Villeneuve is overrated!!!!!!!!!!

[neutral]

I honestly cant understand why so much hype is centred on Jaques. OK he may be quick in the dry, but definately not the quickest. MS and Hakk for e.g are guicker (note the latter is only quicker when he feels like it). Secondly and more importantly, he is absolutely horrible in the wets. In my mind he is a one dimensional driver. Sure he is good, but he is not great. People keep saying that he is driving in an inferior car, but this has not always been the case. He was driving a dominant Williams, which despite being nearly more than a second quicker than the Ferarri, only gave him the title in the final race. Why? because of his clumsy performance in the rain and driver errors!(e.g canada). In my mind McLaren have done the right thing by keeping DC, as he is everything Jaques is and more!!!

[Peter Mallett]

You are of course entitled to your opinion. However, expect attacks from all sides on this one.

I tend to agree with you, but I also think he has worked hard over the last two races. Maybe he's reading this board.

[jvilleneuve2000]

IS HE F***

[Peter Mallett]

Originally posted by jvilleneuve2000
IS HE F***

What. Reading this board or overated?

[jvilleneuve2000]

overated

[Dannyboy]

I don't believe Villeneuve is overrated. I do however believe he is a much more skilled driver than DC and Mika. Nobody really comes close to MS but the closest is probably Villeneuve. You're right about Villeneuve's inability to cope in the rain and that weakness will undoubtedly leave many feeling that he is not a complete driver in the mould of a Senna, Prost or Schumacher. Its debatable. What I admire most about JV is his competitive fire, his unwillingness to accept Schuey's position as the sports fastest driver and his courage. How could you forget those memorable passes - Hill at Melbourne 96, MS in Portugal and Jerez 97. Those were classic moves. As you say Villeneuve had the bestcar in 96. However in 97 that Williams was not the class of the field by seasons end. The Mclarens were definitely quicker towards the end of the season and I believe the Ferrari was at least on par with the Williams by seasons end. Remeber HHF he did nothing with that Williams and Villeneuve thoroughly pasted him during his time at Williams. Most Regard HHF as a quick driver so make you're own conclusions. Lets not forget that Villeneuve won the CART championship and the Indy 500 at a time when real drivers - Mansell, Al Unser Jr, Mario and Michael Andretti and Emmerson Fittipaldi - still populated the grid. Villeneuve then proceeded to vie for the Formula 1 title in his rookie season. It was unprecedented and few know that Adrian Newey worked exclusively with Damon Hill to win that years championship. Added to the fact that Hill had been with the team for three years makes that a fairly hefty advantage don't you agree.

As for JV's position in the sport he will probably never be considered one of the greats. He is constantly in the shadow of his illustrious father and few people understand his complex personality. However, he is not overrated he is a superb driver who probably has at least one more championship in him.

[Peter Mallett]

Originally posted by jvilleneuve2000
overated

Yep, I agree with you, he is.

[jarama]

IMO Villeneuve is certainly a very good driver, but no truly a GREAT one. He's one of the fastest in the dry, although I'm sure he's not the faster. He's skillful and very good starter... but not very good in the wet.

I think he's slightly overrated, too.

[Marshal]

Not overated, but correctly rated. As has been pointed out, he's not good in the wet, but is phenomenal off the line and probably the best racer in F1.

As has been mentioned, at least half the memorable overtaking that's been done in F1 since he started has been done by JV, and I can't recall him making a mistake whilst being presurised this season (though the mistake when try to overtake at Montreal was an absolute peach of a cock-up!)

Overall, good, but not the best.

[Danielsun]

You want overrated? What about M. Schumacher? Sure, he's a good driver, but as many have said, he's no Senna or Prost. When did they (apart from racing each other) ever fall apart and drive someone else off the track as soon as they're in sight of him (or out of sight, as was supposedly the case in France).

Think about it: the last driver to take him on in a straight fight and win was the subject of this debate: Jacques Villeneuve. Overrated? No way...

