124 replies to this topic

[WOOT]

From here. (credit to weirdNumber)
http://forum.planet-...=63168&start=0

1) Ayrton Senna
2) Michael Schumacher
3) Juan Manuel Fangio
4) Alain Prost
5) Jim Clark
6) Jackie Stewart
7) Kimi Raikkonen
8 ) Mika Hakkinen
9) Gilles Villeneuve
10) Niki Lauda
...
12) Alonso
...
15) Lewis Hamilton

Who votes for these??? You probably have guessed I am a fan of Lewis but he shouldn't be there. What is Kimi doing so high up? Why is the guy that beat MS twice so low compared to Kimi who never managed to beat him? Their relative orders should be Alonso over Kimi wherever they are on the list. Similarly why is Mika lower than Kimi?

[Sébastien]

Who cares about those lists they are stupid and people bothering with those mindless lists are.........

[prxty]

You do the same poll 10 months ago or in 10 months and it will change enormously for all active drivers. People don't have enough memory and live only on the facts of the last couple of races.

Furthermore polls on the I-net are not really accurate because the voters are not representative enough. Depending on the site you get very different results. They don't follow any scientific method as the "real" statistics do.

[Yellowmc]

WOOT is quite good at these threads, anything to start a good bash.

Enjoy.

[Risil]

De la Rosa is 79th!

Although he probably would've been higher if fewer people had confused him with Daniel la Rosa.

[ensign14]

Some of the choices look like viral campaigns. Frank Gardner? I know he was a fearsome competitor in touring cars and the kind of bloke you'd be happy to have beside you in the trenches, but as a Formula 1 driver...

Well, I've told you before and I'll tell you again, democracy doesn't work.

[former champ]

I would like to see the complete list but, from what I've seen there, that is the worst top 100 list ever given. The worst, by a country mile. No surprise given it came from F1 Racing and its moronic readers. What a steaming pile of ****.

[Jason]

The top 6 look okay to me, but after that it's looking pretty dubious.

[Gary Davies]

Originally posted by former champ
... that is the worst top 100 list ever given.

I concur with Sébastien's succinct analysis in post #2. In fact, the very notion of there being a hierarchy of top 100 lists, as suggested above, is highly amusing in itself.

[DAT 3000]

I haven't seen a list of all the top 100, but the top 15 here is no worse than the top 15 in Alan Henrys ridiculous recently published book.

[Mika Mika]

If you don't like the thread simply don't post! Don't have a go at WOOT. Some posters do like to post and argue on these "top 100 drivers" lists.

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by WOOT
Their relative orders should be Alonso over Kimi wherever they are on the list.

Why? Because Alonso had a better car than Kimi in 05 and 06???

[Ross Stonefeld]

I never like these lists, but at least this time the 'as decided by you' takes some of the sting out of it. It's a pub vote, not a serious analysis.

I just want to know who the single vote for Sakon Yamamoto was.

[mursuka80]

i am pleased with No.1 but rest is bullshit

[mursuka80]

Originally posted by WOOT
From here. (credit to weirdNumber)
http://forum.planet-...=63168&start=0

1) Ayrton Senna
2) Michael Schumacher
3) Juan Manuel Fangio
4) Alain Prost
5) Jim Clark
6) Jackie Stewart
7) Kimi Raikkonen
8 ) Mika Hakkinen
9) Gilles Villeneuve
10) Niki Lauda
...
12) Alonso
...
15) Lewis Hamilton

Who votes for these??? You probably have guessed I am a fan of Lewis but he shouldn't be there. What is Kimi doing so high up? Why is the guy that beat MS twice so low compared to Kimi who never managed to beat him? Their relative orders should be Alonso over Kimi wherever they are on the list. Similarly why is Mika lower than Kimi?

