What separates the excellent from the elite?
Discussion
cgt2 said:
He told me when Senna came along he was the same as Prost, maybe even more as he had zero interest or focus on anything other than maximising success. I was told Prost had some degree of personal life but Senna appeared to have zero, even wanting to be at the factory on Christmas Day.
The more I look at Senna through the lens of today the more I think he existed on the Autistic spectrum. There was a certain 'distance' about him. And quite possibly, this was his advantage in that he had a singular focus in life.Milkyway said:
hot metal said:
Muzzer79 said:
Not so sure about this. Several drivers have struggled in tin-tops versus open-wheel formula.
Also, some can't handle the transition from rear wheel drive to front wheel drive, where applicable.
Perhaps the best example is those who have left F1 and gone to DTM. Granted, they may be in the twilight of their career but, given their success, they should have bossed it. Hakkinen, Coulthard, Frentzen to name but three.
All 3 would have been targets for the rest of the grid, no greater incentive than to beat these drivers.Also, some can't handle the transition from rear wheel drive to front wheel drive, where applicable.
Perhaps the best example is those who have left F1 and gone to DTM. Granted, they may be in the twilight of their career but, given their success, they should have bossed it. Hakkinen, Coulthard, Frentzen to name but three.
Won a race towards the end of the season.
StevieBee said:
cgt2 said:
He told me when Senna came along he was the same as Prost, maybe even more as he had zero interest or focus on anything other than maximising success. I was told Prost had some degree of personal life but Senna appeared to have zero, even wanting to be at the factory on Christmas Day.
The more I look at Senna through the lens of today the more I think he existed on the Autistic spectrum. There was a certain 'distance' about him. And quite possibly, this was his advantage in that he had a singular focus in life.Sometimes people just work hard and become good at things.
Schermerhorn said:
Not everyone talented is on the spectrum or has Autism. Goodness me.
Sometimes people just work hard and become good at things.
He mellowed after his championships for sure. Berger was instrumental in this as was his relationship with Adriana (which sadly was an issue for his family right up to the funeral).Sometimes people just work hard and become good at things.
StevieBee said:
The more I look at Senna through the lens of today the more I think he existed on the Autistic spectrum. There was a certain 'distance' about him. And quite possibly, this was his advantage in that he had a singular focus in life.
This is possible, and looking back he did have that kind of way about him, ASD , we are not talking Rainman here, there are more people with asbergers than you would ever know, some are very high functioning and are way more capable at their particular interests, make friends the same as others as Senna did but will always have an air of naivety about them in matters they have little interest in, sometimes the feelings of others for instance.Schermerhorn said:
StevieBee said:
cgt2 said:
He told me when Senna came along he was the same as Prost, maybe even more as he had zero interest or focus on anything other than maximising success. I was told Prost had some degree of personal life but Senna appeared to have zero, even wanting to be at the factory on Christmas Day.
The more I look at Senna through the lens of today the more I think he existed on the Autistic spectrum. There was a certain 'distance' about him. And quite possibly, this was his advantage in that he had a singular focus in life.Sometimes people just work hard and become good at things.
Our knowledge of this is greater today than it was on the 80s and early 90s so applying this insight to Senna, one starts to see some traits that we now know to be common amongst those with Aspergers and the like.
StevieBee said:
Schermerhorn said:
StevieBee said:
cgt2 said:
He told me when Senna came along he was the same as Prost, maybe even more as he had zero interest or focus on anything other than maximising success. I was told Prost had some degree of personal life but Senna appeared to have zero, even wanting to be at the factory on Christmas Day.
The more I look at Senna through the lens of today the more I think he existed on the Autistic spectrum. There was a certain 'distance' about him. And quite possibly, this was his advantage in that he had a singular focus in life.Sometimes people just work hard and become good at things.
Our knowledge of this is greater today than it was on the 80s and early 90s so applying this insight to Senna, one starts to see some traits that we now know to be common amongst those with Aspergers and the like.
