Top 20 Greatest F1 drivers

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by Bononi

Heck, I don't even waste my time reading lists like these... is just to sell paper.

I know, I know but it's the passion in me, you know!!

[chillibowl]

'seven titles aren't worth they used to be!' Lance Armstrong

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

'seven titles aren't worth they used to be!' Lance Armstrong

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by chunterer

Without going over old ground Senna, Prost, Fangio, Clark and Lauda all faced comparable talents in the same team or as direct rivals in similarly competitive cars.

Schumacher built the team(s) around himself, and that, you also have to say, is part of being what a racing driver is all about.

Originally Posted by chunterer

main rivals were normally in inferior machinery and when they weren't they were more than capable of offering up a serious challenge like Hakkinen, Alonso, Montoya, Kimi even DC sometimes!

Throughout F1s history, drivers have either had superior machinery (Prost - Senna battles) or suspect team mates. When was F1 as close as it is now between teams and team mates?

Originally Posted by chillibowl

'seven titles aren't worth they used to be!' Lance Armstrong

Indeed. Schumacher still has his integrity intact. People will forget about the Mercedes period and look back at his overall achievements prior to 2010.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Michael Schumacher has been announced at no. 4 in their list of top 20 drivers.

When you look at the current grid (except for Schumacher) it would be difficult to place any of them anywhere near that position.

The current grid has some great drivers, but it doesn't have any 'GREAT' drivers, other than Schumacher. At least, not yet.

NB. No, I haven't suddenly become a TGF fan, far from it, but you can't deny some of the great racing moments that he has given us.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Indeed. Schumacher still has his integrity intact. People will forget about the Mercedes period and look back at his overall achievements prior to 2010.

certainly that will be the approach that most will take but i will treat both his careers as a whole. Muhammad Ali is still the greatest of all time and his legacy was not tarnished in any way despite catching a beat down of epic proportions from Larry Holmes.

this is what i had written early into the comeback:

'will he feel like Ali in 1979 after he won his final title or like Ali after Holmes destroyed him the following year. but for Ali that loss did little to tarnish his reputation. if anything it endeared him more to the world. thats what makes MS' comeback all the more special. despite all that he has accomplished, he has returned to fight the unwinnable fight and there is something more noble in that than all of his records to date.'

sadly it turned out to be more like the latter but im happy to say i got to see it. imo he deserves a higher rating but im sure time (and the need to sell newspapers in Germany) will make up for that as well.

sorry for linking to an old thread. please remove if its a problem.

[wolfhound]

For me Schumacher's come back does not influence his ranking. While he is exceptional in what he has achieved, it is tarnished by a number incidents down the years where he used some very dubious tactics. Examples include the incident with Damon Hill in Australia '94, driving Frenzen off the track in Canada or the incident where he stopped on the track at end of qualifying in Monaco. I doubt he would have got away these in the current climate.
I belive these may have influenced his BBC ranking that was published today.
I would have ranked both Stewart and Prost ahead of Schumacher for these reasons. Senna also displayed a similar disregard for his fellow compeditors but not to the same extent as Schumacher.

[chillibowl]

thats a fair point. it could very well be that it was the incidents during his first career are the reason he is tarnished and lower ranked and not because of his comeback.

[Paradise City]

I think the one indiscretion that may linger and tarnish him in the imagination of the English speaking world is the Hill Adelaide crash. I think the Merc stint is kind of a painful boil for people now but I think that memory will recede over time. That's my instinct anyway.

[formerf1champ]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

'seven titles aren't worth they used to be!' Lance Armstrong

Good one.

[JohnSSC]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

For me Schumacher's come back does not influence his ranking. While he is exceptional in what he has achieved, it is tarnished by a number incidents down the years where he used some very dubious tactics. Examples include the incident with Damon Hill in Australia '94, driving Frenzen off the track in Canada or the incident where he stopped on the track at end of qualifying in Monaco. I doubt he would have got away these in the current climate.
I belive these may have influenced his BBC ranking that was published today.
I would have ranked both Stewart and Prost ahead of Schumacher for these reasons. Senna also displayed a similar disregard for his fellow compeditors but not to the same extent as Schumacher.

I would suggest that you look back at some of the incidents between Senna and Prost. They make Michael look like a model driver. Senna's behaviour bordered on the outrageous numerous times. Did Michael push the envelope rules-wise? He sure did. But Senna was in a league of his own.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by JohnSSC

I would suggest that you look back at some of the incidents between Senna and Prost. They make Michael look like a model driver. Senna's behaviour bordered on the outrageous numerous times. Did Michael push the envelope rules-wise? He sure did. But Senna was in a league of his own.

He certainly was but then so were Prost and Balestre.

