79 replies to this topic

[Ellen UK]

The term ‘Der Regen-meister’, translates literally as ‘The rain-master’. It has been used throughout the history of motor sport to identify such drivers who excel, and often, achieve the impossible in such appalling conditions.

Today, it has become somewhat a clichéd tag, but it still holds true for a few drivers. One only need recall performances by truly gifted drivers such as Gilles Villeneuve, Pedro Rodriguez, and Ayrton Senna to name but a handful.

The saying was first coined way back in the 1930’s, through the great German driver, Rudolf Caracciola, as his prowess in the wet would always prove him a worthy name to the title. For most of his career he drove for the Silver Arrows of Mercedes Benz, and Alfa Romeo. Although not in a competitive career his entire car, in the wet, it seemingly would be. As the first Grand Prix of Germany in 1926 at Avus, which through his achievements, has passed into motor racing legend for eternity, so alarmingly proved. Driving a laughably out-dated Daimler-Benz, against the technological might of the Mercedes he drove from the back of the field in a Forty-car grid on lap 1, to win the gruelling 3-hour event, in despairingly traitorous weather.

Commenting on such performances, Mercedes boss of the time Alfred Neubauer said:

“Of all the great drivers I have known – Nouvolari, Rosemeyer, Lang, Moss or Fangio - Caracciola was the greatest of them all.”
His rain-accentuated caressing feel, and sheer miraculous judgement in such conditions were always dominant, and the fact that in precarious weather, he was not over-awed by such greats as Nouvalari or Varzi, speaks volumes for his own astonishing skills. He dominated again in a Tourist Trophy event in ’29, and after coming through the pack from five laps behind the leader, he went on to obliterate the field during the rain and hailstorm plagued race.
The only man who was arguably as quick in this era was another great young German – Bernd Rosemeyer. Tragically, his career ended before it had really started. Before he was killed in an ambitious lands-peed record attempt, a glimpse of the future was marvellously put on show for all to see at the always-difficult Nurburgring. In his European Championship year of ’36 driving a monstrously powerful Auto-Union, he hammered away to victory by over two minutes. The race was run under blankets and pockets of fog so dense that visibility was reduced to virtually zero, a ludicrous proposition to go racing you may think, but not for Rosemeyer, as the race so emphatically proved.

As his nemesis and self proclaimed ‘Regen-meister’, Caracciola, once said of him;

“Bernd literally did not know fear”.

Such territories of performance, sadly, remained un-chartered by drivers until around the ‘60’s, when an influx of great wet weather drivers sprung onto the F1 scene. Two notables from this era were the abnormally brave Pedro Rodriguez (elder brother of F1 driver Ricardo), and Jacky Ickx. The rain brought out the best in their driving, and never more so was it observed than at the ’71 Dutch GP, at Zanvoort. Although the race here never really failed to produce a classic, no one could be prepared for what they were about to witness.

After hauling both their respective cars in front of the opposition in the early laps, on the soaked track, the two pre-eminent wet weather drivers of the time, Ickx and Rodriguez, then began what would go onto be a fantastic race long duel. Passing and re-passing each other lap after lap in a brilliant display, in a race where no fewer than 15 drivers failed to finish (it should be noted the vast majority of retirements were due to driver skidding or throwing their cars off the road).

Although Rodriguez’ BRM developed fuel gauge problems in the latter stages, amazingly he still managed to keep in touch with Ickx’ tardy Ferrari – shadowing the opposition’ gearbox to the finish. On lap 68 the final lap, Ickx managed to hold the lead, with both jubilantly crossing the finish line almost in tandem, as the crowd erupted. The next car barely within sniffing distance of the chequered flag was the sister Ferrari of Clay Reggazoni – a whole lap behind the two, thus only serving to highlight the mesmerising race these two had driven in the wet. Ickx is often cited as the more naturally gifted of the pair in the wet, through what he achieved. Although the young Mexican, Rodriguez, never fully reach his potential, he only gave on occasion’s glimpses as to what he could do in such conditions.

