49 replies to this topic

[holiday]

Now on the occasion of Loeb and Rossi securing almost simultaneously another title and Schumacher's long-term domination of f1 until not so long ago...have we seen with this triumvirate, men who have in the grand picture dominated the three most important racing series in the world almost without precedent, the best of the best racers/riders ever (before the age of genetically modified pilots)?

[andy-i]

Now on the occasion of Loeb and Rossi securing almost simultaneously another title and Schumacher's long-term domination of f1 until not so long ago...have we seen with this triumvirate, men who have in the grand picture dominated the three most important racing series in the world almost without precedent, the best of the best racers/riders ever (before the age of genetically modified pilots)?

I think you can only answer that question in terms of results. To try to compare drivers/riders with others throughout history on abilty is totally subjective and only ends up in pointless fan-boy type arguments.

Pure Results stats (like mine because I cant be arsed to get all the info required) dont take into account careers shortened by retirement (stewart, hailwood etc) or death (senna, clark etc) but here are the two most basic:-

GP wins
Schumacher 91
Prost 51
Senna 41

GP/F1 titles
Schumacher 7
Fangio 5
Prost 4
5xothers 3

So he has the most titles and roughly the same number of wins as the 2nd and 3rd most successful drivers in history. I think he could claim to the best ever. I personally might not agree but the weight of results is impressive.

WRC wins
Loeb 54
Gronholm 30
Sainz 26


WRC titles
Loeb 6
Makinnen 4
Kankunnen 4

Loebs stats are virtually identical to Schumachers, 2 more titles than any one else and roughly the same number of wins as the 2nd and 3rd most successful drivers in history. An amazing talent no doubt but i'd liked to of seen him in a more competitive era.

500/MotoGP wins
Rossi 77
Ago 68
Doohan 54


500/MotoGP titles
Ago 8
Rossi 7
Doohan 5
3x others 4

Vale has more competiton results wise for the claim of being the GOAT. For me personally he proved it when he moved from the utterly dominant Honda to the drag a dog of a Yahama bike to the title in his first year there. His win in the first race in SA was the most impressive ride ive ever seen. Also credit must go to Jeremy Burgess ( but then the same can be said of Ross Brawn for MS)

All this of course proves nothing, we all have our favourite drivers and riders but that is the whole point of sport. I support Halifax Town because they are my team, not because they are the most succesful (slight dig at the legion of plastic Man Utd fans )

[THE "driverider"]

This may be a controversial statement, first of you could never really compare Juan Manuel Fangio to Michael Schumacher or Giacomo Agostini to Valentino Rossi. Because the machinery and the enviroments in hwich they raced were different. Also is the best driver in the world a Formula 1 driver or a Rally driver? Is the best rider in the world a Moto GP rider or a TT rider? There is no way in which to really find out who is best of the best, and legends will come and go (being able to retire now instead of being killed which is great) and so i still believe we have more to come.

I'll finish with this, when we ever have another John Surtees? When will somone be able to win the World Championship on 2 wheels and 4 wheels ever again?

[The Ragged Edge]

Rossi is good and his stats are there for everybody to see. IMO he should have lost at least one title to Sete Gibernau and at his peak he had no real competition, or maybe it looked like that because he was so good? When Rossi lost to Hayden, i knew then he was not infalable. When Stoner blew him away 2007, I started to see Rossi was not a god, but a mere man. Also seeing Pedrosa, Lorenzo and Stoner stick it to him in 2009 and watching Rossi having to ride out of his skin and push like never before, was a breath of fresh air. Considering Stoners lay off, Rossi does not look that impressive. IMO the era of Rossi dominance is over.

Schumacher doubted himself and retired too early. I still believe today the 2005 & 2006 Renault must have been a rocketship, for Alonso to have beaten him. I still dont believe Alonso is quicker than Schumi.

Loeb? I'm still not decided. Could he have beaten a Tommi Makinen in his prime? Loeb came along IMO, when the greats were on their way out. Still, he took on and beat Gronholm, so he must be good. Begrudgingly you can only beat whats put infront of you and Loeb has done that. Best of the best? Only time will tell.

[Jimisgod]

In reguards to Loeb at least, I feel he happened to be the best driver at the time when the WRC has, essentially, been in free-fall and drivers of the quality of Makkinen, Sainz, Kankkunen and McRae were retiring. He has been magnified from a very good driver to almost an almost "God of rally" by the faltering competition of both teams and drivers.

