Ayrton Senna and Roland Ratzenberger
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
dr_gn said:
Where did anyone say it was the "worst" weekend?
Did you bother to read the O/P yet?
The OP did say this "It will continue to go down as one of the worst weekends" .Did you bother to read the O/P yet?
Which I think is incorrect. It was definitely bad - but there have been even worse weekends.
Whether there have been "even worse" weekends in F1 is irrelevant to the point.
Which F1 events would you rank as worse than Imola '94?
ELUSIVEJIM said:
It will continue to go down as one of the worst weekends in F1 history as losing one driver was bad enough but two was horrendous.
Eric Mc said:
And was it the worst weekend in F1 history?
Eric, your contributions in this part of the forum are predictable and tedious. Please either read properly, or take a day off.C70R said:
ELUSIVEJIM said:
It will continue to go down as one of the worst weekends in F1 history as losing one driver was bad enough but two was horrendous.
Eric Mc said:
And was it the worst weekend in F1 history?
Eric, your contributions in this part of the forum are predictable and tedious. Please either read properly, or take a day off.It was a sad and bad day and it upset me at the time - but I think I've got over it now.
dr_gn said:
Despite the number of deaths in the past at F1 events, it's still in no way commonplace. Any event where there were fatalities, among the thousands of incidents resulting only in injuries (however ad they may have been) must rank as being among the worst in the history of the sport. It's illogical to say otherwise.
Whether there have been "even worse" weekends in F1 is irrelevant to the point.
Which F1 events would you rank as worse than Imola '94?
If you insist - I'd go with Monza 1961.Whether there have been "even worse" weekends in F1 is irrelevant to the point.
Which F1 events would you rank as worse than Imola '94?
Eric Mc said:
dr_gn said:
Despite the number of deaths in the past at F1 events, it's still in no way commonplace. Any event where there were fatalities, among the thousands of incidents resulting only in injuries (however ad they may have been) must rank as being among the worst in the history of the sport. It's illogical to say otherwise.
Whether there have been "even worse" weekends in F1 is irrelevant to the point.
Which F1 events would you rank as worse than Imola '94?
If you insist - I'd go with Monza 1961.Whether there have been "even worse" weekends in F1 is irrelevant to the point.
Which F1 events would you rank as worse than Imola '94?
dr_gn said:
Eric Mc said:
dr_gn said:
Despite the number of deaths in the past at F1 events, it's still in no way commonplace. Any event where there were fatalities, among the thousands of incidents resulting only in injuries (however ad they may have been) must rank as being among the worst in the history of the sport. It's illogical to say otherwise.
Whether there have been "even worse" weekends in F1 is irrelevant to the point.
Which F1 events would you rank as worse than Imola '94?
If you insist - I'd go with Monza 1961.Whether there have been "even worse" weekends in F1 is irrelevant to the point.
Which F1 events would you rank as worse than Imola '94?
The reason it's so relevant to people of this forum, is that there are a lot of guys here between the ages of 25-45 for whom Ayrton Senna would have been ONE OF their first major F1 heroes. As such, it's entirely logical that a forum full of this audience would want to talk about it.
It affected me (as an F1-mad young teen) hugely, and I see no harm in reminding ourselves of the anniversary.
Rather than clutter up a thread trying (and failing) to belittle the OP, why not skip past?
C70R said:
Rather than clutter up a thread trying (and failing) to belittle the OP, why not skip past?
Absolutely this. I would expect better from a man of Eric's obvious intelligence and steeped motor racing knowledge.It was undoubtedly one of the worst days we have experienced in my similarly aged association with motor racing (back to the sixties). History is prevalent but you have to accept that this happened in the days when we had been accustomed to a certain level of safety since around 82/83 - a long time since a previous tragedy, the last one at a f1 race weekend to my memory was Riccardo Palletti (ready to be corrected), and a seriously shocking sight on the grid.
