41 replies to this topic

[davy boy]

The seasons over so how about a bit of "what if"?

Hypothetical situation - Had Damon hill stayed at Williams in 1997 does anybody think that JV would have won the WDC?

[bira]

No.

[jk]

No

[LeTurc]

No, MS would cakewalk it.

[John B]

It's possible as JV improved greatly relative to DH in the second half of 1996, and Hill might have lost just enough edge having won the title that JV could beat him on points. However, he would have taken more points from JV than HHF did, and this would have worked to Schumacher's benefit.

A more interesting question might be would the team have performed more consistently throughout the year with Hill around to participate in developing the car. They had a mid-season down period and almost let the title get away - would this have been prevented with DH's input?

[karlth]

I'd like to go out on a limb and say that I think Hill would have become a WC in 1997 with Williams.

[Paste]

Yah. JV was gonna have the measure of Hill in 1997. He came on strong in the second half of 1996. Schumacher would've been losing points to both Hill and Villeneuve.

[Todd]

LeTurc,

I don't think that it would have helped Michael at all. The only thing that got Michael into the 1997 championship race was Jacques' terrible driving. With Damon driving the #1 Williams, MS would have only scored 63 to 67 points. Jacques would have wound up with something in the mid 60s too, while Damon certainly could have mustered in the high 70s with that large an equipment advantage over the other teams. Jacques drove much better races in 1996 than he did in 1997. Would that have changed if Damon stayed, or did Damon get shined by Williams late in the 1996 season in an effort to get the #1 plate on a Williams for 1997?

[davy boy]

Don't forget that Hill's confidence had been badly affected by knowing that Williams had given him the boot, that's probably a major factor in why JV seemed to close up on him in the second part of the season.

[Ricardo F1]

Well, in a minority here but I think yes JV would have beaten Hill in 1997. A years experience under his belt, I think having Hill there would have been a more stabilizing benefit for JV rather than having to prove himself again against another team mate.

How on Earth LeTurc could quite come up with a theory that MS would have cakewalked it when he couldn't even beat JV in the first place is beyond me. Any explanation of logic behind that or just sheer blindness as usual?

[bira]

Originally posted by davy boy
Don't forget that Hill's confidence had been badly affected by knowing that Williams had given him the boot, that's probably a major factor in why JV seemed to close up on him in the second part of the season.

Hill could have only been affected by it in the last three races of the season - Italy (where he made an error and retired, but so did JV); Portugal (where he finished 2nd to JV); and Japan (where he won and JV retired).

[holiday]

I personally wouldn't rate Hill's performance in a Williams 1997 higher than that of HHF. Clearly, Hill only retained the upper hand over JV due to its much greater experience in f1.

Hill who lost the very first quali and nearly the race as well (only a team order to preserve the car due to falling oil pressure prevented JV from winning) against a greenhorn would have been crushed by a more experienced JV in '97, the more as JV is known to be an extraordinary mentally strong driver, Hill in contrast as rather mentally...well.;)

So: YES.


holiday
There remains the question of the "equal cars"

[SlateGray]

The question should read..... does everybody think Jacques would have won"

Beggs the question. Who is better HHF or DH?

I fear a large number of the JV nay-sayers (you know who you are) have a view of the world through scarlet glasses.

[bira]

The thing is, Schumacher and Villeneuve weren't usually good at the same time in 1997. It was almost them trading places one race after the other. Some of it was due to Schumacher being better than JV in some places; some of it was due to Williams getting it wrong strategy/setup wise. If the setup for the season remains identically the same - JV is the same JV, Williams is the same Williams, etc - then Hill would have bitten off JV's results, not MS's. Whether Hill would have finished ahead or behind JV is another matter, either way - he would have hindreded JV not MS. So I think it would have played to MS's hands.

At the same time, if you take the argument that Hill's experience and ability would have contributed to a stronger Williams team in 1997, less mistake-prone in setup, and would have pushed JV like it did in 1996, then yes - that leaves the door open to debate whether JV or Hill would have won the WC, while I am pretty sure MS wouldn't have won it (in that scenario). And, in that case, I think Hill would have had the upper hand, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Either way, my answer remains the same: no.

[Viktor]

Originally posted by bira
The thing is, Schumacher and Villeneuve weren't usually good at the same time in 1997. It was almost them trading places one race after the other.

I think I read on this forum that MS and JV never shared the podium in 1997!

Hill woth have been a positiv input for Williams and as Bira sad, it woth proberly make them less mistake-prone. I also think that Hill woth have made a much better jobb at Williams then Frentzen did and Williams woth have won the WCC much earlyer. For the drivers title I dont know but I think MS woth have taken it.

