Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

F1 Top 10 of All Time


  • Please log in to reply
319 replies to this topic

#101 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 15,669 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 09 January 2019 - 16:50

Remember reading quite a lot about Hakkinen during that era, the feeling being that he was a pure, seat of the pants racer with a lot of speed but in other aspects, Coulthard was considered stronger. I wish I could remember who said this, but can't. That Coulthard was generally cleverer, better at strategising, thinking through a race, driving around any issues, but Mika was faster. In 1996/7 when the car was unreliable and inconsistent that pace deficit to Mika wasn't always apparent at all (see also Button v Alonso 2015/16) but as soon as McLaren hit the jackpot with the car, suddenly there was a difference. And if Hakkinen was leading from the front, the other stuff wasn't as important. 

 

Not sure what comparison you're trying to make here with Button/Alonso. But if you think it's in any way similar to Hakkinen/Coulthard, you're mistaken.


Edited by Lights, 09 January 2019 - 16:50.


Advertisement

#102 efuloni

efuloni
  • Member

  • 250 posts
  • Joined: November 16

Posted 09 January 2019 - 18:57

1. Senna

2. Schumacher

3. Fangio

4. Clark

5. Hamilton

6. Prost

7. Lauda

8. Vettel

9. Alonso

10. Hakkinen



#103 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 1,589 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 09 January 2019 - 19:25

Vettel is at the top 5 of all major F1 records. I can't understand why people underrate him so much. The guy gave Toro Rosso it's first pole and win, Red Bull its first win, 4 titles that were never conquered again, was as dominant as other greats at a very young age. If it wasn't for his 2017/18 errors he could even be higher. Being the Ferrari lead driver it's not as easy as being the mercedes or Red Bull leading driver. It's another league. He's been strugling a bit [granted] with the pressure but he'll get there. Alonso and Schumacher went for similar process at Ferrari.

The problem is what has happened since his four world titles. He won his four titles all at Red Bull and with the same team-mate. That itself was nothing against Vettel, but he would then be expected to perform similarly against other team-mates if he was up with the real greats. But that hasn't happened. 2014 was a disaster for Vettel, and he was also weak against Raikkonen in 2016 in particular, and generally hasn't been convincing enough since. Schumacher and Alonso were both far more convincing when they went to Ferrari. Anyway, let's see what happens with Leclerc...

#104 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 13,797 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 09 January 2019 - 19:35

Schumacher and Alonso were both far more convincing when they went to Ferrari. Anyway, let's see what happens with Leclerc...

 

It's quite a generous take on Alonso's lack of accomplishments at Ferrari to group him up with Schumacher. Neither Vettel nor Alonso has been able to do what Schumacher did. That's understandable, they're not Schumacher.

 

But to be fair, Schumacher spent more time at Ferrari than Vettel has so far before he won his first title - and he didn't have face down the most dominant team ever, either.

 

Let's wait and see what 2019 brings to the Scuderia. :cool:


Edited by Nonesuch, 09 January 2019 - 19:37.


#105 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 09 January 2019 - 21:02

It's quite a generous take on Alonso's lack of accomplishments at Ferrari to group him up with Schumacher. Neither Vettel nor Alonso has been able to do what Schumacher did. That's understandable, they're not Schumacher.

But to be fair, Schumacher spent more time at Ferrari than Vettel has so far before he won his first title - and he didn't have face down the most dominant team ever, either.

Let's wait and see what 2019 brings to the Scuderia. :cool:

It's not just absolute success, it's having a measure of the teammates and scoring above what could be expected given a certain car.
Vettel already twice had a car good enough for the title and he actually never put up a title challenge, being soundly defeated both times. Alonso brought up the fight to the last race in what was, especially in 2012, a car way down the pecking order.

After his years in cheating rocketships, Vettel was convincingly beaten by the drivers in same or lesser cars in 2014, 2017 and 2018. In 2016 he lost in qualifying. In 2011, in the one and only race where only a part of the cheating advantage that his car enjoyed was taken away (British GP), he was already unable to win.

