430 replies to this topic

[nordschleife]

No, not enough said. Is that all you've got to suggest James Hunt deserves to be higher than Hamilton?

Worth mentioning Hunt won his championship in no small part due to the absence of Lauda for two rounds after his accident at Germany.

Plus, zero Ferrari entries at the following race and only one Ferrari entry in the one after that.

[theTruth]

clark behind senna and prost..wow

Generational bias much . . . ? I can understand Clark/Senna, but behind Prost as well? Doesn't make sense . . . .

[theTruth]

Vettel P26, Kubica 40 something...

JPM and JV are nowhere.

Do not agree with the top.
MS I would personally rate above Senna. Prost would be No. 2, maybe sharing P1 with Michael. while Senna 3

I cannot rate Clark or Fangio, because I wouldn't even know to judge them in fair manner. I think conditions then, and conditions in recent history might not even be comparable for all practical reasons.

Why don't you do some reading? Being on the edge when death was a constant companion, surely rates higher just on the basis that it is way more complicated a proposition to go exceedingly fast, when any miscalculation was potentially fatal. And I mean any medium to high speed calculation, not even taking into account mechanical unpredictability, which was much more a problem than it is today, with no possibility for refutation from even the most ardent "my era" is best cheerleaders!

[exmayol]

The poll is pure rubbish.

[Les]

I noticed a post on the first page (from 2009) asking why Vettel was so high on the list. A fair point at the time possibly but no doubt he would be a lot higher now and deserving of it. Perhaps Jenson Button might have moved up a few places too.

[as65p]

Why don't you do some reading? Being on the edge when death was a constant companion, surely rates higher just on the basis that it is way more complicated a proposition to go exceedingly fast, when any miscalculation was potentially fatal. And I mean any medium to high speed calculation, not even taking into account mechanical unpredictability, which was much more a problem than it is today, with no possibility for refutation from even the most ardent "my era" is best cheerleaders!

Problem is, "the edge" in the old days becomes rather a broad space, on closer look. Fangio himself described his Nürburgring '57 as "I’d never driven like that before, and I knew I never would again.” Which in cold numbers means driving some eight seconds faster than he had done in practice, in the race. Even taking the length of the ring into account, this would translate to a modern driver suddenly finding nearly 2 seconds on a random Tilke track, within himself, just by driving closer to "the edge".

Doesn't happen, obviously. Which suggests that, quite naturally, the dangers and fragility of ancient cars was taken into account by the drivers of that era, they left a margin. Simply had to, in order to survive more than a few corners, because as you rightly say, death might have been a immediate consequence if they got things wrong just once. That's why Fangios drive that day was so unique and memorable, he apparently for once threw all caution out of the window and really got to the cars limit on the day.

On bravery, I think the oldtimers won't ever be surpassed. But on pure skill, and ability to operate close to the maximum of their machinery for lap after lap, it's a whole different matter.

[nordschleife]

When did that period of "death was a constant companion" end? Seems to me that would be the early eighties, depending on the constructor, when aluminum chassis (failing Villeneuve) were superceded by carbon-fibre chassis (saving Watson).

[theTruth]

Can't argue with either of these points, except maybe aspy your last sentence, just for the sake of argument itself. Maybe this is just a reflection of my own bias for those 60s era cars. . . . But my main point is I guess, to lead and to win, when the potential consequences of leading and going faster than every one else were so daunting, takes something very special indeed (and Senna and Stewart are in my top five as well). Also, on the point about skill, and operating close to the limits of the machinery, check out the quote about Clark's first Spa victory (of four in a row), when it was said that he was so far ahead after the first lap, that folks were sure there that there must have been an accident behind him. That is definitely operating close to the limits, at what was then a very dangerous track. (Was not intending to go too far OT)

[marcoferrari]

The official order of "best" drivers according to statistics: /chrono/

01 M Schumacher
02 J M Fangio
03 A Prost
04 J Brabham
05 J Stewart
06 N Lauda
07 N Piquet
08 A Senna !!!
09 A Ascari
10 J Clark !!!
11 G Hill
12 E Fittipaldi
13 M Häkkinen
14 F Alonso
15 S Vettel
16 G Farina
17 M Hawthorn
18 P Hill
19 J Surtees
20 D Hulme
21 J Rindt
22 J Hunt
23 M Andretti
24 J Scheckter
25 A Jones
26 K Rosberg
27 N Mansell !!!
28 D Hill
29 J Villeneuve
30 K Räikkonen

No Stirling Moss, Ronnie Peterson, Gilles Villeneuve or Lewis Hamilton in top 30, Senna and Clark much lower then people would have expected...
I am much more satisfied with the order I got from f1 stats all seasons lap charts with Senna in 2nd place just ahead of Clark... It looks more representative and balanced...

Edited by marcoferrari, 11 December 2011 - 10:03.

[theTruth]

Good points.

[scheivlak]

Also, on the point about skill, and operating close to the limits of the machinery, check out the quote about Clark's first Spa victory (of four in a row), when it was said that he was so far ahead after the first lap, that folks were sure there that there must have been an accident behind him.

I guess that was about his second victory, in the rain, in 1963.
Clark's first victory was in 1962, when he started 16th and took the lead on lap 9.

[jj2728]

This is probably TNF stuff, but it should be remembered that Clark hated Spa. In 1960 both Alan Stacey (Jimmy's teammate) and Chris Bristow were killed durning the race, Mike Taylor suffered career ending injuries after a practice crash and Moss was injured badly enough to keep him out of action for some months afterwards. Today's Spa retains, thankfully, some of the grandeur of the past, but the old circuit was something else indeed.

[Juan Kerr]

This just shows that Joe Public are so ignorant to anything they just follow what they're 'spoon fed' and that's another example of why NOT to listen to the fans when re-formatting sport, they are stupid.

Where the **** is Tazio Nuvolari in the list !?

[theTruth]

I guess that was about his second victory, in the rain, in 1963.
Clark's first victory was in 1962, when he started 16th and took the lead on lap 9.

Righto . . . , I remembered the quote (from reading about it), mis-remembered which of the four straight it was. Thanks.

[theTruth]

This is probably TNF stuff, but it should be remembered that Clark hated Spa. In 1960 both Alan Stacey (Jimmy's teammate) and Chris Bristow were killed durning the race, Mike Taylor suffered career ending injuries after a practice crash and Moss was injured badly enough to keep him out of action for some months afterwards. Today's Spa retains, thankfully, some of the grandeur of the past, but the old circuit was something else indeed.

On Clark, yeah, frightening. . . and therefore uber gutsy to do what he did there. 1960 was his first race there. . . . I was going to ask what TNF was, but I just got it. I checked that out last night, and didn't see anything specifically, and since this is a "top 100" poll, I guess that includes top five too, , but there are a lot of other oddities on this poll as well, just that the Clark rating jumped out at me immediately.

[theTruth]

Where the **** is Tazio Nuvolari in the list !?

I think the list of drivers who didn't vote says a lot about the gravitas of this particular endeavor. . . .

[jhattara]

After giving drivers points based on WDC final position with the current points system and dividing the sums by the number of seasons driven the top of the list looks like this:

1 Juan Manuel Fangio 20,13
2 Alain Prost 16,62
3 Jackie Stewart 16,00
4 Michael Schumacher 15,78
5 Lewis Hamilton 15,00
6 Ayrton Senna 14,91
7 Sebastian Vettel 14,40
8 Nino Farina 14,00
9 Alberto Ascari 13,00
10 Fernando Alonso 12,70
11 Jim Clark 12,67
12 Kimi Räikkönen 12,11
13 Nelson Piquet 11,21
14 Mika Häkkinen 10,73
15 Stirling Moss 10,73
16 Mike Hawthorn 10,71
17 Juan Pablo Montoya 10,67
18 Damon Hill 10,50
19 Denny Hulme 10,10
20 Niki Lauda 9,92
21 Jody Scheckter 9,44
22 Carlos Reutemann 8,82
23 François Cevert 8,75
24 Emerson Fittipaldi 8,73
25 Luigi Fagioli 8,50
26 Eugenio Castellotti 8,33
27 Gerhard Berger 8,29
28 David Coulthard 7,87
29 James Hunt 7,86
30 Nigel Mansell 7,60
31 Jenson Button 7,50
32 Tony Brooks 7,50
33 Jochen Rindt 7,43
34 Jack Brabham 7,19
35 John Surtees 7,15
36 Ronnie Peterson 7,00
37 Graham Hill 7,00
38 Keke Rosberg 7,00
39 Phil Hill 7,00
40 Clay Regazzoni 6,82

[flyer121]

After giving drivers points based on WDC final position with the current points system and dividing the sums by the number of seasons driven the top of the list looks like this:

