Who do you currently regard as the 3 greatest Formula 1 drivers and why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

So how do you explain away Lauda's view?

---

Said after his death? Those opinions sure are never clouded with emotional bias.

Quote:

---

That's not what I've said, but equally the opinions of those who raced alongside GV should not be dismissed so easily IMHO.

---

So facts outweight opinions or vice-versa? Reutemann beat GV as one would expect a world champ to do to an average driver, but CR wasnt even a champion.

Quote:

---

And they had many more races in which to achieve those wins, and better and far more reliable cars with which to do so.

---

Senna and Schumacher both showed far more in their first 4-5 years than Gilles, for example they didnt get beaten by their teammates.

Quote:

---

He finished four points behind his team leader who also became the WDC that year.

---

And how did JS become the team leader at Ferrari, where he was newcomer, whereas GV started his 3rd year with the team? Someone in this thread apologized for GV saying I should discount his first 3-4 races for a new team. JS sure didnt seem to have a problem with that.

Quote:

---

He won three races (the same as Scheckter). He gained one pole position (the same as Scheckter). He had six fastest laps (to Scheckter's 0). He led 308 laps (to Scheckter's 170). He had 7 podium finishes (to Scheckter's 6).

---

And what matters in the end are points, not fastest laps or poles. Fastest laps especially are irrelevant, just look how few fastest laps Senna had. Why? because when others were setting fastest laps, he was already far ahead and leading and not pushing.
JS beat GV in equal cars and one could hardly say JS was the best driver in F1 at that time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

And what matters in the end are points...

---

Would I be right in guessing that you don't rate the likes of Stirling Moss, Ronnie Peterson or Chris Amon very highly then?

As I recall Ferrari basically gifted the title to Jody when left a even table GV would have won the title that year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fousto

As I recall Ferrari basically gifted the title to Jody when left a even table GV would have won the title that year.

---

Yes, but why did Ferrari 'gift' it to Jody?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

And how did JS become the team leader at Ferrari, where he was newcomer, whereas GV started his 3rd year with the team?

---

Well, when Scheckter was signed he was a proven winner with 6 years of F1 experience in three different teams behind him. Gilles, on the other hand, was in his first full season of F1 and yet to win a GP. He did so in the final race of the 1978 season and that win effectively secured his place at Ferrari for 1979. Without it there is a good chance he would have been looking for employment elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

It is a damn shame that facts outweigh opinions.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

So facts outweight opinions or vice-versa?

---

Let me guess, you used to be indecisive, but you just aren't sure anymore? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

:laugh: You seem to be describing a great many male adults who live a playboy life..........

---

Does that make them great human beings?!

Drivers that died on track seem to have a fanatic support from emotional people around here. To the extent that a driver that was beaten by several other drivers while driving the same car is considered to be one of the best ever!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Does that make them great human beings?!

---

What do you think? I think it shows them as weak and flawed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Drivers that died on track seem to have a fanatic support from emotional people around here. To the extent that a driver that was beaten by several other drivers while driving the same car is considered to be one of the best ever!

---

Or it is a bunch of people expressing their opinions.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Drivers that died on track seem to have a fanatic support from emotional people around here.

---

Of course there's an element of lost potential when a driver dies, but my admiration for Gilles Villeneuve has nothing to do with the fact he died on track. It is based on what I saw of him, and read in contemporary race reports, and saw on tv, when he was alive.

Unfortunately I only got to see him race myself on few of occasions; the Race of Champions at Brands Hatch may have been the first time, and then there were a handful of British GP's I attended and saw him around the pits & paddock.

Far more important than any statistics are the opinions of his peers, who were also his rivals. These are men who set out to beat GV at every opportunity, and rarely admitted that anyone was better or faster, than themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Far more important than any statistics are the opinions of his peers, who were also his rivals.

---

Ridiculous.

The Championship title, which is a statistic of the seasons racing, is the only important thing in Formula One and is decided by who scores the most points, not who has the most nice things said about them.

Anyone who believes that opinions of other drivers has anything other than sentimental value is watching the wrong sport.

