127 replies to this topic

[sennafan24]

IIRC, it was in 1992. Actually, i thought that it was rather plain, and didn't need much explanation, especially when a team goes to a driver and tells him that he's not the star.

What you wrote was fine. I was just establishing that I wasn't belittling Patrese or Rubens. 

 

Mansell tells a different tale. He claims that Patrese suspected the team were favouring Mansell. In response, Mansell swapped cars with Patrese (he did not say precisely when this occurred). Nige claims that in Patrese's car, he set the fastest time.

 

Now you mention it, this probably did happen in 1992, so you are probably right. 

[George Costanza]

I think Nico is quicker. Some of Nico's pole laps have been very special. Not just because of the car, but how he was able to put significant distance between himself and Lewis. For example, USA 2014 is a stand-out. Also, Nico's 2013 campaign was top-notch, and that was without a dominant car. His 2010 and 2011 campaigns were also stellar. Yes, Schumi was old, but at times, I don't think Nico gets the credit he deserves for those 2 years (2012 is a mess to examine, so I will leave that, other than saying that Schumi was closer to Nico in that year)

 

I agree that Rubens was better in the wet, and that Rubens never had a car quite as good as the 2014 Mercedes. However, while Rubens was highly touted before he switched to Ferrari, I don't complete buy into the hype. Irvine was very close to him at Jordan, and his other teammates were mid-tier drivers (also, he tended to drive cars with terrible reliability, so it was hard to compare him against his teammates). I would dispute that he ran Button close. It should be remembered they were in back-marker cars for half the time they were teammates, so it was difficult for a reasonable comparison to be made. When they were in decent cars (2006 and 2009), Jenson beat Rubens quite handily. 

 

It's highly subjective, but I am more impressed of the body of the work Nico has produced in his time, than what Rubens produced in his time. 

F2004 is certainly worthy of that; or F2002 even... The 2004 season, Rubens scored 114 points, normally that would be a world champion season. His problem was Michael Schumacher. 

Edited by George Costanza, 27 June 2015 - 23:17.

[garagetinkerer]

F2004 is certainly worthy of that; or F2002 even... The 2004 season, Rubens scored 114 points, normally that would be a world champion season. His problem was Michael Schumacher. 

I would argue against that. This car from last year, it is perhaps the best car ever over as many races. Ferrari had Brawn, who did run them at times with quite brilliant strategies. Magny Cours from 2004, which is the most dominant year for Ferrari, where they stopped 4 times against 3 for Renault that was faster that day. This car from last year, it is pee in my pants impressive. Barring unforeseen incidents, races are but a forgone conclusion. In my very humble opinion, Ferrari would have not won a fair few races during those years, if they weren't running strategies that they did. However, that is what i think about it...

[PlatenGlass]

I agree that Rubens was better in the wet

I think Rosberg's pretty decent in the wet actually. There have been times when Hamilton has struggled to match him. Also, wet weather driving doesn't seem to be the same nowadays. Gone are the days when a driver can just suddenly be seconds a lap faster than someone else because it starts raining.

[garagetinkerer]

I think Rosberg's pretty decent in the wet actually. There have been times when Hamilton has struggled to match him. Also, wet weather driving doesn't seem to be the same nowadays. Gone are the days when a driver can just suddenly be seconds a lap faster than someone else because it starts raining.

Well, the increased/ improved focus on safety has seen to it i guess. Visibility at times is piss poor, and it is not a lot to begin with.

[krobinson]

I would argue against that. This car from last year, it is perhaps the best car ever over as many races. Ferrari had Brawn, who did run them at times with quite brilliant strategies. Magny Cours from 2004, which is the most dominant year for Ferrari, where they stopped 4 times against 3 for Renault that was faster that day. This car from last year, it is pee in my pants impressive. Barring unforeseen incidents, races are but a forgone conclusion. In my very humble opinion, Ferrari would have not won a fair few races during those years, if they weren't running strategies that they did. However, that is what i think about it...

