196 replies to this topic

[mark f1]

I've done a search and can't find anyone having posted what the Autocourse top 10 drivers for 2007 are. Anyone with the new edition care to list it?

Thanks
Mark

- argh....just realised typo in the title....

- thanks mod for fixing.

[parkiw]

Autocourse's 2007 Top Ten:

1. Lewis Hamilton
2. Kimi Räikönnen
3. Fernando Alonso
4. Felipe Massa
5. Nick Heidfeld
6. Heikki Kovalainen
7. Robert Kubica
8. Nico Rosberg
9. Mark Webber
10. Jenson Button

[JForce]

The list is a joke, as much for having Button in the top-10 as anything else.

[zeppo]

Wow another disappointed British editor.

[kar]

Alan Henry doing his bit for McLaren...again.

[selespeed]

Originally posted by JForce
The list is a joke, as much for having Button in the top-10 as anything else.

autosport has button 6th in their top50 drivers of 2007....

[ensign14]

Astonishingly lazy list (again). Top 7 = Championship top 7. 8th was 9th. What's the point? Does Henry really think no-one else could have done a better job in Ferrari #2 than Massa?

BTW, from another thread:

Originally posted by ensign14
Incidentally, can someone remember to bump this thread when Autocourse comes out? Interesting to see who's closest.

Although if Alan Henry's choosing again it'll prolly be the top 10 in the title, in a slightly different order... :

Not far off...incidentally, Taxi seems to be the closest, the exact same 10, albeit slightly differently ordered.

[as65p]

Overall I'd say that any no.1 in such a list for 2007 will always look slightly flattered, no driver really showed consistency and excellence throughout the whole year.

So, as expected, if in doubt, give it to Lewis...;) No big thing really.

I would take more issue with placing Kubica before Rosberg, actually.

[kar]

One driver won 6 races, only 2 of them from pole.

The guy that got #1 won 4 races ALL FROM POLE.

This is as jingoistic a list as there have been this year.

[selespeed]

Originally posted by as65p
Overall I'd say that any no.1 in such a list for 2007 will always look slightly flattered, no driver really showed consistency and excellence throughout the whole year.

So, as expected, if in doubt, give it to Lewis...;) No big thing really.

I would take more issue with placing Kubica before Rosberg, actually.

rosberg is top5 easily...

[as65p]

Originally posted by kar
One driver won 6 races, only 2 of them from pole.

The guy that got #1 won 4 races ALL FROM POLE.

This is as jingoistic a list as there have been this year.

Don't get my wrong, on my list, Kimi would be no.1.

It's just that no driver stoud out head and sholders above the rest, they all had their brilliant as well as pretty low-key moments.

Probably the fairest would have been to leave the top spot empty and start the list with KR as no.2, then Lewis and Alonso. That method would also take care of Button...;)

[karlth]

Originally posted by kar
One driver won 6 races, only 2 of them from pole.

The guy that got #1 won 4 races ALL FROM POLE.

So because "One driver" was crap in qualifying he should be #1?

[undersquare]

Originally posted by kar
One driver won 6 races, only 2 of them from pole.

The guy that got #1 won 4 races ALL FROM POLE.

This is as jingoistic a list as there have been this year.

Winning from pole would only be relevant if Hammy hadn't done any overtaking, which wasn't the case. Look at the other rookies, how long it normally takes a new driver to be consistent and fast, Hammy matched his very fast and experienced WDC teammate in his debut year, of course that was the most impressive performance. The other front-runners have years of experience.

It's not supposed to be a replicate list of the championship order and wins, but of the driving separate from the cars and other factors. I know we here are all weary of the hype, but if you are being objective, and not jingoistic, Hammy's was by far the standout performance.

[Lifew12]

Originally posted by kar
One driver won 6 races, only 2 of them from pole.

The guy that got #1 won 4 races ALL FROM POLE.

This is as jingoistic a list as there have been this year.

Isn't it just; of course, there should be a Code of Conduct whereby Editors, when compiling such lists, deliberately omit to include drivers of their own nationality, in order to avoid such accusations of jingoism - this would, naturally, ensure such lists are acceptable to all, not matter who one actually believes was deserving of number one, two, or whatever.

