The difference between Gilles and TGF

[Liz]

Don't take it from me: take it from Keke:

Keke Rosberg

"To Gilles, racing truly was a sport, which is why he would never chop you. Something like that he'd look on with contempt. You didn't have to be a good driver to do that, let alone a great one. Anyone could do that. Gilles was the hardest ******* I ever raced against, but completely fair. If you'd beaten him to a corner, he accepted it and gave you room. Then he'd be right back at you at the next one ! Sure, he took unbelievable risks - but only with himself - and that's why I get ****ed off now when people compare Senna with him. Gilles was a giant of a driver, yes, but he was also a great man."


------------------------------------------------------------

"You didn't have to be a good driver to [chop other drivers], LET ALONE A GREAT ONE."

[neutral]

The quote talks about Senna and Gilles, and makes no reference to Schumi, but I can see your point. However, Formula 1 is boring enough, and I cant imagine how boring it would be if Schumi turned into Mr polite on the track. Schumi brings his own character to F1, every sport needs a baddy so to speak. I admit that he may not go down as the drivers favourite racer, the cleanest racer, or the safest racer, but it is undisputed that Schumi draws more fans to F1 than any other driver. Schumi needs F1 and F1 needs Schumi.

[Gt_R]

Need a baddy? Well Schumi isnt a baddy!~ its just that the press makes him seems like one, and pple assumes that he is one, just plain unfairness. Anyway, Schumi has been more than fair and safe these days, or years. And its irony that they brought GV up here...YES HE IS A GREAT MAN...but look at his son, JV, certainly not one. I dont think a great man would pull THAT "BATTERING RAM" STUNT in canada and then being cocky and tell pple to get out of his way in MONZA. DOES JV THINK HE GOT THE RIGHTS OF WAY AND ATTITUDE JUST BECAUSE HE HAS A "V" SURNAME??? LEARN FROM YOUR FATHER, STUPID, and i'd prefer Schumi's attitude to racing than JV's.

[freud]

Gilles drove for 'adrnaline rush' & wins....Schu drives for points & podiums.

[Bononi]

Gilles hardly would drive at the current F1. He was a kind of passioned driver that wouldn't suit with the present standards. I think he would be called as a bad driver...

[downforce]

...like Keke Rosberg is gonna say something nice about Michael...pfff
and yeah Keke yeah!...people shouldn't compare Gilles with Senna...they should try with Schumacher...but then again 22 wins in a Ferrari isn't much rite?

[Nuvolari]

If Gilles were driving in today's environment where too often who gets through the first curve determines the entire race, he might well be less the sportsman.

[neutral]

I agree with Nuvolari 100%.

[jarama]

I can't agree with both of you, chaps. I'm sure Gilles today would be the same extremely fast and totally fair driver.

[angst]

Gilles would always be the 'gentleman' - if you want to call it that - because he had a set of ethics which he lived his life with, and drove his races with. Schumi brings excitement to the sport does he? Well if barging your opponents off the track to enhance your chances of winning the WDC is your idea of hotting up the show, I can live without it. A cheat is a cheat is a cheat - end of story. MS is made out to be a 'baddy' because he cheated his way to one WDC and attempted the same with another, he has made a rod for his own back - has he ever apologised for Jerez '97? Let alone Australia '96 - and these things will linger over him like a bad smell for the rest of his career. He may be fast, he may have a good racing brain, the stats will show him to be a massive talent but to my mind he will never be a great. And I'm sure he won't care, but I have my memories of Gilles, of Prost, of Andretti, of Peterson - they don't all have the stats behind them, but they will always be greats because of the manner of their driving. The win at all costs mentality just leaves me cold.
If a long distance runner tripped his opponent up to win, would you see that as good thinking, because he won, or as the actions of a blatant cheat?

[TimD]

I'll bet if Gilles Villeneuve were alive today he'd be spending his time racing Historics, like his contemporaries Patrick Tambay and Jochen Mass.

And we'd still be in awe of what he could do with a car.

[Nuvolari]

I do not advocate a 'win-at-all-costs' philosophy; and it's impossible to know how Gilles or any other driver would act in any other era. I raise my point as a possibility, given today's racing pressures.

