23 replies to this topic

[HistoryFan]

World Champions had different kind of team mates. We had ones like Barrichello, Fisichella or perhaps now Webber.
Then we had World Champions whose team mates were also World Champions, look to Prost's team mates or them from Damon Hill.

But there are some, which are not so often discussed.

What about Alain Prost and Keke Rosberg in 1986? Why was Rosberg so bad? Was he out of motivation? Was Prost so much better? Are there any quotes from Rosberg about this topic?

What about Fagioli's role at Alfa Romeo's team in 1950? Any quotes about that?

What about Jack Brabham against Bruce McLaren in 1959 and 1960? Seems that Brabham was really much better than McLaren...

[Tim Murray]

What about Alain Prost and Keke Rosberg in 1986? Why was Rosberg so bad? Was he out of motivation? Was Prost so much better? Are there any quotes from Rosberg about this topic?

As I understand it Rosberg arrived at McLaren to find that John Barnard had very set theories about how F1 cars should be set up to handle. This produced a car which was very suited to Prost's driving style but not to Rosberg's, and Keke found it difficult if not impossible to persuade McLaren to give him a car set up to handle the way he wanted it to.

[Tim Murray]

... and see also these earlier threads:

Rosberg's switch to McLaren

Keke Rosberg and McLaren

[HistoryFan]

Thank you.

[D-Type]

A difficult question because it is largely a question of opinion rather than fact.

By 1950 Fagioli was past his prime and making up for lack of sheer pace with experience. He was slower than Farina and Fangio but that was his role in the team - to provide support even to the extent of handing his car over to one of the lead drivers.

In 1978 Ronnie Peterson was arguably faster than Mario Andretti but not as consistent. Again his team role was to support Andretti. The same could be said for Villeneuve and Scheckter in 1979.

Brabham was a better driver than McLaren (in my opinion). Some websites say that McLaren was the better driver as he scored more points for Cooper - but they totally ignore the fact that he drove Coopers for a longer period than Brabham and that in his time with them Brabham won two World Championships. That says more about the ability of the website compilers than it does about that of the drivers.

In 1955 Fangio was a better driver than Moss - according to Moss. But by 1957??

[David McKinney]

Some websites say that McLaren was the better driver as he scored more points for Cooper - but they totally ignore the fact that he drove Coopers for a longer period than Brabham

Let's see - 1955-61: six seasons. 1959-65: six seasons
Unless of course you mean McLaren drove works Coopers in F1 for longer

[faaaz]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Rosberg quoted saying (along the lines of) of him thinking he was the fastest driver in the world, until he raced with Prost.

[D-Type]

Let's see - 1955-61: six seasons. 1959-65: six seasons
Unless of course you mean McLaren drove works Coopers in F1 for longer

I don't know - I didn't feel the website worth bookmarking. I assume that is what the website compiler based his figures on.

[Tim Murray]

I don't really feel that statistics prove anything here, but for what it's worth, Brabham drove for Cooper in 35 races, scoring 84 points. McLaren drove for Cooper in 62 races, scoring 136½ points. These stats are based only on World Championship races, and don't include races where the F2 category was a separate event within the main race.

[Bauble]

Who was best when both drove for McLaren, Senna or Prost?

Webber would seem to be as 'fast' as Vettel over a lap, but not so together as a driver.

With Moss and Fangio you had two of the best drivers ever, and Juan won five Championships and Stirling none.

Gilles Villenueve never won a F1 World Championship, while Jody Schecter did.

Nuvolari had no equal. Then or ever.

A few facts mixed with personal opinion, bound to provoke discussion, but what conclusions will be drawn?

Here we go again .........................................

Edited by Bauble, 26 October 2011 - 13:36.

[D-Type]

~
Nuvolari had no equal. Then or ever.

A few facts mixed with personal opinion, bound to provoke discussion, but what conclusions will be drawn?

Here we go again .........................................

Varzi?

[Bauble]

Varzi?

Same to you, mate!!

[Eric Dunsdon]

Varzi?

Very nearly, but not quite, in my opinion. Certainly a top tenner and one of the all time greats.

[Lee Nicolle]

Who was best when both drove for McLaren, Senna or Prost?

Webber would seem to be as 'fast' as Vettel over a lap, but not so together as a driver.

With Moss and Fangio you had two of the best drivers ever, and Juan won five Championships and Stirling none.