As Jacky would be enthralling in the rain, any time, any place. The sight of him running rings around Ferrari’s Lauda in the ’74 British GP at Brands, in his tank like car, passing him in a daring manoeuvre on the outside at Paddock Hill in the rain, was one of F1’s most captivating moments. He was on top of his form too to claim his first GP win at Rouen, France, in a Ferrari, and (yet again) dominating in the rain. Or totally obliterating the opposition in qualifying, taking a stunning pole, for the rain and fog wrapped Nurburgring ‘68 by a spellbinding 10 seconds. No driver ever really mastered ‘the (old) ring’. Even the Hill’s or the Clark’s. Ickx did. In such conditions he totally conquered, no one came close at all, and the result of it was two wins there.

After Pedro’s death, and Ickx’ departure from the F1 arena, the sport would have to wait until the late ‘70s to see the next champion of the rain. But boy, was it worth the wait. As the old saying goes, ‘best things come to those who wait’, and one only need mention to words, Gilles – Villeneuve.

Never since the days of Caracciola or Nuvolari, had motor racing witnessed such a miracle worker. He had a complete tractor of a Ferrari nearly all his career, and in the wet, he miraculously transformed it. Villeneuve was the embodiment of a wet-weather driver. In these conditions, demonstrating probably the finest car control ever seen in the history of racing, he could often run with, and beat the far superior Williams and Brabham turbo’s. His efforts were nothing short of super-human. Had he found himself in more competitive machinery, his day would have come, and would most likely been a multiple world champion. After his amazing performance in Jarama ’81, Enzo Ferrari hailed the little French-Canadian as, ‘The spiritual successor to Nuvolari’. On this occasion, not many could find cause to argue with the old man.

Though the race that Gilles is synonymous for is the U.S GP at Watkins Glen in ‘79. Even then, it wasn’t entirely the race that people identified with him, it was, what appeared to be a seemingly meaningless practice session. But that was before a scarlet red Ferrari went scrambling out of the pit-lane that day, one of only 6 cars to do so. Why? The weather was simply atrocious. Not only was it still raining hard, it had been for six hours or so prior to the session. So there was even more cause for concern as around corners, and over blind brows, traitorous pools of standing water lay in wake to whip your car off the road. Villeneuve was having not if the fear and conservatism bore by the other drivers during the day. No one was remotely in his league, and apart from Scheckter in the other Ferrari, he immediately went 20 seconds faster than anyone else. A truly astounding drive.

Even Scheckter admitted there was absolutely no way he could improve on his practice time, that itself was a whole eleven seconds behind Gilles. In his own nonchalant but serene way, Villeneuve went onto say:

“I was flat in fifth, about 160mph. It should have been faster, but then the engine had a misfire, I could have gone much quicker, but then maybe I’d have crashed…”.

He went onto win race though, thanks to the majority of it being run under his favourite conditions, rain, and Alan Jones retiring. In a way, you could say it was an inherited victory, but he was in a car that had no business being on the same lap as the Williams, or the Brabham for that matter. All throughout his career, he was untouchable in the wet; he seemed to operate on a different planet.

Former Grand Prix himse

[Peeko]

Good article. Who wrote it?

[Bob Nomates]

It's a nice artical but I don't think true, Villenuve is a great showman driver but I don't belive he was better than Senna, certainly not in the wet.

[Peeko]

Waht are your reasons for believing this Bob? Senna never enjoyed the cusion of being 11 seconds faster than anyone else (not taking away anything from Senna).

[John B]

After that Monaco controversy, I can't remember Senna losing a wet race that he finished though at least one DNF was due to an accident (Australia 1989, the shortened race that Boutsen won). The three wet races in 1993 (all of which he won) were a key factor in his 2nd in the championship and ability to hang within sight of Prost's dominant Williams in the title race for half a year.

[RedFever]

I have seen both and both were amazing. But in wet conditions, Gilles was no mact for anyone, not even Senna (maybe because he started racing with snowmobiles and had developed the ability to drive on slippery surface and blinded by the snow of others). I agree with the article, Gilles was amazing.

[RedFever]

Senna never had to drive the T5, arguably the worst Ferrari ever produced (Jody Schecketer, WC then, failed to qualify it once and started in last row on another occasion) and the 126C, powerful, but driveable like a garbage track. Gilles brought it to 3rd place under wet, without a front wing. Gilles was not a showman, just the driver with the best car control ever.

[Peeko]

Red, even Harvey Postlewaithe, who designed the 126C, said the car was a peice of crap. He also said it was amazing that Gilles would drive it as high as he would, let alone win 2 races with it.

