Jump to content


Photo

What has been the most satisfying season?


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Anorak Man

Anorak Man
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 17 November 2003 - 03:59

In your opinion, which have been the most satisfying seasons to have won the driver's title?
And why.

For me, the most satisfying year to win the title would have been 1976.

Not merely because the season was gripping beyond belief, or the outcome so close, but because Hunt won it despite mountains of 'setbacks' against top quality opposition.

Not the most daunting grid of drivers in history, but definitely towards the thick end.

There hasn't been a season since with half the drama.


AM

Advertisement

#2 Option1

Option1
  • Member

  • 12,949 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 17 November 2003 - 05:29

Originally posted by Anorak Man
In your opinion, which have been the most satisfying seasons to have won the driver's title?
And why.

For me, the most satisfying year to win the title would have been 1976.

Not merely because the season was gripping beyond belief, or the outcome so close, but because Hunt won it despite mountains of 'setbacks' against top quality opposition.

Not the most daunting grid of drivers in history, but definitely towards the thick end.

There hasn't been a season since with half the drama.


AM

Hmmm, funny thing is I think Lauda's single little setback that year might have been even more costly than all of Hunt's put together.

Neil

#3 quintin cloud

quintin cloud
  • Member

  • 4,590 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 17 November 2003 - 07:17

This might sound a bit one sided but the 2000 to 2003 have been satisfying seasons for me, but 1992 and 1993 have also been good seasons in my view aswell :up: :smoking:

#4 Alexey Rogachev

Alexey Rogachev
  • Member

  • 835 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 17 November 2003 - 09:33

Hmm... I found a very interesting 'sport satistactory' index for F1 championships somewhere last year... This index had a maximum value for the 1983 championship - about 83%, and minimum for the 2002 champoinship - less than 25%. A curious point of view on Formula 1, isn't it? :)

#5 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 17 November 2003 - 17:10

'67 for me - any season that's got Clark, Stewart, Hill, Amon, Hulme, Brabham and Surtees all active and in decent cars (at least some of the time) has to be pretty damn good.

'86 or so is pretty strong too - Mansell, Prost, Senna, Rosberg, Piquet and a few strong second-tier drivers like Alboreto, Berger and Patrese mean that if you come out on top of that pile you're something rather special.

#6 jph

jph
  • Member

  • 370 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 17 November 2003 - 18:28

I'll go for 1972. Good variety of chassis; cars easily distinguishable from one another by shape and technical features rather than just colour; competitive cars from BRM and Ferrari as well as the Cosworth brigade, not to mention Matra and Tecno (mabe better not to mention Tecno on second thoughts); privateers still welcome; established stars beginning to get their heels bitten by younger tigers; grids over-subscribed. With that lot, you'd feel as though you'd achieved something. Also, in terms of sustainable interest, a bit different compared to how things looked thirty years later.

#7 ReWind

ReWind
  • Member

  • 2,346 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 17 November 2003 - 18:45

Originally posted by jph
I'll go for 1972

You could add the safety record. No fatalities in Formula 1 Grands Prix at a time when death was a frequent companion...

#8 No27

No27
  • Member

  • 1,254 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 17 November 2003 - 19:02

1983

#9 Jimmy Piget

Jimmy Piget
  • Member

  • 530 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 17 November 2003 - 19:27

2003.

And the worst being 1968 and 1982, where anyone could have been the "champion".

#10 jph

jph
  • Member

  • 370 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 17 November 2003 - 19:48

And the worst being 1968 and 1982, where anyone could have been the "champion ".



I accept that 1982 was a bit of an oddball, but 1968? If we put aside the loss early in the year of the man who would undoubtedly have been the champion, the battle was a close-fought one between three worthy contenders, with a number of other interesting asides - wings, a genuine privateer victory etc. There's a difference in my book between 'anyone could be champion' and a close-fought contest with a deserving winner.


You could add the safety record. No fatalities in Formula 1 Grands Prix at a time when death was a frequent companion ...



Yes, I agree. I had been thinking of 1970, for similar reasons as the ones I listed for 1972, but the fatalities immediately rule it out.

#11 Bladrian

Bladrian
  • Member

  • 1,491 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 17 November 2003 - 19:48

I've always had a particular fondness for the season of '65. Jimmy had the right car, and thus the opportunity of demonstrating to the world his true mastery at the wheel. He just flat won everything in sight that year.


Same reason I'm so fond of the season of '02. :)

#12 Jimmy Piget

Jimmy Piget
  • Member

  • 530 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 18 November 2003 - 03:11

1968 - point chart to be checked.
I think I remember that, mathematically, even Lucien Bianchi had a chance to be the world champion until the start at Monza, with only 3 races to go. Am I wrong ?

Beware : this is not a bad opinion of Lucien Bianchi, a great man, a race hero and a true racer. But what about his works Cooper ?

