Jackie Stewart doesn't think MS is one of the greats?

Michael still has the speed and vast amounts of experience. Unfortunately he has been making more mental mistakes than he used to. If it wasn't for clumsily damaging his front wing all the time he would be well-clear of Rosberg in the points. Very impressive for a man his age with a teammate that is a very quick driver.

 

Thank you for keeping me from throwing out the insanity defense. You are 100% correct about the disrespect JS has shown Senna & other drivers. He always has a better, safer way to drive,,,, just ask him and you'll get a lecture! I met him at a Ford event and, man he was the nicest person, but critical of others (esp successful drivers).

 

Strange accident in Singapore....the younger Schumi showed better,,,, but IMO he is still better than Massa,,,, even these days...

 

Ahhhhhhh, old racing driver, are like all old athletes.... They say,

"The older we get...... the better we were"

 

I was thinking of that too - it is in fact exactly the same argument he's putting up now that he did in that interview.

One thing that JS forgets is that in his day it was a helluva lot easier to overtake. Because of the amazingly short braking distances and turbulent air these days, if the move is times slightly wrongly then it all goes pear shaped. Jackie had full seconds to make the move, not milliseconds. And all the other greats he mentiones are also from before 1985. CF brakes have changed the sport.


Onno

 

Stewart and Hamilton

 

Drivers critique each other all the time. Disrespect intended or not. I think his point is the invincibility with these safe cars is making some drivers take more risks that they would if they were going to pay a higher price in return. Nothing new about all this. I could care less who Jackie feels is a 'great one'. Thats a debate that will never end.

 

Thank you very much....I agree, but then, I'm an old fart.

 

When Jackie Stewart won 3 WDC, F1 was a dangerous sport.

That is of course an oxymoron: By definition, a sport should always be dangerous and imply significant physical risk. If no risk is involved, we don't have a sport, we have a game. Hemingway dixit. So...

When Michael Schumacher won 36 (or was it 57?) WDC, F1 was a safe game. It still is.

That for me is amply sufficient to put MS and JS in very different categories as men and drivers. You can guess which one is more worthy of respect in my eyes, and to whose opinion I pay greater attention. I certainly wouldn't dare dismiss it as cavalierly as others have done.

Not to mention Stewart's personal charm and undisputed sportsmanship, qualities that nearly all contemporary drivers (MS, LH, and FA among them) are sorely and totally lacking.

 

I agree with a lot of your points, Julio, but there does seem to be a bit of the 'know-it-all' and 'everything-was-better-in-my-day' attitude in JS' comments when it comes to driving styles.

I think the Senna interview is the perfect illustration. There are probably very few people who would not class Senna as one of the greats. Ayrton gets really upset about Jackie's negative comments about his driving style. I don't think Jackie was too gentlemanly or chivalrous in that interview.

That said, I think JS is a great man and all-time great driver and he certainly deserves our respect.


Onno

 

Hi Onno,

You are probably right about JS's attitude.

But I think we can try to understand... When JS was around, F1 consisted of a bunch of friends who risked their lives in the pursuit of their passion. Not to mention their humanity and comradeship, or their partying.

And now?? The "sport" which has become safe through JS's efforts now consists of a bunch of rude, ungentlemanly, frigid, and obscenely overpaid primadonnas (nearly all of them) who spend most of their free time in the gym with their personal trainer, while the "sport" is regulated and dictated by a bald gnome who would run a GP in North Korea if there was any money in it.

And all that without a shadow of risk...

I feel sorry for JS. I also feel sorry for ourselves. I believe nobody in the current lineup is half the driver and sportsman of the likes of Fangio, Moss, Stewart, Hill, or Clark.

 

Well said.

 

Well said! Jackie Stewart is a living legend. If you remember racing in his day you have respect for the man and dont see him as saying he is better etc.... he just clearly knows how to drive a car!

Every time I have ever met Jackie, he has always been a gentleman and willing to spend time talking to you... I cant say that about any of the current drivers or ones from the past 20 years!

I think its a shame the many here dont appreciate what he has done for racing, not to mention his own personal acheivement.

There is no excuse for crashing into people... no matter if you were in the 50's or today. a good smooth driver is just that.

 

It's the tires and the aero, not the brakes.

 

Jackie's the best - every one says "they don't make them like the used to" as they get old, he's no different. I love everything about Jackie Stewart - a true icon.

But I am perplexed - as I look at MS entire body of work, I don't see him as a "risk taker" or having "too many accidents". He did employ some dirty tactics, but that's nothing new - for sure Jackie saw his share of that.

He bridged the transition from Senna / Prost / Mansell and presided over Ferrari's return to prominence. He faced a slew of worthy competition over the years - the aforementioned Senna / Prost / Mansell through Hill, Hakkinen, Villeneuve, et al.