[Bob Nomates]

Peeko, it was only a practice session and in any case in the conditions described you would have to be pretty careful driving at that speed or not bothered about crashing, many be the other drivers thought, "seems a bit daft driving flat out in these conditions, what happens if I crash?....after all I won't be able to drive 11 seconds faster than everone else for a full race distance and even if I could what would be the point in that?....hmmmmmm"

I think Senna was the much better because he was always quick in the most competative field of drivers ever.

[Bob Nomates]

In 97 Damon Hill nearly won in an Arrows in dry conditions, a couple of years ago so it is possible to win in a crap car, not forgetting that he failed to qualify in Australia.

[Bob Nomates]

Also GV never made it into Murrays all time top 10 a couple of years ago.

[RedFever]

I wonder why every F1 driver, not some idiot TV commentator, that saw Gilles drive ranked him as the guy with best car control they ever saw. I think F1 drivers know a thing or two more than Murray and yourself.

[mtl'78]

Yes, RedFever is right. You just HAD to to see him in action. It had nothing to do with what the others were doing.

When you watch a race today, we have good cameras that give you sharp images and you can see the cars very well. Yet it is still very difficult to see how the car is handling, is it faster through a corner than the one that just went by, etc.

When you watched GV, you could clearly see the difference. He defined the notion of ATTCKING a corner, and in the wet, you could HEAR the difference, the pitch of his engine wouldn't waver as he slip through the puddles, indicating that he hadn't lifted an inch.

He would follow a race car INCHES behind in a rainstorm, where visibilty was 0. You would sit there, on the edge of your seat SCREAMING at the TV "slow down!" I remember once his car being completely hidden by the other's spray he was so close.

What it came down to back then, was that the limit of a racecar was often how fast the driver was able/willing to drive it. Gilles was more willing and just as able to do so than anybody he raced against.

If you can get your hands on tapes from that era, I really suggest you check them out. Talking about Gilles' exploits usually cheapens them, the only way to truly appreciate them is to watch.

How can you explain his pass on Jones at Tarzan? the final laps of Dijon?rain at the Glenn '79? Monaco & Jarama '81?

(the article was great, but failed to mention that Gilles must have locked up all 4 tyres 30 times during that race, he came within inches of leaving the track at almost every corner etc.)

[cambridge]

Right Ellen, great article.. you're redeemed for yesterdays rants!! I agree that some of Gilles V. ability in the wet had to do with his early adventures in snowmobiles, but also was probably his driving style, basically no fear. I think that can't be overlooked when lap times are just 100ths apart, its the person who hesitates just a fraction who loses. As much as I hate to say it, the current rain meister is MS. And why, probably because of no fear, no hesitation. When it starts to get really wet in a race you know its all over if he's anywhere in the lead.

Once again, great post Ellen, back to the real topic at hand, racing!!

[Bob Nomates]

Murray is no idiot, he has been there at ever GP race since the champioship began.
I think fans of GV are very passionate about him and never have a cross word to say, I just find it hard to belive that someone can be this perfect....I have seen clips of his races and he does look good but so do the drivers that he was battling with and they get no respect, I have never heard anyone saying that the guy (not sure of his name) that kept overtaking him was good as well or Gilles was out order for driving back to the pits with one of his wheels dragging along the tarmac behind him, and don't say he didn't realise (which some people have written) because I'm pretty sure I'd notice the differece.
I take nothing at all away from his achievements but he just seems to good to be true to me.

[RedFever]

Bob, did you watch him race? live? that's the whole point.

Gilles was not perfect, Spain 79 trew away a possible victory, in one start he collided and took out two cars with him. In SIlverstone he ended up in the nets. Gilles was not perfect, nobody is perfect. Simply, Gilles had 2 superior skills: 1) he was always at the limit (both because of his personal belief of what a racer should be and because he knew little fear); 2) he had better car control than anyone I have ever seen (1974 on). Ayrton might as well been faster on a single lap, I am not saying Gilles was perfect and better in every area.

Alan Jones was following him in Monaco. He was behind Gilles for many laps and noticed that Gilles was touching the guard-rail under the tunnel at each lap. As Jones explained it "he was going flat out under the tunnel. He wasn't actually hitting the guard rail, he was sliding against it, at each and every lap. You could have glued some paper on the rail and Gilles would have touched it, leaving black marks on the paper, without ripping it off!!" And that is precisely what I and others were saying: superior control of the car. And at the Tosa in Imola (before they introduced the chicane at Tamburello) they used to arrive at 190mph. Guess who was outbreaking everyone else? you guessed right, Gilles.

