Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

F1 Top 10 of All Time


  • Please log in to reply
319 replies to this topic

#301 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 14,173 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 20 January 2019 - 15:23

Hakkinen had a textbook title season in 1998. Wins, podiums, safe and sure dominance over his teamate and terrific qualifying. The only reason it was close was because of mechnical problems, Silverstone and Schumacher's overall exceptional driving - which is a credit to Hakkinen. Schumacher had some bad breaks as well, but it was not a season in which one contender suffered a disproportionate ammount of bad luck.

It does not compare to 1997. Villeneuve's season was riddled with inexplicably poor weekends and he was inconsistent all along the way. Big fat zeroes at Monaco, Montreal and Hockenheim; downright underwhelming driving at France, Spa and Monza. And Schumacher had a lot of off podium and low scoring weekends, there was plenty of room for Villeneuve to have had a much easier time.

There is no comparision.

Edited by Atreiu, 20 January 2019 - 20:20.


Advertisement

#302 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 6,046 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 20 January 2019 - 15:26

I have something of a laugh about this Berger victory in Suzuka '91 discussion because up till now I am missing one vital element of that victory being taken into consideration.

 

It was one if the biggest humilation moments within Berger's career. Because of how he got it.

Because the last lap of the race started with Senna way out in the lead but ordered by Team McLaren to surrender the lead and hand the victory to Berger.

And it happened in the final section of the track in a manner so obvious that it was clear to see or everyone that Senna, for once, surrendered a victory that rightfully was his.

But he certainly made sure that everyone could see that thes was a defeat on orders.

And who knows how this loss of a victory on purpose and ordered as well agitated him and influenced his behaviour in the media room in the post race interview. So he kept that near legendary monologue in which he threw his bile on Balestre, FISA and everyone else who he felt was against him and used all of that as an excuse to justify his deeds of the year before.....

But all of that was of course aftermath....

 

Bu still:  when rating Berger's victory of that year in the powerful '91 McLaren-Honda V12 , don't forget it was a gift.......

 

Given that it wasn't done to help with a championship, if Senna wasn't going to do it respectfully then he shouldn't have done it all. Ron's reasons for wanting this were fuzzy for me - had Berger sacrificed his race to help Senna clinch the championship (by racing off and putting pressure on Mansell, for example)? 

 

Also, if there are suggestions that Prost was given worse engines than Senna then was the same true for Berger?


Edited by garoidb, 20 January 2019 - 15:26.


#303 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,666 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 20 January 2019 - 16:55

Given that it wasn't done to help with a championship, if Senna wasn't going to do it respectfully then he shouldn't have done it all. Ron's reasons for wanting this were fuzzy for me - had Berger sacrificed his race to help Senna clinch the championship (by racing off and putting pressure on Mansell, for example)? 

 

Also, if there are suggestions that Prost was given worse engines than Senna then was the same true for Berger?

 

I had to look it up where I recalled to have read about it but it was the Autocourse '91-92 that stated on page 231 that the drivers had made an agreement that  whoever lead in the first turn after the start. Berger managed to do that....

But according Autocourse, in the final lap Senna, who was leading with 6 seconds asked if the deal was still on, got the word that it was and then in reaction on that, he made it very public that he let Berger pass: within sight of the finish flag.

 

 

People with more affection for either Senna, McLaren and/or Dennis than I have may know more about it. I very vaguely remember something about Dennis wanting to to something for Berger so he would at least have one victory with the team he was leaving. But that is a very vague memory and I might get fans of the mentioned parties involved on my back to deny this. And I would instantly believe them.



#304 BUFFY

BUFFY
  • Member

  • 80 posts
  • Joined: September 18

Posted 20 January 2019 - 17:29

Double check that with Nico Rosberg.  ;)

??

 

2011 was a bad year for Hamilton, but even at his worse, he was still able to take 3 wins (Button also got 3 wins), and was able to comfortably outqualify Button.  He was still the quicker driver. The head to head in 2 car finish was pretty much even too. Hamilton lost on points, but in all the other relevant performance indicators, he wasn't clearly outperformed or embarrassed by Button. 

