199 replies to this topic

[Hacklerf]

Just how good was Eddie Irvine? off the track he was a true legend, pure gold in the post race press conferences and perhaps one of the greatest womanisers to ever hit Formula 1.

In his early days he always tried to win the race at the start, even if he was starting 22nd!

He also went on to become a very wealthy man post F1 through his various other businesses.

He was always 2ths shy of Schumacher, but so was Massa and so was Rubens, although Massa did start to get a lot closer as the year went on.

He could have been the first driver to win the championship for Ferrari for 20 years

Year Standing Team Team mate
2002 9 » 8 points Jaguar Pedro de la Rosa
2001 12 » 6 points Jaguar Pedro de la Rosa, Luciano Burti
2000 13 » 4 points Jaguar Johnny Herbert
1999 2 » 74 points Ferrari Michael Schumacher, Mika Salo
1998 4 » 47 points Ferrari Michael Schumacher
1997 7 » 24 points Ferrari Michael Schumacher
1996 10 » 11 points Ferrari Michael Schumacher
1995 12 » 10 points Jordan Rubens Barrichello
1994 16 » 6 points Jordan Rubens Barrichello
1993 20 » 1 points Jordan Rubens Barrichello

Whats your opinion of Fast Eddie

[Jacquesback]

A legend in his own mind.

[fifi]

i miss Eddie

[Mauseri]

Average. Same class as Salo or Panis or Fisichella.

[metz]

One may not like him as a driver but Eddie would make one hell of a great team manager.
He has matured, knows the business, has the financial accument, is well connected and above all has the PR savy. Where do I invest?

[Ross Stonefeld]

The impression I always had of Irvine was that he didnt care about his performance. He didn't seem to push to reach his full potential, but he also didn't seem to fall victim to team politics, self-doubt, the crush of being Schumacher's teammate, etc.

[brunopascal]

According to himself he was the second best driver in the world ;)

Seriously though, he wasn't a great driver, but he was a good driver.

He was always 2ths shy of Schumacher

IIRC he was some 5ths off MS pace on average, and in the first Ferrari years it was even more, occasionally.

[santori]

Very good. Same class as Salo or Panis or Fisichella.

I liked him when he wasn't playing Eddie Irvine.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Thats a bit harsh on Fisichella.

[turin]

In his early days he always tried to win the race at the start, even if he was starting 22nd!

According to himself he was the second best driver in the world

I think I can stop here. Any driver should think that he is the best driver in the world and try to prove it.

And certainly not on the first lap.

He wins in something though: Ugliest helmet ever.

[Mauseri]

Originally posted by turin
Any driver should think that he is the best driver in the world

Why?

Isnt it more important to try become the best driver instead of wasting time thinking what you are? And even worse, thinking you are something what you are not.

[Arrows4Ever]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Thats a bit harsh on Fisichella.

He's used to it if he's been around here...

[kar]

Reminded me of a Ask Nigel piece, Roebuck is pretty unequivocal Irvine, in his view, is the most overrated driver of all time.

http://www.autosport...x.html/id/21492

Interesting thoughts on the guy. I personally quite liked Irvine but he was a bit more of a poor mans Barrichello than anything else. He was quick, definitely, but he was racing for a pay cheque not for love and I think that takes away a tiny bit from you as a driver that makes the difference between good and great.

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
The impression I always had of Irvine was that he didnt care about his performance. He didn't seem to push to reach his full potential, but he also didn't seem to fall victim to team politics, self-doubt, the crush of being Schumacher's teammate, etc.

Well exactly, that went with part one. He couldn't give a toss and was probably the most subservient number two ever - which frankly as a racing driver makes him a disgrace. I'd give him full marks for being honest with himself and those around him though, and frankly he was a laugh.

[Dolph]

He nearly won the damn thing!

[wingwalker]

Originally posted by Dolph
He nearly won the damn thing!

while being 2nd driver for significant part of the season. he was really good.

[fifi]

Originally posted by turin




He wins in something though: Ugliest helmet ever.

which one? the ferrari one or the Jaguar one

[Peri_Piket]

I read somewere (Guardian?) that Irvine made Eur 300 M in the StockExchange.

So Irvine is richer than Ron, Jordan and Briatore.
Bernie has Eur 3 billion.

So I guess he did the right thing:
raise money w/ F1 and invest it in shares.

[stevewf1]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Thats a bit harsh on Fisichella.

Irvine has a better Win% ratio than Fisichella (as well as Button and Trulli)...

[Atreiu]

An average driver and, to help put things in my perspective, the weakest teammate Schumacher had over an entire season.

[jonpollak]

After what I saw him do at Jerez in 97 during Sunday morning warm up my opinion was formed.

TOTAL JERK OFF

I don't care for Sonya either
(so much for me getting into that overpriced, overhyped Amberlounge)
Jp

[turin]

Originally posted by micra_k10

Why?

