261 replies to this topic

[Spillage]

Here's an interesting topic I've been considering for a while - who, in the Board's opinion, is the worst World Champion of all time?

Not attempting to start a flame thread here, or to belittle the achievements of any driver; clearly it requires uncommon skill and dedication to become a World Champion, but there are some who were less worthy of the title than others, and I am interested in who people believe as the least deserving of this accolade.

For me, it has to be Damon Hill. Clearly he was a great driver and well worthy of his WDC (especially considering he was in his thirties and perhaps already past his peak when he first got a top drive) but I feel that with the opportunities he had, he really should have done better. Arguably he had the car to beat four years on the spin from 1993-1996. I see Hill as not much better than Webber is today - a top bloke and strong driver who on his day can be the best in the world, but a great WDC? Probably not.

What do you guys think?

[cokeb]

The board doesn't have an opinion, but its members sure does. The problem is that you know what they say about opinions: They are divided, and everybody has one.

You might not have wanted to start a flame thread, but I predict that is just what you have done. It's inevitable with a question like that.

[pacificquay]

Everyone who wins a world title is supremely talented.

The vast majority of drivers who have raced in F1 never even make a single podium.

To use a negative word like "worst" about the best drivers there have been - indeed I believe only 32 men have taken the title - is crass and unwarranted.

[UPRC]

Everyone who wins a world title is supremely talented.

The vast majority of drivers who have raced in F1 never even make a single podium.

To use a negative word like "worst" about the best drivers there have been - indeed I believe only 32 men have taken the title - is crass and unwarranted.

He's just asking who seems like they may have been the weakest. There's nothing really wrong with that, especially since we're okay with ranking who the best drivers of all time are, which involves putting some WDCs ahead of others.

Anyway, I can only go back until I started watching (1997). Since then, the weakest probably looked like Button. When the Brawn was dominant at the start of the season, he looked absolutely amazing. However, when the Brawns were caught and then surpassed in the development race, Jenson looked like he was struggling at times. Worse, he wasn't able to convincingly defeat Rubens in the second half of the season once the team's dominance wore off. He still had an amazing season and I can't fault him for his superb driving when the car was right but, as further evidenced by this season, Jenson struggles tremendously when the car isn't to his liking. We saw that a few times in 2009.

Edited by UPRC, 12 December 2012 - 14:33.

[Longtimefan]

I have to agree with you, I've been watching F1 since 1970 and I would have to say Damon Hill.

Nothing against the guy personally but let's be honest, 1996 was a 'gimme' he had the best car by a long long way, his teammate was an F1 rookie and the main opposition (Schumi) was in a car that was much slower and very very unreliable.

[Watkins74]

Keke Rosberg who won while others were developing turbo's and Kimi Raikkonen who barely won even with McLaren imploding.

Edited by Watkins74, 12 December 2012 - 14:50.

[Rinehart]

I'd say although I like and rate him very highly as a driver, Kimi's title in 2007 was rather lost by Alonso, Hamilton and McLaren and rather won by the FIA and the entire Spygate scenario. That was definately not a title won on the track.

I also feel that Prosts title in 86 was somewhat lost by Williams and its drivers, rather than won by The Prof.

[TigersWood]

Jenson Button 2009 WDC is worthless to me, with that car everyone but Barrichello would have won the title. That is what happens when you allow an ilegal car to run, the year is boring and worthless.

[Lazy]

Here's an interesting topic I've been considering for a while - who, in the Board's opinion, is the worst World Champion of all time?

Not attempting to start a flame thread here, or to belittle the achievements of any driver; clearly it requires uncommon skill and dedication to become a World Champion, but there are some who were less worthy of the title than others, and I am interested in who people believe as the least deserving of this accolade.

For me, it has to be Damon Hill. Clearly he was a great driver and well worthy of his WDC (especially considering he was in his thirties and perhaps already past his peak when he first got a top drive) but I feel that with the opportunities he had, he really should have done better. Arguably he had the car to beat four years on the spin from 1993-1996. I see Hill as not much better than Webber is today - a top bloke and strong driver who on his day can be the best in the world, but a great WDC? Probably not.

What do you guys think?

A bit unfair on Damon I think he would definitely of had 2 if he hadn't been deliberately rammed by a certain driver and I seem to recall he was robbed of another under dubious circumstances.