The problem of the guy winning FROM POLE (which, naturally, should be avoided in order to make our lives easier) is rather more difficult to police; to ensure drivers do not do what they are meant to (in this case win, from pole) is a problem.

I would have put Raikkonen first, and Hamilton second, but there you go.

[kar]

Did he win any races by overtaking? I don't disagree Lewis was a standout ... but only for a rookie. And even then I found Vettel's performances more stunning simply because he had by far the inferior car. And since some want to spare Lewis some objectivity because of his rookie status I want to afford Vettel even more on account of his having a dog of a car. Lewis as we know had the best package of the year.

If we are being objective then, in pure terms of race results Kimi's performance was superior. Indeed had Kimi enjoyed the relative reliability Lewis had there would have been daylight between the two.

The only reliability issues as far as I can recall Lewis suffered (i.e. excessive tyre wear in Turkey and China, dirty sensor Brazil) were self inflicted in the same way Kimi's were at the and nurburgring and imola 05. The only genuine unforced reliability issue in my view was at the nurb in q2.

I find it pretty amusing that the same journos who took Kimi to task that year saw fit to apologise or make excuses for lewis in 07. Of course he was a rookie and such mistakes were to be expected. But I didn't realise when determining the 'best of the year' you took into account special dispensation for years in the sport.

Also, and perhaps most importantly, Kimi didn't help drop his team into so much dispute over the year, nor cause anywhere near the sort of controversy that Lewis did. Kimi didn't baulk people in qualifying with the alarming regularity that Lewis seemed to (Hungary and Brazil) not did he see fit to use his car like a missile with wheels at the starts trying to spear across the path of anyone behind or next to him.

Lewis as #1 is a joke. And not a funny one.

[santori]

Originally posted by undersquare


It's not supposed to be a replicate list of the championship order and wins, but of the driving separate from the cars and other factors.

I think that Raikkonen was, separate from the cars and other factors, the best driver. Hamilton's performance as a novice was extraordinary, but that's something different and Raikkonen was the better driver.

Edit: kar got there first while I was finishing my biscuit.

[as65p]

Originally posted by undersquare
I know we here are all weary of the hype, but if you are being objective, and not jingoistic, Hammy's was by far the standout performance.

Only if you count in the "rookie & surprise" factor, and I'm not sure if that should be considered for such a list.

[undersquare]

Originally posted by kar
Did he win any races by overtaking?

What you need is a league table of "drivers in cars that are a bit too easy on their tyres for qualifying". That will give you the (only) acceptable result

Or if we are talking an on-track overtaking league 2007, that would be quite interesting...

[Asperon]

Thats actually a pretty good list. Hamilton at No1 is understandable if you factor in the rookie factor and the rest are pretty accurate.

[karlth]

Originally posted by kar
Did he win any races by overtaking?

Are you seriously applauding Kimi's single overtaking for the lead. - when he overtook a car some 5-10 seconds slower?

Just perhaps Autocourse took a note of Raikkonen's struggling first half of the season and decided to give the consistently fast rookie the award instead?

Just perhaps.

[kar]

Originally posted by undersquare


What you need is a league table of "drivers in cars that are a bit too easy on their tyres for qualifying". That will give you the (only) acceptable result

Or if we are talking an on-track overtaking league 2007, that would be quite interesting...

Or a league table of positions lost after qualifying, that too would be interesting... Or alternatively drivers in cars that were hard on their tyres and unable to make them last in races unlike their teammate...

[kar]

Originally posted by karlth


Are you seriously applauding Kimi's single overtaking for the lead. - when he overtook a car some 5-10 seconds slower?

Just perhaps Autocourse took a note of Raikkonen's struggling first half of the season and decided to give the consistently fast rookie the award instead?

Just perhaps.

How many points did Lewis score in the second half of the season (post indy)? Indeed, retirements excluded, Lewis' second half of the season was poorer than Kimi's so-called 'struggling' first half.

Kimi overtook for the lead 5 times, once in France, TWICE!! at Silverstone, on track at Shanghai, and in brazil, although that one is debatable I grant.