 

Renault faster at Magny cours 2004? That is crazy. Ferrari was much much faster, Renault wasn't even close, but what Renault had was track position, so Brawn had to think of a clever strategy. But to say Ferrari was not the fastest car by a good margin that day is simply ludicrous.

 

F2002 and F2004 as cars were very much comparable to what Mercedes had last year, in fact, I would say the F2002 was even more superior over a race distance than the Mercedes was last year.

[Dolph]

I think Nico has a real chance of a WDC. I expect the Merc dominance to continue 1-2 more years at least. He just needs things to go his way a bit. We've seen in the past that Lewis can have a bad year, make some mistakes or he could just experience some unreliability. It takes just two unlucky races for Rosberg to open up 50 points on Hamilton and that could take 8 races to overcome if they ran 1-2 for the rest of the season.

Edited by Dolph, 28 June 2015 - 22:57.

[sopa]

. I would dispute that he ran Button close. It should be remembered they were in back-marker cars for half the time they were teammates, so it was difficult for a reasonable comparison to be made. When they were in decent cars (2006 and 2009), Jenson beat Rubens quite handily. 

 

It's highly subjective, but I am more impressed of the body of the work Nico has produced in his time, than what Rubens produced in his time. 

 

Button beat Barrichello handily in 2006 in Rubens' first year for the team, but not in 2009. Barrichello actually outqualified Button that year and wasn't far off in the points, this despite worse reliability. Button never had a car-related DNF in '09! In 2007-2008 they were about matched.

 

Barrichello v Rosberg. Hard to say. Barrichello's prime years were against Schumacher, so he will always look sort of average in this comparison. In qualifying Rosberg is perhaps slightly better (not in 2015 though!), in the wet Barrichello, in dry race conditions it is a tough call - both have a tendency to have off-days, but also can put in great drives. Considering I rate Button and Rosberg basically evenly and consider 2009 Barrichello to be already "past it", prime Rubens should be about a match to them. Or if not, then mighty close at least.

 

E: Let's put it this way - people like to cram drivers together into "tiers", when they rate drivers. I would put all three in the same tier. There is not enough in it to justify separate tiers.

Edited by sopa, 29 June 2015 - 08:43.

[ensign14]

The problem with looking at the bare WDC stats is that they ignore how serious stuff outside the Championship was.  Look at the Mille Miglia 1955 for instance, which Denis Jenkinson won in a chauffeur-driven Mercedes.  That race included Fangio, Collins, Musso, Castellotti, Taruffi, Kling.  Basically every active Grande Epreuve winner.  Same as Le Mans 1954.  Those races are worth a handful of GPs each. 

 

And Moss won loads of non-WC races.  Take the Glover Trophy of 1959 for instance.  Moss beat Brabham, McLaren, Bonnier, Schell, Salvadori.  Everyone bar Ferrari.  That was a worthier win than, say, Pironi at Imola 1982.

[sopa]

The F2002 may well have been as dominant as the current Mercedes. The thing with 2002 was that unlike Mercedes now, Ferraris weren't often racing each other. They got five 1-2s in a row late in the season and there were races, where Schumacher was cruising behind Barrichello to let the Brazilian get the win. They were making fun of the competition and still won with ease. Had they really pushed I felt they could have lapped the field on occasion. But maybe it was a wrong impression.

 

F2004 wasn't that dominant. Yes, it was the best car, but there were plenty of races, where Barrichello didn't finish even second, so other cars ran Ferrari close enough to split them. Montoya was second in Malaysia, Button at Imola, Alonso split them in France, Raikkonen in UK, etc.

[velgajski1]

I think Nico has a real chance of a WDC. I expect the Merc dominance to continue 1-2 more years at least. He just needs things to go his way a bit. We've seen in the past that Lewis can have a bad year, make some mistakes or he could just experience some unreliability. It takes just two unlucky races for Rosberg to open up 50 points on Hamilton and that could take 8 races to overcome if they ran 1-2 for the rest of the season.

 

This is one of the reason why I think current point system (and all other point systems without couple of free DNF's) aren't very good. There really isn't much between Nico and Lewis. And I'm saying that as someone who thinks Lewis might just be best F1 driver of this generation.