Isnt it more important to try become the best driver instead of wasting time thinking what you are? And even worse, thinking you are something what you are not.

man, you deliberatley omitted the part where i say "and I try to prove it"

[Porsche996]

Eddie wasn't great, but he was without a doubt the best teammate that Schumacher had, (apart from Piquet obviously). Rubens is and was a journeyman, Massa is better, but still tends to spend more time spinning than racing. Brundle, Verstappen, Patrese, Herbert et al were nothing compared to steady eddie.

Like I said, he was never great, but he was better than every other MS team mate apart from Piquet, (and depending on how much he improves, which he seems to be doing, possibly Massa).

That is not a bad achievement. Plus, he is rediculously rich.

[Blythy]

according to the sunday times rich list, he's worth £150 million, down from £160 mil last year - result of US property prices stalling or something.

[F1Fanatic.co.uk]

Was he the only driver to be gifted two wins in the same year by different people?

[noikeee]

Originally posted by stevewf1


Irvine has a better Win% ratio than Fisichella (as well as Button and Trulli)...

That's actually good evidence on how win ratio isn't a good measure in F1 regarding the ability of a driver.

As for "he's the best teammate MS ever had / no he's the worst" my opinion is that he was.. an average MS team-mate. Better than Verstappen, Brundle and old Patrese, marginally better than Herbert, slower than Rubens (IMO), Massa and Piquet.

[kar]

Originally posted by F1Fanatic.co.uk
Was he the only driver to be gifted two wins in the same year by different people?

I think some would argue he was the driver closest to being gifted a championship by the FIA.

Good thing Ferrari had taken preventative measures in Germany just in case the FIA stepped in as they did :-)

[brunopascal]

Eddie wasn't great, but he was without a doubt the best teammate that Schumacher had, (apart from Piquet obviously). Rubens is and was a journeyman

Well, RB actually managed to beat MS fair and square on a few occasions (eg Silverstone 2003). I never saw Eddie do it.

[Porsche996]

Originally posted by paranoik0


That's actually good evidence on how win ratio isn't a good measure in F1 regarding the ability of a driver.

As for "he's the best teammate MS ever had / no he's the worst" my opinion is that he was.. an average MS team-mate. Better than Verstappen, Brundle and old Patrese, marginally better than Herbert, slower than Rubens (IMO), Massa and Piquet.

Well, if he is slower than Rubens then why did the last year that they drove the same car, (1995), Irvine outquali Rubens 12/5?

[Atreiu]

Originally posted by Porsche996


Well, if he is slower than Rubens then why did the last year that they drove the same car, (1995), Irvine outquali Rubens 12/5?

If they had only raced in F1 in 1995...

And how many times did Eddie ever outqualify Schumacher? Twice?
Barrichello did more.

[Porsche996]

Originally posted by brunopascal

Well, RB actually managed to beat MS fair and square on a few occasions (eg Silverstone 2003). I never saw Eddie do it.

The big difference is that Rubens was driving a car where driver input was far less important than in Irvine's time. Whilst Rubens was driving the Ferrari, it basically drove itself, eliminating driver input. When Eddie drove the car, driver input was far more important and Schumacher basically punched the car far higher than it was worth.

If Rubens drove the 1996-1999 Ferrari, he wouldn't have won a single race.

[Porsche996]

Originally posted by Atreiu


If they had only raced in F1 in 1995...

And how many times did Eddie ever outqualify Schumacher? Twice?
Barrichello did more.

Not quite sure what you mean there. In 1995 Irvine and Rubens drove for Jordan. Irvine outquali'd Rubens 12/5.

[Atreiu]

Originally posted by Porsche996


Not quite sure what you mean there. In 1995 Irvine and Rubens drove for Jordan. Irvine outquali'd Rubens 12/5.

Exactly, but Barrichello went on to improve after that and had remarkable qualifying performances through the years, including a dozen or so of poles and outqualifying Schumacher and Button quite some times. Irvine went on too, but never scored a pole or produced any impressive qualifying.

He might have been faster than RB in 1995, but only then and that was it.

[Flynnie]

I think Irvine was okay. In 96, 97 and 98 he probably drove the Ferrari to its natural ability. In 97 and 98 he was frequently on the podium and from 97-99 he was really a good number 2 driver. Let's not forget his composed third at Monaco in 1997 - pissing down rain, and he overtook several cars to get a podium from 15th place on the grid. There are a lot of drivers who would struggle to do that well in the conditions. He was probably a little unlucky not to win it in 1999 because Ferrari had their usual mid to late season swoon and he was off the pace though Mika really did everything he could to throw it away. The best driver that year was HHF.