Lewis led from lights to pole with the fastest car by far in each of his race victories. The only race he had a genuine fight was in Hungary where despite having the faster car he still could barely contain Raikkonen, and only on account of it being the arguably the most difficult circuit to overtake at.

[karlth]

Originally posted by JForce
The list is a joke, as much for having Button in the top-10 as anything else.

Who then instead? Adrian "I survived the first corner!" Sutil? Barrichello? Sebastian "Oh ****!" Vettel? Coulthard, Who?

[zeppo]

Originally posted by karlth

Just perhaps Autocourse took a note of Raikkonen's struggling first half of the season and decided to give the consistently fast rookie the award instead?

Where was the consistency during the last two races? Losing from being 17 points clear is a huge blunder.

[kar]

Originally posted by zeppo


Where was the consistency during the last two races? Losing from being 17 points clear is a huge blunder.

Look at the original cover they picked for it, it's clear they wrote the majority of it before the season had even ended.

[JForce]

Originally posted by karlth


Who then instead? Adrian "I survived the first corner!" Sutil? Barrichello? Sebastian "Oh ****!" Vettel? Coulthard, Who?

Yeah, any of those.

The Honda was a dog, but Button didn't do anything special with it either. Not hard to do in that car, cause neither did Rubens.

But Sato was better than Jensen this season, and I think DC was too. Sato had at least a couple of drives where you sat up and went "wow thats cool", whereas Jensen didn't.

It's not a slight on Jensen, but it does smack of "Got to get him on the list cause he's English"

[undersquare]

Originally posted by as65p


Only if you count in the "rookie & surprise" factor, and I'm not sure if that should be considered for such a list.

I'm not sure either, I suppose you can define the list either way. But for me Hammy's driving is being compared to Kimi's, they are both great, and the big difference in experience tips the balance.

[kar]

Brundle puts it well

http://www.itv-f1.co...dle&PO_ID=41531

The key thing a lot of people forget is that while Hamilton scampered off at the front, disappeared and wore out his tyres, Alonso and Raikkonen ran comfortably longer on the same rubber.

They looked after their tyres better because they were more experienced.

Makes me laugh at that cretin Winsdor who suggested Lewis had blown Kimi's door off at China until fate seemingly took specific exception with Lewis.

The same sort of limp wristed arguments Henry makes, the guy who lombasts Kimi's loss of concentration in Monaco qualifying yet wilfully ignores the monumental title-losing blunder Lewis made in China and again in Brazil. The blunder of someone who believed the aforementioned limp wristed hype and began to believe the same laws of reason and physics no longer applied to him.

[ensign14]

Originally posted by kar


Look at the original cover they picked for it, it's clear they wrote the majority of it before the season had even ended.

Come on, Autocourse has always tended to advertise itself using a photo of the Championship leader at the time. I have lots of GPIs with Prost on the cover of the 1983 edition...

[undersquare]

Originally posted by kar
Did he win any races by overtaking? I don't disagree Lewis was a standout ... but only for a rookie. And even then I found Vettel's performances more stunning simply because he had by far the inferior car. And since some want to spare Lewis some objectivity because of his rookie status I want to afford Vettel even more on account of his having a dog of a car. Lewis as we know had the best package of the year.

If we are being objective then, in pure terms of race results Kimi's performance was superior. Indeed had Kimi enjoyed the relative reliability Lewis had there would have been daylight between the two.

The only reliability issues as far as I can recall Lewis suffered (i.e. excessive tyre wear in Turkey and China, dirty sensor Brazil) were self inflicted in the same way Kimi's were at the and nurburgring and imola 05. The only genuine unforced reliability issue in my view was at the nurb in q2.

Also, and perhaps most importantly, Kimi didn't help drop his team into so much dispute over the year, nor cause anywhere near the sort of controversy that Lewis did. Kimi didn't baulk people in qualifying with the alarming regularity that Lewis seemed to (Hungary and Brazil) not did he see fit to use his car like a missile with wheels at the starts trying to spear across the path of anyone behind or next to him.

I agree Vettel should have been on the list, he is going to be a star. But he's not yet.