Also, another fallacy. People mention how Ayrton had to fight the fircest opposition of all times. I guess part of this statement is ignorance (people that make that claim have not watched the GPs in the late 70s and early 80s). Gilles competed against Mario Andretti, Ronnie Peterson, James Hunt, Jody Scheckter, Niki Lauda, Carlos Reutemann, John Watson, Jacques Laffitte, Riccardo Patrese, Alain Prost, Dider Pironi, Jean Pierre Jabouille, Rene Arnoux, Patrick Depallier, Nelson Piquet, Elio DeAngelis, Keke Rosberg. Each and everyone of this drivers, if not a WC (in same cases they are, of course) was at least a very, very tought competitor. People like Watson and Laffitte would give HHF and Barrichello a run for their money!!! and cars back then were closer together, with 3-4 or even 5 teams winning races in one season. I don't want to ever hear again that Ayrton had a tougher competition, because in Gilles days the competition was as tough as it gets. ANd he never had the best McLaren of all times.

[Peeko]

Bob, practice sessions were different back then. Friday's times actually counted towards their Saturday times.

[RedFever]

yes, and your best time from both sessions was used to assign your starting position. As far as anyone knew, it could have rained the same on Saturday, leaving everyone else at least 11 seconds behind Gilles. Besides, when Jody SCheckter, newly crowned WC, states that he "scared myself shitless and I am sure there is nothing I can do to improve my time (Jody was 2nd and had the same car as Gilles!!!)", you should realize that F1 driver are not the humble kind and to elevate someone else's skills like that, well, it's self explanatory.

[John B]

Redfever, agreed about the grids from the early 1980s. I wonder though if there was simply more opportunity for all these drivers to prove themselves because the field was closer (with many running Cosworths). GP weekends were much more unpredictable, especially in 1982.

As far as Villeneuve, I think the best measure of his skill was his performance with the 1981 Ferrari, considering that his teammate Pironi (who certainly was not slow) only managed a few points and probably reflected the true level of the car. Pironi had a few great drives that year too, the best holding off Piquet's Brabham for 50 laps at Imola.

[Diffuser]

Did Gilles ever dominate over any of his teammates? I don´t think he did. And Jody Scheckter was the man who won wdc for Ferrari in 79, not Gilles. He was probably very exciting to watch, (no I havn´t seen him live, but I´ve seen him on tv) but it´s the results wich counts.

[Don Capps]

Perhaps I am just too old to really care anymore, but Gilles was a sight to behold - and I saw him in action several times and not just in GP. I watched him in Formula Atlantic and was amazed at how he did what he did!

Results, smultz.

Statistics are just that that, numbers. I have gigs of data on GP & F1 & Indy car & sports car & stock car racing. However, they only go so far. In an era where bean-counters dictate reality and only numbers count, I am delighted I saw the likes of folks like Gilles, Ronnie Peterson, Jimmy Bryan, Curtis Turner, Eugenio Castellotti, and Dan Gurney race.

The performance of Dan Gurney, John Surtees, and Graham Hill at the 1962 German GP was amazing, with Jim Clark in dogged pursuit after stalling on the grid.

Sorry, but I get carried away... pardon an old geezer's intrusions into the modern world. Nice article, BTW Ellen. Yours?

------------------
Yr fthfl & hmbl srvnt,

Don Capps

Semper Gumbi: If this was easy, we’d have the solution already…

[This message has been edited by Don Capps (edited 05-04-2000).]

[404KF2]

Diffuser,

Please research the facts before making rash statements such as you did above.

The reason that Jody Scheckter won the WDC that year was that team orders were invoked at least once, in Jody's favour. Gilles would have won more races and won that year's WDC if team orders had not been used.

In fact, it was Didier Pironi's refusal to respect team orders at the previous race in 1982 that may have led indirectly to Gilles' death at Zolder. Gilles did his job before for Scheckter but Pironi didn't for Villeneuve.

I refer you to Gerry Donaldson's book on Villeneuve.

[magnum]

Villeneuve died after 5 years in F1 - had Schumacher or Mika died five years ago, what would we have said of either of them?