If you want a contest where popularity is important, go watch Big Brother.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Drivers that died on track seem to have a fanatic support from emotional people around here. To the extent that a driver that was beaten by several other drivers while driving the same car is considered to be one of the best ever!

---

As Arrows said, it's to do with the potential argument...like George Best for instance.
Imagine what Jean Alesi would be had he died in 1991 for example....! Surely the greatest ever!...
Likewise, Stefan Bellof is another who is often forgotten about, but if you look at what he did he was very possibly as good as Villeneuve, especially when you see his Group C performances.

I think the Gilles case is a lot to do with the fact that he was the first top driver from his coutry in F1, and there is a lot of partisan support in particular, he was also a show-off like Peterson, so that always gets people's attention. But as one of the 3 greatest ever? Not even close. Car control, determination possibly, but to be the greatest is far more than just those factors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Ridiculous.

The Championship title, which is a statistic of the seasons racing, is the only important thing in Formula One and is decided by who scores the most points, not who has the most nice things said about them.

Anyone who believes that opinions of other drivers has anything other than sentimental value is watching the wrong sport.

If you want a contest where popularity is important, go watch Big Brother.

---

I disagree.

The objective in a race is to win
A champion should be the driver who most successfully meets that objective, i.e. the one who is the best at winning a seriesof races.
A points system is a means to an end, a means to evaluate who is the best at trying to win. It is not an end in itself.
If you want to establish a ranking, then a points system is an end in itself, e.g. football leagues, who gets places on Bernie's charter flights, etc.

Thw question is "Who is the greatest driver?" It is not "Who is the best accumulator of points".

Bruce McLaren scored more points than Jack Brabham in Cooper cars, but it is absolutely ridiculous to say, as some statistical websites do, that he was the most successful, or best, Cooper driver when Brabham won two Championships and seven GPs while McLaren won three GPs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

If you want a contest where popularity is important, go watch Big Brother.

---

My point has nothing to do with popularity. It is about the recognition among GV's peers that, as one of them said, "he is the fastest of all of us". That's a recognition of ability and talent not popularity, and it's a tribute rarely conferred by intensely competitive people on a rival.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Would I be right in guessing that you don't rate the likes of Stirling Moss, Ronnie Peterson or Chris Amon very highly then?

---

Moss I rate highly. He achieved significantly more than gilles and was far better.
Peterson was very talented, but far too inconsistant.
Amon was good, but nothing special.

I have also made a number of points that you have left unanswered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fousto

As I recall Ferrari basically gifted the title to Jody when left a even table GV would have won the title that year.

---

bull****. JS got his title fair and square by outracing and outthinking Gilles. In anycase, if GV was so good as you make him out to be, wouldnt he have had an easy ride over someone like JS. So why didnt he, not even in qualifying?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Far more important than any statistics are the opinions of his peers, who were also his rivals.

---

Probably the stupidest thing I have seen on this forum for a long time.
So if Reutemann says Gilles is the best driver around, then beats gilles 12:4 in qualfying and scores 3x more points, which matters more? Answer this please.
Get it in your head - Opinions are biased, FACTS not nearly as much. The emotional support for gilles was always amazing, but the driver behind it all was not as impressive as made out to be, which is shown by the fact he was beaten by two teammates in row, neither of whom could be said was the best driver around that time.
How many times did Fangio, Senna, Schumacher, Prost did get beaten by teammates, let alone get destroyed bigtime by non-WC teammates?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

My point has nothing to do with popularity. It is about the recognition among GV's peers that, as one of them said, "he is the fastest of all of us".

---

If he was so damn fast, why did he get beaten two years in row by different teammates, and pretty badly by one of them? Or is that irrelevant, because that teammate praised Gilles after his death?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Osella

As Arrows said, it's to do with the potential argument...like George Best for instance.
Imagine what Jean Alesi would be had he died in 1991 for example....! Surely the greatest ever!...
Likewise, Stefan Bellof is another who is often forgotten about, but if you look at what he did he was very possibly as good as Villeneuve, especially when you see his Group C performances.

