37 replies to this topic

[jordan24]

He told the latest edition of F1 Racing magazine: "I think Eddie [Jordan] is completely mad! He’s a great character but how many years must we wait before Jordan become truly serious competitors in Formula 1?

www.itv-f1.com/news/news_story/9201

Two comments actually, my first thread so sorry if it seems ignorant

Is Damon right, will Jordan ever be a success with Eddie leading the team. It seems to me that Eddie has brought in more senior personal in the last two years than any other existing team. Why is Damon coming out and saying this in the first place, admitally my knowledge of Damon is limited but why did the two of them fall out (they were frequently seen out toghether here in Ireland), and is this a factor in Damons comments.

[Ricardo F1]

I think it's a little harsh to say the least. Jordan has done a great job in staying relatively competitive and getting deals like the Honda one. What he needs is for Honda to deliver an engine comparable with the BMW.

[ZenonMark]

Yes Damon is right ,after all he is an ex Williams man.

[Daniel Lester]

Hill and Eddie's relationship went sour after Damon's poor performances in 99, and even more to the point the on/off retirement saga that drew unwanted attention.

However it can be argued that while Damon was there the team got stronger and stronger to the point where they could have taken the next step in 2000 and been championship contenders. While the 2000 car was quick on it's day, it had poor reliability. Since Damon left the cars have been quick in qualifying but generally go backwards or blow up in races and Jordan are falling away from the top and I no longer consider them the up and coming team as they were right until the end of 99. Now that Heinz has been sacked and Gascoyne left there is little remains of the people who made Jordan successful. Fisichella is a bright light for Jordan, but I can't help but feel he's been forced out of Benetton/Renault just as the team are heading back to the top after four seasons of worse and worse cars. Seems to me he's gone to Jordan at the same time in there cycle as he did with Benetton. Benetton peaked in 95 and he joined in 98, Jordan peaked in 99 and he has joined for 02, it's taken Benetton/Renault 7 seasons between being WCC, and being a team on the rise. Let's hope it doesn't happen to him again at Jordan.

For Jordan to become successful they need to hold on to a top designer for a few seasons, and get a driver who is good a developing winning cars.

[fifi]

i read an article ages ago on Eddie Jordan where it was made out that up until the HHF sacking he was a still abit soft when it came to the business side of the team
up until then it seemed as if the hardest thing he done was to cancel the xmas party

[Hakkinen is a robot]

Mr. Lester is right- continuity is a must (check on the tenures of the Ferrari staff- or even RD's team).
As a Jordan fan, I am very optimistic about the new season. I am also realistic; Jordan has one excellent driver (GF should be in anyone's top 5) and one unproven one, and a recent history that has been disappointing in terms of reliability (usually) and pace (occasionally).
Damon Hill, by the way, is afforded the rapt attention that any WDC receives whenever he opens his mouth. It doesn't mean he's an expert on anything at all- just that he was once a very fast racing driver, and that he has an opinion.

[MrAerodynamicist]

I like Alesi's comment on JV "Jaques scares me: he's a crazy driver"

[Earthling]

Originally posted by MrAerodynamicist
I like Alesi's comment on JV "Jaques scares me: he's a crazy driver"

Did he ever look in the mirror at all???

[ehagar]

Originally posted by MrAerodynamicist
I like Alesi's comment on JV "Jaques scares me: he's a crazy driver"

Sorry, but what article are you refering to?

[MrAerodynamicist]

the same issue & article as the DH on EJ quotes, Damon & Alesi are sat talking about the season & reviewing allt eh teams/drivers.

[MinardiRules]

Jordan will be more successful when they stop hiring crap drivers like Damon Hill.

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by MinardiRules
Jordan will be more successful when they stop hiring crap drivers like Damon Hill.

Oh, man with the words of infinite wisdom, who was both years on the team when they scored all of their victories and who was the one to win the first of them?

[eamo]

No one can reasonably assume that Hill was responsible for the development of the car in 99 - he wasn't even trying. I'm a Jordan fan, but MS's absence definitely helped Jordan in 99. That said they had a great car that year, and suffered in 2000 because Mugen stopped developing the engine becasue of Honda's re-entry. Its hard to know where Jordan are going at the moment - They haven't set the world on fire in testing, the car doesn't look reliable, but we won't know until Melbourne

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by eamo
No one can reasonably assume that Hill was responsible for the development of the car in 99 - he wasn't even trying.

