307 replies to this topic

[RA Historian]

Will only lead to disputes and hurt feelings....

[Hank the Deuce]

RA Historian, on Feb 2 2010, 04:56, said:

Will only lead to disputes and hurt feelings....

I'd say that your average TNF'er is old enough to shrug off "hurt feelings", if that's the worst outcome... and isn't "debate" a much nicer-sounding word than "dispute?"

[seccotine]

Hank the Deuce, on Feb 2 2010, 03:25, said:

I'd say that your average TNF'er is old enough to shrug off "hurt feelings", if that's the worst outcome... and isn't "debate" a much nicer-sounding word than "dispute?"

Over rated drivers?
What about super silly threads?

[seccotine]

Sorry Hank, the comment wasn't addressed to you.

I just learnt today that Senna was over-rated, which is also Villeneuve.
What about Fangio, Clark or Stewart?

[David McKinney]

As I think I said earlier in this thread, "underrated" means "I didn't realise he was that good".

If people follow the sport closely enough, they usually rate drivers fairly accurately

[pertti_jarla]

I remember reading from some 50's and 60's sources that Behra would have been overrated in his native country. I don't know how worshipped he was, but he clearly can't have been a poor or mediocre driver considering some of his performances?

Edited by pertti_jarla, 02 February 2010 - 17:12.

[David McKinney]

Ask Nigel Roebuck

If the French claimed he was as good as Fangio and Moss, they overrated him

If they said he was one of the top F1 and sportscar drivers in the world, they didn't

[Spitfire]

'' said

The most overrated driver of all-time is an easy pick. It is none other than Gilles Villeneuve, who managed to get Tazio Nuvolari's reputation out of Gerhard Berger's career.

Probably the best line on GV I've ever read.

Remember, it's about being overrated. Nobody is saying he couldn't drive, but the god-like status is not deserved. Excuse-making like he "let" JS take the title has already been debunked on other threads here.

Honestly, one of the guys who I have the most trouble in "placing" in the driver echelon is Piquet. As unlikable as GV was loved, still 3 WDC is hard to argue with. Obviously, this opens the door to the whole "results is all that matters" debates where Schumi is king and Amon is a putz, and I certainly don't feel that way, but, how to draw the line. . .?

[Formula Once]

Stirling Moss; a great driver, not the greatest although many (media) in the UK seemed to have tried to somehow proof otherwise over the past 50 years...

[philippe charuest]

Formula Once, on Feb 2 2010, 13:53, said:

Stirling Moss; a great driver, not the greatest although many (media) in the UK seemed to have tried to somehow proof otherwise over the past 50 years...

watch out , now youre fiddling with a dogma of the english church thats dangerous

[rallen]

Formula Once, on Feb 2 2010, 18:53, said:

Stirling Moss; a great driver, not the greatest although many (media) in the UK seemed to have tried to somehow proof otherwise over the past 50 years...

Interesting view, can you explain why you think he wasn't that good?

[rallen]

Spitfire, on Feb 2 2010, 17:52, said:

Honestly, one of the guys who I have the most trouble in "placing" in the driver echelon is Piquet. As unlikable as GV was loved, still 3 WDC is hard to argue with

You have just said what I have been thinking for a while. I just don't even understand Piquet's career. I think it is fair to say that even his fans would say Mansell was the better racer in 1987 - just look at the laps led comparison - scary - and he fluked it, one of the most undeserving WDC's? discuss.

[Formula Once]

rallen, on Feb 2 2010, 21:25, said:

Interesting view, can you explain why you think he wasn't that good?

Don't get me wrong: he was VERY good, among the best even, but even the good can be over rated I guess. As long as I can remember, the (British) media have tried to convince the rest of the world that he was the best, mostly by drawing up all sorts of lists. Maybe that is fuelled by the fact that he never was an F1 world champion, I don't know, although his not winning that world title is something that in my opinion does little harm to his talent, personality and achievements. Why I think that he is sometimes over rated, is that when he was in the best car of its time, he was outclassed by Fangio and although we will never know if Clark would have been better, we can't say he wouldn't have been either.