You founded a way to bash Kimi in this thread also.Good job

[speedmaster]

list is not complete without Piquet Sr. among the ten best, IMHO prior than Prost

[The Kanisteri]

Originally posted by WOOT
...Why is the guy that beat MS twice so low compared to Kimi who never managed to beat him? Their relative orders should be Alonso over Kimi wherever they are on the list.

Just wondering...

So in 2005 you think Alonso beat M Schumacher and Kimi didn't?
Let me enlighten you that Räikkönen and Alonso were main rivals in 2005 and M Schumacher were not even close in same playground.

[SeanValen]

I'm with the opinon that Jim Clark was probabley the best, even Senna said that. But then I got say, it's not fair to Schumi, because he lived in a different era, so I gotta put MS up there as well.
Fangio and Moss revered to Clark as a young god. Man was beaming with driving talent and hardly always used his ulimate speed, holding alot in reserve, which could be said of Schumi in the latter ferrari years.

But how would clark have done in the Schumi seasons, impossible to tell, you had to be more then a driver perhaps in the modern era and be a leader in your team, I think Clark could have done this, Schumi did it with Ferrari.


It's a impossible list, but for the sake of the thread, my list would be a comprimise of older eras and more current ones to be fairer.

1. Jim Clark and Michael Schumacher-maybe because he was the first Schumi and did it first, Schumacher M probabley would of made a bigger difference on more driver tracks in those days then he did in the modern era, because whenever Schumi graced Spa and Monaco-historical tracks, he always performed excellent, fastest laps, and won a chuck of Spas+Monaco and Suzukas, proper driver tracks where he should open bigger gaps and succceses, notice Rubens, Irvine, never really got close to MS at Spa and Monaco compared to other tracks.

If the f1 season was based on more driver tracks like Spa, Monaco and Suzuka, MS probabley would of done even better, his advantage in laptimes were margined when increases in aero took away alot of the impact from cornering at high speeds, other drivers got closer to him, Jim Clark would probabley have suffered the same in the current era of lots of aero and in the tyre wars, you were handicapped a bit too much if michelin and Bstone got it wrong, the amount of rule changes Schumacher drived though was perhaps too many, Clark's era didn't fiddle with the rules too much when he won.


3 Fangio and Ayrton Senna

I think Senna was getting better, as his 1993 season showed, technically in how he applied himself on track, Schumacher even when younger, showed he was the man who was going to do a good job in the pitstop sprint era of f1, Senna's race tactical attack had to change if he had lived on, because one of the strengths of Schumi, was his reading of the race tactically while concentrating on driving fast, Senna was coming into a new era, as fantastic as he was a racer, I think Schumacher was applying himself better for the pitstop-refuel era come 1994. Senna's adaptation to the fuel era of f1, was never really seen, because he died too early, but what can be said, he was best of his era prior to his death. Schumacher also just had a team leadership ability to wield a team around him, I don't think Senna and Williams together were a match against Schuey and Brawn tactically, you have got to think about the team strengths, and Senna was more a driver then team man, Schumacher sponsored people in his team and built what he thought could be used to his advantage better, I think Senna would of had to build better relationships on the tactical side, Schumacher perhaps was more cunning in his thinking within the team, and yence added to his driving skills, made for a powerful challenge to the championships, which he we must say, he looked a fighter for it every season from 94 to 2006-apart from 96where he arrived at ferrari
99-where he broke his leg, in a season where Hakkinen and mclaren made a tough job of it, the title was there for Schumacher to punish mclaren and mika, but he broke his leg-but 2000 came, job done

2005-bridgestone effectly too bad for drastic rule change to even defend titles, other then that, Schumacher was a threat throughout his era. Very impressive. The 1997-1998 seasons were exciting because Michael made Williams and Mclaren work for the title to the last rounds, Jacques probabley should of won the title earlier in 97, despite Jerez 97, it's remarkable Schumacher got that close to the title in his 2nd season with Ferrari, and to do it again but fight with Mclaren in 98, some of his best drives where in these seasons, he may not have gotten the titles here, but he showed the paddock just what his driving skills where when he was fighting hard, and that probabley gave him more respect from f1 fans then if he had it too easy.

