Is there any sense in making top 100 lists of all time F1 drivers to determine who is the fastest of all time?
It is impossible to compare drivers who raced in different eras. Placing Senna above Fangio or Clark just doesn't make any sense. How can a driver who raced in the 1950's or 60's be compared to someone who raced in 1980's-90's.
Comparing drivers from different times just doesn't make sense. How can a driver be judged faster or better than hes contemporaries 30 or so years before? It is impossible to judge drivers that have not even raced against each other.
The fastest of all time will simply never be known.
Who is the fastest F1 driver ever? It is impossible to say
Started by
Mobile_Chicane
, Nov 27 1999 21:44
14 replies to this topic
Advertisement
#2
Ruud de la Rosa
-
- 2,137 posts
- Joined: October 99
Member
Posted 27 November 1999 - 21:49
Yep, you're right!
#3
The King
-
- 112 posts
- Joined: November 99
Member
Posted 27 November 1999 - 23:06
And its taken you how long to figure this out?
Its hard enough top compare between 1997 and 1999.
We will never know who the fastest was, but we will know who teh greats were. Cream always rises to the top, hence we have names like Fangio, Senna, Clark, Prost, Schumacher, Piquet, Mansell, Stewart etc who all were amongst the best of their times.
WW
King
Its hard enough top compare between 1997 and 1999.
We will never know who the fastest was, but we will know who teh greats were. Cream always rises to the top, hence we have names like Fangio, Senna, Clark, Prost, Schumacher, Piquet, Mansell, Stewart etc who all were amongst the best of their times.
WW
King
#4
Mobile_Chicane
-
- 917 posts
- Joined: December 98
Member
Posted 28 November 1999 - 10:33
the king,
What I am trying to say is that why do racing magazines, books and so called F1 experts go about making lists of the fastest driver ever? when they will never know. Many books and lists have Senna as the fastest man ever. Of course that is just an opinion by someone, so who cares. People can think what they want.
The latest list I saw of fastest drivers had Nuvolari as the fastest ever. Why make these when they are based on no real evidence?
What I am trying to say is that why do racing magazines, books and so called F1 experts go about making lists of the fastest driver ever? when they will never know. Many books and lists have Senna as the fastest man ever. Of course that is just an opinion by someone, so who cares. People can think what they want.
The latest list I saw of fastest drivers had Nuvolari as the fastest ever. Why make these when they are based on no real evidence?
#5
Fast One
-
- 600 posts
- Joined: October 99
Member
Posted 28 November 1999 - 12:11
MC et al.--
Lists like that sell magazines and provide plenty of fuel for off-season discussion. That's it. The Motorsport list was in many ways abyssmal, but if you've ever read about Nuvolari, you wouldn't quibble much with his winning. The list was "greatest" 100, not fastest, although from some of the selections you'd wonder.
Lists like that sell magazines and provide plenty of fuel for off-season discussion. That's it. The Motorsport list was in many ways abyssmal, but if you've ever read about Nuvolari, you wouldn't quibble much with his winning. The list was "greatest" 100, not fastest, although from some of the selections you'd wonder.
#6
Mobile_Chicane
-
- 917 posts
- Joined: December 98
Member
Posted 28 November 1999 - 13:27
I thought it was a fastest list, but quess I'm wrong. Maybe I'm demented or something but I'm sure Gilles Villeneuve was put in at number 8?
How does he rank as a great? No way a top 10 in terms of what he achieved or accomplished. For speed he could maybe be top 10 as he did take that crappy Ferrari and really throw it around the track. He was enormously entertaining.
How does he rank as a great? No way a top 10 in terms of what he achieved or accomplished. For speed he could maybe be top 10 as he did take that crappy Ferrari and really throw it around the track. He was enormously entertaining.
#7
Fast One
-
- 600 posts
- Joined: October 99
Member
Posted 29 November 1999 - 01:04
MC--
Actually, I believe he was rated #2 behind only Nuvolari! Since we seem to agree on the absurdity of this, see my comments in the Nostalgia section, under Motorsport Top 100.
Actually, I believe he was rated #2 behind only Nuvolari! Since we seem to agree on the absurdity of this, see my comments in the Nostalgia section, under Motorsport Top 100.