If you take out car factors and team/strategy mistakes Lewis would have won the wdc. His tyre failure in Turkey was certainly not driver error, F1 cars are supposed to be driven to the limit. Likewise if the team had brought him in earlier in China his extra speed over Fernando would have got the reward it deserved. The Brazil problem was that the team set slightly too little airflow through the radiators, and even then he'd have made 5th if the team hadn't switched him to the option tyre too soon.

If Hammy had had Felipe for a teammate then there wouldn't have been any controversy there either. The qualifying baulking was one instance in Brazil, where he went too close to the corner before letting Kimi by but was never on the racing line. And I don't remember any drivers complaining about chopping, he gave everyone the room they needed and in fact made all his passes cleanly all year, remarkably.

[Lifew12]

Originally posted by undersquare


I agree Vettel should have been on the list, he is going to be a star. But he's not yet.

I believe the criteria involves drivers having to have completed the entire season, with certain exceptions (Kubica, for logical reasons.)

To include Vettel, who was impressive but erratic, would have been a travesty, quite honestly. I do agree he will be a star.

As for them having 'written most of it before the season's end' - of course they had!! If you expect the writers to wait until after Brazil and then pen furiously for days and nights to complete a tome of that size you are a hard taskmaster indeed!

[undersquare]

Originally posted by kar
Brundle puts it well

http://www.itv-f1.co...dle&PO_ID=41531



Makes me laugh at that cretin Winsdor who suggested Lewis had blown Kimi's door off at China until fate seemingly took specific exception with Lewis.

The same sort of limp wristed arguments Henry makes, the guy who lombasts Kimi's loss of concentration in Monaco qualifying yet wilfully ignores the monumental title-losing blunder Lewis made in China and again in Brazil. The blunder of someone who believed the aforementioned limp wristed hype and began to believe the same laws of reason and physics no longer applied to him.

I think Brundle is being wise after the event. When Hammy was a whole 20 seconds ahead of Fernando - 80% of a pitstop - his live commentary was all about FA being half a second a lap slower, not wisely preserving his tyres ;) .

No-one could have predicted how the rain was or wasn't going to fall. In fact just as the track got dry enough for dries it rained a bit more, so McLaren put off Hammy's stop, two laps too long.

Likewise I don't think Kimi was deliberately going slowly, giving up 8 seconds, he said his balance was off on full tanks.

It's a pity we didn't get to see Kimi and Lewis fight that one out, it would have been close in the dry.

[karlth]

Originally posted by kar


How many points did Lewis score in the second half of the season (post indy)? Indeed, retirements excluded, Lewis' second half of the season was poorer than Kimi's so-called 'struggling' first half.

The difference is that Hamilton was always fast, inspite of his mistakes in China and Brazil.

Raikkonen had a great second half of a season but he was just plain uninspired during the first half of the season.

Kimi overtook for the lead 5 times, once in France, TWICE!! at Silverstone, on track at Shanghai, and in brazil, although that one is debatable I grant.

Are you counting passing cars in the pits as overtaking moves? Haven't seen that before.

Lewis led from lights to pole with the fastest car by far in each of his race victories. The only race he had a genuine fight was in Hungary where despite having the faster car he still could barely contain Raikkonen, and only on account of it being the arguably the most difficult circuit to overtake at.

Whereas Raikkonen's 6 wins were with a massively inferior car?

[Claudius]

I think Lewis was the best driver of the year, not just the best rookie.

Kimi was more than often bettered by his lack-lustre teammate, and I've yet to see him drive that Ferrari like he used to drive the McLaren. Not a single outstanding race for him this season IMO (bar Fuji maybe).

Lewis OTOH had the Fuji race, which was the most difficult of all races and he did not put a wheel wrong. A rookie with championchip pressure in appalling conditions drove a perfect race. The drive of the year.


So for me, this year Kimis driving didn't impress me. He was much more interesting to watch in say 05. He didn't win the title then but his driving was awesome. This year he won the title but his driving was too uneven.

[karlth]

Originally posted by JForce
But Sato was better than Jensen this season, and I think DC was too. Sato had at least a couple of drives where you sat up and went "wow thats cool", whereas Jensen didn't.

Button had two remarkable qualifying performances, and his first lap at the Nurburgring was according to reports pretty special.