Schumacher taking on the Ferrari challenge was the best think to happen to f1 after Senna/Mansell/Prost era was gone, a new era of f1 was born and he was leader of the sprint pit stop tactical races, and while doing wet weather rain master stuff in the style of Jim Clark and Senna. Both Clark and Schumacher scored impressive Spa performances in the rain.

[HP]

Originally posted by speedmaster
list is not complete without Piquet Sr. among the ten best, IMHO prior than Prost

It's really amazing how certain drivers seem to be off the radar. Emerson Fittipaldi ? Mario Andretti?

Ultimately most drivers on any list are racing legends in their own right. And "who's the best" lists simply doesn't do justice to all their efforts.

[LostProphet]

Originally posted by former champ
I would like to see the complete list but, from what I've seen there, that is the worst top 100 list ever given. The worst, by a country mile. No surprise given it came from F1 Racing and its moronic readers. What a steaming pile of ****.

Careful you don't fall off that high horse of yours and break something important.

[SeanValen]

Originally posted by HP
It's really amazing how certain drivers seem to be off the radar. Emerson Fittipaldi ? Mario Andretti?

Ultimately most drivers on any list are racing legends in their own right. And "who's the best" lists simply doesn't do justice to all their efforts.

Even when I'm writing my list, I know it'll take about a few years of writing a book to do justice to all drivers, no one has the time!

[mstar]

oh god kimi at 7th please which idiots did this vote? also hamilton that high

[HoldenRT]

Kimi is a great driver but Alonso should be higher, no doubt about it. Alonso's won 2 WDC's against MS, where as Kimi won one but against Massa and the McLaren's but the McLaren's beat themselves by getting greedy and taking their lead for granted. It still counts as a championship on paper but it wasn't a duel like it was for Alonso vs MS. Kimi now has plenty of time to win more championships (like this season where he is a 90% chance imo) and then when he does then he can be rightly put ahead of Alonso.

[HoldenRT]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Why? Because Alonso had a better car than Kimi in 05 and 06???

I agree that car plays a factor but you can't deny it, in F1 success is defined by the car you drive. If you used your criteria it would be more fair on driver skill, but then for this season Kimi would be behind Alonso in terms of rankings for 08, which most would scoff at because Kimi is in a Ferrari and has won a race and Alonso is in a brick with a lucky 4th as his best.

[giacomo]

I wonder why they did not vote Hamilton on spot 1.

Well, before the recent disasters - Bahrain, Malaysia, Brazil, China - they would have.

[BiH]

I prefer this list. The number of WDC tells you all you need to know.

1. Michael Schumacher
2. Juan Manuel Fangio
3. Alain Prost
4. Ayrton Senna
5. Jackie Stewart
6. Niki Lauda
7. Nelson Piquet
8. Jack Brabham
9. Alberto Ascari
10. Jim Clark
11. Graham Hill
12. Emerson Fittipaldi
13. Mika Häkkinen
14. Fernando Alonso
15. Damon Hill
16. Mario Andretti
17.Keke Rosberg
18. Nigel Mansell
19. James Hunt
20. Kimi Räikkönen
21. Alan Jones
22. Nino Farina
23. Mike Hawthorn
24. Phil Hill
25. John Surtees
26. Denny Hulme
27. Jochen Rindt
28. Jody Scheckter
29. Jacques Villeneuve

[Juan Kerr]

Originally posted by BiH
I prefer this list. The number of WDC tells you all you need to know.