Naturally there will be some overlaps between behaviour, social skills, cognitive ability between "normal" people and those who have been diagnosed with certain "disorders" (urgh, I hate that word, it makes people seem abnormal when they're just different).
I think, my opinion only, that nobody is born with talent. I believe hard work, dedication, commitment to learning and application yield the best results; to the point where it becomes completely natural in the basic humanistic behaviour pattern of that person.
Schermerhorn said:
I think, my opinion only, that nobody is born with talent. I believe hard work, dedication, commitment to learning and application yield the best results; to the point where it becomes completely natural in the basic humanistic behaviour pattern of that person.
I'd disagree TBH - I could train like a mad thing and there's no way I could be an international level rugby or basketball pro (among other professions)DodgyGeezer said:
Schermerhorn said:
I think, my opinion only, that nobody is born with talent. I believe hard work, dedication, commitment to learning and application yield the best results; to the point where it becomes completely natural in the basic humanistic behaviour pattern of that person.
I'd disagree TBH - I could train like a mad thing and there's no way I could be an international level rugby or basketball pro (among other professions)Schermerhorn said:
I think, my opinion only, that nobody is born with talent. I believe hard work, dedication, commitment to learning and application yield the best results; to the point where it becomes completely natural in the basic humanistic behaviour pattern of that person.
This is a really interesting topic (well, I think so!)When you look at athletic sports there are certain genetic traits that benefit one over another whether that's hight, muscle or whatever else is passed on from the parents. Some people are 'born' to run faster, jump higher, punch harder and so on. So whilst talent has to be trained into them, some have a head start.
But then there's the non-athletic sports - darts, snooker, golf... I had previously held the theory that if you got yourself a snooker table and did nothing other than practice playing snooker for 12 hours a day, you would eventually reach a point where you could compete professionally.
But I heard a sports psychologist on 5Live some years back explain that whilst the ability to complete professionally in any sport is within the grasp of most people if they put their mind to it, those that achieve proper, meaningful success have within them a capacity that goes beyond anything that can be trained or developed - it's an innate sense of what you need your body and mind to do to perform at a certain level in your chosen sport - and a drive to achieve.
I read an article about Jochen Rindt recently where the author said that he'd ride up to you in the paddock on a push bike and hold a conversation with you without the bike moving forward or back and without him putting a foot on the ground - such was his sense of balance.
So I guess the theory is that the elite are those with an in-built capacity and the foresight and commitment to capitalise on it. You have to have it all. Tommy Byrne is widely regarded as the most naturally gifted racing driver of the past 60 years - but lacked the ability to capitalise on his talent.
It's interesting that there has been a bit of a wave of negative sentiment about the way Senna went about it, and that it has coincided with recent Verstappenings.
I have always had a bit of a caution on Senna and Schumacher because of some of their actions on track which probably wouldn't have been tolerated from less successful drivers.
I have always had a bit of a caution on Senna and Schumacher because of some of their actions on track which probably wouldn't have been tolerated from less successful drivers.
StevieBee said:
Schermerhorn said:
I think, my opinion only, that nobody is born with talent. I believe hard work, dedication, commitment to learning and application yield the best results; to the point where it becomes completely natural in the basic humanistic behaviour pattern of that person.
This is a really interesting topic (well, I think so!)When you look at athletic sports there are certain genetic traits that benefit one over another whether that's hight, muscle or whatever else is passed on from the parents. Some people are 'born' to run faster, jump higher, punch harder and so on. So whilst talent has to be trained into them, some have a head start.
But then there's the non-athletic sports - darts, snooker, golf... I had previously held the theory that if you got yourself a snooker table and did nothing other than practice playing snooker for 12 hours a day, you would eventually reach a point where you could compete professionally.