After the 2009 Belgian GP, I predicted that Kimi will never again win there because he was so incredibly lucky since 2004 (2008 being an obvious exception) that it was impossible for this improbable chain of events to continue. The same for Vettel - he owed his titles to sheer luck as much as to unfair car advantage (because he has never been good enough to capitalize on it properly, unless it was so huge that anyone could have done so), so that I was sure that it had to end. He is a top 50 F1 driver but no more and that's probably already a stretch. Never in the history of F1 has there been a bigger gap between the statistical success and real quality. Just as Alonso said, one day Vettel got the car more like the rest of them and we saw that he couldn't do anything with it. That's why his four titles, in the light of his later career, are basically worthless.

Edited by boillot, 09 January 2019 - 21:17.


#106 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 14,871 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 09 January 2019 - 21:37

There is harsh... and then there's boillot!

#107 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 14,871 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 09 January 2019 - 21:40

As much as I support Max and think and hope he can end up high in F1 all time ranking lists, I find it a bit odd and premature to find him in your list P123. He has the potential for sure, but still has a lot to prove. Don’t think he belongs there and deserves that (yet).


Maybe... He has a long career ahead so he'll move up and down these lists however he proceeds. But on pure talent and entertainment factor, I'm sticking with where I have him. For now (keeping in mind it's just drivers I have seen race, not the entire history). :)

Edited by P123, 09 January 2019 - 21:40.


#108 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 13,797 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 09 January 2019 - 21:48

In 2011, in the one and only race where only a part of the cheating advantage that his car enjoyed was taken away (British GP), he was already unable to win.

 

This is a very serious issue with Vettel's career.

 

Clearly a Prost or a Schumacher would have jumped out, fetched a spare wheel-gun, and emerged in the same position he had prior to the botched stop.

 

That place being... oh, right, first (but never mind!).


Edited by Nonesuch, 09 January 2019 - 21:49.


#109 messy

messy
  • Member

  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 09 January 2019 - 21:51

Not sure what comparison you're trying to make here with Button/Alonso. But if you think it's in any way similar to Hakkinen/Coulthard, you're mistaken.


That a slow and/or inconsistent car makes pace hard to judge. Button statistically was equal to Alonso in 2015, Coulthard was statistically equal to Mika in 1997. We know which the faster driver was in both cases. No?

#110 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 15,669 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 January 2019 - 06:20

That a slow and/or inconsistent car makes pace hard to judge. Button statistically was equal to Alonso in 2015, Coulthard was statistically equal to Mika in 1997. We know which the faster driver was in both cases. No?

 

Vandoorne's pace was easy to judge last season, so no, I disagree that.

 

Perhaps Coulthard was indeed better at driving around problems in a bad car and that brought him closer to Hakkinen in that situation. However I cannot see that same reasoning being applied for Button, as he's terrible at driving around problems and tends to get better compared to his teammates when the car is great. Alonso I'd say is fantastic at adapting to whatever he has under him. Button was simply close to Alonso in 2015 but he appeared equal or better because Alonso had more bad luck/mechanical issues (like engine modes slowing his car down during races). They were close in 2016 as well, until Button announced his retirement, not helped by then starting to get more of the bad luck. It's far too different to the case you described about the 90's duo that you could group in into the same reasoning (difficult car hides pace of quicker driver).



#111 messy

messy
  • Member

  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 10 January 2019 - 07:08

I'm not saying any of that that about Button though. The ONLY parallel is the slow, inconsistent, unreliable car making respective pace and performance hard to judge. And that's generally the case, if not for all. See also Kvyat outscoring Ricciardo in 2015 as another example. You're arguing with a point that wasn't made.

#112 Taxi

Taxi
  • Member

  • 3,669 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 09:26

It's not just absolute success, it's having a measure of the teammates and scoring above what could be expected given a certain car.
Vettel already twice had a car good enough for the title and he actually never put up a title challenge, being soundly defeated both times. Alonso brought up the fight to the last race in what was, especially in 2012, a car way down the pecking order.

After his years in cheating rocketships, Vettel was convincingly beaten by the drivers in same or lesser cars in 2014, 2017 and 2018. In 2016 he lost in qualifying. In 2011, in the one and only race where only a part of the cheating advantage that his car enjoyed was taken away (British GP), he was already unable to win.