I do, however, have a problem with the amounts of dosh he's meant to be chasing from Renault and the likes for the next couple of years. Nobody is worth that sort of money. JV is a fantastic driver and a personality that F1 sorely needs to get away from its Boredom Kingdom other drivers. His major shortcoming, as mentioned previously, is wet weather. It has long been a hallmark of great drivers that they are at their best in wet or marginal conditions.

A good driver, definitely. A great, certainly not. Overrated, are you kidding me?! Nobody who has made it into F1 (not for one all-expenses-paid race) could really, truly be called overrated.

[steve nielsen]

The problem with drivers who have famous fathers is that people always doubt their abillity's, in Jaques case and also in Hill's case, the other problem they have is they became WDC.......... but they did it in a car that was practicly unbeatable in those years, so iff Jaques and Damon are overrated, so is Mika Hakkinen, anyone can become WDC in those cars, the truth is there are 22 f1 drivers and at least 15 of them can become WDC if they have the right car. And that brings me back to a intervieuw with Max Mosley, he thought about a F1 championship where the drivers swoped cars every race so at the end of the season every driver would have driven in all the different cars.
The best driver would become WDC and the best team would win the WCC, it would make things very interesting, just imagin, Schummi in a Minardi , Hakkinen in an Arrows, and Mazzacane in a Ferrari, what would be the race result in such a situation??

[Danielsun]

Originally posted by steve nielsen
The best driver would become WDC and the best team would win the WCC, it would make things very interesting, just imagin, Schummi in a Minardi , Hakkinen in an Arrows, and Mazzacane in a Ferrari, what would be the race result in such a situation??

Mazzacane without a doubt! All he'd have to do is stay on the track. Oh... he can't do that. Ah well, there's always JV's teammate, Zonta. Maybe other team's cars wouldn't fly over fences or stuff him into barriers. It really would be fascinating, though, to see just who could adjust to their cars for each round the quickest and therefore get on top of things for the race.

Mind you, it would be a rather expensive procedure: imagine how much testing they'd have to do between races - something the FIA is trying to cut down on! But on the bright side of it for Bernie is the amount of extra revenue from merchandise sales! You could no longer support any drivers; rather the teams. Schumacher would have a field day on it...

[Unknown Soldier]

I think the argument that anyone can win a WDC in a great car is a crock of s**t. It takes alot more then simply getting into a car (ie '97 Willimas) and driving it around for 65 + laps.

Let's face you give Rosset at great car and he will still be s**t, why cause he's a s**t driver

[steve nielsen]

I did'nt say that, I said at least 15 f1 drivers could be WDC in the right car, not all of them.

[Peter Mallett]

Originally posted by Danielsun
Think about it: the last driver to take him on in a straight fight and win was the subject of this debate: Jacques Villeneuve. Overrated? No way...

Er. In another thread we talk about DC in France. Methinks you have suffered a minor memory lapse possibly brought on by an over exposure to the waters of the Liffey.

He is definitely not among the best drivers ever. Like most of the current crop he's nowhere near as good as Mickey the Shoe (MH & this year, DC, are much nearer to him).

His worst fault, and its what really ruins his record, is the way he gets the red mist and then throws the car at the scenery. Add to that a lack of ability in the rain and well.......... draw the only conclusion available.

[Valve Bounce]

His engine started to go wrong in his first F1 race, costing him a win against Hill - the penalty there was 8 points vs Hill. Then in the last race his wheel fell off. Lets face the facts, he would have won the WDC handsomely in his rookie year. He beat mS the following year. Over rated? I think not.

[TimD]

Originally posted by Danielsun
Overrated, are you kidding me?! Nobody who has made it into F1 (not for one all-expenses-paid race) could really, truly be called overrated.

Now that's a sentiment I can totally agree with. While I would say that there are perhaps three or four drivers currently competing who are more rounded, more disciplined than Jacques Villeneuve, his sheer speed ranks him right up at the sharp end, and his charisma in and out of the car is a breath of fresh air in this era.

On the subject of Schumacher being no Senna or Prost, I would actually say that he is pretty darned close.

I've been indulging in a little nostalgia lately, catching some of the great races of the past. It is a surprise just how often Alain threw it at the scenery, and quite how familiar Ayrton was with the back tyres of innocent back-markers.