[Colombo]

2004 was the only season when all of the big three won their titles.

GC

[SeanValen]

Perhaps we've been lucky to see a gifted group of sportsmen to dominate the stage in our generation, and for us, we got to enjoy it, the best of the best in these times, yes. For all time......that's always left open for speculation, too many variables. But again, results wise, sure, the claim is there to call them best.

[DarthWillie]

Rossi is good and his stats are there for everybody to see. IMO he should have lost at least one title to Sete Gibernau and at his peak he had no real competition, or maybe it looked like that because he was so good? When Rossi lost to Hayden, i knew then he was not infalable. When Stoner blew him away 2007, I started to see Rossi was not a god, but a mere man. Also seeing Pedrosa, Lorenzo and Stoner stick it to him in 2009 and watching Rossi having to ride out of his skin and push like never before, was a breath of fresh air. Considering Stoners lay off, Rossi does not look that impressive. IMO the era of Rossi dominance is over.

Schumacher doubted himself and retired too early. I still believe today the 2005 & 2006 Renault must have been a rocketship, for Alonso to have beaten him. I still dont believe Alonso is quicker than Schumi.

All the arugments used against Rossi can also be used against Schumacher? Why the difference? You could also argue the ducatti combined with bridgestones was a rocketship

[Boing 2]

did rosssi and loeb have as much help as schumacher?

i don't follow WRC but i know rossis is respected by his peers in a way schumacher never was, that's somethinfg special and tells you a lot.

[Siskue]

did rosssi and loeb have as much help as schumacher?

i don't follow WRC but i know rossis is respected by his peers in a way schumacher never was, that's somethinfg special and tells you a lot.

would you car to provide some examples?

[ex Rhodie racer 2]

This may be a controversial statement, first of you could never really compare Juan Manuel Fangio to Michael Schumacher or Giacomo Agostini to Valentino Rossi. Because the machinery and the enviroments in which they raced were different. Also is the best driver in the world a Formula 1 driver or a Rally driver?

Totally agree. It´s apples and pears. Not the same thing.

Is the best rider in the world a Moto GP rider or a TT rider? .

Moto GP riders, no question. I would give anything to see Valentino on the Island. He might not win 1st time out (depending on how much homework he did), but after a few tries he would rule the roads, for sure. The guys winning in the island today are not really competitive on circuits, even at national level superbike racing.

I'll finish with this, when we ever have another John Surtees? When will somone be able to win the World Championship on 2 wheels and 4 wheels ever again?

Very possible, but only a kid who has a carting and bike racing background. I believe Rossi could have done it if he had switched immediately after winning his first world title (125cc at 17 years old) , or even after winning his first 500 title (at 21), but I think any later would have been too late.

[PrettyBoy22]

I'm not into WRC but am a massive F1 and MotoGP fan so i won't talk about Sebastian Loeb.

Rossis talent is that great i don't think anyone can doubt he's the greatest of his era- probably of all time. However, like someone said earlier in this thread it's so refreshing to see Lorenzo and Stoner pushing him so hard even as a fan of him

Schumacher is the greatest F1 driver of all time- so the stats say anyway. You can't really compare which is more difficult to win but if i HAD to pick one i'd say Schumacher over Rossi.

I don't think we've seen the last of the greatest ever either. Records are there to be broken!

[MegaManson]

did rosssi and loeb have as much help as schumacher?

i don't follow WRC but i know rossis is respected by his peers in a way schumacher never was, that's somethinfg special and tells you a lot.

The same peers that elected him as head of the GPDA ?

Only JV didn't respect him and he had personal reasons to (Jerez)

[MegaManson]

Schumacher, Loeb and Rossi have cleaned up in era's where competition has been weak, they are the best of their era though

Schumacher missed the Prost/Senna/Piquet/Mansell/Alesi golden era really and only had competition really from Hill, Villeneuve, Hakkinen and when he was past it Alonso

Loeb missed the era of McRae/Burns/Makinen/Sainz/Kankunnen at their peaks, his only competition has been Solberg/Gronholm/Hirvonen so again a pretty weak era

Rossi missed the golden era of Sheene/Roberts/Doohan/Mamola etc etc and has just had the likes of Gibernau, Lorenzo, Stoner etc for competition