[sennafan24]

Button beat Barrichello handily in 2006 in Rubens' first year for the team, but not in 2009. Barrichello actually outqualified Button that year and wasn't far off in the points, this despite worse reliability. Button never had a car-related DNF in '09!

I think people sleep on Button's 2009, due to him going off the boil towards the end of the season. On track, Jenson beat Button at a higher rate than Schumi managed in 2002!. Jenson beat Rubens 11-4 when both finished, while in 2002, Schumi beat Rubens 9-4. Plus in 2002, Rubens had 5 DNF's, whereas in 2009, he only he had 1. I know there is a bit more to it than those numbers (for example, when Jenson was taken out at the start of SPA, he was way behind Rubens on the grid), but they do reinforce that Jenson was a few notches above Rubens when it mattered. 

 

As I have said in the past, I think some slightly underrate Button based on his sub-par qualifying, and the odd poor streak of form. In terms of race craft, there are not many better than him from the past few eras. 

Edited by sennafan24, 29 June 2015 - 14:20.

[HeadFirst]

I think people sleep on Button's 2009, due to him going off the boil towards the end of the season. On track, Jenson beat Button at a higher rate than Schumi managed in 2002!. Jenson beat Rubens 11-4 when both finished, while in 2002, Schumi beat Rubens 9-4. Plus in 2002, Rubens had 5 DNF's, whereas in 2009, he only he had 1. I know there is a bit more to it than those numbers (for example, when Jenson was taken out at the start of SPA, he was way behind Rubens on the grid), but they do reinforce that Jenson was a few notches above Rubens when it mattered. 

 

As I have said in the past, I think some slightly underrate Button based on his sub-par qualifying, and the odd poor streak of form. In terms of race craft, there are not many better than him from the past few eras. 

 

I think 2009 was interesting in the way people perceive Button's performance. I saw the second half of that year more as a rise in performance of the Vettel/Red Bull combo than as a drop in performance by Jenson. As the season wore on he no longer had the strongest car, yet still provided some gritty performances. Despite the wins early on in 2009 (and later with McLaren), my fav race for Button was Brazil 2009. More than any other race, his determination to finish 5th and secure the WDC that day won me over as a fan.

[1Devil1]

I think people sleep on Button's 2009, due to him going off the boil towards the end of the season. On track, Jenson beat Button at a higher rate than Schumi managed in 2002!. Jenson beat Rubens 11-4 when both finished, while in 2002, Schumi beat Rubens 9-4. Plus in 2002, Rubens had 5 DNF's, whereas in 2009, he only he had 1. I know there is a bit more to it than those numbers (for example, when Jenson was taken out at the start of SPA, he was way behind Rubens on the grid), but they do reinforce that Jenson was a few notches above Rubens when it mattered. 

 

As I have said in the past, I think some slightly underrate Button based on his sub-par qualifying, and the odd poor streak of form. In terms of race craft, there are not many better than him from the past few eras. 

 

Barrichello was way past his peak in 2009 he was 37 that year, in 2002 he was 30. I also don't buy the argument Button brought the WDC home, and just did what he had too do. He just dropped the ball after his fantastic races at the beginning at went from superior to Barrichello to be matched by him. No top driver would do that, Red Bull did run so close in the end, it would be fatal to lose the WDC. Even if we could argue Barrichello, was beaten by Schumacher and Button in the same style, I was not impressed by Button, or put it that way impressed by Barichello that he wasn't demolished by Button and had his legit shot at the WDC. I also think Button is overrated on this board, he is a good driver in the category of Barrichello himself. Put Barrichello in the F2002/F2004 without Schumacher and old fox besides  him and he would win the WDC Button style that year. I know it's controversial, but some drivers have the luck to find themselves in the right circumstances (fast car/ team mate). I wouldn't for example rate Villeneuve higher just because he won a championship in that Williams.  

Edited by 1Devil1, 29 June 2015 - 14:48.

