Niki Lauda by a country mile.

Crashing at the Nurburgring, sitting in burning fuel without a helmet on, receiving the last rites in the hospital, and being back in the race car a few weeks later in Monza, ravaged for a lifetime with scars still bleeding... and the quickest Ferrari driver in quali: 0.3 sec faster than Reutemann, 0.9 sec faster than Regazzoni.

Difficult question. Was the driver the strongest mentally who was never afraid and therefore mentally strong? Or was the person who was aware of the risks and still drove very, very fast?

Jim Clark was not afraid. He did not even know he was driving fast. He knew he could do it, but he was not AWARE of it all the time. He took the same risks in a car that was perfect, as in a car that had a problem (his only weaknes, according to Jack Brabham).

Jacky Stewart was 'afraid', if you can use that term. He took a lot of weight on his shoulders - as an active driver - by his campaigning for safety. In a sense he made himself all the time he was taking huge risks. And still drove very fast.

Niki Lauda has admitted that untill his accident, he had kid himself: 'Accidents wont happen to me.' He learned the hard way... Still he came back, after his accident, after his retirement.

Schumacher was mentally very strong... but he drove in an era in which mistakes did not mean 'injuries and death'.

Villeneuve, Senna either did not take the risks seriously, or did not care.

So it has to be Jacky Stewart to me.

Nice.

Well the thing is neither of those mistakes came in particularly high pressure, in F1 terms, situation, Imola was just a driving error when a rear wheel caught in the edge of the tarmac and Monza was falling a sleep more due to lack rather than excess of pressure.

can anybody recommend another forum where posters know about F1?

i cannot fathom how alonso is being mooted as the greatest driver of all time for his mental and psychological abilities. really he is one of the last to be considered, given his history and outbursts.

i used to loathe reading sv's posts, but i rather enjoyed his today. sure you know what he's going to say ultimately (and to be fair he has a point) but its well reasoned. in fact, the only blemish i would point out was the knee jerk monaco parking. other indiscretions that might appear to be stupid or cheating were always calculated and brave, even if a little unfair.

but the greatest, off the top of one's head, must be, as ensign says, lauda. whether for coming back so soon, or having the balls to stop in the final race.

that's the way to throw away a championship. feeling peeved and not moving from the pits, well, its just not, is it. not a great idea, not a psychological pressure for his competitors. mental possibly.

on the flipside, seeing as they must be talked about together, his nemesis oozes the ability to induce psychological pressure. twas first applied in his second race and spellblindingly post race 5. indeed this forum itself is still spinning from it. but he's not the greatest. don't think he could ever be. the world is now too safe for that final element.

I think Senna had deep fears from the risks and he was totally in picture with the consequences of crashing, but somehow he managed to find a way to overcome this at the wheel.

I think it's a natural thing. At an earlier stage of my life i had a 2 stroke kart just for hobby, and i was generally deadly scared to sit in it, and thinking about things going wrong, but when i started i was just push to the metal... So its a weird thing, and it's just a simple little puddly kart, i can not imagine how it feels to drive a real racing car... As for the question, my hero is Senna but for the answer, Niki Lauda was a hell of a ballsy guy, real kudos !

I think that's only true for Villeneuve, he really was the no-risk-no-fun bravado style type.

Senna OTOH was actually talking a lot about the risks and dangers of driving - but once he was in the car, he just couldn't help it.

So on track that led to an outwardly comparable risky style but I think they both arrived there from very different angles.

You'd be amazed what (even little) humans can do on adrenalin.

considering that who knows him point out as his main virtue his mental strengh you'd better illuminate us magister about some alonso's outbursts.

some people here seem to work inside f1 garages according to their comments

Renault 2006 (they want Fisichella to win)
McLaren 2007 (they want Hamilton to win)

I'd have to say I never really 'got' Senna... he spoke English very well, but when I listened to him I could not really 'grasp' the person behind the words. So I am happy to believe you. My opinion on Senna is not very substantial.

Lauda definitely has to be up there

Quite embarassing that I forgot him

these episodes don't have anything to do with mental and psychological abilities to drive, besides the 1st is wrong and a british interpretation of his words, and the 2nd has been proven to be completely true so...

hungary 08 - kimi must be cheating.

one really does not need to look far or work in an f1 garage to hear them (tho it helps)

these episodes have everything to do with his driving. or waiting to leave the pits to drive. but as it happens those quoted above were not what i was thinking of. while the one just mentioned, was mentioned in my earlier post.

Well, Senna sure wasn't short of contradictions ;)

Even his fellow drivers were apparently never really sure what to expect. One of my favourite stories is from Brundle (sorry, don't have the source handy) : During the 1993 Monza GP Senna had rear-ended Brundle's Ligier into the first chicane. Afterwards he came running over to Brundle and Martin describes how he was thinking "oh-oh, this means trouble", but in fact Senna had come to apologize and make sure that Brundle wasn't hurt.

with this post I advise you to stay in this forum, its level is much higher than yours regarding f1...

proofs of quoting alonso on kimi cheating?

you posted in a thread about it precisely one hour ago. (as i write)
so please lets return to this thread subject.

fangio at the nurburgring has to get him a top three spot too eh. what do you think?

I saw this grown man cry.