When I received the phone call whilst I was (unusually for those days) not at the race, and I was told that he was clinically dead I argued profusely. I had not seen the accident but simply could not believe it. I can't see how anyone could downplay it's impact to (apperently) gain internet points.
And clearly here, I am focussing on Ayrton's demise on race day. As some have said, it is sometimes almost an afterthought for some to consider Roland the previous day, but such was the status difference between the two drivers and what happened the next day, it twists the perception unrealistically, despite that Roland was another talented racing driver, a human being of undeniably equal mortal status and frankly a seriously lovely person.
Every time we lose a friend or hero in racing, depending on one's association with that individual it is avery sad day, and I echo the OP, one of the worst days for me for sure, as it would have been if it was just Ayrton or Roland, let alone both.
Eric, please climb down from that historical knowledge points scoring horse... please... you are far better than that. It was one of the worst days, it is not a historical competition, when we lose one of our own it is always one of the worst days, full stop.
I think it is fair to say that was numerically a very long way from being one of the worst F1 weekends, if one applies the simple and macabre body count metric . But precisely because there had been so few fatal accidents in the previous decade this in itself highlighted the impact of Imola . Add in the bigger global reach of TV than ever before and , crucially, the fact so many fans had never been exposed to a death before, the unfortunate fact that ,for some , a death adds gravitas to a sport and the factors add up to threads like this, nearly a quarter of a century later .
I sympathise with Eric however as I suspect he feels as I do - that motor sport includes F1 but is not exclusively comprised of it.
Pre war races' body count was horrific - at the 13 miles Ards circuit just one crash killed five spectators.
I sympathise with Eric however as I suspect he feels as I do - that motor sport includes F1 but is not exclusively comprised of it.
Pre war races' body count was horrific - at the 13 miles Ards circuit just one crash killed five spectators.
Classy post SeeFive
I will admit to having a personal hobby horse on this.
Senna has legions remembering him. I went to the memorial at Tamburello on a not particularly special Tuesday in September - and shared it with ten seperate groups of people over the fifteen minutes I lingered.
No one followed me up to The Villeneuve kink to pay Ratzenberger a quiet moment.
I'm not given to the mass laying of trinkets or flags or whatever - Senna had flags, poems, t-shirts - all sorts.
Ratzenberger had a solitary, long since dead rose. That I'm not wholly convinced wasn't there for Villeneuve anyway....
And that made me sad. I profoundly wished I had bought something for him. I will next time.
I'm not judging anyone - people on here have eloquently argued what Senna meant to them.
But whilst Senna was by far the more successful (and ultimately more skilled) driver - as a human Roland's life is of no less value
So i do think it is important that people remember a second life was lost that weekend - Senna's place in history is assured without that nudge.
And whilst I think Eric has a point that in the annuls of motor sport history, this weekend rubs shoulders with some true horrors, Paris-Madrid, Le Mans 55 - they are sadly legion.
However, as mentioned a couple of times above, this one in particular is seated on the memory of the current generation. Made a hell of a dent on my 9 year old mind
I will admit to having a personal hobby horse on this.
Senna has legions remembering him. I went to the memorial at Tamburello on a not particularly special Tuesday in September - and shared it with ten seperate groups of people over the fifteen minutes I lingered.
No one followed me up to The Villeneuve kink to pay Ratzenberger a quiet moment.
I'm not given to the mass laying of trinkets or flags or whatever - Senna had flags, poems, t-shirts - all sorts.
Ratzenberger had a solitary, long since dead rose. That I'm not wholly convinced wasn't there for Villeneuve anyway....
And that made me sad. I profoundly wished I had bought something for him. I will next time.
I'm not judging anyone - people on here have eloquently argued what Senna meant to them.
But whilst Senna was by far the more successful (and ultimately more skilled) driver - as a human Roland's life is of no less value
So i do think it is important that people remember a second life was lost that weekend - Senna's place in history is assured without that nudge.
And whilst I think Eric has a point that in the annuls of motor sport history, this weekend rubs shoulders with some true horrors, Paris-Madrid, Le Mans 55 - they are sadly legion.