#13 canon1753

canon1753
  • Member

  • 618 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 18 November 2003 - 03:48

1986 for many reasons. Prost won from Piquet, Mansell and Senna. Prost thought his way to a 3rd (I think) in Portugal right after he lost his brother (and Senna ran out of fuel) and a 2nd in Mexico by saving his Goodyears when the Williams drivers chewed up theirs and Berger won on Pirellis. Then Prost wins Adelaide by pushing the car as hard as he could after an early puncture. Mansell blows a tire and Piquet just misses catching Prost at the end. All in all a dramatic season.


Plus- great looking cars 1500Hp Turbos and the one full season of Team Haas Lola and Alan Jones.

#14 Anorak Man

Anorak Man
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 19 November 2003 - 04:05

Neil offered:

Hmmm, funny thing is I think Lauda's single little setback that year might have been even more costly than all of Hunt's put together.

No question Neil. Indeed, the only person who could've gained more satisfaction in winning the title that season was Niki. And many believe him to have been the 'moral' victor, JYS amongst them, for his courageous decision to retire at Mount Fuji. You'll find some Choice Lauda Comments on 1976 Here. See which year he says was his best.


Pete voted for:

'67 for me - any season that's got Clark, Stewart, Hill, Amon, Hulme, Brabham and Surtees all active and in decent cars (at least some of the time) has to be pretty damn good.

Unquestionably! Ferociously competitive list despite leaving out Rindt. Denny must've been right chuffed to have won the pot as a number two too.


AM

#15 Anorak Man

Anorak Man
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 19 November 2003 - 04:07

Jimmy went for:

1968 - point chart to be checked.
I think I remember that, mathematically, even Lucien Bianchi had a chance to be the world champion until the start at Monza, with only 3 races to go. Am I wrong?

I've not checked the points, but I do recall that at the last round, Mexico, there were three contenders for the crown. Apparently, Graham was unapproachably tense. He was surely a satisfied man when he drank the bubbly, but of course it was one of those bitter sweet moments for him. Though in the crisis, he came through and lifted Lotus. I'd be really interested in knowing which of his two WDCs he gained most satisfaction from. The BRM one was a stunner, particularly in view of the threat hanging over the Team.


JPH decided on:

I'll go for 1972. Good variety of chassis; cars easily distinguishable from one another by shape and technical features rather than just colour; competitive cars from BRM and Ferrari as well as the Cosworth brigade, not to mention Matra and Tecno (mabe better not to mention Tecno on second thoughts); privateers still welcome; established stars beginning to get their heels bitten by younger tigers; grids over-subscribed. With that lot, you'd feel as though you'd achieved something. Also, in terms of sustainable interest, a bit different compared to how things looked thirty years later.

1972 Emo's year, yes, I'm sure he got more out of his first WDC than his second. Virtually still a kid, in a Team run by Peter Warr (nuff sed), with the ever present memory of Rindt's wreckage dancing before his eyes each time he ... ever so gently hit the brakes. With Stewart filling his mirrors. Heroic.


Take the thread whichever way you like, but some have commented upon how satisfying a season was for spectators. The point of the thread, is which season was the most satisfying to win for the driver.

Soon after I posted the thread, both the title and the first two posts were unaccountably 'butchered' by one of the mods. I politely asked why privately, and have yet to receive a response.

For the life of me, I can't see anything remotely offensive or controversial in these posts can you?

Here's how they originally appeared ...
(Pre-apologies to the mods, be assured that no malice is intended.)

The thread title should be:

If One Green Bottle Should Accidentally Fall ...

There'll be NO world champion on the grid. (Selah)

Assuming Jagwaar see sense and don't sign JV: 2004 will field the weakest F1 driver line up in history.

Not since 1951, has there been a solitary WC in the bunch. What possible $atisfaction can 'The Cobbler' gain in a $eventh crown won from this motely crew?

In your opinion, which have been the most satisfying seasons to have won the driver's title?
And why.

AM

And the second post was:

Remarkably prescient post AM!

Not sure if you're right in your assumption; there may well have been another year with a solitary WC during Fangio's domination. We'll have to see what the 'onourable anoraks come up with.

But for me, the most satisfying year to win the title would have been 1976.

Not merely because the season was gripping beyond belief, or the outcome so close, but because Hunt won it despite mountains of 'setbacks' against top quality opposition.

Not the most daunting grid of drivers in history, but definitely at the thick end.

There hasn't been a season since with half the drama.

AM

#16 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 53,734 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 19 November 2003 - 04:40

I think it was your spelling of 'motley' that did it...

As for the driver satisfaction, surely 1966?

The driver that year had to be mighty satisfied...

