Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

F1 Top 10 of All Time


  • Please log in to reply
342 replies to this topic

#151 Taxi

Taxi
  • Member

  • 3,783 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 10 January 2019 - 17:45

I get the feeeling german drivers are not much apreciated. Schumacher himself was kind of hated to untill people couldn't underrate him anymore. Still the amount of people puting him 4th best or lower in the all time lists is very high. With Vettel is even worse. 



Advertisement

#152 Dan333SP

Dan333SP
  • Member

  • 2,908 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 10 January 2019 - 17:46

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.

 

He was most likely a top 3 driver in 2012, but this thread is about all-time rankings. I'm inclined to think he doesn't deserve a place in the top 10 if we're looking at the history of the sport as a whole.



#153 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 767 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 17:47

Schumacher is up with Fangio and Clark, he was really special. Add Prost, Senna and Alonso and there’s top 6 that one can shuffle in many orders.

#154 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,826 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 17:52

To open another can of worms, I started wondering whether putting Clark into P1 is the least controversial choice of all?

 

Fangio was already in his mid-to-late-40's, when he did his winning, so likely he wasn't at his ultimate peak any more and it probably shows his competition was lacking?

 

With Senna and Schumacher you can talk about ethics endlessly. Plus Senna was prone to occasionally making mistakes, and with Schumacher there is endless arguing, how favoured he was...

 

While Hamilton for most of his career hasn't been clear best driver of "his" era.

 

But with Clark? Any issue? Humm...   ;)



#155 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 767 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 17:56

With Clark one can say that he probably didn’t know enough about his cars (lack of technical understanding) and that he was always clear no. 1 in the team that was usually unable to prepare two equal cars anyway. Also, he did all his winning in a single team (but he won with BRM H16!).
But I’m playing devil’s advocate here - I’m fine with him at the no. 1 spot! I could write a much longer post about his qualities.

Prost could be another good candidate.

Edited by boillot, 10 January 2019 - 17:59.


#156 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 9,392 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 10 January 2019 - 18:15

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.

 

 

 

Well, if you rate Vettel the way you do, I wonder if there is any positive comment you can find about Mark Webber regarding his qualities as a driver....



#157 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 4,438 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 10 January 2019 - 18:28

I could write a much longer post about his qualities.


Please don't, I think most are aware of them. The reason he always wins these polls by miles is that people don't know enough about the qualities of the other top contenders.

#158 messy

messy
  • Member

  • 3,407 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 10 January 2019 - 18:33

Vettel was great in his Red Bull years. He took full advantage of the great machinery he had, rode a wave of confidence and at times (end of 2010, 2011, 2013) he was about as unstoppable as I've ever seen a racing driver. When he was on song his pace advantage over everyone else was crazy. He was just playing with everyone. Also in 2012 without a clear car advantage, he showed he could win by digging down as well as just waltzing away from everyone. I hated his tedious domination, but it's hard to pick too many holes in it. Mark Webber was a fine driver, he showed that often enough in his career.

In rating him though, he's absolutely screwed by everything that's happened since 2013. Blown into the weeds by Ricciardo, getting run quite close by 49 year old Kimi Raikkonen, failing to put together a single convincing season long challenge in a Ferrari that was quite likely the best car out there, and blowing it in almost exactly the same way two seasons running, making stupid mistakes, clumsy collisions and just throwing it all away. He's been pretty poor. Roebuck recently concluded that he's simply well past his best already. Dunno, but he's not done much aside from the odd flash here and there for a long time.

#159 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 14,550 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 10 January 2019 - 18:47

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

 

 

Basically Spa and qualifying at Imola. And also how he took the title fight unti Japan despite suffering wipeouts at Australia, Brazil, Monaco, Germany and Indy. That's a lot to make up for against a Schumi in his prime despite the 4 zeroes.

 

Taxi, nobody gives a shoot about nationalities except fanboys, and their opinions are irrelevant (but usually pretty loud). I think MS's and SV's relatively low ratings are simply because:

- the records Vettel and Hamilton compiled made Schumi's look less extraordinary and more circumstancial, dominant cars are huge steroids for number, and they'll always be:

- MS's comeback and form against Rosberg;

- SV's post RB struggles and sudden chinks in the armour;

- a readjustment thanks to how Hamilton won against Rosberg himself and two terrific and incredibly quick Ferrari's and Vettel himself;

- And it's a fluid list. Every decade of so some names will be reshuffled.