[D-Type]

Formula Once, on Feb 2 2010, 22:59, said:

Don't get me wrong: he was VERY good, among the best even, but even the good can be over rated I guess. As long as I can remember, the (British) media have tried to convince the rest of the world that he was the best, mostly by drawing up all sorts of lists. Maybe that is fuelled by the fact that he never was an F1 world champion, I don't know, although his not winning that world title is something that in my opinion does little harm to his talent, personality and achievements. Why I think that he is sometimes over rated, is that when he was in the best car of its time, he was outclassed by Fangio and although we will never know if Clark would have been better, we can't say he wouldn't have been either.

Outclassed by Fangio in the W196 GP car but not in the 300SLR sports car which makes it very difficult to judge.

[Gabrci]

I can only agree with what has been said, the word overrated has always been synonymous with Gilles Villeneuve for me. Sure, he was brilliantly talented and brave (read reckless), but some others more than made up for that with brainpower.

Piquet - a strange man indeed. Brilliant on his day, excellent technical knowledge, but sometimes just couldn't be bothered I think. In 1987 he had I think 9 consecutive podium finishes. He was not spectacular, but very reliable and always there, and at the end of the day he was smiling and Mansell was miserable. As someone has already said, three world titles is very hard to argue with.

I'm very cautious to say anything about Sir Stirling as I have so much respect for him as a man and as a racing driver, but I do have to agree that he probably wasn't just quite as good as the British media tends to show. He was absolutely awesome and miles better than Hawthorn or Phil Hill, but perhaps just not in the Fangio-Clark-Schumacher class. Although very, very close behind.

[kayemod]

Gabrci, on Feb 2 2010, 23:56, said:

Piquet - a strange man indeed. Brilliant on his day, excellent technical knowledge, but sometimes just couldn't be bothered I think. In 1987 he had I think 9 consecutive podium finishes. He was not spectacular, but very reliable and always there, and at the end of the day he was smiling and Mansell was miserable. As someone has already said, three world titles is very hard to argue with.

For all kinds of reasons, I won't hear a word against Sir Stirling, one or two others may have been his equal, even slightly better on rare occasions, but I'd say that his place on the top step is pretty secure, even outside TNF. There has never been an all-rounder quite like Stirl.

Piquet is I agree slightly difficult to place, though three WDCs and a lot of wins are hard to argue against, but the biggest minus point against his record is that he should have retired earlier. It's often said that he wasn't the nicest person to deal with, though surely the important point here is that he was 'nice' when he wanted to be, some people he just didn't bother with, and there are always two sides to any difference of opinion. Many people he worked with, the Brabham team for example almost worshipped him, though there was the odd exception I'd agree, the same for BMW, and Sir Frank Williams won't hear a word against him, he's always been one of Nelson's biggest fans, something that Piquet reciprocates. Slightly different eras of course, but if it's wins and championships you were after, who would ever have gone for Gilles in preference to Nelson?

[fbarrett]

'' said

Eddie Cheever drove in F1 for a long time. I don't remember if he was overhyped, but how did he manage to get hired for so many years while producing such abysmial results?

Dave

Dave:

We used to call him "Under-Achiever."

Frank

[Formula Once]

[quote name='kayemod' date='Feb 3 2010, 00:32' post='4113888']
...I won't hear a word against Sir Stirling.

My point exactly

There has never been an all-rounder quite like Stirl.

I think Mario Andretti has the right to disagree...

[kayemod]

Formula Once, on Feb 3 2010, 09:24, said:

I think Mario Andretti has the right to disagree...

The best US all-rounder I'll grant you, but how many races did Mario win in Jaguar Mk VIIs ?

[philippe charuest]

kayemod, on Feb 3 2010, 04:06, said:

The best US all-rounder I'll grant you, but how many races did Mario win in Jaguar Mk VIIs ?

how many race Moss won on dirt track

[B Squared]

kayemod, on Feb 3 2010, 04:06, said:

The best US all-rounder I'll grant you, but how many races did Mario win in Jaguar Mk VIIs ?