No one? I can - so you are wrong there. Wonder if you are right that you think that Hill had no role in development of 99 car? Methinks you are wrong there too.

[eamo]

He sulked all year and didn't like the car - Do you think he would develop a car he didn't like?

[pRy]

There are a few people who have in the past questioned Eddie Jordan's possition at Jordan GP. I think an example they quoted went along the lines of... one Grand Prix weekend, instead of having a team meeting and discussing the race the next day, Eddie was in a bar with other team members enjoying a Rugby match on the television. That may or may not be true.

Personally I do think that Eddie is in F1 more for the life style than the success. Obviously he would love to be successfull.. but I just wonder how long it will be before someone says "Ok, maybe we need a different direction". Jordan have been hanging around for a good while now, Damon is right. I wonder just when they will make a move towards the front, or if they will hang in limbo untill they run out of money when B&H or someone else pulls the plug.

Of course I could be very wrong and Eddie may be a great manager.. but the Schumacher contract incident esspecially may underline possible faults.

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by eamo
He sulked all year and didn't like the car - Do you think he would develop a car he didn't like?

It is his job and was one of the best in the world in that departement. What do you think that he drove 80 laps a day in the tests just for the fun of it all? Geez how simple life is for ya...

[Daniel Lester]

Besides most the ground work for the 99 car occurred in 98 and early 99 before the **** hit the fan.

Damon moved Arrows forward, and Jordan forward and both teams reached success like they hadn't had before or since. This is one thing that annoys me about Jacques, he complains about his car if it isn't right but he never brings the car forward during the season. If the designer doesn't get it right and the team can't keep on the pace, the car and Jacques fall down the grid. After 3 seasons with BAR I would have thought that Jacques would have at least 15 career wins (i.e 4 with BAR). If Damon can get an Arrows to nearly win a race and win in a Jordan and help drag the team into the top 4 then so should Jacques. Some of the blame lays with the aero guys and designers the rest with Jacques.

Let's just say had Jacques been the one heading to Ferrari in 96, they'd still be the 4th best team (if that) and still waiting for that 1st drivers title since 79. Even if everyone else currently at Ferrari was there.

[Breadmaster]

agreed last two:

Damon may have lacked motivation in the races but his testing was second to none....I seem to remember that other test driver that everyone rates saying how good Damon was...now what's his name....oh yes....one Alain Prost.

Big Up Damon Hill!

[eamo]

The car was developed in the way Frentzen wanted it to go, because he was being more sucessful. Hill wanted it to go a different direction - Therefore Frentzen developed the 99 car

[Force Ten]

eamo, how's that nice black and white world is doing?

Hill developed the car during 1998 season - you know, most of the work with next years car is always being done during the previous year and at 1998 season Heinz Harald Frentzen was an employee of Williams (why do I have a feeling that I am talking to a kid here, a kid who does not want to listen and think?).

During 1999 season, as it wore on, the car was developed more towards the likings of Heinz Harald Frentzen, but that was on the second half of it. Before that both of them were doing long test sessions, thus helping to develop the car. Please answer me, if Hill wasn't trying (as you suggest here) - what the hell was he doing driving the car around the racetrack 80+ laps a test day? During 1999 season, up until Monza GP timeframe - only after that he stopped testing. "Feeling the speed"? "Digging the groove"? "Putting some pedal to the metal while enjoying his new car stereo"?

[aportinga]

My prediction...

Yes the team will win. But only after they lose Honda Power and are bought out by Audi!

[BlackGhost]

Put yourself in Eddie's shoes, his team is also his main way to make money.


If you were Eddie you'd probably begin the year with a calculation on how much money you want to make during the season and then spend the money in accordance.


I mean its not like a Ron D who has the backing of a Mercedes or a Williams/Head combination who are much more fanatics of F1.


Eddie seems the guy who really prefers the good life to winning races.

[MinardiRules]

Originally posted by Force Ten
Oh, man with the words of infinite wisdom, who was both years on the team when they scored all of their victories and who was the one to win the first of them?