1. Michael Schumacher
2. Juan Manuel Fangio
3. Alain Prost
4. Ayrton Senna
5. Jackie Stewart
6. Niki Lauda
7. Nelson Piquet
8. Jack Brabham
9. Alberto Ascari
10. Jim Clark
11. Graham Hill
12. Emerson Fittipaldi
13. Mika Häkkinen
14. Fernando Alonso
15. Damon Hill
16. Mario Andretti
17.Keke Rosberg
18. Nigel Mansell
19. James Hunt
20. Kimi Räikkönen
21. Alan Jones
22. Nino Farina
23. Mike Hawthorn
24. Phil Hill
25. John Surtees
26. Denny Hulme
27. Jochen Rindt
28. Jody Scheckter
29. Jacques Villeneuve

Senna is obviously worse because he got killed then yeah is that your philosophy ?

[Arion]

Originally posted by giacomo
I wonder why they did not vote Hamilton on spot 1.

Well, before the recent disasters - Bahrain, Malaysia, Brazil, China - they would have.

No, they wouldn't. They're no as moronic as you'd like to believe.

[ensign14]

Originally posted by BiH
I prefer this list. The number of WDC tells you all you need to know.

Yes, it's a useless and arbitrary bauble invented for marketing reasons.

[Beyond]

Kimi could be at p7 only after a couple of championships more. Put Lauda at his place. Alonso is about where he should be. No words for Hamilton. The rest of the top10 is not bad.

[Sakae]

Originally posted by BiH
I prefer this list. The number of WDC tells you all you need to know.

1. Michael Schumacher
2. Juan Manuel Fangio
3. Alain Prost
4. Ayrton Senna
5. Jackie Stewart
6. Niki Lauda
7. Nelson Piquet
8. Jack Brabham
9. Alberto Ascari
10. Jim Clark
11. Graham Hill
12. Emerson Fittipaldi
13. Mika Häkkinen
14. Fernando Alonso
15. Damon Hill
16. Mario Andretti
17.Keke Rosberg
18. Nigel Mansell
19. James Hunt
20. Kimi Räikkönen
21. Alan Jones
22. Nino Farina
23. Mike Hawthorn
24. Phil Hill
25. John Surtees
26. Denny Hulme
27. Jochen Rindt
28. Jody Scheckter
29. Jacques Villeneuve

This one makes almost sense to me.

[ex Rhodie racer]

Originally posted by MiPe

This one makes almost sense to me.

Me too, only I would swop Clark and Stewart around. No way the certified one was superior to Jimmy. In fact I would slot Clark in at #3

[SeanValen]

Originally posted by BiH
I prefer this list. The number of WDC tells you all you need to know.

It's more subjective then that, there's more to Schumacher's career then his tally of titles, he did so many great drives, that if retired at the end of 2000, when he completed his mission to win with ferrari, he still would be up there with the best, because up until then, Michael was especially very driven. He didn't need to be the most successful driver to prove his driving skills, he already did that, no one was asking many questions of him, but winning with ferrari was important to him. When you think of Schumacher, you think of Spa 95, Hungary 98, Japan 2000, Spain 96, Spain 94-stuck in 5th gear to 2nd etc

The performances of a driver that impressed people. There's alot more quality in Jim Clark's career then say Mika Hakkinen, Jim Clark just was better, yet they both had titles, Even if you never saw Jim Clark race, if you read up on his career, what people said about him, his peers, what Senna said about him, you will put him alongside Schumacher, both were wet weather masters, especially great at Spa, it's more subjective then titles. Titles tell you that perhaps, you needed to be a bit lucky to stay alive and be in the right era to win the titles, I think Schumacher was born in the right era to get his titles, Senna and Roland died so he and others could continue, it's sad, but that's life, not Schumi's fault, someone had to play the tragic figure, it was Ayrton, Jim Clark was the leader of his generation, like Senna, died young, but did many impressive performances, he was quick in eveything, he was the first Schumi, born though in a dangerous era, I wouldn't of wanted to be foruming back in the 60s, every year or so almost a driver was dead.

Schumacher and Jim Clark, different eras. but great great talent. Titles are overatted to a extent when comparing different eras so further apart.

