New theory emerges on the Most Controversial F1 season and Schumacher's maiden World Championship

[alesifan]

Thoughts?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/kids/other/ne ... li=BBqdg4K

[Andres125sx]

Thoughts?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/kids/other/ne ... li=BBqdg4K

I can´t see how keeping 10-15% throttle while braking can be confused with traction control while accelerating...

[wesley123]

It's simply an author that is trying to cash in on nostalgia.

I'm also interested in why OP has advertisement of the book in his signature.

[hollus]

@Wesley, we are reviewing that with the signature.

[Jolle]

1994 was a f*7ked up season and almost ended F1. Not just the two deaths in one race but also left the sport without a star or world champion.

Briatores team cheated, a lot. But the FIA/FOM were left with a problem. They couldn't taint this season even more by excluding Benneton or Schumacher. In 1994 there was no one else that could replace the stars it lost in the years before. Remember, in the late eighties/early nineties you had Mansell, Prost, Senna, Piquet.... Would be like Hamilton, Vettel, Raikkonen and Alonso all retired at the same time and we were left with Verstappen vs Bottas.

The evidence is quite clear: The FIA investigation that found hidden software in the ECU, the pitlane fire, Senna's view, Verstappen's story and that Briatore (and Schumacher in lesser extent) had a big hand in foul play in later seasons.

It's a real shame, Schumachers talent shouldn't have needed this.

[alesifan]

I am interested in people's opinion on this theory...

It is natural for some to be sceptical upon first reading that theory but note what Senna may have heard as he studied Schumacher's car at Aida 1994 is not clear and remains a topic of debate to this day. Senna obviously thought it might be an illegal traction control device at work, but it is worth noting at the time Senna was walking past the braking zone to turn 1. I would also like to add this alternative theory is explained in much more detail within a recently released book (supported by Willem Toet, Frank Dernie & telmentry traces) and in order to stay on the correct side of forum rules I have emailed a moderator (hollus) requesting permission to post a link which contains images of the relevant pages & telmentry traces of that book.


Essentially the theory is connected with the semi-automatic gearbox which in 1994 was still new technology. Ferrari introduced it in 1989, and by 1992 both Williams & McLaren were using a semi-automatic gearbox whereas Benetton’s system was operational a year later. Because semi-automatic gearboxes didn’t require a clutch pedal/lever after the start, drivers could now modify their braking technique in ways that were previously not possible because F1 cars could now adopt 2 pedal layouts (not 3 pedals as before).


My research from all the period magazines like Autosport etc indicates that by Aida 1994 out of all the F1 teams, only McLaren & Benetton had a 2 pedal layout in reality. I’ve also had it confirmed from a Williams mechanic (Paul West) the FW16 had a 3 pedal layout and Mark Blundell has confirmed to me Left Foot Braking under heavily braking (like turn 1 in Aida) is impossible with a 3 pedal layout F1 car. So Senna wouldn't have been aware of the Left Foot Braking technique I am referring to at Aida 1994. We also know Schumacher was at the forefront of LFB (Left Foot Braking) at the time. Also worth noting that LFB wouldn't have been necessary during the active suspension & electronic gizmo era. Of course all of that was banned for 1994.


Interestingly in 1994 Hakkinen (the only other “confirmed” left foot braker I know in 1994) annihilated Brundle when they were teammates in the two pedal McLaren that year. Over the course of their 15 races together Hakkinen out qualified Brundle by an average of 4.73 places per race. Whereas in 1992, Schumacher out qualified Martin by an average of 2.69 places per race. Brundle recently admitted somewhere here:



“Then when I had to compete with Michael and Mika, it (right foot braking) was a hindrance because they could rotate the car into the slow corners and use their left foot on the brake and pick up the throttle and transfer between the two pedals. In a way that I just couldn’t do. So unfortunately that crash in Dallas (1984) was probably the key reason I underperformed (in F1).”

I understand you need to see the additional telemetry traces & detail referred to earlier & subject to recieving a moderators permission I will certainly provide that. But what is everyone’s thoughts on this theory so far based on the above?

[roy928tt]

I'm a little perplexed, I've read an article by Willem Toet on his LinkdIn feed outlining how a traction control system might have worked on a 1994 F1 car......he seemed quite familiar with such a system and how it might have worked within the ECU constraints of the time.....No prizes for guessing where he was working in 1994.

[alesifan]

Firstly apologies I hadn't realised how poorly worded that article was when orginally posting it. This is the orginally article it stemmed from; https://www.msn.com/en-au/sport/motorsp ... cUbs7Hw1-w

I would also like to make it clear I did not write either article.

I'm a little perplexed, I've read an article by Willem Toet on his LinkdIn feed outlining how a traction control system might have worked on a 1994 F1 car......he seemed quite familiar with such a system and how it might have worked within the ECU constraints of the time.....No prizes for guessing where he was working in 1994.