---

Group C is not F1 though. And especially considering that Jacky Ickx wasnt exactly driving fantastically when he retired from F1.

Garry Walker, why do you have such a low opinion about Didier Pironi? In 1981 he was very unlucky - whenever he was fighting for podium, the car let him down and in fact he even didn't finish on podium.

In some way he was similar to Gilles, a real fighter, who even didn't care about team orders and I think in 1982 he would have given GV a real battle for the WDC if both drivers had survived until the end of the season. Didier was a bit 'crazy' too and probably due to mistakes failed to outscore for example Laffite in 1980 (as was also probably the case in GV and JS battle the year before).

But I generally tend to agree that G. Villeneuve is a bit overrated. Drivers that die tend to be more glorified than others. However, I think Pironi is underrated compared to Villeneuve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

Garry Walker, why do you have such a low opinion about Didier Pironi? In 1981 he was very unlucky - whenever he was fighting for podium, the car let him down and in fact he even didn't finish on podium.

In some way he was similar to Gilles, a real fighter, who even didn't care about team orders and I think in 1982 he would have given GV a real battle for the WDC if both drivers had survived until the end of the season. Didier was a bit 'crazy' too and probably due to mistakes failed to outscore for example Laffite in 1980 (as was also probably the case in GV and JS battle the year before).

But I generally tend to agree that G. Villeneuve is a bit overrated. Drivers that die tend to be more glorified than others. However, I think Pironi is underrated compared to Villeneuve.

---

Scheckter also was regarded as wild in his early F1 days. See 1973 Silverstone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

So if Reutemann says Gilles is the best driver around, then beats gilles 12:4 in qualfying and scores 3x more points, which matters more?

---

Statistics on a page or a website are just that - statistics. They provide no background as to the many, many different factors involved in making up those numbers, just as points in the final WDC standings tell you nothing about how those points were won.

Reutemann's opinion is significant because he raced in the same team at the same time as GV. He was there. We weren't.

Statistics and opinions matter, but taking either one in isolation will never give you as full a picture as the two together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Statistics and opinions matter, but taking either one in isolation will never give you as full a picture as the two together.

---

In which case, the only possible verdict is that Gilles Villenueve was very good, but not a great.....with maybe an asterisks to indicate that his was a tragically unfulfilled potential.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

However, I think Pironi is underrated compared to Villeneuve.

---

Good points in your post, and I agree with this point :up: Just like Prost compared to Senna etc.

FACTS

I've finally checked the record of GV and his team mates at This site
As Garry Walker has said, this shows that in 1978, his first full season, his record was not as good as Reutemann but remember it was his first season. Then in 1979 there is barely a whisker between him and his team leader, Jody Scheckter, with only seven points separating them at season's end and GV ahead or equal on all indicators. In 1980 he eclipsed Scheckter and in 1981 Pironi.

Another fact - he won a GP in his first full season. Who else has done that?Hamilton, Schumacher, Stewart, Fittipaldi and Baghetti. Any more?

I accept that his early death leads to a certain amount of rose-tinted viewing, as it does in the case of Senna, Peter Collins, Jean Behra and, to an extent, Jim Clark but nevertheless he deserves to be ranked among the greats near the top of the pyramid. Maybe not in the top three but certainly in the next five or ten.

I think that some here are under-rating him.

I'll finish with a quote from Steve Small's book:

Quote:

---

"To this day opinions are sharly divided about Gilles Villeneuve. To many he was simply what motor racing was all about. To the more dispassionate he was an accident waiting nto happen, and when the end came, well they were proved right weren't they?
In soccer, if the ball goes to Pele or Best, or nor Giggs, there is a collective sense of anticipation, a feeling that something special could be about to happen. . . It was like that with Gilles. As anordinary punter denied access to the inner sanctum of pit or paddock, you could stand on any corner, at any circuit and wait for his Ferrari to scream into view. Then came the reward. With a glint of wildness in his eyes, and the car at some wicked angle - more often than not at its very limit and then some - Villeneuve would pass and you could sense the thrill."

