Your post only reflects your lack of knowledge on the subject, both on Gilles and the Toleman...but of course you're entitled to have an opinion, even if it's a wrong one.
Not meaning to git between, 'just using your post as a springboard... Also not being argumentative as I realize I ain't gonna change your view but maybe you can shed a light for me. What, and again, I ask sincerely, do you consider Gilles great accomplishments that places him "above"...?
I could get you a simple answer like : Just watch him race..this should be enough. But again and since we are discussing this properly (and the fact that the person asking is a Clark fan wich in itself shows a good judgement) i will give you my honest opinion on it. I never judge a driver on his final results, simply because oposed to many other sports, a driver is completly dependent on the machinery he carries, hence if i relied on stastics to see how good a driver was, Damon Hill woul be a better driver than Stirling Moss, wich would be uterly ridiculous. What i personaly look is at raw talent, the sheer ability to drive fast, in a good or bad car, car control in the rain, that amazing overtake, taht impossible manoever, even the way you start of the grid, how well you defend your position, how you can defend even with shot tires, how to win a race in a dog of a car, this is to me the reason why i watch f.1, to see something that excites me, someone who can take it further than all the others, and again, to me, no one did it better than Gilles. The opinion of other drivers also counts a lot to me, and in that, both Gilles and Jimmy were considered the best by their respective peers. As for concrete examples i can give for example Monaco 1981...that was probably the best qualifying lap ever made. Gilles was second in a car that was at least 2 sec per lap slower than a Brabham or a Williams around that circuit. he was only beaten by Piquet that was driving a car below minimum weight. His teammate thatw as very good at Monaco (indeed had led for a long time in 1980) qualified 2.5 sec behind him (and he was regarded by many as the second fastest driver on teh grid!) and was laped during the race. Winning was just another impossible thing, with the worst chassis on the grid and the most dificult engine to use around that track. If Monaco was unbelievable, what he did 15 days later in jarama was out of this world, the 5 cars that finished behind him were all about 1.5 to 2.5 seconds per lap quicker, but no one was able to pass him, although they were able to passa amongs themselves! and Gilles did star behind 4 of them!! That lap in watking glenn, were he bested the second fastest man (incidently his team mate and that year champion Jody Sheckter) by eleven seconds! was neevr seen in modern f.1 days!! Jody shaked hid head in desbelief saying he scared himself to do that time...whilst Gilles reported he had a misfiring engine, otherwise he would have been quicker..or crashed, lololo you just don't see that, because nobody else could do it. The fight with arnox, when his tires were already gone, just mindblowing, his stars at various g.ps, he frequently jumped from the second or thir row to first position, just amazing!!! I remeber Prost saying " I always though Gilles must had a trick, he was so much quicker than everybody else!" And the race at Zaeltweg 79, the overtaking on Jones on the outside of tarzan, the way he controls his car when the tire has a flat, making the car spin and avoyding the barrier, that's absolute car control, the stuff of genious! And that race in canada, with the front wing blocking his vision, lolo, who else could have sone that? And so many others, thing is, in most of his races yyou can see something trly amazing from Gilles, thats why his peers, team managers, tire people, journalist revered him. Just like they did with Jimmy back in teh day, but Clarck had at his disposal the best and fastest car for a big part of his carrer, Gilles did not, in fact he never had the fastest car, only in a couple of races. By the way, Jimmy was Gilles hero..and he also admired Peterson very much.
furoni also thinks one-win-wonder Alesi is one of the best and Alonso a hack. So decide yourself whether this is worth your time to argue or not
I have as much knowledge as you, probably, so don't assume ... My opinion isn't wrong; it's just different from yours. Learn to deal with it.
Already have and am not arguing. 'Absolutely agree to disagree. If his qualification for greatness is "raw talent" (whatever that is) then so be it. I consider intellect in creating results along with speed (my "raw talent") in accomplishing results when deciding who is the bestest... To me, Gilles definitely had the speed. He was just lacking in the intellect department. Maybe that might (key word) have come with more time but we'll never know thus my opinion is what it is.
Gilles was spectacular but not necessarily the brightest candle. Case in point was the race where he crashed and broke the rear wheel suspension but kept on going. The fans loved it but it was pointless. As was his death.
