Who was better? Damon Hill or Jacques Villeneuve?

[Adam43]

Alright ASCII, I meant first paragraph (done in a rush). This is all off topic, but clearly the concern is copyright. I'll have to remove the photo.

Sorry for the distraction from the topic.

[Jordi]

Originally posted by Gt_R
PS Jordi...you love JV...Jerez 97???

I point you to your own signature for that.
It's the last championship-decider that was decided with an overtaking maneuver involving the two rivals... It ended in tears, but not for the man who was overtaking...

About Jacques being a pain to work with... any proof?

Also about Damon qualifying often ahead of Jacques in 1996.. let's not forget Jacques was learning a few of those tracks still. He only set three poles and of those tracks he only knew Suzuka. Melbourne he was on equal footing with everyone (but still the new one!) and Spa... that was dominating. Jacques should have won Spa first time out, had it not been for the radio problems...

Good on you Yoong Montoya to point Jacques' drive at Austria 2002. Very much overlooked. As Austria 2003. He drove a cracker there too, was holding off Alonso and DC, but as he had a problem with the steering wheel and finished 12th, no one said anything about it. I guess it's easier to say "he was with the Minardis at Nurburgring!"

[Gt_R]

Jordi mate,Yeah, i mean, i do get you if you love JV for his balls to overtake. If we're talking about his quality to overtake, i'd have understood you. But you're talking about Jerez 97, where (1) He made a pretty rough move, which many people think he would have gone into the traps if MS didn't knock into him, not exactly a well executed move. (2) His team later helped fixed the race to ease him into the WDC seat.

I mean, neither are really issues for which we ought to admire.

I do however agree with you that his move on MS in 96 is well executed, and it's nice to have a character "not a clone" in F1 (though lately, his "difference" did more bad than good).

I also agree the point of qualifying in 96, that JV learns new tracks, which is why i din't say DH is quicker in quals. For JV to challenge a veteran in his first year in equal cars show that either the veteran is simply not good, or that the rookie is simply great. And in this case, they take the middle groud.

The problem is, though every now and then he could put in a good drive at a race, his poor performance in others simply shadows those. 1 good race a year really meant nothing. Expectations of him were high (which he played a part in raising the bar), and fans are left disappointed time and time again.

[Jordi]

Originally posted by Gt_R
1) He made a pretty rough move, which many people think he would have gone into the traps if MS didn't knock into him, not exactly a well executed move. (2) His team later helped fixed the race to ease him into the WDC seat.

I mean, neither are really issues for which we ought to admire.

Rough as it was, he has the balls to do it. But in a way, it had to be rough. He had to come from far behind, because otherwise Michael would have seen his intentions. Would he have gone off... maybe, but that's where Michael comes in...

You say his team helped fix the race... Well, I have my own opinions on that and I don't want to start a fight. I'll just say they are different...

The problem is, though every now and then he could put in a good drive at a race, his poor performance in others simply shadows those. 1 good race a year really meant nothing. Expectations of him were high (which he played a part in raising the bar), and fans are left disappointed time and time again.

2000 and 2001 are examples of years where he didn't have only 1 good race a year. In 2002 and 2003, the car failed much more. True, he was overshadowed by Button, but he drove fine races. What I don't like is some people -not necessarily you- saying that he is an unworthy 1997 champion, that he's overpaid, etc... but when he drives a good race they all shut up. I mean, when Schumacher drives a very good race (eg Monza) I think I can acknowledge that.

[Gt_R]

I understand what you mean about the "quick to criticise/slow to praise", but let's just take it works both ways for all fans, be it JV/MS/JPM/Kimi/DH etc.

[Kirk]

The bottom line here is; Damon Hill is a gentleman and was a smooth, rather precise and consistent performer (much like Rubens actually and like Rubens above average only), but JV was up to his pace immediately, as a rookie. JV the racer was better, just like MS, the racer is better than RB. Anyone who tries to convince themselves otherwise is kidding only themselves.

[deeks6]

Originally posted by Kirk
and like Rubens above average only

just like MS, the racer is better than RB. Anyone who tries to convince themselves otherwise is kidding only themselves.

