| Readers' Comments | |
|
| |
| Updated: 20 August 1997 | Hungarian Issue |
|
Why, when Damon has a moment in front, do all the "Hill Bashers" come
out and say, nah it wasnt him, it was because whoever had a problem or
something?
Give credit where credits due. Hill drove a brilliant race with a sub-spec car.
Chris Sedgbeer
To all those trying to convince themselves that Villeneuve really is a good driver, and that Hill's bad luck at this year's Hungarian Grand Prix is somehow justification for Villeneuve having to concede the lead in his first Grand Prix in Australia last year, recall that the reason he had to concede the lead was due to an oil leak caused by running off the track at the exit from a corner. On the slower tracks where the power of the car counts less than the drivers' ability, Villeneuve rarely shows anything special - take the Monaco races both this year and last. We all talk about Hill all the time and that is the sign that he is very interesting driver. I am big supporter of Hill. I was at Hungaroring this year. I just want to say that Damon drove his own race. He was absolutely amazing, and he certainly deserved championship crown. In fact, this is the best result for the Arrows team in the last 10 years, so do you need any more comment? He is very close to Schumacher and in the next few seasons he will take another WC Crown, remember this! Best wishes to all folks, who know what is real F1 racing. If you dont know, just take the time and see at least one race. Then you will understand that all drivers in F1 are the best with technique, support, mentality and skill. Enough for today and thanks.
Matej Kuharic
I am surprised by the lack of controversy over Charlie Whiting's decision to declare the Ferrari throttle control system legal. It seems a fairly open-and-shut case - it's traction control, as banned by the rules. Can someone explain to me why it is legal? Of course, if it were deemed illegal, Ferrari and Schumacher would be disqualified and removed from the Championship, and that wouldn't do much for TV ratings, would it? Yours, not at all surprised
Phil Stoker
Firstly, some people keep mentioning that Hill's win in Australia last year was pure luck and that JV was unlucky not to win. That seemed to be the end result but wasnt the whole story. The only reason JV had the problem was because he went off the track -- under pressure from Damon Hill who was trying to overtake him. Hill would have put more pressure on JV as he was in the ideal position to do so and had plenty in reserve. Even Patrick Head said, "Hill seemed to be driving well within himself." Secondly, Some guy said Schumacher was lucky to win in Monaco and France after going off the circuit. Well, he did go off the circuit, but why didn't others take advantage of his errors? Mainly because they were too far back. In Monaco, the Williams' were not setup correctly and the drivers did not hesitate to prove it. In France, Schumacher was just too far ahead. The only time Schumacher got lucky this season was when David Coulthard stalled his car in Canada. Another person has pointed out that Hill had better tyres and that he did not suddenly become a better driver then JV and Schumacher. Well, of course he did not suddenly become a better driver, he always was just as good a racing driver -- if not a better one. Hill was not the only one on Bridgestones, why didnt Jarno Trulli or Rubens Barrichello do well? Also mentioned was that Schumacher looked good in qualifying but was less impressive in the race. Well, again, Schuey had to use the spare car because he crashed in the warmup and ruined his original race car. However, the end result of the race was that JV won and Hill didn't, even though Hill deserved to win more than anyone. But, that's motor racing for you. The most remarkable thing about F1 is its unpredictability. Who would have thought that Hill would lead so comfortably and his car would develop a problem when the win was practically his.
Zain Hashmi
Dear Atlas: What a weekend, eh? it was kinda funny as I watched this race I was remind of another race not too long ago. It was the French GP of 1990 and a surprise was Ivan Capelli on a Leyton House March 901 with Judd V10 power. To make a long story short, he held of a 3-time WC in Alan Prost who was driving for Ferrari at that time in an underpowered underfunded car for the vast majority of the race. Prost got by very late on and Capelli finished 2nd. I'd imagine that a lot of people at that time were figuring that this was a March revival (March at that time being a long time member of the F1 community -- and, at that time, were in trouble), but sadly the team wwere gone 2 years or so later. It was a fine drive, much as Hill's was on Sunday. But, all you rabid fans out there note this story before you spin your tales of an Arrows revival.
Cecil King
p.s a note for all you trivia buffs .. the Yamaha that was in the Tyrrell that Katayama surprised the F1 world at Monza '94 with was derived from the V10 that was in Capelli's car in 1990 Hey Anders Thelin, some much needed editing for your poetry:
Trash is trash,
Speaking of which, where do I sign up for Murray Walker's "Damon Hill Fan Club"? Come on Murray, there are a couple other cars out on the track too! The sign of a truly good sports commentator is you never know which side he's rooting for.