 

2011 was the only truly poor year Hamilton has had. Even when Hamilton lost the title to Rosberg in 2016, on the whole, Hamilton drove well e.g https://www.eurospor...257/story.shtml        https://www.skysport...-of-the-f1-year      etc


Edited by BUFFY, 20 January 2019 - 17:36.


#305 FrontWing

FrontWing
  • Member

  • 4,655 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 20 January 2019 - 17:50

Double check that with Nico Rosberg.  ;)

He still out qualified and won more races than Nico. There was a clear performance difference between Dan and Vettel in 2014 which is why it's brought up more than Lewis' off seasons. Most could still see Lewis was the better driver even in the 2 seasons he lost, not so with Vettel. Granted its tougher with Vettel as he only had one season against Dan.

Edited by FrontWing, 20 January 2019 - 17:51.


#306 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 20 January 2019 - 18:31

People with more affection for either Senna, McLaren and/or Dennis than I have may know more about it. I very vaguely remember something about Dennis wanting to to something for Berger so he would at least have one victory with the team he was leaving. But that is a very vague memory and I might get fans of the mentioned parties involved on my back to deny this. And I would instantly believe them.

 

But Berger (nor Senna) was not leaving. He scored another 2 wins for McLaren in 1992.



#307 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 20 January 2019 - 18:35

He still out qualified and won more races than Nico. There was a clear performance difference between Dan and Vettel in 2014 which is why it's brought up more than Lewis' off seasons. Most could still see Lewis was the better driver even in the 2 seasons he lost, not so with Vettel. Granted its tougher with Vettel as he only had one season against Dan.

 

Actually, it's not tough with Vettel at all because he had many other sketchy seasons, helped by having weak(er) teammates.

He was bad or so so in 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2017 and 2018. And that leaves only 2008, two seasons with an absolutely dominant car and 2015, that was not bad but not that special either. It's easy to see that 2014 was by no means an exception. It's actually the accurate reflection of Vettel's capabilities.



#308 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,666 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 20 January 2019 - 19:19

But Berger (nor Senna) was not leaving. He scored another 2 wins for McLaren in 1992.

 

 

Shoot!!!! you're right. I'm one year off, he went back to Ferrari in '93.

So much for what I vaguely remember about the reasons why.

 

You're right, thanks for correcting me.



#309 boillot

boillot
  • Member

  • 603 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 20 January 2019 - 19:41

Shoot!!!! you're right. I'm one year off, he went back to Ferrari in '93.

So much for what I vaguely remember about the reasons why.

 

You're right, thanks for correcting me.

I also don't remember the reasons.

Perhaps, having won all 4 titles in 1990-91, but with Berger not scoring a single win, Dennis wanted to say thank you to Berger this way.



#310 messy

messy
  • Member

  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 20 January 2019 - 21:53

Hakkinen had a textbook title season in 1998. Wins, podiums, safe and sure dominance over his teamate and terrific qualifying. The only reason it was close was because of mechnical problems, Silverstone and Schumacher's overall exceptional driving - which is a credit to Hakkinen. Schumacher had some bad breaks as well, but it was not a season in which one contender suffered a disproportionate ammount of bad luck.
It does not compare to 1997. Villeneuve's season was riddled with inexplicably poor weekends and he was inconsistent all along the way. Big fat zeroes at Monaco, Montreal and Hockenheim; downright underwhelming driving at France, Spa and Monza. And Schumacher had a lot of off podium and low scoring weekends, there was plenty of room for Villeneuve to have had a much easier time.
There is no comparision.


Yup, then he had utter burnout over the winter with constant press and sponsor events, came into 1999 absolutely mentally drained, exhausted and not ready to do it all over again, and followed it up with a mess of a title defence probably more akin to Villeneuve's '97.

In both cases the car was far enough ahead to get them across the line. JV '97 and Mika '99 were not great campaigns, or even arguably good ones. Mika, though, was fantastic in 1998.

#311 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 1,589 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 20 January 2019 - 22:22

Yup, then he had utter burnout over the winter with constant press and sponsor events, came into 1999 absolutely mentally drained, exhausted and not ready to do it all over again, and followed it up with a mess of a title defence probably more akin to Villeneuve's '97.