All 3 are great at what they do but have had weaker competition compared with many champs that have achieved less

[PrettyBoy22]

Schumacher, Loeb and Rossi have cleaned up in era's where competition has been weak, they are the best of their era though

Schumacher missed the Prost/Senna/Piquet/Mansell/Alesi golden era really and only had competition really from Hill, Villeneuve, Hakkinen and when he was past it Alonso

Loeb missed the era of McRae/Burns/Makinen/Sainz/Kankunnen at their peaks, his only competition has been Solberg/Gronholm/Hirvonen so again a pretty weak era

Rossi missed the golden era of Sheene/Roberts/Doohan/Mamola etc etc and has just had the likes of Gibernau, Lorenzo, Stoner etc for competition

All 3 are great at what they do but have had weaker competition compared with many champs that have achieved less

Alesi? He raced against him for 8 years of his career. And also how can you include Alesi in that "golden era"?

[pacwest]

Loeb does not rate in my books.

Sorta like Indy Racing League champions. I've watched a lot of WRC in my day. Loeb was racing in a watered down event.

[Beamer]

Schumacher, Loeb and Rossi have cleaned up in era's where competition has been weak, they are the best of their era though

Schumacher missed the Prost/Senna/Piquet/Mansell/Alesi golden era really and only had competition really from Hill, Villeneuve, Hakkinen and when he was past it Alonso

Loeb missed the era of McRae/Burns/Makinen/Sainz/Kankunnen at their peaks, his only competition has been Solberg/Gronholm/Hirvonen so again a pretty weak era

Rossi missed the golden era of Sheene/Roberts/Doohan/Mamola etc etc and has just had the likes of Gibernau, Lorenzo, Stoner etc for competition

All 3 are great at what they do but have had weaker competition compared with many champs that have achieved less

Competitors are measured against each other. Does one look so great because the rest is mediocre, or does the rest look mediocre because one is so great?

Look at Usain Bolt: As soon as he started running the 100m the rest suddenly looked pretty crap.

[Risil]

Moto GP riders, no question. I would give anything to see Valentino on the Island. He might not win 1st time out (depending on how much homework he did), but after a few tries he would rule the roads, for sure. The guys winning in the island today are not really competitive on circuits, even at national level superbike racing.

Well, the Senior TT winner this year also won a national championship on the short circuits.

[MegaManson]

Alesi? He raced against him for 8 years of his career. And also how can you include Alesi in that "golden era"?

Well I meant Berger but true even Gerhard wasn't a true legend but one of the best of his era and was not his best when Schumi was at his winning stage

[qvn]

Competitors are measured against each other. Does one look so great because the rest is mediocre, or does the rest look mediocre because one is so great?

Look at Usain Bolt: As soon as he started running the 100m the rest suddenly looked pretty crap.

+1 I could not have said it better.

Edited by qvn, 27 October 2009 - 16:09.

[rally man]

Schumacher, Loeb and Rossi have cleaned up in era's where competition has been weak, they are the best of their era though

Schumacher missed the Prost/Senna/Piquet/Mansell/Alesi golden era really and only had competition really from Hill, Villeneuve, Hakkinen and when he was past it Alonso

Loeb missed the era of McRae/Burns/Makinen/Sainz/Kankunnen at their peaks, his only competition has been Solberg/Gronholm/Hirvonen so again a pretty weak era

Rossi missed the golden era of Sheene/Roberts/Doohan/Mamola etc etc and has just had the likes of Gibernau, Lorenzo, Stoner etc for competition

I disagree you heavely. Grönholm and Solberg beat crap out of old generation (Mäkinen, Mcrae, Sainz) so thoroughly that it's very hard to see how those old guns would have ever been better. I wouldn't also belittle Stoner and Lorenzo. If Stoner had been full healthy Rossi could have had one championship less. Stoner was already 2008 affected by wrist problem and in this year he has been indisputably out of contention due to physical factors.

I would rather say that it should be attributed to the nature of modern time that there is certain drivers dominating continually. In past times power-relationships between the teams were much more inconsistent. For instance Loeb and Schumacher have enjoyed the best machinery in almost every year. Perhaps only in Rossi's case the weak level of competition has been the reason of dominance. But that time is over now. Let's see if rossi is able to win next year. It will be task of his life!

