198 replies to this topic

[lbennie]

"The only way Vettel could possibly get away, legacy wise, from being beaten by Riccardo this season, would be if Riccardo goes on to become one of the greatest drivers of all time."

 

Exactly.

 

I disagree,

Alonso was beaten by hamilton in his first year and hamilton hasn't gone on to become one of the greats, yet alonso's legacy seems healthier than ever.

[Thomas99]

I disagree,

Alonso was beaten by hamilton in his first year and hamilton hasn't gone on to become one of the greats, yet alonso's legacy seems healthier than ever.

 

Hamilton is absolutely one of the greats. Maybe not of all time, but he's the only driver in the spot currently i'd consider rating above Alonso. They're still the two best drivers around.

Edited by Thomas99, 08 May 2014 - 04:04.

[bourbon]

Hamilton is absolutely one of the greats. Maybe not of all time, but he's the only driver in the spot currently i'd consider rating above Alonso. They're still the two best drivers around.

 

Just below Vettel. 

 

And all this proves is that we all have different opinions on the non-WDC measures.  We all have no choice but to agree on WDCs.  Senna has 3, Hamilton 1, Piquet 3, Alonso 2, Vettel has 4, Schumi has 7, Prost has 4, Button has 1, Raikkonen has 1, etc., etc.  Nobody can disagree with that.

[lbennie]

Hamilton is absolutely one of the greats. Maybe not of all time, but he's the only driver in the spot currently i'd consider rating above Alonso. They're still the two best drivers around.

 

Really? I disagree.

I'm sure I'm not alone either.

 

So all ricciardo has to do is beat vettel this year, pick up a WDC with a kova-eqsue team mate and have a few inconsistent seasons in an inconsistent car with a solid but unspectacular team mate (who out-points him) then he will be considered an all time great?

Edited by lbennie, 08 May 2014 - 04:36.

[garagetinkerer]

What i absolutely love about the top driver lists is how drivers who won a lot in British cars do a lot better, or if the drivers are british driving whatever... with noted exceptions being Fangio and Villeneuve.

 

All drivers want to win, even Chilton, although he doesn't have a car anything remotely close to win anything except the fag end of the grid yet. I laughed so hard when last year Hamilton suggested that he wouldn't want to win easy like Vettel... but i certainly don't see him slow down to spice things up I don't blame him... he's doing what he could in his car.

 

What i also love about these 'objective' lists is that they are so subjective to terms and conditions, i mean personal preferences, and yet the lists are suggested to be "unbiased" most of the times.

 

I still think that if Piquet, Prost etc didn't speak out against the British teams they drove for, they'd be rated better. On the same hand, if Schumacher and Vettel won a couple or so titles in a British team, they'd be rated higher still. It always amuses me a fair bit, how most Brit commentators are always falling over themselves to be the first to suggest Schumacher (whenever they refer to him) to be "statistically the greatest driver of all times!" No, absolutely no bias there. This when Murray Walker quite openly confirmed that he feels Schumacher was better than Senna, and the greatest driver he has ever seen... make of it what you will, but that man has forgotten a lot more about F1 than a lot of us here collectively know.

 

To me, there's absolutely no doubt that there are four names that are a must in a top-4 for any list to be taken even remotely seriously as far as a list evaluating drivers goes:

Fangio, Lauda, Prost and Schumacher... To be truthful, these 4 form the top 4 of my list and in this order:

Fangio

Prost/ Schumacher

Lauda

 

It is a shame that people forget that Lauda is more than a cheese salesman. He was a bloody brilliant driver.

 

Vettel for me has earned his place in top 10... just look at his sodding strike rate. Nevermind the car, you have to be able to make the most of what you have. This is only his seventh full year in F1 and he's a four times WDC already, but some are not impressed because Webbo wasn't snapping at his heels enough (or whatever else have you). Edit: An absolutely over-rated driver who almost every team worth its salt has been trying to hire since 2010 if not earlier. /sarcasm

 

There's JYS, Piquet, Senna and so on and so on... the only current driver who's earning laurels, ahem, has earned enough with four titles in a row, is Vettel (only the third person to do so) and is somewhat worthy of mentioning anywhere close to top-10 lists or something such... (in my not so humble opinion)

Edited by garagetinkerer, 08 May 2014 - 04:57.