When the Formula One of today has gotten rid of tracks like Suzuka, the real challenge for the sport is making sure drivers are tested with rules and venues that allows them to showcase their talent, I don't think current f1 shows it as well as it should, the return to slicks in 2009 is a good move. The points system also these days is something that must be changed back to reward the winner more, it's changed the value of wins, and that's not right.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by SeanValen


1. Jim Clark and Michael Schumacher-maybe because he was the first Schumi and did it first, Schumacher M probabley would of made a bigger difference on more driver tracks in those days then he did in the modern era, because whenever Schumi graced Spa and Monaco-historical tracks, he always performed excellent, fastest laps, and won a chuck of Spas+Monaco and Suzukas, proper driver tracks where he should open bigger gaps and succceses, notice Rubens, Irvine, never really got close to MS at Spa and Monaco compared to other tracks.

If the f1 season was based on more driver tracks like Spa, Monaco and Suzuka, MS probabley would of done even better, his advantage in laptimes were margined when increases in aero took away alot of the impact from cornering at high speeds, other drivers got closer to him, Jim Clark would probabley have suffered the same in the current era of lots of aero and in the tyre wars, you were handicapped a bit too much if michelin and Bstone got it wrong, the amount of rule changes Schumacher drived though was perhaps too many, Clark's era didn't fiddle with the rules too much when he won.


3 Fangio and Ayrton Senna

I think Senna was getting better, as his 1993 season showed, technically in how he applied himself on track, Schumacher even when younger, showed he was the man who was going to do a good job in the pitstop sprint era of f1, Senna's race tactical attack had to change if he had lived on, because one of the strengths of Schumi, was his reading of the race tactically while concentrating on driving fast, Senna was coming into a new era, as fantastic as he was a racer, I think Schumacher was applying himself better for the pitstop-refuel era come 1994. Senna's adaptation to the fuel era of f1, was never really seen, because he died too early, but what can be said, he was best of his era prior to his death. Schumacher also just had a team leadership ability to wield a team around him, I don't think Senna and Williams together were a match against Schuey and Brawn tactically, you have got to think about the team strengths, and Senna was more a driver then team man, Schumacher sponsored people in his team and built what he thought could be used to his advantage better, I think Senna would of had to build better relationships on the tactical side, Schumacher perhaps was more cunning in his thinking within the team, and yence added to his driving skills, made for a powerful challenge to the championships, which he we must say, he looked a fighter for it every season from 94 to 2006-apart from 96where he arrived at ferrari
99-where he broke his leg, in a season where Hakkinen and mclaren made a tough job of it, the title was there for Schumacher to punish mclaren and mika, but he broke his leg-but 2000 came, job done

Fantastic chapter on Fangio and Ayrton Senna

[BMW_F1]

My top 5,

Senna
Clark
Prost
Fangio
Shumi

Shumi, cannot be up there with the top guns, because most of his career he had a dominant car and always a weak teammate.

[former champ]

Originally posted by LostProphet


Careful you don't fall off that high horse of yours and break something important.

the list is ****. I'm just pointing out the obvious. You want to act all oblivious, whatever suits.

[HP]

Originally posted by BMW_F1
My top 5,

Senna
Clark
Prost
Fangio
Shumi

Shumi, cannot be up there with the top guns, because most of his career he had a dominant car and always a weak teammate.

Placing drivers is always difficult. On your Schumi line. To me it's not about weak teammates. But teammate Barrichello for example was just too inconsistent to put up a season long fight. In certain races Barrichello certainly was better than MS, but over a season? Now when you go through the years, you'll find that there are very few pairings of which one of them won that years WDC were evenly matched. If we could do seasons in retro, but give every driver a 100% reliable car, we might see things more clear.

