I've started reading MotorSport magazine again recently (after a gap of a few decades) and have been intrigued by the focus on British drivers such as Peter Arundell, Mike Parkes, Chris Irwin, Tony Trimmer, Chris Craft, Jonathan Williams and so on, but does anybody have any recollections of Chris Lambert?
Would I be correct in saying that great things were expected of him at the time and was there really a lot of trouble following his death at Zandvoort with the Dutch authorities and one Clay Reggazoni...?
Somebody once told me that it nearly went to court.
MCS
Chris Lambert - was he an F1 star in the making ?
Started by
MCS
, Jun 20 2003 20:51
5 replies to this topic
Advertisement
#2
neville mackay
-
- 127 posts
- Joined: April 03
Member
Posted 21 June 2003 - 10:24
Lambert was a bespectacled former karting champion , born in Birmingham in May 1944, who went F2 racing in 68 with what I believe was a self run team. Earlier in the year he came 4th at the tragic Hockenheim race in which Jim Clark was killed. He subsequently qualified 8th a Thruxton (but failed to finish), 11th at Madrid (with a 13th place finish), 11th at the Palace (DNF) and 13th at Tulln-Langenbarn (another DNF). At Zandvoort he qualified 9th for the final and was battling with Regazzoni when his fatal accident occurred. The two cars tangled near the East Tunnel and both somersaulted - Regazoni walking away unscathed but poor Lambert being killed. Lambert's father took things very badly and convinced himself that Regazzoni had caused his son's death. He subsequently waged an unsuccessful but bitter campaign for a year or so to get Regazoni banned or prosecuted or both. In the finest traditions of the time, very little of this washing of dirty linen in public made the motorsports press. At one point Louis Stanley tried to intervene with Lambert senior but to no avail.
With the passage of time it would be interesting to discover whether any fault for the accident might reasonably be attributed to Regazzoni, who was considered wild and hairy in his early days, or whether this was a genuine racing accident. It is also interesting to speculate whether Lambert really had the potential to go places or whether - as perhaps the statistics above suggest - he had found his level as one of the talented but underfunded peleton who made up much of the grid in the 1960's F2 circus.
Neville Mackay
With the passage of time it would be interesting to discover whether any fault for the accident might reasonably be attributed to Regazzoni, who was considered wild and hairy in his early days, or whether this was a genuine racing accident. It is also interesting to speculate whether Lambert really had the potential to go places or whether - as perhaps the statistics above suggest - he had found his level as one of the talented but underfunded peleton who made up much of the grid in the 1960's F2 circus.
Neville Mackay
#3
Pedro 917
-
- 1,767 posts
- Joined: August 02
Member
Posted 21 June 2003 - 20:49
From Louis Stanley's book "Behind The Scenes" :
The Lambert affair
For many months I was involved in the controversy following the tragic death of Chris Lambert at Zandvoort. The shock of his son's death hit John Lambert very hard. He became bitter and hypersensitive to any suggestion that Chris might have made a drivererror. He accused Clay Regazzoni of being responsible for the crash. It was an understandable reaction, but ill advised in that it blurred the image of a talented young driver. It was not fair to his memory and I attempted to get this point home. I failed as John Lambert's letter shows:
'It was very nice seeing you and I was so surprised at your request to me that l sat well into the night considering it. I am not a vindictive man as l hope you realize but as I think back my anger rises and there are things I cannot forget or forgive and feel the only thing the FIA can do is to put them right, whatever the loss of face. Chris was killed without doubt in my opinion by the dangerous driving of Clay Regazzoni. Chris was blamed for his own death. Regga was cleared and Chris was called a 'Sunday driver'. A libellous and completely untrue account of the accident was published.
'When the above facts were proved to the RNAC, they made no effort to put the record right and broke all regulations to bring out a report which enabled them to lie doggo.
'When I went to the RAC where I could expect a hearing on behalf of one of their own boys, they gave me an incomprehensively unfair 'Tribunal' refusing to listen to my case and rejected it. I wrote to all members of the Competition Committee and I have heard since that there were many unhappy people when the decision was made to reject my request for support. In view of the fact that on the evidence I have supplied the Dutch judiciary they are contemplating (and I believe may even have started) a criminal case against Regazzoni, it is obvious the RAC must have been totally wrong to reject my request for support.