But I heard a sports psychologist on 5Live some years back explain that whilst the ability to complete professionally in any sport is within the grasp of most people if they put their mind to it, those that achieve proper, meaningful success have within them a capacity that goes beyond anything that can be trained or developed - it's an innate sense of what you need your body and mind to do to perform at a certain level in your chosen sport - and a drive to achieve.
I read an article about Jochen Rindt recently where the author said that he'd ride up to you in the paddock on a push bike and hold a conversation with you without the bike moving forward or back and without him putting a foot on the ground - such was his sense of balance.
So I guess the theory is that the elite are those with an in-built capacity and the foresight and commitment to capitalise on it. You have to have it all. Tommy Byrne is widely regarded as the most naturally gifted racing driver of the past 60 years - but lacked the ability to capitalise on his talent.
This concentration and composure is unearthly.
https://youtu.be/knuYY8oiDZU
StevieBee said:
... But I heard a sports psychologist on 5Live some years back explain that whilst the ability to complete professionally in any sport is within the grasp of most people if they put their mind to it, those that achieve proper, meaningful success have within them a capacity that goes beyond anything that can be trained or developed - it's an innate sense of what you need your body and mind to do to perform at a certain level in your chosen sport - and a drive to achieve. ...
Forgive me for being cynical - but did you hear a professional say that their profession can add value?I could see why a sports psychologist would want people to think that it takes more than just dedication and repetition to succeed at a sport. It might make someone who was doing just that think "hmmm - maybe I need a sports psychologist".
Not saying the sports psychologist in question was right or wrong ... just that there may be a teeny bit of bias in that particular opinion.
In terms of the actual topic, I think it comes down to consistency of excellence. There are a number of people who can be excellent on their day, when everything lines up, etc. There are fewer who can maintain that over the duration of a season. Then there are those who manage to maintain it across the duration of a career ... multiple seasons, multiple cars, often multiple teams. Those are the elite. In terms of those I have watched 'live', for me it'd be Senna, Schumacher Sr and Hamilton. From my limited knowledge of the history of the sport, I'd add Clark and Fangio. Depending on my mood, I may also add Stewart, Prost & Alonso to that list.
I think Nico Rosberg is the perfect example here. He was (and possibly still is?) an excellent driver. He got to F1 ... had some good results. For a very brief period - in relation to a career - he managed to raise his level to the point where he beat an absolute elite. However, what it took from him, combined with the likelihood of it happening again, led him to leave on the highest of highs. I think he knew it was all downhill from there.
An excellent driver can beat an elite driver on any given race weekend. Occasionally they manage it over the course of a season. But over the course of a career, the elite do stand out.
But then I say all this ... and wonder 'what if' ... maybe if Mansell's tyre hadn't blown out in 1986 ... what if Webber had come out on top in that race at Yas Marina ... and I wonder if they might have gone on to have careers that we'd debate about being elite? But then I look to Hamilton in China '07 ... that could easily have been his 'what if' moment. But he moved past it, and still achieved what he did. There is the elite rising above the 'mere' excellent.
Stan the Bat said:
hot metal said:
HustleRussell said:
I believe that any driver who can be competitive in an F1 car you would be competitive in any other form of circuit racing.
However, I don’t believe it works the other way around- being competitive in a sports car, GT etc doesn’t automatically mean the driver will be competitive in F1.
In Jim Clark’s era, drivers used to race all sorts for the love of it so we’d get to see evidence that they can win in anything but I don’t necessarily agree that Clark’s ability to win in a Mini or a Lotus Cortina elevates him compared to others.
For me, from what I’ve heard, what made Clark exceptional was the incredible efficiency and fluency of his inputs to the car, which made him unfathomably quick but also outrageously consistent and highly sympathetic to the machinery.
This is the real definition of elite ...However, I don’t believe it works the other way around- being competitive in a sports car, GT etc doesn’t automatically mean the driver will be competitive in F1.
In Jim Clark’s era, drivers used to race all sorts for the love of it so we’d get to see evidence that they can win in anything but I don’t necessarily agree that Clark’s ability to win in a Mini or a Lotus Cortina elevates him compared to others.
