Rock 'n Stroll . . . The Stroller Thread.

Depends on what you value - I agree that to win titles you have to have mechanical sympathy, strategy etc. so if that's your main measure, he's not a great. He had two wdc capable cars and his teammate won the wdc in one of them and he was killed in the other. That doesn't tell the whole story, though, in that there were numerous times Gilles won in a car that shouldn't have, something many a wdc could never do. There are only a rare few capable of that, in current F1 there's Max, Fernando and, well, that's about it tbh. Even in the last 20 years I think that's your list. That's why some rank him as an all time great with Senna, Clark and Fangio, guys that could win in anything.

 

In the last 20 years you have to put Schumacher on the list of drivers that could win in a car that probably should never have won. You're right though, might be the only 3 in the last 20 years that could do it and do it on any given day. However I would say all of them had a very high chance of actually winning the race, or at the very least getting that podium. It was 50/50 that Gilles crashes or blows up the car.

 

Punishable by death

Enzo would reply to his engineers that pointed out the destruction caused by Gilles that Gilles was just showing us where the weak spots were in the car

 

Blame Peroni

 

And I value excitement, never say die attitude

Today's races are too sanitised, safe, sissy , for sooks (look it up, F1 drivers to a T)

Gilles was mad, stark raving mad, but we loved him for it, I would rate ONE of his wins as better than the WDC Hamilton won with a car that was at least 2 seconds faster than all of the other

FFS, my ex-wife could have won 9 WDC in that Mercedes

 

Today's F1 is data driven/focused. Not on racing but on feedback, aggregate data views/exposure on multiple platforms for marketing. Nothing else. As long as the 'events't sell well locally and are viewed well internationally then the racing will not be the focus, but eyes exposed to logo's/messages and image of the sponsors. Liberty are an expert at this. The team value messaging is driven on the teams by Liberty who eagerly enjoy the numbers. What has changed overall. Nothing.

Processions, teams who are now RISK AVERSE keeping well paid, marketing image popular drivers into their 40's. Young drivers DO NOT bring that with them at all. LH to Ferrari is a major example of this. They are expanding their marketing reach and image projection by 30mil+ younger marketing potential clients by hiring LH. He can still drive and is the most viewed/popular driver in the electronic influencing world. Ferrari is targeting young wealth who spend freely for experiences, travel and gear. They buy cars and prefer to be seen and share with others as much as they enjoy the experience themselves.

 

Ferrari isn't targeting young wealthy people to buy cars with the hiring of His Lewisness. Their order book is full already, for several years. They have zero issues shifting the cars they build every year.

They're hiring Lewis to sell more hats and t shirts. Not to the young wealthy lot. Just those that buy the hats and shirts of their favourite team (or rather driver).

 

Its all marketing no matter what they are selling and 30mil new Ferrari fans buys anything with the logo. Yes the cars sell themselves and why not keep your market younger and viable as they age. Its a going concern that must endure and adapt as all do.

 

McLaren didn't see it that way.

 

Peroni was a contributing factor. Just like Mass. But ultimately it was Gilles who lost his cool and took an insane and completely unnecessary risk.

 

FIFY

 

It is hard to accept that our hero's could ever make a mistake so casting blame is easy to try and not tarnish their reputation. I was a little young to understand when Gilles died but I do remember a great Canadian dying driving a Ferrari in the sport I loved as a kid. As I am older now I can respect and admire what a massive talent Gilles was while being at peace in the knowledge that he was human and prone to errors. Sadly it was a human error that took his life but it does not take away in any bit what a truly fantastic driver he was.

 

Ah yes. Beer on my mind.

 

I think we can all agree that Lance is not and never will be on the level of Gilles, no matter what the stats may say. As others have pointed out, I'd rate him above a lot of wdcs that only won because they had the best car.

You ask most Ferrari fans whether they'd rather have Scheckter or Gilles in the car and most won't pick the guy that won the wdc for Ferrari...

 

Gilles Villeneuve lived his life with a very slim safety margin, as witnessed by the way he drove on the road or on track, also by the manner he piloted his helicopter, according to people around him. This carefree attitude was bound to catch up with him as some point. it did at Zolder when he tried another display of bravado under emotion.

 

No doubt. I always regarded Lance as a journeyman and midfielder. He is not WDC material (Gilles could have easily won the 79 title).

That said, statistics are a big deal of any sport. Whether they give the full picture or not. And in some of those Lance might get close to Gilles (number of poles) while others he will never reach or surpass (number of wins).

Regardless, it is a fact that so far Lance is the 3rd most successful F1 driver from Canada of all times.

 

+27

 

The "James Dean effect"; live fast and die young, thus creating a legend.

 

Gilles Villeneuve was not interested in the end result, as long as he enjoyed himself.
He was interested in instant gratification at the wheel, and put all his heart in it.
"I'm not here to count points like a greengrocer", he once said," I only want to win races!"
Championships were anathema for him. So he never had any strategy; he only aimed no further than the next corner.

 

Sucking

 

Why are you guys calling Peroni to Didier????

 

Agree, Gilles was not perfect, certainly not the best option to win a title if you had to preserve a car to finish in the points if you couldn't win, but if his car was reliable enough he would destroy the oposition, no matter who, any name you can bring from f.1 history, bevause his driving skills were clearly above and beyond anyone else. Jusr a reminder that in 76 he won every single race in f.Atlantica (bar one when an engine broke to due to a mistake from his team), so this shows how consistent he could be when he didn't have to make up a 2sec a lap déficit to the front cars.

 

Too much beer perhaps ?

 

If this was true then why was he not a superb qualifier? Typically if you are the best driver in history you should be faster than your teammates at least 90% of the time. You are literally saying he would destroy anyone in F1 history yet he could barely beat his teammates in outright speed. He collected a whopping 6 wins and 2 poles despite having some of the best cars between 78 and 82. 1980 the car was crap though.

I swear Gilles is the only driver in history that didn't need put up results to be considered great. Every other driver needed to get poles, wins, and championships to be considered great, let alone the best of all time. The whole argument of how fast he was but the car broke or he crashed doesn't help his case IMO. It's logical to assume if he managed the car to finish the race he wouldn't have been as fast in short stints. It's also logical that other drivers were driving to keep the car alive and the car on track and thus were not at 100% of their speed. Imagine Lance Stroll going flat out, 2 seconds faster than everyone, but burning up his tires in no time, running out of fuel or battery power, burning up the car or just crashing out by pushing too hard. Then we go on to call him one of the greats.

 

That's sums it up, and is the reason why I find he is overestimated.