greg mansell etc..

I brought back the title.

---

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/22/2008 02:06PM by red 5.

red 5 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> *DH excluded for obvious reasons: he was Graham's
> son but he had no use of it (other than surname),
> as the old man passed away
> way before his F1 debut, therefore couldn't pull
> all the necesarry strings to help his son. Same
> goes for JV.


you seriously think that their last names had NO bearing on them getting to formula 1?

I seriously doubt damon would have got any where near Formula 1 without his last name he had no go-kart expeciance and just decided one day to become a racing car driver.

Go-karting was not always the first way into motorsports in those days. Damon was a succesful (on a national level) motorcycle racer. He took an advanced racing course and then moved onto Formula Ford, which is usually the first proper racing car, especially in those days (not so much now).

He didn't go from nothing to racing driver one day.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

Re: another clone emerging
Date: October 10, 2008 01:32PM
Posted by: NeilPearson (IP Logged)

you seriously think that their last names had NO bearing on them getting to formula 1?

another clone emerging
Date: October 09, 2008 03:54PM
Posted by: red 5 (IP Logged)

*DH excluded for obvious reasons: he was Graham's son but he had no use of it (other than surname)


hard language that english, ha?

---

He'll fail like others, Prost, Lauda, soon-to-be Piquet



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/10/2008 07:09PM by Guimengo.

And what relevance does that have? Scott Mansell is no relation to 1992 Formula One World Champion Nigel. His children are Chloe, Leo and Greg

Damas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And what relevance does that have? Scott Mansell
> is no relation to 1992 Formula One World Champion
> Nigel. His children are Chloe, Leo and Greg

...?

I edited my post, it's why it doesn't make sense. I was too vague and mentioned Scott Mansell who shares the same last name but I lead to believe they were related.

The Mansells are definitely on borrowed / paid for time.

Neither has shown any flash of competitive pace in their careers so far. They did British F3 last year, Greg got a couple of podiums but was generally unimpressive whilst Leo was just unimpressive.

They're fairly lucky though, because Nigel uses his big mouth to get them drives. That and they are supported by the same sponsors that Nigel was in his early career.

I don't see either of them getting near to a F1 car, unless it's EuroBoss or Goodwood festival of speed.

DaveEllis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Go-karting was not always the first way into
> motorsports in those days. Damon was a succesful
> (on a national level) motorcycle racer. He took an
> advanced racing course and then moved onto Formula
> Ford, which is usually the first proper racing
> car, especially in those days (not so much now).
>
> He didn't go from nothing to racing driver one
> day.

I do realise he didnt go from nothing to racing driver in one day, but going from bikes to cars, his name would have helped alot.

Whilst the surname did open doors, you still have to deliver the goods when you get there.

Damon won 22 Gp's and delivered a WDC

You dont do that by riding on the back of your surname without having the talent to back it up




LS's Tip of the week
ESSENTIAL OILS aren't essential unless you're an engine, a gearbox or a twat

Damon is one of the worst WCs in many ways. He couldn't deliver the goods when he had competition, and when he did have some, he still almost threw it away.

94 he was only in contention because of the Benetton being illegal and Schumachers antics. 95 he was awful and often out paced by DC. 96 he should have won easily, but made a meal out of it and almost lost to a rookie. 97 was probably the best year of his career in terms of his driving standards. 98 he showed his true character - a hypocritical liar who asked for team orders to be inflicted so he could win, whilst complaining about it at other times. His driving at Montreal was also a joke. 99 he was pathetic and should have left earlier in the year.

Currently he is playing the victim as the head of the BRDC. Pretending to be a company, and trying to run a circuit.

You'd struggle to find a lower calibre of F1 World Champion than Damon.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

James Hunt?

---

DH was not the most brilliant WDC, but there were more WDC titles of questionable quality.

IMO. chronologicaly.

Farina -awfull on track antics, was never really faster than Fangio or Ascari

Hawthorne -helped a lot by his teammate, and won only because competition declined drasticly in 1958, Musso killed, Fangio grew old and retired etc., Behra lost competitive drive. But he still beat Moss, so maybe MH does not really deserve to be on this list, but I'll keep him...

Surtees -won after Bandini let him by to take 2nd place in Mexico, and because Lotus suffered of mechanical failiures during the season.

Hunt - 1976 was strange season, DSQ, errors, Laudas accident...

Rosberg -1982 awfull season, with drivers killed and maimed, the ones that had luck survived it, and one of them won the title, but there were at least 3 other drivers with a chance of title

Lauda - his 1984 title is pure luck, and hadnt Monaco been shortened to allow Prost victory, Prost would became WDC, because he would have scored 6pts and would outscore Lauda with 0.5 points in the end. quite an irony.

Piquet - his 1981 title was good one, but 1983 and 1987 were only due to misfortune of his rivals.

Mansell - with that car (FW-14) he should have won 1991 WDC. 1992 was ok, plain dominance but ok, deserved.

Villeneuve -OMG, he should have wrapped it by Monza, instead of dragging it to the last race.

Hakkinen -1999 same as above, 1998 was OK.

Raikkonen - won WDC because main title rivals killed eachother chances.

Hamilton/Massa -mistakes, penalties, through whole season.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/22/2008 02:42PM by red 5.

"Lauda - his 1984 title is pure luck, and hadnt Monaco been shortened to allow Prost victory, Prost would became WDC, because he would have scored 6pts and would outscore Lauda with 0.5 points in the end. quite an irony."