Edited by Atreiu, 10 January 2019 - 18:56.


Advertisement

#160 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 767 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 19:14

Well, if you rate Vettel the way you do, I wonder if there is any positive comment you can find about Mark Webber regarding his qualities as a driver....

Indeed there is. It is a matter of context. If you are talking about aunt Annie who drove her Ford around a town for 20 years without accident you may say she was a careful and reasonably skilled amateur driver. The same way Webber, who was not a WDC material was a very good journeyman who matched Vettel in 2010, one may even say could have won the title without Vettel’s stupidity in (was it?) Turkey. Thereafter he got hurt and more-less gave up.
When evaluating Vettel, the context is different - he "won" four titles. Based on that, the future fans who will not have seen him drive may think that he was somehow a driver of equal stature to Prost. It is the task of the historians and journalists to create the realistic image showing that he was perhaps a driver worthy of a title but that having four is simply due to unfair advantage and very special circumstances and not due to his actual qualities. Everything else would be a historical travesty!


Edited by boillot, 10 January 2019 - 20:06.


#161 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 767 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 10 January 2019 - 19:17

Please don't, I think most are aware of them. The reason he always wins these polls by miles is that people don't know enough about the qualities of the other top contenders.

I didn’t mean to, it was a metaphor saying that he had much more qualities than flaws :-)

 

But actually, I thought that Senna usually wins such polls - mostly due to the James Dean effect.


Edited by boillot, 10 January 2019 - 19:37.


#162 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 15,675 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 10 January 2019 - 19:56

Vettel was great in his Red Bull years. He took full advantage of the great machinery he had, rode a wave of confidence and at times (end of 2010, 2011, 2013) he was about as unstoppable as I've ever seen a racing driver. When he was on song his pace advantage over everyone else was crazy. He was just playing with everyone. Also in 2012 without a clear car advantage, he showed he could win by digging down as well as just waltzing away from everyone. I hated his tedious domination, but it's hard to pick too many holes in it. Mark Webber was a fine driver, he showed that often enough in his career.

In rating him though, he's absolutely screwed by everything that's happened since 2013. Blown into the weeds by Ricciardo, getting run quite close by 49 year old Kimi Raikkonen, failing to put together a single convincing season long challenge in a Ferrari that was quite likely the best car out there, and blowing it in almost exactly the same way two seasons running, making stupid mistakes, clumsy collisions and just throwing it all away. He's been pretty poor. Roebuck recently concluded that he's simply well past his best already. Dunno, but he's not done much aside from the odd flash here and there for a long time.


I think it is just the way Vettel is. He managed to get it over the line in 2010 and 2012, both of which should have been a fair bit more comfortable than they ended up being, so was never under the sort of scrutiny that failure would have brought, with the media instead celebrating his four in a row and hailing him as one of the greatest ever. Nobody is perfect, but the flaws which were there then were ignored. He still is one of the best of his era, one of the best of all time, but 2014 or 2018 are as much of a guide as 2010 or 2012, or 2011 and 2013 when he was dominant. I suppose you could say that in 2010 and 2012 he heeded the wake up call, but it never came in 2018.

#163 Ramon69

Ramon69
  • Member

  • 859 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 10 January 2019 - 20:57

I didn’t mean to, it was a metaphor saying that he had much more qualities than flaws :-)

 

But actually, I thought that Senna usually wins such polls - mostly due to the James Dean effect.

Or is it the James DEEN effect? 



#164 Dan333SP

Dan333SP
  • Member

  • 2,908 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 10 January 2019 - 21:22

Certainly, the people who were killed in their prime (Senna, Clark, Rindt) tend to be rated higher than those who raced until their retirement. Imagine how opinions would have changed if Senna retired in '95 after losing back to back titles to MSC and came back in 2001 as, say, Montoya's teammate at Williams and got smashed? Same basic premise as Schumacher 2.0. Yea, he'd still be regarded as an all time great, but he wouldn't have the same unbeatable luster that he does in his martyrdom.



#165 Taxi

Taxi
  • Member

  • 3,783 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 11 January 2019 - 09:19

Schumacher is up with Fangio and Clark, he was really special. Add Prost, Senna and Alonso and there’s top 6 that one can shuffle in many orders.