So he had his wow moments but unlike the rest of the young chargers he also managed to keep his head above water in most of the races as well, avoiding many of the silly mistakes we saw from the younger guys.

Coulthard was of course though the driver of the season. He just struggled badly with the car, tyres and track conditions.

[Claudius]

And kar, since you keep harping about overtakings, what about Lewis amazing overtake on Kimi in Monza?
Or doesn't that count because it wasn't for the lead? While Kimis "overtakings" in the pits counts?

Strange logic there...

[karlth]

Originally posted by Claudius
So for me, this year Kimis driving didn't impress me. He was much more interesting to watch in say 05. He didn't win the title then but his driving was awesome. This year he won the title but his driving was too uneven.

I would agree but for the first half only. He disappointed in qualifying throughout the year but his race performances during the second half were great.

The only reason though why I would vote for Raikkonen is due to the fact that he never complains. It such a great attribute and the only time we saw something like that from him, at the Brazilian GP after the incident with Hamilton, it felt like Ferrari had instructed him to moan about it.

[F1Fanatic.co.uk]

I agree with Autocourse's top two and this is why:

2. Kimi Raikkonen

Kimi Raikkonen snatched the world championship in the final round in a manner seldom seen in Formula 1. Not since 1976 has a driver overcome such a large points gap to win the title - and on that occasion James Hunt (Raikkonen’s preferred nom de plume, appropriately) beat Niki Lauda because the Austrian had missed several races through injury.

Raikkonen ended the season in fine style, scoring seven consecutive podiums and winning three of the last four races. Admittedly he had the pressure release of being so far behind in the championship that he could take risks, and Massa gave him a helping hand at Interlagos. But still these were not easy races to win - he never put a foot wrong in the wet/dry drama at Shanghai, and raced from 16th to third in pouring rain at Fuji.

Once he’d got the F2007 to his liking Raikkonen seemed able to win at will. At Magny-Cours and Silverstone he confidently took a heavier load of fuel in qualifying and used it to leapfrog his opponents on race day, Schumacher-style. After a bad crash in practice at Monza (which Ferrari seemed to blame him for but might actually have been caused by damper failure) he persevered to take third and a useful six points.

He won six races compared to Alonso and Hamilton’s four each, and he was the only driver in the top two teams to retire twice because of car failure. Given this, it might seem extraordinarily mean-spirited not to pick him as best driver of the year.

Weighed against Raikkonen’s bravura performances in the latter half of the season were some oddly indifferent drives in the first half of the year. At Sepang he seemed content to take third and rarely looked like passing Hamilton. At Bahrain he didn’t seem to be paying attention at the rolling restart.

At Montreal he ran wide at the start and was passed by Nico Rosberg, which ruined his race. He finished fifth behind Heikki Kovalainen, who’d made his way up from last on the grid. And he missed the pit lane while leading at the Nürburgring.

Worst of all came when he crashed in qualifying at Monte-Carlo - the very worst track at which to make such a mistake. He made a valiant recovery effort on race day but the damage was done and he finished eighth.

Viewed from the perspective of the end of the season it’s easy to overlook some of the problems Raikkonen had early in the year, and how he struggled to overcome them. On balance he had an exceptional season - the move to Ferrari seems to have rejuvenated him. That said, over the course of the season the Ferrari was marginally the better car (regardless of whatever traumas were going on at McLaren).

In this same feature last year I said that Raikkonen was “clearly overdue a world championship” and I would not argue that he didn’t deserve this one.

1. Lewis Hamilton

Lewis Hamilton looked like a championship contender from the first corner of the season, when he rallied from being passed by Robert Kubica to re-take the BMW driver - and Fernando Alonso for good measure.

His uncanny ability to judge the latest possible braking point - particularly at the first corner of a race - was one of several impressive weapons in Hamilton’s arsenal. He picked off both the Ferraris at Sepang and jumped from tenth to fourth at the Nürburgring (until he was hit by a spinning BMW).

He did it partly by outstanding natural feel and partly because, unlike the kind of drivers who fall asleep at restarts or drive into their team mates in safety car periods, you got the impression that he’d bothered to read the rule book. Before the Malaysian Grand Prix he admitted he’d studied the previous F1 starts at the track - and it showed.

