I was suprised 10 beat 11 for a start. But Alan has seen a lot more than me

Regards
Andy
Posted 27 February 2008 - 18:21
Advertisement
Posted 27 February 2008 - 21:12
Posted 27 February 2008 - 22:17
Posted 27 February 2008 - 22:26
Posted 28 February 2008 - 00:45
Posted 28 February 2008 - 01:16
Originally posted by turin here
I did a little experiment with the F1 Racing list.
Tell me what do you think about this personal ranking:1 Alberto Ascari 0.084785638 2 Ayrton Senna 0.127707641 3 Stirling Moss 0.175969544 4 Fernando Alonso 0.253192733 5 Michael Schumacher 0.322851764 6 Jochen Rindt 0.414052206 7 Alain Prost 0.518497586 8 Ronnie Peterson 0.522236302 9 Keke Rosberg 0.522302698 10 Niki Lauda 0.562122269 11 Stefan Bellof 0.575159585 12 Gilles Villeneuve 0.592584777 ..... 50 Hans-Joachim Stuck 0.881409162
Originally posted by turin
Great!!
If that is all you could find faulty, I'm rather pleased.
All I did is to copy the list in excel, assign a random number generator and then sort the list based on that random number (which are shown on the right column). I ran it only twice to get someone reasonable as number 1.
The only tweak was to divide the list in two, as to prevent Jenson Button being higher than Senna, say. So I put the originals 1-20 in a group, and the rest on another.
Funny that Senna, Moss, MS, FA, and Prost ended up in the top ten. If Clark and Fangio had made it, it would have been an incredible coincidence.
In short, I wouldn't take any list seriously.
Posted 28 February 2008 - 08:14
Posted 28 February 2008 - 08:48
Posted 28 February 2008 - 09:11
Posted 28 February 2008 - 09:24
Posted 28 February 2008 - 09:51
Posted 28 February 2008 - 10:09
Nuvolari took part in several F1 racesOriginally posted by jgm
Since when were Rosemeyer, Nuvolari and Moll F1 drivers?
Posted 28 February 2008 - 10:17
Posted 28 February 2008 - 10:26
Posted 28 February 2008 - 10:39
Originally posted by ensign14
Meh, world championships are meaningless.
And if Jonesy is in the top 30, where does Tony "lapped Jones in identical car" Brise go?
Posted 28 February 2008 - 10:50
You'd have to be a bit insecure to think you justify your ranking on the basis of an excel spreadsheet stating that a second and a ninth is worth more than a fifth and a sixth.Originally posted by Stephen W
World Championships are not meaningless especially if you won one!
Posted 28 February 2008 - 10:50
Originally posted by D-Type
Curious
When AH wrote The 100 Greatest Racing Drivers in 2000 he ranked Gurney at No 33, Graham Hill at 49 and Ickx at 55, so he must have revised his opinion - or forgotten what he wrote in this potboiler that I found remaindered in Poundland.
Posted 28 February 2008 - 11:02
Yes, one can! They are much more busy over there...Originally posted by Hieronymus
Can one view the complete list somewhere or can someone please post it here?
Posted 28 February 2008 - 11:25
ISTR it had Jim Clark at no. 8 so immediately discounted it as worse than useless.Originally posted by former champ
Is there any chance you (or anyone else) could post that top 100 list from 2000? I'm curious to see it.
Advertisement
Posted 28 February 2008 - 11:30
Posted 28 February 2008 - 11:30
Posted 28 February 2008 - 11:33
True. But is Ralfie a better driver than Taffy von Trips, Eugenio Castellotti or Brian Redman?Originally posted by wdm
Any list that ranks Ralf Schumacher below Roy Salvadori can't be all bad![]()
Posted 28 February 2008 - 11:35
Posted 28 February 2008 - 11:44
Originally posted by Vitesse2
True. But is Ralfie a better driver than Taffy von Trips, Eugenio Castellotti or Brian Redman?