---

Yes I am a Gilles Villeneuve fan.

OK my 3 greatest:

1. Michael Schumacher: Even though his antics were sometimes intolerable, he remains the greatest driver ever in terms of statistics and racecraft. I wish he was still racing as a battle between him, Lewis, Kimi and Fernando would probably be one for the ages.

2. Mika Hakkinen: Always had the balls to take the fight to whoever was challenging him. A gentleman, a proper racer, and two titles isn't bad, eh?

3: Kimi Raikkonen: Current World Champion and a surprising choice for me considering i'm not his biggest fan. However, I cannot ignore the fact that he is freakishly good, and relatively mistake-free compared with most of the other drivers. Deserves all the success he gets.

Almost made it: Lewis Hamilton, Jenson Button, Fernando Alonso.

I'll finish with a quote from Steve Small's book:

Originally Posted by http://www.motorsportforums.com/foru...s/viewpost.gif
"To this day opinions are sharly divided about Gilles Villeneuve. To many he was simply what motor racing was all about. To the more dispassionate he was an accident waiting nto happen, and when the end came, well they were proved right weren't they?
In soccer, if the ball goes to Pele or Best, or nor Giggs, there is a collective sense of anticipation, a feeling that something special could be about to happen. . . It was like that with Gilles. As anordinary punter denied access to the inner sanctum of pit or paddock, you could stand on any corner, at any circuit and wait for his Ferrari to scream into view. Then came the reward. With a glint of wildness in his eyes, and the car at some wicked angle - more often than not at its very limit and then some - Villeneuve would pass and you could sense the thrill."

Yes I am a Gilles Villeneuve fan.
from D-type


OH yea!!!


unfortunately in these days of electronics and drivers who are sponsored into drives because of marketing PR or connections, those days are mostly gone...a few flickers of light are left, in Kimi perhaps......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D-Type

FACTS

I've finally checked the record of GV and his team mates at This site
As Garry Walker has said, this shows that in 1978, his first full season, his record was not as good as Reutemann but remember it was his first season. Then in 1979 there is barely a whisker between him and his team leader, Jody Scheckter, with only seven points separating them at season's end and GV ahead or equal on all indicators. In 1980 he eclipsed Scheckter and in 1981 Pironi.

Another fact - he won a GP in his first full season. Who else has done that?Hamilton, Schumacher, Stewart, Fittipaldi and Baghetti. Any more?

I accept that his early death leads to a certain amount of rose-tinted viewing, as it does in the case of Senna, Peter Collins, Jean Behra and, to an extent, Jim Clark but nevertheless he deserves to be ranked among the greats near the top of the pyramid. Maybe not in the top three but certainly in the next five or ten.

I think that some here are under-rating him.

I'll finish with a quote from Steve Small's book:


Yes I am a Gilles Villeneuve fan.

---

the above was the quote

LMAO. Gilles was beaten on raw speed by more than one teammate. One of the most overrated drivers of all time.

Motorsport magazine rated GV second greatest driver all time (to Nuvolari) in Nov. 1999. D Jenkinson, Nigel Roebuck and most of his driving contempories considered him something special.Consider The US Grand Prix, Watkins Glen 1979. In practice on a wet, treacherous track GV set the fastest time by 11 seconds over the next man, teammate Jody Scheckter. Next day GV qualified 3rd on the grid, 13 places ahead of Scheckter. He also won the race over Jones and Arnoux.In 1981 at Monaco he qualified 2nd on the grid 15 spots ahead of Pironi and also took the victory.I do not believe that GV was ever consistently outpaced by a teammate.

well some facts to consider - as a racer and a man Pironi wouldn't make a hair on Gilles's ass!! Carlos was a man and a racer plus a very good countryman for Argentina. I would respect what Carlos has to say. Plus the "Old Man" knew the real cut of a man!!! So take you facts but I was at Long Beach to witness Gilles and Carlos and if you weren't there you just don't get it!! And we who have been there really can't help you!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Statistics on a page or a website are just that - statistics. They provide no background as to the many, many different factors involved in making up those numbers, just as points in the final WDC standings tell you nothing about how those points were won.