[pacwest]

+1 I could not have said it better.

So the people that raced against Schumacher and became champions should rate. JV gets no respect.

[MegaManson]

I disagree you heavely. Grönholm and Solberg beat crap out of old generation (Mäkinen, Mcrae, Sainz) so thoroughly that it's very hard to see how those old guns would have ever been better. I wouldn't also belittle Stoner and Lorenzo. If Stoner had been full healthy Rossi could have had one championship less. Stoner was already 2008 affected by wrist problem and in this year he has been indisputably out of contention due to physical factors.

I would rather say that it should be attributed to the nature of modern time that there is certain drivers dominating continually. In past times power-relationships between the teams were much more inconsistent. For instance Loeb and Schumacher have enjoyed the best machinery in almost every year. Perhaps only in Rossi's case the weak level of competition has been the reason of dominance. But that time is over now. Let's see if rossi is able to win next year. It will be task of his life!

McRae/Makinen/Sainz were has beens when Loeb started his dominance, I think with Makinen and Sainz had Loeb been racing with them at their peaks Loeb would be maybe a double champion, the fact Loeb best them when they were in their mid to late 30's doesn't really count as they were past it

Same as had Schumi been a few years younger and had his career when Senna/Prost/Mansell and Piquet were at their peak would he be a 7 times champion ? I would say nearer 2 time

Had Rossi been racing in the Barry Sheene/Roberts Snr era would he have as many titles and wins ? I doubt it

You can only beat what is infront of you and all 3 have done that well

[Risil]

Had Rossi been racing in the Barry Sheene/Roberts Snr era would he have as many titles and wins ? I doubt it

Rossi racing 500s in the 1980s? Wouldn't have stood a chance, not with his lack of experience on dirt.

Undoubtedly he's the motorsports figure of the decade, but he won't go down as the undisputed greatest of all time. If the combined efforts of John Surtees, Giacomo Agostini, Mike Hailwood, Kenny Roberts, Eddie Lawson, Wayne Rainey and Mick Doohan haven't conclusively unseated Geoff Duke from his place as the Greatest, what chance does the latest one have?

[ex Rhodie racer 2]

Well, the Senior TT winner this year also won a national championship on the short circuits.

With respect, Plater is a very experienced, and fairly competent short circuit rider who was competing in the national 600 supersport class against a field of relative beginners. Hardly world class stuff, I think you will agree.

[Risil]

With respect, Plater is a very experienced, and fairly competent short circuit rider who was competing in the national 600 supersport class against a field of relative beginners. Hardly world class stuff, I think you will agree.

I know, but it's definitely one of the best 600 series out there. And you did say 'national level' racing. Any higher up the motorsport ladder and the insurance premiums would hardly make a TT excursion worth a rider's while.

Edited by Risil, 27 October 2009 - 16:53.

[SeanValen]

I'm not into WRC but am a massive F1 and MotoGP fan so i won't talk about Sebastian Loeb.

Rossis talent is that great i don't think anyone can doubt he's the greatest of his era- probably of all time. However, like someone said earlier in this thread it's so refreshing to see Lorenzo and Stoner pushing him so hard even as a fan of him

Schumacher is the greatest F1 driver of all time- so the stats say anyway. You can't really compare which is more difficult to win but if i HAD to pick one i'd say Schumacher over Rossi.

I don't think we've seen the last of the greatest ever either. Records are there to be broken!

The thing with Schumacher as well, he hasn't ruled out returning now as well, something nobody was expecting prior, he could still add to his records if he wants.

[rally man]

McRae/Makinen/Sainz were has beens when Loeb started his dominance, I think with Makinen and Sainz had Loeb been racing with them at their peaks Loeb would be maybe a double champion, the fact Loeb best them when they were in their mid to late 30's doesn't really count as they were past it

Grönholm was 39 during 2007 and he practically paralleled Loeb during whole season collecting more gravel points than Loeb! Mäkinen and Mcrae on the contrary were outpaced by minytes per/rally consistently when they were not as old as Grlnholm was in 2007. If my memory serves me Tommi retired when he was 37 and before it he was thoroughly outpaced by Solberg.

When Grönholm came to the world championship he won the whole series in his first year. At that point Tommi and Colin were almost in the same age where Loeb and Solberg are now.