1 Juan Manuel Fangio 20,13
2 Alain Prost 16,62
3 Jackie Stewart 16,00
4 Michael Schumacher 15,78
5 Lewis Hamilton 15,00
6 Ayrton Senna 14,91
7 Sebastian Vettel 14,40
8 Nino Farina 14,00
9 Alberto Ascari 13,00
10 Fernando Alonso 12,70
11 Jim Clark 12,67
12 Kimi Räikkönen 12,11
13 Nelson Piquet 11,21
14 Mika Häkkinen 10,73
15 Stirling Moss 10,73
16 Mike Hawthorn 10,71
17 Juan Pablo Montoya 10,67
18 Damon Hill 10,50
19 Denny Hulme 10,10
20 Niki Lauda 9,92
21 Jody Scheckter 9,44
22 Carlos Reutemann 8,82
23 François Cevert 8,75
24 Emerson Fittipaldi 8,73
25 Luigi Fagioli 8,50
26 Eugenio Castellotti 8,33
27 Gerhard Berger 8,29
28 David Coulthard 7,87
29 James Hunt 7,86
30 Nigel Mansell 7,60
31 Jenson Button 7,50
32 Tony Brooks 7,50
33 Jochen Rindt 7,43
34 Jack Brabham 7,19
35 John Surtees 7,15
36 Ronnie Peterson 7,00
37 Graham Hill 7,00
38 Keke Rosberg 7,00
39 Phil Hill 7,00
40 Clay Regazzoni 6,82

How can be vettel so low then... Which yer did you make him debut?

[Watkins74]

jhattara,

Are you counting full seasons or including partial seasons?

[Group B]

How can be vettel so low then... Which yer did you make him debut?

Why worry? It's all hyper subjective. Had MS not come back he'd be higher, had Hamilton not spent every year in a top car he'd be lower, etc, etc. A bit of fun, yes, but far from an accurate way to rank drivers. Frankly, Vettel's not yet done enough to be so high, as, obviously, hasn't Hamilton.

[Sakae]

After giving drivers points based on WDC final position with the current points system and dividing the sums by the number of seasons driven the top of the list looks like this:

1 Juan Manuel Fangio 20,13
2 Alain Prost 16,62
3 Jackie Stewart 16,00
4 Michael Schumacher 15,78
5 Lewis Hamilton 15,00
6 Ayrton Senna 14,91
7 Sebastian Vettel 14,40
8 Nino Farina 14,00
9 Alberto Ascari 13,00
10 Fernando Alonso 12,70
11 Jim Clark 12,67
12 Kimi Räikkönen 12,11
13 Nelson Piquet 11,21
14 Mika Häkkinen 10,73
15 Stirling Moss 10,73
16 Mike Hawthorn 10,71
17 Juan Pablo Montoya 10,67
18 Damon Hill 10,50
19 Denny Hulme 10,10
20 Niki Lauda 9,92
21 Jody Scheckter 9,44
22 Carlos Reutemann 8,82
23 François Cevert 8,75
24 Emerson Fittipaldi 8,73
25 Luigi Fagioli 8,50
26 Eugenio Castellotti 8,33
27 Gerhard Berger 8,29
28 David Coulthard 7,87
29 James Hunt 7,86
30 Nigel Mansell 7,60
31 Jenson Button 7,50
32 Tony Brooks 7,50
33 Jochen Rindt 7,43
34 Jack Brabham 7,19
35 John Surtees 7,15
36 Ronnie Peterson 7,00
37 Graham Hill 7,00
38 Keke Rosberg 7,00
39 Phil Hill 7,00
40 Clay Regazzoni 6,82

It appears some people will bent backwards just to manipulate history to theirs vision of reality.

[cheapracer]

The lists by drivers have always been amusing but there is some serious flaws, Denny Hulme was not only an extremely underated great driver he was also a world champion but he's in the 60's rankings ffs!

And 3 times WDC Jack Brabham does not deserve to be outside the top ten, you don't get to be 3 times WDC, be successful for 15 years in F1 and win your last race at age 44 by luck.

While I am pleased to see Jackie Stewart 6th where he should be, overall a lot of it you would have to put down to lack of factual history knowledge being coverted by a lot of romance (Gilles in 10th position for example).

Zarnardi should not be on that list at all, not even close, he was as useful as a one armed trapeze artist with an itchy arse in F1.

[Taxi]

So.... Kimi should be 5th in the McLaren top 50 drivers.








I'll get my coat.