#17 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,177 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 19 November 2003 - 11:42

Originally posted by Anorak Man
Assuming Jagwaar see sense and don't sign JV: 2004 will field the weakest F1 driver line up in history.

Not since 1951, has there been a solitary WC in the bunch. What possible $atisfaction can 'The Cobbler' gain in a $eventh crown won from this motely crew?

He may have been a WDC six years ago, but Jacques was one of the weakest drivers on the grid last year. I don't see why the F1 line up would suddenly become 'the weakest in history' if Jag would field Heidfeld or Wurz instead of him (or how the mere presence of Jacques might prevent that).
Besides that, I think that MS will be happy enough if he beats the likes of Raikkonen and Montoya again next year - like Jack Brabham was in 1959, even though he only won against the "motely crew" of Moss and Brooks....

#18 kenjafield

kenjafield
  • Member

  • 802 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 19 November 2003 - 12:00

At the beginning of '94 also there was just 1 WDC on the grid, so don't get too hasty in saying how "weak" teh lineup is.

#19 Anorak Man

Anorak Man
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 20 November 2003 - 02:36

Originally posted by Ray Bell
I think it was your spelling of 'motley' that did it...

As for the driver satisfaction, surely 1966?

The driver that year had to be mighty satisfied...


Ahh yes, that IS a shocker isn't it.
'Pologies to the Mods, I'll write out motely 100 times before I go to bed.
Motley crue ... moatly queue ...

'66 Now that's a question I'd like to ask Jack. 59, 60 or 66?

What does he say?

Advertisement

#20 Anorak Man

Anorak Man
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 20 November 2003 - 02:40

Scheivlak: It wasn't a slight against JV, it's obvious to all his fire's gone out. It was a comment on the paucity of winners on the grid.

In addition to the solitary WDC, I wonder if 2004 will field the grid with the least number of GP winners ever?

Could somebody check the stats please?

AM

#21 Anorak Man

Anorak Man
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 27 November 2003 - 02:46

Musing on the number of GP winners on the grid. (ie. Drivers who've already won a GP in their career):

Assuming JV goes West (as in gardening, not McLaren), comparing the start of 2004 with the end of 1998 reveals this counter-intuitive result:

2004: MS, RB, DC, JPM, RS, KR, OP, GF, FA, = 9
1998: MS, MH, DC, JV, DH, JH, OP, HHF, = 8

Missed any?

Care to compare 2004 with say: 92, 72, 62

AM

#22 Leif Snellman

Leif Snellman
  • Member

  • 1,076 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 27 November 2003 - 08:28

1972: MA, JPB, FC, EF, PG, GH, DH, JI, CR, JS, JS = 11
1971: JB, EF, GH, DH, JI, CR, PR, JS, JS, JS = 10

#23 Jeroen Brink

Jeroen Brink
  • Member

  • 167 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 28 November 2003 - 07:09

It is about time to mention 1979. Strong grid and GV being more than Vice-WC.

#24 Anorak Man

Anorak Man
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 01 December 2003 - 02:56

Leif supplied:

1972: MA, JPB, FC, EF, PG, GH, DH, JI, CR, JS, JS = 11
1971: JB, EF, GH, DH, JI, CR, PR, JS, JS, JS = 10

And the 1972 grid contained 3 WCs, 1971 had 5 WCs competing for the title.
And they weren't one-off-wonders like Rosberg and Sheckter.

I'd love to have the totals for other years ...
Can anyone do '92 and '62 without looking at the stats books?

AM

#25 jph

jph
  • Member

  • 370 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 01 December 2003 - 21:08

It is about time to mention 1979. Strong grid and GV being more than Vice-WC.



OK, but given that the original question related to how satisfying it must have felt to win the title, surely Scheckter's satisfaction in winning was diluted by knowing that GV was under orders? For the life of me I cannot understand the satisfaction in being gifted a win, any more than what made Mansell think that Patrese would feel grateful as a result of his blatant 'look at how much I have to slow down to let my team-mate get past' gesture' (I know Mansell wasn't the only one by a long chalk, but he somehow made it seem more demeaning than anyone else has managed to).

#26 Jeroen Brink

Jeroen Brink
  • Member

  • 167 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 03 December 2003 - 10:49

For Gilles it was probably the most satisfying season as well. Moreover, for him being ahead of the pack and winning "laps" was more perhaps more valuable than putting points on the bank.

#27 rallen

rallen
  • Member

  • 545 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 05 August 2010 - 12:05

2003.

And the worst being 1968 and 1982, where anyone could have been the "champion".


Doesn't that make them great seasons!?

#28 rallen

rallen
  • Member

  • 545 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 05 August 2010 - 12:10

Damon must have been chuffed with 1996, what with being cheated out of the 1994 WDC and then having a really bad and embarrasing 1995 before being sacked for 1997 and then leaving the team as World Champion.