We in the Mario "camp" can quite readily say how many sprint car and midget victories did Sir Stirling register during his career? Or Daytona 500's? Or Indy 500's? The best European all-rounder? A bit tongue in cheek here. It will be a debate as long as men debate such trivial (in the grand scheme of life) matters.

[kayemod]

philippe charuest, on Feb 3 2010, 16:07, said:

how many race Moss won on dirt track

Shot with HP pstc4500 at 2010-02-03

Alpine Rally 1952, but I'll grant you that aspect of The Great Man's career, doesn't quite match up to Mario's.

[RA Historian]

Re Sir Stirling and Mario as all arounders: About a decade ago Motor Sport ran an article listing the top 20, 50, whatever the number was, all around drivers of all time. Now we all know that this is a highly subjective venture, open to much debate and disagreement, but the magazine listed Sir Stirling Moss as number one and Mario Andretti as number two.

Hard to argue with that, IMO.

Tom

[Zeroninety]

RA Historian, on Feb 3 2010, 09:09, said:

Re Sir Stirling and Mario as all arounders: About a decade ago Motor Sport ran an article listing the top 20, 50, whatever the number was, all around drivers of all time. Now we all know that this is a highly subjective venture, open to much debate and disagreement, but the magazine listed Sir Stirling Moss as number one and Mario Andretti as number two.

Hard to argue with that, IMO.

Tom

A British mag.

[philippe charuest]

probably that all racers of the past are overated , before the late sixties the base was much narrower and in any pyramid wider is the base higher is the summit there was no karting no formula x y z spec series( add to that the socio -economic factors and class society and so on), a driver was doing a couple of club races against doctors lawyers and lords and after a couple of good races he was doing international racing , and again even there half of the pack were privateers who were doing tourism, honestly timo glock and pedro de larosa are probably better driver then fangio and moss . i agree that it took a lot more guts then it was a zillion time more dangerous , but anyone who saw once a world level karting race know that competition now is a million time more ferocious

Edited by philippe charuest, 03 February 2010 - 16:09.

[RA Historian]

Zeroninety, on Feb 3 2010, 11:51, said:

A British mag.

Your point being?

[Zeroninety]

RA Historian, on Feb 3 2010, 10:09, said:

Your point being?

Someone was going to point it out eventually.
(Especially since the earlier argument was that Moss is overrated by the British).

[D-Type]

philippe charuest, on Feb 3 2010, 17:52, said:

probably that all racers of the past are overated , before the late sixties the base was much narrower and in any pyramid wider is the base higher is the summit there was no karting no formula x y z spec series( add to that the socio -economic factors and class society and so on), a driver was doing a couple of club races against doctors lawyers and lords and after a couple of good races he was doing international racing , and again even there half of the pack were privateers who were doing tourism, honestly timo glock and pedro de larosa are probably better driver then fangio and moss . i agree that it took a lot more guts then it was a zillion time more dangerous , but anyone who saw once a world level karting race know that competition now is a million time more ferocious

I disagree.
The base of the pyramid may be wider but it is no more difficult to rise to the top. With the narrower pyramidI agree that it was probably easier to get to compete in a grand prix or three but the driver still had to beat the established stars to reach the top. In some ways it may be more difficult as the steps are now more clearly defined and the chance of languishing in a career blind alley.
One factor remains constant: the route is easier if there is family money around.

[Mansell4PM]

kayemod, on Feb 3 2010, 09:06, said:

The best US all-rounder I'll grant you, but how many races did Mario win in Jaguar Mk VIIs ?

If we're going OT for a bit, then surely Graham Hill rates a mention amongst the greatest all-rounders. After all, will anyone ever equal 2 F1 WDCs, an Indy 500 win, and a Le Mans win in their career?

Jacques Villeneuve may yet achieve a Le Mans win, but is likely to remain forever as a one time F1 WDC. So Hill's record (in terms of spread of achievements) may never be bettered.

