|
|
Post by chrisb on Aug 7, 2019 19:35:24 GMT
that is a great thingy Rob, very well worked out, I would add a little extra to that if I may, insofar the 'weekend triple' i.e. pole position, fastest lap and victory, according to the last time I looked at this Jimmy was still far ahead of everyone, but then, he always will be - won't he?
that is interesting Mikael, the reliability of the 1966/7 seasons was pretty poor - I don't have the stats to hand but it must be comparable, and the 1982/3 seasons must have been a bit fraught with retirements but the 90's were full of screaming V10's which sounded magical, oh how we took such a poor direction then, all we had to do was restrict revs not bring those awful V8's- but time permitting this looks like a task ahead methinks, but really intriguing
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Aug 7, 2019 21:16:18 GMT
that is a great thingy Rob, very well worked out, I would add a little extra to that if I may, insofar the 'weekend triple' i.e. pole position, fastest lap and victory, according to the last time I looked at this Jimmy was still far ahead of everyone, but then, he always will be - won't he? that is interesting Mikael, the reliability of the 1966/7 seasons was pretty poor - I don't have the stats to hand but it must be comparable, and the 1982/3 seasons must have been a bit fraught with retirements but the 90's were full of screaming V10's which sounded magical, oh how we took such a poor direction then, all we had to do was restrict revs not bring those awful V8's- but time permitting this looks like a task ahead methinks, but really intriguing Although one or two come close, by any sensible measure Jim Clark is the best of all time. Poor David Croft is sense deprived and will never know. I suspect his recent idiotic proclamation was motivated by national pride, but this ignores that Clark was also part of the greater national fabric of Great Britain.
Corporate control ruins sport, a decline accelerated in Formula One by the sport being warped into a device for enrichment. ecclestone and mosley should both be in prison.
|
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Aug 8, 2019 11:36:13 GMT
An interesting bit of statistical analysis Rob. Actually using your figures one could use a far simpler version to obtain a similar result. Take away the none finishes from GP's started and divide the wins into that figure, I believe it gives Jim Clark a 50% win rate and Lewis Hamilton 36.7%.
Obviously there would be those who like to add in variables etc for their favourite, but there is always a counter argument for whichever. One thing I could add would be the fact that Jim Clark finished races, and often won, in a car that anyone before or after him could not have done. His huge level of delicacy brought home ailing cars that no other could have finished a race in, and with that in mind his reliability record would have been even poorer.
|
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 8, 2019 17:47:33 GMT
An interesting bit of statistical analysis Rob. Actually using your figures one could use a far simpler version to obtain a similar result. Take away the none finishes from GP's started and divide the wins into that figure, I believe it gives Jim Clark a 50% win rate and Lewis Hamilton 36.7%. Obviously there would be those who like to add in variables etc for their favourite, but there is always a counter argument for whichever. One thing I could add would be the fact that Jim Clark finished races, and often won, in a car that anyone before or after him could not have done. His huge level of delicacy brought home ailing cars that no other could have finished a race in, and with that in mind his reliability record would have been even poorer. Hi Charles, your way is much easier and does away worrying about how many races each person drives in. The other fact that most people forget about when analysing Jim Clark and Jackie Stewart for that matter is that in Clark's case from 1962 to his death in 1968 nobody else won a GP in a Lotus and most cases were not even on the podium. In JYS case only one other driver won a GP in the cars JYS drove between 1969 and 1973 and there were only a few podiums by his teammate in 1973. In just about any other team from 1962 to today, if the car has been competitive enough to win a world championship then both drivers have won races or finished on the podium regularly. The only exception possibly being Alonso when at Ferrari in 2010 and 2012. Hector Rebaque in the Brabham BT49 with the trick suspension being a case in point of a competitive car making a driver competitive when otherwise he would have been a backmarker. The second Lotus was only competitive in the hands of the second driver in 1967 with G Hill and even then it broke almost every race whereas Jim would bring his home. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Aug 9, 2019 12:39:59 GMT
