Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 8 votes

Best F1 drivers since the new millennium


  • Please log in to reply
141 replies to this topic

#101 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 23,183 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 04 September 2013 - 10:28

Alonso isn't a mistake-prone driver at all, that's total bullshit as per usual.



Advertisement

#102 HopkinsonF1

HopkinsonF1
  • Member

  • 381 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:09

I've always had a soft spot for drivers with blinding one-lap pace, rather than the full package. So on that basis alone, here's my list:

 

Top tier:

  1. Hamilton
  2. Vettel
  3. Schumacher
  4. Raikkonen (circa 2005)

 

After that it's difficult to separate drivers, so in no particular order:

 

  • Maldonado (on a good day)
  • Trulli
  • Alonso
  • Hakkinen
  • Montoya
  • Webber
  • Rosberg


#103 DutchQuicksilver

DutchQuicksilver
  • Member

  • 6,314 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:11

Alonso has far more shunts than any of the other highly rated drivers.  From the standpoint of points, he lost the 2010 and 2012 title because of mistakes that Hamilton and Kimi just don't make.  Frankly, if Hamilton or Kimi has been driving for Ferrari those years then Red Bull would have 1 WDC and Ferrari 3 out of the last 6.

 

Kimi and Hamilton don't make those mistakes? Have you even watched the 2008 and 2011 season?


Edited by DutchQuicksilver, 04 September 2013 - 11:12.


#104 HopkinsonF1

HopkinsonF1
  • Member

  • 381 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:14

Kimi and Hamilton don't make those mistakes? Have you even watched the 2008 and 2011 season?

Or the 2010 season for that matter. Singapore and Italy spring to mind for Lewis.



#105 mzvztag

mzvztag
  • Member

  • 816 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:16

Or the 2010 season for that matter. Singapore and Italy spring to mind for Lewis.

 

And Singapore and Spa 2008 for Kimi...

 

Everybody makes mistakes from time to time but neither Alonso nor Kimi nor even Hamilton are mistake-prone drivers.


Edited by mzvztag, 04 September 2013 - 11:31.


#106 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 5,818 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:42

What are you talking about?!?

 

Canada 2010 where Button pushed Alonso off?

Or Spa 2010 where Barrichello damages his car?

Or Spa 2012 where Grosjean attempted to win the race by landing on other cars?

Or Japan 2012 what is, if anything Kimi's fault as he was the whole car length behind?

 

Your agenda is really becoming tiresome.

 

OK, you've listed 4 incidents, and in 2 of them Alonso was at least partly at fault.

 

Not clear what you are trying to prove.



#107 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:49

Or Japan 2012 what is, if anything Kimi's fault as he was the whole car length behind?

If he was a whole car length behind, they wouldn't have touched ;) 

If you want to proof Alonso doesn't make errors, that is a really bad example.


Edited by mnmracer, 04 September 2013 - 11:50.


#108 mzvztag

mzvztag
  • Member

  • 816 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:56

If he was a whole car length behind, they wouldn't have touched ;) 

If you want to proof Alonso doesn't make errors, that is a really bad example.

 

Kimi was not alongside by any means, the foremost part of his car was just near the rear edge of Alonso's rear tyre. Therefore it can't be his mistake at all.

Anyway, all the drivers make mistakes from time to time and my point is that Alonso is not a mistake prone driver. Nor is Kimi, nor is Hamilton.



#109 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:58

Kimi was not alongside by any means, the foremost part of his car was just near the rear edge of Alonso's rear tyre. Therefore it can't be his mistake at all.

Anyway, all the drivers make mistakes from time to time and my point is that Alonso is not a mistake prone driver. Nor is Kimi, nor is Hamilton.

Your latter conclusion does not make your former statement any less incorrect.



#110 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 04 September 2013 - 12:11

I'd definitely put Barrichello into top 10. He didn't have a very good shot at the WDC unlike Massa or Hakkinen, but he has very good longevity record since 2000. 11 wins, many podiums and a lot of seasons as a frontrunning driver. I'd take him definitely above Coulthard. I'd be tempted to take over Montoya, Webber, Massa and Hakkinen too, which means straight into seventh position behind Button. Hakkinen had only one decent season in the 2000s, so I am doubtful about adding him into top 10 at all. I see people put Webber above Barrichello, but imo it is because Webber is a more recent driver and more fresh in the minds of people.

