planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:38 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2018 1:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 1369
Location: Far side of Koozebane
Fiki wrote:
Jezza13 wrote:
Yeah the only time I can recall Senna getting "preferential treatment" was when he nixed Derek Warwick joining Lotus in 86 but that was not because he was worried about facing Warwick but because he felt Lotus wasn't strong enough to support 2 top line drivers, hence the arrival of Dumfries.

I remember reading the British press vilified Senna for blocking Warwick but years later it was pretty much accepted that Senna was right in his conclusion
If you remember that, you might also remember de Angelis complaining about the way Lotus treated him in 1985, having finished 3rd in the previous year's championship, effectively cold shouldering him into joining Brabham.

Lotus may have been too small to field two number 1 drivers. But how would Senna have been able to donkeys that, after only 1 year in F1?


From memory, Senna was given joint #1 status when he joined Lotus in 85. I can only guess that after Senna won his 2nd race for them in Portugal, Peter Warr quickly concluded, & probably rightly so, that Senna was the future of Lotus. That DeAngelis left Lotus because he felt the team was focusing more on Senna than him doesn't necessarily mean Senna was getting preferential treatment as per a contractual agreement. I don't think there's ever been any indication that Senna was given parts, set up info, use of the T - car or any other assistance that DeAngelis didn't get. Senna might have gotten an extra hug before bedtime than Elio, i'm not disputing that, but as I said, I don't think, and I could be wrong, that Senna got any preferential treatment over DeAngelis that compromised DeAngelis' race performance.

I suppose we can kind of liken it to when Vettel first joined Webber at Red Bull. While both would have been equal in status, it was plain to see pretty early on where the love lied.

I would have thought it would have been pretty evident early on if a team was capable of fielding 2 top line drivers to the point of allowing a genuine challenge for a championship. Senna was pretty astute at summing up a situation pretty quickly and after 12 months in the team I think most drivers would have been able to draw that conclusion.

_________________
Question: If a compulsive liar tells you they're a compulsive liar, are they really a compulsive liar?

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2018 7:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:17 pm
Posts: 453
1. Michael Schumacher (7 titles)
2. Fangio (5 titles)
3/4. Vettel/Hamilton (4/5 titles)
5. Prost (4 titles)

Everything else is mere speculation and/or denial.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2018 10:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5944
Location: Michigan, USA
Quark wrote:
1. Michael Schumacher (7 titles)
2. Fangio (5 titles)
3/4. Vettel/Hamilton (4/5 titles)
5. Prost (4 titles)

Everything else is mere speculation and/or denial.

That, my friend, is disingenuous at best.

1. We all know titles are not a good indicator of who is the best individual performer in a team sport.
2. If they were, there would be no point having this discussion, so you have not contributed to it.
3. Speculation is precisely what is intended here, as is proper for a discussion forum.

If you don't want to partake in the discussion, that's perfectly fine. But posting something that's obviously contrary to the intended discussion isn't very helpful.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2018 11:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Invade wrote:
Irvine more or less stated that unless you were driving a Newey car or your name was Michael Schumacher, you weren't going to be winning the WDC, and so the decision that was in the best interests of Michael had to be made.

To me, it's quite obvious that Schumacher's talent was in the same ballpark as Senna.


This is true, but this is what happens in every sport; the biggest stars get their ego's massaged and everyone bends over backwards to accommodate them. I can't blame Senna for putting preferential treatment in his contract nor any other driver that wants to secure his best chance to get the best drive. It is what they do from the very first era of F1. People get so hang up with Schumacher that they forget what all the other drivers in the past have done. Patrick O'B wrote an article of how other top drivers in the past have won races by taking their team mate's car, being pushed by the crowd back in the race, getting the only wet tyre in the grid, etc., but you never see Fangio nor Steward getting the negativity that Schumacher got.

I would like to have a source for Senna's alleged preferential treatment, this seems a bit of a throwaway comment, he might have had it over someone like Johnny Dumfries while he was at Lotus but this is kind of putting it out there that he had it during his title years?


Article 4.3:

https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.uc ... d=zmkb0190

I also never said he had it in all his WDC years, unless you can point it out?

Well that's poignant to how drivers win their titles, nice find with the contract though, one small point the contract is for 1987 and 1988 but Senna drove for McLaren in 1988, was the contract broken?

It was how I thought when he was at Lotus with Senna's belief that Lotus couldn't run 2 competitive cars so the team was built around him with basically sub standard teammates.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6451
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Invade wrote:
Irvine more or less stated that unless you were driving a Newey car or your name was Michael Schumacher, you weren't going to be winning the WDC, and so the decision that was in the best interests of Michael had to be made.