[OO7]

I laughed so hard when last year Hamilton suggested that he wouldn't want to win easy like Vettel... but i certainly don't see him slow down to spice things up I don't blame him... he's doing what he could in his car.

What's even more funny is Marc Marquez in MotoGP is following Hamilton's lead in not wanting easy victories.

[garagetinkerer]

What's even more funny is Marc Marquez in MotoGP is following Hamilton's lead in not wanting easy victories.

Did he (Marquez) say something like that too... been years since i have been able to keep up with what i would love to... all things but F1 have been ignored and for the worse ;( would you please share links? May be over pm?

 

sorry for OT

Edited by garagetinkerer, 08 May 2014 - 05:20.

[OO7]

Did he (Marquez) say something like that too... been years since i have been able to keep up with what i would love to... all things but F1 have been ignored and for the worse ;( would you please share links? May be over pm?

 

sorry for OT

Your wish is my command: http://www.autosport...t.php/id/113786

[LewDaMan]

What i absolutely love about the top driver lists is how drivers who won a lot in British cars do a lot better, or if the drivers are british driving whatever... with noted exceptions being Fangio and Villeneuve.

 
And Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Lauda, Alonso, Vettel etc etc

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/20324109

http://greatestdrivers.autosport.com/

And Britain has provided more F1 title winning cars than any other country, so see if you can work out how that affects your claims.
 
Funny how casual anti-British xenophobia is deemed acceptable.
 

I still think that if Piquet, Prost etc didn't speak out against the British teams they drove for they'd be rated better.

Prost was sacked by his Italian team yet you're silent about that. And seeing as you're fixated on nationality, Prost was also said to have the ear of countryman Balestre. Do you think that helped his reputation?
 

On the same hand, if Schumacher and Vettel won a couple or so titles in a British team, they'd be rated higher still.

Yawn.

Let's get this straight. You complain about alleged bias and xenophobia from the British but then yourself make xenophobic inferences about the British.

Fighting (alleged) bias/xenophobia with (actual) bias/xenophobia, garagetinkerer style! Nice one.
 

It always amuses me a fair bit, how most Brit commentators are always falling over themselves to be the first to suggest Schumacher (whenever they refer to him) to be "statistically the greatest driver of all times!" No, absolutely no bias there.

Er, say what!? Schumacher IS statistically the greatest driver of all time. If you can see bias in factually accurate statements then you're obviously prepared to take offence at pretty much anything.
 

This when Murray Walker quite openly confirmed that he feels Schumacher was better than Senna, and the greatest driver he has ever seen... make of it what you will, but that man has forgotten a lot more about F1 than a lot of us here collectively know.

But Murray Walker is a "Brit commentator" and it seems clear from your previous comments that you don't like them and think that their comments, even when factually correct, should be taken as inherently biased. Make your mind up, please.

[garagetinkerer]

 
And Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Lauda, Alonso, Vettel etc etc

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/20324109

http://greatestdrivers.autosport.com/

And Britain has provided more F1 title winning cars than any other country, so see if you can work out how that affects your claims.
 
Funny how casual anti-British xenophobia is deemed acceptable.
 
Prost was sacked by his Italian team yet you're silent about that. And seeing as you're fixated on nationality, Prost was also said to have the ear of countryman Balestre. Do you think that helped his reputation?
 
Yawn.

Let's get this straight. You complain about alleged bias and xenophobia from the British but then yourself make xenophobic inferences about the British.

Fighting (alleged) bias/xenophobia with (actual) bias/xenophobia, garagetinkerer style! Nice one.
 
Er, say what!? Schumacher IS statistically the greatest driver of all time. If you can see bias in factually accurate statements then you're obviously prepared to take offence at pretty much anything.
 
But Murray Walker is a "Brit commentator" and it seems clear from your previous comments that you don't like them and think that their comments, even when factually correct, should be taken as inherently biased. Make your mind up, please.

Ahem, i said....

 

how drivers who won a lot in British cars do a lot better

Prost, Senna, Lauda all will fall under that category as they all won more or some with British teams. No? McLaren, Williams were British when i checked the last time about, but i guess you know better...

 

When i started working proper, i was working in a BPO, working with mostly British clients. I actually love British people and by and large a lot of things about them. It was a wonderful experience working for them. You may call one such as me an anglophile of sorts. Of course, if you knew me, you'd know better, but... it is easier to label people than learn about them, so i can't blame you.

 

About the Italian team... i'm a tifoso and my loyalties to the team as a fan have been questioned often in the forums here Don't get me started again about my beloved team... I wasn't easy on them for Schumacher's exit, and for that matter of Brawn and Todt's exit as well.

 

Geez, i didn't know Murray was Brit... then again, may be i did, which is why i suggested "most." I know not to judge a place and its people because of a couple of fools one may run into. It was not a judgement on Britain or its people in general, but some of the commentators. Heck, just so you know, i had an interesting conversation with a reputed journalist, who would not for a second think McLaren were to be blamed in any way for the poop they landed themselves in 2007... despite all the evidence against it. Believe me, we went at it patiently. Yes, i have my reasons for suggesting what i do. None of the reasons have anything to do with anything remotely as you suggest. You may not like it. You can always question one's reasoning. However, labeling them is something i would refrain (as much as it possible) from but then again, that's just me i guess.

 

psst., i also write blogs against the policies which my government (in india) gets wrong... they've recently created provisions, which make it possible for them to take down anyone with charges of sedition, that is if they don't like what you say. I speak about it,  naturally against it, but in more moderate language (and understandably so).

 

edit: it is very hard to keep personal preferences aside and judge something, anything, properly in an unbiased fashion. It gets murkier when you start learning how our subconscious works and influences what we think, we do. I will not for a second say that i'm a man without my flaws, my prefernces for and bias against etc. and so on... It boils down to how coloured the glasses really are from which we peer through. I try to pick one with least influence, but i'm only human!

Edited by garagetinkerer, 08 May 2014 - 06:25.

[lbennie]

How is pointing out home country bias xenophobic?

[Kingshark]

I disagree,

Alonso was beaten by hamilton in his first year and hamilton hasn't gone on to become one of the greats, yet alonso's legacy seems healthier than ever.

 

Hamilton already has 25 wins, will probably win a few more championships (esp with this Merc team), and unless something strange happens Lewis will probably retire with 40+ wins and several WDC's to his name.

 

Alonso tied a driver like that with 109 points and 4 wins in equal cars.

 

Ricciardo hasn't even had an official podium yet, and he is older than Lewis was when he won a championship. He is currently beating Vettel, who's statistical reputation is higher than Alonso's.

 

Ask yourself, who would you rather be "narrowly beat" by, Ricciardo or Hamilton? Who do you think would hurt your reputation less? If you said Dan, then you're living in denial.

Edited by Kingshark, 08 May 2014 - 06:40.

[lbennie]

Hamilton already has 25 wins, will probably win a few more championships (esp with this Merc team), and unless something strange happens Lewis will probably retire with 40+ wins and several WDC's to his name.

 

Alonso tied a driver like that with 109 points and 4 wins in equal cars.

 

Ricciardo hasn't even had an official podium yet, and he is older than Lewis was when he won a championship. He is currently beating Vettel, who's statistical reputation is higher than Alonso's.

 

Ask yourself, who would you rather be "narrowly beat" by, Ricciardo or Hamilton? Who do you think would hurt your reputation less? If you said Dan, then you're living in denial.

 

I have no idea what point you are trying to prove by comparing the stats of a driver who has had 7 years in top cars with a driver who has had 4 races.

[garagetinkerer]

Hamilton already has 25 wins, will probably win a few more championships (esp with this Merc team), and unless something strange happens Lewis will probably retire with 40+ wins and several WDC's to his name.

 

Alonso tied a driver like that with 109 points and 4 wins in equal cars.

 

Ricciardo hasn't even had an official podium yet, and he is older than Lewis was when he won a championship. He is currently beating Vettel, who's statistical reputation is higher than Alonso's.

 

Ask yourself, who would you rather be "narrowly beat" by, Ricciardo or Hamilton? Who do you think would hurt your reputation less? If you said Dan, then you're living in denial.

Erm, actually Vettel put to rest Webbo's reputation as a qualifier. Infact, saying "RIP" wouldn't be out of place, albeit may offend some fans of Webbo, given how he brutalised Webbo. [Apologies to all who felt offended, it was not my intent to offend, but impress upon the utter domination of Seb during their partnership.] If anything, one could say Ricciardo is doing himself favours and it would be more plausible to suggest that, than what some here are seemingly suggesting. Heck, even a McLaren man, Geoff McGrath was rather complementary about abilities of Vettel in a story withdrawn quite immedately by Autosport, but available still online, elsewhere.