[freud]

Strangely, Gilles resembles Mika more than Schu in my opinion. He may not be driving a Ferrari but the ferrari of 90s doesnt have the passion of 70s, so I guess both Mika and Michael are playing equal fields.

Both Gilles and Mika are gentlemen...very fast....introvert....nice guys....baby face innocence...Both wont put anybody else in danger because of their driving...??

[Liz]

That's a good analogy of the runner tripping his opponent to win - how about a swimmer who hits her opponent in the throat, or a golfer who yells or makes a sudden move to disturb his opponent's putt - or baseball players who throw beanballs? The only thing that matters is that you win, not how you win? Not in my world, thank you. If you have to cheat, you're not a winner.

Gilles in historics ... I wish.

Someone sent me a lovely pic of Elio De Angelis from 1983 today. Isn't it remarkable how much he looked like Gilles? I remember reading about the drivers' strike and Elio playing the piano and Gilles leading the singing ...

Whatever happened to Formula One?

[Ace]

Being a French Canadian F1 fan that has been born to F1 after Gilles was gone I may sound like traitor saying that Gilles was far from being a saint, both in the track and out of it. If Rosberg thinks that Senna and Gilles are not comparable he must have his reasons. Just like Rosberg they are many that did not consider Gilles risk taking as harmless to them or as ethical or fair. Ask his wife if she considers Gilles as a good husband or even as a good father and then make your conclusions about him as a person.

The differences between Gilles and TGF or any other driver will always be enormous. First of all because they belong in different eras in F1. It would be a historical sin to say this is better or this is worse. They are just different, nothing more, nothing less. Personal preferences will always remain as personal preferences.

[downforce]

Agree with Ace...for once

So when will "formula 1" lovers be happy...I mean theyre waiting for the likes of Schuey, Mika and Co. to DIE and looking for the "Gilles incarnation"??
Geez life mus be hard since 1991...

[Dino IV]

It's very easy to take today's fast changing values for granted, downforce, and simply accept them without ever doubting their meaning and comparing them to your own beliefs. But one could try - I do try at least - and come to other conclusions. Also regarding the topic about television ethics one could say that immorality is bound to be an accepted value today if one just takes it as it is. Same goes for good sportmanship, so yeah life's been hard since 1991 if you think that's where it all started.

[angst]

Well said Dino - too often today ethics is a concept that people can't seem to get their heads round. downforce - I am not wishing anybody dead, and I don't have a problem with Mika, and you cannot re-incarnate your heroes (as Gilles was to the young lad that I was then).
Ace, I don't think I've ever heard any of Gilles' contemparies have any complaints about his driving. As for the issue with his wife, well unless you know something you wish to share with us then I don't think you should make assumptions about anybody's personal life - I don't for one minute suggest MS is anything other than a good husband/father/man outside of his profession(?) as I don't know anything about the private man. What I have a problem with is the manner of his racing at times. And at times it has been well beyond the pale, and that has sullied his reputation as far as I am concerned.
Liz, Elio was another favourite of mine, a real gentleman and a damned good driver - usually faster than Mansell and gave Senna a run for his money before it became obvious that he was number two in the team.

[Murph]

Some "thoughts" about some of the views expressed in this thread.

(1) Angst
Who would have EVER thought that I would stick up for Ace... but I am. I was lucky enough to see Saint Gilles in action in the "flesh" 8 times.... his debut for Ferrari at Mosport Park in '77, Watkins Glen in '78-80, and Montreal in '78-81. Oh the memories.... THE Friday qualifying session at the Glen in '79, wins at Montreal in '78 and the Glen in '79, the Jones/Gilles battle at Montreal in '79, and Gilles drive during the deluge at Montreal in '81.

A: The flollowing "contempories" had harsh words for both Gilles and Rene at Silverstone (after Dijon).....Scheckter ("Because I had such a good relationship with Gilles I could talk to him quietly and tell him he was a silly ass. He was intelligent enough to know that it was a stupid thing to do and that you don't last long doing that kind of stuff."), Fittipaldi, Regazzoni, and Niki. Personally, I agreed with DSJ who lambasted his fellow journalists for attacking Gilles and Arnoux.."Well, they're a bunch of women, aren't they!" But Ace was correct in his statement.