After that he went to Jaguar and was crap. I think Irvine is the kind of driver who would do a very good job in a very good car, but he was never capable of bringing more out of the car than it deserved, and he didn't have the application to really wrestle with a dog. He was pretty useless for most of 1996 with Ferrari and he mentally checked out halfway through 2000.

[Porsche996]

Originally posted by Atreiu



Exactly, but Barrichello went on to improve after that and had remarkable qualifying performances through the years, including a dozen or so of poles and outqualifying Schumacher and Button quite some times. Irvine went on too, but never scored a pole or produced any impressive qualifying.

He might have been faster than RB in 1995, but only then and that was it.

Barichello went on to drive a car that was unbeatable for 5 years. Irvine went on to drive a Jaguar. Are you seriously suggesting that Rubens would have won in a Jaguar? Rubens is a journeyman who lucked into the fastest car on the grid. Irvine was driving maybe the 3rd or 4th fastest car. If Schumacher had a better record against Irvine than Rubens, it was entirely down to the fact that Schumacher was able to drive a second class car in a first class manner. If Irvine had the 2000-2004 Ferrari, the results would be totally different. 1995 proved that Irvine is a much faster driver than Rubens the journeyman.

[Flynnie]

Originally posted by Porsche996


Barichello went on to drive a car that was unbeatable for 5 years. Irvine went on to drive a Jaguar. Are you seriously suggesting that Rubens would have won in a Jaguar? Rubens is a journeyman who lucked into the fastest car on the grid. Irvine was driving maybe the 3rd or 4th fastest car. If Schumacher had a better record against Irvine than Rubens, it was entirely down to the fact that Schumacher was able to drive a second class car in a first class manner. If Irvine had the 2000-2004 Ferrari, the results would be totally different. 1995 proved that Irvine is a much faster driver than Rubens the journeyman.

Fine, Irvine is faster. But Rubens is better, since he scored 19 points to 6 in 1994 (including Jordan's first podium), a season in which he nearly died, got the 2nd at Canada in 1995, outscored Irvine in 1995 and 1996 (and while that was a dog of a Ferrari, it was better than the Jordan), got the 2nd at Monaco in 1997 and turned in a blistering performance at Brazil in 1999, qualifying on the 2nd row of the grid (Irvine was 6th) and leading much of the race before the Ford blew up. Again, in a Stewart.

[brunopascal]

Originally posted by Porsche996


The big difference is that Rubens was driving a car where driver input was far less important than in Irvine's time. Whilst Rubens was driving the Ferrari, it basically drove itself, eliminating driver input. When Eddie drove the car, driver input was far more important and Schumacher basically punched the car far higher than it was worth.

If Rubens drove the 1996-1999 Ferrari, he wouldn't have won a single race.

You're correct, Rubens' Ferrari was easier than Eddie's so it was only to be expected that he came closer to MS. I thought of mentioning that in my post you quoted.

Still, though, Rubens did actually beat MS, and was brilliant occasionally in a way that I never saw Eddie like.
(Although he too had his moments, like Suzuka 1997 IIRC and quali for Australia 1996, but he never beat MS over a race weekend).

[Peri_Piket]

Originally posted by Porsche996


Not quite sure what you mean there. In 1995 Irvine and Rubens drove for Jordan. Irvine outquali'd Rubens 12/5.

Barrichello is 5 times WCC.
What is the worth of a driver?
RESULTS.
A driver that can provide VALUE to the team.

IMO, Rubens along with MS, Frentzen, Heidfeld and Panis - DC maybe - are the only drivers capable of moving a team forward.

His job at Stewart was outstanding.
It was the key to open the doors at Ferrari.

When they were at Jordan, Rubens used to work on settings and then at the race Irvine just copied it and went faster.
It used to piss Rubens off.

5 WCC is a lot of thing.

[Ciao]

Thats a bit harsh on Fisichella.

Agreed 100%. Eddie was better than most credit him, but Fisi is not a lesser driver at all. You probably understand how Renault is a great team but didn't work like McLaren, where Lewis has just about the same chances of Alonso. I hate Dennis for being such a pompous ass, but you gotta give him credit for giving exactly the same chances to both of his drivers, always. Not so at Ferrari Michael-era and Renault.

But I miss Eddie, he was phenomenal on a good day, a tosser on the wrong one. But never missed to speak his mind.Stupid he wasn't and he is now just as rich as Michael by buying half of Miami Beach before it got so expensive. Smart ass, Eddie.

[former champ]

Originally posted by micra_k10
Average. Same class as Salo or Panis or Fisichella.

rating Irvine to salo or Fisichella is a huge insult to Irv the swerve IMO.

He did what he could as teammate to MS in his absolute prime and, lets not forget, gifted races or not he almost won the 1999 title in what was an inferior car. Had Mika and Eddie swapped cars, who would you honstly think would have been quicker that year? Hint : not mika.

and lets not harp on about gifted wins, Hakkinen's first 2 remember.......lets not have one judgement for one driver and then forget the same for another.