[george1981]

I would say that Jenson's WDC stands out for being the least worthy WDC that I've seen since I've been watching F1 since 1994. Jenson himself has said that he's driving better now than he was in 2009, which I would agree with but this year he came 5th overall whilst in posession of arguably the fastest car through the season, whereas in 2009 he won with the only real challenge coming from his team mate.
You could argue that some of Schumacher's later championships were less worthy than others because his car was so dominant, but if you consider the valient efforts he put into championships that he nearly won then I think he gets let off by having one or two easy championships with Ferrari.

[LiJu914]

Here's an interesting topic I've been considering for a while - who, in the Board's opinion, is the worst World Champion of all time?

Not attempting to start a flame thread here, or to belittle the achievements of any driver; clearly it requires uncommon skill and dedication to become a World Champion, but there are some who were less worthy of the title than others, and I am interested in who people believe as the least deserving of this accolade.

For me, it has to be Damon Hill. Clearly he was a great driver and well worthy of his WDC (especially considering he was in his thirties and perhaps already past his peak when he first got a top drive) but I feel that with the opportunities he had, he really should have done better. Arguably he had the car to beat four years on the spin from 1993-1996. I see Hill as not much better than Webber is today - a top bloke and strong driver who on his day can be the best in the world, but a great WDC? Probably not.

What do you guys think?

In his rookie year Hill began to get his teammate - a certain Alain Prost (No.5 of all time for the BBC) - in more and more trouble with increasing experience and even outscored him in the 2nd half of the season despite retiring from the lead twice and Prost inheriting both wins (if both Williams drivers would´ve had perfect reliability in 93, Hill would´ve been less than 10 points behind Prost at the end of the season).
In 94 Williams had a very difficult year and Hill certainly didn´t disappoint, when he suddenly had to take over the role as team leader.
In 95 he was outclassed by MSC - but it was MSC and perhaps the greatest year of his career on top of that.
Then he became WDC, left Williams and would´ve almost won in a fvcking Arrows. After that he achieved Jordan´s maiden victory in F1.
The only really disappointing season was his last.

What did e.g. Nigel Mansell do so much better compared to that?
Did "lose" more WDCs in great cars than Hill did.
Didn´t look better against Prost than Hill - and he wasn´t a rookie (he lost to de Angelis as a rookie instead, which would go on that way for the following years...).
Didn´t look great against Hill himself (of course we can assume that Mansell most likely wasn´t at his best in 94 anymore).
Didn´t even look really better than Berger, when they were together at Ferrari in 89.
Won his WDC in an even better car with Patrese as a teammate and not someone, who went on to become a WDC a year later.
He may have been much more spectacular and entertaining as Hill, but that´s not the definition of better.

I´ve nothing against Nigel nor do i think, that he was crap. I´ve just picked this as an example, because Mansell was so often portrayed as a real hero for british F1 unlike Hill, who was more seen as a driver, who was swamped by the demands for being a great driver and just lucked into a WDC.

Edited by LiJu914, 12 December 2012 - 17:24.

[Fulcrum]

Worst WDC Top5:

1. Rosberg
2. Rakkonen
3. Hunt
4. Button
5. Hill

[jrg19]

http://forums.autosp...p;#entry6034849

Poll i started for best 1 x WDC, it kind of shows who people don't rate as a WDC.

[Jovanotti]

I see many are confusing "worst" with "lucky circumstances" here. Räikkönens title might have come as a surprise and required a McLaren meltdown, but that title was so overdue considering what he had done before.

[TheNewStig]

Hawthorn?Giuseppe Farina?Denny Hulme?
No.
Jacques Villeneuve maybe?
I think so but also Damon Hill is a candidat.
Who knows.

[LiJu914]

http://forums.autosp...p;#entry6034849

Poll i started for best 1 x WDC, it kind of shows who people don't rate as a WDC.

Because alle people in here are so well informed about Phil Hill or Denny Hulme, right?

[Seanspeed]

Jenson Button 2009 WDC is worthless to me, with that car everyone but Barrichello would have won the title. That is what happens when you allow an ilegal car to run, the year is boring and worthless.

So how come Toyota, with a much bigger budget than Brawn, weren't dominating races? They had a DDD from the start, too.

I share the opinion that Button's WDC wasn't incredibly impressive due to his lackluster 2nd half of the season, but I wont take anything away from the team for that car, which was great.

[Starish]

Alonso's in 2005 is a good one but you just know he had his fair share of luck. MSC 2002 wasn't so much bad but boring. Prost 93 and Mansells weren't spectacular to me either.

[Ragingjamaican]

Not sure why Villeneuve is not getting mentioned much.

Think Hakkinen is worth a mention, groomed by Ron Dennis from the get-go when they had a good performing car, giving him his first two wins easily. Had a really fast car in 1998 and 1999, and made a hash of both, especially 1999, as exciting as the season was, the challenge for the title was not at a top level at all, both teams and drivers making a big hash of it, especially Hakkinen who should have walked the title.

Wouldn't go as far to call him the worst, but certainly don't think he was great as he was made out to be, despite being a fan of his.

[Starish]

Not sure why Villeneuve is not getting mentioned much.

Think Hakkinen is worth a mention, groomed by Ron Dennis from the get-go when they had a good performing car, giving him his first two wins easily. Had a really fast car in 1998 and 1999, and made a hash of both, especially 1999, as exciting as the season was, the challenge for the title was not at a top level at all, both teams and drivers making a big hash of it, especially Hakkinen who should have walked the title.

Wouldn't go as far to call him the worst, but certainly don't think he was great as he was made out to be, despite being a fan of his.

Villeneuve was actually very good to me, he came in and was on point right away. WDC in his 2nd season is incredible. just didn't retain that form too long.

[Buttoneer]

Posts deleted.

While I might agree that the thread topic is a long way from being the most positive subject, the onus is on everyone to approach the question sensibly or ignore it. "Raikkonen lol" really doesn't cut it. If you are unable to propose a driver and justify your decision with facts and reasoned argument, then chances are you're just looking for a reaction, and therefore trolling. Please don't, and please report those who do.

[Wander]

Maybe Hill wasn't the greatest champion, but I would be ready to bet that never in my lifetime will there again be an F1 champion who started racing cars at over 20 years old.

E: (I know there were many champions like that before him, but I'm saying he will be the last one)

Edited by Wander, 12 December 2012 - 17:13.

[darkkis]

Alonso 2005 at least. He only won because Räikkönen had such a bad luck.

[beute]

Keke Rosberg who won while others were developing turbo's and Kimi Raikkonen who barely won even with McLaren imploding.

With "imploding" you mean having exactly zero DNF's due to reliability compared to the two that Raikkonen suffered?

the internal political struggle barely affected car performance, how could it...
People dont forget how to do their jobs just because some primadonna started a bitchfight with a control freak...

that is just a convenient excuse that mclaren fans and/or Raikkonen haters love to use.
Mclaren/Hamilton lost it in china all on their own, and political struggle is no excuse.
Ferrari made a similar mistake in 2010 in abu dhabi, they obviously had a different scapegoat back then...

Edited by beute, 12 December 2012 - 17:33.

[Fungio]

Reasonable candidates for the worst WDC might be those who deliberately crashed into their opponents to win.

And considering some of the more bizarre nominations: when a guy wins against a stiff opposition in fairly evenly matched cars, by making less mistakes and despite having more car reliability issues, to regard him as "the worst WDC ever" is quite remarkable. But I guess people have their reasons...

[MP422]

Jenson Button 2009 WDC is unimpressive to me, with that car it was super easy to win the title. Double decker diffuser should have been banned, the year is boring and worthless like the poster above said.

[TifosiUSA]

1.) Villeneuve
2.) Rosberg
3.) Hill
4.) Button

Edited by TifosiUSA, 12 December 2012 - 17:26.

[maverick69]

If we are going on the latent talent of a driver then despite being a massive fan at the time - and still having fond memories - then Damon was perhaps a little down on the ladder in comparison to his peers.

Ironically, I think that the most genuinely "worst" was Schuey in 1994. Caught cheating with the regulations - and then shunting Hill off the road. Classy........ Not.........

[Rinehart]

The misunderstanding of the 2009 title is mind-boggling. Jenson won 6 out of 7 races at the start, but without the out and out best car in all of those races, variously Toyotas and Redbulls could and in some cases should have won. Look at Turkey for instance. He made the difference. If he only had to beat Barrichello, then why wasn't Barry 2nd in all those races. We're not talking 2002 levels of domination here. And across the season Vettel could have won. He didn't, he didn't because he didn't capitalise as clinically when the opportunity arose as Jenson did. Against all of this is the backdrop fact that Brawn had no money to invest in the car during the season so it got sucked into the pack. By the end of the season Button was holding on to a lead the car by then did not have the legs to defend adequately. Pressure told. But he still put in performances like at Brazil in order to secure the title. Its a strange mentally tough position to be in to be defending a big lead with a dwindlingly competitive car. But I bet if the lead had been a lot narrower, or even if he'd fallen behind, his later season performances would have been better. He drove to circumstance. Bottom line is I don't think you could have replaced Barrichello with many other drivers that season and Jenson not still come out on top.

Edited by Rinehart, 12 December 2012 - 17:37.

[P123]

Hill is ridiculously underrated. He faired well against Prost, was pushed into leading the WIlliams team due to tradgedy, came close to winning that championship, admittedly had a scrappy '95 but came back and won in '96 against Villeneuve, nearly won in an Arrows, won in a Jordan and his 'Newey car' percentages aren't far off Vettel's. He also had some fine drives in the wet. I guess it's fashionable to dismiss his talents, purely for the crime of being not quite as good as Schumacher.

[Rinehart]

Alonso 2005 at least. He only won because Räikkönen had such a bad luck.

Plus the all french Michelin Tyre-Renault Suspension collusion.

[P123]

The misunderstanding of the 2009 title is mind-boggling. Jenson won 6 out of 7 races at the start, but without the out and out best car in all of those races, variously Toyotas and Redbulls could and in some cases should have won. Look at Turkey for instance. He made the difference. If he only had to beat Barrichello, then why wasn't Barry 2nd in all those races.

Exactly, and as you say we shouldn't forget that some of those victories he did have to fight for- such as Bahrain and Turkey. Early season he was giving RB a pasting, and even with his issues later on in the season was still scoring strong results. Not exactly his fault the rest couldn't capitalise- they would have had any of them driven like he did in the first half of the season.

[Skinnyguy]

I´ll just say in which years I think a driver won it with others doing a better job/deserving it more since I watch the sport:

2003 (Räikkönen/Montoya), 2005 (Räikkönen), 2008 (Kubica), 2012 (Alonso).

I´m fine with the rest. Some mention 2007, but Räikkönen beat the rivals in the way he did because he had his misfortune earlier than the rivals, otherwise he would have arrived leading to the last race. Some mention 2009, but I think Jenson did a great job and following years (plus 2004 and 2006) show he can do the job as well as anyone. Some mention 2010 but I think Vettel deserved it big time, he just won it that way because all the misfortune he went throught. Just in these four seasons since 2000 I mentioned up there I feel the best did not win. And still in those, the winner did a really good job, you don´t win otherwise.

[LiJu914]

Hill is ridiculously underrated. He faired well against Prost, was pushed into leading the WIlliams team due to tradgedy, came close to winning that championship, admittedly had a scrappy '95 but came back and won in '96 against Villeneuve, nearly won in an Arrows, won in a Jordan and his 'Newey car' percentages aren't far off Vettel's. He also had some fine drives in the wet. I guess it's fashionable to dismiss his talents, purely for the crime of being not quite as good as Schumacher.

You´ll be charged for copyright infringement.

[Rinehart]

Exactly, and as you say we shouldn't forget that some of those victories he did have to fight for- such as Bahrain and Turkey. Early season he was giving RB a pasting, and even with his issues later on in the season was still scoring strong results. Not exactly his fault the rest couldn't capitalise- they would have had any of them driven like he did in the first half of the season.

It never ceases to amaze me what the chronology of events does for their apparent worth. Rotate the season around so Jenson comes from well behind with a much more sorted car to overall and beat Vettel and you suddenly have a hero champion and a choker. As you say, a number of drivers really didn't capitalise on their opportunities that season. That was the real story.

[BackOnTop]

I'd say although I like and rate him very highly as a driver, Kimi's title in 2007 was rather lost by Alonso, Hamilton and McLaren and rather won by the FIA and the entire Spygate scenario. That was definately not a title won on the track.

I also feel that Prosts title in 86 was somewhat lost by Williams and its drivers, rather than won by The Prof.

At least do some research or better, watch the races with some intelligence about the whole race, whole season before making one of the "worst statements" reflecting the thread title. How can any sane person with sound judgement make an assumption that this "Title" stated below was "NOT Won on TRACK"??!!

Kimi Raikkonen- FIA World Drivers Champion 2007

`AUS - Win 1* - one of the select few to win first race with Ferrari.
`MAL - 3rd
`BHR - 3rd
`ESP - Ret
`MON - 8
`CAN - 5
`USA - 4

`FRA - Win 2*
`GBR - Win 3*
`EUR - Ret

`HUN - 2nd
`TUR - 2nd
`ITA - 3rd
`BEL - Win 4*

`JPN - 3rd
`CHN - Win 5*
`BRA - Win 6* -joining Elite Greats to win Wdc with Ferrari in 1st season.

Kimi Raikkonen Stats for 17 Races:- 6 Wins, 6 Podiums (12 in total), 5 Fastest Laps, 3 Pole Positions.

Alonso & Hamilton won 4 races each. Maybe some can't digest that Raikkonen is still Ferrari's "current" world champion.

Edited by BackOnTop, 12 December 2012 - 18:03.

[LiJu914]

In the second half of the season Jenson didn´t win a race compared to Ruben´s two victories in Valencia and Monza. He was outqualified 1:9 by Rubens in the last ten races and would´ve been ahead of Rubens in just 2 races of the 2nd half of the season if not for some major mishaps on Rubens side (like the abysmal pitstops in Germany and Singapore and the puncture in Brazil). If some people ask in here, whether ALO "choked" in 2012, i wonder what Jenson did in 2009 compared to that.

The story about a unconvincing win with a dominant car is certainly wrong. However the revisionism, that JB rescued the WDC heroically in a fading Brawn-Team isn´t any better as he himself played a huge part in that development.


Still his WDC is hardly the worst of all, and Jenson himself as a driver even less.

Edited by LiJu914, 12 December 2012 - 18:01.

[BackOnTop]

Worst WDC Top5:

1. Rosberg
2. Rakkonen
3. Hunt
4. Button
5. Hill

If you think Raikkonen's pressure drives in the final 12 races of 2007 against Mclaren's Hamilton & Alonso was worst than Button's 2009 against nobody.... then I salute you for knowing something that we don't, or is it just dislike.

Edited by BackOnTop, 12 December 2012 - 18:18.

[LiJu914]

If you think Raikkonen's pressure drives in the final 12 races of 2007 against Mclaren's Hamilton & Alonso was worst than Button's 2009 against nobody.... then I salute you!

He listed his pov about the worst WDCs, not the worst WDC-campaigns. That´s a difference even though i still disagree.

Edited by LiJu914, 12 December 2012 - 18:18.

[eronrules]

poor kimi ... people will always drag him in every thread, no matter what subject matter that is. Leave kimi alone


btw, all those people who says kimi 2007 and hamilton 2008 are lucky championships, i think they are looking it from the wrong angel, it's more like other other blithering idiots were so incompetent that they failed to achieve it.

[KnucklesAgain]

Hill is ridiculously underrated. He faired well against Prost, was pushed into leading the WIlliams team due to tradgedy, came close to winning that championship, admittedly had a scrappy '95 but came back and won in '96 against Villeneuve, nearly won in an Arrows, won in a Jordan and his 'Newey car' percentages aren't far off Vettel's. He also had some fine drives in the wet. I guess it's fashionable to dismiss his talents, purely for the crime of being not quite as good as Schumacher.

Admittedly he had, but:

1. For me it's understandable after the '94 he had had, and those who didn't know then have seen since that the Schumachers, Alonsos and Hamiltons can have scrappy years as well.

2. I said it in 95 and after recently rewatching that season I haven't changed my opinion: The Williams team let Hill down just as much as Hill let Williams down. The Benetton strategy team outwitted them on race tactics all freakin the time, and not just because they had MS as a driver, but simply because they came up with better tactics and made less mistakes. Spa 95 still hurts especially, because Hill really should have won that, and blame for the fact that he didn't is IMO shared between the strategy team, Hill for not passing MS when his car was 6 seconds faster, and particularly dirty driving by MS (for which he got a one-race suspended ban, and I'm still shaking my head about it).

[Rinehart]

At least do some research or better,

Err, leaving aside your rant, all you've achieved is to show me how Raikkonen scored more points. Err, that would be the first criteria of being an unworthy champion... This thread is about its worthieness, and I'll repeat that without Mike Coughlain and a photocopier, Kimi would not have won that title in 2007. I think its you that needs to do the research.

[Andrew Hope]

There's an important distinction here that I think needs to be made. Are we looking to find the worst driver to have ever won a WDC, or are we trying to find the least impressive WDC season? For example, I don't find Button's WDC to be very magical, but I don't think he's the worst driver to have ever won it. People like to laugh at someone like Villeneuve but a lot of us like to forget he was a killer from the get go in F1, fresh off an incredibly victory in the Indianapolis 500 (came from 2 laps down to win, in the days before any "letting the backmarkers get a lap back" deals). The thing is, a lot of forummers here started following F1 when Villeneuve was on the way down (which is something all drivers eventually do, by the way). The man is pure entertainment, good or bad, in the races he does now, but we shouldn't let that distract us from the fact that he was one of only a handful of drivers to straight up beat Michael Schumacher to a title, and that he still holds the record for most wins by a driver in a rookie season with 4 (later tied in 2007 by the forum's golden boy, Lewis Hamilton). That's just an example, we can all make similar cases for most drivers bound to be mentioned in here.

And let's remember.. saying a guy was the worst F1 Driver's Champion is a bit like pointing to a pack of foxes on a stage somewhere and labelling one of them as the ugliest supermodel. It doesn't really mean anything in the end.

If it's worst driver to ever win a WDC, this is what I'd vote from my experience watching them, or from what I can reasonably guess about a driver from reading reports and whatnot from people who saw it happen:

1) Jones
2) Rosberg
3) Hill

If it's least impressive WDC season, regardless of driver talent, this is my top 3, even though they begin to overlap:

1) Rosberg
2) Hill
3) Button

Edited by Andrew Hope, 12 December 2012 - 18:33.

[Rinehart]

In the second half of the season Jenson didn´t win a race compared to Ruben´s two victories in Valencia and Monza. He was outqualified 1:9 by Rubens in the last ten races and would´ve been ahead of Rubens in just 2 races of the 2nd half of the season if not for some major mishaps on Rubens side (like the abysmal pitstops in Germany and Singapore and the puncture in Brazil). If some people ask in here, whether ALO "choked" in 2012, i wonder what Jenson did in 2009 compared to that.

The story about a unconvincing win with a dominant car is certainly wrong. However the revisionism, that JB rescued the WDC heroically in a fading Brawn-Team isn´t any better as he himself played a huge part in that development.


Still his WDC is hardly the worst of all, and Jenson himself as a driver even less.

Given that of all the drivers, Jenson seems to race each race in quite a calculated sometimes conservative fashion, I don't think it takes a great leap of faith to think he was driving for the title in such a manner. Rubens needed to catch up.

[LiJu914]

Given that of all the drivers, Jenson seems to race each race in quite a calculated sometimes conservative fashion, I don't think it takes a great leap of faith to think he was driving for the title in such a manner. Rubens needed to catch up.

But i doubt Jenson´s strategy was to get constantly outqualified and having trouble to make up for that in the races and rely on Rubens hitting problems instead...

Edited by LiJu914, 12 December 2012 - 18:37.

[Ragingjamaican]

And let's remember.. saying a guy was the worst F1 Driver's Champion is a bit like pointing to a pack of foxes on a stage somewhere and labelling one of them as the ugliest supermodel. It doesn't really mean anything in the end.

True.

[stanga]

But i doubt Jenson´s strategy was to get constantly outqualified and having trouble to make up for that in the races and rely on Rubens hitting problems instead...

I seem to remember Button benefitting in a major way when he and Hamilton made contact and Rubens had a puncture...

[Tsarwash]

Jenson has never been great at qualifying, but luckily for him, it doesn't count for points. He has only had 8 F1 pole positions in his career, and four of those came with unarguably the best car at the time, the Brawn early in the season.

[Kingshark]

Keke Rosberg beat Nigel Mansell when they were teammates.

To anyone who does nominate Keke.

[Kingshark]

Jenson has never been great at qualifying, but luckily for him, it doesn't count for points. He has only had 8 F1 pole positions in his career, and four of those came with unarguably the best car at the time, the Brawn early in the season.

He took pole with BAR twice, San Marino 2004 against the superior Ferrari's and Canada 2005 against faster Renault's and Mclaren's. Also took pole with Honda, Australia 2006.;)

Edited by Kingshark, 12 December 2012 - 19:03.