However, as mentioned a couple of times above, this one in particular is seated on the memory of the current generation. Made a hell of a dent on my 9 year old mind
Edited by Vocal Minority on Wednesday 3rd May 07:40
Vocal Minority said:
Classy post SeeFive
I will admit to having a personal hobby horse on this.
Senna has legions remembering him. I went to the memorial at Tamburello on a not particularly special Tuesday in September - and shared it with ten seperate groups of people over the fifteen minutes I lingered.
No one followed me up to The Villeneuve kink to pay Ratzenberger a quiet moment.
I'm not given to the mass laying of trinkets or flags or whatever - Senna had flags, poems, t-shirts - all sorts.
Ratzenberger had a solitary, long since dead rose. That I'm not wholly convinced wasn't there for Villeneuve anyway....
And that made me sad. I profoundly wished I had bought something for him. I will next time.
I'm not judging anyone - people on here have eloquently argued what Senna meant to them.
But whilst Senna was by far the more successful (and ultimately more skilled) driver - as a human Roland's life is of no less value
So i do think it is important that people remember a second life was lost that weekend - Senna's place in history is assured without that nudge.
And whilst I think Eric has a point that in the annuls of motor sport history, this weekend rubs shoulders with some true horrors, Paris-Madrid, Le Mans 55 - they are sadly legion.
However, as mentioned a couple of times above, this one in particular is seated on the memory of the current generation. Made a hell of a dent on my 9 year old mind
I became a fan of F1 in 1966, and had been a motor racing fan for years before. Up until Imola 94 I'd seen every F1 race that had been broadcast live on TV or else had been at the track. Given that I worked shifts, it showed a certain ingenuity. On the morning of the race I said to my wife that we'd take the kids out for the day - it was lovely weather. I'd been upset by Ratzenberger's death.I will admit to having a personal hobby horse on this.
Senna has legions remembering him. I went to the memorial at Tamburello on a not particularly special Tuesday in September - and shared it with ten seperate groups of people over the fifteen minutes I lingered.
No one followed me up to The Villeneuve kink to pay Ratzenberger a quiet moment.
I'm not given to the mass laying of trinkets or flags or whatever - Senna had flags, poems, t-shirts - all sorts.
Ratzenberger had a solitary, long since dead rose. That I'm not wholly convinced wasn't there for Villeneuve anyway....
And that made me sad. I profoundly wished I had bought something for him. I will next time.
I'm not judging anyone - people on here have eloquently argued what Senna meant to them.
But whilst Senna was by far the more successful (and ultimately more skilled) driver - as a human Roland's life is of no less value
So i do think it is important that people remember a second life was lost that weekend - Senna's place in history is assured without that nudge.
And whilst I think Eric has a point that in the annuls of motor sport history, this weekend rubs shoulders with some true horrors, Paris-Madrid, Le Mans 55 - they are sadly legion.
However, as mentioned a couple of times above, this one in particular is seated on the memory of the current generation. Made a hell of a dent on my 9 year old mind
Edited by Vocal Minority on Wednesday 3rd May 07:40
The fact that I hadn't seen it, and of my own volition, made it stick in my mind.
I don't think there's any reason not to have these threads. Anyone who thinks they are, in some way, wrong can ignore them. Those who want to read them and remember can. I normally read them. I certainly do of the Clark one.
Arguing over the number of angels on the head of a pin sort of thing is tedious.
There's little doubt that Senna's death has saved the lives of many F1, and lower formulae, drivers. The safety regulations that were brought it after it were late to the sport. It was a game changer.
I was taking other's advice on this and intended not to make any further posts on this topic. It's strange that people who disagree with me fall into two camps - they either call on me to go away or they call on me to justify what I said.
My plan was to "go away". But I will just restate my position one final time and won't say anything else on this thread.
The point I always have about this incident is that over the history of ALL motorsport there have been some truly awful and tragic events that make the events of April 30 and May 1 1994 pale in comparison.