B: I suggest you read THE definitive book on Gilles...... Gilles Villeneuve The Life of the Legendary Racing Driver. It was written by Gerald Donaldson Covers all aspects of Gilles life....... I am "sharing" that with you and again... Ace is correct ( gosh... it is KILLING me to say that..hehehe)

C: Team Lotus followed a #1 driver.... and then as an after thought a #2 driver. That's the way Chapman ran HIS team. Chapman liked Mansell... and saw something in him. (nobody at that time knew exactly WHAT....that was ).The reason I mention this is that with the death of Colin..... Peter Warr ran the team..... and he disliked Nigel Mansell. Elio had some great drives with Shadow.... he was a very good developemment driver.... and under Warr he was the definite #1. I remember being in the pits (snuck in) prior to Sat. qualifying at Montreal in '84..... I think I talked to Nigel more then any of the Lotus personal. Talk about low man on the totem pole....it is not surprising that Elio was "faster". Unfortuately for Elio.... Warr was in love with Aryton, and with his arrival in '85.... Elio was in Nigel's shoes on the outside looking in. He was able to win a race for Lotus but Lotus was Aryton's team. Nothing wrong with that... but please do not think that Elio and Nigel... and later Aryton and Elio raced the same packages..... that said.. Elio was probably the most liked driver (by his contempories) in f1 during the late 70's-mid 80's.

(2) Freud

I agree that Mika and Gilles have a couple of things in common..... gentlemen and being nice guys. But the big difference between them ( and between Gilles and 99% of the f1 driivers I have seen since 1972) is that Gilles busted his A** on EVERY lap... whether it was a downpour, drizzle, hot, dry.....there was no QUIT in Gilles.... no matter what the conditions.... or his track position.... or the lack of competiveness of his car....Gilles tried to go faster EVERY lap. Gilles was a RACER! Can't say that about anyone else I've ever seen.....most drivers go fast when the car is "right".... but let something be amiss and it's a whole 'nother ball game..... the only guy that I can think of that came the closest to Gilles was Ronnie.

AS others have said it.... Gilles drove in a much different era...... more sportsmanship, more competitive teams, more challenging tracks. I don't believe in playing the "what if" game... but.... if Gilles was driving today.... this era of 20 lap "sprints" broken up by pit stops would have been perfect for his talents. That said...he would have hated the "mind games" played by everyone.. drivers, team managers, sponsors,and agents ( I imagine that if he was still alive today... he would have taught Jacques to shut up and just drive). Also, as he unfortunately learned from Pironi... he wouldn't have had anything to do with Schumacher (whom I like) and others that shared the "win at all costs" mentality ( this would also have included Schumacher's "mentor".... Aryton).... Gilles would have gotten along well with Alain, Gerhard, Jean, Nigel, and Mika... but of course it is very easy to get along with those that you are faster than...

I have tried to avoid posting recently.....but Gilles is one of my heroes and I just couldn't help myself...... so I will now slither back under my rock and gaze at my pics of "Saint Gilles".........

take care all

Murph

[angst]

Thankyou Murph for that insight. I must find a copy of that book. However I will clarify my position a little more.
I am not attacking anything about MS except for the manner he has gone about his racing - ie cheating. I have never assumed Gilles or any other human being is a saint (unless they ARE a saint, obviously) I was pointing out that there were things that he would not do, and could not tolerate from those around him (Pironi)and that to say that the way the races are now would have forced him to behave in a way that was alien to him is to be nothing more than an apologist for MS. My stand is that there is NO excusing his behaviour in'96 and '97. When I said that nobody had a complaint against Gilles I meant that he never had a complaint from a driver regarding Gilles putting them at risk.
With Elio I was merely pointing out that he was a pretty good driver, I wasn't trying to devalue the merits of Nigel Mansell. Elio was usually faster than Mansell even with Chapman at the helm, and I think after the years with Andretti/Reutemann Andretti/de Angelis there was no doubt that the two cars were prepared pretty equally, so the same would stand for de Angelis/Mansell I would imagine.