No doubt he also picked up the Michael Schumacher lesson that you can shut a door completely on a driver on a straight and not get punished for it. Hamilton’s version of that trick was to give his opponent just enough room to get through - and then insouciantly re-pass them anyway. He did it to Massa at Sepang - twice - and again at the start at Monza.

Perhaps I am old fashioned. If there’s one thing I appreciate in a driver it’s an affinity for wheel-to-wheel race craft - and if there’s one thing that 2007-style F1 undervalues it’s wheel-to-wheel race craft. But Hamilton was strong in other areas, too.

The tragedy of his fall-out with Alonso this year is that they’re actually not that dissimilar. Hamilton, like Alonso, knows just how to treat a set of tyres to inject as much heat and coax as much grip out of them as possible, without destroying them. They traded heart-stopping opposite-lock slides through La Piscine at Monte-Carlo. And they bitterly fought over every last advantage they could wring from their team.

Despite his much-lauded blunders in the final two races, Hamilton’s mistakes were no worse than those of his rivals over the course of the year. There were inconsequential errors at Melbourne (kicking up the dirt on one lap) and Silverstone (almost leaving the pits too soon). His most serious mistakes at the Nürburgring and Shanghai were borne of his unfamiliarity with judging when to change between wet and dry tyres in mixed conditions - not something a driver can pick up in testing.

It’s quite right to point out that he should have been more conservative in the final two races. In particular, trying to race Alonso for third at Interlagos was utterly pointless. But his brief foray off the track at that point didn’t cost him the championship - that came when his gearbox broke a few laps later. His indefatigable charge back through the field, in which he seldom paused before leaping past each driver, made you think on more than one occasion that he just might do it.

It was not the first time his McLaren let him down. It did in qualifying at the Nürburgring, provoking a big crash and leaving him tenth on the grid. And it did in Istanbul when his tyre let go. But crucially, unlike Raikkonen’s troubles, his race problems were not terminal.

Race in, race out, Hamilton looked capable of scoring a podium anywhere. Indeed he led more laps than anyone else (321) and was second on more laps than anyone else (311). His consistency extended to qualifying, where he had more front row starts (12) and a better average starting position than any of his rivals (2.59 vs Alonso 3.18).

I don’t think Hamilton drove a better year than Alonso or Michael Schumacher did in 2006. But on balance over the entire season, Lewis Hamilton was the best driver of 2007.

And i didn’t even mention the fact that he did it all in his first year of racing in Formula 1.

source

[scheivlak]

Originally posted by karlth


Button had two remarkable qualifying performances, and his first lap at the Nurburgring was according to reports pretty special.

So he had his wow moments but unlike the rest of the young chargers he also managed to keep his head above water in most of the races as well

Not too literally - he spun off at the 'Ring (OK, he was not the only one but there were enough drivers who coped) and banged straight into another car (Heidfeld) in the first corner once the race at Fuji got really started.

[wingwalker]

Scrapping your tyres wasn't a problem in itself - Kubica did just that and completely abandoned his strategy coming in something like 10 laps earlier than scheduled, but thanks to that he got some really impressive (even fastest lap if i recall correctly) lap times on both stints and was able to emerge on the lead - which didn't last for long, but this is a different issue. Both Maclaren and Lewis should have been wise enough to do the same, as tenths lost when carrying additional fuel do not equal seconds lost when the car struggles to stay on track. And still, Lewis should have reduced the speed before that corner, he had many laps to notice that the tyres are crap at that point.

As for the ranking, It'd rate Kimi above Hamilton too. If we count factors like Hamilton being rookie and unexperienced we should also remember that Kimi was one of the drivers who was hurt the most by the new tyres, but the seemed to handle it much better than Alonso. And it seemed like learning new tyres was really difficult as they had very little in common with 06 Michelins - tyres on which Lewis sucked on, as was recently reported. As for rating Rosberg above Kubica - i agree, although Kubica had really terrible luck this season (apart from that one moment in Canada, which is a fair exchange imo) and was top class when the car was working good. Massa wouldn't be in my top 5, Vettel was WAY too erratic, but he seems to have the pace (but it is worth noting he didn't look that good against Heidfeld and he had a car he was familiar with in USA). Button - yeah, he was better than Rubbens, but as sad as it is, as i really like the guy, he seems to be outdated a bit. Alonso was disappointing (trackwise, im not even going into you-know-what). Heidfeld was quick and solid although I don't recall him doing some exceptional moves (except for that move on Alonso in Bahrain, that was great). Hekki really upped his game after the start of the season (tyre factor again). Overall, it seems like we have a strongest new faces team in years - Hamilton, Kubica, Vettel, Rosberg, Heikki.. wonder what will next season bring (and it might be even more interesting with Bourdias and Piquet jr), but older drivers really will have to shown they are worth their money in 2008.