 

 

No Hamilton eh... 

 

WIth you it's all about Alonso [great driver BTW but not there with the first group]



#166 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 767 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 11 January 2019 - 09:20

No Hamilton eh...

WIth you it's all about Alonso [great driver BTW but not there with the first group]

Yes, you are right, Hamilton should be there as well. Make it 7 indisputable then. About Alonso, I have my opinion, let’s see how will time judge him. Had he managed to win in 2012, I assume nobody would have second thoughts.

Edited by boillot, 11 January 2019 - 09:26.


#167 Taxi

Taxi
  • Member

  • 3,783 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 11 January 2019 - 09:25

Yes, Hamilton should be there as well. Make it 7 indisputable then.

 

not that different from mine. I just slot Vettel before Alonso.  :lol:



#168 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 767 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 11 January 2019 - 09:27

not that different from mine. I just slot Vettel before Alonso. :lol:

Yes, we disagree about Vettel :-)

#169 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 1,722 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 11 January 2019 - 16:43

Yes, you are right, Hamilton should be there as well. Make it 7 indisputable then. About Alonso, I have my opinion, let’s see how will time judge him. Had he managed to win in 2012, I assume nobody would have second thoughts.

I see Stewart as the eighth banker.

#170 Yamamoto

Yamamoto
  • Member

  • 804 posts
  • Joined: April 16

Posted 11 January 2019 - 17:04

I see Stewart as the eighth banker.

 

A few years ago, in my head your top six had Fangio, Clark, Stewart, Prost, Senna, Schumacher. That's your extended Mount Rushmore.



#171 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 4,438 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 11 January 2019 - 17:35

My Mount Rushmore has been Fangio, Moss, Clark and Senna for some time.

The next group - Stewart, Prost, Ascari and Schumacher - need to be carved in cheese as one or two of them are in danger once Hamilton and Alonso hang up their helmets for good.

#172 Boxerevo

Boxerevo
  • Member

  • 2,609 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 11 January 2019 - 17:48

Gonna put only those i saw and whole career:

 

1- Senna Ayrton

2- Hamilton Lewis

3- Alonso Fernando

4- Schumacher Michael

5- Prost Alain

 

Vettel, Hakkinen, Rosberg, Button, Montoya... in some order.



#173 chrisj

chrisj
  • Member

  • 829 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 11 January 2019 - 18:31

Seems like Hamilton is placing high on these polls because he had a good year, is flavour of the month (and the forum has a lot of Brits). He's also had some pretty average years, too. 



#174 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 11 January 2019 - 19:49

Seems like Hamilton is placing high on these polls because he had a good year, is flavour of the month (and the forum has a lot of Brits). He's also had some pretty average years, too. 

 

Technically* even 2011 was a great year for Hamilton because as we've heard said here in similar threads, he "beat himself" that year.

 

Since it's not every year that someone manages to beat a five time champion, in hindsight 2011 was pretty impressive. :cool:

 

*Might not be entirely true.

 


#175 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 15,675 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 11 January 2019 - 20:02

Technically* even 2011 was a great year for Hamilton because as we've heard said here in similar threads, he "beat himself" that year.
 
Since it's not every year that someone manages to beat a five time champion, in hindsight 2011 was pretty impressive. :cool:
 
*Might not be entirely true.


At least Hamilton is still responsible for it then. :)

#176 CountDooku

CountDooku
  • Member

  • 10,138 posts
  • Joined: March 15

Posted 11 January 2019 - 21:55

Seems like Hamilton is placing high on these polls because he had a good year, is flavour of the month (and the forum has a lot of Brits). He's also had some pretty average years, too.


Hamilton has had one poor year (2011) and one average year (2013). The rest of the time he has been exceptional.

#177 Dan333SP

Dan333SP
  • Member

  • 2,908 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 12 January 2019 - 03:13

Hamilton has had one poor year (2011) and one average year (2013). The rest of the time he has been exceptional.


This. He’s pretty clearly a top shelf all time talent, and I’m saying this as an American with no specific affinity for Lewis.