[sennafan24]

I think 2009 was interesting in the way people perceive Button's performance. I saw the second half of that year more as a rise in performance of the Vettel/Red Bull combo than as a drop in performance by Jenson. As the season wore on he no longer had the strongest car, yet still provided some gritty performances. Despite the wins early on in 2009 (and later with McLaren), my fav race for Button was Brazil 2009. More than any other race, his determination to finish 5th and secure the WDC that day won me over as a fan.

Yeah, other cars had caught up at this stage. Hence why there is an argument that the Red Bull was the best car overall in 2009 (an argument that I used to dismiss, but am now more open to)

 

But, Rubens had more success against Jenson in the 2nd half, then he did the 1st half. There was a stretch of 5 races from Valencia to Japan, where Rubens beat Jenson 4 out of 5 times. You are correct that Jenson did have some gritty performances during the 2nd half. He also finished the year strong, by beating Rubens in the final 2 races.

[HeadFirst]

Yeah, other cars had caught up at this stage. Hence why there is an argument that the Red Bull was the best car overall in 2009 (an argument that I used to dismiss, but am now more open to)

 

But, Rubens had more success against Jenson in the 2nd half, then he did the 1st half. There was a stretch of 5 races from Valencia to Japan, where Rubens beat Jenson 4 out of 5 times. You are correct that Jenson did have some gritty performances during the 2nd half. He also finished the year strong, by beating Rubens in the final 2 races.

 

"Jenson was a few notches above Rubens when it mattered."

 

 

I think you said it best, with that ^ statement.

[sennafan24]

Barrichello was way past his peak in 2009 he was 37 that year, in 2002 he was 30.

Fair point. But there are other considerations to consider.

 

Firstly, while Schumi would have been the class of the field anyway, it should not be forgotten that the Ferraris of that period were tailored in his favour. Schumi worked with Bridgestone to develop tyres that suited his driving style, and the actual car was also developed to his liking. Rubens himself also helped the process, as he is perceived to be excellent at setting up the car.

 

Rubens was racing in a car specifically developed for another driver. Now, if the car and tyres had been developed for both drivers, do I think Rubens would have beaten Schumi? Not at all, but it would have been closer. Check how Lewis improved his performance relative to Nico from 2013 to 2014. That I believe was partially due to the 2014 car being designed to accommodate Lewis's preferences.

 

While one could argue that Jenson was favoured at Brawn at times, Rubens had more stroke at Brawn than he did at Ferrari. 

[Nonesuch]

Jenson beat Button [Barrichello] at a higher rate than Schumi managed in 2002!. Jenson beat Rubens 11-4 when both finished, while in 2002, Schumi beat Rubens 9-4

 

That's a bit generous on Barrichello. Note that the only times Barrichello finished ahead of Schumacher in 2002 occurred while Schumacher had already clinched the title (except for the European GP), that Schumacher came second every time, and that he was within a second of Barrichello in all these four races (0,294 at the Nürburgring; 0,434 in Hungary; 0,255 in Italy; 0,011 in the USA). The last race was probably a mistake on Schumacher's part, as he had led the race comfortable before Ferrari's staged photo-finish. 'Payback for Austria' was the talk of the day back then, and it's not all that conspiratorial to think so.

Edited by Nonesuch, 29 June 2015 - 15:10.

[SpeedRacer`]

Rubens was always very particular and sensitive to his brakes - in previous seasons he'd used a different material to Button, but after switching to Button's material in Silverstone he couldn't believe the difference and was able to shade the Briton for the rest of the season after that.

 

Not saying he would've beaten Button had he discovered this earlier, but who knows it may have cost JB the title if Barrichello had been taking points off him earlier in the season.

 

It also may or may not matter in the context of this discussion, but Barrichello was also one of the greatest ever drivers ever at setting up a car and testing.

[BRK]

He could still end up being a pretty successful one-time or two-time WDC, you know..

[Collombin]

And Moss won loads of non-WC races. Take the Glover Trophy of 1959 for instance. Moss beat Brabham, McLaren, Bonnier, Schell, Salvadori. Everyone bar Ferrari.

