[Driver] Is Lewis the new Gilles?

[strider]

I never though I would be asking this question, but to be fair it's not an original thought. It comes from people whose opinions are far more significant than mine.

It first came to my notice when it was raised by David Tremayne in the admirable e-magazine GP+, which he and Joe Saward produce after each Grand Prix.

Perhaps more importantly, the original source of the thought was Nigel Roebuck, formally of Autosport and now of Motor Sport.

I thought back to Monza last year, and how Lewis crashed on the last lap whilst chasing the dominant Brawns," said Nigel. "That was pure Gilles. Third place meant nothing if there was a chance that he might be able to do better.

Now think of Lewis's driving so far this season. He has been in attack mode the whole time. This is from Tremayne:

Too often in the modern era drivers settle for points, ready to fight again if they don't have a winning car. Lewis has done that himself, especially in 2008. But every so often it's so uplifting to see someone hanging it out because to hell with any other approach, he just wants to squeeze out everything that he and his car have to give. It's a reminder of all that is good and, to use the new F1 word, 'excitating' (sic) about motor racing. You want to see someone who can make the car dance.

I don't think Lewis is going to win the title this season, but he is going to give his all and provide us with plenty of entertainment along the way.

[chunder]

In a word no he isn't!

Gilles was a talent yes and a pure driver, but he was also, at times a little dangerous!!

He pulled off some amazing moves later in his career, but early on was repimanded by many drivers for baing too rash and OTT, much like his best mate Scheckter was early in his career!

Lewis has been controlled, quick and ruthless! I would never have called Gilles ruthless, but definately quick and mayeb a little out of control!!

But by God I miss him!!

[Knowlesy]

He has elements of Gilles I suppose, just much better overall.

[Super Hans]

They definitely share the same determination and will to win, though their motivation is probably different. Gilles' raced for pleasure whereas Lewis seems to be always wanting to prove something to himself or others.

[Belatti]

I must admit that thought crossed my mind while watching Lewis fighting many many times.

Now I have to be careful because after saying that while watching a race with a bunch of Argentinean tifosis they almost beated me to death

[strider]

One thing I think they have in common is that they are out to win every race regardless and the championship seems to be secondary.

[Super Hans]

Originally Posted by strider

One thing I think they have in common is that they are out to win every race regardless and the championship seems to be secondary.

I admire that attitude. That's why I'd like to see a few non-championship Grands Prix with huge prize money. Let the drivers throw caution to the wind and race.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

He has elements of Gilles I suppose, just much better overall.

But for whatever reason will never be loved or revered as much.

[tony griffiths]

Gilles was a gentleman !

[tristancliffe]

Originally Posted by chunder

Gilles was a talent yes and a pure driver, but he was also, at times a little dangerous!!

So much like Lewis. Talented, pure driver, and downright dangerous at times.

Originally Posted by tony griffiths

Gilles was a gentleman !

So very much not like Lewis.

[snowen250]

In some respects yes they are similar, the desire to win never give up spirit is the same. As is the ability to ring the neck of any car they are in.

However personality wise they couldnt be more different. Gilles was quiet, unassuming and often modest regarding his abilities and chances. He would never spit back at the team the way Lewis does.

I respect Lewis as a driver and believe him to be immensley talented. But as a guy, just not keen. Gilles on the other hand.......greatest raw talent that F1 ever saw in my humble opinion, as well as being a nice guy. Dodgy taste in food though.

Simon

[Born Racer]

He is in a way, although I have read nothing of Gilles to make me think he was quite as good as he's sometimes remembered, and as good as Hamilton. He was clearly an inspirational driver, who captured people's imaginations and all the 'artistry' of motor racing. And that is in part why he is remembered fondly.

I'm aware some people think it is sacriledge to even question Gilles Villeneuve's reputation, so I've probably just put myself in the firing line.

[BrendanMcF]

I see more Senna than Villeneuve in Hamilton.

Gilles was a tough, but religiously fair competitor, which ironically probably led to his ultimate demise. He raced to be the fastest, sure to win races if possible, but that wasn't his primary motivation. Being the quickest guy out there was what he thrived upon. That's why he was 11 seconds quicker than anyone else in a wet free practice session at (as far as I remember) Watkins Glen.

Senna was more volatile, passionate, and an intensely driven man. He didn't just want to win, he wanted to dominate, and race wins, and pole positions were his aim.

However, neither are a perfect fit as Hamilton is very much a one-off, and unlike any other driver. He has natural car control like Jim Clark, aggressive overtaking abilities eclipsing even JPM and Mansell, the ability to get one quick lap in qualifying like Senna, wet weather skills that border on the extraterrestrial, and perhaps his only failing is a relative lack of experience. It took Ayrton several years to truly show his ability, and I expect we have not yet seen the best of Lewis.

I never judge a driver's ability by their personality, it's like rating a footballer on his good looks...

[Born Racer]

That's why he was 11 seconds quicker than anyone else in a wet free practice session at (as far as I remember) Watkins Glen.

In context, isn't this slightly less impressive than it's made out to be? I can't remember how but I recall reading that the circumstances make these 11 seconds sound more impressive than they are.

Senna was volatile, so perhaps you're right that he's more like Ayrton.

[F1 Prospects]

Gilles Villeneuve got me hooked on motor racing and I was lucky enough to see him race in Formula Atlantic and in F1.

I think in some ways the memories of Gilles are a bit too rosy because of what happened to him but the great thing about him was that the average fan could identify with him, something they can not do, in my opinion with Senna or Hamilton or almost any other driver in the last 30 years or so. It is a given that he put everything he had into each lap and his outlook was that you had to aim to dominate if you were a true racer but that was his downfall as he tended to lose site of the big picture and aim for points rather than wins when neccessary. Both Senna and Hamilton understand this and apply it where neccessary.

But the reason Villeneuve is so revered even to this day is that he wore his heart on his sleeve, drove to the the full of his potential regardless of the car or his position on the track and had a genuine honesty both in a personal sense and a sporting sense that people recognized and cherished. Was he the best racer in F1? Absolutely not. But he was down to earth and true to himself and that is why he belongs right up there with drivers that have won championships or more races. And that is also why I would caution on calling anybody the "next Gilles" because what made him who he was was not just his performance on the track but how he was off the track as well.