 

Button v Barrichello is a good argument too. Who to put sixth. I know Button beat him to WDC, but Barrichello was past his prime at the time. The early 2000s Barrichello may have been at least as good/fast as Button.


Edited by sopa, 04 September 2013 - 12:12.


#111 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 04 September 2013 - 12:35

The likes of Trulli and Heidfeld are also interesting. They had a perennial midfielder career, which means they don't have the statistics to compete with some other drivers, but they were still doing fine where they were and have a very good longevity record too. I don't think I can include them into top 10 in this tight competition, but they are close and I'd be tempted to take them over the likes, who had maybe only a couple of good seasons in which they racked up good statistics - and then disappeared.



#112 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 17,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 04 September 2013 - 12:42

Button v Barrichello is a good argument too. Who to put sixth. I know Button beat him to WDC, but Barrichello was past his prime at the time. The early 2000s Barrichello may have been at least as good/fast as Button.

 

Even if you forget about Brawn and Button beating Barrichello to the WDC, it's still not really a contest in my opinion. Button won the same amount of races in 3 years at McLaren during Red Bull winning and sometimes dominated seasons, as Barrichello in 5 years at Ferrari during Ferrari winning and sometimes dominated seasons. And yes I do realize it's never as clear cut as that, but in principle this has some truth and says enough already.

 

I also don't believe the myth that Rubinho was past his prime in 2009. He was still very competitive at Williams and beat Hulkenberg and Maldonado with ease.


Edited by Lights, 04 September 2013 - 12:42.


#113 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 04 September 2013 - 12:50

Even if you forget about Brawn and Button beating Barrichello to the WDC, it's still not really a contest in my opinion. Button won the same amount of races in 3 years at McLaren during Red Bull winning and sometimes dominated seasons, as Barrichello in 5 years at Ferrari during Ferrari winning and sometimes dominated seasons. And yes I do realize it's never as clear cut as that, but in principle this has some truth and says enough already.

 

I also don't believe the myth that Rubinho was past his prime in 2009. He was still very competitive at Williams and beat Hulkenberg and Maldonado with ease.

 

Well, except for Nigel Mansell I don't know any driver of recent decades, who had his best season in F1 at the age of 37 or later. Barrichello's problem was that ever since 1999 he was never the (official or unofficial) lead driver of a team. He beat Hulkenberg and Maldonado, but those blokes were hardly performing very well at the time I guess? For prime Barrichello see 2003, when he matched Schumacher in qualifying 8-8. Which I think was a greater achievement than even the 10-7 against BUtton in 2009.

 

Yeah, Button got some race wins in McLaren. But the problem in early 2000s was that Schumacher-Ferrari was very much flawless, which didn't allow anyone else to win unlike Button's McLaren years. For that see 2004 Button's BAR season. Good season, but no wins, since Ferrari and particularly Schumacher was perfect. Meanwhile Button got wins in McLaren in the wet, because others couldn't capitalize on the opportunity that well.

 

I wanted to say something about Hakkinen too. The more I think about it, the more I realize there isn't really a case of putting him into top 10. Let's see Coulthard v Hakkinen. In the 2000s DC outscored Hakkinen 138-126 (based on 2000 and 2001). After that Hakkinen quit and DC continued his career, sometimes impressively (2005 RBR season). How should I Hakkinen rate above Coulthard in the 2000s?


Edited by sopa, 04 September 2013 - 13:01.


#114 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 9,302 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 04 September 2013 - 13:16

Ok, and Kimi is ahead on that list in comparison with Massa. Why is Montoya ahead of Kimi? I fail to see relation with Massa and Montoya. What is that specific criteria, please name it.

Kimi was a better driver compared to Massa before and after their time together at Ferrari.

Kubica never won a WDC but Button did, however my opinion is that Kubica was the better driver.