Edited by garagetinkerer, 08 May 2014 - 06:49.

[sopa]

What i also love about these 'objective' lists is that they are so subjective to terms and conditions, i mean personal preferences, and yet the lists are suggested to be "unbiased" most of the times.

 

 

This is what I can agree with.

 

The way some people are arguing, I get the impression a racing driver's main career goal is to get as high ranking as possible in fans all-time driver ranking lists. Even thinking about something like that as a goal is quite confusing to me.

[bourbon]

Hamilton already has 25 wins, will probably win a few more championships (esp with this Merc team), and unless something strange happens Lewis will probably retire with 40+ wins and several WDC's to his name.

 

Alonso tied a driver like that with 109 points and 4 wins in equal cars.

 

Ricciardo hasn't even had an official podium yet, and he is older than Lewis was when he won a championship. He is currently beating Vettel, who's statistical reputation is higher than Alonso's.

 

Ask yourself, who would you rather be "narrowly beat" by, Ricciardo or Hamilton? Who do you think would hurt your reputation less? If you said Dan, then you're living in denial.

 

Ricciardo is not currently beating Sebastian. 

 

That excuse for Alonso does not work - and is why the whole teammate deal falls apart.  Alonso's drove against Hamilton as a rookie.  There is no dressing it up by relating what Hamilton went on to do because he had not done it yet - did not have that experience, confidence or mindset that comes with his achievements in those later years. 

 

It is odd to compare it to Seb/Ricciardo anyway because Dan is in his 4th year in a new team, so he has built up some experience and confidence in driving in F1 which comes only with participation - which Hamilton lacked.  The reasoning in every case tends to have fatal flaws associated with it.  That is why I do not believe any driver would use it as a serious criteria upon which to judge his overall greatness - he'd instead stick with championship wins.

[Thomas99]

Ricciardo is not currently beating Sebastian.

Yes he is. In fact he's beaten Vettel in both the races both cars have finished this season. Vettel has never finished ahead of Ricciardo in a race.

Vettel is 'beating' Ricciardo in the same way Rosberg is 'beating' Hamilton, being they have both finished 1 more race.

Edited by Thomas99, 08 May 2014 - 08:44.

[Thomas99]

That is why I do not believe any driver would use it as a serious criteria upon which to judge his overall greatness - he'd instead stick with championship wins.

Championship wins is mostly car dependent. If Hamilton finds himself in this quality car for the next decade few would bet against him becoming a 10X WDC. There are alot of ways we rate driver performance, the first measure being against their team mate, secondly how many mistakes they make, thirdly their underlying pace, fourthly capitalizing on the car performance they have etc.

Race wins, championships are certainly one metric that should be taken into account and if Sebastian loses to Daniel this it does not discredit his ability of driver. Daniel is much better than most people gave him credit for last year. If anything the 'surprise' that he can beat Vettel comes mostly from the general communities lack of education on the midfield drivers and their quality. However Daniel has still exceeded expectations as we have seen with Perez how a once highly rated driver can suffer in a top team. Vettel is a harder team mate then Jenson to go against too.

One driver I really want to see go against an established team mate is Nico Hulkenberg. I think he would beat Button, Raikkonen, Rosberg.

[Kingshark]

Ricciardo is not currently beating Sebastian. 

 

That excuse for Alonso does not work - and is why the whole teammate deal falls apart.  Alonso's drove against Hamilton as a rookie.  There is no dressing it up by relating what Hamilton went on to do because he had not done it yet - did not have that experience, confidence or mindset that comes with his achievements in those later years. 

 

Hamilton will probably retire as successful, if not more successful than Alonso - hence - Alonso's reputation will not be hurt in the grand scheme of things by the final result in 2007, where both men scored 109 points and 4 wins in equal cars. Unless Ricciardo turns out to be as successful as Vettel himself, Seb's reputation will definitely take a nosedive if Daniel continues to beat him in what are supposedly the prime years of Vettel's career.