To me, it's quite obvious that Schumacher's talent was in the same ballpark as Senna.


This is true, but this is what happens in every sport; the biggest stars get their ego's massaged and everyone bends over backwards to accommodate them. I can't blame Senna for putting preferential treatment in his contract nor any other driver that wants to secure his best chance to get the best drive. It is what they do from the very first era of F1. People get so hang up with Schumacher that they forget what all the other drivers in the past have done. Patrick O'B wrote an article of how other top drivers in the past have won races by taking their team mate's car, being pushed by the crowd back in the race, getting the only wet tyre in the grid, etc., but you never see Fangio nor Steward getting the negativity that Schumacher got.

I would like to have a source for Senna's alleged preferential treatment, this seems a bit of a throwaway comment, he might have had it over someone like Johnny Dumfries while he was at Lotus but this is kind of putting it out there that he had it during his title years?


Article 4.3:

https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.uc ... d=zmkb0190

I also never said he had it in all his WDC years, unless you can point it out?

Well that's poignant to how drivers win their titles, nice find with the contract though, one small point the contract is for 1987 and 1988 but Senna drove for McLaren in 1988, was the contract broken?

It was how I thought when he was at Lotus with Senna's belief that Lotus couldn't run 2 competitive cars so the team was built around him with basically sub standard teammates.

I do not recall if Senna had his contract broken or not to be honest now. In any case, this came out a few years ago and it was a bit of a first, as we never had a contract revealed with info of preferential treatment before.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 1:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
This is true, but this is what happens in every sport; the biggest stars get their ego's massaged and everyone bends over backwards to accommodate them. I can't blame Senna for putting preferential treatment in his contract nor any other driver that wants to secure his best chance to get the best drive. It is what they do from the very first era of F1. People get so hang up with Schumacher that they forget what all the other drivers in the past have done. Patrick O'B wrote an article of how other top drivers in the past have won races by taking their team mate's car, being pushed by the crowd back in the race, getting the only wet tyre in the grid, etc., but you never see Fangio nor Steward getting the negativity that Schumacher got.

I would like to have a source for Senna's alleged preferential treatment, this seems a bit of a throwaway comment, he might have had it over someone like Johnny Dumfries while he was at Lotus but this is kind of putting it out there that he had it during his title years?


Article 4.3:

https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.uc ... d=zmkb0190

I also never said he had it in all his WDC years, unless you can point it out?

Well that's poignant to how drivers win their titles, nice find with the contract though, one small point the contract is for 1987 and 1988 but Senna drove for McLaren in 1988, was the contract broken?

It was how I thought when he was at Lotus with Senna's belief that Lotus couldn't run 2 competitive cars so the team was built around him with basically sub standard teammates.

I do not recall if Senna had his contract broken or not to be honest now. In any case, this came out a few years ago and it was a bit of a first, as we never had a contract revealed with info of preferential treatment before.

Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 2:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5944
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.

Did he? Do you have a source for that aside from Mansell himself? Because Prost stated in an interview that I recall from 2013 (on the subject of Kimi and Alonso partnering at Ferrari next year) that 'if they had had a #1 and #2 driver in 1990, he would have won that title easily'. That doesn't sound like he had #1 status.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 2:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6451
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
[quote="pokerman"
I would like to have a source for Senna's alleged preferential treatment, this seems a bit of a throwaway comment, he might have had it over someone like Johnny Dumfries while he was at Lotus but this is kind of putting it out there that he had it during his title years?


Article 4.3:

https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.uc ... d=zmkb0190

I also never said he had it in all his WDC years, unless you can point it out?

Well that's poignant to how drivers win their titles, nice find with the contract though, one small point the contract is for 1987 and 1988 but Senna drove for McLaren in 1988, was the contract broken?

It was how I thought when he was at Lotus with Senna's belief that Lotus couldn't run 2 competitive cars so the team was built around him with basically sub standard teammates.

I do not recall if Senna had his contract broken or not to be honest now. In any case, this came out a few years ago and it was a bit of a first, as we never had a contract revealed with info of preferential treatment before.

Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.[/quote]

As I said, this is the only contract that has come to light with these conditions. We know that Prost has talked about the "special engines" that Senna was getting from Honda, so there may have been something in his contract with Macca, it is not inconceivable. Do we know about Prost's contract at his tenure with Mansell at Ferrari? There's little proof there Poker


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:08 am
Posts: 96
KingVoid wrote:
Tier 1:
Fangio, Clark, Senna, Schumacher, Hamilton

Tier 2:
Ascari, Stewart, Prost, Alonso, Vettel

Tier 3:
Hill, Brabham, Fittipaldi, Lauda, Piquet, Hakkinen


Tier 1:
Fangio, Clark, Senna, Schumacher, Hamilton

Tier 2:
Lauda, Ascari, Stewart, Prost, Alonso, Vettel

Tier 3:
Vettel, Hill, Brabham, Fittipaldi, Piquet, Hakkinen


I agree on your selection, though myself would swap Ascari for Lauda for Tier 2 or add them both and drop Vettel into Tier 3 ;) .... Reason being Vettel has made a lot of mistakes and not always been on his game after his season in Red Bull. All these other drivers have pretty much had solid performances in their whole careers..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.

Did he? Do you have a source for that aside from Mansell himself? Because Prost stated in an interview that I recall from 2013 (on the subject of Kimi and Alonso partnering at Ferrari next year) that 'if they had had a #1 and #2 driver in 1990, he would have won that title easily'. That doesn't sound like he had #1 status.

I would have thought that Mansell is a strong source, interesting what Prost said, maybe Mansell didn't honour what was expected of him, he left the team at the end of the season seemingly not on good terms with Prost.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.


As I said, this is the only contract that has come to light with these conditions. We know that Prost has talked about the "special engines" that Senna was getting from Honda, so there may have been something in his contract with Macca, it is not inconceivable. Do we know about Prost's contract at his tenure with Mansell at Ferrari? There's little proof there Poker

There was nothing in their contracts about anyone receiving special treatment, I think McLaren disputed what Prost said, the very next year Prost signed with Ferrari as the #1 driver with Mansell the #2 driver, this comes from Mansell who excepted the conditions and relinquished his own #1 status for monetary compensation I believe?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6451
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.


As I said, this is the only contract that has come to light with these conditions. We know that Prost has talked about the "special engines" that Senna was getting from Honda, so there may have been something in his contract with Macca, it is not inconceivable. Do we know about Prost's contract at his tenure with Mansell at Ferrari? There's little proof there Poker

There was nothing in their contracts about anyone receiving special treatment, I think McLaren disputed what Prost said, the very next year Prost signed with Ferrari as the #1 driver with Mansell the #2 driver, this comes from Mansell who excepted the conditions and relinquished his own #1 status for monetary compensation I believe?

Wait a minute...

Just on the post above you are happy to accept a driver's word (Mansell). But now Prost's word is not good enough???

And yes, that's what I said before, we do not know about their contracts, it's what Prost said about the preferential treatment he witnessed. And it hasn't got to be contractual No1 and No2, it could be little things, like the engines labelled "Senna" etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7363
Location: Belgium
I haven't read the whole contract, fascinating though it is, but I was surprised that Senna was insecure enough to put his No 1 status into his contract. I use the word insecure, but I can see some race fans might phrase it differently.

About those Honda engines; on searching for it I was rather surprised to find this: https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/history/f1/hondas-engine-war-mclaren
I knew from television interviews I saw with Prost after his career, what he had said about this. But to read about Keke saying very much the same thing to Nigel Roebuck, concerning his end of tenure with Williams, did come as a bit of a shock.

For those uncertain (or too certain) about Prost's speed, or lack thereof, I recall that Keke once said that he always considered himself fast. Until he came across Prost. Keke said no such thing about Mansell.

A final thought about contracts. Lauda once said or wrote that whenever he had a problem with McLaren, he would first visit the Philip Morris headquarters before visiting McLaren. Though Prost went from McLaren to Ferrari, and therefore stayed with the same tobacco sponsor, I can't help but wonder whether they had a say in which of the two champions they themselves preferred - on paper or not.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 11:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.


As I said, this is the only contract that has come to light with these conditions. We know that Prost has talked about the "special engines" that Senna was getting from Honda, so there may have been something in his contract with Macca, it is not inconceivable. Do we know about Prost's contract at his tenure with Mansell at Ferrari? There's little proof there Poker

There was nothing in their contracts about anyone receiving special treatment, I think McLaren disputed what Prost said, the very next year Prost signed with Ferrari as the #1 driver with Mansell the #2 driver, this comes from Mansell who excepted the conditions and relinquished his own #1 status for monetary compensation I believe?

Wait a minute...

Just on the post above you are happy to accept a driver's word (Mansell). But now Prost's word is not good enough???

And yes, that's what I said before, we do not know about their contracts, it's what Prost said about the preferential treatment he witnessed. And it hasn't got to be contractual No1 and No2, it could be little things, like the engines labelled "Senna" etc.

