Emilia Romagna Grand Prix - Imola

[charleselan]

Villeneuve Jnr has always been controversial but he is a very intelligent and well educated guy, not the most popular on many motor sport forums but then anyone with a brain is not going to be popular on those places. I do not agree with him regarding Bottas not being fast enough for he can be very quick, his main hinderance is his inability to be a complete driver. He lacks the ability to adapt and to control his environment.

In many ways he is an example of someone being promoted above his abilities but on the other hand he is a worthy F1 driver and would be an ideal lead driver in a lesser team.

With regard to Alan Jones, I have not liked many of the things he has come out with post race career, far too much "I could have' and "wasn't I great" but in this instance I think he had pretty much hit the mark. I have listened to his comments on Peter Windsor's podcast and it is interesting what he actually says.

In reality the problem we have is that no team principle like Wolff should also be a driver manager, there is a conflict of interest and the F1 body should actually put a stop to this ever happening. The fact that George Russell's career is beholden to this guy is disgraceful and really precludes him from doing what Alan Jones suggest. Can you imagine Wolff trying this on with the likes of Jones; Ayrton; Niki or JYS, no neither can I.

Maybe George should stick with Williams in the future as he could well benefit from the VW Rally "Super Team" that is now running the organisation for they are no lightweights. My advice to Russell would be that if he hasn't been guaranteed a MB drive next year by mid season 2021 to tell Wolff to stick his sticky fingers elsewhere. Another two years with Williams in the new formula would be no bad thing and at the end he would still only be 25(ish) and someone most teams would be looking at.   

[robmarsh]

Yep sage advice Charles. I guess like the troop of monkeys endlessly typing and producing Shakespeare, Alan Jones will eventually say something one can agree with. I preferred him when he was driving for Williams and that isn't by much. He has become a legend in his own lunchtime.

[charleselan]

Last evening I sat down and watched most of the Peter Windsor Podcast of April 7th, the anniversary of Jim Clark's death which is very important to Peter and all of us who idolised the great man. Chris mentioned this sometime back, and also brought out some of the content as something worth looking at.

There was some material on Jim of course but most of it focused on contemporary F1 which after a while became a bit tedious to be honest, well it was from my point of view. I did find the constant eulogies of Lewis Hamilton to be overbearing, and Peter is never far from expressing his admiration of Nigel Mansell. One question that as put to him was that of who did he think Lewis; Max; Charles and George were like when compared to drivers of the past.

Now this was quite interesting, even if maybe not fitting with my own personal view. He said that Lewis was very like Mansell in many ways, just by keeping everything simple and focused on the job in hand. Now here was the shocker for me in that he compared Verstappen with Ronnie, nearly fell out of my chair there. His comparison was in respect of car control and speed, as well as the feeling that like Ronnie Max would jump at the chance just to drive something for fun. He stated a time in 1976 when he asked Ronnie if he would like to do a piece on testing the 1976 works F3 March of Bruno Giacomelli, which he did. Peter mentioned that he felt Max would do the same if he were contractually allowed to do so.

I did not agree with his view that Ronnie overdrove the car on occasions, or did not manage his races well at times. He has jumped on a comment from JYS with the overdrive bit which may have been true in his earlier days at March, but I do not consider that to have been the case in his Lotus years and afterwards. Race management, Ronnie was as good as anyone, Peter.

Another surprise was in his comparison of Charles Leclerc with JYS, which was quite illuminating. He says that Charles goes about the business very like Jackie did, very analytical of his performance and where he can improve. That could well be very true but he still reminds me more of Gilles in the way he races and drives, so maybe a combination of both .

Talking of Gilles he actually likened him to George which is something I have never considered myself but an interesting observation especially as it was pre Imola.

Returning to Charles he also earlier remarked that he thought of all the drivers currently racing Jim Clark would have the most time for. Charles quiet understated but focused personality would have been to Jim's taste, I would also say that his honesty would also have been high on the agenda.

Interestingly he did not mention once Ayrton or Alain in driver comparisons which is something new today.

P.S.

Something i missed when I wrote this earlier was the comment that Ferrari have published a book that has only been released to selected people, Nigel Roebuck being one but not Mr Windsor. Anyway in the book Charles Leclerc was asked what Ferrari GP car from earlier years he would liked to have raced the most, he chose the 1970 Ferrari 312B. Then he was asked who he would have liked his team mate to be and he said Mario Andretti. That boy has a fine understanding of history.

Just as an afterthought about who Max is like, my feelings are more of a young Jacky Ickx, a lot of similarities brilliant in the wet; very young in contemporary terms and taking it to the long established top man.

[René]

Wonderful post JC!

I think there is no right or wrong in this kind of discussion, comparing drivers. It's a personal view I guess.

His comparison between Leclerc and JYS however is interesting I must say and I do see where he is coming from. Also for me, Charles does remind of Gilles sometimes but he also seems more calculated which is more JYS like.

Charles's choice for the 312B and Mario Andretti says it all.