[BunnyK]

After giving drivers points based on WDC final position with the current points system and dividing the sums by the number of seasons driven the top of the list looks like this:

1 Juan Manuel Fangio 20,13
2 Alain Prost 16,62
3 Jackie Stewart 16,00
4 Michael Schumacher 15,78
5 Lewis Hamilton 15,00
6 Ayrton Senna 14,91
7 Sebastian Vettel 14,40
8 Nino Farina 14,00
9 Alberto Ascari 13,00
10 Fernando Alonso 12,70
11 Jim Clark 12,67
12 Kimi Räikkönen 12,11
13 Nelson Piquet 11,21
14 Mika Häkkinen 10,73
15 Stirling Moss 10,73
16 Mike Hawthorn 10,71
17 Juan Pablo Montoya 10,67
18 Damon Hill 10,50
19 Denny Hulme 10,10
20 Niki Lauda 9,92
21 Jody Scheckter 9,44
22 Carlos Reutemann 8,82
23 François Cevert 8,75
24 Emerson Fittipaldi 8,73
25 Luigi Fagioli 8,50
26 Eugenio Castellotti 8,33
27 Gerhard Berger 8,29
28 David Coulthard 7,87
29 James Hunt 7,86
30 Nigel Mansell 7,60
31 Jenson Button 7,50
32 Tony Brooks 7,50
33 Jochen Rindt 7,43
34 Jack Brabham 7,19
35 John Surtees 7,15
36 Ronnie Peterson 7,00
37 Graham Hill 7,00
38 Keke Rosberg 7,00
39 Phil Hill 7,00
40 Clay Regazzoni 6,82

It's not a bad list but this shows only how important is to start your career with a competitive car (and a reliable one)

Edited by BunnyK, 27 December 2011 - 19:56.

[jhattara]

flyer121: 2007 was the first season Vettel finished a race (8 to be exact) in Formula 1.

Watkins74: I'm counting all the seasons the driver finished a Formula 1 race.

Sakae: If you find an error in the scores, please let me know what that error is.

I'm not saying that this would be my top-40 list. Most likely I'd rank several drivers high outside of this list and would rank several drivers on this list out of the top-40.

My personal top-10 would probably include these drivers in no particular order:

Juan Manuel Fangio
Ayrton Senna
Alain Prost
Jackie Stewart
Alberto Ascari
Jim Clark
Niki Lauda
Luigi Fagioli
Jack Brabham
Michael Schumacher

Edited by jhattara, 27 December 2011 - 21:07.

[kenny]

flyer121: 2007 was the first season Vettel finished a race (8 to be exact) in Formula 1.

Watkins74: I'm counting all the seasons the driver finished a Formula 1 race.

Sakae: If you find an error in the scores, please let me know what that error is.

I'm not saying that this would be my top-40 list. Most likely I'd rank several drivers high outside of this list and would rank several drivers on this list out of the top-40.

My personal top-10 would probably include these drivers in no particular order:

Juan Manuel Fangio
Ayrton Senna
Alain Prost
Jackie Stewart
Alberto Ascari
Jim Clark
Niki Lauda
Luigi Fagioli
Jack Brabham
Michael Schumacher

are you counting 94 for Senna?

[jhattara]

are you counting 94 for Senna?

Yes. Checked my sheet and it includes all the drivers who have participated in a racing weekend (excluding test drivers). Senna would have 16.40 excluding 1994.

Edited by jhattara, 27 December 2011 - 22:53.

[joshb]

Just to say i got bored in the summer and made a database of every result by all 800 drivers (Dan Ricciardo being the 800th)
I then tallied their number of poles, FLs, 1sts, 2nds...24ths and then NCs Retirements, DSQs, DNQ/DNPQs and other (as on the wikipedia site)
I then took an average points per start and points per entry in the 2010 format (25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1) and the 2002 points format (10-6-4-3-2-1)

In 2010 points order top 10
M. Schuacher 3841pts at 13.34 pts/entry
A. Prost 2483 at 12.48
F. Alonso 1929 at 10.90
R. Barrichello 1897 at 5.89
A. Senna 1881 at 11.68
D. Coulthard 1726 at 7.02
N. Piquet 1672 at 8.20
N. Mansell 1509 at 8.07
K. Raikkonen 1498 at 9.60
J. Button 1435 at 6.90
also
Massa 1116 at 7.94
Hamilton 1101 at 12.23
Webber 984 at 5.59
Vettel 963 at 11.89