That Linkedin article is dated November 2015. Willem Toet has since changed his opinion from that to the Left Foot Braking theory in December 2017. I know because I worked with him on something which I am unable to mention within this thread (but you might be able to guess what). Whatsmore Willem was happy to be quoted as saying: "I think it (what Senna heard at Aida 1994) was the use of left foot braking combined with the throttle which would have made the strange noise. There won't have been any engine cutting at all in those circumstances because the engine will not have been accelerating fast (with brakes applied as well) but it would have been strange to hear the engine working in those places on the track. That's what I believe is the most likely scenario."


Mark Blundell, a Tyrrell F1 Driver that season and like Senna was also taken out at that first corner in Aida. Whilst Blundell didn’t recall any strange sounds on Schumacher’s Benetton himself when walking back to the pits that day, he believes it was common knowledge their engine note was different. When asked whether the sound could have been left foot braking, Blundell responded “in terms of your description on what the input, outputs and benefits that would all make a lot of sense. Left foot braking was something that became a trend at that stage again, I was probably in the minority because I didn’t left foot brake, I was a conventional right foot braker and I think Rubens (Barrichello) was like me for quite a long time...It (left foot braking) would have made a different sound in that it would have had RPM carried into a corner, but I don’t think that would have made a sound like traction control.”


“When I was at Williams (as a test driver in 1991) I can remember driving around Imola where I had raced for Brabham the previous weekend. The Brabham didn’t have a blown diffuser, whereas the Williams did and it was just an unbelievable difference! When you got on the throttle (in the Williams) the thing would just suck down at the rear and just drive you off the corner. As such you would be able to crank a lot more front wing in and get a lot more aero on the car and the grip level was sensational…Left Foot Braking became an art and a trend was something you could only do if you had confidence.”


Frank Dernie, Benetton’s Chief Engineer in 1994, gives his view on Aida. “I am not sure what he (Senna) might have heard. Certainly, Schumacher left foot braked and certainly, Cosworth never permitted an engine map with any sort of torque manipulation in it, even when it was legal. My view is that Senna was searching for a reason why the Benetton had so much better traction than Williams, which I am sure was aero, and wrongly plumped for traction control. Once the great Senna had given his opinion it was taken as gospel by many, even though it was just speculation."


Similarly Christian Silk, who was race engineer to the second Benetton drivers throughout 1994 adds “Possibly Jos was too new and just learning the ropes of the B194, to be worrying about the intricacies of the Left Foot Braking and the Exhaust Blown Diffuser (at Aida 1994). Also at the start of 1994 no-one knew how good Schumacher was, hence the reason Benetton kept changing their second driver that season.” Silk also believes Schumacher’s driving style helped with pitch sensitivity, stability of the car, and tyre pressures, whereas his various teammates’ lack of confidence within the car induced more nervousness.


Let me explain why Willem Toet has changed his mind on this issue (which is a quality I hugely respect…indeed my motto is: “there is no point having a mind unless you are willing to change it”). Because in that Linkedin article you referred to he said:


“…A good driver would use the system to learn how to apply the throttle. Driving flat out everywhere would be fine except that it wasted fuel and made a more detectable sound."


So based on the bolded text Verstappen’s car should have been making the funny noises at Aida, given the Dutchman was a lesser driver than Schumacher? Nevertheless, I am open to the possibility it could have been this combined with the previous theory which Senna mistook for an illegal device.

I wish I could explain more than this, but I don't want to infridge the self-promotion rule. So I would say just do a bit of digging online into this yourself & see what you find

[alesifan]

It's simply an author that is trying to cash in on nostalgia.

You couldn't be further from the truth on that...you really couldn't!

I wish I could explain why, but I don't want to infridge the self-promotion rule. So I would say just do a bit of digging online into that author yourself & see what you find. Don't judge a book by its cover or indeed an author, simply because you don't know them.

[alesifan]

Thoughts?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/kids/other/ne ... li=BBqdg4K

I can´t see how keeping 10-15% throttle while braking can be confused with traction control while accelerating...

Let's just examine what Williams team manager in 1994 Ian Harrison (who stood alongside Senna at Aida 1994) is quoted as saying within that article. He said “Senna himself was convinced that there was something different about Schumacher’s car,Whether there was or not I don’t know, but Senna was utterly sure there was.” FYI Ian Harrison also said this in Autosport in 2014.