[JtP1]

philippe charuest, on Feb 3 2010, 15:52, said:

probably that all racers of the past are overated , before the late sixties the base was much narrower and in any pyramid wider is the base higher is the summit there was no karting no formula x y z spec series( add to that the socio -economic factors and class society and so on), a driver was doing a couple of club races against doctors lawyers and lords and after a couple of good races he was doing international racing , and again even there half of the pack were privateers who were doing tourism, honestly timo glock and pedro de larosa are probably better driver then fangio and moss . i agree that it took a lot more guts then it was a zillion time more dangerous , but anyone who saw once a world level karting race know that competition now is a million time more ferocious

Never has it been easier to buy your way to the top than now. You don't even need as much natural talent as in the past. Data logging and dashboard traffic lights see to that. As for Glock or even 2/3 of the current grid being near the Fangio or Moss class, that is just laughable.

The competition in a world level karting race might seem a million times more ferocious, but its money based. Was it David Kennedy who used to buy used tyres and brakes from other F3 competitors and use the stuff to beat them?

[Doug Nye]

I really don't give much credence to Quebecois opinions upon British bias. As for SCM having shone only when he drove the best car around - have his critics here been paying attention? It was the ITALIAN press which first drew unqualified attention to his class - and the start and appearance monies he was later offered by race organisers in Europe, the USA, Canada, South America, Australasia, New Zealand and South Africa confirm that interests even less partial than the singularly open-minded British specialist press (of that period!) certainly rated him pretty highly. It's worth asking Andretti his rating of Moss - and if it comes to it, of Tony Brooks too...

If you weren't around in the period, or are not now aware of how 'things' really were at that time, it's a misleading pitfall to think that modern 'Autosport' and 'F1 Racing' exemplify British press attitudes of the 1940s-1960s.

DCN

[philippe charuest]

wrong target again , old age i guess

[philippe charuest]

JtP1, on Feb 3 2010, 15:33, said:

Never has it been easier to buy your way to the top than now. You don't even need as much natural talent as in the past. Data logging and dashboard traffic lights see to that. As for Glock or even 2/3 of the current grid being near the Fangio or Moss class, that is just laughable.

The competition in a world level karting race might seem a million times more ferocious, but its money based. Was it David Kennedy who used to buy used tyres and brakes from other F3 competitors and use the stuff to beat them?

david kennedy thats the seventies no , so i dont understand your point hes a perfect exemple of a driver of that generation who did karting . formula ford f3 and so on , but even then its the piquet and co who had big budget wo were winning championship not the kennedys

[Giraffe]

philippe charuest, on Feb 3 2010, 21:25, said:

wrong target again , old age i guess

What do you mean, Phillippe?

Edited by Giraffe, 03 February 2010 - 21:46.

[philippe charuest]

Giraffe, on Feb 3 2010, 16:46, said:

What do you mean, Phillippe?

come on . im not even the guy who have talk of british bias my propos was much more general then that read the thread and as far as i know im the only quebecois here so , obviously moderator here have no backbone , still someone here have shown his true color

[Giraffe]

philippe charuest, on Feb 3 2010, 22:01, said:

come on . im not even the guy who have talk of british bias my propos was much more general then that read the thread and as far as i know im the only quebecois here so , obviously moderator here have no backbone , still someone here have shown his true color

Why the moderator Phillipe? you've said nothing wrong as far as I'm aware. You are entitled to express your opinion.

[Jerry Entin]

The following comes from Willem Oosthoek:

During the mid 50s Eddie Crawford was one of the best Porsche driver in the U.S. It earned him a position in the Cunningham team, which by 1960 had switched from Listers to a Maserati Tipo 61. Crawford considered himself the equal to any driver around, with one exception: Stirling Moss. At Sebring the men raced the same type of Maserati and Crawford admitted that, although he could stay even with Moss on the straights, in the corners Moss would always manage to pull away. In Crawford's eyes Moss was the very best, obviously reinforced by the fact that the international market place was willing to pay substantial appearance money to the Brit, as Doug Nye mentioned already.

[Andrew Hope]

Depends on what part of the driver the racing scene exaggerates. Gilles might be overrated by those (the very few, I have a hard time finding many people who) say he was a reliable, consistent finisher (which is almost a lie, really) but he was one of the most ballsy, courageous and supremely talented drivers of a car the sport has ever seen, maybe even the best, and bravery and skill do not always translate into championships. They didn't for him and those that talk about him as though he would have won half the championships in the 80s if he hadn't died are as wrong as opinions can be wrong about that, but those that simply speak of his car control aren't nearly as prone to overrating him.