Posted 28 February 2008 - 11:46
If I can find the time I will.Originally posted by former champ
Is there any chance you (or anyone else) could post that top 100 list from 2000? I'm curious to see it.
Posted 28 February 2008 - 11:51
Originally posted by D-Type
If I can find the time I will.
That book covered all racing drivers so he had A J Foyt and a few NASCAR drives in there as well.
Posted 28 February 2008 - 13:25
Posted 28 February 2008 - 13:34
Posted 28 February 2008 - 14:00
Posted 28 February 2008 - 14:39
Posted 28 February 2008 - 14:42
Posted 28 February 2008 - 14:46
Posted 28 February 2008 - 18:19
Posted 28 February 2008 - 18:50
Posted 28 February 2008 - 18:54
Posted 28 February 2008 - 19:25
Originally posted by rl1856
Without haveing seen the entire list or an explanation of the context in which the list was prepared, I do have a few observations.
It appears that weighting is given to results achieved rather than talent/potential. How else to explain John Surtees above Ronnie Peterson, or Lewis Hamilton at #30, or Brabham ranking above Andretti, Rindt, Lauda or Gurney ?
You can make a great case for Moss as #1, and make an equally great case for Fangio, Nuvolari, Senna.
However, I am very surprised to see Fangio at "only" #6. In a straight fight, in equal cars, Fangio consistantly outpaced Moss and Moss himself admitted that Fangio was better.
Chris Amon above Tony Brooks ? Fittipaldi above Andretti ?
The real conclusion is that lists such as this are highly subjective. You can correct for driving in different eras, but it is much more difficult to correct for the relative quality of the cars which is an extremely important variable.
Best,
Ross
Posted 28 February 2008 - 22:18
Posted 28 February 2008 - 22:35
Posted 28 February 2008 - 23:08
Advertisement
Posted 28 February 2008 - 23:12
Posted 28 February 2008 - 23:15
Posted 29 February 2008 - 05:38
Originally posted by Barry Boor
I'll collate it if sufficient people are prepared to participate.
I would suggest a minimum of 20 people - otherwise there would probably be numerous 'ties'.
It could, of course, be anonymous.
Posted 29 February 2008 - 09:24
Originally posted by Hieronymus
I would suggest that these 20 people represents a wide variety of nationalities. Perhaps one will get a more objective, non-biased view.
Posted 29 February 2008 - 11:03
Posted 29 February 2008 - 11:29
Posted 29 February 2008 - 11:42
Originally posted by zakeriath
Somebody should contact Duckworth & Lewis so see if they can come up with a mathamatical formulation to rank drivers base on various factors. That way all the personal, nationalist views are eliminated.
In the end South Africa would still lose by 27 runs.
Posted 29 February 2008 - 13:44
Originally posted by brandspro
While there are many eyebrow raising rankings on the list (Lewis Hamilton...at 30...???), Fittipaldi above Andretti, IMO, is spot on. Admittedly, I've always felt that Andretti was overrated, but Fittipaldi, having won in his first season in F1, went on to win two world championships with two different teams, while Andretti managed only one - in an exceptional car. The argument could then be made that Andretti would have done more had he not spent as much time competing in Indycars in the US, but even there, Fittipaldi doubled Andretti's number of Indy 500 victories in significantly fewer attempts. It could also be argued that, had Fittipaldi made the switch to Indycars sooner, instead of beating his head against the wall with the Copersucar/Fittipaldi F1 effort, his record there would probably have included more than two Indy 500's and one championship (by the same token, what more might he have achieved in F1 if not for the Copersucar/Fittipaldi blind alley?).
As has been said, these kind of lists are always subjective, and always contentious, but I think a fair argument can be made for ranking Fittipaldi above Andretti.
Posted 29 February 2008 - 13:46
Originally posted by rl1856
What was it Votaire said....... ?
Best,
Ross
Posted 29 February 2008 - 13:59
Posted 29 February 2008 - 16:18