I do understand those who were very much effected by what happened that weekend. That is often down to the age of the person and the moment in time it happened. Both those effects are very subjective. In absolute terms, it was definitely bad but there had been days when things were MUCH worse - in motorsport in general and F1 in particular.
I also have strong feelings that F1 should never be seen in isolation. It does tend to be selected out and treated as if it is some sort of special case in the history of motor sport. Indeed, I wasn't even enamoured with PH when the powers that be decided to segregate F1 into its own "special" category away from general motorsport discussions - which I considered typical of the attitude that F1 is somehow "different" and "special".
It's not. It's just (supposedly) the top category in a whole raft of different classes. In the era I became interested in motor sport (the 1960s) it was hardly differentiated at all as all the top drivers drove in multiple categories.
Anyway, that's it from me on this thread. You can continue to discuss amongst yourselves about how badly YOU felt about the deaths of Senna and Ratzenberger.
My plan was to "go away". But I will just restate my position one final time and won't say anything else on this thread.
The point I always have about this incident is that over the history of ALL motorsport there have been some truly awful and tragic events that make the events of April 30 and May 1 1994 pale in comparison.
I do understand those who were very much effected by what happened that weekend. That is often down to the age of the person and the moment in time it happened. Both those effects are very subjective. In absolute terms, it was definitely bad but there had been days when things were MUCH worse - in motorsport in general and F1 in particular.
I also have strong feelings that F1 should never be seen in isolation. It does tend to be selected out and treated as if it is some sort of special case in the history of motor sport. Indeed, I wasn't even enamoured with PH when the powers that be decided to segregate F1 into its own "special" category away from general motorsport discussions - which I considered typical of the attitude that F1 is somehow "different" and "special".
It's not. It's just (supposedly) the top category in a whole raft of different classes. In the era I became interested in motor sport (the 1960s) it was hardly differentiated at all as all the top drivers drove in multiple categories.
Anyway, that's it from me on this thread. You can continue to discuss amongst yourselves about how badly YOU felt about the deaths of Senna and Ratzenberger.
Eric Mc said:
I was taking other's advice on this and intended not to make any further posts on this topic. It's strange that people who disagree with me fall into two camps - they either call on me to go away or they call on me to justify what I said.
My plan was to "go away". But I will just restate my position one final time and won't say anything else on this thread.
The point I always have about this incident is that over the history of ALL motorsport there have been some truly awful and tragic events that make the events of April 30 and May 1 1994 pale in comparison.
I do understand those who were very much effected by what happened that weekend. That is often down to the age of the person and the moment in time it happened. Both those effects are very subjective. In absolute terms, it was definitely bad but there had been days when things were MUCH worse - in motorsport in general and F1 in particular.
I also have strong feelings that F1 should never be seen in isolation. It does tend to be selected out and treated as if it is some sort of special case in the history of motor sport. Indeed, I wasn't even enamoured with PH when the powers that be decided to segregate F1 into its own "special" category away from general motorsport discussions - which I considered typical of the attitude that F1 is somehow "different" and "special".
It's not. It's just (supposedly) the top category in a whole raft of different classes. In the era I became interested in motor sport (the 1960s) it was hardly differentiated at all as all the top drivers drove in multiple categories.
Anyway, that's it from me on this thread. You can continue to discuss amongst yourselves about how badly YOU felt about the deaths of Senna and Ratzenberger.
There's a subtle difference between your opinion on motorsport fatalities in general, and the relevance of those opinions to the thread (which is specifically about F1, and Imola '94). My plan was to "go away". But I will just restate my position one final time and won't say anything else on this thread.
The point I always have about this incident is that over the history of ALL motorsport there have been some truly awful and tragic events that make the events of April 30 and May 1 1994 pale in comparison.
I do understand those who were very much effected by what happened that weekend. That is often down to the age of the person and the moment in time it happened. Both those effects are very subjective. In absolute terms, it was definitely bad but there had been days when things were MUCH worse - in motorsport in general and F1 in particular.