[Trev Campbell]

Ha Ha great to see you've taken the Senna movie at face value. Ha Ha Ha

[formerf1champ]

I don't normally read best/greatest ever lists, they bore me to tears, but I had nothing to do, so i took a peek at some specific drivers. Nelson Piquet was one of them, he's an intriguing driver to me. I only caught his Benetton days, I do remember watching both Japanese and Australian GP and getting up at 4:30 -5 in the morning to watch Canada, no doubt I missed his peak (Aus GP was a really good win, though). However, when I've spoken to older race fans about drivers I'm unfamiliar with, Piquet is known as someone who, on his day, was seriously fast. But when it wasn't, he was nowhere. That's alright though, everyone has their weaknesses and strengths. He never dominated a season and picked up 3 titles. Scoring the most points 3 times is a lot...A lot.

I think his career makes for an interesting study behind the psychology of drivers and what has to happen to get the most out of them. In Piquet's piece, it refers to him being thought of as the best driver in the world in the mid-80s, and fair enough too. But in his career at Brabham, Piquet had free reign at Brabham and could do as he pleased, he was the number 1 guy, and there was immense success. At Williams, he was held accountable by Mansell (reputedly an unfancied driver at the time) and had lowered his colours, despite a career best 4 wins in 86 and the 87 title.

I compare this to Schumacher's career, a guy who's had the whole racing team support him in a similar way to what Piquet had at Brabham. I can see some similarities between the two. Schu was thought of as the best driver in the world (also record contracts, everything) and, for no other reason than Briatore liking him, had the whole of Benetton backing him. This was then ramped up when Schu moved to Ferrari, who took this model into overdrive.

So, looking over their career's. I wonder if the conclusion that Schu may be a Piquet mk2, is a reasonable comparison? Mk2 being an improvement. You look at the criticisms of Schu, he never had a team mate who would hold him to account, you can't say the same about Piquet. Schu has, with the odd exception, driven bulletproof cars, unlike Piquet. Never had a team mate that could hold him to account, at a time of his career where it matters, unlike Piquet (unless you do include both of Schu's stints at MB). Piquet drove for Brabham, a team I don't think was as thorough Benetton, definitely nowhere near as thorough as Ferrari. Schumacher enjoying the benefits of these advantages.

Schu, a less satisfied version of Piquet? Just wondering.

Also, I'm having an impression that Fittipaldi was criminally underrated.

[Marbot]

Just a little post to say that the top 20 greatest cars thread, appears to have sunk without trace.

No doubt about it. When it comes to F1, digging out the facts about the drivers is much more popular than digging out the facts about the cars.

Carry on.

[nicanary]

Red rag to a bull...

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Just a little post to say that the top 20 greatest cars thread, appears to have sunk without trace.

No doubt about it. When it comes to F1, digging out the facts about the drivers is much more popular than digging out the facts about the cars.

Carry on.

It's sill there.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It's sill there.

It was three pages back when I posted that.

[Bononi]

Are you surprised ?

Ahn... this one, 18 pages and going strong.

[deeks6]

Originally Posted by Marbot

When you look at the current grid (except for Schumacher) it would be difficult to place any of them anywhere near that position.

The current grid has some great drivers, but it doesn't have any 'GREAT' drivers, other than Schumacher. At least, not yet.

NB. No, I haven't suddenly become a TGF fan, far from it, but you can't deny some of the great racing moments that he has given us.

Totally disagree ... IMO Vettel already qualifies (likely 3 titles at 25) and Teflonso is also a bona fide A+ as well. Also I think the driver lineups these days go much deeper than they did years ago when there were "genuine" pay drivers with no more credentials than money.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by deeks6

Totally disagree ...

OK.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by deeks6

Totally disagree ... IMO Vettel already qualifies (likely 3 titles at 25) and Teflonso is also a bona fide A+ as well. Also I think the driver lineups these days go much deeper than they did years ago when there were "genuine" pay drivers with no more credentials than money.

+1

[chunterer]

Yes, in the mid to late 90's the overall depth was probably poor at the sharp end, in terms of top line drivers and competitive teams.

Compare that time with the early early-mid 80's , the early noughties and obviously the last 3-4 years 3 periods when exceptionally talented drivers came through.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by chunterer

Yes, in the mid to late 90's the overall depth was probably poor at the sharp end, in terms of top line drivers and competitive teams.

Compare that time with the early early-mid 80's , the early noughties and obviously the last 3-4 years 3 periods when exceptionally talented drivers came through.

Shows just how good Seb Vettel is does it not??!!

[FastDB2s]

Originally Posted by wnut

Shows just how good Seb Vettel is does it not??!!

May also have something to do with best car, team, designer though