/Viktor

[Boston Killer]

NEIN!

[Haz 2]

I've often thought about what would have happened if Hill had stayed at Williams. The Williams mechanics have stated that Villeneuve and Hill were a good combination due to their different set up strategies. On certain tracks Hills approach would produce faster times and on other tracks it was Villeneuve that would have the advantage. In either case, Williams would have both bases covered, which would make it much harder for Ferrari to score points. So, as far as the Constructors title, Williams would have taken it much earlier in 97 if Hill had stayed around.

Again, since Hill and Villeneuve go well on different tracks, I don't think they would have taken too many points away from each other, so I'm not convinced that Schumacher would have benefited enough to get the drivers title. Between Hill and Villeneuve, I'd say Hill would get a few more points over the season and so he would have been champ. I need to review the 97 season again to make sure. I have all the races on tape, and it will give me something to do now that the season is over.

[AD]

If Hill was at Williams in '97, MS wouldn't have had a hope in hell of winning the WDC IMO. The '97 Ferrari was a slower more reliable version of the '96 Ferrari. People forget that the '97 Ferrari was actually less competitive that the '96 one, but just more reliable. MS would've probably won the wet races and Monaco in '97 if Hill was in the Williams.

[gerry nassar]

Originally posted by AD
If Hill was at Williams in '97, MS wouldn't have had a hope in hell of winning the WDC IMO. The '97 Ferrari was a slower more reliable version of the '96 Ferrari. People forget that the '97 Ferrari was actually less competitive that the '96 one, but just more reliable. MS would've probably won the wet races and Monaco in '97 if Hill was in the Williams.

what makes you say that the 97 Ferrari was less competitive than the 96 one?? I just dont have any evidence in front of me. If you do please inform me (im not sure of 96 qualifying). I'd say that 97 was far more competitive - yes - thus making the Ferrari (in EI's hands atleast) fall back down the grid. Remember - Williams, Benetton, Maclaren, Jordan, Ferrari -even Prost and Stewart managed to qualify on the front row throughout the year!

However I agree that Ferrari sorted out their reliablity which has become their trademark ever since!

[gerry nassar]

AD - I checked out Forix and crunched a few numbers. Qualifying positions suggest the Ferrari 96 car was faster than the 97 car:

96 MS average qualifying position: 2.6
97 MS average qualifying position: 3.6

96 EI average qualifying position: 7.8
97 EI average qualifying position: 9.3

You are right there!

However, I still think the 97 car was the better car (especially in race trim) and the grid positions were lower due to the competitiveness and closeness of the field aswell as the tyre waqr between Bridgestone and Goodyear!

[Zawed]

I think Hill could have edged out Jacques for the WC in 97 if he had stayed. Maybe not in qualifying, but definitely most races. Hill definitely would have contributed more to the stability of the cars performance in that rough patch midseason.

[Frans]

If Hill stayed he would have been 97 champion.

Schumacher would have hitted Hill then in Jerez, but then his sissy-punishment wouldn't be applied.

Hill would have pinned him to the highest stick on the track, with the words "you tried ut again huh Mikey!!!!" WHAMBAM

but, ... let's stay realistic, Hill drove Arrows in 97, Ville in the Williams.

Schumacher is not even classified in that championship, what makes the 1997 championship one of the sweatest of all.



Schumacher ZERO points. hahaha.
[ but not really apparently... but that's because the FIA(t) sucks!]

[arcwulf7]

The question seems to be -- would JV or DH have raised the Williams enough to keep the team from dividing their points and handing MS the championship. I sometimes wonder if Frank Williams wasn't speculating on the same scenario, seeing the surging Ferraris with Schumacher at the wheel, and going with his best chance at a championship by keeping his best driver, providing him with a competent technical partner in HHF, and ditching his newly minted WDC in the process. Kind of Machiavellian -- but if you look at the statements FW made during the period you could gleen he was never really had much confidence in Damon's natural driving abilities -- he thought the WDC was the car, experience and Damon's raising his game enough to edge out rookie Villeneuve. I don't think Frank Williams had any intention of paying DH's asking price of $8M from the get go.

[Simioni]

JV didn't drive that badly in 97. He looked so bad because of his mistakes and Schumacher's masterful season, but we can't forget that he won 7 races got 10 poles in a car that was nowhere as dominant as the previous williams. And he did win the championship, in a straight fight against MS. It was a poor season compared to Schumacher's efficiency but not too shabby at all by any other standards IMO. It was still his 2nd season afterall.