 

Side note; Hamilton had thousands of miles of testing under his belt before he began racing in 2007, about 23 race distances IIRC. You can't compare the rookies of the unlimited testing era to the rookies of today.

[Cesc]

I still can't really see the common issues between Alonso-Hamilton case and the current Red Bull one.

 

The cases would be very similar if Alonso would have been driving and winning in McLaren for 4 or 5 years and suddenly a rookie (Ricciardo is not a rookie neither, but ok) lands in the team and starts to perform clearly better (Hamilton was not performing "clearly better" than Alonso in 2007 compared to what Ricciardo is doing with Vettel at this point).

[sopa]

I think people are still making too many conclusions based on 4 races. Now people speak like Ricciardo was beating Vettel over a full year, even though it was 2 races.

 

And if you talk about 2007, in the same way you can choose a couple of races, where Hamilton beat Alonso and say he was dominating him. Alonso had an appalling race in Canada (7th, while Hamilton won), but Vettel is judged by his worst race really in this discussion. Also, Hamilton was leading Alonso by 64-50 in mid-season.

 

So let's wait till the end of the year before you conclude something.

[sennafan24]

I disagree,

Alonso was beaten by hamilton in his first year and hamilton hasn't gone on to become one of the greats, yet alonso's legacy seems healthier than ever.

Give him time. 

 

Depends on what you classify as "greats". He is not in the same class as Senna, Prost and Schumi. But he is comparable already with the likes of Mansell and Mika (both of which he should surpass). Alonso's legacy is up in the air. I consider him a "great", but views elsewhere are very divided. Too many absolute views in your post.

 

Why does every one of these threads end up revolving around Seb these days? 

 

Championship wins is mostly car dependent

 

This

 

F1 is not a spec series. It is entirely possible a decent driver could end up with more WDC's than a great driver (not a potshot at Vettel/Schumi or anyone else before anyone jumps in)

 

Performance is what matters to me, and you do not always need to win a WDC or have an elite level teammate to show you are a great driver. Gilles Villneurve is remembered fondly, and in some quarters as an all-time great. He never won a WDC, and none of his teammates are considered great drivers.

 

Personally I take into consideration the follow variables when rating drivers. All of which are strictly opinion based. There is no real scientific method to rating F1 drivers in my opinion.

 

- Performance relative to teammate

- Performance relative to car

- Certain amount of success 

 

The last one I underline means a driver has to probably be a GP winner for me to rate him as "great". I do not think he would have to win a WDC, even in this era. One of the best campaigns I have seen in recent times was Lewis's 2012, and he ended up miles behind in the WDC race.

 

I always rate Senna's 1993 campaign, which highly complies to the second variable I mentioned. Yes, the McLaren was still a good car that year, but the Williams was quite a bit better, and for most of the year the Benetton was "flat out better" (reference goes to Motor Sport Magazine). Yet Senna dazzled.

 

You do not have to beat a elite level teammate to impress me. I stated in another thread I was impressed with how Alonso ruined two highly touted drivers (Massa/G.F) reputation when they competed in equal machinery. No one ever said G.F was a elite driver (although he was voted the 2nd best driver on the grid in 2001 by fans), but he was hyped enough. Same with Massa, he was voted 2nd on the grid by the paddock in 2008. Alonso destroyed them both, despite them having decent reputations beforehand.

[tghik]

Championship wins is mostly car dependent.

 

Unfortunately ... F1 is too much about technology ... less aero like in old days pleaseeeee

[sopa]

Personally I take into consideration the follow variables when rating drivers. All of which are strictly opinion based. There is no real scientific method to rating F1 drivers in my opinion.

 

- Performance relative to teammate

- Performance relative to car

- Certain amount of success 

 

 

One interesting unique case for me is Stefan Bellof. I think his example shows well, how "legends" can be made and not in a conceivable way at all. But in some fan circles he is considered a legend. He doesn't have great stats to back himself up. He doesn't have a great team-mate resume, in fact people till this day debate whether Bellof beat Brundle at all, thinking the hype got way over the top.

 

So what is his hype or legend based on? Old Nurburgring lap record in a Porsche + one single race performance in F1, the 1984 Monaco Grand Prix.

[tghik]

Ricciardo is not currently beating Sebastian. 

 

How so ?

[bub]

Really? I disagree.

I'm sure I'm not alone either.