Infinite wisdom is not something that I claim, and I will happily admit that Damon Hill is not my all time favourite driver, but let's just have a look at the 1999 stats:

HHF: No 3 in the WDC 54 points
Damon Hill: equal 11th, 7 points

Perhaps you prefer 1998:

DH: 6th with 20 points
HHF: 7th with 17 points

However, HHF was the more consistent scorer with points in seven races, DHs scored 50% of his overall points with his one win, his other points were 3, 3 , 1 & 3. One fluke win gave him the upper hand over his team mate...

[henryting]

An Irishman and any Englishman.
"Can't we just get along" somehow doesn't apply.

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by MinardiRules

and I will happily admit that Damon Hill is not my all time favourite driver,

Geez, really??? I couldn't have said.... Wonder if that can cloud your judgement perhaps?

Perhaps you prefer 1998:

DH: 6th with 20 points
HHF: 7th with 17 points

However, HHF was the more consistent scorer with points in seven races, DHs scored 50% of his overall points with his one win, his other points were 3, 3 , 1 & 3. One fluke win gave him the upper hand over his team mate...

Ain't no such thing as a fluke win. We might aswell say that both of Frentzen's wins were fluke. When it's your 22nd and you've managed to win (or almost win) every single year on the 5 previous years and it is the 3rd team you've put in a winning position, something that even Michael Schumacher haven't done thus far. Crap driver, eh? Nice logic, buddy!

BTW, since you obviously were asleep during 1998 season let me kindly remind you that Ralf Schumacher drove for Jordan at 1998. Also, Ralf scored his points not in seven races (I really hope you didn't compare Hill's performance of 1998 with Frentzen's performance at 1999 - might aswell compare Hill's performance at 1996 with Frentzen's performace at 1997 and see how's that gonna come out) but in 5 - they were 1, 2, 1, 6, 4 - not that much different than Hill.

[Force Ten]

Geez, now I get it. You were comparing Heinz Harald Frentzens performances (in Williams of all the teams) with Hill's performances in a Jordan. That's a good one. Why didn't you compare Hill's performances in Williams with HHF's performaces in, say, Sauber? That should come out as a quite interesting one...

[Ivan]

Originally posted by Daniel Lester
Damon moved Arrows forward, and Jordan forward and both teams reached success like they hadn't had before or since. This is one thing that annoys me about Jacques, he complains about his car if it isn't right but he never brings the car forward during the season. If the designer doesn't get it right and the team can't keep on the pace, the car and Jacques fall down the grid. After 3 seasons with BAR I would have thought that Jacques would have at least 15 career wins (i.e 4 with BAR). If Damon can get an Arrows to nearly win a race and win in a Jordan and help drag the team into the top 4 then so should Jacques. Some of the blame lays with the aero guys and designers the rest with Jacques.

Let's just say had Jacques been the one heading to Ferrari in 96, they'd still be the 4th best team (if that) and still waiting for that 1st drivers title since 79. Even if everyone else currently at Ferrari was there.

The first part I totally agree with.
The second leaves me thinking you fell and hit your head. I agree that without the personnel at Ferrari JV would be out of it. But I think with the brain trust that is there he would win. That is why MS got them to leave Benetton with him. Without them MS would still be waiting for the throphy.

[JForce]

DH was never the kind of driver to really compete with others. But as a development driver, he's pretty damn good

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by Ivan
But I think with the brain trust that is there he would win. That is why MS got them to leave Benetton with him. Without them MS would still be waiting for the throphy.

I think that maybe MS wouldn't have gotten WDC trophy as of yet, but he certainly would have won races every year, no matter who would have the team consited of... I do not see Jaques Villeneuve as a man who can elevate the team, but I certainly can see Michael doing it. And I ain't no fan.

[Brian O Flaherty]

Ahem, back on topic

Fifi touched on what I believe to be the truth.

I always had Eddie down as a likeable, good businessman who lacked the ruthlessness of, say, Flavio or Frank to really succeed in the cut-throat world of F1 until he fired HHF. He went up in my estimation as a team boss from that day. That is because he showed that he may have what it takes to make the tough decisions.

I think Giancarlo is definitely a driver he should hold on to, and if he can hold onto Eghbal Hamidy and get some good aerodynamic packages out of him, plus get a good Honda engine, I dont see why he shouldn't be battling with the big boys.

I am forever the optimist when it comes to Jordan and I just hope this year's pre-season testing does not foretell what'll happen in 2002 (in the way Prost's 2001 pre-season didn't )

I would have agreed with Damon (I can't f**king stand the bloke by the way) up until the HHF sacking. Now I think we're on the right road.