Top 10 Points per entry (2010 format)
D. Serafini 18pts at 18.00 pts per entry
L. Wallard 33 at 16.50
J.M. Fangio 857 at 16.48
L. Fagioli 112 at 16.00
A. Ascari 443 at 13.42
M. Schumacher 3841 at 13.34
N. Farina 441 at 12.97
A. Prost 2483 at 12.29
L. Hamilton 1101 at 12.23
S. Vettel 963 at 11.89
Then
11th A. Senna 1881 at 11.61
12th J. F Gonzalez 301 at 11.58
13th J. Clark 839 at 11.49
14th J. Stewart 1109 at 11.09
15th F. Alonso 1929 at 10.84
Also when i take the average points per entry for the old system, where WINS are more advantagous than consistency, THE TOP 15 is Fangio (6.13pts/entry), Serafini (6), Wallard (5.5), Fagioli (5.43), Ascari (4.94), Schumacher (4.62), Prost (4.19), Farina (4.18), Clark (4.1), Senna and Vettel (4.00 although Senna had that DNQ so has a higher pts/starts), Hamilton (3.88), Stewart (3.87), Gonzalez (3.62), Alonso (3.34)
Amazing to think Fangio came a bit better than 2nd on average every race!
The good bracket seems to be around 2.00 and the very good would be 2.50+ but it doesn't factor in machinery/quality of opponents etc
482 of the 800 drivers have achieved a 10th place or better (1 point in todays money)
324 have achieved a top 6 result (1 point in the 2002 system)
Note that shared drives i counted as a seperate entry so a driver may have 2 results in 1 race but I counted both. Also half point races i made full points

Edited by joshb, 27 December 2011 - 23:05.

[joshb]

Just to add in the post above. I added in a 'Points per finish' column for both scoring systems.
This is points scored divided by Total CLASSIFIED finishes
So taking mechanical failure and bad luck (as well as some driver errors) out of the equation, as cars now are much more reliable than before and the cars aren't stressed to the maximum as before too.

Minimum classification 15 races
Fangio (20.9 or 7.78 points per finish using new and old money respectively)
Ascari (20.14 or 7.41)
Stewart (17.60 or 6.14)
Senna (17.42 or 6.00)
Prost (17.36 or 5.92)
Clark (17.12 or 6.10)
Moss (17.00 or 6.00)
Farina (16.96 or 5.46)
Schumacher (16.85 or 5.83)
Gonzalez (15.84 or 4.95)
Mansell (15.40 or 5.11)
Lauda (15.07 or 5.01)
Vettel (14.82 or 4.98)
Rindt (14.32 or 4.60)
D. Hill (14.17 or 4.68)
Hawthorn (14.03/4.12)
Hamilton (13.94 or 4.42)
then 6 more to Alonso (13.12 or 4.05)

Alonso having a season in a minardi and 2009 in a poor Renault just to name 1 example of where the car can negatively influence this result.
Also in the 50s if you finished a race, chances are you were high up, as the grids were smaller and reliability wasn't great. For example, Fagioli finished 6 of his 7 races and all 6 on the podium! and Fangio had a sole 9th place- his only finish below his five 4ths
Reliability also aids the drivers of yesteryear here, as now if you finish you could still be 24th but in days gone by, if you finished, a top 10 result was likely.

[jhattara]

Points per entry (not-including Indy 500) with the current score system. Minimum of 15 entries. Shared drives award shared points. Multiple drives in one race count as one entry. Half-points awarded as half-points.

1 Juan Manuel Fangio 16,00
2 Alberto Ascari 13,65
3 Michael Schumacher 13,24
4 Nino Farina 12,28
5 Alain Prost 12,23
6 Lewis Hamilton 12,20
7 Sebastian Vettel 11,89
8 Jim Clark 11,49
9 Ayrton Senna 11,48
10 Jackie Stewart 11,09
11 Fernando Alonso 10,84
12 Mike Hawthorn 9,86
13 Kimi Räikkönen 9,54
14 José Froilán González 9,42
15 Damon Hill 8,94
16 Juan Pablo Montoya 8,68
17 Piero Taruffi 8,56
18 Stirling Moss 8,48
19 Denny Hulme 8,39
20 Mika Häkkinen 8,38
21 Nelson Piquet 8,08
22 Wolfgang von Trips 8,02
23 Jody Scheckter 7,91
24 Nigel Mansell 7,82
25 Richie Ginther 7,81
26 Carlos Reutemann 7,70
27 Niki Lauda 7,60
28 Jack Brabham 7,37
29 Phil Hill 7,34
30 Bruce McLaren 7,26
31 Felipe Massa 7,24
32 Peter Revson 7,19
33 David Coulthard 6,99
34 Tony Brooks 6,99
35 François Cevert 6,85
36 Jenson Button 6,77
37 Gerhard Berger 6,71
38 Luigi Villoresi 6,69
39 James Hunt 6,67
40 Emerson Fittipaldi 6,66

[KateLM]

This is probably a bit bah-humbugish, but I've never understood the appeal of trying to compare different eras and creating all sorts of ranking lists and whatnot. I'd rather enjoy each era and its drivers individually on their own merits rather than getting all het up analyzing things that there will never be a definitive answer for.