Stats mean nothing. Gilles was supreme. Bob, you say he sounds too good to be true? Well, that's exactly right - he was. Just simply unbelievably f;ing awesomely incredible car control. A freak, he was, an absolute freak.

[selena]

Yes, Senna was indeed the rain-master. I hope Schuey will just be as good as I am waiting for another rain-master and another rainy/wet race to watch some brilliant wet-weather driving.

[westendorf]

Great stuff. I vote for Gilles just because I saw him three times, and yes he was amazing! Saved my program for Watkins Glen too. I wonder which would be more difficult to drive in the wet, the 1930's skinny tire cars or the modern [Senna era] fat rain tire cars? The old cars would drift easily in the dry on narrow tires with breakaway being nice and gradual but little over-all grip. The wide tires with added chassis down force would help but wide tires generally breakaway with less notice? hmmm..
ciao, GFW

[Billy]

Brilliant article !

Ellen: could you let us know who wrote it, and where was it published ?

[cjs f1]

Well, they agreed with my Ickx/Rodriguez 'rain drivers' belief , nice to know. Few people seem to mention them, especially Rodriguez.

[MichaelL]

I think Schumacher,Senna and Giles Villeneuve
are the 3 finest wet driver of the last 30 years.

[SpaRCo]

My god villenuve is overrated,diffuser is right,if he was so good why couldnt he ever dominate ANY of his team mates????

If he was the FASTEST why did he lose the qualifying battles with every team mate,I think Jody got him 12-4 in one season.And carlos beat him as well.

He had some brilliant momements for sure but they have all been blown up way to much.

In all his years he was never the No1 ferrari driver.

He was 11 seconds faster than everyone lese at the glen in a PRACTICE section,Most of the other drivers where to scared to push in those conditions,so all it proves it that gilles was braver than them all.

For the writer of this article to say he was better than senna and the rest is farcical to say the least.
Look at the drives senna and shuey have delivered in the wet,they are in another league.

Gilles villenueve IS the most overrated F1 driver EVER.

[Peeko]

Sparcro, I'm curious; how old are you? How long have you been watching F1?

[SpaRCo]

Why do you care how old i am and how long ive been watching F1?

You seem to be implying that i dont know what im talking about.

I have been watching long enough and read enough to know my facts mate.

[Peeko]

Well, obviously you don't, because the great majority of the motorsports world (i.e., drivers, mechanics, managers, etc...) would tell you you're full of it.

[Bob Nomates]

Are there any good books about GV that are worth reading, which is the best book to read?....I'm not to big on stats, a book that's a bit like 'As time goes by' by Christoper Hilton on Senna would be good.

[mtl'78]

Bob, 1st of all, those are good points you raise. All of us look back with rose coloured glasses and that's normal. Gilles was far from perfect. He often made ridiculouos mistakes that left you gasping in the same way his exploits did! I remember in '78 he was leading at Long Beach, actually after a difficult start to his career, when he came up to lap a car, he stuck his nose inside of a turn and took himself and the other car out. It was a spectacular accident, His Ferrari got up on the other car's rear wheels and flew into the tyres! His '78 season progressed like this the whole year, to the point that people were wondering if Enzo had lost his touch by signing him. It wasn't until the final race of the year (my 1st GP, hence the handle) that he won. He won in a very un-Villeneuve way, driving a comfortable 2nd, until Jones retired and he cruised home for the win.

In 1979, he was usually faster than Jody, but his attitude that it was more important to be fastest than to finish well cost him many many points. Very often, unhappy with 4th place, he would pit for new rubber late in the race (this was pre refueling), then rejoin and set a series of fastest laps that were seconds faster than anyone else. At the end, he was 6th or something, but he was as happy as the winner, because he had proved himself the fastest.

How many times did he throw away a podium, going for a win? Dijon '79 is the best example. The Turbo Renaults were pulling off a Maclaren-type domination of the race, and Gilles was the only one near their pace, he fought and fought, locking up, powersliding, until he caught Arnoux, but it was clear that he had no hope of being able to stay ahead, yet he kept banging and fighting passing and re-passing until the flag dropped. I don't think ANYONE would have been able to do that. It just required someone with zero fear. They touched a dozen times in 4-5 laps!!!! That's more than NASCAR for God's sake!

It wasn't until 81-82 tha GV started to mature as a driver, and realized the importance of driving for points etc. and that's what made his death so hard to take.