#178 OvDrone

OvDrone
  • Member

  • 9,356 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 12 January 2019 - 03:24

*sigh* the winter Motorsport blues got the better of me so here goes my personal top 10 as of early 2019:

 

1. Jim Clark

2. Juan Manuel Fangio

3. Alain Prost

4. Ayrton Senna

5. Michael Schumacher

6. Lewis Hamilton

7. Niki Lauda

8. Jackie Stewart

9. Sebastien Vettel

10. Jack Brabham



#179 Blackmamba

Blackmamba
  • Member

  • 274 posts
  • Joined: January 15

Posted 12 January 2019 - 05:30

There is circular logic there, though. Rubens is viewed as an easier team-mate because Michael beat him convincingly. He was a strong appointment when he joined Ferrari. Button and Rosberg both had their statuses enhanced because Lewis was not able to beat them as thoroughly as initially expected. Retrospectively uprating or downrating a driver as a means of trying to justifying his team-mates relative performance is a slippery slope.


Rubens got soundly beaten by Button so maybe he was just never that special

Advertisement

#180 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 12 January 2019 - 08:54

Rubens got soundly beaten by Button so maybe he was just never that special

 

Barrichello got 81% of Button's WDC-winning points total in 2009 - not shockingly less than Rosberg got of Hamilton in 2014 (82%) and 2015 (84%).



#181 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 15,675 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 12 January 2019 - 09:43

Barrichello got 81% of Button's WDC-winning points total in 2009 - not shockingly less than Rosberg got of Hamilton in 2014 (82%) and 2015 (84%).


Rubens came up short against Button by any measure. He wasn't quite as good as him. No shame, as Button had already beaten Trulli over a season, had the measure of Villeneuve and buried Sato. That, as well as Button's performances against Hamilton and Alonso (who themselves have strong records against a variety of teammates) elevates him above the likes of Rubens. It doesn't mean Barichello is rubbish; he's still a multiple GP winner.

#182 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 12 January 2019 - 10:21

Absolutely. Still, I like to think there's a lot of room between "never that special" and not quite being as good as a world champion (Brawn shenanigans aside), who later held his own against Hamilton and Alonso.

 

But who knows, maybe I'm just partial to Rubens. Nice guy! :cool:

 

24H_of_Le_Mans_2017_Racing_Team_Nederlan



#183 hittheapex

hittheapex
  • Member

  • 1,159 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 12 January 2019 - 12:35

Final results in, thanks everybody for taking part. After counting the totals of 24 nominees we end up with the tightest podium of any of the top 10 threads I've posted in the off season. Here we go:

 

Senna               156

Hamilton            155

Schumacher      154

Prost                 137

Clark                 115

Fangio               113

Alonso                 80

Stewart                55

Lauda                  42

Vettel                   39

 

I think this reinforces the idea that the 2010s, despite the politics and sometimes poor spectacle on track, from a talent point of view are a golden era. No decade has as many drivers in the top 10 as the 2010s unless you count the 1990s by including Senna and Prost's end of their careers alongside Schumacher. The results confirm the head to head threads involving the top 4 are not going to result in a consensus anytime soon.

 

A tight fight between Clark and Fangio for 5th place, both of them handicapped by the common tactic of only judging drivers that one has actually seen race. I wonder if in 50 years time we'll see Hamilton, Schumacher and Senna slide down the list for other names.

 

Next from me, a much less binary thread, not a top 10, but something that I hope will be just as, or even more, fun. Cheers.


Edited by hittheapex, 12 January 2019 - 12:35.


#184 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 1,722 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 12 January 2019 - 13:03

What if you only include the votes from people who didn't explicitly say they were only ranking drivers they'd seen? Kind of breaks it really.

#185 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 12 January 2019 - 13:49

I think this reinforces the idea that the 2010s, despite the politics and sometimes poor spectacle on track, from a talent point of view are a golden era.

 

There's a recency bias in all these things. Look how people bring down fire and fury on Vettel's season while proclaiming Verstappen the best thing since forever, despite him spending the early races crashing into people left and right. In particular for this ranking, which would necessarily involve looking at all F1 seasons, quite a few people noted they only ranked people they had seen, which skewed things heavily towards the later years.

 

Anyway, in keeping with the thread's focus on fair play, it's good to see Clark win after removing those who have tarnished their legacy by being disqualified from one or more races for sporting infringements. :cool:

 

Good job Jim! :up:

 


#186 hittheapex

hittheapex
  • Member

  • 1,159 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 12 January 2019 - 14:02

 

There's a recency bias in all these things. Look how people bring down fire and fury on Vettel's season while proclaiming Verstappen the best thing since forever, despite him spending the early races crashing into people left and right. In particular for this ranking, which would necessarily involve looking at all F1 seasons, quite a few people noted they only ranked people they had seen, which skewed things heavily towards the later years.

 

 

 

True.



#187 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 4,438 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 12 January 2019 - 14:11

Anyway, in keeping with the thread's focus on fair play, it's good to see Clark win after removing those who have tarnished their legacy by being disqualified from one or more races for sporting infringements. :cool:


Even his infringements improve his reputation - he qualified at Indy in 1966 with a broken lap belt that he deliberately hid from the officials, adding an extra layer of bravery to his run.

#188 Sterzo

Sterzo
  • Member

  • 1,206 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 12 January 2019 - 14:12

What if you only include the votes from people who didn't explicitly say they were only ranking drivers they'd seen? Kind of breaks it really.

Quite.

 

I've never agreed with the fairly common view that you can only know about someone you've seen race yourself. I'd have thought any ranking is based on much more data than what you happen to see. The amount any of us can contribute as a direct witness is surely minimal.

 

As it happens, my own nomination of Fangio as number one is the only driver on the final list I haven't watched trackside, which is irrelevant but I thought I'd say it anyway.



#189 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,826 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 12 January 2019 - 14:12

You have to consider WDC history is almost 70 years long by now, so 3 drivers from current era might be crowding it a bit towards moderns times. The HAM-ALO-VET triangle is a bit like I look at Fangio-Moss-Ascari triangle from the 50's. Fangio is a shoe-in into top 10 from there, and then you choose between Ascari and Moss. Well, Ascari has the titles and 9 consecutive wins, while a bit later Moss left a great impression in his prime, despite no titles.

 

Inbetween these eras you have Clark, Stewart, Lauda, Prost, Senna and Schumacher, all of who were benchmarks of their fields for a while.



#190 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,826 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 12 January 2019 - 14:20

Quite.

 

I've never agreed with the fairly common view that you can only know about someone you've seen race yourself. I'd have thought any ranking is based on much more data than what you happen to see. The amount any of us can contribute as a direct witness is surely minimal.

 

As it happens, my own nomination of Fangio as number one is the only driver on the final list I haven't watched trackside, which is irrelevant but I thought I'd say it anyway.

 

If you want to analyze a race, I guess watching it on TV is better than watching it trackside, where you get to view it from one (distant) angle.

And then you have to consider that long time ago TV coverage was much worse. Quality was less, there were much less cameras, and cameras were often following the leader. With little screen graphics and data.

 

So basically... even if you were watching a race, chances are you were still missing things for a good analysis, especially down the field. You didn't see someone making a mistake and making a mockery of himself, thus potentially degrading his status as a driver. :p



#191 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 767 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 12 January 2019 - 14:22

Final results in, thanks everybody for taking part. After counting the totals of 24 nominees we end up with the tightest podium of any of the top 10 threads I've posted in the off season. Here we go:

Senna 156
Hamilton 155
Schumacher 154
Prost 137
Clark 115
Fangio 113
Alonso 80
Stewart 55
Lauda 42
Vettel 39

I think this reinforces the idea that the 2010s, despite the politics and sometimes poor spectacle on track, from a talent point of view are a golden era. No decade has as many drivers in the top 10 as the 2010s unless you count the 1990s by including Senna and Prost's end of their careers alongside Schumacher. The results confirm the head to head threads involving the top 4 are not going to result in a consensus anytime soon.

A tight fight between Clark and Fangio for 5th place, both of them handicapped by the common tactic of only judging drivers that one has actually seen race. I wonder if in 50 years time we'll see Hamilton, Schumacher and Senna slide down the list for other names.

Next from me, a much less binary thread, not a top 10, but something that I hope will be just as, or even more, fun. Cheers.

Thanks for summing it up!
Three drivers from the current era are perhaps one too many and having Senna on top is not a surprise (he always wins simply because he died in a race and was the greatest self-promoter F1 has ever seen).
But if we take just the names (with one obvious exception) with no particular order, it's a very reasonable list.

Edited by boillot, 12 January 2019 - 18:46.