[DaveK]

Williams as a team stalled in the last half of 97. MS drove good, JV and Williams made mistakes and the car was definitely not the car of 96. They still won it, that's what counts.

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by arcwulf7
The question seems to be -- would JV or DH have raised the Williams enough to keep the team from dividing their points and handing MS the championship. I sometimes wonder if Frank Williams wasn't speculating on the same scenario, seeing the surging Ferraris with Schumacher at the wheel, and going with his best chance at a championship by keeping his best driver, providing him with a competent technical partner in HHF, and ditching his newly minted WDC in the process.

You are way off base here - Frank hired HHF back then because he thought that HHF would be the "Schumacher beater" he always hoped to have. I remember watching his interview back in 1996 where he praised HHF's speed. He certainly hoped that HHF would come out good. Frank's intention is never to have an "established number one" driver and a young guy paving way for that dude. He expects his drivers to be competitive pretty much from day one onwards or atleast to learn quickly.

Yes, DH and JV would have raised the Williams enough, more accurately, they would have probably not let to slip the car backwards as much. Remember, Hill just got the long-awaited WDC under his belt, as massive a confidence boos anyone driving an F1 car can hope for.

[Force Ten]

Also, Frank could have hired Mansell for '95 but 1994 showed him that the long awaited rescue for his team in a form of Nigel Mansell driving the car for some races didn't pan out as it was expected to be - Nigel turned out to be actually slower than Damon, so Coulthard got a ride for 1995.

Now Coulthard got a lifeline of about two thirds of the 1995 season to prove his worth, and he got swapped for JV. Frank is not a man with great patience, when things go wrong.

[RV_Canada]

Yes, I believe JV would still have been WDC. He would have outperformed Hill in his second year .. just like Montoya will outperform Ralf next year. The anti-JV crowd (Todd, Bira, etc.) will say otherwise, of course.

[alain]

NO

[Bruce]

Unsure - JV's cause was undoubtedly aided in 1997 by HHF's apparent difficulty in adapting to a new car and team - a team-mate who is new to the team will always be easier to deal with than someone like Hill, who has been with Williams since 1993...

Having said that, I would be interested to see how it would have gone - JV seems at his best when he is under pressure from a good team-mate - that is probably why many see 1996 as his best season - he was being pressured constantly... so it is possible that JV would have been more consistent in 1997 with Hill as a team-mate.

Regardless, I really think that HAD Hill been JV's team-mate, MS would have been out of it. Between the two of them, MS would have had very slim pickings. Remember, in 1996, when JV had a problem, it did not necessarily follow that DH would and vice-versa, so saying that DH would not have been in a position to challenge in races in 1997 that JV dropped out of or was less than totally competitive in is a bit dodgy imo.

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by Bruce
Unsure - JV's cause was undoubtedly aided in 1997 by HHF's apparent difficulty in adapting to a new car and team - a team-mate who is new to the team will always be easier to deal with than someone like Hill, who has been with Williams since 1993...

And let's not forget that this teammate also would have hade a number 1 pasted into his car's nosecone - while not as significant a performance boost, it still would have been a significant confidence boost for Hill. Of course, losing in 1996 would have raised JV's competitive spirit even more, so that kinda evens things out, with that exception that Michael would have had it much harder than he did.

[crouchyaj]

It would have diffenently interesting year with a possible 3 way tussle for th WDC.

However, 2 experienced drivers in that Williams, if it was so outstandingly as good as all the MS fans say it was, that excel at different track types, Hill the twisty tight ones ala Hungry, and JV the more horse power tracks ala Nuremburg. Then I think it would have ended in a 2 way battle between JV and DH.

I would hope that DH would have won and then some of his detracters would shut up.

But it could have gone one of 3 ways in reality depending on whom DH would take the points away from, MS or JV. Hopefully both but more so MS.

[Clatter]

Originally posted by Force Ten
Also, Frank could have hired Mansell for '95 but 1994 showed him that the long awaited rescue for his team in a form of Nigel Mansell driving the car for some races didn't pan out as it was expected to be - Nigel turned out to be actually slower than Damon, so Coulthard got a ride for 1995.

Now Coulthard got a lifeline of about two thirds of the 1995 season to prove his worth, and he got swapped for JV. Frank is not a man with great patience, when things go wrong.

Not quite right, DC was already contracted to Mac for 96. He only drove the Williams in 95 because Williams went to court to get him back from Mac who had tried to sign him for that year.