I think Irvine's best performances came at Monaco on various occasions, including in the terrible Jaguar and his qualy performances in 2000, for example, were very impressive. That year he wrung the absolute out of that Jag, routinely doing what Mark Webber is praised for, qualifying a car higher than it should be.

He was a good, solid, fast driver and lived life hard off it. In short, far better than Fisichella or Salo.

He added alot to the formula 1 paddock which is as bland as ever currently. He and Villeneuve are much missed in that department.

[fifi]

Originally posted by Flynnie


After that he went to Jaguar and was crap.

2 podiums he got for Jag, in fact the only 2 they got so i dont know whether you mean he was crap or the car was crap,

[Arrow]

Post 94, Irvine was as good as anyone other than Michael and maybe Mika. He just had the unfortunate problem of being team mate to a prime Schumacher in difficult cars, which made him look poor but in reality anyone during those years would have looked just as bad. Mika for example looked bad against Coulthard in cars he couldnt drive so you can only imagine what would have happened at Ferrari.

Apart from Schumacher he outpaced or beat the rest of his team mates, throughout his career which is something an overrated Coulthard struggled to do.

Rubens looked a little better compared to Michael but during that era Michael rarely had to drive 100% all the time and Rubens had the benefit of the post 2003 rule trap doors to help him race against Michael, which Irvine never did.

[lattitude]

Irvine is just a normal good driver. He does not have what it takes to be a champion.
Plus,...he has got a big mouth

[Risil]

Originally posted by Arrow

Post 94, Irvine was as good as anyone other than Michael and maybe Mika. He just had the unfortunate problem of being team mate to a prime Schumacher in difficult cars, which made him look poor but in reality anyone during those years would have looked just as bad. Mika for example looked bad against Coulthard in cars he couldnt drive so you can only imagine what would have happened at Ferrari.

Apart from Schumacher he outpaced or beat the rest of his team mates, throughout his career which is something an overrated Coulthard struggled to do.

Rubens looked a little better compared to Michael but during that era Michael rarely had to drive 100% all the time and Rubens had the benefit of the post 2003 rule trap doors to help him race against Michael, which Irvine never did.

Barrichello managed to beat him quite well when they were at Jordan together, judging by the WDC standings at the end. Other than Schumacher, he beat the octogenarian Johnny Herbert and Pedro de la Rosa, who I think we can safely say were 'lesser' drivers, but hardly enhancing of Irvine's reputation. At Ferrari, Irvine only really came into his own during Schumacher's injury, which probably says more about the team than the driver, who was made to look like a Rebaque to his Piquet for the majority of his time there.

Also, Coulthard? I don't think anyone mentioned Coulthard.

[RichardVirenque]

I tought the topic was going to mention the gap between Delarosa and EI when team mates (which I don't know) and the gap between KR and PdlR for example when team mates

[stevewf1]

Originally posted by paranoik0
That's actually good evidence on how win ratio isn't a good measure in F1 regarding the ability of a driver.

Not sure what you mean exactly... I always thought that winning was the most important thing.

For example, Jean Alesi was certainly a good driver, but he has the worst win% of any F1 driver since 1950. So he seemed to have lots ability, but just wasn't much of a winner?

[F1 Tor.]

Eddie knew his role and played it well. The fact he was in the title hunt in 99 was gravy on top. He got to experience greatness being alongside Michael and he always knew that. Literally lived life in the fast lane and had a chance(still does!!) to live a life most people dream of. Good on him. Do I miss his driving?..Ummm..no.

[Fatgadget]

Eddie had a open goal the year Michael broke his leg,and he missed.

[noikeee]

Originally posted by stevewf1


Not sure what you mean exactly... I always thought that winning was the most important thing.

For example, Jean Alesi was certainly a good driver, but he has the worst win% of any F1 driver since 1950. So he seemed to have lots ability, but just wasn't much of a winner?

Because having a winning car helps more than just a little bit. That's exactly why people like Irvine and Coulthard have far higher winning ratios than Alesi, Button, Webber, Trulli - because they spent more years in absolute top cars.

Although Alesi was more unlucky than anything.. he had something equivalent of the 3rd best car for a long time (1991; 1994-1997). Still, having the 2nd best instead of the 3rd best car can already make a big difference on your winning ratio.

[giacomo]

Originally posted by paranoik0
Although Alesi was more unlucky than anything.. he had something equivalent of the 3rd best car for a long time (1991; 1994-1997). Still, having the 2nd best instead of the 3rd best car can already make a big difference on your winning ratio.

Alesis switch into Schumachers Benetton in late 1995 reflected a lot about his qualities (and also about the qualities of buddy Berger).