[kar]

Originally posted by Claudius
And kar, since you keep harping about overtakings, what about Lewis amazing overtake on Kimi in Monza?
Or doesn't that count because it wasn't for the lead? While Kimis "overtakings" in the pits counts?

Strange logic there...

They were impressive to be sure. But then so too were Kimi's at Monaco and especially in Fuji. The point is Lewis won his races from the front row with nothing to do but drive fast and not crash. On the days he won he had far and away the fastest car and his teammate more often than not was not in a position to threaten him.

Kimi won two races by overtaking his teammate, one race by overtaking both mclarens and on a day when the mclaren was the best car by some margin (hungary) he tenaciously pushed Lewis all the way to the flag. At almost any other circuit (other than hungary) lewis would have lost the race.

It's ridiculous to suggest Lewis was rubbish in 2007, but he wasn't as good as Kimi. As Brundle put it very well in his recap of 2007s top drivers, Lewis didn't do anything magical he was merely exceptionally competent. He didn't do a Kimi at Fuji, nor a Michael at Shanghai 06. Kimi made some mistakes but he also performed some miracles e.g. Fuji and Hungary. Lewis only made some (catastrophic) mistakes without any major redemption.

And for as average as Kimi was in some races (Bahrain / Barca) so too was Lewis when things weren't going his way, e.g. the ridiculousness at the Nurburgring, the chronically mediocre race pace at Silverstone, Monza, Spa, Magny Cours etc...

I think his rookie status should afford him some credit in terms of rating his performance in a relative sense. But taking it into account in terms of who actually performed the best in an aggregate measure over the whole season it is ridiculous.

[karlth]

Originally posted by kar
They were impressive to be sure. But then so too were Kimi's at Monaco and especially in Fuji. The point is Lewis won his races from the front row with nothing to do but drive fast and not crash.

So let me get this straight:

• With the fastest car Hamilton qualified on pole and won the race. Which is bad.
• With the fastest car Raikkonen qualified not on pole and won the race. Which is superb.

Is that what you are saying?

[Spunout]

Originally posted by karlth


So let me get this straight:

• With the fastest car Hamilton qualified on pole and won the race. Which is bad.
• With the fastest car Raikkonen qualified not on pole and won the race. Which is superb.

Is that what you are saying?

The car that is fastest in race isn´t necessarily fastest in qualifying. As some of us can remember, Ferrari had lots of problems with quali pace. I guess the point is when you don´t start from pole, it´s harder to win. Although, I haven´t seen anybody suggesting winning from pole is "bad".

[kar]

Are you suggesting that the Ferrari was not an intrinsically faster car in race trim than qualifying? Therefore it was usual that a McLaren had a fuel balanced advantage in qualifying?

It is obvious to anyone who watched the 2007 that overtaking, even via fuel stops was perhaps the most difficult it's ever been.

I certainly believe that to win races from anywhere but pole in 2007 was an extraordinary achievement, let alone from anywhere but the front row. In fact I believe Raikkonen was the only one to do it more than once, and Alonso the only other driver to manage to win a race from anywhere but p1 after the first lap.

What I am saying is that Lewis was magnificently competent he converted four (but not all) of his poles in to victory. Kimi had more work to do because his package was disproportionately crippled in qualifying, even when the car was overall the one to have in the race.

The days Lewis' car had a performance advantage he had it in both qualifying and the race. The same cannot be said for Raikkonen.

So in my opinion Raikkonen had more to overcome in 2007 and that's why he should be considered the #1 driver. That and he didn't cock up a lead where only 3 (or was it 4) points from two races were required to become champion.