After the 2009 Belgian GP, I predicted that Kimi will never again win there because he was so incredibly lucky since 2004 (2008 being an obvious exception) that it was impossible for this improbable chain of events to continue. The same for Vettel - he owed his titles to sheer luck as much as to unfair car advantage (because he has never been good enough to capitalize on it properly, unless it was so huge that anyone could have done so), so that I was sure that it had to end. He is a top 50 F1 driver but no more and that's probably already a stretch. Never in the history of F1 has there been a bigger gap between the statistical success and real quality. Just as Alonso said, one day Vettel got the car more like the rest of them and we saw that he couldn't do anything with it. That's why his four titles, in the light of his later career, are basically worthless.

 

 

Do you even read what you write? Don't you realise that saying Vettel 4 titles were won by a top 50 driver at best you are downplaying the mighty Alonso who had equivalent cars in 2010 and 2012 and still lost the title to the worthless Vettel? 

 

Vettel has better results in the 4 years at Ferrari than Alonso in 5 years against a much more dominant team than the Red Bull ever was. 



#113 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 09:50

Do you even read what you write? Don't you realise that saying Vettel 4 titles were won by a top 50 driver at best you are downplaying the mighty Alonso who had equivalent cars in 2010 and 2012 and still lost the title to the worthless Vettel?

Vettel has better results in the 4 years at Ferrari than Alonso in 5 years against a much more dominant team than the Red Bull ever was.

The car advantage that Vettel enjoyed over Alonso, especially in 2012, can be compared with Mercedes’ advantage 2014-2016. That Alonso was in the title fight in 2012 is simply down to his brilliant and Vettel’s poor driving.
In 2010 Alonso made mistakes (Vettel as well) but 2012 was a clear case of Vettel winning only due to incredible car advantage. Just as in 2011 and 2013.

Also, I can’t see any better results for Vettel in Ferrari. Alonso brought the fight to the last race twice. Vettel, with better equipment, was beaten by huge points margin seceral races before the end each time.The number of victories is comparable. The number of mistakes is not.

Let Vettel win something after Red Bull if he’s really any good. There’s nothing more to say.

Edited by boillot, 10 January 2019 - 10:02.


#114 DeKnyff

DeKnyff
  • Member

  • 1,245 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 10 January 2019 - 10:11

It's quite a generous take on Alonso's lack of accomplishments at Ferrari to group him up with Schumacher. Neither Vettel nor Alonso has been able to do what Schumacher did. That's understandable, they're not Schumacher.

 

But to be fair, Schumacher spent more time at Ferrari than Vettel has so far before he won his first title - and he didn't have face down the most dominant team ever, either.

 

Let's wait and see what 2019 brings to the Scuderia. :cool:

 

Yup. This is a fact which is very often sidelined when comparing Schumacher success at Ferrari with Prost's, Alonso's and Vettel's alleged "failures".



#115 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 4,621 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 10 January 2019 - 10:18

Do you even read what you write? Don't you realise that saying Vettel 4 titles were won by a top 50 driver at best you are downplaying the mighty Alonso who had equivalent cars in 2010 and 2012 and still lost the title to the worthless Vettel?

Vettel has better results in the 4 years at Ferrari than Alonso in 5 years against a much more dominant team than the Red Bull ever was.


There is a reason so many people, so many journo’s and so many pundits have their reservations about Vettel.

He’s shown over and over that his skillset is narrow. He’s extremely good when he can control situations. But he’s pretty average otherwise.

#116 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 13,797 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 10 January 2019 - 10:53

The car advantage that Vettel enjoyed over Alonso, especially in 2012, can be compared with Mercedes’ advantage 2014-2016.

 
What does that make Webber, the secret identity of Alex Yoong? :stoned:
 
The idea that Red Bull in 2012 had anywhere close to the total dominance enjoyed by Mercedes in those years is, well, interesting.

Edited by Nonesuch, 10 January 2019 - 10:53.


#117 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,405 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 11:26

Vettel is at the top 5 of all major F1 records. 

 

The issue with modern F1 records compared to the past is that reliability levels, stability of top teams, amount of races have inflated the statistics of top drivers - and drivers in top teams in general - in particular, and this includes M.Schumacher, Hamilton, Vettel and also Nico Rosberg.