'At the occasion of the Formula Two race I wrote to nearly all the intended drivers giving them the opportunity to say "let sleeping dogs lie" ? not one so replied.
I therefore feel Chris and I have both been wronged far too much and far too frequently and beyond the point where one can turn the other cheek. I am very sorry if it is what you would like me to do. I cannot believe in your heart of hearts that it is.'
Seven months later John Lambert was still unhappy that his censure had not been acknowledged. He said that he read with interest a plea I had made in the press for non-police intervention in the field of motor-racing, but feels that:
'Its logic, if my own experience is anything to go by, leaves much to be desired. If privilege is granted, then full responsibility must go with it.... In the event of my son's death, matters were left to the motor?racing world and not only was no inquest as we know it held, but a completely false account was issued. It was not the Dutch Automobile Club who asked for an enquiry by the FIA, it was not the GPDA, it was not the club who sponsored my son's entries in the field of motor?racing, but it was the Dutch police, who on hearing my case felt there was sufficient truth in it to warrant such an enquiry. I shall forever be grateful to them and I hope that this enquiry will enable me to fade from this unpleasant scene and to live only the very pleasant memories which my association with my son's motor?racing has given me over the years.'
Unfortunately it was not to be so. Some 18 months later I received another letter:
'In view of what you did, or attempted to do when Chris was killed, I have the greatest regret in writing this letter to you.
'After the findings of the FIA, although they were not accurate in some details and went out of their way to praise Regazzoni's style of driving, I should have let the matter drop. However, Regazzoni caused to be printed accounts of the accident in which he stated that:
1. He was not to blame.
2. Lambert ran into him,
3. John Lambert has pursued the enquiries because of insurance money.
He has refused to withdraw this and the FIA has stated that the matter is closed as far as they are concerned. I shall therefore pursue my campaign against his style of selfish, dangerous, and, at times, maniacal driving because I believe it is some-one's job to shout before the inevitable happens. I would not be in the shoes of the FIA or the RAC if Regazzoni caused the death of another racing driver and
perhaps even that of innocent bystanders. My dossier would be at the disposal of any interested parties and I should esteem it a privilege to be called as a witness to any proceedings that might follow'
So ended a bitter dispute. John Lambert's reaction was understandable. His son had died. Violent death is a terrible shock for those involved. Usually the tragedy is accepted in stoical silence. Motorracing is dangerous and those who take part know the risks as do their families. But occasionally another dimension is added if it is felt that death might have been avoided had the actions of others been more temperate, and when officialdom appears to sweep the evidence under the carpet, it is instinctive for a grief-stricken parent to react as John Lambert did. Nevertheless I feel it was misguided. Nothing could bring back his son. For the sake of his memory it would have been more timely to restrain bitterness so that the memory of Chris should be of a talented, dedicated young driver who would surely not have wanted the recriminations that followed. Alongside Regazzoni he was a boy as regards experience. Clay was a professional driver in the mould of men like Farina and Mairesse. He knew no fear. He was hard, unyielding, and at times criticised by fellow drivers for taking risks that endangered others, but he would never deliberately cause another driver to crash. In a tight situation, he expected the other fellow to have the same degree of skill and be able to cope with the situation. That understanding has to be there. When drivers are bunched together at maximum speed, each man is confident that the others will not react stupidly. Only a break or mechanical failure should break the pattern of race behaviour. That is the argument in theory, but inevitably any driver who tests his machinery to the limit time and time again will, on the law of averages, have accidents Regazzoni paid the price with a crash that left him paralysed. His racing days are over, but he lives. Chris Lambert was not so fortunate.
The Lambert affair
For many months I was involved in the controversy following the tragic death of Chris Lambert at Zandvoort. The shock of his son's death hit John Lambert very hard. He became bitter and hypersensitive to any suggestion that Chris might have made a drivererror. He accused Clay Regazzoni of being responsible for the crash. It was an understandable reaction, but ill advised in that it blurred the image of a talented young driver. It was not fair to his memory and I attempted to get this point home. I failed as John Lambert's letter shows:
'It was very nice seeing you and I was so surprised at your request to me that l sat well into the night considering it. I am not a vindictive man as l hope you realize but as I think back my anger rises and there are things I cannot forget or forgive and feel the only thing the FIA can do is to put them right, whatever the loss of face. Chris was killed without doubt in my opinion by the dangerous driving of Clay Regazzoni. Chris was blamed for his own death. Regga was cleared and Chris was called a 'Sunday driver'. A libellous and completely untrue account of the accident was published.