I wouldnt say Gilles was lacking "in the intellect department", he simply(oposite to Clark) didn't have a fast enough car, and had to overcompensate , wich obviously somethimes led to mistakes. To those who thing Gilles was a crasher, i remind that in 1976 he won every single race in f atlatic (bar one, when the engine failed), this shows than when he had a car that was competitive enough, he would use to full efect, getting the results. If Gilles had had the cars Jimmy drove, you can be sure he would be winning just as much if not more. If he had reliable cars as we see today, he would simly destroy the competition....you just have to look at what everyone else said about him, to realize his talent was beyond reach for the rest of the field. (Jody once said Gilles was a very smart guy but that in his opinion he wanted the wrong things out of racing". Maybe he was right, everyone knows Gilles first objective wasn't the championship, but to win races, that was all that matered to him, this i think explains why he didn't think twice before commiting to something crazy, it was win or nothing for him, this certainly doesn't make him any less greater in my view. It's curious that there is one driver that doen't rate Jimmy as much as the others, Jack Brabham...for some reason he doesn't think he was that good...i personaly desagree....
Yes, differences of opinions aren't worth arguing. There are always people ready to worship some individuals, in sport like in other areas. I suppose that reflects their passion. I am just not one of them; I just call a spade a spade and I speak as I find.
Gilles Villeneuve has enormous car control and was looking for instant gratification, IMO. He preferred to attack all the time regardless because that was the aspect of racing he liked: the thrill. That was very entertaining of course, but also precluded a serious challenge to the championship. He said himself in an interview that he wasn't interested in "counting points over a season". That sums up his attitude, I think. He surely had fun whilst it lasted. The modern F1 racer has to be a thinking man who knows how to pace himself, without dissipating his energy and not just enjoy exuberance at the wheel. Gilles' son, the much maligned Jacques Villeneuve, fulfilled better the requirements for the job, and achieved more, I think, even if he never had the adulation his father received. That's my opinion.
And of course there is Fangio...who came in second in the 1952 (I believe that's the year) Mille Miglia driving an Alfa Romeo Disco Volante in which only one of the front wheels was responding to steering input, the other just kept pointing straight ahead. And I think he had to fight with that for almost half the race. But that was then and this is now.
Yes, and let's not forget his race at the nurburgring, defeating both Ferraris, one of the greatest performances of all times...the thing with fangio is that Moss was much better than all the others, yet, he wasn't as good as Fangio, at least in an f.1 car, wich makes me believe Fangio was an absolute genious...however, Moss himself, puts fangio on a pedestal but considers Ascari to be his equal, and Dennis Jenkinson considered Ascari to be better than fangio, so he was certainly very good also.
Aiye yi-yi. When does the rationilazation stop. You can't make a car do wht it can't...there's no magic. Regardless, part of the intellect, to this very day, is to put yourself in a car that is capable of winning consistently. If he wasn't worried about championships, just races, he still didn't do a very good job of it, now did he? The obvious (although I still don't understand why) hero worship is quite apparent.
I think he did, he won races whe his car was obviously uncapable of doing so, and lost a few others because of reliability issues. He was in a top team, but at a bad moment, it happens to a lot of drivers. 1980 and 1981 were the 2 years Ferrari made the very worst chassis in their history, and thye reliability was apalling. Gilles was almos certainly going for Mclaren in 83, after the incidents with Pironi....wich would have costed him a shot at the title in 83 but would give him plenty of oportunities for the folowing years. And you're right, he is my hero, I love racing, and Gilles was the very best racing driver i ever saw, the fastest, the bravest, the most spectacular..and he was driving a Ferrari!
Gilles is an enigma. He is a un-finished work of art. Taken before he had the chance to put his stamp in the record books. His hero worship is based on a very small part of the career he should have had. The modern day parallel would be Verstappen. If he were taken from us now (god forbid) then he would also achieve hero worship status. Same with Senna although at least he did manage to get a bucket load of good stats before being taken from us. We have seen many drivers who get immense praise in their early years when they are young and dumb and don't have enough maturity to combine immense raw speed with a well developed racing brain. In the current grid, in addition to Verstappen, you can add Vettel, Hamilton even maybe Jules Bianchi to that list. All of them were given emotional hero worship in their early years, and as we see now, the picture of each of them is changed. In particular, whilst undoubtedly fast, and even though they have 7 WDCs between them (soon to be 8), Vettel and Hamilton have both settled down and dialled down their hero driving styles to maximise points and championship potential. So Gilles can only really be rated on what could have been - and there are no right or wrong answers. I too rate Gilles very highly as I love the raw racer drivers and hate the robots, but I think blind hero worship of him is not valid.
Unfortunatly we won't..it would have been wonderfull to see Bellof driving a Ferrari (unfortunatly he would have picked up a bad car in 86...but 87 he could shine)
Are u affiliated with toleman? Lol They were not good cars end of the story...let it go Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