Didnt you say in another thread that RB was Better than MS?

I'm confused...:confused:

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Gt_R
(1) He made a pretty rough move, which many people think he would have gone into the traps if MS didn't knock into him, not exactly a well executed move. (2) His team later helped fixed the race to ease him into the WDC seat.

I mean, neither are really issues for which we ought to admire.

Gt_R, you can't tell me that this is something Michael or his team hasn't done either, but i'm sure your views would change when it comes to these manoeuvres

[Mr V]

Originally posted by santori
But then his Arrows was perfectly suited to Hungary.

As was Alonso's Renault in 2003, but the result was no less deserved don't you think?

Sure, there were circuits where Damon went better, Spa being one of them, and that is thought of as a real drivers circuit.

[Jordi]

I think we should rate Damon's Hungary'97 drive in its right measure. Surely that Arrows was maybe the best Arrows for Hungaroring of the 90s (coupled with the Bridgestones) but it was Damon who set it up and who passed Schumacher and he was the one to lead convincingly.

And 1998 Damon, when the Jordan was a point-scoring car, he'd usually get those points. Remember he gained fourth place on the last race passing Frentzen on the last lap of the last race!

[Gt_R]

Com'on MrV, i think "rough" is a very decent word to use don't you think? (compared to "dirty" as some may use)Many moves JPM made are rough too...nothing negative about it. There are well executed moves and roughly executed moves...don't take it as a criticism. And honestly, i see no link between what we are discussing on this thread to what you are implying about my views....unless you've something up your sleeves?

Of course, it's the same thing isn't it? MS takes somebody out and it's unforgivable. Senna takes somebody out it's understandable. MS benefits from team orders and its unforgivable. Mclaren/Williams use team orders and it's perfectly justified...

Oh seesh...telling me my views change with the wind??

Anyway, surely, you know that's not what we are discussing here MrV, don't you?

[Gt_R]

Yes, i agree the drive DH had in Hungary 97 was impressive in its own rights.

[Kirk]

Originally posted by deeks6
Didnt you say in another thread that RB was Better than MS?

I'm confused...:confused:

Sarcasm, to make a point, it was. But some actually think (or would like to think) that Rubens is as good or better. Perhaps a pole among Brazilians would put MS in his place.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Jordi


Remember he gained fourth place on the last race passing Frentzen on the last lap of the last race!

What was even more impressive about that imo, was that it was the very last corner of the last lap of the last race

Originally posted by Gt_R
And honestly, i see no link between what we are discussing on this thread to what you are implying about my views....unless you've something up your sleeves?

I can assure you there is nothing up my sleeves Gt_R and i can't believe that i was standing up for a Villeneuve move. My point was, you mentioned that things like that are not something we ought to admire, but other drivers and teams have done the same sort of thing. There wouldn't be anyone left to admire

[Jordi]

Didn't remember it was the last corner Mr V...impressive!

Of course, it's the same thing isn't it? MS takes somebody out and it's unforgivable. Senna takes somebody out it's understandable.

Well, Jacques didn't take anyone out, nor did Damon. They are the protagonists of this topic.
Both had two championships-deciding races and unlike Prost, Senna or Schumacher, they didn't take anybody off.

[Yoong Montoya]

Originally posted by Jordi
Good on you Yoong Montoya to point Jacques' drive at Austria 2002. Very much overlooked. As Austria 2003. He drove a cracker there too, was holding off Alonso and DC, but as he had a problem with the steering wheel and finished 12th, no one said anything about it. I guess it's easier to say "he was with the Minardis at Nurburgring!"

Thanks Jordi. But Villeneuve's charge through the field isn't exactly what would spring to people's minds when Austria 2002 is mentioned is it?

I'd say Villeneuve was more spectacular whereas Hill was more consistent.

[Jordi]

Indeed. Damon's perfect weekend would be pole, lead all laps and fastest lap, utterly dominating and rarely prone to mistakes (except end of 1995).

While most people don't remember Jacques qualified the BAR 4th at Monza'00, but they do remember the perfectly controlled 360º spin at Austria that same year!