In the current state of F1, a consistent driver will be better rewarded, than a more on and off one. Let's take Barrichello again. IMO he easily could have won a WDC, if he could drive each and every race like he does usually at Silverstone. But even when many hyped him to be able to match MS at Ferrari, I was sure he wouldn't become WDC. Simply because he lacked consistency before. Same with DC. He was brilliant in certain races, but he couldn't put it together throughout a season. With todays cars that's just not good enough. In earlier times, car reliablity served a bit as equalizer. Now that car reliability is less and less a factor, we'll actually see more clearly the differences between a driver that happens into a masterful driver vs. one that can pull off a masterful drive at will.

I think since the AS/AP (exception the surprising FA/LH) pairing there is not one other pairing that you can't tell who is going to win the WDC within the team, in case the reliability is there. It has been exemplified with MS. The car was rather reliable, and the more dependable driver won. But for me that doesn't diminish MS career in any way. He demanded a reliable car, Ferrari delivered a fast and reliable. The results are history, bearing witness that being able to get the maximum on most of the races pays always off. Be your name Clark, Fangio, Prost, M.Schumacher, Senna, Stewart, to name a few (and in alphabetical order).

In all of this, the real standout for me is Jim Clark. The reason is the unreliable nature of the cars he drove. But when the car held up, Clark was usually on another level to the rest. More so than anyone else .. at least IMO.

Also a thought worth is your claim about the dominant car. Fangio for example and many in his time, tried to get the ride in the best car. Fangio made that happen, because of his clout as driver. MS made the same happen in a different way, again because of his clout as a driver. So in that aspect Fangio was as good as MS, or as bad as MS depending on your view what is good or bad about jumping to a race winning team, or being part of developing a team.

Anyay when we talk about drivers charisma, I think then it bears more clearly out, why people prefer certain drivers above others. That IMO is also why we see such an 'interesting' list posted by the TS. However there are only few F1 drivers that can claim, they have changed their home country (and beyond) in regards to F1 and racing in general. Maybe not direct a driver skill, but it is part to explain why Nelson Piquet Sr. is missing in the list above, but Ayrton Senna not.

Anyhow, my main point is that Schumi's dominance could have happened much earlier for another driver, if cars had been the same reliable as their today. had it been that way, then we'd read the exact same thing you wrote about other drivers from further in the past than Schumi.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Originally posted by BMW_F1
My top 5,

Senna
Clark
Prost
Fangio
Shumi

Shumi, cannot be up there with the top guns, because most of his career he had a dominant car and always a weak teammate.

****ing hell, who doesn't win without a dominant car? It's like you guys are intentionally stupid sometimes.

[Gary Davies]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld


****ing hell, who doesn't win without a dominant car? It's like you guys are intentionally stupid sometimes.

Just a suggestion, you understand...

[Ross Stonefeld]

I don't want those kind of people as my friends. As for influence, they are seemingly un saveable.

[SeanValen]

It's interesting also this list basically has Senna and Schumi, and they've made their names collectively across F1 through the last 3 decades, is it because their more recent, or perhaps the most exciting to recent memory, because to some us growing up, it seems Senna's legacy has been well drilled, he fact we visited Imola for over 10 years since his death, always kept Senna in peoples minds, in some way or another, he was the last great driver death, and it hasn't gotten lesser with time. Senna's personality and character was exciting for f1 fans, even Hamilton and Alonso, plus Schumacher have all menstioned him, Schumacher himself visited Senna's grave in his last GP at Brazil in 2006, and Schumi pretty much inherited the best driver tag after Senna, his career started at Spa 91, a race Senna won, and his last performance was in Senna's home GP, Brazil, his last big overtaking move was at the Senna S with Kimi, it's like those two were pre-destined. And both were perhaps flawed racing genuises to some, but that flaw being the win at all costs mentality, some fans loved that, but I think Schumacher got a harder time about it, since he didn't die, Senna taking out Prost in Japan 1990, but not admitting it until a year later, was some of the psychology MS had, but Senna did it first, when Schumacher did it, the sport was more a global tv monster, people who haven't seen f1 much, still remember Schumacher's on track fouls or the media's intepretation of it. Damon Hill and Jacque V played the media to Schumacher's disadvantage, Schumi though usually though got back to winning ways and answered on track, his reply was being the best driver while Hill and Jacques eventually start to lose again.