91 wins, 7 WDC's - clearly the greatest of all time...not even close IMHO.

 

Here we go again!..... I guess its all grist for the mill. I happen to agree with you that *statistically* he's at least one of the GOAT's - Although, you should study Jimmys record if you want too see total domination - He typically either won or broke down over a tragically shortened career.

However, as has been said ad-nauseum, its simply impossible to compare across eras. It just can't be done IMO.

I saw Jackie many times, including a qualy session at Silverstone that had the Woodcote grandstand on it's feet at the end. Jackie was visibly quicker than anyone else and *so* smooth.... Right up until Ronnie came by in a big lurid slide, lap after lap they went faster and faster. One that sticks with me to this day....

I do think some of his criticisms are, as someone said above, simply that things have moved on and the sport is very different today. He never had to contend with ~10 cars being within a second of his pole time for example. Simple increased competitiveness is gonna make overtaking more difficult, and result in more 'shenanigans' between the protagonists for example. Factor in the incredible safety today and certainly guys are taking more risks.

Whether F1 is the better for it is another debate of course.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Fair enough - I am not old enough to have seen Jimmy, and just (barely) the tail of Jackie's career, surely not enough to remember, although he was very prominent stateside as one of ABC's principle auto racing commentators.

 

I've got to respectfully disagree, at least in part, for a number of reasons;

- The peanut gallery has *always* claimed there's not enough overtaking in F1. "Back in the day" we'd be lucky if 3-4 guys finished on the lead lap with the rest spread out behind over, sometimes, 3-4 laps. Hardly a lot of overtaking in that scenario.

- Tires? Partly responsible - When Gilles was asked why there's not more overtaking he said because the braking distances are so short with so much grip that it's impossible to outbrake anyone "these days"..... His answer was to put 'em on F3 tires. [And this of course before carbon brakes.]

- Aero? It's been influencing overtaking/drafting almost forever. See this thread for some comments from Jochen Rindt in about 1968; http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=261744

Hardly a new phenomenom.

- Brakes - Are a huge influence IMO - The braking distances are now so short a banzai, down-the-inside-under-braking maneuver just isn't possible today I honestly believe a return to steel brakes would "improve the show".

Cheers,
Ian

 

Driving is driving all the same basics apply. As Fangio said More gas and less brake is how you win.

Stewart where his age right would be right up there with the top guys today. Not only was was / is he a gifted driver, he also understood the mechanics of the car like all great drivers do.

In his day he spent the time to set up his car for each track, ratios, suspension settings etc.. and that was before you had data acquisition - the driver had to interpret what was going on. I think other than Schumacher nobody could deliver that kind of data to set up a car today if you took away all the telemetry.

I dont buy the era's are different. I think if you put Stewart in a Red bull at the age of 25 he would be just as fast if not faster than Vettel.

Schumacher is ruthless and did pull alot of "dirty" manouvers - when he was at Bennetton and early on with Ferrari... even in his last years - remember Monaco - blocking the track in qualifying? Stewart and Lauda, Clark etc... never did that. Sure the rewards were less back then but the penalties were MUCH higher and for that I would consider anything Stewart says before any of the "young drivers".

Clearly Schumacher is one of the all time greats... most likely not the greatest. As for what Stewart has asked Senna in the movie- that was just part of the interview... a year later Senna admitted that he deliberately drove into Prost.... so the editing was done for a specific spin... Afterall it is supposed to be a sport... there has to be some honor left, otherwise its just all fake.

 

No need to hide behind members Mrs. (Sir) Jackie as your opinion is about 30+++ yr's irrelevant.

 

Try to find an old man who doesn't reminisce about the old days and how (insert activity here) was performed by real men in those days, and you will be looking for a very long time.

Jackie is Marilyn Monroe, if she was still alive and talking about how 'real' actresses were the women of the 40's.

comically nostalgic, slightly sad and mostly irrelevant.

Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk

 

Spot on...the numbers are impossible to argue with.

 

The downforce effect and tire improvements shorten braking distances. This has changed F1.

CF brakes only allow for lighter unsprung mass. They do nothing or almost nothing to shorten the brake zone. Yes, everyone is going to say that they can run hotter but this doesn't matter in an open wheel car. They do have heat problems with the brakes today but that is because they carefully control the brake temperature with shrouds (for aero, not for cooling), and is not indicative of iron brakes being inadequate.

The tires stop the car, not the brakes.

Maybe lmpdesigner is reading this thread and can chime in.

 

Uh, no.

 

Hooray!!!! Someone understands basic physics!

I've read heaps from suppliers of CCB for motor bikes and cars and NEVER have I seen a claim that the braking distance is shorter.

You'd reckon that would be a MAJOR selling point otherwise!