'When the above facts were proved to the RNAC, they made no effort to put the record right and broke all regulations to bring out a report which enabled them to lie doggo.
'When I went to the RAC where I could expect a hearing on behalf of one of their own boys, they gave me an incomprehensively unfair 'Tribunal' refusing to listen to my case and rejected it. I wrote to all members of the Competition Committee and I have heard since that there were many unhappy people when the decision was made to reject my request for support. In view of the fact that on the evidence I have supplied the Dutch judiciary they are contemplating (and I believe may even have started) a criminal case against Regazzoni, it is obvious the RAC must have been totally wrong to reject my request for support.
'At the occasion of the Formula Two race I wrote to nearly all the intended drivers giving them the opportunity to say "let sleeping dogs lie" ? not one so replied.
I therefore feel Chris and I have both been wronged far too much and far too frequently and beyond the point where one can turn the other cheek. I am very sorry if it is what you would like me to do. I cannot believe in your heart of hearts that it is.'
Seven months later John Lambert was still unhappy that his censure had not been acknowledged. He said that he read with interest a plea I had made in the press for non-police intervention in the field of motor-racing, but feels that:
'Its logic, if my own experience is anything to go by, leaves much to be desired. If privilege is granted, then full responsibility must go with it.... In the event of my son's death, matters were left to the motor?racing world and not only was no inquest as we know it held, but a completely false account was issued. It was not the Dutch Automobile Club who asked for an enquiry by the FIA, it was not the GPDA, it was not the club who sponsored my son's entries in the field of motor?racing, but it was the Dutch police, who on hearing my case felt there was sufficient truth in it to warrant such an enquiry. I shall forever be grateful to them and I hope that this enquiry will enable me to fade from this unpleasant scene and to live only the very pleasant memories which my association with my son's motor?racing has given me over the years.'
Unfortunately it was not to be so. Some 18 months later I received another letter:
'In view of what you did, or attempted to do when Chris was killed, I have the greatest regret in writing this letter to you.
'After the findings of the FIA, although they were not accurate in some details and went out of their way to praise Regazzoni's style of driving, I should have let the matter drop. However, Regazzoni caused to be printed accounts of the accident in which he stated that:
1. He was not to blame.
2. Lambert ran into him,
3. John Lambert has pursued the enquiries because of insurance money.
He has refused to withdraw this and the FIA has stated that the matter is closed as far as they are concerned. I shall therefore pursue my campaign against his style of selfish, dangerous, and, at times, maniacal driving because I believe it is some-one's job to shout before the inevitable happens. I would not be in the shoes of the FIA or the RAC if Regazzoni caused the death of another racing driver and
perhaps even that of innocent bystanders. My dossier would be at the disposal of any interested parties and I should esteem it a privilege to be called as a witness to any proceedings that might follow'
So ended a bitter dispute. John Lambert's reaction was understandable. His son had died. Violent death is a terrible shock for those involved. Usually the tragedy is accepted in stoical silence. Motorracing is dangerous and those who take part know the risks as do their families. But occasionally another dimension is added if it is felt that death might have been avoided had the actions of others been more temperate, and when officialdom appears to sweep the evidence under the carpet, it is instinctive for a grief-stricken parent to react as John Lambert did. Nevertheless I feel it was misguided. Nothing could bring back his son. For the sake of his memory it would have been more timely to restrain bitterness so that the memory of Chris should be of a talented, dedicated young driver who would surely not have wanted the recriminations that followed. Alongside Regazzoni he was a boy as regards experience. Clay was a professional driver in the mould of men like Farina and Mairesse. He knew no fear. He was hard, unyielding, and at times criticised by fellow drivers for taking risks that endangered others, but he would never deliberately cause another driver to crash. In a tight situation, he expected the other fellow to have the same degree of skill and be able to cope with the situation. That understanding has to be there. When drivers are bunched together at maximum speed, each man is confident that the others will not react stupidly. Only a break or mechanical failure should break the pattern of race behaviour. That is the argument in theory, but inevitably any driver who tests his machinery to the limit time and time again will, on the law of averages, have accidents Regazzoni paid the price with a crash that left him paralysed. His racing days are over, but he lives. Chris Lambert was not so fortunate.