 

So all ricciardo has to do is beat vettel this year, pick up a WDC with a kova-eqsue team mate and have a few inconsistent seasons in an inconsistent car with a solid but unspectacular team mate (who out-points him) then he will be considered an all time great?

 

Well he would have had to beat Vettel as a rookie and he also would have to get the poles, wins, podiums and generally good performances in races and over seasons, become rated as the best (or joint best) driver on the grid by many, out-perform another top 5 rated WDC teammate and then beat another driver rated top 5/6 by many, but yeah if he has a career like Hamilton's he will be considered a great by many people. Many people consider Alonso and Vettel great's and most people consider Hamilton as good as them so I don't see why he wouldn't also be considered a great.

[tghik]

Erm, actually Vettel put to rest Webbo's reputation as a qualifier. Infact, saying "RIP" wouldn't be out of place

Would be true if no blown diffuser. Blown diff is a special technique of driving, you keep your foot planted when in corners and breaking, contrary to regular driving when you take it off  ... I wish Webber competed with today's regulations to see the real picture.

[sopa]

People keep bringing up the EBD or lack of EBD, but didn't it disappear in 2012, yet Vettel got up to speed, while the season unfolded and still won title?

[Collombin]

Old Nurburgring lap record in a Porsche

.....on a much shorter track than the F1 cars used to run.

.....and anyway the F1 cars would have gone considerably faster had they returned there post 1976. The lap record used to drop by a minute every 7 years! This means that in 10 years time an F1 car will be able to lap the Nordschliefe instantaneously. Probably.

[PayasYouRace]

.....on a much shorter track than the F1 cars used to run.

.....and anyway the F1 cars would have gone considerably faster had they returned there post 1976. The lap record used to drop by a minute every 7 years! This means that in 10 years time an F1 car will be able to lap the Nordschliefe instantaneously. Probably.

 

[discover23]

This drivers rating method is not too far off the mark.
http://www.theriches...rivers-in-2014/

[Bartonz20let]

The greatest trick is to win a championship but not in the best car.

If it's clearly demonstrated that your car (or team) is not quite the best but you win the title then surely that could be worth as much as say 4 in an impeccable car?

One of the reasons why many believe 2012 was one of Lewis's best years, he probibly flattered McLaren a bit that year.

[David1976]

The jury is out on Vettel for me.  The 4 championships are massively in his favour but...  they were all in by far the best car on the grid in an era dominated by exhaust manipulated aero, in a team that favoured him, and against a team mate that hasn't been rated that highly by any of the other top teams.

 

If Vettel wins a championship this year my mind would change.  But I still rate him at "Button" level.

 

Alonso and Hamilton are one step above that with Alonso's consistency marginally ahead of Hamilton's speed on the rating.  At least at the moment.  

 

No one generally rated Ricciardo before this year.  So far he has kicked Vettel into touch.

[garagetinkerer]

The greatest trick is to win a championship but not in the best car.

If it's clearly demonstrated that your car (or team) is not quite the best but you win the title then surely that could be worth as much as say 4 in an impeccable car?

One of the reasons why many believe 2012 was one of Lewis's best years, he probibly flattered McLaren a bit that year.

Actually 2012 car won as many races as RBR... and should have won more if not for incompetence of staff and sheer bad luck. If that does not mark out a fast car,

[slpierce]

I don't think greatness should be judged just looking at the number of titles a driver has won, i only have too look at Schumacher's subjugated teammates to realize that.

[bourbon]

How so ?

 

We were debating whether WDCs or teammate battles are more meaningful and in the course of that discussion, Rinehart stated that Lewis tied Alonso in the standings over a year in 2007.  He went on to compare that with Seb and Dan, and said that Dan was beating Seb - which, in terms of the WDC standings Seb is beating Daniel, so the comparison is invalid.  That kind of comparison can only be made after a season is complete.  Moreover, it cannot be compared in this case because Dan is not a rookie.

 

If some people believe that Alonso earned credit for 2007, that's fine.  For me, he earned no credit at all - he not only lost to a rookie, it is documented in ink that he resorted to brass tactics to attempt to obtain the advantage.  So I stand by my opinion that Alonso proved nothing in 2007 - certainly not that he could beat Hamilton after he became a WDC himself. 

