Talk:Graham Hill
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] Who Sued Whom?
I'm not an expert on the law, but from what I do know about the law I'm rather sceptical of the claim that his wife was prosecuted. Do you possibly mean that Hill was posthumously sued? PatGallacher 23:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- If I remember the section on Brise's death in the boo, The Lost Generation, Brise's (father or father-in-law) sued the Hill family or something along those lines. Sorry, I don't have the book with me, but I'll try and find what exactly happened. Once again, sorry.--Skully Collins Edits 15:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- If you sue a dead person you sue their estate. Of course that has has the same effect as suing the benefactors of the estate but its not quite the same thing. --LiamE 18:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Indy Streaks
Here are a couple of links to back-up the assertions:
--Mycroft.Holmes 15:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Indy 500 Chassis numbers added for Lotus cars + reasons for 1969 withdrawal - source Team Lotus - The Indianapolis Years by Andrew Ferguson M100 21:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] TV Driving Series
As well as the often-repeated clip of Graham Hill and Jackie Stewart's double-act at the Sports Personality of the year show, I can remember him doing a series of TV shorts(or a regular spot within whatever was then the equivilent of Top Gear) on better roadcraft - or road driving skills. I'd guess around 1972-73. No idea what it was called, but it was very popular at the time and perhaps equally worthy of inclusion if anyone can find any details. Mighty Antar 00:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Completely irreverent information follows
Also the name of a minor hill and elementary school in Seattle. -Uagehry456talk 22:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] TRIPLE CROWN
What a bizarre notion that anyone would think that the definition of Motor Racing's Triple crown is the Indianapolis 500 (yes) Le Mans (yes) and..... the Monaco Grand Prix!!
The Monaco Grand Prix is only PART of the Formula 1 World championship, and ANY authoritative reference you care to look up (even the one on the French version of Wikipedia, which at some point this article makes reference to) will confirm that the Triple Crown of Motor Racing is regarded as :
FIA F1 World championship
Le Mans 24 Hours
Indianapolis 500
The only driver that has so far captured all three is Graham Hill, (Jacques Villeneuve has 2/3, namely the Indy 500 and the F1 championship) and so long as the present entry for both "Graham Hill" and the "Triple Crown" remain as they are at present in Wikipedia, they will define precicely the weakness of Wikipedia, namely they are the work of someone more interested in his/her (misguided) conviction in their own infallability, rather than providing true facts.
And yes, Bette Hill did get sued by the estate of the passenengers in Graham Hill's plane and lost a great deal of money.
Peterkirchem 13:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- What an (sic) bizarre notion that anyone would think that the definition of Motor Racing's Triple crown includes the Indianapolis 500 and Le Mans 24hr as they are both part of championships? Why would it be 2 races and a championship especially when 2 of the races used to be in the same championship? The triple crown is a carry over from horse racing where it is the the three most important races not 2 races and a championship. --LiamE 17:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- And no, Bette Hill was not sued, Graham's estate was sued. Of course in reality there is no appreciable difference between the two in terms of who loses money. --LiamE 18:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
You are simply wrong on both counts, though well done spotting my typing error Peterkirchem (talk) 22:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've updated the article to identify the alternative definitions of Triple Crown of Motorsport. An alternative (preferable?) solution would be to just say that he's the only driver to have won it, and if people want to find out what "Triple Crown of Motorsport" means, they can follow the link. DH85868993 (talk) 01:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks DH, clearly both definitions are currently used, with the F1 championship perhaps being used more often lately than it has before simply because of interest in Jaques Villeneuve. Of course by either definition Graham Hill has won it and is the only person to have done so. --LiamE (talk) 11:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- Peter, you really must try harder. As far as I can see I made 3 points, firstly I pointed out the obvious fallacy in your rant which perhaps you still can't see. Your logic is flawed, and even if it wasn't it would stil be OR. Secondly, I really can assure you that the triple crown in horse racing is indeed 3 races, not 2 races and a championship in every country that has one. I can also assure you that the horse racing triple crown was first won quite some time before the invention of the car. Thirdly, you simply cannot sue someone for something they are not responsible for, ergo Mrs Hill was not sued, but rather Graham's estate was. The fact that Mrs Hill was the main beneficiary of the estate means she was in effect sued by proxy, but still SHE was not sued. Furthermore using "an" inappropriately is not a spelling error but an error of grammar. I would also like to point out that the only reason I pointed it out at all was to draw attention to the fact I was using your logic, but perhaps that just went straight over your head too. --LiamE (talk) 12:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Whatever...!! But the most valid contribution to this little lot is the fact that there is no such thing as a formal Triple Crown anyway. No such trophy or award exists for either permutation, therefore making its inclusion in Wikipedia, there for the dissemination of facts, irrelevant. So we are ALL barking up an inappropriate tree ! Just for fun though, I nominate a new Triple Crown for Motorsport.... one which also would almost certainly only be available to Bette Hill... namely wife, mother and eventual grandmother of an F1 World champion... or do you prefer a F1...etc Peterkirchem (talk) 10:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- There is no formal grand slam in tennis, but many people are conversant with the term. Incidentally that used to be triple crown too! The 3 race crown was the original - the races all pre-date the F1 championship by 20 years or more, but 2 races and the F1 title has also been bandied about where anyone appropriate has got close, such as Villeneuve, who's mother might be a near miss for your new triple crown. Should Montoya get a drive at Le Mans we'll be back to the 3 race crown as fast as you can say "Monte Carlo" in faux French accent. As for the new triple, Mrs Hill does have some competition from the Hunts, Sennas, Piquets, Laudas and Rosbergs... time will tell. Now to the crucial question of grammar. I would prefer "an" F1 if pronounced eff-one, but "a" Formula one if that's okay! --LiamE (talk) 11:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
So we are back on with the Triple Crown thing !! As someone has quite correctly pointed out, there is in fact no such thing as the Triple Crown of Motorsport. It is a concept invented by someone for the sake of it, and as there is certainy no formal recognition of it in any form whatsoever, such as a trophy, a prize, a website dedicated to it, I am surprised it is included in Wikipedia which purports to deal in facts only. Anyway, I have dropped Mad Max Moseley a tongue in cheek email asking him to rule on the whole matter. Crikey.. maybe we get a fine of 50 million quid !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterkirchem (talk • contribs) 11:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC) Hang on chaps !! Havent we forgotten someone who came close to winning the triple crown, and, if you include the Daytona 500, instead of Le mans - as someone has - DID win the Triple Crown.... namely Mario Andretti !! Oh, he cant have done.... it doesnt exist !
- Does the tennis grand slam not exist because there is no prize for it and its not official? Or the horse racing triple crown for that matter? And what body would could define it anyway? Simply put, the triple crown exists but it exists as what people want it to be at the time, with the Daytona included if necessary I guess! --LiamE (talk) 15:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes Liam... after all the argy-bargie, that sums it up pretty well. What is interesting is that if you look at some of the other Grand Slam definitions (Tennis, Horse Racing etc) is it in each case a perception of what people want it to be, rather than anything specific. Which gets back to my original point. WHY is it mentioned at all in Wikipedia ? Go to the Pitpass Forum... and let's meet up again there under F1 History !! Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterkirchem (talk • contribs) 22:55, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