 

I didn't include Vettel into my group of ten, but he is just bubbling under together with the likes of Ascari and Piquet. Top 10 is a very select group of drivers anyway and it's pretty hard choice. Just about getting left out is not a bad mark on a driver.

 

On the flipside. As for having weak seasons, which many mention, Lauda wasn't particularly convincing in his comeback, yet he is a popular choice into top 10. It's a bit of recency bias that people are too heavily invested in some recent seasons, while forgetting long-term past.



#118 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 21,500 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 10 January 2019 - 11:39

Yup. This is a fact which is very often sidelined when comparing Schumacher success at Ferrari with Prost's, Alonso's and Vettel's alleged "failures".

 

It's mindboggling to think that the team that later would go on to unseen domination 2001-2004 was literally a hairs width from crumbling to dust for their failure to win the big prize 1997-1999. Had they failed to win the title in Suzuka 2000, Todt would surely have been replaced. He was already only saved by Schumachers intervention a year earlier. And who knows if Brawn and MS would have stayed without Todt, or be as successful.



#119 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,405 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 11:58

 
What does that make Webber, the secret identity of Alex Yoong? :stoned:
 
The idea that Red Bull in 2012 had anywhere close to the total dominance enjoyed by Mercedes in those years is, well, interesting.

 

It's literally the first time ever I have seen anybody saying that 2012 Red Bull was as dominant was 2014-16 Mercedes. A little more and it will be the most dominant car F1 has ever seen. :) 

 

Nah, I'm already loving it. Total extremism on the forums.  :p

 

By the way, one has to acknowledge what a stunning job Maldonado did in the 2012 Spanish GP, because he didn't get anywhere near victories in 2014-15 against Mercedes, but - see - he actually did manage to defeat a similar Red Bull for once.  :p  And all those occasions Perez, Grosjean, Massa, et al ended up on podiums and defeated the superb 2014-15 Mercedes driven by Vettel and Webber in 2012.

 

Now that you look at it this way, Webber indeed looks like Yoong and rating Vettel among the top 100 of all times is generous to say the least.  :p



Advertisement

#120 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,405 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 12:06

What concerns Hakkinen, who some mention here, he did have periods he was getting outperformed by Coulthard, like the first half of 1997. Now was it because the car was worse, and he could drive better cars (i.e 98-99) better? Don't know. It could be more related to particular handling characteristics or motivation (latter particularly in 2001).

 

Not every driver ages the same, some have earlier or later peaks.

Lauda also had that couple of years away from the sport, drivers tend to find it hard to come back at the same level after you've had a break.

 

True that. Lauda being past it in the 80's is easily verified by the fact that in 1978 he did beat Watson in a team-mate battle, while in 82-83 he got beaten by the same driver. Which makes me think... peak Lauda against peak Prost could have been very interesting.


Edited by sopa, 10 January 2019 - 12:07.


#121 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 12:14

It's literally the first time ever I have seen anybody saying that 2012 Red Bull was as dominant was 2014-16 Mercedes. A little more and it will be the most dominant car F1 has ever seen. :)

Nah, I'm already loving it. Total extremism on the forums. :p

By the way, one has to acknowledge what a stunning job Maldonado did in the 2012 Spanish GP, because he didn't get anywhere near victories in 2014-15 against Mercedes, but - see - he actually did manage to defeat a similar Red Bull for once. :p And all those occasions Perez, Grosjean, Massa, et al ended up on podiums and defeated the superb 2014-15 Mercedes driven by Vettel and Webber in 2012.

Now that you look at it this way, Webber indeed looks like Yoong and rating Vettel among the top 100 of all times is generous to say the least. :p

The 2012 Red Bull was not as dominant as Mercedes but on average, Red Bull 2010-2013 was. In 2010 and 2012 Red Bull was badly driven as well.

#122 Bleu

Bleu
  • Member

  • 2,074 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 January 2019 - 12:48

My top 10 in chronological order.

Fangio

Moss

Clark

Stewart

Lauda

Prost

Senna

Schumacher

Alonso

Hamilton



#123 messy

messy
  • Member

  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 10 January 2019 - 13:06

 

On the flipside. As for having weak seasons, which many mention, Lauda wasn't particularly convincing in his comeback, yet he is a popular choice into top 10. It's a bit of recency bias that people are too heavily invested in some recent seasons, while forgetting long-term past.