Note the bolded bit DOES NOT say traction control, it simply says "something different". The automatic assumption when you hear something different with the engine note, tends to be illegal TC doesn't it but as Willem Toet said about the Left Foot Braking theory: "There won't have been any engine cutting at all in those circumstances because the engine will not have been accelerating fast (with brakes applied as well)"

Also worth noting Senna was walking past the braking zone of turn 1 at Aida 1994, and was quite some way away from the traction zone out of turn 1. https://www.motorsportimages.com/photo/ ... &year=1994

Also worth noting that Senna was so furious at being taken out of that first corner, IIRC he accused Hakkinen of doing it deliberately during that day. I think it was only during the plane journey home, that Senna had calm down enough to start thinking rationalely again, and realise that Mika hadn't done it on purpose. That little back story shows, anger clearly clouds one's judgement on certain things...

Finally...Katayama stood track side at Montreal 1994 to listen out for Schumacher's B194 & explains his observations at 32:55 into this video; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6qL7Vv ... 4#t=16m55s ...Interesting isn't it?

As I said earlier would love to explain more, but can't because I don't want to infringe any rules of this forum, like self promotion.

[wesley123]

It's simply an author that is trying to cash in on nostalgia.

You couldn't be further from the truth on that...you really couldn't!

I wish I could explain why, but I don't want to infridge the self-promotion rule. So I would say just do a bit of digging online into that author yourself & see what you find. Don't judge a book by its cover or indeed an author, simply because you don't know them.

I sincerely do not care who wrote it. It is something written on a really controversial season 25 years ago that has some 'new theories', that is literally just cashing in on the nostalgia.

[alesifan]

It's simply an author that is trying to cash in on nostalgia.

You couldn't be further from the truth on that...you really couldn't!

I wish I could explain why, but I don't want to infridge the self-promotion rule. So I would say just do a bit of digging online into that author yourself & see what you find. Don't judge a book by its cover or indeed an author, simply because you don't know them.

I sincerely do not care who wrote it. It is something written on a really controversial season 25 years ago that has some 'new theories', that is literally just cashing in on the nostalgia.

So would you prefer 1994 F1 history to remain full of rumors & speculation then? Perhaps the author just wishes to seek the truth behind everything and end all the 1994 controversies / rumors via the book?

Tell a lie 1000 times, and it becomes the truth. Current UK politics show us its never the best idea to base opinions on falsehoods & speculation. Also explain to me how presenting an previously undiscussed theory with seemly very creditable evidence, is "cashing in" as you put it over and above trying to find answers? Especially when certain participates are trying hard to keep the conversation focused on that theory.

Also consider the amount of time that has passed and certain people of power now out of the sport means certain important contributors can now talk about more openly. Also they realise this is perhaps the last major anniversary of 1994 they'll live to...so either talk about it now, or not at all. Also ask any debut or unknown author will tell you...its not the sort of industry to make a quick buck - again research that yourself. Lots of other reasons why books tend to be published on major anniversaries (i.e. traditional publishers wouldn't consider debut authors otherwise etc). I personally gives readers credit, and believe they have enough intelligence themselves to decide for themselves.

Debut author Darren Banks who wrote the 2017 Stephen South book summed that experience up as a "labour of love" and 75% of books don't even sell above 250 copies. Also research what the average salary is of an author. Probably nothing I say or provide as evidence will convince some people of this however I tend to judge books by its reviews or free content available. Rather than the opinions of people who haven't read the book they are trying to give an opinion on. Don't judge a book by its cover as they say.

Now let's try and keep the conversation focused on the LFB theory & peoples opinion on it?

[marmer]

i like how the website looks like its from 1994 i hope thats was the idea.

on the left foot braking is it possible that michael was just really good at it. and the over fueled the car and he was trying his best to waste it under braking.
lets also not forget for all the potenial traction control. senna got the best of michael in all 3 races in qualifaction. so it clearly wasn't that much better. if senna had lived on perhpas michael would't have been world champion in a potentinall illegal car.

personally i don't care. it happened plenty of cars have been driven with far from legal parts if they get away with it at the time they should be left alone rules in f1 are to be twisted and cheated around to be the fastest.

[alesifan]

Can someone explain how to upload photos here, I have evidence LFB became a trend again in 1994 (an autosport magazine article Jan 1994)

[munudeges]

Thoughts?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/kids/other/ne ... li=BBqdg4K

Seen it. Utter rubbish. Senna knew about left foot braking as much as anyone and was one of the first drivers to really be an exponent of keeping the throttle in through corners.

We all know Benetton had traction control and we know they cheated. France 94 when Schumacher pathetically claimed his joke lightning start was as a result of experimenting with a new clutch nailed that one down, as well as the FIA having located where the software was activated. Renault also did a lot of acoustic analysis and they were convinced.

Frankly, who can blame them? They were ruthlessly ambitious, but you see your main rival with the ability to produce a better chassis, better resources and a much better and more powerful engine than you that you'll never get and they then sign Ayrton Senna. What are you going to do?