#8
The King
-
- 112 posts
- Joined: November 99
Member
Posted 29 November 1999 - 01:18
MC,
Yeah, they are just pointless. But that happens, it just fills up a few more pages and provokes discussions. like alot of teh stories in F1 racing etc, they are just crap. I would rather have a full mag dedicated to F1 news, not Mika Salos holidays or why Mika thinks DC is gonna be WDC or whatever.
WW
King
Yeah, they are just pointless. But that happens, it just fills up a few more pages and provokes discussions. like alot of teh stories in F1 racing etc, they are just crap. I would rather have a full mag dedicated to F1 news, not Mika Salos holidays or why Mika thinks DC is gonna be WDC or whatever.
WW
King
#9
Xrayman
-
- 33 posts
- Joined: October 99
Member
Posted 29 November 1999 - 03:52
In my opinion the bets driver is not always the fastest! I believe that the better drivers are those who, as MC said, who can eke the best from a poor car or who provide the most entertainment value fro hteir racing.
Prost was a good, fast driver but he was very consistant and gave no indication of his speed (he was also driving the best cars of the time), whereas Gilles drove a dog of a ferrari in a much more entertaining way hence in my opinion he was the better driver.
With Motorsport placing Nuvolari as #1 they gave a similar explaination in that he could be competative in a uncompetative car (such as the Alfa P3).
In the long run, a suppose it all comes down to taste and personal preferance.
------------------
Martin.
ICQ 53805151
Prost was a good, fast driver but he was very consistant and gave no indication of his speed (he was also driving the best cars of the time), whereas Gilles drove a dog of a ferrari in a much more entertaining way hence in my opinion he was the better driver.
With Motorsport placing Nuvolari as #1 they gave a similar explaination in that he could be competative in a uncompetative car (such as the Alfa P3).
In the long run, a suppose it all comes down to taste and personal preferance.
------------------
Martin.
ICQ 53805151
#10
f li
-
- 299 posts
- Joined: October 99
Member
Posted 29 November 1999 - 13:09
Actually guys, it's quite easy. Each of us selects a distinctly different driver. One of us is right. Problem is that we'll never know which one of us is right!
#12
mtl'78
-
- 2,975 posts
- Joined: September 99
Member
Posted 14 March 2000 - 01:02
The thing I love, is that Gilles a winner of 6 grand prix, is ALWAYS mentioned in these types of discussions. The reason is simple: He WAS the greatest!
Seriously though, To be able to understand how amazing he was, you had to be there. At every race, he had you watching with your jaw on the ground, totally incredulous! Every corner you were on the edge of your seat "Locks'em up AGAIN! Will he crash THIS time?"
His last win, in Spain, was like if Verstappen took the lead at the first corner, and held off the Ferraris and Maclarens for 58 laps, with 5 people dicing all race long behind him and finishing within 1.2 seconds of each other. He was just incredible. You would sit there and say "what I am watching is impossible, yet it is happening right infront of me"
Seriously though, To be able to understand how amazing he was, you had to be there. At every race, he had you watching with your jaw on the ground, totally incredulous! Every corner you were on the edge of your seat "Locks'em up AGAIN! Will he crash THIS time?"
His last win, in Spain, was like if Verstappen took the lead at the first corner, and held off the Ferraris and Maclarens for 58 laps, with 5 people dicing all race long behind him and finishing within 1.2 seconds of each other. He was just incredible. You would sit there and say "what I am watching is impossible, yet it is happening right infront of me"
#13
bschue
-
- 120 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 14 March 2000 - 03:47
mtl'78 - Agree Gilles was great, but IMO Senna was the best ever. Watch the in-car footage of the qualifying lap for Monaco '89 (I think). Too bad they could never go head-to-head.
#14
mtl'78
-
- 2,975 posts
- Joined: September 99
Member
Posted 14 March 2000 - 04:08
Senna is the only other driver to evoke the same feeling (for me) as Gilles. I guess that since he came after Gilles, I always had a special place in my heart for GV, but Senna could make you leap from your seat as well.
What a race they must be having right now in F1 heaven, no?
What a race they must be having right now in F1 heaven, no?
#15
bschue
-
- 120 posts
- Joined: June 99
Member
Posted 14 March 2000 - 04:17
mtl'78 - Agreed! By the way I just finished the Donaldson book on Gilles a few weeks ago. It was great reading. I couldn't barely put it down. I finished it in less than 2 days and I'm not much of a reader. Pretty much the same with the books I read on Senna (by Hilton and Williams). I'd recommend those if you haven't read them yet.