In 1982, you had the same feeling that a lot of people had at the start of this year, it is MS' year finally! 1982, all the pundits agreed, was GV's year...


As far as books to read, I've read some very good french books by Pierre Lecours and Gaston Parent, but in English, there's Gerry Donaldson's "Villeneuve: The life of a Legendary racing driver" It's a very meat-and-potatos biography, long on annectotes and a race-by-race account of his career, with very little in the way of personal life etc.

[magnum]

Or you could always try the worst journalist (so-called by Schumacher fans on this BB), Nigel Roebuck. Called "Villeneuve".

And frankly, I really do not see schumacher and senna in the same list - last time i saw a wet race with the two of them, i clearly recall senna driving past the german on the outside without much problem ...

[Indian Chief]

He had a complete tractor of a
Ferrari nearly all his career

It is precisely such quotes which turn me off from supporting Gilles.
The writer conveniently forgets the excellent cars he drove in 1977 (at the end). 1978, 1979 and 1982. Driving poor cars for 2 years hardly makes it "a tractor for most of his career".
404, Team orders were only imposed at Monza '79 when it was clear that Gilles had almost no chance of winning the WDC. Alan Jones was catching up with Jody (with the Williams- the best car on the grid)
Sure, Gilles had great races, but his mediocre races (which are many in number) are always forgotten because he was killed while racing.

[Peeko]

Indian cheif, He drove 4 full seasons of F1. That would mean that the 2 years he spent in **** cars, would be half of his career. Add the few races from 77 and 82, and that gives you **** cars for most of his career. Harvey Postlewaithe, who designed the 126C(1981)said himself that the car was absolute ****. I think the actual word was "truck".

[RedFever]

Diffuser and Sparco, you only managed to show your ignorane. Don't comment on something you didn't see, it makes you look absolutely stupid.


mtl'78 is right, Gilles approach to F1 was quite unhortodox and only by 1981 he realized that he didn't have to risk uselessly. Contrary to his son, who showed an incredible level of maturity when he reached F1 for a guy that young, Gilles did not spend a second thinking about results when he first approached F1, he only wanted to go fast.

He said just a few months before his death "well, you know, eventually you mature, you look at things with a different perspective. If now I am leading a race with 30 seconds over my closest opponent, I am not going to push and risk a crash. But I used to, I used to go as fast as I could all the time. I never really cared about winning championships. For me racing is not about collecting points, it's about going at the limit. But I guess I have learned to control certain situations better. I think that if another one or two guys will retire soon, I am really going to be the best around here (laughs)"

Now regarding the fallacies posted by people who never saw Gilles drive:

In 1978, Gilles was a rookie, while his teamate Carlos Reutemann was extremely experienced, already familiar with the Ferrari team and car, and one of the fastest (albeit underestimated) drivers in F1. I don't recall D. Hill dominating Prost as a rookie, or Jacques Villeneuve dominating Damon when he was a rookie. Why would you expect Gilles, coming from Formula ATlantic to dominate one of the best drivers in F1 in his first year???

In 1979, Ferrari hired Jody Scheckter, then considered one of the top drivers to win the title and have Gilles, with some more experience under his belt, support him. Things turned out very differently. Gilles took the lead of the championship and only his mistake in Spain (arrived 7th) and 2 lucklater races allowed Jody to pass him. They were close the entire season and in Monza, Ferrari asked Gilles to let Jody win, since that would have meant title for Ferrari, since Jones was still a potential threat. The season ended with Jody scoring 4 points more than Gilles. If Gilles would have been allowed to attack and win in Monza, he would have won the title with a 4 points lead. That is without mentioning that a Gilles with 20 GPs behind him at season start, outqualifyied the WC Jody 8 out 15 times........

From then on, there was no competition between Gilles and his teamate.

In 1980, Gilles outqualified Jody 13 out of 14 times!!!!!! He scored 6 points with the dreadful T5 while Jody scored 2.

The music didn't change when young gun Didier Pironi joined Ferrari.

In 1981, Gilles outqualified Didier 10 out of 15 times. He also scored 25 points and 2 wins, against 9 points for Didier and a 4th his best result!!!!!!!

In 1982, Gilles outqualified Didier 4 out of 4 times!!!!!! Didier arrived 2nd in the WC, 5 points behind Keke with 5 less GPs attended than Keke due to his disastrous crash. That shows how easily Gilles would have dominated that season, and not only it would have been so deserved, but also would have allowed people who know nothing about his racing to see some nice numbers and recognize him for his talent.