[wingwalker]

Originally posted by kar




Kimi won two races by overtaking his teammate, one race by overtaking both mclarens and on a day when the mclaren was the best car by some margin (hungary) he tenaciously pushed Lewis all the way to the flag. At almost any other circuit (other than hungary) lewis would have lost the race.

Other than Hungary, Monaco, Silverstone (remeber Massa being stuck behind much slower Kubica?), Spain, Spa, Nurburgring (no overtaking moves when the track was dry) and probably more (unless he would have come out of pits on softs right after Hammy on hards/used softs)

[scheivlak]

Originally posted by kar
The days Lewis' car had a performance advantage he had it in both qualifying and the race. The same cannot be said for Raikkonen.

This is getting a bit over the top.
Melbourne anyone?
Magny Cours, Spa, Brazil as well.

[kar]

Originally posted by wingwalker



Other than Hungary, Monaco, Silverstone (remeber Massa being stuck behind much slower Kubica?), Spain, Spa, Nurburgring (no overtaking moves when the track was dry) and probably more (unless he would have come out of pits on softs right after Hammy on hards/used softs)

Raikkonen probably could have overtaken Lewis on track at Silverstone, remember that fantastic sequence in the first stint? But thought better of it because he knew lewis did a glory run for pole (indeed most of his poles, showed him to be lighter than his immediate competitors) and he could take him in the stops.

Spa the Ferrari was a rocket in a straight line I think Raikkonen could have made a move, especially given the F2007's dominance around there. Monaco is perhaps the other circuit where a pass would have been absolutely impossible. But Raikkonen's drive in Hungary, despite having the lesser car on the day was pretty exceptional.

[kar]

Originally posted by scheivlak
This is getting a bit over the top.
Melbourne anyone?
Magny Cours, Spa, Brazil as well.

Four exceptions out of a 17 race season? You can do better than that.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by F1Fanatic.co.uk
I agree with Autocourse's top two and this is why:

Example:

Weighed against Raikkonen’s bravura performances in the latter half of the season were some oddly indifferent drives in the first half of the year. At Sepang he seemed content to take third and rarely looked like passing Hamilton.

...who was way off the pace compared to his teammate, who won the race. Funny how Autocourse forgot this!? Even if we skip the fact that Kimi had down-tuned engine, Massa got into position to try and overtake because Hammy was all over the place. And of course, in the end...KR 3rd, FM 5th. More: KR is crucified for Monaco error, whereas Lewis gets free pass for race-ending mistake at Fuji and gravel trap visit at Nurb. And every race where he was in fact slow compared to the other guy with similar car. Yes 2007 was Hamilton´s rookie season, but in this specific situation that shouldn´t count. And the same applies to nationalism.

[Slowinfastout]

Originally posted by wingwalker
Overall, it seems like we have a strongest new faces team in years - Hamilton, Kubica, Vettel, Rosberg, Heikki.. wonder what will next season bring (and it might be even more interesting with Bourdias and Piquet jr), but older drivers really will have to shown they are worth their money in 2008.

Sorry if I've just highlighted that part of your post but I believe thats an important point.

Nobody disputes that Hamilton had an exceptionnal year for a rookie, and I have no problem with people rating him as the best driver of 2007. Although obviously you always have to remember that 1 point separates the top 3 drivers at the end of the day... With that in mind, its quite easy to tell that people are being generally a bit too emotional...

Its easy for some people to dislike Alonso and the forum kind of reflects that, but on the track he was 1 point from winning the WDC in a new team, like Kimi, and to some extent, like Hamilton as well..

Its amusing to see people argue like theres massive speed difference between them all...

That said, I would personally have difficulty making a top 10.. Apart from Ferrari and McLaren, and BMW too in a sense, you end up with a big blur, IMHO... because the other teams are not only significantly slower, but their performance (the car not the drivers) seem much more inconsistent from a weekend to the next...

There are a couple of drivers who have clearly outperformed their teammates, and I see them on the list up there, but where do they really stand between each others in a 'best driver' ranking? I cant tell for sure because really I cant tell how crap exactly their car was...