Had the race carried on prost would have finished 3rd not 2nd as Bellof was catching both senna and prost.

Also would Alonso have won had MS not had a car break down and kimi not kept breaking down?

Same in 2000 would MS have won had mika not had so many break downs and that idiot walking on the track in germany?

1994 would MS have won had the car not been illegal and he not taken out DH.

Would prost have won 1989 had he not taken senna out in japan and would senna have won 1990 had he not taken out prost in Japan?

Re: greg mansell etc..
Date: October 23, 2008 01:25PM
Posted by: marcl (IP Logged)

Had the race carried on prost would have finished 3rd not 2nd as Bellof was catching both senna and prost.

Senna would never finish 100% race distance as his suspension was already damaged, he would retire after some laps.

Would prost have won 1989 had he not taken senna out in japan and would senna have won 1990 had he not taken out prost in Japan?

yes Prost would win it anyway. He showed mor consistency during the season, anyway would have Senna won it it would as well be worth of that WDC. Infact in 1988,1989 and 1990 those two were equally matched and worthy of titles.


Also would Alonso have won had MS not had a car break down and kimi not kept breaking down?

Still it does not qualify Alonso as WDC of questionable quality, he too had his share of bad luck during 2006. (Hungary, Monza penalty)

Same in 2000 would MS have won had mika not had so many break downs and that idiot walking on the track in germany?

MS drove better than Mika in 2000, although his mid season retirements could have costed him the title, but thos retirements were not due to his errors, he was worthy 2000 WDC, not deserving to be on that list

1994 would MS have won had the car not been illegal and he not taken out DH.

o come on, it was never proven that B194 was illegal. Furthermore he was stripped of win in SPA, was banned from 2 races, come on he destroyed HIll in 1994. If you look only at statistic it was close, yes one point difference, but performance wise he was in the class of his own. DH could never match him, only maybe at Suzuka, and when MS got stuck in 5th gear in Barcelona. By Adelaide he should have had at least 20pts advantage judging by his performance during the season. It was close bacause FIA wanted to save lost season. Overtaking on parade lap is worth of black flag. Plank stratching at SPA only because spun into the dirt thus stratching those few milimeters resulted in DSQ and ban. DH had all the help he could get to wit that WDC but he couldnt. In my eyes MS is worthy 1994 WDC. And he would still be if Senna would be in contention. MS was superstrong in 1994.

---

Mansell - with that car (FW-14) he should have won 1991 WDC. 1992 was ok, plain dominance but ok, deserved.

Mansell had to drive against, Senna and Prost. He had competition. Damon did not, and still almost lost it. Whilst Mansell was good, he was not as good as Senna or Prost.

Villeneuve -OMG, he should have wrapped it by Monza, instead of dragging it to the last race.

Villeneuve had to drive against Schumacher, and he was in his second year of F1. That isn't bad by any stretch of the imagination.

Hakkinen -1999 same as above, 1998 was OK.

Hakkinen again had Schumacher, and whilst he was poor in 1999, 1998 cannot be faulted...

Raikkonen - won WDC because main title rivals killed eachother chances.

Hung in there, in arguably an inferior car, and managed to win against the odds at the end of the year. I don't see the problem with that.

Hunt I'll agree with, he was a poor WC. But that doesn't detract from how easy Damons job should have been. Remember, Damon had no competition. His faster team mate got shipped off to McLaren to get screwed by Ron. His new team mate was a rookie, and Schumachers car struggled to finish formation laps without a technical issue. He should have walked it, but he didn't.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2008 10:13PM by DaveEllis.

Thats what I mean though so many if's and buts.

Would senna's car have failed in Monaco? who knows for sure.

At the end of the day though MS earnt the race bans, and he damaged his car at spa. We won by taking hill out.

red 5 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Overtaking on parade lap is worth of black flag.

He didn't get a black flag for that. He got a black flag for refusing to acknowledge the penalty he was given. He was then given a 2 race ban for refusing to acknowledge the black flag. I've defended some of Schumachers antics in '94, particularly the incident at Adelaide (not that I necessarily say it was right), but he should have been suspended from racing the remainder of the '94 season after Silverstone.

It was a 2-race ban, suspended for 4 races, and during that period, his plank was found to be illegal at Spa, so the 2-race ban came into effect. You break the rules, you deserve to be punished. Not like the random penalties dished out this season. There was, what, a few centimetres with the Bourdais-Massa Fuji one?! Remember you can't see over the nose of the cockpit.

Schumacher in 1994 basically dominated and should have won it earlier. The FIA gave Hill just enough chances to make it competitve, but he couldn't do it. 1996 he could have won it earlier, but he was choking at the last, and only a cool head in Suzuka put paid to that.

In 2000, realistically, Schumacher should have won it earlier, but alas the team and his erratic driving mid-season put paid to that. Alonso in 2006 should have had that one wrapped up by Italy, but the FIA were so keen to make it a more competitive season they hindered where they could, thus allowing probably the fastest car on the grid that season to nearly walk away with it come the final race.

---

Everyone knows that million-to-one chances happen 9 times out of 10; indeed, it's a common requirement in fairy tales. If the human didn't have to overcome huge odds, what would be the point? Terry Pratchett - The Science Of Discworld

GPGSL S5 Race driver for IED.