[Daniel Lester]

Remember Alesi and Berger at Benetton in 96, 0 wins in car that was an evolution of the 95 car. While Jacques is a fair bit better than that lot, I dobut he'd have won more than a handful of races before leaving for BAR.

[MinardiRules]

Originally posted by Force Ten
Geez, now I get it. You were comparing Heinz Harald Frentzens performances (in Williams of all the teams) with Hill's performances in a Jordan. That's a good one. Why didn't you compare Hill's performances in Williams with HHF's performaces in, say, Sauber? That should come out as a quite interesting one...

Yeah, I made a mistake there. Well, the 98 Williams Mecachrome, you can make your own conclusions...

But I remain convinced that Hill was a crap driver in a good car - and does MS really have to win in 3 cars to "equal" Hill? This sort of logic might go down well in a British pub, but nowhere else, I am afraid.

And as for our observation that there is no fluke win - 1999, Johnny Herbert, Stuart Ford, did you sleep through that one?? Or - as it was another Brit - is it proof of his brilliance.

Argh, I give up, no point arguing with Hill fans...

[eamo]

Force Ten, as you said yourself the car was developed in the second half of the season more to Frentzen's liking - This when the car was competing at the front on its own merit. Earlier in the season, they picked up podiums and a win (because of good strategy and rain), but later in the season, the car was in front on merit in the Nurburgring, before the rain came down, and Frentzen had take his one and only pitstop.
Before that at Monza, Mclaren asked Hak to push because he did not have enough of a lead over Frentzen, because they believed he had more fuel on board (Jordan had the largest fuel tank in 99).
All this in the second half of the year, when according to yourself Frentzen’s wishes were being followed as regard development.

I think Hill was a good driver, abd good at development work – and did well for Jordan in 98 in bringing that car on. But please don’t give him credit for everything.

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by MinardiRules
Yeah, I made a mistake there. Well, the 98 Williams Mecachrome, you can make your own conclusions...

How's that for a conclusion for you - it was hell of al lot better car than Jordan in 1998 season, constantly on podium and clear number three car of a year to have throughout the season - how's that?

But I remain convinced that Hill was a crap driver in a good car - and does MS really have to win in 3 cars to "equal" Hill? This sort of logic might go down well in a British pub, but nowhere else, I am afraid.

This sort of assumption is one that you made up. I just said that it is a thing Michael hasn't done yet, so it isn't all that bad.

So, if Hill was a crap driver in a good car, how do you explain HHF's performance in 1997? It was substantially worse than what Hill ever managed to do at his stay in Williams.

And as for our observation that there is no fluke win - 1999, Johnny Herbert, Stuart Ford, did you sleep through that one?? Or - as it was another Brit - is it proof of his brilliance.

Oh, it's a Brit thing? Does my assumption that you dislike Hill and Herbert simply on the basis that they are British, hold water? Funnily you mentioned two British drivers on a downlooking manner while making rude remarks about British people in general... If it is so, well, you, pal, are not worth to be debating with in this BB, sorry. No, I ain't no British and I couldn't care less for Herbert. BTW, Herberd happened to have drven a very good race that day and it were for his strategic decisions that he won the race. Or put himself into a position to win the race when the guys in front messed up.

[Force Ten]

Originally posted by eamo
All this in the second half of the year, when according to yourself Frentzen’s wishes were being followed as regard development.

I think Hill was a good driver, abd good at development work – and did well for Jordan in 98 in bringing that car on. But please don’t give him credit for everything.

I actually don't. You just stated that he did NOT develop the car at 1999 while he clearly did and that I attacked. He did at least something, and while he probably was not the crucial factor in team Jordan, his feedback was still most likely considered as being valuable.

[eamo]

OK - I meant the development that made the car a race winner

[MrAerodynamicist]

Originally posted by Force Ten
How's that for a conclusion for you - it was hell of al lot better car than Jordan in 1998 season, constantly on podium and clear number three car of a year to have throughout the season - how's that?

Well thats not quite true - JV and HHF mamaned just 2 and 1 podiums respectively. (RS & DH also manaed 2 and 1 apiece) The difference was Williams managed 16 scoring positions. Jordan only 10, and all of which were in the last 8 races.

I'll let you get back to arguing what ever it is you're all argueing about.....