 

When Montoya and Kimi raced against each other and against Shumi and drove for different teams, he was the better driver. Is my opinion and you are obviously entitled to yours.



#115 Trust

Trust
  • Member

  • 5,153 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 04 September 2013 - 13:23

Kimi was a better driver compared to Massa before and after their time together at Ferrari.

Kubica never won a WDC but Button did, however my opinion is that Kubica was the better driver.

 

When Montoya and Kimi raced against each other and against Shumi and drove for different teams, he was the better driver. Is my opinion and you are obviously entitled to yours.

Of course, no problem with that. It was just that I was very interested by which criteria you put Montoya ahead of Kimi and still didn't got the answer. But everything is clear now. No need to discuss this anymore.



#116 PNSD

PNSD
  • Member

  • 3,276 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 04 September 2013 - 14:00

 

Kubica never won a WDC but Button did, however my opinion is that Kubica was the better driver.

 

 

What is this based on exactly? 

 

You don't just believe he is better, there are obviously reasons. So what are they? 



#117 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 17,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 04 September 2013 - 14:03

Well, except for Nigel Mansell I don't know any driver of recent decades, who had his best season in F1 at the age of 37 or later. Barrichello's problem was that ever since 1999 he was never the (official or unofficial) lead driver of a team. He beat Hulkenberg and Maldonado, but those blokes were hardly performing very well at the time I guess? For prime Barrichello see 2003, when he matched Schumacher in qualifying 8-8. Which I think was a greater achievement than even the 10-7 against BUtton in 2009.

 

Yeah, Button got some race wins in McLaren. But the problem in early 2000s was that Schumacher-Ferrari was very much flawless, which didn't allow anyone else to win unlike Button's McLaren years. For that see 2004 Button's BAR season. Good season, but no wins, since Ferrari and particularly Schumacher was perfect. Meanwhile Button got wins in McLaren in the wet, because others couldn't capitalize on the opportunity that well.

 

Being past your prime or having had your best season behind you are two different things though. Some Button fans argue 2004 was his best season, so according to that he's been past his prime ever since? I don't notice it when I see him driving now, and neither did I with Rubens in 2009. 

 

Being past your prime means that you've lost some of the drive or motivation, like noticeable with Coulthard at Red Bull in 2008, or that you've physically decreased in performance, like perhaps could be arguable for Schumacher after a 3 year break, but even that is not certain.

 

He beat his teammates at Williams so they were hardly performing very well, 'you guess?' Lol sorry, that's a weak attempt at an argument.

Barrichello might've faced Schumacher but Button hasn't exactly had the easiest teammate in Hamilton either. Over their careers, Button achieved just as much or more while driving considerably fewer seasons with great material, so I don't see why it's a toss-up for you.



#118 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 17,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 04 September 2013 - 14:07

What is this based on exactly? 

 

You don't just believe he is better, there are obviously reasons. So what are they? 

 

In my opinion Kubica had the potential to achieve more than Button has, by being less prone to weekend-to-weekend inconsistency. He had the potential to be seen up there with the very best instead of a bracket lower. But in truth we'll never know.



#119 Zesus

Zesus
  • Member

  • 958 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 04 September 2013 - 14:20

  1. Schumacher
  2. Raikkonen
  3. Alonso
  4. Vettel
  5. Hamilton
  6. Montoya
  7. Button
  8. Kubica
  9. Button
  10. Bottas, Ricciardo ( I belive they have a future)


Advertisement

#120 revlec

revlec
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 04 September 2013 - 14:48

 

:up:

It's amazing how journos can distort perception and reality as you can read in this thread that Hamilton's reputation is high because of 2007. :drunk:

 

You may already know the stats below, but I bet many don't.

 

Since 2007(the year VET and HAM entered the sport), the stats of the top 3(HAM, VET, ALO) look like this:

 

Wins

1) Vettel        31

2) Hamilton   22

3) Alonso      17

 

Poles

1) Vettel        39

2) Hamilton   31

3) Alonso       7

 

Podiums

1) Vettel        54

1) Hamilton   54

3) Alonso      53

 

WDC

1) Vettel         3

2) Hamilton    1

3) Alonso       0

 

http://www.statsf1.com/it/pilotes.aspx

 

You only need to compare their machinery....