An interesting bit of statistical analysis Rob. Actually using your figures one could use a far simpler version to obtain a similar result. Take away the none finishes from GP's started and divide the wins into that figure, I believe it gives Jim Clark a 50% win rate and Lewis Hamilton 36.7%. Obviously there would be those who like to add in variables etc for their favourite, but there is always a counter argument for whichever. One thing I could add would be the fact that Jim Clark finished races, and often won, in a car that anyone before or after him could not have done. His huge level of delicacy brought home ailing cars that no other could have finished a race in, and with that in mind his reliability record would have been even poorer. Hi Charles, your way is much easier and does away worrying about how many races each person drives in. The other fact that most people forget about when analysing Jim Clark and Jackie Stewart for that matter is that in Clark's case from 1962 to his death in 1968 nobody else won a GP in a Lotus and most cases were not even on the podium. In JYS case only one other driver won a GP in the cars JYS drove between 1969 and 1973 and there were only a few podiums by his teammate in 1973. In just about any other team from 1962 to today, if the car has been competitive enough to win a world championship then both drivers have won races or finished on the podium regularly. The only exception possibly being Alonso when at Ferrari in 2010 and 2012. Hector Rebaque in the Brabham BT49 with the trick suspension being a case in point of a competitive car making a driver competitive when otherwise he would have been a backmarker. The second Lotus was only competitive in the hands of the second driver in 1967 with G Hill and even then it broke almost every race whereas Jim would bring his home. A good point Rob. I think that in 1962 Trevor Taylor was a very good number two to Jim, he finished second in the Dutch GP driving the Lotus 24 and was mighty in the Belgian GP until he and Willy Mairesse collided. Trevor then had a series of accidents that were none of his own fault, mostly mechanical breakages, which sapped his confidence. I have said previously that Trevor Taylor had all the makings of an extremely good grand prix driver who could have won many races had he been at say BRM. It was only many years later in F5000 that Trev regained much of that confidence, but by then it was too late for F1. Following Trevor Lotus had Peter Arundell as number two to Jim Clark and his debut was outstanding in my opinion as he gained many top placings and looked to be going on to very good things. Then half way through the season he had an awful accident that was akin to what happened to Stirling Moss, and although he eventually returned to race in 1966 he was a shadow of his former self. Arundell could have been as good as anyone on the grid other than Jim, but fate took that prospect away. Mike Spence had a great season as replacement for Peter Arundell in 1965, and actually won the early season Race Of Champions after Jim crashed heavily when dicing with Dan Gurney. Mike was a quality driver who looked to be going on to very good things at BRM in 1968 but tragically died soon after Jim while testing the Lotus 56 turbine at Indianapolis. The one thing however that is apparent is that Jim Clark was quite simply on another level, a truly extraordinary driver the like we are never likely to see again. Colin Chapman once said that he doubted that Jim ever drove to his fullest capacity, the 1962 German GP possibly being the only exception when Jim actually admitted that he frightened himself once too often and then slowed down. |
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 9, 2019 17:59:21 GMT
Thanks Charles for the updates on the number 2 Lotus drivers. It was before I actually started following F1 closely but I did read all the MotorSport mags from 1963 forward.
As you said Jim Clark was a once in a lifetime driver, the likes of whom we probably won't see again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Aug 9, 2019 21:29:06 GMT
John Charles, I second Rob's expression of appreciation. Your knowledge is often essential to our discussions. Could the young Lotus number two drivers have driven above their abilities because Jim Clark was so much faster? Would Colin Chapman have indirectly applied pressure? Do you feel Belgian driver Willy Mairesse may have been recklessly ambitious? Some suspect Chris Bristow's Cooper was sent off at the Burnenville Corner to fatal result after avoidable contact with the Ferrari of Mairesse, also involved in the massive collision you mention, two years later with Trevor Taylor. In your opinion, is this a pattern we can attribute to recklessness?