A.Wilson
I'm a Canadian and a big Villeneuve fan.... I'd like to comment on the article "Lady Luck" by Mazen Bararbhy.. That is just plain garbage! I agree with Rob MacLeod... Would you just stop this Lady Luck stuff... You just don't want to admit that Villeneuve is the best driver on the track. I can understand that this person isn't a big Villeneuve fan, but come on! Give this guy soem credit! Fighting off Coulthard with a second rate car was a good job! And, he had to push to catch up Damon before the laps ran out. Well, all I say is GIVE VILLENEUVE SOME CREDIT! I hope to see some more positive comments about Villeneuve next issue.
James Moore
Dear Atlas F1, I'd like to thank you and Mazen Baradhy for the "Lady Luck" article as I thought it was very funny and all in good humour. I'm a Fisichella fan, but I still go for Villeneuve because he is a good racer and not alot of guys can match it with him in a one-on-one track fight (I doubt many people would despute this). I admire him alot, but saying that this article is unfair to him isn't what this article is about. It's humour, people! Somethings I thought were extremely misconstrude, but I still enjoyed it otherwise. Keep up the good work and keep the humour rolling in. Off-track politics is just that... off track.
Richard Leong
So Damon's pace in Hungary was down to better tyres? The one make tyre monopoly we've recently had in F1 gave us extremely hard tyres which meant that drivers that aren't particularly smooth or good at setting cars up could win races (and indeed championships), The current tyre war will show the men from the boys. Drivers who are good at their craft are the ones who have the ability understand their cars (as all the past greats have). The bubble will burst over many current drivers. Michael's tyre scrubbing pointy kart car setups have robbed him of pace (until Ferrari re-invented traction control). Give Damon some credit -- he is the only current complete F1 driver. If Michael was so great, then his teammate would be allowed to have the same equipment. Notice how Michael's driving falls to pieces every time Hill gets behind him? He knows who the better driver is. I know I know, Damon Hill was robbed of a monumental victory. One of the best in the history of the sport, etc. Lets not forget a near monumental victory for Jaques Villeneuve last year in Australia. If I'm not wrong, he would have been the first rookie to win his debut race in Formula 1 since the first ever F1 race. Bad luck is a part of racing. I think Ayrton Senna had worse luck than this when he died. At least Damon has a chance to win again. I know it was tragic and he deserved to win the race along with HHF. Frentzen went out just before the half way mark, but his speed was impressive. He was about 1.5 seconds a lap quicker than Damon, and had bad luck not stopped by to knock on his door first, he would have probably won. But that is racing. It's a shame that people talk about only Damon's bad luck in the Hungarian GP. What about Jacques Villeneuve's bad luck this season. Or HHF for that matter. I think that if the Williams car was as reliable as last years car, it would have been a battle between the two Williams drivers with Schumacher a close third at best. I am not taking anything away from Schumacher, but the fact is that there are enough talented drivers out there who will beat him in a reliable Williams. The FW19 is still a small fraction better than the competetion. But that is life. At least Hill's misfortune has given us the opportunity to see a potentially brilliant finish to the season. Maybe we should try to enjoy the racing instead of crying about what could have been. I might be called a fool for my beliefs, but I think that enough fuss has been made about last week. At least it was not as bad as Australia 94.
Faisal Khalil Ahmad
Dear Atlas: As a Canadian and a big Villeneuve fan I had to take a minute to voice my opinion on the "Lady Luck" article I just read. What a bunch of garbage! Does this person still believe in the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny as well? I can understand if he is not a big fan of Jacques but give the guy some credit. He has had is own share of bad luck, go back to last year when he had to let Damon pass him on the last couple of laps in Australia.
Rob MacLeod
The Hungarian Grand Prix showed us a few things: 1. Given the right combination of equipment and setup, there are probably half of the current F1 drivers who can win races and I would say they have the same talent. 2. Damon this time had the right tires which made him faster than Villeneuve and Schumacher, whose tires were blistering. He did not suddenly become a better driver than these two. 3. Had HHF not been victim of a mechanical failure, he would probably have won the race. He also had the right tire compound. 4. Although Schumacher looked brilliant in qualifying, he only achieved it through use of softer compound, which gave him more grip. His speed was not due to a superior talent. In any case, this show off was useless in the race, because he made the wrong choice of tires. Same goes for Villeneuve in my opinion. 5. Had the temperature on the day of the race been cooler, Schumacher's and Villeneuve's tires would not have blistered and they would have been faster than Damon and HHF. So it looks that it is a lot a question of luck in making the right choice. 6. See item 1.