 

Alonso, R-28 y RB-29

Vettel, four rockets in a row.. and he even won in the last race in 2010 and 2012.

 

:rotfl:

 

 

Please don't include you post into mine.. It could be confusing for people reading it, and they could think I wrote it.

  Click the "edit" button to  correct your post(the bolded part  of this post) and exclude it from mine.

 

In response to your post, with a more competitive team mate(like Hamilton and Vettel(in 2010 and 2012), Alonso statistics could have been even worse. 



#121 GiancarloF1

GiancarloF1
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 04 September 2013 - 16:41

 

I haven't given a gigantic amount of thought to this but for the record here's my ranking:

 

1. M Schumacher
2. Alonso
3. Vettel
4. Hamilton
5. Raikkonen
6. Hakkinen
7. Button
8. Montoya
9. Kubica
10. Webber
 
11. Massa
12. Barrichello
13. Coulthard
14. N Rosberg
15. R Schumacher
16. Heidfeld
17. Trulli
18. Fisichella
19. Hulkenberg
20. J Villeneuve
 
Then of course some drivers in here had some ups and downs and would deserve higher or lower rankings depending on what part of their careers you look at. Overall from 2000 onwards this is right about how I'd rate them.

 

 

Damnit, there is really no love for Fisi in this board. He has beaten Button (7th on your list), Massa (11th on your list) and Ralf (15th on your list) despite being rated at the lowly 18th. Also what did the likes of Trulli and Heidfeld did to be placed higher? Kubica's 9th is also big, he didn't do that well, and was matched by Heidfeld.

 

Btw. Hakkinen is also too high. He is great, but his prime happened before 2000, his results after the millenium doesn't justify 6th. And villeneuve isn't that bad if we consider the entire carreers.



#122 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 04 September 2013 - 21:36

Being past your prime or having had your best season behind you are two different things though. Some Button fans argue 2004 was his best season, so according to that he's been past his prime ever since? I don't notice it when I see him driving now, and neither did I with Rubens in 2009. 

 

Being past your prime means that you've lost some of the drive or motivation, like noticeable with Coulthard at Red Bull in 2008, or that you've physically decreased in performance, like perhaps could be arguable for Schumacher after a 3 year break, but even that is not certain.

 

He beat his teammates at Williams so they were hardly performing very well, 'you guess?' Lol sorry, that's a weak attempt at an argument.

Barrichello might've faced Schumacher but Button hasn't exactly had the easiest teammate in Hamilton either. Over their careers, Button achieved just as much or more while driving considerably fewer seasons with great material, so I don't see why it's a toss-up for you.

 

Yeah ok, Barrichello wasn't exactly poor in 2009 indeed. 

Just if we put it in such way. If in some alternative universe Barrichello v2002 was paired in a team-mate battle with Button v2009, then seriously I am not sure, who would come out on top. Barrichello has a chance there, better chance than he actually did in 2009. "Past the prime" - we are talking about tiny margins here. Barrichello ran Button very close in 2009, but if he was at Button's age, with a tiny bit more energy and additional consistency the intra-team dynamic would have been a bit different instead of Rubens being a "brave grand old man" giving a run for the young man's money.



#123 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 04 September 2013 - 22:07

When Montoya and Kimi raced against each other and against Shumi and drove for different teams, he was the better driver.

 

What movie you say that stuff happened in? :drunk:



#124 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 23,879 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 04 September 2013 - 22:51

In particular years, he was, or he at least appeared to be. Note that in those years the gaps between teams were bigger and he did have great material most of the time. I'm basing most of this on memory though and obviously that does stretch to the Walrus Williams, so I also remember how that wasn't a poor car. Montoya never drove a poor car. The Honda RA107 was a poor car. The Walrus Williams was still a faster car than the much-praised BAR at the start of the 2004 season. Seeing Montoya's attitude and temperament, I don't know why he went to McLaren in the first place as that clearly wasn't working. But he still quit the sport, not just the team. 

If I compare that to Button's career, or Rosberg, or Trulli I don't see how people rate him above them. But like I said, could just be different criteria.