For me, from what I’ve heard, what made Clark exceptional was the incredible efficiency and fluency of his inputs to the car, which made him unfathomably quick but also outrageously consistent and highly sympathetic to the machinery.
- Debuted in F3, F2 and F1 in the same year and nearly won his first F1 event (albeit non-WC).
- Third in WC in his first F1 year including a win at Monza.
- Rookie of the year at Indy in a race where another rookie actually won.
- Two years in the wilderness with the recalcitrant BRM H16, although he did haul it to second place at Spa.
- 1st and 2nd in the two Tasman series in which he competed.
- F1 WC with Matra, a team created from scratch in just two years. No-one else ever won a WC F1 race for Matra.
- F1 WC with Tyrrell, a team created from scratch in just two years. WC again with Tyrrell. No-one else ever came close to the WC in a Tyrrell and very few ever subsequently won a race in a Tyrrell.
- Still holds the distinction of the only driver to have led at least one lap of every race in a single year.
- Set a WC wins record that lasted for 14 years.
I think again that the elite make it look easy, it was easy for them and even them doing it easy made everyone else realise it was. When a total legend like Jackie says Jimmy made it look easy and we all did not know how he did it so easily, that to me says far more.
there are very few like this, I will, only add Prost, Stewart, Fangio, Ascari and I will also say Lewis.
But I also like to see grafters like both Rosbergs, Villeneuve, Schumacher win titles, some title winners were lucky in good cars like Piquet, Andretti, Vittel some managed to pull it all together for a short time like Schackter, Phil Hill, Farina, and some made the best of what they had to winliike Brabham, Hulme, and a few others, they all won it in slightly different ways.
But they all won it, something I have to say annoys me about Moss lovers, because despite the fact he was THAT good, well he never damn well won it did he!!
there are very few like this, I will, only add Prost, Stewart, Fangio, Ascari and I will also say Lewis.
But I also like to see grafters like both Rosbergs, Villeneuve, Schumacher win titles, some title winners were lucky in good cars like Piquet, Andretti, Vittel some managed to pull it all together for a short time like Schackter, Phil Hill, Farina, and some made the best of what they had to winliike Brabham, Hulme, and a few others, they all won it in slightly different ways.
But they all won it, something I have to say annoys me about Moss lovers, because despite the fact he was THAT good, well he never damn well won it did he!!
StevieBee said:
I read an article about Jochen Rindt recently where the author said that he'd ride up to you in the paddock on a push bike and hold a conversation with you without the bike moving forward or back and without him putting a foot on the ground - such was his sense of balance.
i guarantee that every single F1 driver has an incredible vestibular system ...& that is what primarily what divides us from them& no amount of hard work, dedication, commitment to learning and application is going to compensate or overcome for that
angrymoby said:
StevieBee said:
I read an article about Jochen Rindt recently where the author said that he'd ride up to you in the paddock on a push bike and hold a conversation with you without the bike moving forward or back and without him putting a foot on the ground - such was his sense of balance.
i guarantee that every single F1 driver has an incredible vestibular system ...& that is what primarily what divides us from them& no amount of hard work, dedication, commitment to learning and application is going to compensate or overcome for that
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oa2V96X21Hc
PhilAsia said:
StevieBee said:
Tommy Byrne is widely regarded as the most naturally gifted racing driver of the past 60 years - but lacked the ability to capitalise on his talent.
Is he? By who?He won a F1 test in a McLaren. Senna put down a couple of marker laps and Byrne beat them pretty much first time out. Dennis didn't want him anywhere near the team and was only fulfilling an obligation to run him in the test. Worried the times may start a campaign to get him a seat, he asked the mechanics to detune the (either the engine or suspension, can't recall which). He still beat Senna's time.
Have a read of the book Crashed and Byrned. Very interesting read!
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff