions. I agree with you that the 1994 Benetton system was a passive TC so legal since it's not strictly TC. Toet mentioned in his article other teams soon copied Benetton on that front (via staff transfer). Also the book gives numerous other examples of simliar forms of "passive" TC after 1994. Most famously during the late 1990s where antistall software was exploited so they effectively acted as Launch Countrol. Others were rumored to have used their pitlane speed limiters as traction control because their mandatory pitlane speed sensors where placed by the rear wheels, enabling it to inadvertently detcted wheel slip (Jordan 1999 anyone?). Leading to this rule clarification 

 

Quote

Much of the discussion heading into the event was a revision to allow teams to use modified pit lane speed limiters. The FIA allowed them to be used provided they were "hard-coded" below a limit of 50 miles per hour (80 km/h), thus preventing teams from modifying them. It was in response to preventing driver aids like traction control and launch control from being secretly implemented.^[15] 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia...tish_Grand_Prix 

 

Part of the problem was how badly the 1994 rules were written up, which led to all these loopholes to be exploited. The free book preview in this link https://www.performa...-f1-season.html gives people an idea of what I mean. 

Edited by Ibsey, 07 May 2020 - 17:02.

[PlatenGlass]

as65p, on 07 May 2020 - 16:40, said:

You chose to believe claims from a Wikipedia article with no direct quotes from Toet, but call an article the man wrote himself "obscure"?

 

Strange choice.

 

Well I just mean that it's in a very hidden-away place on the internet (which the Wikipedia isn't).

[PayasYouRace]

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 16:59, said:

 

Toet is a lovely man isn't he.

 

Yes he's a top bloke. He was working at Sauber at the time and brought us Swiss chocolate. Yummy!

 

 

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 16:33, said:

No Willem Toet was a major contributor towards the book and worked closely with me to work out what happened. He changed his mind, after I pointed out something that did not make sense within that Linkedin article. In it Willem stated:

 

 

Could you expand on what he "changed his mind about"? There's a lot of opinions being thrown about and as it is, his own words on linkedin are the best we can go by. What are the ramifications of his change of mind?

 

At the end of the day what I'm still hoping for is some primary evidence (video or some such) which shows the strange sounds that Senna supposedly identified as traction control. Now the system Toet speaks about is fair enough and could well have been on the cars, but then why are you talking about left foot braking? Even if Ayrton was imagining things I'm sure he'd be clear headed enough to not mistake noises on corner entry for noises on corner exit.

 

 

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 16:33, said:

 

Another interesting point, look where Senna was standing that day at Aida. He was stood in the braking zone and about 50 meters from the acceleration zone out of turn 1.   

 

50 metres is nothing for an F1 car of the time, which you could clearly track around a circuit by its sound. They were bloody loud.

[Ibsey]

as65p, on 07 May 2020 - 16:40, said:

You chose to believe claims from a Wikipedia article with no direct quotes from Toet, but call an article the man wrote himself "obscure"?

 

 

Just given you a direct quote from Toet himself in my post above (#124) which was after his 2016 Linked post.

 

 

as65p, on 07 May 2020 - 16:40, said:

Besides, for some reason I have a hunch who wrote that specific part of the Wikipedia piece...

 

 

 

 

It was not me if that's what you are inferring to. 

 

 

as65p, on 07 May 2020 - 16:40, said:

 I see no reason why Toet wouldn't update his Linkedin article with his alleged "change of mind", especially as he has updated his original post before.

 

Toet is a very busy man so he's got much better things to do than update an old Linkedin post that is now 4 years old. Especially as his change of mind on the subject is now contained within a published book, which probably more people have read than that Linkedin post.  

[Ibsey]

PayasYouRace, on 07 May 2020 - 17:15, said:

 

Could you expand on what he "changed his mind about"? There's a lot of opinions being thrown about and as it is, his own words on linkedin are the best we can go by. What are the ramifications of his change of mind?

 

 

 

I did just that in my post above #124. Toet changed his mind from believing Senna heard that legal TC system he discussed in his 2016 Linkedin post. Because as mentioned in #post 124 those sounds were more likely to have come from Verstappen's car not Schumacher's. In the 1994 book (published in 2019...so 3 years after Toet's Linkedin article) Toet says and I quote:

 

Quote

I think it was the use of left foot braking combined with the throttle which would have made the strange noise (on Schumacher’s car at Aida 1994) 

 

 

If you think I am making up that latter quote and wrongly attributing to Willem Toet, then see the bottom of this blog: https://www.linkedin...rs-willem-toet/ where Toet talks about my 1994 book. and says

 

Quote

"I am impressed with the balanced approach it presents.  The author has assembled more facts about the season than I’ve ever seen before and managed to get more interviews with stakeholders involved at the time than I thought would be possible." 

 

 

Toet and myself also wrote this blog together: https://www.linkedin...rs-willem-toet/ where he again mentioned the 1994 book.

 

 

 

PayasYouRace, on 07 May 2020 - 17:15, said:

Now the system Toet speaks about is fair enough and could well have been on the cars, but then why are you talking about left foot braking? Even if Ayrton was imagining things I'm sure he'd be clear headed enough to not mistake noises on corner entry for noises on corner exit.

 

 

 

Again see the flaws with the theory Senna heard Benetton's legal TC from my post above (number #124). In short he should have heard Verstappen's car making the funnily noises, not Schumacher's car. Given Jos was a lesser driver and Toet says the system made a more "detectable noise when you drove flat out." If you read the book, see all of the extensive evidence collated on this subject, then you'll see the most likely theory is left foot braking. Not only does Toet agree, but also Mark Blundell. The telemetry traces and other images from the book all help explain why. Autosport wouldn't have mentioned the left foot braking theory in their review, if they thought there was no creditability to it.  

 

 

 

PayasYouRace, on 07 May 2020 - 17:15, said:

Even if Ayrton was imagining things I'm sure he'd be clear headed enough to not mistake noises on corner entry for noises on corner exit.

 

50 metres is nothing for an F1 car of the time, which you could clearly track around a circuit by its sound. They were bloody loud.

 

I disagree with the bolded bit. He was taken out of the first corner at Aida 1994, which his title rival won. In short he could see his 94 WDC chances slipping, especially considering how poor the FW16 was at that stage of the season. Anger like that clouds one's judgement. What you also have to remember is there were other car noises given how the Aida circuit occupies only a small piece of land (relative to say Spa). So where Ayrton was standing, he was as close to turn 7 as much as turn 1.: https://en.wikipedia...t_TI_(Aida).png

 

So we don't know if the Benetton noise was disrupted by other cars, or even the crowd noise (lots of cheers whenever Senna walks past grandstands of course) or something else like the circuit PA etc. Why did Senna hear something from circa 50 meters away, that no-one else claimed to have heard? 

 

Like you I cannot believe the illegal TC theories until he hear a piece of video footage proving it. My old Autosport posts prove I have been research the 1994 allegations since 2016, and in all that time I never did see or hear that. Make of that what you will. 

Edited by Ibsey, 07 May 2020 - 18:04.

[PayasYouRace]

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 17:49, said:

[snip]

 

50 meters 

 

Would it kill you to just answer a question rather than promoting your book every single post?

 

Anyway, what about 50 metres? That's nothing in F1 terms and I don't see the point.

 

But I think we're in general agreement. It's just not fun trying to have a conversation with someone who's trying to sell their work.

[Ibsey]

PayasYouRace, on 07 May 2020 - 18:01, said:

Would it kill you to just answer a question rather than promoting your book every single post?

 

 

I am answering all your questions, and there was no promoting of the book in my last two posts ( #129 & #130). So don't understand why you are saying that?

 

Interesting that Ukyo Katayama also stood Trackside to watch why Schumacher was so quick in 1994. What he noticed was Schumacher was last of the late brakers, had good car control, and was early on the throttle: https://www.youtube....VvYLa8#t=16m55s (see 32:53 onwards).

 

All that is consistent with this footage as well: https://www.youtube....h?v=NtaV_cOGgTM

Edited by Ibsey, 07 May 2020 - 18:16.

[PayasYouRace]

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 18:15, said:

I am answering all your questions, and there was no promoting of the book in my last two posts ( #129 & #130). 

 

From those very posts.

 

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 17:17, said:

 Especially as his change of mind on the subject is now contained within a published book, which probably more people have read than that Linkedin post.  