Gilles Villenueve never won a F1 World Championship, while Jody Schecter did.

Nuvolari had no equal. Then or ever.

A few facts mixed with personal opinion, bound to provoke discussion, but what conclusions will be drawn?

Here we go again .........................................

In my opinion Prost was better than Senna, he was more of a sportsman. A more complete driver,,, most of the time.
Mark has been the last 2 years normally a more consistent driver than Vettel, but lousy starts and lousy calls from the team have hampered him a lot. Vettel is faster though in qualifying and occoasionally on a race lap. But would not come back through the field like Webber has far too often. Mark has the maturity if not the absolute outright speed

[Spaceframe]

As the reason for Fagioli's inclusion in the 1950-51 Alfa Romeo team, the most likely explanation was that he was a known quantity, and he was still alive, as opposed to former Alfa factory drivers like Varzi and Wimille. Of course running the three F´s might also have been to the marketing department's liking.

[ellrosso]

I'd agree with you re Prost Vs Senna Lee. I always thought Prost the complete race driver. When I first saw him in action at Adelaide in 1985 I was really impressed by his effortless speed - so smooth, yet right up there or thereabouts. Re Webber, its interesting that Mark had the most fastest laps by far last season, so nothing wrong with his race pace per se.

[ensign14]

Nuvolari had no equal. Then or ever.

As a team-mate, Rosemeyer? 10 Grande Epreuves in 2 years, TN only had three. They barely overlapped though.

The more I read about the 1930s, though, the more I think Caracciola has been under-rated all these years...had he not had his leg-break I wonder whether anyone would have seen him in the latter half of the decade.

Although I reckon Nuvolari drove the greatest race ever...

[stevewf1]

A difficult question because it is largely a question of opinion rather than fact.

By 1950 Fagioli was past his prime and making up for lack of sheer pace with experience. He was slower than Farina and Fangio but that was his role in the team - to provide support even to the extent of handing his car over to one of the lead drivers.

In 1978 Ronnie Peterson was arguably faster than Mario Andretti but not as consistent. Again his team role was to support Andretti. The same could be said for Villeneuve and Scheckter in 1979.

Brabham was a better driver than McLaren (in my opinion). Some websites say that McLaren was the better driver as he scored more points for Cooper - but they totally ignore the fact that he drove Coopers for a longer period than Brabham and that in his time with them Brabham won two World Championships. That says more about the ability of the website compilers than it does about that of the drivers.

In 1955 Fangio was a better driver than Moss - according to Moss. But by 1957??

I've also read that Andretti was given the #1 role because he was the one who helped Lotus develop a competitive car after that low period they went through in the mid-70s.

Edited by stevewf1, 20 January 2012 - 12:10.

[ensign14]

Can anyone point out a race in 1978 where Peterson was unarguably faster than Andretti?

[alansart]

Can anyone point out a race in 1978 where Peterson was unarguably faster than Andretti?

Quickest in Qualifying: Andretti 11 - Peterson 3

Highest finishing position (when both finished): Andretti 7 - Peterson 1

[ensign14]

Highest finishing position (when both finished): Andretti 7 - Peterson 1

And that 1 would be at South Africa where Andretti was ahead of Ronnie all the way until the last lap (didn't Mario run out of fuel?).

[as65p]

Can anyone point out a race in 1978 where Peterson was unarguably faster than Andretti?

Zandvoort, but Andretti had a broken exhaust, so... Hockenheim is a candidate too, Peterson lead at the start but let Andretti through soon.

Neither of them "unarguably", arguably. It's a bit hard to find a clear cut case when Ronnie honoured his role as no. 2 each and every time the whole year.

I'm saying all that as an Andretti fan (my first racing hero). As far as I can see, we'll never know what would have happened if they were allowed to race and had the same equipment all year, and why must we? My guess is that Andretti would still have won but it's nothing more than a guess.

[ensign14]

I think Andretti's style was surely more suited to ground effect than Peterson's. And although Ronnie played second fiddle he was scarcely near Mario. Even his wins were inherited to some degree.

[LittleChris]

Austria was hardly inherited, pole ( even though Mario had the latest aero suspension pieces available during practice ) , win and fastest lap with Mario throwing it off the road at the 2nd corner having already dropped a place to Reutemann.

Agree that Ronnie pretty much inherited South Africa but if Mario had've won, it also would've been inherited from Patrese's Arrows ( and I think Lauda's Brabham ).