 

Must say Lauda is a driver I'd never really thought was 'top ten of all time' material and was quite surprised he appeared on so many lists. Then I started to do my own list and....

 

Even though by his comeback he was kinda past his sell-by date and everything, the fact he won another World Championship just adds to his legacy massively. However he did it, it was one hell of an achievement. 



#124 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,071 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 10 January 2019 - 13:08

<bitter rant>

You're a funny guy.

 

Alonso brought up the fight to the last race in what was, especially in 2012, a car way down the pecking order.

The Ferrari was not exactly a match for RBR but to suggest it was 'way down the pecking order' is nothing short of hyperbole.

 

After his years in cheating rocketships, Vettel was convincingly beaten by the drivers in same or lesser cars in 2014, 2017 and 2018. In 2016 he lost in qualifying. In 2011, in the one and only race where only a part of the cheating advantage that his car enjoyed was taken away (British GP), he was already unable to win.

Cheating? I don't recall sanctions being imposed on RBR during Vettel's championship winning years for any sort of contravention of sporting regulations. You may have also forgotten that Vettel lost out on pole in the 2011 British GP by less than a tenth, was in P1 by turn one (classic Webber) and only lost the lead through an error in the pits by the pitcrew.

 

The same for Vettel - he owed his titles to sheer luck as much as to unfair car advantage (because he has never been good enough to capitalize on it properly, unless it was so huge that anyone could have done so), so that I was sure that it had to end. He is a top 50 F1 driver but no more and that's probably already a stretch.

No less than four years of continued luck, coupled with four years of continued, unsanctioned cheating. You must be onto something there. Vettel's driven some great races since going to Ferrari, but like you mention he's also ballsed up his championship challenges. I'd say that the mistakes and the margin with which Hamilton has defeated him is exacerbating this perception people are building that Vettel is a second-rate driver. Irrespective of any 'luck' you believe there to be, no man on this Earth is lucky enough to drag themselves to four consecutive world titles without being nearer to the top of the ladder than the bottom.



#125 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 13:20

Nearer to the top than to the bottom he may be but near the top Vettel is not. Let him win the title with Ferrari. I’ll happily shut up then! Let him win without cold blowing, flexing wings, flexing floors and whatever Newey’s cheating mind invented and Red Bull’s political influence protected.

#126 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 14,173 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 13:42

Just curious... as far as I am aware... Hakkinen never excelled in the wet, never dominated a wet race nor did he ever win a race without one of the fastest cars on the grid. Most of them in the outright best car (fyi I am not counting Jerez for obvious reasons).

So where is he 'equal to Schumacher at his peak?' A man who dominated a number of wet races, even won championships without a car the best of the field... and won races when he shouldn't have.

Frankly I don't see them in the same class. There is alot of rose tint when it comes to Mika Hakkinen. Being polite, having Schumachers off track respect and being finnish clearly wins alot of people over!

 

 

 

When I think of their peaks, I think of the 2000 season and how both were evenly matched. Hakkinen had higher highs and lower lows, Schumi didn't as much, in the end it was decided by a coin flip of timely unreliability and incidents. Also, in the 2000s Schumacher's records and numbers seemed near impossible and were magnified by the swarms of Schumi-tifosis, but Vettel's and Hamilton's subsequent run of titles evidenciate how numbers aren't everything and even seemingly unique runs of dominance are misleading.

 

Hakkinen's run with good cars was a flash in the pan compared to Schumacher's.

 

But it's not like I'm shutting the door on the discussion. Maybe I am overly fond of Hakkinen.



#127 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,405 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 13:49

When I think of their peaks, I think of the 2000 season and how both were evenly matched. Hakkinen had higher highs and lower lows, Schumi didn't as much,

 

I'm just wondering, how did you conclude Hakkinen had higher peaks in 2000?



#128 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,666 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 10 January 2019 - 14:10

Must say Lauda is a driver I'd never really thought was 'top ten of all time' material and was quite surprised he appeared on so many lists. Then I started to do my own list and....
 