-Carl
|
|
|
|
Post by René on Aug 10, 2019 12:05:14 GMT
Great thread here guys, absolutely wonderful! I wouldn't dare to challenge Jim Clark's position as best of all time with so many Clark fans on the forum  but personally I am still not a fan of these 'best of' comparisons. Times have changed so much it is virtually impossible to compare different eras. The speeds are so much higher and a driver has to do so much more to keep everything in check, it's a different game. And the only reason it took Max Verstappen so long to secure his first pole position is the utter dominance of Mercedes, not his speed. We used to think Lotus was dominant in 1978 but that was nothing compared to the Ferrari dominance of the early 2000's and the Mercedes dominance we see nowadays. This kind of dominance skews the statistics and therefore makes it impossible to compare I feel. But that doesn't take anything away from Jim Clark's achievements. He was clearly the best. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Aug 10, 2019 13:35:22 GMT
John Charles, I second Rob's expression of appreciation. Your knowledge is often essential to our discussions. Could the young Lotus number two drivers have driven above their abilities because Jim Clark was so much faster? Would Colin Chapman have indirectly applied pressure? Do you feel Belgian driver Willy Mairesse may have been recklessly ambitious? Some suspect Chris Bristow's Cooper was sent off at the Burnenville Corner to fatal result after avoidable contact with the Ferrari of Mairesse, also involved in the massive collision you mention, two years later with Trevor Taylor. In your opinion, is this a pattern we can attribute to recklessness?
-Carl
Carl, Thank you for the compliment but the only reason I know a bit about this period is the fact that I spent the majority of my youth reading about all things involved with the sport, both cars and motorcycles. It has to be said to the detriment of my education and maybe career in later life, although I didn't do too badly thanks to having some ability but in truth lacked application as it was directed elsewhere, as above  . In answer to your comment I do not believe that Colin Chapman put undue pressure on the "number two" drivers, he did not really need to as he had Jim Clark. In their early careers as team mates at Lotus in Formula Junior Jim & Trevor were very evenly matched, in fact they jointly held the British FJ title. That being said Trevor always felt reverential towards Jim, probably realising how hard he had to try to match Jim, but there were times when he could. One great tale I picked up on was about the 1963 Pau Grand Prix, a non championship event held on the challenging street circuit in the South West of France during springtime. In 1963 the race was held in scorching hot temperatures, so much so that the tar on the street melted and thus threw up stones and chipping as at Reims in 1961. Team Lotus did not really have much opposition that weekend but arrived I believe due to there being good starting money. Jim had the new fuel injected Coventry Climax engine in his Lotus 25, and Trev had the older carburettor version in his 25. before the race Jim offered that if they were still running together in the race they would tie the finish. Both cars circulated throughout as if tied together on string and as they approached the line side by side Trevor dabbed the brake forcing Jim to cross the line first. He did not think that he deserved the win and that was his reverence towards Jim Clark. It was very unfortunate what happened to Trevor Taylor's career following all of those crashes which were not of his making al largely due to car failures and getting involved in other people accidents. He was a very good driver, as was his sister Anita who was a top touring car racer of the period, and I maintain to this day that had he driven for anyone else he would have been right up there with the likes of Graham Hill; Bruce McLaren; Jack Brabham etc. In all probability it was this period in Team Lotus' history that cemented the belief that they could not build two competitive or reliable cars. With regard to Willy Mairesse he did have a reputation for being somewhat cavalier thus gaining the nickname from some as "Wild Willy". I think it quite unfair to be honest as he was a passionate racer who just lived and breathed for the sport and was blindingly fast on his good days, such as the 1962 Belgian GP where he put the then already outdated Ferrari 156 in a position to challenge the Team Lotus cars. I do recall Trevor Taylor mentioning that he did not think Willy drove recklessly that day, and did not lay blame on him for their coming together, it was just a racing incident which happened on the scary and ultra fast Spa road circuit. I also do not believe that anyone who was reckless could have won the Targa Florio on two separate occasions, as Willy Mairesse did, as that as a course that demanded discipline and skill of the highest order. As those of us know from that period, poor Willy took his own life when he found that following some severe injuries sustained at Le Mans he could no longer race. He was a man who just lived to race cars and gave absolutely everything he had in doing so. In 1963 I bought a very good book titled "Men At The Wheel" by Peter Miller, which gave great detail about 25 top drivers of the period. Willy Mairesse was included and it gives a great insight into the man and driver. In it Miller quotes a comment by Trevor Taylor about that titanic duel he had with Willy at Spa in 1962; " Trev Taylor told me that even in the heat of battle together. Mairesse showed courtesy and gallantry, indicating his intentions with quick hand signals". John Charles |
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Aug 10, 2019 16:24:55 GMT
John Charles,
All pertinent and accurate knowledge has the same stature, especially when hard-earned. While you were learning so much about motorsport, others were fixated on their navels and learning very little.