All three have been guilty of utterly unforced errors which plonked them in the Monaco barriers. Alain managed to spin a gilhooly during a parade lap at Imola once. Michael hasn't done that. Every time the Schumacher nose/DC rear wheel interface is mentioned, I have visions of the rear camera on Martin Brundle's Tyrrell being speared by a McLaren coming out of the spray "like Jaws" according to Murray.

No, there's only one driver who I ever thought was totally overrated in F1. And he was Senna's team mate in 1993. After all, this young man was heralded as the second coming, the son of a virtual deity, entering F1 to do his Father's work. Heck, he even came from Nazareth.

Take a bow, young master Andretti.

[Peter Mallett]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce
His engine started to go wrong in his first F1 race, costing him a win against Hill - the penalty there was 8 points vs Hill. Then in the last race his wheel fell off. Lets face the facts, he would have won the WDC handsomely in his rookie year. He beat mS the following year. Over rated? I think not.

A good example of what I was saying. Thank you. The reason he lost his first race was because he ran over the kerbs whilst passing Hill and damaged the oil system.

He needed to win and Hill fail to finish in the last race of that year. Hill, played the game very well to put pressure on JV. Admittedly the wheel thing was unfortunate.

Tim,

You are of course right about the failings of Senna, Prost et al. Its just that They didn't do those things with boring regularity. It was always a surprise. JV on the other hand is either spectacular or a spectacular failure. So he's good but not that good.

[TimD]

Hang on, Peter.

When I started talking about Senna and Prost, it was in the context of Schumacher, not Villeneuve.

I wouldn't put Jacques in the same bracket as Michael, let alone Ayrton and Alain.

It's the very fact that Schumacher's slips are unexpected that makes them memorable, just like with the class acts who went before...

[Peter Mallett]

Tim,

I merely thought I'd juxtapose your ideas in the context of the syntax of this underlying metaphor!

Or. Sorry old bean, I was off on a different tack.

I agree with you about TGF, Senna et al. Also other over-rated ex Indy-car drivers. Alex Zanardi. An Ecclestone PR exercise if ever there was one.

JV is good. He is definitely suffering from over-hype. But of the drivers out there only three or four are better. He just fails (like most of the current grid) to inspire any admiration in me.

[Valve Bounce]

Peter, my point is that in his first race, he was faster than Hill. I am not sure where you obtained the information from that he damaged his oil system because he ran over the kerbs - you are probably right, but I don't have that information. Nevertheless, his performance in that first race was stunning, and as you did say, he passed Hill. To say he is overated, ??? I think not!!! To elaborate, Jacques has that brilliance that is required to produce something extraordinary when others would have thought otherwise. I like this ability. I will never concede that he is overated.

[Dannyboy]

Spot on Valve Bounce.

[EERO]

Jacques Villeneuve may not the greatest raw talent out there, nor is he a consumate technician, but he is fast, tenacious and has a lot of heart. Put him in race winning car, and he will bring it home in first. Put him in a dog and he'll spin out trying.
The point is, that even the mighty Schumacher was not a consistent race winner in '96 and '97 when he first went to Ferrari, and Alesi, who is generally regarded as one of the most talented drivers in F1 by many members of this forum, has been unable to accomplish anything in two years at Sauber and a half-season at Prost.
Unfortunately, we are not in an era in which a skillful driver through mere force of will is going to win races in a pig of a car.
Most of the current crop would challenge at the front in a McLaren or Ferari; JV certainly would.

[bobdrummond]

Jacques Villeneuve over-rated? Get bent!

The mere suggestion just proves how brief some peoples memories can be. In America, he showed what he was capable of. In F1, he has since proven that, without a shadow of a doubt, he's special. It's a shame he's unlikely to drive for McLaren, but Ferrari should be interesting.

Dunno what he sees in Danni though. She's a talentless tart who'll drop him as soon as he ceases to be an F1 driver.

[ganda123]

I don't support him particularly, but I respect the guy for his patience with that BAR team that last year was next to hopeless. It will be interesting to see how he goes when he gets a really competitive car (which he will eventually). Yeah he does go over the top occaisonally and his wet weather driving isn't the best, but I think he's good. And his starts?