 

 

I do not understand trying to make teammate battles important anyway.  It only matters in so far as it is the first driver to beat on the way to the cup.

 

 

 

 

Why does every one of these threads end up revolving around Seb these days? 

 

It comes with the territory of winning multiple championships and surpassing the incumbents.  For good or bad, the winner is the focus of either admiration or acrimony - the former often from over-enthusiastic fans and the latter usually from bitter fans of rivals.  It was the same with Michael back in the day.  

Edited by bourbon, 08 May 2014 - 19:09.

[garoidb]

What really counts is beating a top class team-mate (such as a former WDC) while winning a WDC. 

 

Edit: This has been achieved relatively rarely, and not at all for 24 years.  The ones I have are Fangio, Ascari (x2), Hulme, Prost (x3) and Senna. 

Edited by garoidb, 08 May 2014 - 18:12.

[Cesc]

We were debating whether WDCs or teammate battles are more meaningful and in the course of that discussion, Rinehart stated that Lewis tied Alonso in the standings over a year in 2007.  He went on to compare that with Seb and Dan, and said that Dan was beating Seb - which, in terms of the WDC standings Seb is beating Daniel, so the comparison is invalid.  That kind of comparison can only be made after a season is complete.  Moreover, it cannot be compared in this case because Dan is not a rookie.

 

If some people believe that Alonso earned credit for 2007, that's fine.  For me, he earned no credit at all - he not only lost to a rookie, it is documented in ink that he resorted to brass tactics to attempt to obtain the advantage.  So I stand by my opinion that Alonso proved nothing by losing to a rookie - certainly not that he could beat that rookie a year down the line after he was crowned WDC.

 

 

I do not understand trying to make teammate battles important anyway.  It only matters in so far as it is the first driver to beat on the way to the cup.

 

Really?

 

Ricciardo is not currently beating Sebastian. 

 

That excuse for Alonso does not work - and is why the whole teammate deal falls apart.  Alonso's drove against Hamilton as a rookie.  There is no dressing it up by relating what Hamilton went on to do because he had not done it yet - did not have that experience, confidence or mindset that comes with his achievements in those later years. 

 

It is odd to compare it to Seb/Ricciardo anyway because Dan is in his 4th year in a new team, so he has built up some experience and confidence in driving in F1 which comes only with participation - which Hamilton lacked.  The reasoning in every case tends to have fatal flaws associated with it.  That is why I do not believe any driver would use it as a serious criteria upon which to judge his overall greatness - he'd instead stick with championship wins.

 

2007 is one of the best seasons Hamilton has had. 2008 was probably worse, the same for 2011 amd probably 2012.

I don't understand this need of downplaying Hamilton's skills as a rookie when actually he had a terrific season in terms of consistency.

[garoidb]

2007 is one of the best seasons Hamilton has had. 2008 was probably worse, the same for 2011 amd probably 2012.

I don't understand this need of downplaying Hamilton's skills as a rookie when actually he had a terrific season in terms of consistency.

 

The motive is fairly obvious, actually.

 

But, setting that aside, it is interesting to ponder how much, or in what aspects, a driver can improve or disimprove over the years of his career. Does speed increase? What about wheel to wheel racing instinct, or judgement or race management? Which parts are innate, and which can improve with experience, or dissipate over time? In different seasons, different things matter more. 

[Thomas99]

Just below Vettel.

In no way is that true.

But I guess i'm not too opposed to Ricciardo being the #1 driver in the sport.

Edited by Thomas99, 08 May 2014 - 23:15.

[bourbon]

Really?

 

 

2007 is one of the best seasons Hamilton has had. 2008 was probably worse, the same for 2011 amd probably 2012.

I don't understand this need of downplaying Hamilton's skills as a rookie when actually he had a terrific season in terms of consistency.

 

But hindsight is 20/20.  You can say that now of course, but in 2007, Hamilton was a rookie and had never before raced in F1 proper.  It is wholly disingenuous to try to attribute him the confidence, experience and mindset at that time that he would have only acquired 2 years later when he was WDC champ, imo.  Alonso did not race or challenge WDC Hamilton.  It doesn't matter what level one feels Hamilton was driving at - after all, 2010 was Webber's best year.  Nether of them were WDC drivers during those years and that is the criteria under discussion in this thread.