Well we were talking about contractual #1's, Mansell stated this was in the contract, did Prost state that Senna was the contractual #1?

McLaren disputed Prost's claims

https://www.grandprix247.com/2015/06/02 ... rspective/

Quote:
On the track the tension between the best two drivers in the world was intensifying. Alain was becoming increasingly convinced that Ayrton was receiving better engines from Honda, claiming that he had more speed on the straight.

McLaren took this very seriously. Whilst the collection of car data through the telemetry was in its early stages, especially when compared to today, I do remember having the data explained to me that the reason Ayrton was quicker on the straight was that he was quicker coming out of the corners!

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 12:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Fiki wrote:
I haven't read the whole contract, fascinating though it is, but I was surprised that Senna was insecure enough to put his No 1 status into his contract. I use the word insecure, but I can see some race fans might phrase it differently.

About those Honda engines; on searching for it I was rather surprised to find this: https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/history/f1/hondas-engine-war-mclaren
I knew from television interviews I saw with Prost after his career, what he had said about this. But to read about Keke saying very much the same thing to Nigel Roebuck, concerning his end of tenure with Williams, did come as a bit of a shock.

For those uncertain (or too certain) about Prost's speed, or lack thereof, I recall that Keke once said that he always considered himself fast. Until he came across Prost. Keke said no such thing about Mansell.

A final thought about contracts. Lauda once said or wrote that whenever he had a problem with McLaren, he would first visit the Philip Morris headquarters before visiting McLaren. Though Prost went from McLaren to Ferrari, and therefore stayed with the same tobacco sponsor, I can't help but wonder whether they had a say in which of the two champions they themselves preferred - on paper or not.

Senna was favoured after Prost decided to leave the team?

However his paranoia started long before that so that's not sustainable reasoning.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:05 pm
Posts: 259
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.

_________________
Short-time member, Life-Long Fan from 1965 -- More than 550 Grand Prix recorded since 1982 (all but 3), and counting...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6451
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.


As I said, this is the only contract that has come to light with these conditions. We know that Prost has talked about the "special engines" that Senna was getting from Honda, so there may have been something in his contract with Macca, it is not inconceivable. Do we know about Prost's contract at his tenure with Mansell at Ferrari? There's little proof there Poker

There was nothing in their contracts about anyone receiving special treatment, I think McLaren disputed what Prost said, the very next year Prost signed with Ferrari as the #1 driver with Mansell the #2 driver, this comes from Mansell who excepted the conditions and relinquished his own #1 status for monetary compensation I believe?

Wait a minute...

Just on the post above you are happy to accept a driver's word (Mansell). But now Prost's word is not good enough???

And yes, that's what I said before, we do not know about their contracts, it's what Prost said about the preferential treatment he witnessed. And it hasn't got to be contractual No1 and No2, it could be little things, like the engines labelled "Senna" etc.

Well we were talking about contractual #1's, Mansell stated this was in the contract, did Prost state that Senna was the contractual #1?

McLaren disputed Prost's claims

https://www.grandprix247.com/2015/06/02 ... rspective/

Quote:
On the track the tension between the best two drivers in the world was intensifying. Alain was becoming increasingly convinced that Ayrton was receiving better engines from Honda, claiming that he had more speed on the straight.

McLaren took this very seriously. Whilst the collection of car data through the telemetry was in its early stages, especially when compared to today, I do remember having the data explained to me that the reason Ayrton was quicker on the straight was that he was quicker coming out of the corners!



I see. I got confused as you did not mention contractual No1 in your post that I was referring to:

pokerman wrote:
Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6451
MB-BOB wrote:
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.


Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:05 pm
Posts: 259
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.


Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?
Nope. All drivers have contracts, and all drivers view themselves as better than their teammate, whether stipulated in a contract or not.

Do you remember Ascari's contract? Fangio's contract? Mike Hawthorn's contract? Discuss all the fine points of who was better all you want, but 40 years from now, all this bickering will not matter, because it will not be relevant, let alone remembered. The only thing to be remembered will be the statistical facts. And a 2-time WDC will never be ranked higher than a 7-time WDC.

_________________
Short-time member, Life-Long Fan from 1965 -- More than 550 Grand Prix recorded since 1982 (all but 3), and counting...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6451
MB-BOB wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.


Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?
Nope. All drivers have contracts, and all drivers view themselves as better than their teammate, whether stipulated in a contract or not.

Do you remember Ascari's contract? Fangio's contract? Mike Hawthorn's contract? Discuss all the fine points of who was better all you want, but 40 years from now, all this bickering will not matter, because it will not be relevant, let alone remembered. The only thing to be remembered will be the statistics. And a 2-time WDC will not be ranked higher than a 7-time WDC.