Reutemann's opinion is significant because he raced in the same team at the same time as GV. He was there. We weren't.

Statistics and opinions matter, but taking either one in isolation will never give you as full a picture as the two together.

---

Crazy. Opinions are biased, especially about drivers who attract emotional support, just as GV did for sure.
In the end, stats are what matter. There is no denying or going around that Reutemann and Schekter beat Gilles and losing to 2 teammates in row surely wouldnt cement anyones reputation as the worlds fastest driver. If there was proof Ferrari was screwing Gilles, then things could be reconsidered, but I have never heard of anything pointing to that.

In any case, if you take opinions and stats together (where stats are far more important, because they are more unbiased), they fully support my view that rating Gilles amongst top 3 of all drivers is bordering on the line between lunacy and idiocy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D-Type

FACTS

I've finally checked the record of GV and his team mates at This site
As Garry Walker has said, this shows that in 1978, his first full season, his record was not as good as Reutemann but remember it was his first season. Then in 1979 there is barely a whisker between him and his team leader, Jody Scheckter, with only seven points separating them at season's end and GV ahead or equal on all indicators. In 1980 he eclipsed Scheckter and in 1981 Pironi.

---

So going by the full years he had, 2:2 versus his teammates. That is a record not very special

Quote:

---

Another fact - he won a GP in his first full season. Who else has done that?Hamilton, Schumacher, Stewart, Fittipaldi and Baghetti. Any more?

---

His teammate won 4 races that year, so now apply that to your comparison and then we are talking. Most other drivers never had a car anywhere good enough to challenge for wins in their first seasons, GV did.

Quote:

---

I accept that his early death leads to a certain amount of rose-tinted viewing, as it does in the case of Senna, Peter Collins, Jean Behra and, to an extent, Jim Clark but nevertheless he deserves to be ranked among the greats near the top of the pyramid. Maybe not in the top three but certainly in the next five or ten.

---

Senna, Schumacher, Prost, Piquet, Lauda, Stewart, Fangio, Moss, Clark, Fittipaldi, Brabham, Ascari are drivers who I would rate far above Gilles at any time of the day.
Added to that, there are many more drivers, like Farina, Mansell, Rosberg, Alonso, Räikkönen, Häkkinen who I personally would take above GV as well.
So we are likely talking a place between top 15-20 for GV in all time, no where near top 8.

Quote:

---

I think that some here are under-rating him.

---

No. There is no underrating him, only crazy overrating.

Quote:

---

I'll finish with a quote from Steve Small's book:

---

Thanks for helping my case.
Your posted quote only showed how GV got people emotional due to his style. The same can be said about Colin Mcrae for example, but Sebastien Loeb is many times the better driver, just without as much flare as CM. The same comparison applies to F1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D28

Motorsport magazine rated GV second greatest driver all time (to Nuvolari) in Nov. 1999.

---

Then they are full-blown idiots.

Quote:

---

Consider The US Grand Prix, Watkins Glen 1979. In practice on a wet, treacherous track GV set the fastest time by 11 seconds over the next man, teammate Jody Scheckter.

---

Actually, it was much less than 11 seconds and it was PRACTISE, where only 6 recorded a time. Out of those 6, most were no where near the quality of the Ferrari.

And as a point of reference, 1999 CART wet qualifying (so people were actually trying) at Mid-Ohio

1 Juan Montoya Reynard-Honda 1:28.135
2 Memo Gidley Lola-Ford 1:35.105
3 Luiz Garcia Jr. Reynard-Mercedes 1:38.629

Quote:

---

Next day GV qualified 3rd on the grid, 13 places ahead of Scheckter. He also won the race over Jones and Arnoux.
In 1981 at Monaco he qualified 2nd on the grid 15 spots ahead of Pironi and also took the victory.

---

Why are you posting the results of 2 races? I can show you many races where he was nowhere compared to his teammates.

Quote:

---

I do not believe that GV was ever consistently outpaced by a teammate.