[beau]

arhhhhhhh you guys have to come up with the most trickey questions

I go for JV mainly because he managed to beat Micheal at his best when Hill won the championship Schumi's Ferrari was unrealiable but fair enough Micheal was Hills nearest rival except for JV. shame they only had a season together.

[Rennen]

Hill was an excellent test driver...but an awful racer!...those ludicrus lunges on MS in 94/95! Villeneuve was a proper racer...a real hard charger.

But Damon was a well brought up English 'gent...wheras Jacques was kindof wierd in his mental approach and preparation.

Both made the best of their respective Williamses to win a championship apiece...so maybe they share equal status overall.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Rennen
Hill was an excellent test driver...but an awful racer

An awful racer doesn't win 22 GP's

[freud]

Damon was allround a polished driver though JV was naturally faster (offcourse he was 10 years younger than Hill).

Hill did well in 1994 but imho made it too easy for Michael in 1995. 1996 was supposed to be 'his' year yet JV almost won the season. And JV's heroics at Jerez 1997 speak for themselves. Though I wouldnt take anything away from Hill. I still remember Suzuka 1994 and how damon won that race.. imho the second best wet driving display of the 90's (first is donington 93, offcourse).

[Gt_R]

Hah..Jordi, don't misunderstand, it's just a friendly "counter" to MrV regarding the MS/Senna thing, really out of the point.

It's better to clear things up before things get out of hand.

Quote MrV:"There wouldn't be anyone left to admire"

Why? I think you agree with me every driver makes a mistake or two. JV and team didn't do "something" admirable in Jerez doesn't mean i don't admire them. It's the issue of that day that i don't think its worth admiring, but on general, it doesn't mean i don't admire them at all. To put it into context, Ferrari didn't make a good decision in Austria 02, and while i don't admire THAT incident, it doesn't take away my admiration for the team nor their drivers in general.

Hope that clears up the air



Now back to topic

JV is a more talented driver than DH IMHO. He had a successful story in America, and he really is a great potential in his early F1 years. Sadly, he is given **** cars after 97 which doesn't help his case. And after years of bad cars and messy teams, he kind of lost the shine...resulting in a less than promised JV we have now.

DH and JV are 2 different style drivers who approach F1 differently, yet came out of it with very similar story. To compare both is quite reasonable, nothing offensive.

PS. Hah, anyway, before people start accusing i'm biased towards JV, realise that i'm neither a fan of DH either! Real silly to hate any driver really.

[Gt_R]

Quote:"I go for JV mainly because he managed to beat Micheal at his best when Hill won the championship Schumi's Ferrari was unrealiable"

To be fair to Damon, Hill won 96 championship against good driver in a equally great car. JV won 97 championship against great driver in an inferior car. The level of competition both drivers faced are similar.

[DriverT]

Unreliable? The Ferrari of 96 was a heap of junk. But I applauded Hill's win all the same. You can only beat what's put in front of you.

And as for Jacques' move on TGF at Jerez 97, hasn't every driver made a stupid move at some point in their career? If it wasn't at Jerez, no-one would have gave a damn.

[jonnyrickett]

damon started at 19 but this doesnt really matter. it does show that he had the skills to win and that if he had started earlier, who knows what he could have achieved. His motorbike racing experience gave him an edge when it came to positioning the car and cornering etc. but JV was far more aggressive and could push harder than anyone else. pehaps you could say, JV could get more out of the car. in 97, jv struggled but still one and if williams had been competitive in 98, perhaps JV would have carried on getting better and better. however they both kicked MS and thats all that matters to me. JV never lost to MS in a championship in a competitive car, but hill did. i think they are just as good as each other.

hill and villeneuve are superb drivers. i am british and i was a hill supporter from day one, but my no.2 driverwas JV. now JV is the only driver left and the only driver who can bring the old formula 1 spirit back to life. i am hoping so much that he returns. williams made a mistake in dropping hill and now i hope they dont make the same mistake by leaving JV out.

He could still beat most people out there, well everyone obn a good day including the likes of schumacher.