To the casual fans, yes, you are right. But it only takes a view in any F1 youtube video's comment section to see how uninformed the casual F1 fans are.

But in this forum we look a little bit further than that, even if we don't always agree! We have had countless threads about the statistics and how much they can flatter or undermine drivers, as statistics always do. There's a reason that Sir Stirling Moss is a more famous name than many other drivers, even though he has exactly 0 WDC's to his name.


Last edited by Siao7 on Wed Sep 26, 2018 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4862
MB-BOB wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.


Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?
Nope. All drivers have contracts, and all drivers view themselves as better than their teammate, whether stipulated in a contract or not.

Do you remember Ascari's contract? Fangio's contract? Mike Hawthorn's contract? Discuss all the fine points of who was better all you want, but 40 years from now, all this bickering will not matter, because it will not be relevant, let alone remembered. The only thing to be remembered will be the statistics. And a 2-time WDC will not be ranked higher than a 7-time WDC.


You don't think there's anyone that ranks Clark ahead of Schumi? I'm sure I've read some from time to time. Memories don't fade half as quick as you think they do and now we have every race on film and forums to keep discussions going. I know how highly rated Moss was and I'll know it in 40yrs too if I'm still here and I'll talk about it. I'll talk about the likes of Alonso and share articles,video etc about him and I'm sure there will be plenty more doing it as it's near impossible to talk about the careers of three of the guys high up on the stat list without mentioning Alonso and looking into the seasons.

I don't think you're getting push back for your opinion on stats trump all, it's a fairly common standpoint and for a lot of people it'll be true even in a non-spec series like F1, but I think it's more the finality you seem to think it will be that only the stats will be talked about or rated. The game is over 50 years old and it's not true now so why would it be in another 50?

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 2:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 1893
Lotus49 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.


Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?
Nope. All drivers have contracts, and all drivers view themselves as better than their teammate, whether stipulated in a contract or not.

Do you remember Ascari's contract? Fangio's contract? Mike Hawthorn's contract? Discuss all the fine points of who was better all you want, but 40 years from now, all this bickering will not matter, because it will not be relevant, let alone remembered. The only thing to be remembered will be the statistics. And a 2-time WDC will not be ranked higher than a 7-time WDC.


You don't think there's anyone that ranks Clark ahead of Schumi? I'm sure I've read some from time to time. Memories don't fade half as quick as you think they do and now we have every race on film and forums to keep discussions going. I know how highly rated Moss was and I'll know it in 40yrs too if I'm still here and I'll talk about it. I'll talk about the likes of Alonso and share articles,video etc about him and I'm sure there will be plenty more doing it as it's near impossible to talk about the careers of three of the guys high up on the stat list without mentioning Alonso and looking into the seasons.

I don't think you're getting push back for your opinion on stats trump all, it's a fairly common standpoint and for a lot of people it'll be true even in a non-spec series like F1, but I think it's more the finality you seem to think it will be that only the stats will be talked about or rated. The game is over 50 years old and it's not true now so why would it be in another 50?



You do raise a striking and critical point which makes the landscape of future percepts harder to predict according to precedents because of the extent of archiving. Everything is now stored - complete records of achievement with the footage to boot - and it will be reasonable to go back and compare complete careers of an Alonso to a future legend in 40 years time in a manner which simply isn't possible when trying to compare Messi to Pelé or even Maradona.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
As I said, this is the only contract that has come to light with these conditions. We know that Prost has talked about the "special engines" that Senna was getting from Honda, so there may have been something in his contract with Macca, it is not inconceivable. Do we know about Prost's contract at his tenure with Mansell at Ferrari? There's little proof there Poker

There was nothing in their contracts about anyone receiving special treatment, I think McLaren disputed what Prost said, the very next year Prost signed with Ferrari as the #1 driver with Mansell the #2 driver, this comes from Mansell who excepted the conditions and relinquished his own #1 status for monetary compensation I believe?

Wait a minute...

Just on the post above you are happy to accept a driver's word (Mansell). But now Prost's word is not good enough???

And yes, that's what I said before, we do not know about their contracts, it's what Prost said about the preferential treatment he witnessed. And it hasn't got to be contractual No1 and No2, it could be little things, like the engines labelled "Senna" etc.

Well we were talking about contractual #1's, Mansell stated this was in the contract, did Prost state that Senna was the contractual #1?

McLaren disputed Prost's claims

https://www.grandprix247.com/2015/06/02 ... rspective/

Quote:
On the track the tension between the best two drivers in the world was intensifying. Alain was becoming increasingly convinced that Ayrton was receiving better engines from Honda, claiming that he had more speed on the straight.