Even though by his comeback he was kinda past his sell-by date and everything, the fact he won another World Championship just adds to his legacy massively. However he did it, it was one hell of an achievement.



Lauda achieved something quite similar as what MS did some 20 years on: dragging Ferrari out of the doldrums and be a vital part within the newly built up structure that finally, ater trying times worked at last and succeeded at last. Not that they became champion because of them being who they were but the blended in perfectly within the new structure that was built-up within the Scuderia and that paid off handsomely for both men.

#129 Sterzo

Sterzo
  • Member

  • 853 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 10 January 2019 - 14:58

There was a six year period from Stewart's retirement to Lauda's first, when Niki was pretty clearly the top driver of the time, even if he was pushed closely by Fittipaldi, Hunt, Andretti and Piquet.


Edited by Sterzo, 10 January 2019 - 14:58.


#130 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,071 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 10 January 2019 - 15:04

Nearer to the top than to the bottom he may be but near the top Vettel is not. Let him win the title with Ferrari. I’ll happily shut up then! Let him win without cold blowing, flexing wings, flexing floors and whatever Newey’s cheating mind invented and Red Bull’s political influence protected.

Newey's genius with respect to loopholes is to take advantage of wording that does not expressly prohibit particular practices, therein it is not cheating. Why you think it is, I'll never know.



#131 Taxi

Taxi
  • Member

  • 3,669 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 15:58

The 2012 Red Bull was not as dominant as Mercedes but on average, Red Bull 2010-2013 was. In 2010 and 2012 Red Bull was badly driven as well.

 

So you're telling us that in  2010 a 23 old kid without team orders who had a title contender car drove badly and a absolute all time top 10 legend with a contender car couldn't  beat him even having his team mate moving out of his front with ilegal team orders?



#132 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:01

Newey's genius with respect to loopholes is to take advantage of wording that does not expressly prohibit particular practices, therein it is not cheating. Why you think it is, I'll never know.

Well, Newey himself considered the double diffuser of 2009 cheating (because he did not came up with that idea himself), therefore it’s not about his being a genius (he is excellent, of course), it’s a matter of double standards and political influence.

#133 Spillage

Spillage
  • Member

  • 5,205 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:02

The problem is what has happened since his four world titles. He won his four titles all at Red Bull and with the same team-mate. That itself was nothing against Vettel, but he would then be expected to perform similarly against other team-mates if he was up with the real greats. But that hasn't happened. 2014 was a disaster for Vettel, and he was also weak against Raikkonen in 2016 in particular, and generally hasn't been convincing enough since. Schumacher and Alonso were both far more convincing when they went to Ferrari. Anyway, let's see what happens with Leclerc...

Vettel's margin over Raikkonen at Ferrari was just as convincing as Alonso's was. 2016 wasn't great, but in every other year Vettel dominated him in qualifying and won 13 races to Raikkonen's 1. I don't think it's fair to say that he's benefited from weak teammates after he's just beaten a world champion four years in a row.


Edited by Spillage, 10 January 2019 - 16:03.


#134 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:05

So you're telling us that in 2010 a 23 old kid without team orders who had a title contender car drove badly and a absolute all time top 10 legend with a contender car couldn't beat him even having his team mate moving out of his front with ilegal team orders?

Yes, I’m telling you that. Because that kid had a rocketship while others had cartwheels in comparison. I’d just like to repeat: let him win with Ferrari. His reputation is in his hands. And I’ll stop here because this thread is not about Vettel - it’s about top 10 F1 drivers.

Edited by boillot, 10 January 2019 - 16:08.


#135 thefinalapex

thefinalapex
  • Member

  • 429 posts
  • Joined: July 16

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:07

Yes, I’m telling you that. Because that kid had a rocketship while others had cartwheels in comparison. I’d just like to repeat: let him win with Ferrari. His reputation is in his hands. And I’ll stop here because this thread is not about Vettel.

 

You are delusional... 



#136 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,071 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:07

Well, Newey himself considered the double diffuser of 2009 cheating (because he did not came up with that idea himself), therefore it’s not about his being a genius (he is excellent, of course), it’s a matter of double standards and political influence.

Double standards or his prior words do not make his innovations throughout the course of 2010-13 cheating.



