114 replies to this topic

[Tsarwash]

Yeah, it´s unfair to leave Maldonado in the list, but Frentzen - who fought for a WDC in a Jordan - of course has to stay there, right? ....or Trulli, who gave ALO a good run for his money (he even beat him on points in 2004)....or Jean Alesi, who wasn´t any worse than Berger. I´ll leave it with that, even if there still a few other names, who certainly aren´t more likely candidates than Maldonado.

I don't like Maldonaldo ,and you may not like him either, but his run in F1 is inly just starting, and he may well turn out to be a championship winning driver in the future so to leave him on seems a bit premature to me.

[sopa]

Maldonaldo beause he has not had a car that could win races for long enough to judge, and Kubica for much the same reason and his accident.

To be honest, many single-winners, like Panis or Trulli, hardly had cars with which to win even across their whole careers.

Anyway, in my view, based on 2012 Maldonado is the worst winner of the last 20+ years. Yes, he is fast, but when I compare him to other candidates like Kovalainen and Herbert, the latter two were much more consistent, not even comparable. And in similar situations in their primes - no1 driver in a good midfield car - both would have got many more points.

But as said. Maldo gets the benefit of doubt, because his career has hardly started. Maybe he can still match Herbert's 1997 or Kovalainen's 2007 season. Good decent seasons in a midfield cars with a few podiums.

Edited by sopa, 17 December 2012 - 18:44.

[1Devil1]

Have you read my posts in the thread ? My methodology was simple. ALL winners from last twenty years, then remove ALL WDC's then remove ALL drivers who won five races or more. (From somebody else's sensible suggestion.) The only subjective part of that final list was to remove Maldonaldo and Kubica. Maldonaldo beause he has not had a car that could win races for long enough to judge, and Kubica for much the same reason and his accident. I was only making it easier for people to see the available options. I have been watching F1 since the mid 80's thank you.

And this logic makes sense in which particular way? You cut out all drivers having a great car for many years like Webber, Massa or Barrichello because they won more than five races in top machinery. A lot of drivers mentioned in your list had to fight in midfield cars the most of their career. If you take Maldonado out, Rosberg, Alesi or Kubica have to follow

[sopa]

But if we look at the whole history, I agree with those, who say that Brambilla is a good candidate.

I am not sure, what to make of Mass. He spent many years in a top team, but hardly stood out. Although you can argue that if McLaren employed him for so long, he can't have been that bad.

Many careers were a bit too short to make a proper judgement, e.g Baghetti, Scarfiotti, Nilsson.

Have not studied the guys from the 50s properly to judge. But of course a good point made about the car sharing. Initially I didn't even think that this is the only way some guys have got a win.

[Tsarwash]

Just because we're looking for the worst winner, and somebody is unlikely to have lucked into five wins while still being near the bottom. To be honest, looking at the last twenty years, only three candidates stand out to me, Herbert, Kova and Irvine.
We will never know what people like Panis or Alesi would have done with competitive machinery.

[Alfisti]

To be honest, many single-winners, like Panis or Trulli, hardly had cars with which to win even across their whole careers.

Anyway, in my view, based on 2012 Maldonado is the worst winner of the last 20+ years. Yes, he is fast, but when I compare him to other candidates like Kovalainen and Herbert, the latter two were much more consistent, not even comparable. And in similar situations in their primes - no1 driver in a good midfield car - both would have got many more points.

But as said. Maldo gets the benefit of doubt, because his career has hardly started. Maybe he can still match Herbert's 1997 or Kovalainen's 2007 season. Good decent seasons in a midfield cars with a few podiums.

You're a mad man. Kovalainen consistent?? He was consistently slow and if the Mclaren was a good midfield car in 2007 then i'm a freakin eskimo.

[sopa]

You're a mad man. Kovalainen consistent?? He was consistently slow and if the Mclaren was a good midfield car in 2007 then i'm a freakin eskimo.

I am speaking of the Renault.

[LiJu914]

Just because we're looking for the worst winner, and somebody is unlikely to have lucked into five wins while still being near the bottom. To be honest, looking at the last twenty years, only three candidates stand out to me, Herbert, Kova and Irvine.
We will never know what people like Panis or Alesi would have done with competitive machinery.

Just one example: The largest part (96-98) of Irvine´s time at Ferrari , their overall competitiveness was similar to the last last three years. How many wins scored Massa in that period?

Edited by LiJu914, 17 December 2012 - 19:42.

[metz]

To put Frentzen on that list shows pure ignorance.

[Tsarwash]

To put Frentzen on that list shows pure ignorance.

Look !I didn't put Frentzen on the list. I just didn't take him off the list. There is a massive difference. Read the damn thread.

[Tsarwash]

Just one example: The largest part (96-98) of Irvine´s time at Ferrari , their overall competitiveness was similar to the last last three years. How many wins scored Massa in that period?

I don't rate Massa much at all, but he was good once, He was not that far behind Schu or Kimi in his day.

[Jimisgod]

Can't judge Kubica (injury), Rosberg (beat Schumi, has years left), Maldonado (barely started).

[wepmob2000]

I don't know about "worst" driver, but this unnecessarily negative thread is definitely a contender for "worst" thread of the year

[Henri Greuter]

Why is Maldonado being mentioned? He thrashed Senna, is fast when he hooks it up and his win was well deserved.

Irvine or Herbert for worse driver to win a race imo.

Thrashing Senna....

Now that was an achievement: More drivers could have done that, Kovalainen and perhaps one or two others of the three small teams could have done it too I think.
It is that he didn't win a GP but otherwise Bruno Senna would have been mentioned in the conversation here as well.
You overrate Bruno in a manner that is frightening.....
Because of the name perhaps?

Maldonado's other results apart from that fluke victory say more about how good he really is.
Soso at best.
His victory at Barcelona remind me so much about the almost victory of Hill in 1996 at Hungary. A brilliant display that race, not doubt about it.
With the important difference that, unlike Hill in 1996, `the Priest`his luck held on to the finish flag.
And another important difference: Hill's Arrows was among the 1996 cars of less quality than the 2012 Williams was compared with its opponents.


Henri

Edited by Henri Greuter, 18 December 2012 - 08:44.

[apoka]

Maybe, you should do a poll with 104 options (all GP winners) on who should be considered for a poll for the worst driver to win a race.

After all, if you keep people with 5+ race wins, you 'd also have to think about WDCs like Phil Hill (3 race wins, WDC in season when team mate von Trips died). If you continue that way, it's difficult to find some objective criterion when to stop.