McLaren took this very seriously. Whilst the collection of car data through the telemetry was in its early stages, especially when compared to today, I do remember having the data explained to me that the reason Ayrton was quicker on the straight was that he was quicker coming out of the corners!



I see. I got confused as you did not mention contractual No1 in your post that I was referring to:

pokerman wrote:
Prost had preferential treatment over Mansell at Ferrari, I think in light of the thread it's only really relevant in respect to title years, Senna won no titles with Lotus.

Yeah I jumped about a bit there, Prost was very much going for the title that year but I don't believe that Mansell was acting like a #2 driver, I think it was brought up that Prost said he would have won the title if Mansell would have helped, it makes a difference.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.


Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?

:nod:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.


Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?
Nope. All drivers have contracts, and all drivers view themselves as better than their teammate, whether stipulated in a contract or not.

Do you remember Ascari's contract? Fangio's contract? Mike Hawthorn's contract? Discuss all the fine points of who was better all you want, but 40 years from now, all this bickering will not matter, because it will not be relevant, let alone remembered. The only thing to be remembered will be the statistics. And a 2-time WDC will not be ranked higher than a 7-time WDC.

To the casual fans, yes, you are right. But it only takes a view in any F1 youtube video's comment section to see how uninformed the casual F1 fans are.

But in this forum we look a little bit further than that, even if we don't always agree! We have had countless threads about the statistics and how much they can flatter or undermine drivers, as statistics always do. There's a reason that Sir Stirling Moss is a more famous name than many other drivers, even though he has exactly 0 WDC's to his name.

I'm not quite so sure Moss I would say is remembered more by older members, how often do you hear Moss' name mentioned in idle conversation, far less I would say then 20 years ago?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:05 pm
Posts: 259
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Lotus49 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.


Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?
Nope. All drivers have contracts, and all drivers view themselves as better than their teammate, whether stipulated in a contract or not.

Do you remember Ascari's contract? Fangio's contract? Mike Hawthorn's contract? Discuss all the fine points of who was better all you want, but 40 years from now, all this bickering will not matter, because it will not be relevant, let alone remembered. The only thing to be remembered will be the statistics. And a 2-time WDC will not be ranked higher than a 7-time WDC.


You don't think there's anyone that ranks Clark ahead of Schumi? I'm sure I've read some from time to time. Memories don't fade half as quick as you think they do and now we have every race on film and forums to keep discussions going. I know how highly rated Moss was and I'll know it in 40yrs too if I'm still here and I'll talk about it. I'll talk about the likes of Alonso and share articles,video etc about him and I'm sure there will be plenty more doing it as it's near impossible to talk about the careers of three of the guys high up on the stat list without mentioning Alonso and looking into the seasons.

I don't think you're getting push back for your opinion on stats trump all, it's a fairly common standpoint and for a lot of people it'll be true even in a non-spec series like F1, but I think it's more the finality you seem to think it will be that only the stats will be talked about or rated. The game is over 50 years old and it's not true now so why would it be in another 50?


I remember watching Jimmy Clark’s 1965 victory at the Indy 500 in real time, which signaled the future of rear-engined cars. (a wake-up call at the time here in the US). I followed his career in real time (as best the media would allow) until his tragic death in 1968. He was an unassuming Scot with a humble, mild-mannered attitude, sometimes feeling embarrassed when he won, even feeling guilty that he raced against his parent’s wishes.

While we can wax poetically about this, at the end of the day, you will realize Clark will be remembered as much because of the unfulfilled promises of a career cut short in its prime... as he will be remembered for his 2 WDCs, bravely driving cars better known as death traps than proper racing machines.

In contrast, we can say that Schumacher will be remembered for his arrogance, his driving ethics, and occasional lapses in judgment. But really, he will be remembered (much more) for earning 7 WDC’s in dominating fashion, setting record after record with two different teams over a 10-year period. He will not be remembered for his ill-fated comeback attempt, any more than Clark will be remembered for being a consummate driver, but NOT a strong technical mind for diagnosing a car (Colin Chapman did that).

You can insist that all these nuances will be preserved over time, and I hope I’ve proven that I can appreciate all these nuances, too. Appreciating the statistics does not take away any of these nuances. Instead, I’d like to think the records are realized proof of talent over time. And it will be these records mentioned first when a driver’s career is discussed. Can’t really avoid that practicality, and I don't think it a shallow sin to expect it.

_________________
Short-time member, Life-Long Fan from 1965 -- More than 550 Grand Prix recorded since 1982 (all but 3), and counting...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
This Senna contract discussion is WAY off topic, and deserving of the same chiding you folks heap on me and others who see this ranking of drivers simply.


Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?
Nope. All drivers have contracts, and all drivers view themselves as better than their teammate, whether stipulated in a contract or not.

Do you remember Ascari's contract? Fangio's contract? Mike Hawthorn's contract? Discuss all the fine points of who was better all you want, but 40 years from now, all this bickering will not matter, because it will not be relevant, let alone remembered. The only thing to be remembered will be the statistics. And a 2-time WDC will not be ranked higher than a 7-time WDC.

To the casual fans, yes, you are right. But it only takes a view in any F1 youtube video's comment section to see how uninformed the casual F1 fans are.

But in this forum we look a little bit further than that, even if we don't always agree! We have had countless threads about the statistics and how much they can flatter or undermine drivers, as statistics always do. There's a reason that Sir Stirling Moss is a more famous name than many other drivers, even though he has exactly 0 WDC's to his name.

I'm not quite so sure Moss I would say is remembered more by older members, how often do you hear Moss' name mentioned in idle conversation, far less I would say then 20 years ago?


A lot more than Mike Hawthorns.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
MB-BOB wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Don't you think that getting an advantage over your peers contractually is worth a mention when assessing their relevant performances?
Nope. All drivers have contracts, and all drivers view themselves as better than their teammate, whether stipulated in a contract or not.

Do you remember Ascari's contract? Fangio's contract? Mike Hawthorn's contract? Discuss all the fine points of who was better all you want, but 40 years from now, all this bickering will not matter, because it will not be relevant, let alone remembered. The only thing to be remembered will be the statistics. And a 2-time WDC will not be ranked higher than a 7-time WDC.

To the casual fans, yes, you are right. But it only takes a view in any F1 youtube video's comment section to see how uninformed the casual F1 fans are.

But in this forum we look a little bit further than that, even if we don't always agree! We have had countless threads about the statistics and how much they can flatter or undermine drivers, as statistics always do. There's a reason that Sir Stirling Moss is a more famous name than many other drivers, even though he has exactly 0 WDC's to his name.

I'm not quite so sure Moss I would say is remembered more by older members, how often do you hear Moss' name mentioned in idle conversation, far less I would say then 20 years ago?


A lot more than Mike Hawthorns.

Maybe because Hawthorn died a long time ago and we see Moss around from time to time?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
pokerman wrote:
Maybe because Hawthorn died a long time ago and we see Moss around from time to time?


Dying young didn't do any harm for the fame of many other WDC's.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Maybe because Hawthorn died a long time ago and we see Moss around from time to time?


Dying young didn't do any harm for the fame of many other WDC's.

Are we talking about avid fans or the general public?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Maybe because Hawthorn died a long time ago and we see Moss around from time to time?


Dying young didn't do any harm for the fame of many other WDC's.

Are we talking about avid fans or the general public?


I guess in this context people are talking generally about fans of F1.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Maybe because Hawthorn died a long time ago and we see Moss around from time to time?


Dying young didn't do any harm for the fame of many other WDC's.

Are we talking about avid fans or the general public?


I guess in this context people are talking generally about fans of F1.

So that would be the likes of me who is as aware of Hawthorn then he is of Moss but basically wouldn't have a clue who was the better driver only that one was a world champion and the other wasn't.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Maybe because Hawthorn died a long time ago and we see Moss around from time to time?


Dying young didn't do any harm for the fame of many other WDC's.

Are we talking about avid fans or the general public?


I guess in this context people are talking generally about fans of F1.

So that would be the likes of me who is as aware of Hawthorn then he is of Moss but basically wouldn't have a clue who was the better driver only that one was a world champion and the other wasn't.


You're being obtuse. You've heard far more about Moss than you have Hawthorn.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7363
Location: Belgium
MB-BOB wrote:
In contrast, we can say that Schumacher will be remembered for his arrogance, his driving ethics, and occasional lapses in judgment. But really, he will be remembered (much more) for earning 7 WDC’s in dominating fashion, setting record after record with two different teams over a 10-year period.
You caused me to look up the correct meaning of the verb to earn!

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6385
Location: Nebraska, USA
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:


I guess in this context people are talking generally about fans of F1.

So that would be the likes of me who is as aware of Hawthorn then he is of Moss but basically wouldn't have a clue who was the better driver only that one was a world champion and the other wasn't.


You're being obtuse. You've heard far more about Moss than you have Hawthorn.