Meh. 1961 International Trophy was better. Clark, Brabham, Hill, Surtees etc. Cars with much bigger engines than F1 cars. Heavy rain. Moss started poorly and didn't relieve Brabham of the lead until about lap 23. Brabham was still 2nd 30 laps later, when Moss lapped him.

Struggling to recall Nico doing something similar.

[George Costanza]

The F2002 may well have been as dominant as the current Mercedes. The thing with 2002 was that unlike Mercedes now, Ferraris weren't often racing each other. They got five 1-2s in a row late in the season and there were races, where Schumacher was cruising behind Barrichello to let the Brazilian get the win. They were making fun of the competition and still won with ease. Had they really pushed I felt they could have lapped the field on occasion. But maybe it was a wrong impression.

 

F2004 wasn't that dominant. Yes, it was the best car, but there were plenty of races, where Barrichello didn't finish even second, so other cars ran Ferrari close enough to split them. Montoya was second in Malaysia, Button at Imola, Alonso split them in France, Raikkonen in UK, etc.

F2002? If they were pushing, it would have made the rest of the field 2 laps behind.The fact that Barrichello won races in the margins he did is pretty amazing.

 

But I mantain that the most dominant F1 car is the 1992 Williams....Even more dominant than F2002, McLaren of 1988 (think about the drivers, Nigel and Riccardo were not on the level of Prost and Senna) or McLaren of 1998 or Mercedes of 2014, 2015 or the RBR of 2011. But ironically, Williams of 1996 is the best car, stat wise, of the 1990s.

Edited by George Costanza, 30 June 2015 - 02:29.

[sopa]

 He also finished the year strong, by beating Rubens in the final 2 races.

 

Barrichello had a puncture in Brazil, which is why he dropped behind Button.

[sopa]

That's a bit generous on Barrichello. Note that the only times Barrichello finished ahead of Schumacher in 2002 occurred while Schumacher had already clinched the title (except for the European GP), that Schumacher came second every time, and that he was within a second of Barrichello in all these four races (0,294 at the Nürburgring; 0,434 in Hungary; 0,255 in Italy; 0,011 in the USA). The last race was probably a mistake on Schumacher's part, as he had led the race comfortable before Ferrari's staged photo-finish. 'Payback for Austria' was the talk of the day back then, and it's not all that conspiratorial to think so.

 

I think in Europe Barrichello genuinely beat Schumacher, though Schumacher didn't make any effort late in the race to pass despite catching up with Rubens. But Hungary and Italy (and USA) were genuine gifts with Schumi playing the rear-gunner. Schumacher had long ago secured the WDC and Ferrari wanted to secure P2 for Barrichello. People often talk about Austria in the context of 2002, but Barrichello got his payback and more than once, he was let to get many race wins late in the year.

 

Remember, in late 2001 also Schumacher "worked for" Barrichello's P2 in overall standings, only in this case it didn't work out. In Italy Barrichello was 2nd, Schumacher 4th. And in USA Schumacher let Barrichello past him, but Rubens' suffered an oil leak and retired from P2 late in the race, with Schumacher inheriting that second place.

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

Is Rosberg going to be the most successful non-WDC F1 driver ever?

 

No, He can be world champion even in 2015 season. He has the ability to do it. He should go for it with all his strength.

[Guizotia]

That looks like Nico!

[Nonesuch]

I think in Europe Barrichello genuinely beat Schumacher

 

I'd agree; he really made the difference on the first lap to put himself ahead of the Williams cars. When Michael spun later on the team probably told the drivers to take it home safely, and thereby ruled out any battle between the two.

[travbrad]

I think Rosberg's pretty decent in the wet actually. There have been times when Hamilton has struggled to match him. Also, wet weather driving doesn't seem to be the same nowadays. Gone are the days when a driver can just suddenly be seconds a lap faster than someone else because it starts raining.

 

Part of that is because they don't ever race when it's fully wet anymore.  Any time it's wet enough to use the full wet tyres there is a safety car or red flag.