 

the FW26 a faster car than the BAR?  Not over the balance whole of the season it wasn't.  Generally it was, marginally, in the opening fly-away races.

 

In the time he was in F1 I rated him above Button and Trulli.  I'd still rate him above Trulli, and Rosberg.  Of course JB has gone on from strength to strength since JPM left.

 

As for criteria, I'm not sure 'never drove a poor car' is a genuine reason to dismiss him.  Driving a poor car isn't a badge of honour or a free pass to greatness afterall.



#125 zack1994

zack1994
  • Member

  • 2,368 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 04 September 2013 - 23:05

Damnit, there is really no love for Fisi in this board. He has beaten Button (7th on your list), Massa (11th on your list) and Ralf (15th on your list) despite being rated at the lowly 18th. Also what did the likes of Trulli and Heidfeld did to be placed higher? Kubica's 9th is also big, he didn't do that well, and was matched by Heidfeld.

 

Btw. Hakkinen is also too high. He is great, but his prime happened before 2000, his results after the millenium doesn't justify 6th. And villeneuve isn't that bad if we consider the entire carreers.

Yeah when button was 21 and no where near the driver he is today. 



#126 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,473 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 04 September 2013 - 23:13

Damnit, there is really no love for Fisi in this board. He has beaten Button (7th on your list), Massa (11th on your list) and Ralf (15th on your list) despite being rated at the lowly 18th.

 

So where should we place Kovalainen?



#127 GiancarloF1

GiancarloF1
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 05 September 2013 - 16:24

Yeah when button was 21 and no where near the driver he is today. 

 

The Button of "today" is barely better than the one of 2001. Driving a car not within' his comfort zone was always his real problem. Team-rookie Perez more often than not outpaced him on Sundays, but his lack of race intelligencie (due to age probably) and luck restrain him of being a true benchmark of the car's capablities.

 

With that said, Fisi (and many other drivers) didn't have the chance to shine in a car that is truly to his/their liking, and if this list is really about driving skills, he should be mentioned at the very least in the same page of Button, Massa or Ralf, all of whom he beat convincingly. Even if Button improved from 2001 (sure he did), he is still no better, as his deficit was really big back then.

 

 

So where should we place Kovalainen?

 

Kovalainen is another good example of being underrated and having no proper chance. His stint at McLaren was even worse than Fisi's at Renault, but with those hideous heavy load strategies he was handicapped big time. He has beaten Trulli in that what's their name team, a Trulli who had been rated as a top 10 in many list (IMHO he has no business there). 2007 wasn't truly a benchmark against Fisi, as Fisi and Renault simply didn't care about each other after Canada/US GPs. Fisi was not even the shadow of his true self in the rear end of that season.



#128 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 17,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 05 September 2013 - 17:31

the FW26 a faster car than the BAR?  Not over the balance whole of the season it wasn't.  Generally it was, marginally, in the opening fly-away races.

 

If you read carefully, I didn't claim anything else.

 

In the time he was in F1 I rated him above Button and Trulli.  I'd still rate him above Trulli, and Rosberg.  Of course JB has gone on from strength to strength since JPM left.

 

As for criteria, I'm not sure 'never drove a poor car' is a genuine reason to dismiss him.  Driving a poor car isn't a badge of honour or a free pass to greatness afterall.

 

Not claiming it is a reason for anything like that. But it can contribute to things like your first sentence. He never looked truly bad or was forgotten because he always had the material to fight up front. It creates an image.



#129 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 9,216 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 05 September 2013 - 20:41

Team-rookie Perez more often than not outpaced him on Sundays,

Please, please, please get yourself over to the JB/SP thread and post the 6 (or more?) races you're talking about.  I can't promise not to take the piss if you do, obviously.



#130 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 06 September 2013 - 02:00

Schumacher
Vettel
Raikkonen
Alonso
Montoya
Hamilton
Button
Rosberg
Coulthard
Fisichella
Massa
Webber
Kubica
Heidfeld
Trulli

#131 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 06 September 2013 - 02:46

The fact is he makes more of these kinds of mistakes than the other top drivers and that just one or two fewer, and Ferrari would have won WDCs in 2010 and 2012.

 

Similarly, Red Bull had an inferior car for half the season in 2012.  Do you think his shunt in Malaysia was someone else's fault too?

 

1. To claim that Alonso makes more mistakes than Hamilton and Raikkonen is laughable, have you never watched 2008 or 2011?

 

2. Red Bull had an inferior car to Ferrari at any point in 2012? Bloody hell, what season were you watching?



#132 mzvztag

mzvztag
  • Member

  • 816 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 06 September 2013 - 21:33

1. To claim that Alonso makes more mistakes than Hamilton and Raikkonen is laughable, have you never watched 2008 or 2011?

 

2. Red Bull had an inferior car to Ferrari at any point in 2012? Bloody hell, what season were you watching?

 

He almost certainly wanted to say that Red Bull was for a port of the season inferior to Lotus   ;)



#133 Tron

Tron
  • Member

  • 614 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 06 September 2013 - 21:38

In no specific order... Schumacher, Kimi, Lewis, Vettel, Alonso. That's it.



#134 Alexandros

Alexandros
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 10 September 2013 - 02:34

I take "since the new millenium" to mean, those who drove from 2000 forward, and not those who entered F1 from 2000+.

 

With that note, here is my rating, in no particular order:

 

MS, Hamilton, Trulli, Alonso, Kimi, Rosberg, Vettel, Hulk, Mika

 

A small justification is in order:

 

1) MS: He was the most successful guy in the grid, not through sheer speed but by being the greatest all around package. His response times was suboptimal. His racing craft was lacking. His spatial awareness was problematic. His driving style consisted by being forceful on the tires every single lap - something that was "ok" in the older generation tires, but not OK with tires like 2005 or the new ones. What made him great was the determination to win at all costs, something that is also a negative trait. Few drivers have such a single minded focus as MS had.

 

2) Hamilton: Currently the fastest man in F1 over one lap, although he lacks mentally and technically to be the best all around package. His race speed is extracted by tire abuse, something that ensures that other drivers like rosberg or button can be right at his tail within a few laps of him opening a gap and destroying his tires. His racing craft was lacking but improving. He still depends too much on the other guy to avoid him. He doesn't have a single-minded focus to win, but rather results are accumulated due to his doing his best.

 

3) Trulli: Probably the fastest man in a qualify that F1 has ever seen. The ability to replicate a qualify performance over a race distance is of course impossible, therefore he was getting hammered for going backwards or holding up faster cars in the race - which was normal, given where he positioned inferior cars. He beat Alonso in 2004 fair and square - and is the only driver to have ever done so, except Hamilton (who "beat him" on equal points). He didn't have a strong vision of winning / becoming champion and thus his performance never translated into great success. He also never got into the right car, at the right time. Ferrari, instead of Toyota, might have been a far better option for him. 

 

4) Alonso: Best all around package - with minor weakness in absolute speed, racecraft and work ethics. He is extremely determined to win and has a win-at-all-costs attitude which is both good and bad. His mental state is somewhat fragile when things don't go to plan. His vision of winning is what pulls him through and allows him to deliver a consistent title-challenge.

 

5) Kimi: Immense talent / pure-no-BS speed. If he was able to adapt to the harder tires of the last few years during qualify, he'd be the absolute race/qualify package. The best racer / spatial awareness / reactions when racing wheel-to-wheel, by a very large margin over the others. Unlike Alonso / MS / Hamilton, his race speed is not dependent on squeezing the tires, but rather by opening up his lines - leading to greater speeds while cornering. This allows him to be much more consistent on the long-run than simply chewing the tires and experiencing degrading performance like the aforementioned drivers. Wide tracks with runoff which can be taken with wider lines are his best for this reason - and usually he is untouchable there. He has a huge hunger for win -nothing else satisfies him except the win- but he doesn't have the single minded focus to envision success in the way that MS, Vettel and Alonso do. It's not like if he doesn't win 5 titles that he would have failed in life (that's how the other 3 guys actually think and operate). His success is a result of his speed, consistency and ability to stay out of trouble through superior racecraft, rather than an overarching vision of enjoying glory & success. His 2003 title challenge, in a year old Mclaren chassis, is the most mind blowing title challenge in F1 in decades (the guy with the 3rd fastest car almost winning the championship and losing it due to car failure in Nirburgring).

 

6) Rosberg: Excellent all around package and brilliant speed. Beat MS for 3 seasons and would be up there with Hamilton if not for some problems, team orders etc. You can't do that if you don't have tremendous speed. People won't notice him until he has a good car that allows him to win more. Rosberg lacks the vision and determination of MS, Vettel and Alonso and his results would only come as a byproduct of his speed and consistency.

 

7) Vettel: Tremendous speed in qualify and race. Easily among the the best. However his will to win and succeed, and the determination to win at all costs is surpassed by no-one. That's not to imply he is ruthless but rather that it is his life purpose to be the best he can in F1 - and anything less is a failure for him. Few drivers can compete with such levels of determination and vision. It is this type of vision that pulls everything together and makes it happen. 

 

8) Hulk: He's shone in inferior cars, a mark of someone who's truly great performance-wise. His mental attitude will be assessed in years to come since he can't really work on a winning vision without winning equipment. 

 

9) Hakkinen: Extremely fast in qualify and race and could hold a vision of being WDC and follow through it - as long as the vision was believable (having a good car makes it believable). It was then that he stepped it up and could deliver his 2x WDC. Very fair and intelligent racer.

 

Conclusion: There are many fast drivers with unique traits and combination of traits (+ and - in various areas), with the most successful being those who have a huge focus and determination. These are those who are waking up and sleeping with only one thought in their mind: How to become world champions - again and again. There are three drivers that have this property. MS, Alonso and Vettel. There are also a couple that could develop that property once they realize that the car could allow them to become champions (eg Hakkinen).

 

Currently, Alonso's ability to realistically envision the WDC is hampered by the apparent success of Vettel. Thus his own dream is being destroyed, losing his faith in his vision and subsequently becoming disappointed. Other drivers, like Kimi and Hamilton, for example, achieve their long-term WDC results, not as a result of their long-term focus and vision but rather as an accumulation of points that is the result of their race-to-race performances and hunger to win. 



#135 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 4,954 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 10 September 2013 - 02:59

Alonso has far more shunts than any of the other highly rated drivers. From the standpoint of points, he lost the 2010 and 2012 title because of mistakes that Hamilton and Kimi just don't make. Frankly, if Hamilton or Kimi has been driving for Ferrari those years then Red Bull would have 1 WDC and Ferrari 3 out of the last 6.


The wah? Hamilton not making errors? Did you watch F1 between '08 and '11?

He lost 2010 due to consecutive errors at Italy and Singapore. And 2011, oh boy, errors at every second race. Monaco 2011 he was involved in every accident that day. Crashed on the final lap at Italy 2009, too.

#136 sheepgobba

sheepgobba
  • Member

  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 10 September 2013 - 09:20

I think a fitting title would 'Which drive best utilised their machinery' In this sense I would have Seb as first followed by Fernando and Lewis as the top 3. 



#137 InfectedPumpkin

InfectedPumpkin
  • Member

  • 535 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 10 September 2013 - 09:31

Alonso, Hamilton, Raikkonen, Kubica.



#138 thuGG

thuGG
  • Member

  • 2,177 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 10 September 2013 - 12:27

I didn't put them in any particular order (because it's hard):

 

Alonso, Raikkonen, Hamilton, Vettel, Kubica, Rosberg, Schumacher, Hakkinen, Button, Montoya



#139 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 13,725 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 10 September 2013 - 12:59

Just for reference point.

 

F1 race wins since 2000.

1. Schumacher M  56
2. Alonso        32
3. Vettel        31
4. Hamilton      22
5. Raikkonen     20
6. Button        15
7. Barrichello   11
=. Massa         11
9. Webber         9
10. Coulthard     7
==. Montoya       7
12. Hakkinen      6
==. Schumacher R  6

Then also Fisichella, Rosberg (both 3), Trulli, Kubica, Kovalainen, Maldonado (all 1).