 

But again - that is my beef with this teammate stuff - people stretch all kinds of interpretations and ideas into it so that they can then shoehorn certain drivers in as having satisfied the requirement.  Doesn't fly with me.

Edited by bourbon, 09 May 2014 - 01:36.

[Thomas99]

after all, 2010 was Webber's best year.

Maybe results wise, but to find Mark's best performances you have to go back a lot further then that. He was already 34 in 2010 and on the decline imo

[D28]

What really counts is beating a top class team-mate (such as a former WDC) while winning a WDC. 

 

Edit: This has been achieved relatively rarely, and not at all for 24 years.  The ones I have are Fangio, Ascari (x2), Hulme, Prost (x3) and Senna. 

 

Considering the top class criteria (but not WDC), would Andretti 1978, and Scheckter 79 wins, not be included?

Peterson and G. Villeneuve were formidable opponents.

Edited by D28, 09 May 2014 - 16:02.

[jrwb6e]

I disagree,

Alonso was beaten by hamilton in his first year and hamilton hasn't gone on to become one of the greats, yet alonso's legacy seems healthier than ever.

 

If beaten you mean by tying each other in the points, I guess it is not too bad considering McLaren were actively against him.

[Bartonz20let]

Actually 2012 car won as many races as RBR... and should have won more if not for incompetence of staff and sheer bad luck. If that does not mark out a fast car,

Should have been more specific, I felt he flattered the team in general, not the car as such, just using it as an example if how you can look on a drivers performance in a good light even in a poor season.

[garoidb]

Considering the top class criteria (but not WDC), would Andretti 1978, and Scheckter 79 wins, not be included?

Peterson and G. Villeneuve were formidable opponents.

 

Perhaps. It could also be expanded out quite a lot if we count team-mates who went on to win WDCs, as Peterson and Villeneuve might have done. Prost would have a clean sweep, for example.

 

The interesting thing is that in several of the cases I gave, the defeated team-mate was actually the defending champion (Farina in 1951, Brabham in 1967, Lauda in 1985, Senna in 1989).  

[garoidb]

I disagree,

Alonso was beaten by hamilton in his first year and hamilton hasn't gone on to become one of the greats, yet alonso's legacy seems healthier than ever.

 

Alonso's legacy has been cemented by the nature of his title challenges in those Ferraris, as well as his competitive spirit when the championship is not on the line. One fairly level season against Hamilton is not enough to dislodge that. I would argue that, at times, Lewis's reputation has benefited by association with Alonso. Imagine if Massa had defeated Alonso, by as much happened in reverse. That would have raised questions about Lewis, especially as he was failing to dispatch Button to the extent anticipated.

 

In summary, Alonso's continued high reputation benefited Hamilton through what might otherwise have been an even trickier part of his career. 

[garagetinkerer]

Championship wins is mostly car dependent. If Hamilton finds himself in this quality car for the next decade few would bet against him becoming a 10X WDC. There are alot of ways we rate driver performance, the first measure being against their team mate, secondly how many mistakes they make, thirdly their underlying pace, fourthly capitalizing on the car performance they have etc.

Race wins, championships are certainly one metric that should be taken into account and if Sebastian loses to Daniel this it does not discredit his ability of driver. Daniel is much better than most people gave him credit for last year. If anything the 'surprise' that he can beat Vettel comes mostly from the general communities lack of education on the midfield drivers and their quality. However Daniel has still exceeded expectations as we have seen with Perez how a once highly rated driver can suffer in a top team. Vettel is a harder team mate then Jenson to go against too.

One driver I really want to see go against an established team mate is Nico Hulkenberg. I think he would beat Button, Raikkonen, Rosberg.

Can't say whether Hamilton will have cars of this quality over the next few years. However, Hamilton did have cars worthy of WDC's in both 2007 and 2010. I would give you that 2010 was tight, but then not many drivers have a career this long, much less competitive drives for as long. You have to make most of your oppotunities count, as those may be it. Alonso surely must be kicking himself over for 2010 and 2012 (although a little less than 2010 i guess). How long do you reckon he would continue and continue at the top of his game, especially since he's already spent more than a decade in the sport.

Edited by garagetinkerer, 11 May 2014 - 14:55.

[Jimisgod]

Who beat several high quality teammates but never became champion? Aside from Moss of course.