---

Take a look at 1978 for example.
http://f1-facts.com/statistics/team-mates/GVilleneuve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

Actually, it was much less than 11 seconds...

---

Much less? Reports vary between 9 and 11 seconds, but whatever it was those who were there knew what they had seen. According to Jody Scheckter:

Quote:

---

"I scared myself rigid that day. I thought I had to be quickest. Then I saw Gilles's time and — I still don't really understand how it was possible. Eleven seconds!"

---

Jacques Laffite had this to say about the time:

Quote:

---

"Why do we bother? Gilles is different from the rest of us. He is on a separate level."

---

Both drove in those conditions at the same time so, sorry Garry, but their opinion carries more weight than yours.

However, as Nigel Roebuck has said:

Quote:

---

"No one would ever suggest that Gilles was a complete racing driver, in the Stewart or Prost sense of the word: he was too impetuous for that. Races were always more important than championships, and that made him a man apart."

---

He also said:

Quote:

---

"Opinions are sharply divided about Gilles Villeneuve. To many he was simply what motor racing was all about. To the more dispassionate he was an accident waiting to happen, and when the end came, well, they were proved right, weren’t they?"

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Much less? Reports vary between 9 and 11 seconds, but whatever it was those who were there knew what they had seen. According to Jody Scheckter:
Jacques Laffite had this to say about the time:
Both drove in those conditions at the same time so, sorry Garry, but their opinion carries more weight than yours.

However, as Nigel Roebuck has said:

He also said:

---

It was 9,2 seconds if I remember correctly. The only sources that vary about that time is the ones going by what Jody said and Nigel Roebuck has been reporting for decades, like the fool he is.
I posted times from a qualifying by montoya where he destroyed everyone. Qualifying, where more than 6 drivers took part. Surley qualifying is more important than an irrelevant practise session, where only a few drivers scored times.
If Gilles was on a level different compared to everyone else, why was he beaten by 2 teammates in row?


You have again chosen to ignore parts of my post.

Quote:

---

In any case, if you take opinions and stats together (where stats are far more important, because they are more unbiased), they fully support my view that rating Gilles amongst top 3 of all drivers is bordering on the line between lunacy and idiocy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

You have again chosen to ignore parts of my post.

---

No, I read it. You say that opinions and stats together support your view of GV and I happen to agree that he does not rank among the top 3 all-time F1 drivers, but I do not agree with your view of GV's ability as a racing driver.

You chose to discount the experiences and opinions of Reutemann, Lauda, Scheckter and Lafitte among others, and use phrases such as "like the fool he is", "full-blown idiots" or "lunacy and idiocy" to discount others who disagree with you. In doing so you merely undermine your own argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

No, I read it. You say that opinions and stats together support your view of GV

---

No, I dont let opinions of biased people cloud my judgement. I quoted you where you said opinions and facts should be taken together.

Quote:

---

and I happen to agree that he does not rank among the top 3 all-time F1 drivers,

---

Which has been my problem in this thread, glad you agree.

Quote:

---

but I do not agree with your view of GV's ability as a racing driver.

---

So where do you rank him? I dont see a place for him in top 15 of all time f1 drivers.
Incidentally, what do you see as my views on his abilities as a racing driver?

Quote:

---

You chose to discount the experiences and opinions of Reutemann, Lauda, Scheckter and Lafitte among others, and use phrases such as "like the fool he is", "full-blown idiots" or "lunacy and idiocy" to discount others who disagree with you. In doing so you merely undermine your own argument.

---

I used the phrases full-blown idiots and like the fool he is regarding journalists, drivers i just called biased.
Gilles easily had an ability to get people to support him, like very few other athletes have. But that doesnt make his driving abilities better or worse.
FACTS remain. The so-called super Gilles never was so convincing against his teammates to make a case for him being an all-time great.

Garry,

I think you are confusing a driver's statistical record with his ability. Villeneuve had the ability, unfortunately he rarely had the car to demonstrate it and his untimely death precluded his etablishing a significant set of statistics.