Given equal cars does anybody really think that Schumacher would have beaten Montoya seven times out of every eight races ? It seems clear to me that Schu, Fred, Seb and Lewis are in a class of their own, (since 2000) with the rest playing a support role. 



Advertisement

#140 squall1981

squall1981
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 10 September 2013 - 13:13

1) schmacher - obvious reasons

2) Vettel - imo best driver since MSC

3) Alonso -  best all round driver, not as fast as vettel but great driver

4) Kimi - super fast deserves faster car

5) Hakkinen - another fast fin

6) Hamilton - fast driver but doesn't maximise what the car can do (2012 and 2007 were the best cars but didn't win either year) also been behind Alonso for the past 4 years despite driving faster cars

7) Button - most recent british world champion, beat Hamilton over  3 years on points but behind him because his career won't be as good when they both retire imo.

8)Hill - world champion

9)rosbger/webber/massa - won nothing but better than most



#141 1Devil1

1Devil1
  • Member

  • 5,848 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 10 September 2013 - 15:19

I take "since the new millenium" to mean, those who drove from 2000 forward, and not those who entered F1 from 2000+.

 

With that note, here is my rating, in no particular order:

 

MS, Hamilton, Trulli, Alonso, Kimi, Rosberg, Vettel, Hulk, Mika

 

A small justification is in order:

 

1) MS: He was the most successful guy in the grid, not through sheer speed but by being the greatest all around package. His response times was suboptimal. His racing craft was lacking. His spatial awareness was problematic. His driving style consisted by being forceful on the tires every single lap - something that was "ok" in the older generation tires, but not OK with tires like 2005 or the new ones. What made him great was the determination to win at all costs, something that is also a negative trait. Few drivers have such a single minded focus as MS had.

 

 

 

What? You put him on spot one most of your text is about negative aspects? Race craft lacking, response time suboptimal, did you just watch his comeback. MS had by far the best race craft in his generation, even in 2006 this was his strongest point. I don't if you are joking. He was the complete package only with determination you will not become a dominant force in F1. 



#142 Alexandros

Alexandros
  • Member

  • 2,069 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 11 September 2013 - 02:55

What? You put him on spot one most of your text is about negative aspects? Race craft lacking, response time suboptimal, did you just watch his comeback. MS had by far the best race craft in his generation, even in 2006 this was his strongest point. I don't if you are joking. He was the complete package only with determination you will not become a dominant force in F1. 

 

Yes, I saw his racing career, incl. the comeback. What racecraft are you talking about? Ramming other people and colliding with them all the time? Or nearly putting Rubens on the wall and saying "oh, yes, I didn't realize how tight it was".

 

Even in his dominant ferrari days, when for some reason he started from the back or further back, he was known to have contacts, prompting the creation of a thread like "poor mikey can't drive from the behind" (or something to that effect) - something like 10 years ago, in this forum.

 

I said he was the greatest all around package, not only that he had the best determination. However he was not the fastest and his weakest point was reflex times/racecraft. His biggest strength was his determination. His second biggest strength was the ability to lap continuously on good times, by maximizing tire consumption - something that only worked as far as the rubbers were hard. For example in mid-2003 when, after the barcelona tests, Barichello chose as the future direction for bridgestone the softer compounds, barichello excelled and schumi was nowhere (races like silverstone). Then they reverted the compounds to hard so that Michael could drive again, as he knew. Another big strength of Michael was his attention to detail - to optimize everything that could be optimized in order to gain time on track. From his own weight (losing kilograms to put it into ballast in the bottom of the car - as far back as the late 90s) to things like changing braking bias per corner etc, asking your mechanic* every lap on which parts of the lap you are losing time etc. If you are the fastest, you don't need to do these things. But not being the fastest makes you innovative to compensate. And this was a strong point for him. Actually his modus operandi to improve every peripheral aspect so that he could gain an advantage, changed the way modern drivers operate - and things that he did are now considered "standard".

 

* Andrea Stella understood the difference in quality between an innately quick driver and a driver who strives to be quick by doing all sort of things when he realized that Kimi was going fast anyway without getting advice on sector parts.