I also have strong feelings that F1 should never be seen in isolation. It does tend to be selected out and treated as if it is some sort of special case in the history of motor sport. Indeed, I wasn't even enamoured with PH when the powers that be decided to segregate F1 into its own "special" category away from general motorsport discussions - which I considered typical of the attitude that F1 is somehow "different" and "special".
It's not. It's just (supposedly) the top category in a whole raft of different classes. In the era I became interested in motor sport (the 1960s) it was hardly differentiated at all as all the top drivers drove in multiple categories.
Anyway, that's it from me on this thread. You can continue to discuss amongst yourselves about how badly YOU felt about the deaths of Senna and Ratzenberger.
The O/P made a perfectly valid point (which you subsequently agreed with). If you mis-read a post and respond to it (which confuses people), or want to post your opinions on wider issues (which many would find irrelevant to the discussion), then don't be surprised when people get fed up with it.
dr_gn said:
Eric Mc said:
I was taking other's advice on this and intended not to make any further posts on this topic. It's strange that people who disagree with me fall into two camps - they either call on me to go away or they call on me to justify what I said.
My plan was to "go away". But I will just restate my position one final time and won't say anything else on this thread.
The point I always have about this incident is that over the history of ALL motorsport there have been some truly awful and tragic events that make the events of April 30 and May 1 1994 pale in comparison.
I do understand those who were very much effected by what happened that weekend. That is often down to the age of the person and the moment in time it happened. Both those effects are very subjective. In absolute terms, it was definitely bad but there had been days when things were MUCH worse - in motorsport in general and F1 in particular.
I also have strong feelings that F1 should never be seen in isolation. It does tend to be selected out and treated as if it is some sort of special case in the history of motor sport. Indeed, I wasn't even enamoured with PH when the powers that be decided to segregate F1 into its own "special" category away from general motorsport discussions - which I considered typical of the attitude that F1 is somehow "different" and "special".
It's not. It's just (supposedly) the top category in a whole raft of different classes. In the era I became interested in motor sport (the 1960s) it was hardly differentiated at all as all the top drivers drove in multiple categories.
Anyway, that's it from me on this thread. You can continue to discuss amongst yourselves about how badly YOU felt about the deaths of Senna and Ratzenberger.
There's a subtle difference between your opinion on motorsport fatalities in general, and the relevance of those opinions to the thread (which is specifically about F1, and Imola '94). My plan was to "go away". But I will just restate my position one final time and won't say anything else on this thread.
The point I always have about this incident is that over the history of ALL motorsport there have been some truly awful and tragic events that make the events of April 30 and May 1 1994 pale in comparison.
I do understand those who were very much effected by what happened that weekend. That is often down to the age of the person and the moment in time it happened. Both those effects are very subjective. In absolute terms, it was definitely bad but there had been days when things were MUCH worse - in motorsport in general and F1 in particular.
I also have strong feelings that F1 should never be seen in isolation. It does tend to be selected out and treated as if it is some sort of special case in the history of motor sport. Indeed, I wasn't even enamoured with PH when the powers that be decided to segregate F1 into its own "special" category away from general motorsport discussions - which I considered typical of the attitude that F1 is somehow "different" and "special".
It's not. It's just (supposedly) the top category in a whole raft of different classes. In the era I became interested in motor sport (the 1960s) it was hardly differentiated at all as all the top drivers drove in multiple categories.
Anyway, that's it from me on this thread. You can continue to discuss amongst yourselves about how badly YOU felt about the deaths of Senna and Ratzenberger.
The O/P made a perfectly valid point (which you subsequently agreed with). If you mis-read a post and respond to it (which confuses people), or want to post your opinions on wider issues (which many would find irrelevant to the discussion), then don't be surprised when people get fed up with it.
Sadly, I am reminded of a phrase I often say, which is "you can't argue with an idiot".
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff