170 replies to this topic

[Henri Greuter]

Diffificult to judge one-time champs of earlier years who had nowhere near as many GP's to prove themselves against later ones who had to drive many more races in a season.

On the other hand, some of those earlier champs drove in other races than F1 as well while recent champs didn't drive anything else.

Must, or are we allowed to bring such factors as well to judge them? Or must we rate on F1 performances only?

 

Phil Hill won

 

Hmmm.

 

 

I'll vote blanco: even when concentrting on F1 careers alone, too many factors involved to make a fair comparison

[barzini]

I’m not going to comment American BS on a racing forum but I’m very curious if the truth about 2007 will ever resurface.

I don't have my tinfoil hat ready yet, so I hope it won't happen very soon.

[boillot]

I don't have my tinfoil hat ready yet, so I hope it won't happen very soon.

You won't need one if somebody from McLaren speaks first hand about it in 10-20 years....let's see. Until then (if it ever happens), we can believe what we think is more plausible.
I'd only say that fixing the 2008 Singapore race seemed far less likely than the 2007 WDC, yet it happened. So not every conspiracy is fabricated.

Edited by boillot, 17 November 2018 - 13:42.

[barzini]

You won't need one if somebody from McLaren speaks first hand about it in 10-20 years....let's see. Until then (if it ever happens), we can believe what we think is more plausible.
I'd only say that fixing the 2008 Singapore race seemed far less likely than the 2007 WDC, yet it happened. So not every conspiracy is fabricated.

When you have nothing to back up your statements you seem quite silly to believe in conspiracy theories.

[Sterzo]

F1: Mansell
Cars: Andretti
Motorsport: Surtees

Perfectly summarised. < /endthread >

[boillot]

When you have nothing to back up your statements you seem quite silly to believe in conspiracy theories.

Really not a place for it but what happened in the last two races of 2007 is not just something to back it up, it's almost as good as any solid proof.
Kimi was very lucky that Mosley wanted personal revenge against Ron Dennis because that what brought him the WDC, and that was probably the point of one of the posts above saying that Kimi (and N. Rosberg) are actually quite lucky to be on this list.

But anyway, it's a complete waste of time debating the merits of Kimi (a very good but not great driver) against true greats like Andretti.

Edited by boillot, 17 November 2018 - 15:13.

[barzini]

Really not a place for it but what happened in the last two races of 2007 is not just something to back it up, it's almost as good as any solid proof.
Kimi was very lucky that Mosley wanted personal revenge against Ron Dennis because that what brought him the WDC, and that was probably the point of one of the posts above saying that Kimi (and N. Rosberg) are actually quite lucky to be on this list.

But anyway, it's a complete waste of time debating the merits of Kimi (a very good but not great driver) against true greats like Andretti.

Dear Lord. I guess Alonso was orderd to crash out? And he'll do that because...?

Edited by barzini, 17 November 2018 - 17:22.

[LBDN]

Factoring in that he was fighting Hamilton and that they ended 1-2 in championships, I on think its that straightforward to conclude this. Nico is definetely one of the quickest drivers that have been on the grid for the last 5 years.

As a contrast look at how dull it is now that Hamilton has gotten Bottas.

I think people need to take into account Nico was up against a teammate who is arguably one of the greatest drivers of all time.

Edited by LBDN, 17 November 2018 - 17:28.

[boillot]

Dear Lord. I guess Alonso was orderd to crash out? And he'll do that because...?

....because, for example, otherwise McLaren would have been banned from competing in 2008 or the drivers disqualified from 2007 as well, or whatever else. There was no way Mosley would have allowed a WDC from the team that was disqualified and fined 100 million.
But again, not for this topic - please send me a PM if you feel like discussing more.

Edited by boillot, 17 November 2018 - 17:49.

[barzini]

....because, for example, otherwise McLaren would have been banned from competing in 2008 or the drivers disqualified from 2007 as well.

Alonso was leaving the team anyway, why should he give a damn.
What if Kimi had a dnf in Japan or Brazil? Or anyone between Lewis and Kimi in Brazil?


Next time you want to go on and claim something was fixed, have some proof or atleast a theory that could be real. Now, you got nothing.

[LBDN]

Alonso was leaving the team anyway, why should he give a damn.
What if Kimi had a dnf in Japan or Brazil? Or anyone between Lewis and Kimi in Brazil?


Next time you want to go on and claim something was fixed, have some proof or atleast a theory that could be real. Now, you got nothing.

This is off topic as a previous poster said.

That said, in this day and age with all forms of media plus the amount of people involved in the team involved who are no longer there, it seems almost impossible that it there was anything untoward going on something would have been leaked by now but this just isn't the case.

Time to move on and remain OT.

[sopa]

Diffificult to judge one-time champs of earlier years who had nowhere near as many GP's to prove themselves against later ones who had to drive many more races in a season.

On the other hand, some of those earlier champs drove in other races than F1 as well while recent champs didn't drive anything else.

Must, or are we allowed to bring such factors as well to judge them? Or must we rate on F1 performances only?

 

Phil Hill won

 

Hmmm.

 

 

I'll vote blanco: even when concentrting on F1 careers alone, too many factors involved to make a fair comparison

 

You make a good point here.

 

I think non-championship F1 races would be a decent addition too, provided the fields in those races were up to usual championship standard.

 

Why I didn't ask to add other series into the discussion in OP is that other series are after all different. Different demands, somewhat different skillsets. The discussion would get too scattered and cross-era comparisons even more complicated considering modern drivers don't race much elsewhere. And if a champion went on to race in, say, DTM, and finished 15th there, so what? Doesn't diminish his F1 accomplishments in my eyes.

[BuddyHolly]

Nico Rosberg for me.

Admittedly a controversial season and a bit of luck but he found a way to crack Hamilton and maximized his opportunity.

I like Nico and he did deserve his title without a doubt, but him and the likes of Hill & Button are the last ones I'd pick for this, quite frankly its a bit of a joke to put them up against the likes of Rindt, Andretti, Surtees etc.   but hey. we are all entitled to our opinions.

[jstrains]

Alonso (+1)

[BalanceUT]

Reading the Wikipedia Entry's first two paragraphs tells the entire story for me about Mario Andretti. 

 

 

Mario Gabriele Andretti (born February 28, 1940) is an Italian-born American former racing driver, one of the most successful Americans in the history of the sport.^[1] He is one of only two drivers to have won races in Formula One, IndyCar, World Sportscar Championship and NASCAR (the other being Dan Gurney). He also won races in midget cars, and sprint cars. During his career, Andretti won the 1978 Formula One World Championship, four IndyCar titles (three under USAC-sanctioning, one under CART), and IROC VI. To date, he remains the only driver ever to win the Indianapolis 500 (1969), Daytona 500 (1967) and the Formula OneWorld Championship, and, along with Juan Pablo Montoya, the only driver to have won a race in the NASCARCup Series, Formula One, and an Indianapolis 500. No American has won a Formula One race since Andretti's victory at the 1978 Dutch Grand Prix.^[2] Andretti had 109 career wins on major circuits.^[3]

Andretti had a long career in racing. He was the only person to be named United States Driver of the Year in three decades (1967, 1978, and 1984).^[4] He was also one of only three drivers to have won major races on road courses, paved ovals, and dirt tracks in one season, a feat that he accomplished four times.^[4] With his final IndyCar win in April 1993, Andretti became the first driver to have won IndyCar races in four different decades^[5] and the first to win automobile races of any kind in five.^[4]

 

[ClubmanGT]

Hulme, Andretti, Surtees all need to considered a breed apart due to their success in other categories for their entire careers, as well as their F1 exploits. 

I mean Mansell was unlucky to not win a title before the one he did, but driving the 1992 Williams was like having a fighter jet when everyone else was flying Sopwith Camels. I'd say he was equally lucky to end up with one as none. 

 

I'm also finding the five comedy votes for HIll most amusing. Must be that dry British wit I've heard so much about. 

[teejay]

Hands down Mario. 

 

His length of career and his ability to win in anything and everything means there is no one else close. 

[Henri Greuter]

Hulme, Andretti, Surtees all need to considered a breed apart due to their success in other categories for their entire careers, as well as their F1 exploits. 

I mean Mansell was unlucky to not win a title before the one he did, but driving the 1992 Williams was like having a fighter jet when everyone else was flying Sopwith Camels. I'd say he was equally lucky to end up with one as none. 
 
I'm also finding the five comedy votes for HIll most amusing. Must be that dry British wit I've heard so much about.

Keep in mind that Hill won Le Mans three times in a row. And maybe that was not the period of times that Le Mans was (retrospectively known) for might battles between different manufacturers but cars were mere prone to retirement then and the brand of car that was dominant at that time fielded several highly competitive cars each year.

[Rinehart]

This post has been heavily edited for clarity and concision:

Kimi, I guess. Mostly because he is the driver on the list who I think has the most raw speed and (admittedly unfullfilled) talent. But there are other worthy candidates.

It cannot be Mansell. He was clumsy and a choker. His spell against a disinterested and then concussion affected Piquet gave him a reputation he never deserved even though it was Piquet who kept it together and raised a title. For some reason, people do not consider how he was outscored by Rosberg, Piquet and Prost. Neither do they consider his long list of crashes and blunders. The FW14B deserves all the praise for the success in 92, Mansell just had to be competent enough to beat pre-retired Patrese. And he still threw wins away. But he had the right passport to assure employment in the grid and goodwill from the press.

Of course he ran way from Prost after 1992. Prost schooled him in 1990 and could do it again without breaking a sweat.

Just goes to show that any old false narrative can be presented as fact.

Mansell beat Piquet fair and square in 86 and was obviously only a famously unlucky puncture away from the title, which would mean he wouldn't even be in this poll now. And as for 87, Mansell was way better than Piquet but had worse reliability and didn't even take part the final 2 races after that qualy shunt which gifted Piquet the title. On the head to head Mansel beat Piquet 6-3 in races they both finished. I don't think Mansell is given more or less leeway than other drivers who have been "outscored by teammates" otherwise the likes of Vettel and Hamilton's stock would have taken a nose dive - it's all about the context surely and it cannot be said with a straight face that Piquet beat Mansell on ability.

 

I'd give JB and Nico a vote, in modern times those to have shown with they are easily good enough (relative to a teammate who is probably going to become the GOAT) to have secured multiple titles if they had been fortunate enough to have been a Red Bull driver instead of Vettel from 2010-13...

[AlexPrime]

F1: Mansell
Cars: Andretti
Motorsport: Surtees

Yes, Surtees is certainly very impressive... not only a Moto GP champion, but won the chilling Isle of Man race as well, if I am not mistaken. Lion.

[Collombin]

Many times. His 1959 Senior TT win in truly appalling conditions is the single thing I most admire him for (other than his handling of his son's death).