#4
MCS
-
- 4,790 posts
- Joined: June 03
Member
Posted 21 June 2003 - 21:35
Wow!
I'm lost for words.
Were there any witnesses to what happened at Zandvoort, or was anything else ever said...?
MCS
I'm lost for words.
Were there any witnesses to what happened at Zandvoort, or was anything else ever said...?
MCS
#5
Felix Muelas
-
- 1,216 posts
- Joined: November 99
Member
Posted 21 June 2003 - 22:13
MCS
According to my friend Jose Luis Otero, the accident happened on the 12th lap of the final heat. On the corner of the West Tunnel (I know Mattijs is going to kill me for not finding the adequate name of that corner, sorry in advance) Lambert´s Brabham-Ford´s rear wheel was touched by Regazzonni´s front left, as he was intending to overtake on the inside, whilst both of them travelling in excess of 200 km/h. Lambert´s Brabham was sent to the left, flying over the armco. He was dead even before being transported to hospital.
The original investigation by the Dutch Auto Club was not accusing Regazzoni, but John Lambert, after speaking with witnesses, was.
Finally, on November 14th 1971, there was an official declaration by the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile that established that Regazzoni was guilty of “a mistake in appreciation, but not of a serious negligence" whilst at the same time the declaration included a sentence where the "audacity" of a driver was said to be impossible to monitor...
At no time in that report it is stated that "Lambert ran into him" as the Stanley quote might imply (maybe we are not talking about the same statement). In the Nov 14, 1971 there IS a blame on Regazzoni, although "light". Just a mistake in appreciation.
Jose Luis acknowledges to have used the following reports when preparing his notes:
Prensa (Alfil) : 29 de Julio de 1968
CuatroRuedas: Septiembre de 1968, pg. 82
Sport-Auto: Septiembre de 1968, pg. 5; Noviembre de 1968, pg. 4
L´Automobile: Septiembre de 1968, pg. 79; Diciembre de 1971, pg. 11
According to my friend Jose Luis Otero, the accident happened on the 12th lap of the final heat. On the corner of the West Tunnel (I know Mattijs is going to kill me for not finding the adequate name of that corner, sorry in advance) Lambert´s Brabham-Ford´s rear wheel was touched by Regazzonni´s front left, as he was intending to overtake on the inside, whilst both of them travelling in excess of 200 km/h. Lambert´s Brabham was sent to the left, flying over the armco. He was dead even before being transported to hospital.
The original investigation by the Dutch Auto Club was not accusing Regazzoni, but John Lambert, after speaking with witnesses, was.
Finally, on November 14th 1971, there was an official declaration by the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile that established that Regazzoni was guilty of “a mistake in appreciation, but not of a serious negligence" whilst at the same time the declaration included a sentence where the "audacity" of a driver was said to be impossible to monitor...
At no time in that report it is stated that "Lambert ran into him" as the Stanley quote might imply (maybe we are not talking about the same statement). In the Nov 14, 1971 there IS a blame on Regazzoni, although "light". Just a mistake in appreciation.
Jose Luis acknowledges to have used the following reports when preparing his notes:
Prensa (Alfil) : 29 de Julio de 1968
CuatroRuedas: Septiembre de 1968, pg. 82
Sport-Auto: Septiembre de 1968, pg. 5; Noviembre de 1968, pg. 4
L´Automobile: Septiembre de 1968, pg. 79; Diciembre de 1971, pg. 11
#6
neville mackay
-
- 127 posts
- Joined: April 03
Member
Posted 22 June 2003 - 12:26
Thank you Felix for this fascinating information. I hadn't realised that the FIA had eventually concluded - albeit 3 and a half years after the event- that an element of blame officially lay with Regazzoni. Their conclusion seems a masterpiece of compromise and clever wording, which puts me in in mind of their conclusion to another similar incident about which I'll start another thread right now!
Neville Mackay
Neville Mackay