Loeb has done the same points as I am doing now. I have followed rallying very closely during last ten years and to me it's question if Tommi and others were ever as good as Grönholm and Solberg, not reverse. The reason why Loeb has been so dominant is Citroen team. Loeb is also probably the best ever rally driver which helps the thing. However it's clear that Grönholm had as competitive car only in his last season and Solberg had when he won his championship. Citroen has not always been the fastest but it has always been the most reliable car which has helped greatly.

Edited by rally man, 27 October 2009 - 18:03.

[Raelene]

Schumacher, Loeb and Rossi have cleaned up in era's where competition has been weak, they are the best of their era though

Or possibly all three were so good they made the competiton look weak....

[postajegenye]

Or possibly all three were so good they made the competiton look weak....

Yeah... just consider 2000-2004 without MS. We might have had great battles between Mika, DC, Rubens (who knows what he could have done without MS as his team mate) and later between Kimi, Montoya, Alonso... maybe the racing would have been much more exciting and we would say how awesome those drivers are/were, they belong to the all-time greats etc... if there hadn't been a driver so superior, nobody would say that the field was weak... (By the way, I don't think it was weak anyway.)

[Atreiu]

Rossi admitted he has been pushed harder than ever in these last two seasons, and even though he has committed more mistakes than usually this season, he has also won both titles and reassured himself. So maybe, in his case, we can concede he took the benefit of a weaker competition in his first titles. But I still see his 2004 title as the most important and significant one of his collection.

So I guess we can assume he did benefit from a "weak" playing field but then he also raised his game when the time called for it.

Too bad Doohan had his career interrupted.

[holiday]

Schumacher, Loeb and Rossi have cleaned up in era's where competition has been weak, they are the best of their era though

Schumacher missed the Prost/Senna/Piquet/Mansell/Alesi golden era really and only had competition really from Hill, Villeneuve, Hakkinen and when he was past it Alonso

Loeb missed the era of McRae/Burns/Makinen/Sainz/Kankunnen at their peaks, his only competition has been Solberg/Gronholm/Hirvonen so again a pretty weak era

Rossi missed the golden era of Sheene/Roberts/Doohan/Mamola etc etc and has just had the likes of Gibernau, Lorenzo, Stoner etc for competition

All 3 are great at what they do but have had weaker competition compared with many champs that have achieved less

Looks like the classical zero-sum game mistake. It could be just as well the other way round, with Prost/Senna/Piquet/Mansell/Alesi, McRae/Burns/Makinen/Sainz/Kankunnen and Sheene/Roberts/Doohan/Mamola were only achieving so much because they were not against someone like MS, Loeb or Rossi, but only against each other.

[Ducks McTeeth]

All I want to know is who will be able to take the triple crown of auto racing next. Graham Hill is the only one so far; Mario Andretti tried and finished second at Le Mans, and Jacques Villeneuve tried and finished second at Le Mans. There is something noble about this pursuit; it was even fun watching a very old Mario try one last time in a Panoz several years ago. These guys are racers.

[GhostR]

Potentially controversial reply: I think a fully fit Doohan would have been at least the equal of Rossi if they'd raced in the same era. That Doohan could do what he did after the injury he suffered...

[Johnrambo]

Schumacher had the privilege to drive great Ferrari's for most of his career. Loeb has the privilege to race against mediocre opposition talentwise. Only Rossi stands out as he neither has had equipment advantage or lack of skillful competitors like the two others.

[P123]

No doubting that all three are greats of their respective sports.

However, Schumacher and Loeb have enjoyed the majority of their successes against similar backdrops- weak competition, the best car and previously unheard of levels of reliability.

Both are easily in the top 5 of all time, but others could have done the same with the same favourable situation. I don't think people should salivate too much over their stats, impressive as they may seem.

Edited by P123, 27 October 2009 - 20:50.

[lustigson]

Triumvirate Schumacher, Rossi and Loeb - Have we seen the Best of the Best?

I'm not sure about 'the best of the best', but an exceptional bunch, indeed. And to think that the latter two are far from retired...

[George Costanza]

Or possibly all three were so good they made the competiton look weak....

Tennis analog: Pete Sampras and Roger Federer did this...

[George Costanza]

Best of the best? That's the one and only Juan Manuel Fangio.

Edited by George Costanza, 28 October 2009 - 02:08.