[bira]

Originally posted by Bruce
JV seems at his best when he is under pressure from a good team-mate

What the hell makes you say that?

JV's best season was arguably 2000. He had Ricardo Zonta as teammate.

This year he's had a good teammate who at the start of the season at least seemed apt to outshine JV. So, what you are saying is that JV was at his best this year? God help us all if the answer is yes ;)

[Robbie]

Okay, so DH and JV would have taken wins from each other and MS would have been WDC (in that crappy Ferarri).

The question is, who would have finished higher, DH or JV?

IMO, Jacques: DH was often very, very fast, but was always (not just in his last season, my friends) very frail psychologically. I don't rate JV that highly, but he is very strong in the psychological department. I think that that would have been a deciding difference.

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by Robbie
Okay, so DH and JV would have taken wins from each other and MS would have been WDC (in that crappy Ferarri).

Well, that's your opinion.

IMO, Jacques: DH was often very, very fast, but was always (not just in his last season, my friends) very frail psychologically.

Umm... Wasn't it Damon that pressurized Michael into mistake at Adelaide 1994? Wasn't Damon the one that at the last race of 1996, when he was considered finished as a racing driver, destroyed the field at Suzuka and wasn't Jacques the one that messed the start up so badl, that it was actullally one of his worst starts ever? Did you actually watched races back then or are you just saying what others have told you ?

[JayWay]

Originally posted by RV_Canada
Yes, I believe JV would still have been WDC. He would have outperformed Hill in his second year .. just like Montoya will outperform Ralf next year. The anti-JV crowd (Todd, Bira, etc.) will say otherwise, of course.

Bira is not anti-JV. Stop acting like an ass.

I dissed MS fans for bashing any driver that was brough up in a conversation against MS, and now I see JV fans doing the same to RS just because RS said one thing. I think Bira made a fair point about points being taken away with Hill there, so why label her an anti-JV?

[Robbie]

Originally posted by Force Ten
Well, that's your opinion.

Umm... Wasn't it Damon that pressurized Michael into mistake at Adelaide 1994? Wasn't Damon the one that at the last race of 1996, when he was considered finished as a racing driver, destroyed the field at Suzuka and wasn't Jacques the one that messed the start up so badl, that it was actullally one of his worst starts ever? Did you actually watched races back then or are you just saying what others have told you ?

Silly stuff, Force Ten.

Yes I watched. And as a Schumi fan was deligted to see DH make mistakes which gave MS wins.

MS and all the others make mistakes too. Some make more of them when under pressure. DH is one of them.

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by Robbie
[B]

Silly stuff, Force Ten.

Yes I watched. And as a Schumi fan was deligted to see DH make mistakes which gave MS wins.

As a Schumacher fan you don't dissapoint. Nice emoticons by the way.

MS and all the others make mistakes too. Some make more of them when under pressure. DH is one of them.

Michael is one of them, too. Even more so. Damon made it (getting championship by not cracking under pressure on the final race of the championship) on his second attempt, Michael only in third.

[Samurai]

Good sentiments crouchyaj , I'm with you guy.

Robbie I don't think MS would have got the WDC.
Why?------

I think when you consider this thread question (like other people already post) DH's large positive input/contribution toward developing/setting the car can't be ignored.
That DH does make a difference in such aspects I think you can see when you consider how the teams he's been on improved----

The '97 Arrows. A clunker (out of the 107% for jeeesh sakes) at the beginning of the season, but challenged for a win toward the end of the season, and got quite close to pole at Jerez too.

'98, '99 Jordan also improved a lot (though Damon's driving in '99 was obviously not his best self... ). HHF almost got there in '99...
But the '00 and '01 Jordan did not live up to the highest expectations, despite added support from Honda.

And of course Williams (though they're finally back now).


So my personal answer to the original question is... No,
because I think DH (not MS) would have been able to beat JV.
The Williams performance should have been good enough and also JV would be more competetive (and stable with DH as teammate) so no room for Schumi in the '97 Ferrari.
#1 DH , #2 JV, #3 MS


It would be interesting if someone would try to do a race-by race extrapolation (or rather I should say present one point of view) ...

[bira]

FYI the discussion why MS fans hate Hill was split into a new thread, which can be found here.

[DAS WUNDER KIND]

Originally posted by RV_Canada
Yes, I believe JV would still have been WDC. He would have outperformed Hill in his second year .. just like Montoya will outperform Ralf next year. The anti-JV crowd (Todd, Bira, etc.) will say otherwise, of course.

Of course u do , after all u r a canadian!And its a pretty tough
back up of your opinion.