Next time, first you do your homework, you will not make an ass out of yourself.

PS Indian Chief. Gilles raced 2 GPs with Ferrari in 77. In 1978 the car was good, but no match for the illegal Lotus 79 with miniskirts. He won his first GP, which is all one can expect from a rookie. His beginning of the season was not too good, but once he learned how to adapt his style to an F1, he did very well.

In 1979 the car was good, but not dominant. The williams of Jones was faster during the second part of the season, while the Ligier of Laffitte and Depaillier was faster during the first part. All in all was a good car and Gilles in fact scored 3 wins and arrived 2nd in the WC.

In 1980, the T5 was the worst Ferrari ever. Jody did not even qualify it once!!! In 1981, the 126C had HPs, but the handling was a disaster. Didier was a good diver and barely managed a 4th place as the highlight of the season. Gilles somehow managed to drive it sideways in turns and scored to memorable victories in Monaco and Jarama.

Finally he got a car, the 126C2 that after the first 4-5 races eventually developed into the very best car of the season. Unfortunately, by then he was dead. So, Gilles never had a dominant car, like Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Hill, Mansell, or Hakkinen. He had 2 good cars, but he was very inexperienced back then. He won4 GPs with them, but Gilles really managed to emerge had the best talent in F1 by the end of 79. By then, his mistakes were extremely rare and his performance brilliant. But his cars became atrocious. We can only imagine what he would have achieved with ars like the ones he had in 78 and 79 in his last 2 years of F1 or if he had survived in 82. If Mika Hakkinen would have died after 4 years in F1, he would be today a footnote in the annuals, since he never had good cars until 98. Yet, people that look beyond the numbers already knew that Mika was very talented. It took Gilles a good 2 years to learn to use his talent in F1 in a constructive way. His many mistakes became rare and his control of the car became superior to anybody else. He had finally matured into the best F1 driver I had ever seen, but he had to suffer with uncompetitive cars for 30 GPs. Then, when it was his time, he died.

[This message has been edited by RedFever (edited 05-04-2000).]

[SpaRCo]

redfever i never said gilles was a crap driver,i said he was overrated and you cant argue that point.

When I read articles saying he was the best wet weather driver ever it makes me laugh considering he never won a wet weather race compared to senna who won NUMEROUS wet races
and in stunning style ,same as shuey,they both crushed the opposition like ants in the wet,when did gilles do that??

Thats what i mean when i say hes overrated and you must be incredibly ignorant to argue that.

Sure he may of done this and may of done that if he had lived,point is he DIDNT and saying more is just SPECULATION.
Senna and shuey have the results simple.
He obviously had talent but he didnt apply it well.

[RedFever]

SparCo, if there is one ignorant person here that is you.

First, you can hardly call me ignorant, holding two masters degrees from NYU and Columbia University.....

Second, you are the biggest ignorant when you attempt to judge something you haven't witnessed. Arriving first with a good car is good, arriving 3rd in the rain with the worst piece of **** like Gilles in Montreal 81 is much better. Unfortunately there are bunches of people who cannot see anything beyond numbers. You are one of them. I don't need to look at numbers. I have seen Gilles race and I have seen how he outclassed everyone else that was on a circuit with him. I leave you to your stupid numbers and statistics, happy in your ingorance.

[RedFever]

PS. Overated you say. In your ignorance, you fail to explain why:

Alan Jones (Aussie 1980 WC)
John Watson
Jacques Laffitte
Jody Scheckter (WC 1979)
Niki Lauda (WC 1975, 1977, 1984)
Riccardo Patrese
Rene Arnoux

and many many other F1 drivers, extremely more knowledgeable about F1 than you, have been very vocal in judging Gilles, when he was still alive as "the most talented of all of us". Coming from three times World Champion Niki Lauda, I am inclined to belive that Gilles was not overated, that you are the one who has no clue.

[Smooth]

Originally posted by RedFever:
First, you can hardly call me ignorant, holding two masters degrees from NYU and Columbia University.....

Well, having a degree is not any proof someone is lacking ignorance, so that proves nothing. I have a degree from one of the best engineering schools in the USA, but I still manage to prove my ignorance on this BB almost daily!