[Doug Nye]

Jerry Entin, on Feb 4 2010, 20:30, said:

The following comes from Willem Oosthoek:

During the mid 50s Eddie Crawford was one of the best Porsche driver in the U.S. It earned him a position in the Cunningham team, which by 1960 had switched from Listers to a Maserati Tipo 61. Crawford considered himself the equal to any driver around, with one exception: Stirling Moss. At Sebring the men raced the same type of Maserati and Crawford admitted that, although he could stay even with Moss on the straights, in the corners Moss would always manage to pull away. In Crawford's eyes Moss was the very best, obviously reinforced by the fact that the international market place was willing to pay substantial appearance money to the Brit, as Doug Nye mentioned already.

Understood, but sadly it prompts the question where exactly did Ed Crawford register upon the International racing drivers' Richter Scale - not least against Dan Gurney, and Walt Hansgen, and Carroll Shelby, and...? Does he qualify for the phrase 'a legend in his own mind' - or is that far too unkind?

DCN

[gerrit stevens]

Mansell4PM, on Feb 3 2010, 21:08, said:

If we're going OT for a bit, then surely Graham Hill rates a mention amongst the greatest all-rounders. After all, will anyone ever equal 2 F1 WDCs, an Indy 500 win, and a Le Mans win in their career?

Jacques Villeneuve may yet achieve a Le Mans win, but is likely to remain forever as a one time F1 WDC. So Hill's record (in terms of spread of achievements) may never be bettered.

Besides Indy 500 champion, Jacques was also a CART champion. Graham never achieved that.

Gerrit Stevens

[Jerry Entin]

Doug:
Willem will try and bring you as we say "Up to Speed" on the Crawford issue.

In its September 1958 issue Road @ Track magazine listed its choice of the nine top road racing drivers in the U.S.: Phil Hill, Masten Gregory, Carroll Shelby, John Fitch, Walt Hansgen, Jack McAfee, Paul O'Shea, Ken Miles and Eddie Crawford.

Names such as Dan Gurney, Richie Ginther and Billy Krause did not make the cut yet.

Rather than educate you on Crawford's entire career and his numerous victories in the U.S.- and I agree the international component [Nassau, Cuba, Caracas, Le Mans, Monaco, Crystal Palace] was relatively small, but then he was a Chicago stockbroker by trade - let me mention just a few highlights:

- Sebring 1957: turned faster laps in practice with his private Porsche than all Porsche works drivers.

- Road America 500 1957: 3rd overall in an underpowered 550RS behind Phil Hill [3.8 Ferrari] and Shelby [3.0 Maserati], only one lap down after 500 miles.

- Nassau 1957: beat Ricardo Rodriguez and McAfee, both in similar Porsches, four times.

- Cuba 1958: qualified a 3.5-liter Ferrari on the second row between Phil Hill [4.1 Ferrari] and von Trips [3.8 Ferrari]. World Championship comparison material?

- Beat Lister teammate Hansgen in the July 1958 Lime Rock National.

- Beat Lister teammate Hansgen in the September 1958 Watkins Glen National [fastest qualifier and fastest race lap as well]

- Set a new lap record and captured a sizeable lead in the 1959 Road America 500 in a year-old knobbly, only to hand the car over to Hansgen, who was scheduled to race none-stop in an ill-fated Costin Lister, for victory.

- Leading the Sebring 1960 Formula Junior race until the final lap, when his Stanguellini suffered a blow-out, giving victory to someone you may remember better: Jim Hall.

All that for a guy who wore eyeglasses/contacts and who suffered from rheumatoid arthritis, which interrupted his race career a number of times. Sometimes just competing internationally does not mean too much, compared to judgement calls by someone with proven talent.

Nuff said.

[Mansell4PM]

gerrit stevens, on Feb 4 2010, 21:45, said:

Besides Indy 500 champion, Jacques was also a CART champion. Graham never achieved that.

Gerrit Stevens

Which I suppose means that Jacques Villeneuve has won the two top level drivers' championships that he competed in. Fair point.