In both cases the car was far enough ahead to get them across the line. JV '97 and Mika '99 were not great campaigns, or even arguably good ones. Mika, though, was fantastic in 1998.

One reason why I would rate Hakkinen's 1999 above Villeneuve's 1997 is that while Hakkinen often had inexplicable slumps when Coulthard would be faster than him for a few consecutive races, that didn't actually happen in 1999. It was actually one of his best years in terms of consistent speed. And while Hakkinen (1999) and Villeneuve (1997) both made errors, Villeneuve had more races where he was off the pace, and I think Villeneuve still made more errors - it's just that Hakkinen's two major errors came when he was leading.

#312 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,666 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted Yesterday, 08:11

I also don't remember the reasons.
Perhaps, having won all 4 titles in 1990-91, but with Berger not scoring a single win, Dennis wanted to say thank you to Berger this way.





Somehow, I'm still getting back some memories about Dennis wanting Berger to have a victory as well for whatever reasons. If that is indeed true then about the only option to get this done was when the drivers had agreed on the one who lead after the first turn be the winner if such was indeed possible to `arrange` should such be necessary. As long as the team managed to get Senna's cooperation of course.


Come to think of it, if this was indeed the scenario as took place, then this was at least the first of at least three occasions when McLaren `arranged` which of their drivers was allowed to win the race in the case of an upcoming double victory. ('97 Jerez & '98 Australia the other two I am aware of)

#313 FordFiesta

FordFiesta
  • Member

  • 64 posts
  • Joined: January 19

Posted Yesterday, 09:43

If it was a gift, the win I mean, then was it that a bad idea? Rather a nice gesture. And apart from that: Berger suffered problems with the... what it's called: there was misfiring. And so he couldn't keep up the fight. And he wasn't slower than Senna at that weekend.

And regarding the blocking of Mansell: at least, the No.1 driver didn't feel being above and did the blocking himself in Suzuka (also like in Monza (?)).

Edited by FordFiesta, Yesterday, 09:44.


#314 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 4,251 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted Yesterday, 13:51

If it was a gift, the win I mean, then was it that a bad idea? Rather a nice gesture.


Then do it the way Fangio did at Aintree and AVUS, no need to blatantly humiliate the other guy.

#315 FordFiesta

FordFiesta
  • Member

  • 64 posts
  • Joined: January 19

Posted Yesterday, 14:20

Wasn't it a gift by McLaren? (By the way: the Jerez win in 1997 was also a nice gesture. It wasn't to break Coulthard like many said).

And regarding people saying that Senna was cheering too much: Well, he'd just won the championship. So, the overly cheering was because of that and not to remind people that he actually won the race.

#316 PlayboyRacer

PlayboyRacer
  • Member

  • 1,464 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted Yesterday, 22:07

Hakkinen had a textbook title season in 1998. Wins, podiums, safe and sure dominance over his teamate and terrific qualifying. The only reason it was close was because of mechnical problems, Silverstone and Schumacher's overall exceptional driving - which is a credit to Hakkinen. Schumacher had some bad breaks as well, but it was not a season in which one contender suffered a disproportionate ammount of bad luck.

It does not compare to 1997. Villeneuve's season was riddled with inexplicably poor weekends and he was inconsistent all along the way. Big fat zeroes at Monaco, Montreal and Hockenheim; downright underwhelming driving at France, Spa and Monza. And Schumacher had a lot of off podium and low scoring weekends, there was plenty of room for Villeneuve to have had a much easier time.

There is no comparision.

What were Jacques poor weekends? France? He finished 4th. Hakkinen in the corresponding race finished 3rd in 1998. Both ironically had spins chasing Irvine. More similarities than you think.

What else? Monaco? Yep poor race, he followed Williams' call for the race and he and Frentzen went backwards. Germany? Italy? Yep... off the pace. But Williams were as a team, they weren't the fastest car there. It was really competitive. Whereas McLaren had the fastest car at EVERY race in 1998... also just on Hakkinens 'terrific qualifying in 1998' and 'safe and sure dominance over his teammate', what was Jacques in 1997 in those departments? Diabolical? Jesus lol.