#137 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:10

Double standards or his prior words do not make his innovations throughout the course of 2010-13 cheating.

No, but the fact that FIA failed to police his designs does not make them legal as well. Just as the 1981 cars with suspension height correction switches, for example.

#138 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,071 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:11

Yes, I’m telling you that. Because that kid had a rocketship while others had cartwheels in comparison. I’d just like to repeat: let him win with Ferrari. His reputation is in his hands. And I’ll stop here because this thread is not about Vettel.

How do you explain 2013? In said rocketship Vettel won nine straight grands prix while Webber couldn't even sew up P2 in the championship with the same car. Over Vettel's four championship seasons he outscored Webber by 448 points at an average of 112 per season. What was that word you used to describe Vettel's championships? Luck?



#139 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,071 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:12

No, but the fact that FIA failed to police his designs does not make them legal as well. Just as the 1981 cars with suspension height correction switches, for example.

If the FIA want to write regulations that contain room for tactical maneuverability then that is on them, not Newey. He should be praised for having the wherewithal to do so, not admonished for creating a car with such an advantage. Let's stop pretending that the sporting regulations specifically said not to do this, and then Newey did.. this.


Edited by Dratini, 10 January 2019 - 16:13.


Advertisement

#140 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,405 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:14

 I’d just like to repeat: let him win with Ferrari. 

 

I'm sure it won't solve anything, because were that to happen it would be because he had the best car and a poor* team-mate.   ;)

 

* yeah Leclerc is currently highly rated, but if he got beaten by Vettel, his rating would plummet.



#141 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,405 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:18

There was a six year period from Stewart's retirement to Lauda's first, when Niki was pretty clearly the top driver of the time, even if he was pushed closely by Fittipaldi, Hunt, Andretti and Piquet.

 

One could say Lauda was the most complete driver in the field in his prime. In terms of speed peak Peterson or peak Hunt could challenge him, or even outpace him on occasion. But over a championship season you would still back Lauda to get the job done. And not just in terms of driving consistency, but also off the track and in developing the car. In this aspect one would say Andretti was also pretty handy. From that era I would also mention Scheckter, who was pretty much a top driver too.



#142 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:23

How do you explain 2013? In said rocketship Vettel won nine straight grands prix while Webber couldn't even sew up P2 in the championship with the same car. Over Vettel's four championship seasons he outscored Webber by 448 points at an average of 112 per season. What was that word you used to describe Vettel's championships? Luck?

Yes, luck, to have a rocketship and luck to have a poor teammate. Webber gave up after 2010.

#143 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:28

One could say Lauda was the most complete driver in the field in his prime. In terms of speed peak Peterson or peak Hunt could challenge him, or even outpace him on occasion. But over a championship season you would still back Lauda to get the job done. And not just in terms of driving consistency, but also off the track and in developing the car. In this aspect one would say Andretti was also pretty handy. From that era I would also mention Scheckter, who was pretty much a top driver too.

I think that Lauda’s greatest achievment was how he managed to reestablish himself at Ferrari in 1977, beat all the odds and open coldness, if not quite outright hostility of his own team and win the title in what was by no means the best car of the year.
After what happened, I’d say that Lauda got ten years older during 1976-1977. He certainly spent a lot of courage and energy.

Edited by boillot, 10 January 2019 - 16:28.


#144 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:31

I'm sure it won't solve anything, because were that to happen it would be because he had the best car and a poor* team-mate.  ;)

* yeah Leclerc is currently highly rated, but if he got beaten by Vettel, his rating would plummet.

There is a difference between having the best car and a car that is as if it were built to another formula. Vettel already had the best or equal best cars in 2017-2018 and we saw that it’s nowhere near enough for him.

#145 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 13,797 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:40


The 2012 Red Bull was not as dominant as Mercedes but on average, Red Bull 2010-2013 was.

 

Not especially in 2012 then?

 

The car advantage that Vettel enjoyed over Alonso, especially in 2012, can be compared with Mercedes’ advantage 2014-2016.

 

 Anyway.

 

There's one thing Vettel, for all his screw-ups, his failures, his rookie antics, and his cheating ways never did, and that is of course ... lose the title to a team-mate.