[pinnacle racing]

Ahem ... Tom Kristensen - 8 time Le Mans winner.

Can he be considered as an equal to those 3 guys?

Edited by pinnacle racing, 28 October 2009 - 02:22.

[Magnus]

Yeah... just consider 2000-2004 without MS. We might have had great battles between Mika, DC, Rubens (who knows what he could have done without MS as his team mate) and later between Kimi, Montoya, Alonso... maybe the racing would have been much more exciting and we would say how awesome those drivers are/were, they belong to the all-time greats etc... if there hadn't been a driver so superior, nobody would say that the field was weak... (By the way, I don't think it was weak anyway.)

Mika, Dc Rubens, Hill, Montoya ect would not be seen as greats without schumacher though, so that argument that michael surpressed a generation of possible greats because he was so much better is just rubbish. Anyone who followed the sport during 94 onwards knows full well it was a weak period lacking any legitimate great talent except Schumacher. Schumacher was lucky it took Alonso 5 years to get into machinery worthy of his talent, and lucky senna expired early. Without those circumstances his record would only be half of what it is today.

[Birelman]

Well, the way Formula 1 is changing, I seriously doubt a "Dinasty" such as Schumacher enjoyed in Ferrari will ever be seen again. So, statistically, at least, I think maybe, yes, the best has been seen.

As far as raw talent is concerned, not even close......

[Magnus]

Looks like the classical zero-sum game mistake. It could be just as well the other way round, with Prost/Senna/Piquet/Mansell/Alesi, McRae/Burns/Makinen/Sainz/Kankunnen and Sheene/Roberts/Doohan/Mamola were only achieving so much because they were not against someone like MS, Loeb or Rossi, but only against each other.

How many races did schumacher win when prost, manseel and senna were racing? 4 out of 38? Your argument doesnt stack up.

[Mary Popsins]

It's likely that we have seen the best of the best.

It's also debatable, hopefully.

It's unfortunate that it hasn't been exciting though. To start with, it's Rossi's fault: he rarely falls, never gets injured, and he often pulls the fastest laps. That leaves everyone else behind.

Then it's Schumacher's fault: a mix of incomparable skills, together with the bitchiness in his driving, not to mention so many external favorable influences.

Finally it's Loeb's fault: he has a fifty per cent chance to win a rally he participates to. Unfortunately, I haven't "seen" much of that. The WRC absence of coverage is a greater scandal than almost anything happening in F1. Plus my stupid S..box crashed during the recording of the "daily highlights" for the final day.

I'll check on Youtube.

[Raelene]

Without those circumstances his record would only be half of what it is today.

IYO of course...

and many of us watched well before 94...

[Mary Popsins]

Anyway the number of wins in itself means absolutely nothing. You have to consider the ratio races/wins. Until 1966 there were less than 10 races per F1 season. There must be a statistic on that somewhere. I guess.

Another thing is that you win when you have to, and if you have to. That's what Jimmie Johnson does every weekend.

[MS7XWDC]

it would appear [at least in F1] that we are trending to a 1 WDC / 2 WDC champion.

interested to see what Fernando does next year, however, having 2 WDC in his pocket

[Risil]

Anyway the number of wins in itself means absolutely nothing. You have to consider the ratio races/wins. Until 1966 there were less than 10 races per F1 season. There must be a statistic on that somewhere. I guess.

Championship races. If anything drivers in the past drove more races than their counterparts do today.

[holiday]

How many races did schumacher win when prost, manseel and senna were racing? 4 out of 38? Your argument doesnt stack up.

He ranked in 1992 and 1994 before AS in the standings (don't even try to bring 1991 into the equation when he jumped into f1 with zero mileage), and was way better than Mansell in 1994 on a race per points basis despite the latter had better machinery. And the best was yet way to come....

[hsvone]

Looks like the classical zero-sum game mistake. It could be just as well the other way round, with Prost/Senna/Piquet/Mansell/Alesi, McRae/Burns/Makinen/Sainz/Kankunnen and Sheene/Roberts/Doohan/Mamola were only achieving so much because they were not against someone like MS, Loeb or Rossi, but only against each other.

Exactly! It's like asking how Fangio would have done in a modern F1 car (too unfit?) against how Schumacher would have done in a '50s GP car (too scared?). You just can't compare.

And I still believe Fangio to be the greatest.