 

 

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 17:49, said:

I did just that in my post above #124. Toet changed his mind from believing Senna heard that legal TC system he discussed in his 2016 Linkedin post. Because as mentioned in #post 124 those sounds were more likely to have come from Verstappen's car not Schumacher's. In the 1994 book (published in 2019...so 3 years after Toet's Linkedin article) Toet says and I quote:

 

 

If you think I am making up that latter quote and wrongly attributing to Willem Toet, then see the bottom of this blog: https://www.linkedin...rs-willem-toet/ where Toet talks about my 1994 book. and says

 

 

Toet and myself also wrote this blog together: https://www.linkedin...rs-willem-toet/ where he again mentioned the 1994 book.

 

[Ibsey]

PayasYouRace, on 07 May 2020 - 18:18, said:

From those very posts.

 

Wasn't trying to promote the book in those posts, but apologies if it came across that way. I was merely responding back to yours and as65p suggestion that I was making up Toet's quotes. Nothing more nothing less.

 

Are there any questions I haven't responded to? 

Edited by Ibsey, 07 May 2020 - 18:40.

[wj_gibson]

Senna was an intelligent man, and always entirely honest with himself. If he felt the Benetton was running some sort of TC then I’m sure he felt there was good reason to think that. He was never the paranoid or delusional sort.

[as65p]

Ibsey, on 07 May 2020 - 18:27, said:

Wasn't trying to promote the book in those posts, but apologies if it came across that way. I was merely responding back to yours and as65p suggestion that I was making up Toet's quotes. Nothing more nothing less.

 

As PayasYouRace already pointed out, it's highly unlikely Senna (or any other actual F1 driver), standing beside a corner during a race, would mistake strange noises on corner entry (which might occur with left-foot braking) with strange noises on corner exit (where traction control would be audible). Regardless where exactly around the corner the observer was placed. The timing of those two types of noises would be separated clearly.

 

That timing issue alone, among other things, debunks the theory that any hypothetical left-foot-braking noises could be mistaken for traction control.

[Ibsey]

as65p, on 07 May 2020 - 20:01, said:

As PayasYouRace already pointed out, it's highly unlikely Senna (or any other actual F1 driver), standing beside a corner during a race, would mistake strange noises on corner entry (which might occur with left-foot braking) with strange noises on corner exit (where traction control would be audible). Regardless where exactly around the corner the observer was placed. The timing of those two types of noises would be separated clearly.

 

That timing issue alone, among other things, debunks the theory that any hypothetical left-foot-braking noises could be mistaken for traction control.

 

I'll take Willem Toet's and Mark Blundell's opinion over yours if its all the same. Because if you see the telemetry traces they've seen, you'll know Schumacher was hardly on 0% throttle from the moment he applied the brakes to the exit of the corner.

Edited by Ibsey, 07 May 2020 - 20:14.

[PayasYouRace]

Did Ayrton go on record saying that he thought he heard traction control? Again, do we have any primary sources?

 

Because at this point it sounds like a bit of a case of the press filling in the gaps from snippets of what they heard second hand. Perhaps he was just relaying the same stuff that Mark Blundell and Willem Toet are talking about and the story has been built up into something it wasn't? Or perhaps he was just getting a bit paranoid and thinking he was hearing stuff from Schumacher's Benetton?

 

This is why I'd like to get some primary sources of evidence. You guys did history in school, right? You know the difference between primary and secondary sources? Mark Blundell and Willem Toet are still secondary sources, and no matter how respected these guys are, their memories are still as fallible as the next human's.

[Ibsey]

Ian Harrison, was Williams Team Manager at Aida 1994 and stood with Senna for a bit during that infamous moment at Aida 1994 (when Senna allegedly heard whatever he did). Harrison said he did not hear anything on the Benetton: https://www.autospor...m-manager-story Nor did Larini, who also stood alongside Senna at Aida 1994. 

 

I'm not aware of any "on the record" quotes by Senna about Benetton's traction control. Only comments that Senna told his close associates in private.

 

The clearest sounding footage I've ever found on the 1994 Benetton is this: https://www.youtube....h?v=2L33OxZSrJ0 at 3:10. I could not hear any TC though, even though Schumacher ended that pre-season test 0.2 seconds quicker than Senna. IIRC that Imola test was held 2 or 3 weeks before the first race at Brazil, and was seen as a bit of a surprise that Benetton could beat Williams. 

Edited by Ibsey, 07 May 2020 - 20:47.