FAR from being mentally tough/strong in my books. I'd motor back to the Monza pits and find out WHY I was off. I'd try to replay what I was thinking, what the telemetry and on board camera showed. WHY did I get here?

Senna thought he was untouchable. That was his downfall. Prost had a slight edge on him to make up for his lack of raw talent. Prost ftw.

Piquet's games? Games, nothing more. No dice.

Current driver that gets a mention? I think Webber has pretty stout synaptic fortitude.

Right, I'm going to bite, in case you're serious. As far as any reasonable judgement goes, McLaren actively abstained from controlling pace, just risk.

Case in point: Monaco - Hamilton, constantly the faster of the two, unfortunate with the pit strategy, prevented from challenging for the lead.

I once read in the ask Nigel (Roebuck) column that a guy asked 'which question would you ask Michael Schumacher if you only had one?' Nigel's answer was 'Is it true Michael that your car was starting to develop a race terminating technical failure before you steered into Jacques?' If true it would not suggest that he cracked under pressure in Jerez.

Current driver mention? Raikkonen. Isn't excessively enthousiastic in victory, and is totally stoic and unimpressed after bad luck or bad performances.

His coolness is very impressive.

are you saying he cracked from something else then? what was his answer by the way?

But his strength in the face of a challenge isn't. Whether he shows it or not, he's seeming to be flummoxed by Massa, at the moment.

Wonder what Roland and Ayrton might think?

F1db
Pitpass
grandprix.com

To those of you who think Alonso should be considered: Remember winter testing '06 (brake testing), Hungary '06 and '07, Germany '06 ("Did you see what Michael did?"), among others.

I don't think Raikkonens current problem is a mental or psychologic one.

Massa is the weaker one in that aspect. He's just a tad quicker in quali. That's all.

he didn't crack. he calculated it as the only way to win. that's mental ability. not nice tho.

and i think the question was never asked by nigel

or michael's legs for that matter!

what kind of mental ability do you need for ramming into your opponent to take him out of the race.?
I think what you need is a cheating mentality and this the reputation that unfortunately would have to live with MS.

Wasn't Senna fearless because he thought that God was protecting him in the car? I seem to remember that Prost said something like that.

it's nothing to do with the topic...but anyway dennis "we were racing fernando not kimi" sums it up

case of monaco, hamilton faster of the two? you'd better read in the internet the good laughter alonso had after british press attack "hamilton wasn't allowed to overtake alonso" and their pace...alonso was way quicker than hamilton throughout the race and only slowed down when team said so

and repeat, your statements have nothing to do with mental abilities

But that was true, wasn't it? Post Hungary at least ....

and your point is?


but by the by, for one he already had that reputation in some circles, and for two, if he'd done it right, you wouldn't know about it, and wouldn't have the reputation of a cheater.

Of course. Not many men had the balls to give up a world title that's there for the taking because he considers the conditions suitable for lunatics. And to take the "blame" himself rather than make up an excuse that the car was broken or something.

How about Nuvolari at winning at the ring against the mighty German armada?

so alonso's breakdown post monaco has nothing to do with his mental abilities?

and are you aware of when and under what circumstance ron made that comment?

Maybe I went off topic a bit. But the things is that to me someone who participates in a sport at a highly competitive level should not be considered the greatest at anything really when his mentality is that of a cheater..

going back to the topic.. In Japan 03 Michael cracked and rammed into the back of Sato, he had to pit to get his nose changed. If Juan or Kimi had not suffered those engine failures earlier on the year, he perhaps would have been remembered for losing that WDC for cracking under pressure..

I don't think that it was Nuvolaris mental strenght that caused the bursting of von Brauchitsch's tyre.

Nigel didn't have the boldness to ask this question as far as I know.

The point is if it is true, he didn't crack under pressure then, 'cause it would have been a bloody calculated move then.

Recent history seems to suggest otherwise - in Hungary and Germany it took well into Sunday afternoon for him to start to keep pace with Massa.

Massa, however, has looked rock-solid.

I am not saying Alonso is the most stronger here but keep in mind that Alonso at some point last year did not have the full support of team. We will never know how Schumacher would have handle this situation since at all times during his career he was #1 driver.

Michael certainly had the cheating ability. But he was not alone, as other top drivers like Alain Prost and Ayrton Senna proved.

lame excuse to justify someone's actions..

not even greatest cheater?!

not sure he cracked in japan. he still won. he cocked up tho.

who do you suggest btw?

We'll see if Massa remains rock-solid.

There were nine of them! But it was a supreme test for the man in the red hat and the yellow jumper.

I must say I find this ecumenicism encouraging - an Italian name sticking up for the Germans and a German name for the Italian. Most refreshing.

Oh how I wish, in MS´s case at least, that was true. Fact is, it does. You only have to read the rabid hatred towards the man to realise that. Sorry, but that´s a fact.

I defer to you guys with more experience. I've only been following F1 since 2000 (prior to that, I've only watched videos of Senna/Prost etc..). In this span of time, I have to say Alonso..

never said you did. he didn't have their support for one reason only, he lacked the mental ability needed to know how to keep their support. schumacher didn't.

but for you the comparison is moot anyway, because neither can be the greatest at anything.

edit...


double standards no? you just said a cheater can't be the greatest at anything and now you nominate alonso! how does that work exactly?