That's a wonderful story about two great drivers at Pau.
-Carl
|
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Aug 11, 2019 8:39:33 GMT
John Charles, All pertinent and accurate knowledge has the same stature, especially when hard-earned. While you were learning so much about motorsport, others were fixated on their navels and learning very little. That's a wonderful story about two great drivers at Pau. -Carl Good point Carl. All the geography I learnt in my teens, in between reading MotorSport and Auto Racing, is of no use to me now. The names have changed, in many cases the borders have changed and the industries no longer exist. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Aug 11, 2019 15:28:54 GMT
 I can cover two items in this comment. Firstly I have often mentioned that the first monthly motor sport magazine I bought as a small child was one called "Motor Racing" which was very striking with its bright yellow heading and lower band on the cover. It was a great magazine and edited by a good journalist John Blunsden; quite different in format to Motorsport which later became the must read. The attached screen shot shows the December 1960 edition which featured a rare colour front cover of the Goodwood Formula Junior race from earlier in the year. The photo of the cars leaving the grid show the two Team Lotus works 18's of Trev Taylor and Jim Clark in the first two grid slots, with Trev in pole position. Jim's car was usually identified by its white nose band and Trevor ahead of his time in his bright yellow race overalls and helmet. I do not personally have this copy of this edition of Motor Racing but came across this on an Australian web site which featured it in an article on the ex-Jim Clark FJ Lotus 18 now owned by an Australian chap. |
|
|
|
Post by René on Aug 11, 2019 16:38:34 GMT
Cool. The chrome underside of Taylor's car looks great, like the 1958 Lotus 16.  |
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Aug 11, 2019 17:16:55 GMT
having finally visited the new Jim Clark museum today !! [but my wretched phone will only download 7 of the 20 photos so can't attach any of the really better ones] which is well worth a visit, getting up close and personal to a Lotus 25 and Cortina and all those cups, and yes I bought even more memorabilia - yet another mug- my 3rd, and a great T shirt and can finally rid myself of the only thing that worked on my Porsche, the hat, by buying a Jim Clark beanie hat, oh well
there is a great story by one of my favourite spectators to all this wonderful time Cedric Selzer Jimmy's one time mechanic, who described a very 'full of himself' Peter Arundel who, when joining the team, said competing with Jimmy wouldn't be that difficult only to follow him at Spa in practice and become yet another Jim Clark fan, and admitting he had no idea how Jimmy could do what he did,
Trevor gave a lovely interview in MS a few years he sadly passed away and still spoke with such deference to Jimmy and totally agree JC, Trevor would have been a winner in a Brabham or a BRM,
I haven't been able to find a definitive answer to Chris Bristow's accident, I do believe he ran in a corner on the wrong line at the wrong speed and I am aware what happened subsequently but why he arrived there in the wrong place at the wrong speed I am not sure, there is a website dedicated to his memory, but reading some contemporaries say he was very quick, others say very wild, but Willy was interesting, passion and dedicated although I was more of a of Olvier Gendebien fan Wild Willie won races, and you don't do that if you are that wild
that was a great magazine JC, I seem to think I have some copies somewhere - must try and dig them out
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Aug 11, 2019 17:19:42 GMT
Cool. The chrome underside of Taylor's car looks great, like the 1958 Lotus 16. The Lotus 16 was a truly beautiful car and combined the genius of Colin Chapman and Frank Costin. Esthetic beauty was lost for a few years years when the early mid-engine cars came on the scene.
I don't suppose either Charles or John Cooper cared much about appearance. Like the modern prototypes, the speed of their cars understandably trumped beauty.
|
|
but personally I am still not a fan of these 'best of' comparisons. Times have changed so much it is virtually impossible to compare different eras. The speeds are so much higher and a driver has to do so much more to keep everything in check, it's a different game. 
.