So if Villeneuve does achieve a Le Mans win we could roughly compare his career with that of Graham Hill.

Wildly OT though.

[Doug Nye]

Uh huh - Ed Crawford...plainly legendary, considering his handicaps. Still just a sizeable fish in a medium-sized pond.

DCN

[ensign14]

JtP1, on Feb 3 2010, 20:33, said:

Never has it been easier to buy your way to the top than now.

How about the 1950s and 1960s? You could buy a world championship winning car and run it yourself...

[kayemod]

ensign14, on Feb 5 2010, 13:18, said:

How about the 1950s and 1960s? You could buy a world championship winning car and run it yourself...

Nothing changes, only the amounts involved. Last year, there were stories that Nelson Piquet was involved in negotiations to buy the entire BMW team, the only way that his talented son's bum was ever going to feel the inside of a reasonably competitive F1 car again. That wasn't a championship winning team of course, but they came fairly close the previous year. I suppose back in the 50s or 60s though, you'd have been thinking more along the lines of the cost of a decent semi in a highly desirable area like Solihull, and an Alf Francis type to look after the car.

[HDonaldCapps]

Doug Nye, on Feb 5 2010, 12:49, said:

Uh huh - Ed Crawford...plainly legendary, considering his handicaps. Still just a sizeable fish in a medium-sized pond.

DCN

Yet, could not the same be said of most of the "rated" British and European drivers of the day -- and later -- for that matter?

[milestone 11]

Mansell4PM, on Feb 5 2010, 08:03, said:

Which I suppose means that Jacques Villeneuve has won the two top level drivers' championships that he competed in. Fair point.

Quote

More than a decade ago!

Quote

So if Villeneuve does achieve a Le Mans win we could roughly compare his career with that of Graham Hill.

He single handedly cost Peugeot the win in 2008, so doubtful that he'd get a competitive drive any time soon.

Edited by milestone 11, 05 February 2010 - 13:35.

[ivandjj]

There are many middleaged GV fanboys around now and most of them won't claim that GV was the best as overall F1 driver even in his day. Alan Jones or Niki Lauda or a few more were obviously more capable and effective in getting black on white results.

I don't think that even Nigel Roebuck would put GV very high if Points Gathering was the yardstick.

I don't thing GV is overrated regarding some of his traits which are already mentioned in this thread. Courage, big balls, big reflexes, big heart, etc.

Bottom line, GV left his mark on many people and you can witness it still now. You can't argue about that.


I guess that Moss too left his mark, and not only as a racing driver. Judging from some heated defense on his behalf, that is.


Those impressions are always nice to see, regardless if its Moss, GV or Andrea de Cesaris. No point arguing about them.

[Rosemayer]

'' said

well, Alesi drove the reigning champion Benetton's Schumacher... He had enough chances to prove he is or was good... I don't think he proved, although his good performance in Monaco now. Just a regular and bad-lucky driver... like Barrichello still is... I think just 2 drivers could challenge Michael in an equal equipment: Ralf and Jacques Villeneuve (in certain occasions, not in the wet for sure, ha ha ha)

Another thing: Alesi didn't beat his 91 teammate, by the way it was Alain Prost in a bad moment. What a big deal defeating drivers such as Berger, Herbert or Diniz (which was not defeated, by the way)?? I just want some renovation in F-1, and Alesi must retire, besides Herbert, Diniz, Salo, Verstappen, Irvine,... people who didn't do anything appreciable. Barrichello had good results with poor cars, and he is a regular and bad-lucky such Alesi... But Alesi had chances in a big team, RB is having just now.

Alesi and Berger both tried Schumachers Benetton and they both claimed the car was undriveable.

[kayemod]

ivandjj, on Feb 5 2010, 16:56, said:

I guess that Moss too left his mark, and not only as a racing driver. Judging from some heated defense on his behalf, that is.


Those impressions are always nice to see, regardless if its Moss, GV or Andrea de Cesaris. No point arguing about them.

I think that you're rather missing the point of TNF...

(Have you come for the five minute argument, or do you want the full ten minutes?)