[Ace]

Murph, why is so hard for you to agree with me?

[Bononi]

Liz remind some good memories of Elio, and like Murph said, one of the most liked drivers.
Yes, Murph you clearly said it all. I can't track where F1 turned out be what it is today, but we all know what it is now. I sometimes think that all my posts are related to the past, and I can't help it. If the present drivers doesn't shine like the past ones, is something to be worried about. And I am not telling about the big stars or the promising guys, I am saying about the enviroment, the show or whatever it turned out be...
But still we are here, watching it, talking about it.

[neutral]

OK Gilles was a good driver. But wouldnt it be boring if everyone shared the same character? OK the good sportsman, friendly racer may cater too a lot of fans, like most on this panel. But I for one admire determination and those with an aggressive nature. Call me crazy, dangerous or whatever, but I love the way Senna drove and how Schumi drives today. Every week we watch 21 robots and Michael Schumacher, and I dread the day where we have 22 robots and no Michael Shumacher.

[TimD]

I've GOT to respond to that!

The dirty tactics that Senna popularised are without a shadow of a doubt the WORST thing that happened to Formula 1.

Closely followed by the evolution of a style of Formula 1 car which simply does not suit the flamboyant driver. There have always been meticulous drivers in the top flight of motor racing. Fangio would corner so precisely that his tyre would touch the same piece of straw on a straw bale at the apex of a given corner EVERY SINGLE LAP.

But there were also the Villeneuves, the Clarks, the Behras, who went quickest when they were exhibiting armfuls of opposite lock, and drifts which could be measured in yards.

Trouble is, if you gave them a modern F1 car, they would be totally outclassed, because the cars today do not reward that. It is as though we have legislated the charisma out of the drivers and given ourselves a grid full of Alain Prosts. This is not to denigrate Alain. His nickname "The Professor" was precisely because his meticulous nature was notable and distinctive. It was also very, very fast. But he had foils in Mansell, Piquet, Alboreto, whose driving was so very different.

In another thread, we have been discussing the relative point standings of Hakkinen and Coulthard at given places in their career. Has anyone noticed that Mika gained the ascendancy over David at roughly the point that grooved tyres were introduced? Mika's precise point-and-squirt style is naturally suited to the current generation of cars. David is more of the kart racer still, and will use opposite lock to help him around a corner. That is not rewarded by a car with grooved tyres.

And the cars would be able to take the sort of driving which we all remember so fondly from the '79 French GP, when Villeneuve and Arnoux spent those laps happily banging wheels and swopping places and paint. But nowadays, one would be in the gravel with smashed suspension. And while Gilles and Rene stepped out of their cars, and shook hands, and clapped each other on the back, in mutual appreciation for a cracking duel, Senna's response, as Eddie Irvine might well attest, would be a clenched fist and a swift right to the jaw.

So to respond directly, Neutral, you don't have to give up your aggression to be fair. Determination and caution are not mutually exclusive. But while the cars remain in their present configuration, the only driver who will be distinctive is the driver who doesn't give a damn for sportsmanship.

And that is a shame.

[Nuvolari]

I find it ironic that so many people are citing GV as a paradigm of the good sportsman who would never jeopardize a fellow driver simply to gain advantage. Perhaps that was his behavior while racing. Certainly accounts of his personal conduct paint a darker picture of a man solely interested in satisfying his own lust for walking the tightrope. Biographical anecdotes cite his insensitivity to the safety of passengers while he drove at breakneck speeds over land or risked imminent disaster while piloting his helicopter.

I believe in sportsmanship, NOT a 'win-at-all-costs' philosophy. It strikes me, though, that what's at work here (apart from a healthy distaste for Michael) is time viewed through the prism of our own nostalgia. Therefore, Senna and Schumacher stand as brutish compared with the jolly good fellows of old.

Racing has always been a knife-edge business where two drivers dicing wheel-to-wheel into a corner know that only one of them will be ahead at the exit.

As did the racers who preceeded them, Senna understood this. So does Schumacher.

My point is that despite their imperfections, neither man represents the end of fair play in F1