[alainsfoot]

Albaforever, on 06 May 2020 - 10:00, said:

That will be Senna and Prost who liked take each other off for the F1 Championship is it?

 

Sell out crowds for the British GP to see mostly Mansell, granted Senna a had big following at the British GP as well.

 

You go on about Mansell  getting beaten by his contemporaries Mansell did beat them as well as you know as they beat Mansell fair play.

 

F1 is not a contest who should be liked or not liked, big deal. 

 

End of the day whether you like it or not Mansell will go down as one the F1 greats and still to this day we see some of the great battles between Mansell and Senna / Piquet  on our TV screens.

fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions.  unfortunately, your opinion is in contrast to facts, statistics, history and the vast weight of expert opinion.  

[alainsfoot]

alainsfoot, on 07 May 2020 - 21:45, said:

fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions.  unfortunately, your opinion is in contrast to facts, statistics, history and the vast weight of expert opinion.  mansell is only a legend in the myopic view of some inhabitants of a small damp island off europe.  

[AnttiK]

Some actual footage of Ayrton watching Schumacher/other cars:

 

Amateur video of Ayrton watching the cars go by on lap 2:

http://www.youtube.c...1-OgCMk&t=2m38s

 

World feed of Ayrton watching the cars go by on lap 3:

http://www.youtube.c...v=8eQ6j_5il_c=6m27s

 

Still lap 3 and world feed, Ayrton is now already walking back to the pits and probably watches Schumacher exiting the slow speed Piper corner, considering it was near him on the left in that very moment and he is looking in that direction as the feed cuts to him from Schumacher who is in that corner:

http://www.youtube.c...6j_5il_c&t=7m8s

Btw, when listening that last section at max volume with headphones, it does vaguely sound a bit like TC kicking in, either that or something in the engine note sounds somewhat similar...at 07:12 exactly you can hear the note I mean, right before it cuts to Ayrton.

 

Also listen here 06:12 exactly...you can just about here a sound that very much resembles TC again very mildly kicking in, just for a fleeting split second.

https://www.youtube...._5il_c&t=06m08s

 

Again here at 06:49, listen closely, is that TC just about kicking in again for a split second?

https://www.youtube...._5il_c&t=06m45s

 

I feel you really need headphones and max volume to pick these notes out though.

 

Also what was this button pressing for in the braking zones? 

https://www.youtube...._5il_c&t=21m36s

 

Senna did the same thing in Imola with the infamous yellow button. In 1993 that was for initiating the automatic downshift sequence that had been programmed specifically for each corner, but I thought that was banned for 1994. It does very much look like initiating automatic downshift to me anyway, just like in 1993.

Listen here at 15:02 as well...that's probably one of the clearest of the "TC resembling sounds"

https://www.youtube...._5il_c&t=15m00s

 

Edited by AnttiK, 07 May 2020 - 22:33.

[Risil]

alainsfoot, on 07 May 2020 - 21:45, said:

fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions. unfortunately, your opinion is in contrast to facts, statistics, history and the vast weight of expert opinion. mansell is only a legend in the myopic view of some inhabitants of a small damp island off europe.

Don't be daft. 31 Grand Prix wins, one world title, three more challenges, an Indycar championship and a few grade-A debacles means Mansell won't be forgotten in a hurry.

You don't like him but there's no arguing with the historical record.

[William Hunt]

I find it strange that we are discussing whether Schumacher had traction control on his Benetton in '94-'95 whilst it has been proven black on white that he had it.

 

The FIA found traction control software in those days on the Benetton of Schumacher, they discovered it and that was made public: it's a fact.

Benetton's explanation was 'yes the software is there but you can't prove that we used it' and they weren't punished because the FIA afterwards officially said 'that they couldn't prove that the software was used' but that's the most ridiculous excuse I've ever heard.

 

it was however very clear that the Benetton software was illegal was and that McLaren's software (they were also investigated) was legal and (that was used for the gear changes, not for traction) and had no traction control and Larini's car during Aïda practice was also investigated and deemed legal by the FIA.

From my memory I believe the investigation of McLaren & Benetton's software took place somewhere in 1995 and not 1994 but that's purely from my memory so I'm not sure about that.

Both teams had initially refused to have it investigated and they received a 100.000$ fine for that refusal from the FIA.