Greatness is more than mere statistics. It is the ability to extract more performance from a car that those who understand believe is possible. It is having a 'racer's' attitude and commitment whether contesting 1st or 10th place. It is having the integrity to stand by an agreement. It is making me want to watch him race and arrange my weekend around it rather than merely watch the GP if I'm at home.

Had Villeneuve not been killed, one of two things might have happened: he might have scored no more wins and become a mere footnote in history, as you obviously consider him, or he might have gone on to score many wins and poles and figure higher in a table of statistics. But he gave his life for our sport so we will never know and must simply form opinions on what our hearts say might have been.

Like Berndt Rosemeyer, Guy Moll and others, he has earned his place in the pantheon of top drivers on the basis of 'what might have been'. Personally I don't think there is sufficient evidence to justify a top three ranking, but some people's hearts say otherwise. But his ability cannot be dismissed or ignored.

Now, a couple of points of fact:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

It was 9,2 seconds if I remember correctly. The only sources that vary about that time is the ones going by what Jody said and Nigel Roebuck has been reporting for decades, like the fool he is.
I posted times from a qualifying by montoya where he destroyed everyone. Qualifying, where more than 6 drivers took part. Surley qualifying is more important than an irrelevant practise session, where only a few drivers scored times.

---

It was not 'an irrelevant practise session' it was the first qualifying session. In those days the qualifying rules were completely different from today. There were two timed sessions where cars circulated freely and every lap was timed; the fastest from either session determined the grid. There were also two untimed sessions, usually one on the Thursday or Friday and another on race day morning.

On this occasion the first timed session was wet and Villeneuve was fastest. the second session was dry and everybody was faster. The times were definitely set during a timed qualifying session not an untimed purely practice session.

Quote:

---

If Gilles was on a level different compared to everyone else, why was he beaten by 2 teammates in row?

You have again chosen to ignore parts of my post.

---

As I have already pointed out, the first was his rookie season and the second was because he recognised his status as number two driver, a concept that apears alien in today's world.

So, who is ignoring what is posted?


Edit: This was posted without seeing the latest exchange

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

No, I dont let opinions of biased people cloud my judgement.

---

If by "biased people" you mean the likes of Scheckter, Lauda, Reutemann then they were there. They were team-mates and/or rivals of GV at the time and were in a far better position to judge than anyone how good a driver GV was. Scheckter's opinions of Watkins Glen, for example, are telling in my view because he was in the same car and the same conditions. He knew his capabilities, and those of the car, and he could not understand how GV did what he did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

So where do you rank him? I dont see a place for him in top 15 of all time f1 drivers.
Incidentally, what do you see as my views on his abilities as a racing driver?

---

I'd certainly rank GV in my all-time top ten drivers because a top driver to me doesn't depend on the number of wins or championships. There's far more to being a great driver than that.

Just on the basis of Watkins Glen, where you've pointed out that "it was PRACTISE, where only 6 recorded a time" I'd say that your opinion of GV's abilities as a racing driver is that he is overrated ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

The so-called super Gilles never was so convincing against his teammates to make a case for him being an all-time great.

---

And you've certainly argued that case :cool: :s mokin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D-Type

Greatness is more than mere statistics. It is the ability to extract more performance from a car that those who understand believe is possible. It is having a 'racer's' attitude and commitment whether contesting 1st or 10th place. It is having the integrity to stand by an agreement. It is making me want to watch him race and arrange my weekend around it rather than merely watch the GP if I'm at home.

---

:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D-Type

Greatness is more than mere statistics. It is the ability to extract more performance from a car that those who understand believe is possible. It is having a 'racer's' attitude and commitment whether contesting 1st or 10th place. It is having the integrity to stand by an agreement. It is making me want to watch him race and arrange my weekend around it rather than merely watch the GP if I'm at home.

---

I enjoy watching Sato race, but that don't neccesarily mean he's a 'great' driver!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wedge

I enjoy watching Sato race, but that don't neccesarily mean he's a 'great' driver!

---

I agree. On it's own it doesn't. But in combination with other factors it might.