As far as the Gilles thing, well I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Was the guy gifted with car control, flair, and lack of fear? Certainly, without a doubt. He pulled off moves that would have put most drivers in the kitty litter, and he did it often. But he lacked many of the skills that make up a complete F1 racer. While it is easy to speculate that he would have gained those with experience (I believe he would have) it is also easy to look back with a teared eye and 'remember when....'
Gilles was a treasure to many, and I can appreciate the reasons why. But I can also see the negatives.... there is always a little extra romance and legend attached when a driver as gifted as Gilles or Senna dies doing what they loved, and I think most of us recognize that.

[magnum]

Bah! What a load of politically correct nonsense! I too have three degrees (one of which is a Masters! He-yah!) and no less than eight diplomas (ooooooo!) and so, qualifications and creedentials spelt out, here's my point:

Sparco, I have never read a more unenlightening attack on a racing driver in my life. If you want to attack a driver, at least stick to some semblance of FACT - for you to be unable to see Gilles for what he was does nothing to derail Gilles' estimation in the minds, souls, hearts and eyes of those blessed enough to have seen him - all it does it manifest the dour fact that you have no idea what F1 is about - who the **** ever said F1 was about winning?! You "new" bloody fans make me sick (oooo!) - with all your f'ing stats this and stats that - well, guess what! Mika is faster than Schumacher because he has more pole positions! And Hill is faster and BETTER than Strirling Moss (Stirling who?, I hear you ask, scrambling for Forix) - f;ing stats, numbers - this is NOT f'ing BASEBALL!

WHo CARES if Gilles did not win a championship! Who CARES if Alesi only won one race! Who CARES that Moss never won a championship! Only people who care are those anally retentive freaks who wish to propel their current ubermensch (oh we all know who you supprt, Sparco, don't we) to the status of greatest driver of all time. Well, it PATENTLY is NOT the case ... and it NEVER will be the case - because in one broad stroke, there is MORE than numbers, MORE than championships, MORE than wins, MORE than starts to wins ratio, MORE to qualifying figures, MORE - there is a HUMANITY within F1, an unquantative way of rating a driver - and what, you ask, bug eyed, is that? I'm glad you asked - it is the personality of the driver, it is the WAY the driver comports himself on the track, it is his guts, his commitment, his desire, his flair, his skill, his talent, his ability - greateness, mate, is NOT judged on facts and numbers. It is based on being loved by the people that have watched you. Greatness is not bought - and is not found in stale figures. It resides defintately in the heart and soul of those blessed to have watched greatness.

BY your statement, it is clear that you have never seen greatness. And it makes you a lesser person for it.

[mtl'78]

Yeah, but what sets Gilles apart from Senna, Prost Schumacher or Lauda was that there was not an evil bone in his body.

He never took someone out purposely, He never played behind-the-scenes political games, when he raced, he ALWAYS left room for his competitors, and always took care of his teamand teammates. He stood by Enzo and his crap Ferraris when Ted Mayer and Ron Dennis were trying to get him to break his contract.

He was just a ral hero, in thre classic way. Came from abject poverty, sold EVERYTHING he owned to fund 1 season of F Atlantic, which ended up launching his career, when at the Trois-Rivieres race, he beat all the invited F1 drivers, including WC James Hunt, who was so impressed, got GV his seat at Maclaren for Silverstone '77.

When he made it to F1 he travelled in a motorhome with his family, they slept in the truck, at the track!!!!

His life was full of these stories that just set him apart from the prima donna world of F1.

[magnum]

Jees what F1 has become

[Bob Nomates]

I have four degrees and I still say Senna was the greatest!!!

[magnum]

BAh Bob, I just corrected your English in another thread so I say that you BOUGHT your degrees

[Peeko]

Yeah but mtl'78, magnum, he's overated. Just because a guy in his first race is able to keep pace with the likes of Mario Andretti, James Hunt in a car that was 2 years old, on a track he had never driven before, means f;ck (thanks magnum ) all.

[magnum]

Peeko I sincerely hope you have a degree - and a MAsters, at that. Otherwise ...

[magnum]

And one more thing, Sparco - I am very surprised that those who feel it neccessary to criticise one of the greats, has not used Gilles' escapade into the crowds in Japan. And his quote afterwards too. But since you're so aware of Gilles career, I guess I don't need me to tell you that.

[This message has been edited by magnum (edited 05-04-2000).]