Schumacher made Ferrari a winning team simply by going there, and being the missing element they needed, and many fans had endured poor Ferrari success for a long time. Schumacher and Ferrari was a dream team, a whirlwind chapter in f1's history, forget the driving for a minute, Schumacher was villian, hero, villian and hero, the sports ambassodor, he commited some on track fouls like Senna, both him and Senna had a win against all costs mentality, some like this, some don't, but largely it made the sport exciting, the tangles and fights they put up gave the sport many moments. Senna is immortalised alongside Prost, and Senna's fights with Prost helped made Prost a household name, forget Prost's 4 titles, people loved their Mclaren years.


The nature of this list isn't all driving, it's about the drivers that made you talk more often then not that you personally can remember. Mostly everyone on this forum apart from some older folk didn't see Jim Clark race live, and they probabley were born after his death. Yet many f1 fans get into f1 proper, after Senna's death, and they go back and do research and say, wow this guy was special, plus Senna in a press conference sold you, he was a bit of a F1 poet, a gladiator living his passions on the centre stage. Because Schumacher is alive and well and didn't die in F1, and still competitive, and his retirement hasn't been that far off to wonder about a unlikely comeback, he's very fresh in fans minds still.

Some of these reasons I've talked about probabley is why Senna and Schumi will remain the popular ones for a while. Die Hard f1 fans will respect Clark more, maybe they need more time to look back at history, I didn't fully know of Clark's details, races and story when I started watching f1 many years ago, because I was fully into the ferrari winning era, didn't need to look back too often, but when I did, it was usually Senna/Mansell, Prost/young MS era

[Just]

I think is much better than anyone on this list, and deserves to be number 1. He's certainly better than , who's vastly overrated, always had the best car, and doesn't even deserve to be on the list.

-Just, providing forum posting templates since '97.

[Risil]

Originally posted by Spunout


Fantastic chapter on Fangio and Ayrton Senna

C'mon, asking Sean to go through a whole chapter on Senna without repeatedly mentioning Schumacher would be like having Rambo go easy on Viet Cong. Sure, it would be a novelty, it might even be more socially acceptable, but what are you left with? Just some muscle-bound, troubled hero, shorn of the thing he loves.

And anyone who said this is the worst Top 100 ever, you have obviously forgotten the MSN list a few months ago that appeared to place Tony Pond at #1.

[Gary Davies]

Originally posted by Just
I think is much better than anyone on this list, and deserves to be number 1. He's certainly better than , who's vastly overrated, always had the best car, and doesn't even deserve to be on the list.

-Just, providing forum posting templates since '97.

[giacomo]

Originally posted by giacomo

I wonder why they did not vote Hamilton on spot 1.

Well, before the recent disasters - Bahrain, Malaysia, Brazil, China - they would have.

Originally posted by Arion

No, they wouldn't. They're no as moronic as you'd like to believe.

But they are quite close, right?

[PassWind]

Originally posted by SeanValen



It's more subjective then that, there's more to Schumacher's career then his tally of titles, he did so many great drives, that if retired at the end of 2000, when he completed his mission to win with ferrari, he still would be up there with the best, because up until then, Michael was especially very driven. He didn't need to be the most successful driver to prove his driving skills, he already did that, no one was asking many questions of him, but winning with ferrari was important to him. When you think of Schumacher, you think of Spa 95, Hungary 98, Japan 2000, Spain 96, Spain 94-stuck in 5th gear to 2nd etc