#192 BuddyHolly

BuddyHolly
  • Member

  • 2,920 posts
  • Joined: December 15

Posted 12 January 2019 - 18:07

Jimmy 5th?  Absurd. :drunk:



#193 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 4,438 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 12 January 2019 - 18:51

I think the Fangio fans should be more upset than the Clark ones. But anyway it's not like this poll really counts for anything, and of course is distorted by the timeframes that some of us chose to use. But ultimately it's the discussion and seeing the variety of opinions that matters, not really the end result - it's hardly definitive.

#194 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 18,521 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 January 2019 - 19:25

Even his infringements improve his reputation - he qualified at Indy in 1966 with a broken lap belt that he deliberately hid from the officials, adding an extra layer of bravery to his run.


I’d call that an extra layer of stupidity.

#195 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 4,438 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 12 January 2019 - 19:32

I’d call that an extra layer of stupidity.


Well it was risk v reward. He may not have had chance to qualify that day if the problem had been spotted, which would have put him way down the grid - not a safe place to be that year as it turned out.

#196 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 767 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 12 January 2019 - 19:37

I’d call that an extra layer of stupidity.

Those were different times, that was certainly seen as heroics. I kind of miss that layer of danger - but not the accidents, of course. I am aware you can't have one without the other.

Edited by boillot, 12 January 2019 - 20:26.


#197 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 1,722 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 12 January 2019 - 21:42

Final results in, thanks everybody for taking part. After counting the totals of 24 nominees we end up with the tightest podium of any of the top 10 threads I've posted in the off season. Here we go:
 
Senna               156
Hamilton            155
Schumacher      154
Prost                 137
Clark                 115
Fangio               113
Alonso                 80
Stewart                55
Lauda                  42
Vettel                   39


I've come up with my own list that looks at head-to-heads in the voting rather than by awarding points. If people have excluded older drivers, I have just left out the relevant head-to-heads so that the older drivers aren't penalised. Here is the list:

1. Fangio
2. Clark
3. Schumacher, Senna, Hamilton*
6. Prost
7. Stewart
8. Lauda, Alonso
10. Moss

*Schumacher actually beat Senna in the head-to-head and tied with Hamilton, whereas Senna Beat Hamilton, so arguably Schumacher should be 3rd with a win and a tie followed by Senna and Hamilton.

#198 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 767 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 13 January 2019 - 11:56

I've come up with my own list that looks at head-to-heads in the voting rather than by awarding points. If people have excluded older drivers, I have just left out the relevant head-to-heads so that the older drivers aren't penalised. Here is the list:

1. Fangio
2. Clark
3. Schumacher, Senna, Hamilton*
6. Prost
7. Stewart
8. Lauda, Alonso
10. Moss

*Schumacher actually beat Senna in the head-to-head and tied with Hamilton, whereas Senna Beat Hamilton, so arguably Schumacher should be 3rd with a win and a tie followed by Senna and Hamilton.

:up:
My list exactly ( my original top 10 list contained 9 names, apparently I’m too dumb to be able to count to 10, I missed Hamilton).

#199 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 13 January 2019 - 12:04

Schumacher actually beat Senna in the head-to-head and tied with Hamilton, whereas Senna Beat Hamilton, so arguably Schumacher should be 3rd with a win and a tie followed by Senna and Hamilton.

 

This would be fair, seeing as how Hamilton's fans are all about the count-back to decide ties. :cool: 



Advertisement

#200 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 14,550 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 13 January 2019 - 16:11

Does Alonso have a place in this discussion?

He was shockingly terrific for a very brief time, but after that all we have is conjecture over poor decisions, missed opportunities and what if scenarios. And then somehow the narrative for his narrow defeats in 2007 and 2010 is centered around him being heroic, but it should actually be how his own small mistakes cost him a lot. Hats off to his 2012 season though. He made a meal of his teammates, but how many were far past their prime and how many just weren’t that good?

When it comes to FA, I think people are too seduced by what could have been, instead of what he achieved (espcially compared to his main rivals and why the gap is so vast).

While we’re at it, I would struggle to have Vettel close to the top ten as well. Half of his titles came over incredibly weak and lucky campaigns. I can’t think of any multi-WDC with two or more titles in similar situations, struggling to make the best of the best car and eventually winning by a ridiculously uncomfortable margin.

Edited by Atreiu, 13 January 2019 - 16:25.