Indeed be is.
While Moss may still be around, it is his driving that made him a legend...not his longevity. Miss is a great counter to those who claim that wins and championships are the only things that count of that people remember. And if his name is remembered less today than it was 20 years ago, the fault lies with the "fans" of today, for there is no shortage of info about Stirling Moss available to those you care to know and look.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Dying young didn't do any harm for the fame of many other WDC's.

Are we talking about avid fans or the general public?


I guess in this context people are talking generally about fans of F1.

So that would be the likes of me who is as aware of Hawthorn then he is of Moss but basically wouldn't have a clue who was the better driver only that one was a world champion and the other wasn't.


You're being obtuse. You've heard far more about Moss than you have Hawthorn.

I heard of Moss before I heard of Hawthorn, when I was younger Moss was well known nowadays not so much or maybe that's just an impression I get because his name doesn't get mentioned as much?

That's the thing will future generations know of Moss to the extent they know of the champions?

Me personally I know no more about Moss than I do about Hawthorn, I can't quantify through personal experience how good Moss was but just have second hand appraisals, and look at todays drivers and the very different opinions about them.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
Blake wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:


I guess in this context people are talking generally about fans of F1.

So that would be the likes of me who is as aware of Hawthorn then he is of Moss but basically wouldn't have a clue who was the better driver only that one was a world champion and the other wasn't.


You're being obtuse. You've heard far more about Moss than you have Hawthorn.


Indeed be is.
While Moss may still be around, it is his driving that made him a legend...not his longevity. Miss is a great counter to those who claim that wins and championships are the only things that count of that people remember. And if his name is remembered less today than it was 20 years ago, the fault lies with the "fans" of today, for there is no shortage of info about Stirling Moss available to those you care to know and look.

I wouldn't disagree with your sentiment, I think things change and winning titles means more, whoever doesn't win the title this year between Hamilton and Vettel will probably be seen as having failed.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:


I guess in this context people are talking generally about fans of F1.

So that would be the likes of me who is as aware of Hawthorn then he is of Moss but basically wouldn't have a clue who was the better driver only that one was a world champion and the other wasn't.


You're being obtuse. You've heard far more about Moss than you have Hawthorn.


Indeed be is.
While Moss may still be around, it is his driving that made him a legend...not his longevity. Miss is a great counter to those who claim that wins and championships are the only things that count of that people remember. And if his name is remembered less today than it was 20 years ago, the fault lies with the "fans" of today, for there is no shortage of info about Stirling Moss available to those you care to know and look.

I wouldn't disagree with your sentiment, I think things change and winning titles means more, whoever doesn't win the title this year between Hamilton and Vettel will probably be seen as having failed.


It depends on the manor of the defeat.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28053
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Blake wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
So that would be the likes of me who is as aware of Hawthorn then he is of Moss but basically wouldn't have a clue who was the better driver only that one was a world champion and the other wasn't.


You're being obtuse. You've heard far more about Moss than you have Hawthorn.


Indeed be is.
While Moss may still be around, it is his driving that made him a legend...not his longevity. Miss is a great counter to those who claim that wins and championships are the only things that count of that people remember. And if his name is remembered less today than it was 20 years ago, the fault lies with the "fans" of today, for there is no shortage of info about Stirling Moss available to those you care to know and look.

I wouldn't disagree with your sentiment, I think things change and winning titles means more, whoever doesn't win the title this year between Hamilton and Vettel will probably be seen as having failed.


It depends on the manor of the defeat.

The way things are dissected these days there are reasons to be found why one driver or the other would have won if he had done something differently.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6451
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Maybe because Hawthorn died a long time ago and we see Moss around from time to time?


Dying young didn't do any harm for the fame of many other WDC's.

Are we talking about avid fans or the general public?


I guess in this context people are talking generally about fans of F1.

That's what I touched above, that the general public will not remember much. Hulme? Hawthorn? Farina? Who are they? Moss is very famous for a variety of reasons. It's not only his longevity, I remember a few times they included him (and his - just as famous! - bent steering wheel) as an example of a lucky escape back then in various documentaries when comparing the different eras. One of them was with Lewis Hamilton (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHBoVrq4IeY), so you can bet the newer fans would have looked Moss on the net.

In any case, the OP does not mention much regarding the fans, he opened this thread in this forum, where most of the fans are somewhat educated in this difficult sport compared to the Youtube fanboys. People here read books, watch old races, hell the older members actually attended a few as well. So I suspect (Invade will have to confirm his intentions I guess) that this thread is meant for us. This is why I was arguing with MB-BOB, an avid fan from what he says in the other post, that we do know a few stuff about Moss and how he is praised by his contemporaries. He is held in a very high standard even though he never won anything.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: UnlikeUday and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group