The performances of a driver that impressed people. There's alot more quality in Jim Clark's career then say Mika Hakkinen, Jim Clark just was better, yet they both had titles, Even if you never saw Jim Clark race, if you read up on his career, what people said about him, his peers, what Senna said about him, you will put him alongside Schumacher, both were wet weather masters, especially great at Spa, it's more subjective then titles. Titles tell you that perhaps, you needed to be a bit lucky to stay alive and be in the right era to win the titles, I think Schumacher was born in the right era to get his titles, Senna and Roland died so he and others could continue, it's sad, but that's life, not Schumi's fault, someone had to play the tragic figure, it was Ayrton, Jim Clark was the leader of his generation, like Senna, died young, but did many impressive performances, he was quick in eveything, he was the first Schumi, born though in a dangerous era, I wouldn't of wanted to be foruming back in the 60s, every year or so almost a driver was dead.

Schumacher and Jim Clark, different eras. but great great talent. Titles are overatted to a extent when comparing different eras so further apart.

When the Formula One of today has gotten rid of tracks like Suzuka, the real challenge for the sport is making sure drivers are tested with rules and venues that allows them to showcase their talent, I don't think current f1 shows it as well as it should, the return to slicks in 2009 is a good move. The points system also these days is something that must be changed back to reward the winner more, it's changed the value of wins, and that's not right.

Yeah we get it, you read a book about Clark and think he is neat, enough already.

In front he was sublime, under pressure he wasn't and he also managed to kill himself racing. Some find it distastful but I put some merit in surviving as well.

The list of WDC is fine, maybe some subjectivity for those single WDC winners but other than that sounds about right.

[Galko877]

Originally posted by WOOT
From here. (credit to weirdNumber)
http://forum.planet-...=63168&start=0

1) Ayrton Senna
2) Michael Schumacher
3) Juan Manuel Fangio
4) Alain Prost
5) Jim Clark
6) Jackie Stewart
7) Kimi Raikkonen
8 ) Mika Hakkinen
9) Gilles Villeneuve
10) Niki Lauda
...
12) Alonso
...
15) Lewis Hamilton

Who votes for these??? You probably have guessed I am a fan of Lewis but he shouldn't be there. What is Kimi doing so high up? Why is the guy that beat MS twice so low compared to Kimi who never managed to beat him? Their relative orders should be Alonso over Kimi wherever they are on the list. Similarly why is Mika lower than Kimi?

Who cares? These "best of all times" lists are only good for stirring it. And if it was voted by fans then it's more a popularity list than anything else.

Edit: Not that pundits' lists are any better - usually.

[Yellowmc]

Originally posted by PassWind
In front he was sublime, under pressure he wasn't and he also managed to kill himself racing. Some find it distastful but I put some merit in surviving as well.

Steady on.

That's not just distasteful, it's simply an absurd thing to say.

Every driver has accidents, the difference is what would kill you back then, will simply give you a sore neck today.

[Gareth]

Originally posted by mursuka80


You founded a way to bash Kimi in this thread also.Good job

if saying 'Kimi isn't the 7th best driver of all time' or 'Kimi isn't as good as Alonso' is a 'bash' then things may have become a little too sensitive.

Seriously, anything worse than 7th of all time for kimi is bashing him? Suggesting that Alonso is better is bashing? Both seem like perfectly reasonable opinions to me.

Of course, I also think that thinking Kimi to be better than Alonso is perfectly reasonable. And I wouldn't consider that to be a 'bash' on Alonso.

It's not about having the 'right' opinion, there is no right opinion. It's just about having an opinion that isn't so outlandish that you're just obviously trying to have a 'bash' at a driver.

[as65p]

Originally posted by Yellowmc


Steady on.

That's not just distasteful, it's simply an absurd thing to say.

Every driver has accidents, the difference is what would kill you back then, will simply give you a sore neck today.

It also means that Kubica will should never make it very high on Passwinds list, even if he wins a few WDCs in the future.

Unless one thinks he controlled his Canada accident "on merit".

;)