In the end we ain't gonna agree with this. But I certainly think when you factor in JVs experience at the time plus the fact the grid was closer and more competitive than 1998, I think Jacques was every bit as impressive as Hakkinen in 98 and 99. I put much more emphasis on context... rather than comparing every little mistake.

Plus there was the Jerez finale. Jacques under pressure was something quite impressive and it was one for the ages. This debate might have been different had JV not wasted his prime years building a team and joined MH at McLaren but what can ya do.

Edited by PlayboyRacer, Yesterday, 22:53.


#317 FordFiesta

FordFiesta
  • Member

  • 64 posts
  • Joined: January 19

Posted Today, 04:58

[...] Germany? Italy? Yep... off the pace. But Williams were as a team, they weren't the fastest car there.


Even the overall better 1996 Williams was poor at Monza and Hockenheim.

Strange, in many cases even very good working Newey cars, decades later, had their problems at Monza (2010, 2012). Seems to be kinda achilles heel of those constructions.

[...] also just on Hakkinens 'terrific qualifying in 1998' and 'safe and sure dominance over his teammate', what was Jacques in 1997 in those departments? Diabolical? Jesus lol.


[Regarding the former season] At least, Villeneuve lasted quite long against a driver who had beaten the driver Häkkinen had to cope with (and Häkkinen wasn't even always (only two thirds of their mutual team-mate time) crystal clear in front of him (otherwise 1997, 2001) like Dhill was during their entire team-mate time in 1995 and 1994.

#318 messy

messy
  • Member

  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted Today, 08:46

For me Hakkinen's 1998 season was on a different level to his 1999 campaign and Villeneuve's 1997. Mika in 1998 was superb. He had the best car and overall, maybe if you had to choose one of them then Schumacher was the star of the year - but both of them were pretty incredible. Two gladiators on a different level entirely to the rest of the grid. Coulthard, after blowing his opportunity at Argentina, was nowhere really and Irvine was half a second behind him; then the rest.

Pros and cons comparing 97 and 99. I'd say personally both were fairly weak title campaigns. Mika had fearsome speed but his bulletproof performance levels from 98 were gone as he made two very costly unforced errors and struggled with it all, Villeneuve established himself ahead of a very dangerous (on paper) team-mate and his form fluctuated much more - but generally along with Williams' own.

Monza and Hockenheim have always caught teams out. I remember Schumacher and Ferrari really struggling there too in 97 and 98, and the other examples alluded to above with Williams and Red Bull. Even back in 2001 it was the circuit where the dominant Ferraris dropped behind Williams on merit. I suppose it's less of an issue now, Singapore seems to have taken over as the 'quirky' circuit in recent years.

#319 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,666 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted Today, 11:03

Even the overall better 1996 Williams was poor at Monza and Hockenheim.

Strange, in many cases even very good working Newey cars, decades later, had their problems at Monza (2010, 2012). Seems to be kinda achilles heel of those constructions.


[Regarding the former season] At least, Villeneuve lasted quite long against a driver who had beaten the driver Häkkinen had to cope with (and Häkkinen wasn't even always (only two thirds of their mutual team-mate time) crystal clear in front of him (otherwise 1997, 2001) like Dhill was during their entire team-mate time in 1995 and 1994.



Coincidence? Both these tracks were among the fastests tracks of the trail...

Advertisement

#320 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,405 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted Today, 11:08

I think Berger was gifted the 1991 Suzuka win, because he hadn't won yet for McLaren and they wanted to thank him for being a team player. Because as mentioned, Berger had to sacrifice his race by going flat-out to catch out Mansell in the title contention.

 

As for Hockenheim, it indeed threw some surprises. Benetton was really quick in 1996-97. Meanwhile they struggled on high downforce tracks. And I'm a bit amazed, how Jordan could be so quick in 1997 and 1999, because I doubt Peugeot or Mugen-Honda had one of the most powerful engines. I guess the chassis was really suited to low downforce circuits.


Edited by sopa, Today, 11:08.