Philippe Côté
Comments on Hungary... In defense of Michael Schumacher - he was driving a car in which he had not driven prior to the race. A lot of guess work must have gone into the set-up. Regarding Hill, all in all a brilliant performance from a great driver in a crappy car that does not befit his talents. It would be great to see him as no.1 driver for Jordan, along side his rivals brother! Unlike most people, I think Hill did the right thing in getting out of Williams (not that Arrows was a good choice, though). It seems that, on the whole, the cars are just not up to expected/usual standard. How many times have both Williams finished a race this season? Now if only a middle range team, such as Sauber or Jordan, would pick Hill up... And how about that Ralf Schumacher. Talk about good stats: finishing in the top six in every F1 race he has finished. Definately not a bad 'rookie' year. He WILL be a champion given the right circumstances.
Gerry Satrapa
Dear Atlas, Mazen Baradhy's article on Lady Luck was very interesting, although to be honest, I think a little unfair. Frentzen has been unlucky, but then sometimes I think some of the things that Mazen has put down to bad luck has actually been poor driving. For example, with tyres, maybe Villenuve is simply better at saving his tyres than Frentzen. Certainly in post race interviews Villenuve has given the impression that he has consciously tried to stop them blistering... whilst Frentzen seems to push too hard. Maybe the problem is that Frentzen just isn't that good at setting his car up, and this causes them to blister too. If Villenuve wins the Championship, then sure... some of his victories can be put down to luck, but if Schumacher wins, so can some of his victories. I mean, Coulthard should have won in Canada, and in both France and Monaco Schumacher went of the track, but was able to get back on and take deserved victories. For a lot of drivers though, that would have been the end of their race. In Hungary, Hill was unlucky not to win, but then he was also lucky to have finished. Both Coulthard and Hakkinen have scored no points when they should have scored 10, at least Hill got 6. Also, in the past, some of Hills wins have been fortunate (such as Germany last year), so maybe it was time he was unlucky. Therefore I think luck tends to even itself out between good and bad. If a driver gets a higher proportion of bad luck, then that's not luck, it's bad driving. Regarding the Grand Prix of Hungary, I think the race answered a lot of questions about Damon Hill. Despite being in a less powerful car he managed to overtake Michael Schumacher at the end of the start/finish straight (something Hakkinen, Ralph Schumacher and Fisicella were unable to do), and looked set for a relatively easy victory until the throttle problem occurred. All this in a car that sturggled to qualify for the first race of the season. How many other drivers could have assisted in the development of the Arrows car the extent Hill has, and then have the skill to run rings around the much more fancied opposition. I would like to have been able to read Frank Williams mind as he wathced Hill pull further and further away from Villenuve until those last few cruel laps. I'm sure every driver has his hard luck stories (Hill was lucky to win from Villenuve in Australia last year), but who could not feel sorry that Arrows, Yamaha, and Bridgestone were all robbed of their first win.
Gary Slegg
I know that I am not the only one writing in about Damon Hill at Hungary. Everyone saw what happened. Though Damon's luck was cruel, he had done the damage by lap 75. To say that at this track horsepower does not matter would be correct, but somehow it takes away from the brilliance of Hill. The Arrows is no Ferrari, Williams, Benetton, McLaren, Jordan, Prost, or even Sauber. So Damon had no real advantage. Infact I would say he was handicapped. What "was" his advantage was his brilliant, smooth, driving. He set that FA-18 up perfectly and pulled some serious moves on all the big guns. I still remember those comments about it being the car and not the driver. Now we can see that the car "was", due to the driver. All the other F1 boys were left to follow the Champion. Damon showed them the way home. Though fate was to deprive Hill of a monumental win, I shall never forget the display of racing briliinace which was put on for the world by a man who goes by the name of Damon Hill.
Fawad Khalil
Hey guys, I loved your first comment after the race. It seems to be a great success for Damon. Wonderful race!
Markus Geiger
As a long-time Damon fan, I just can't stop myself from getting poetic after his brilliant drive this weekend:
Trash is trash, (Gustaf Fröding, Swedish 19th century poet) Do you think Frank W. still feels it was money well saved when he ditched Damon for HHF?
Anders Thelin
Hello, I watched with great enthusiasm the last GP. But, I always remember the interviews and comments before the race: "impossible to overtake at this circuit..." Did I seen another race at another track? How did Hill and Villeneuve pass M.Schumacher? I can't remember all manoevres, but it seems to me that there was a lot of overtaking in this race (compared to other races)... and even Ralf Schumacher would have passed his brother if the race lasted a few more laps. So what is this talking all about?
Chris Heiss
|