 

 ;) 



#146 Dan333SP

Dan333SP
  • Member

  • 2,682 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:42

I think when all is said and done, Vettel's legacy will be determined by what happens with LeClerc. If they build a winner again next year and Charles outperforms Seb in the same way that Danny Ric did in 2014, he'll be regarded as the most overrated multiple title winner ever.

 

If he demolishes Charles and takes the title from Hamilton, I think he'll cement a place in the top 10 all time lists.



#147 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:43

I think when all is said and done, Vettel's legacy will be determined by what happens with LeClerc. If they build a winner again next year and Charles outperforms Seb in the same way that Danny Ric did in 2014, he'll be regarded as the most overrated multiple title winner ever.

If he demolishes Charles and takes the title from Hamilton, I think he'll cement a place in the top 10 all time lists.

Exactly!

#148 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 13,797 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:48

Vettel's legacy will be determined by what happens with LeClerc. If they build a winner again next year and Charles outperforms Seb in the same way that Danny Ric did in 2014, he'll be regarded as the most overrated multiple title winner ever.

 

That'd be a bit soon. Who knows what Leclerc will do over the course of his career. He might even bring five titles to Ferrari like King Michael did. There'd be no shame for Vettel in struggling to beat someone like that

 

We'll see how it goes. It's a great combination, though! Exciting times for Ferrari fans.  :up: 

 

And either way, one year is just one year, as I'm sure all of Hamilton's fans can agree. :cool:

 


#149 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,405 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 16:58

I think when all is said and done, Vettel's legacy will be determined by what happens with LeClerc. If they build a winner again next year and Charles outperforms Seb in the same way that Danny Ric did in 2014, he'll be regarded as the most overrated multiple title winner ever.

 

If he demolishes Charles and takes the title from Hamilton, I think he'll cement a place in the top 10 all time lists.

 

Based on 2019 there will surely be a lot of ponderings about Vettel's legacy. However, how much does it make sense to change retrospective ratings? I mean Raikkonen was still impressive in McLaren, despite having done little afterwards. One can't become too hysterical with retrospective re-evaluation.

 

If Vettel gets beaten by Leclerc, he was still a top 3 driver on the grid in Red Bull. Even in that much-maligned 2012 championship season. You can argue Alonso and Hamilton were better than Vettel in 2012, but seriously who else? Even if 2019 points score shows Leclerc - 300, Vettel - 250.



#150 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 17:07

Based on 2019 there will surely be a lot of ponderings about Vettel's legacy. However, how much does it make sense to change retrospective ratings? I mean Raikkonen was still impressive in McLaren, despite having done little afterwards. One can't become too hysterical with retrospective re-evaluation.

If Vettel gets beaten by Leclerc, he was still a top 3 driver on the grid in Red Bull. Even in that much-maligned 2012 championship season. You can argue Alonso and Hamilton were better than Vettel in 2012, but seriously who else? Even if 2019 points score shows Leclerc - 300, Vettel - 250.

That’s fine, Vettel may have been a top 3 driver in that period. But that shows even more how much skewed his stats are because in those four years he won everything while the guys that were certainly better at least in some years won nothing. It happens all the time because of the car factor but before Vettel, it has never happened that one and the same inferior driver won four in a row. That’s terrible, that completely devalues the drivers’ championship.

Before Vettel one may have said that a certain driver had the luck to be in the best car for a year or two but earlier there was usually at least some merit, e.g. D. Hill was an excellent development and test driver who helped Williams build dominant cars. Or in another sense, P. Hill was lucky to have things go his way in 1961 but it did not last longer. That’s all acceptable. One or even two titles for Vettel would be acceptable as well.

But with Vettel’s four titles, in the era of no testing, there’s no justification. He was simply given a tool from another world for four years. That’s honestly horrible, the worst thing (bar serious accidents and outright non-sporting behaviour) that happened to F1 in 21st century or even since much earlier. It showed us that we, as public, really should not care who wins the title because it can be completely circumstantial for years. It devalues the title even for the drivers who actually deserved it.

And all that because of Red Bull’s money and 4 cars that they could pulled out in the case they won nothing.

Edited by boillot, 10 January 2019 - 17:28.