 

Why would you put something, hard or software, on an F1 car if you aren't planning to use it? Imagine a cyclist in the Tour the France who would be caught with an  electrical device on his bike that would help him to push his pedals. Do you think anyone would believe him if he said 'oh but I didn't use it, it's just there'.... Or imagine if they found EPO or a similar drug in the luggage of a tennis player in the airport and he would say 'oh I have this but I never use it', how believable would that be?

 

There is also Jos Verstappen who said after his F1 carreer on several occassions in interviews (I still have one of those in one of my magazines) that Michael had different 'stuff' on his car that he wasn't allowed to have and that it included traction control.
Also I remember an online second hand sale of Schumacher's Benetton ('95 model I believe), the website selling it said in their description that the car 'comes with traction control included', that ad was posted on this forum, it was a couple of years ago.

 

Benetton also cheated with the fuel system in the pits in 1994. They had removed a part that allowed them to fuel quicker but it went wrong on Verstappen's pit stop in Hockenheim and his car caught fire and the fraud was discovered.

Edited by William Hunt, 08 May 2020 - 19:31.

[Risil]

Wasn't the implication that the software was an update from the 1993 car and the engineers had simply hidden it rather than rewriting it to remove the code?

I'm not enough of a software engineer to know if that's plausible but it wouldn't be unheard-of for a programmer to do the minimum and then move on to the next task.

[PlatenGlass]

William Hunt, on 08 May 2020 - 19:15, said:

 

Also I remember an online second hand sale of Schumacher's Benetton ('95 model I believe), the website selling it said in their description that the car 'comes with traction control included', that ad was posted on this forum, it was a couple of years ago.

Could that have been a joke?

[William Hunt]

PlatenGlass, on 08 May 2020 - 20:25, said:

Could that have been a joke?

 

No joke, here about a sale of a '94 model:

https://www.telegrap...le-on-eBay.html

Edited by William Hunt, 08 May 2020 - 20:40.

[Dolph]

Totally offtopic, but today I watched a facebook stream (now on youtube) that showed Häkkinen in 2017 and he talked (in perfectly fluent Finnish) how he was negotiating with Williams in 2004 or 2005 for a race drive. Häkkinen said he was training hard to get fit and driving the McLaren simulator to be ready to get into the car again. Williams negotiations were going up and down and Häkkinen said he became disillusioned with Williams for not being straight up. He later had his test in the McLaren (already well established fact) and he had a torrid time driving a car with bad electronics (correct electronics were broken so they used previous years electronics) and he just thought he is not willing to go through hardships after winning two drivers titles. He was wrong though (in hindsight) as the 2006, 2007 and 2008 McLarens were great cars.

 

LINK: https://www.youtube....h?v=FLMGlkC1T8E

 

There are English subtitles, but I listened to it in Finnish as I am baddass and I speak the Finnish language.

Edited by Dolph, 08 May 2020 - 20:58.

[Dolph]

Risil, on 08 May 2020 - 19:26, said:

Wasn't the implication that the software was an update from the 1993 car and the engineers had simply hidden it rather than rewriting it to remove the code?

I'm not enough of a software engineer to know if that's plausible but it wouldn't be unheard-of for a programmer to do the minimum and then move on to the next task.

 

Sometimes if I annually update an Excel file I hide some unused sheets that have fallen out of use just in case. I don't actually use them, but they are there in the shadows. Totally irrelevant and nobody knows they are there.

[Dolph]

wj_gibson, on 07 May 2020 - 18:30, said:

Senna was an intelligent man, and always entirely honest with himself. If he felt the Benetton was running some sort of TC then I’m sure he felt there was good reason to think that. He was never the paranoid or delusional sort.

 

Well... he also strongly believed in god. Some consider that delusional. Then again, I come from the most atheist country (Estonia) in the world. 

 

Senna was most honest with himself - I don't buy that for a second.

 

But don't get me wrong. I absolutely wanted Mansell and Schumacher to beat Senna in the early 90s. Now I am just in awe of Senna. If someone ever was one step further from man to god, then he was it. Not because of his racing skills, but how he was admired and adored in Brazil. I was just a kid then. I knew nothing. I know better now. The inspiration he brought - otherworldly. But sadly he is gone and left are only VHS quality tapes of him giving short quotes.

Edited by Dolph, 08 May 2020 - 21:21.