Stewart: Current F1 field is best ever. Do you agree?

[E.B]

Sir Jackie Stewart says he rates the current Formula 1 pack as the 'best ever', and believes the likes of Sebastian Vettel can be compared to legends such as Jim Clark, Jack Brabham and Graham Hill.

Full story here

I dont agree. Firstly I have always been opposed to comparing anything of a different era. The variables are just far too great to make it anything other than nonsense.

For a start he uses the closeness of the drivers this season, in the environment of a dominant car as a benchmark.... despite the fact that the Championship race was at some stage a comedy of errors, namely driver errors for all the top 4 anyway, that ultimately made the championship so close. Vettel, made his errors, as did Webber, Hamilton and Alonso. I dont see how given the number of errors they made that any of them could be classified as say a Clark. Jim Clark in his whole career only DNF'd 3 times through accident.... one of those was as a result of his gearbox locking up at Monaco, one of course was with Von Trips at Monza in 1961, and the other was a very rare Clark error at Germany in 1966.

I believe the pressures and demands now on drivers are totally different. Now a driver is more worried about losing a tenth of a second, and will take risks to get it back knowing at worst he will lose a position maybe if he goes into a run off area, or misses a chicane. In times of old a mistake like that was often life threatening, so any move had to be more considered. They also had to live with the fear of technology being infantile compared to now. The number of car failures of major components is less now we have new unobtanium based bits. Wings dont collapse when they are needed most.

Yes I agree we have more WDC's on the grid now. Again thats very much an era thing given the longer careers now against often curtailed careers, so not a fair comparison.

For all the good drivers we have on the grid we have a fair number of drivers who are there for reasons of commercial viability than talent. Yes we have always had them and we have always had a difference in qulaity over the grid, but I would think other eras may have been more talented. Certainly if you took the top 24 of each time.

Do you agree with Sir Jackie? Are they 'the best' now? Or not? Its a big call. I have thrown my 2 cents worth in.

[ascarracinguk]

in terms of potential race winners, the number of very good drivers and world champions in the field id say its the best ever. in terms of are they the best ever drivers....no...not yet....individually they are very good but none of them are better than fangio, clark, stewart, senna, prost....but the difference between now and other eras is the amount of good drivers that are out there, we currently have hamilton, button, alonso, massa, webber, vettel,rosberg, kubica who are all capable of winning races, we have 5 wdc in the field. compare this to any other time and youd find 2 or 3 great drivers within a period, not 6 or 7....so individually they are not ahead of other eras in f1, but as a group id say they stand above the rest.

[cptkablamo]

It could be a bit of a golden era for drivers and the best since the early 80s or early 90s but I still think there is a case for saying 1985 field was as strong. 4 Champions in the field (not including Prost) and 3 that would come to dominate over the next 9 odd years...You're never comparing apples with apples so it is hard to say that one group is better than another...but, I would say that the group of 2010 is like the group of 1985...

[Paradise City]

I would disagree with Stewart and at heart he probably disagrees with himself! You routinely risked death in his era and that requires unusual amounts of courage and courage is a critical part of the racing driver. Today you can push the limit with relatively little risk so there's little comparison between then and now. I do think the grid is phenomenally talented today but only taken in terms of the safety era.

I don't mind Stewart making the remarks he does though. He's actively trying to promote the sport that has given so much to him. He's alot like Moss in that way.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Paradise City

I would disagree with Stewart and at heart he probably disagrees with himself! You routinely risked death in his era and that requires unusual amounts of courage and courage is a critical part of the racing driver. Today you can push the limit with relatively little risk so there's little comparison between then and now. I do think the grid is phenomenally talented today but only taken in terms of the safety era.

I don't mind Stewart making the remarks he does though. He's actively trying to promote the sport that has given so much to him. He's alot like Moss in that way.

I think you have smmed up the situation very well here.
The technology enables the mediocre to perform against the brilliant.
I believe the current field contains some excellent racing drivers, but they simply can't show case their talents in what currently parades around as F1 racing cars, the current problem is undoubtedly with the cars and not the drivers.

[jab]

As every generation of drivers can only race with what they're given, I'd say on balance there's a good chance he's right, in that there are less rubbish drivers. If you look back to 10, 20 or 30 years ago, there were a lot of drivers who were only there because of the money and weren't that great. This year, we only had 1 of those

However, I wouldn't go too far with it because while it appears we have loads more very good drivers than in the past, obviously if you again look at 10, 20 or 30 years ago, the gap between the top teams and the rest was much bigger. We have been lucky that 2 years ago saw a complete reversal of form which allowed the likes of Button, Barrichello, Webber and maybe even Vettel to show what they could (still) do in a very quick car, something they wouldn't have been able to do had the pecking order of teams stayed the same

But back in the 80s or 90s, we never had a moment like that, and the accepted top drivers always got the top seats, so it's a lot more difficult to compare the number of very good drivers then with the number of very good drivers now. I may have said it before here, but there are probably some hidden gems out there in history who never got a break and have been overlooked

[Bonanza]

Although it's very hard to compare different times, I'd say the current field is the best since the start of the Jackie Stewart era; Hill, Clark, Rindt, Stewart, Hulme, Ickx, Mclaren, Rodriguez, Siffert, Surtees, Brabham, Amon, Gurney, Andretti. This is an immense list of Formula One superstars that in my view is yet to be matched. Just imagine if none of them had of been killed in racing, and that Von Trips and Moss were still in F1 at the time, it would have been a pretty ultimate line up for a few 'ultimate seasons' that we would still talk about now, maybe more so than the mid/late 80s.

We have a similar situation now; Hamilton, Vettel, Alonso, Webber, Button, Massa, Rosberg, Schumacher, Kubica and young stars of the future like Hulkenberg, Petrov, Perez and ofcourse Kobayashi. Considering the list of quality that is coming through the ranks; Ricciardo, Vergne, Bianchi, Gutierrez, Bird, Aleshin etc.......we have the prospect of a list that is almost as good as the above stewart-era ultimate line up.

Many people say 'It's the best line up since the mid/late 80s', I disagree, When I look at the line up of 2010 and say 1986, I'd pick 2010 every time. Because in the mid 80s, outside of Mansell, Senna, Prost, Piquet, Rosberg.....who really stood out? the best outside of that was Jonhanssen, Berger (who seemed to crash alot anyway), De Angelis, Alboreto.....Real quality drivers don't get me wrong, but considering we have the likes of Kubica and Button to compare them against, I think 2010/2011 is superior. The modern midfield is as strong as any era since the 'Stewart era'......remember in 1986 for every Senna there was a De Ceaseris after all....

[Jamesy-18]

I can't make comparison easily as I wasn't born in the time that the likes of Prost and Senna were racing, but certainly in the time I've followed it the latter part of this decade has been very strong in the quality of guys racing.

[jab]

Originally Posted by Bonanza

Although it's very hard to compare different times, I'd say the current field is the best since the start of the Jackie Stewart era; Hill, Clark, Rindt, Stewart, Hulme, Ickx, Mclaren, Rodriguez, Siffert, Surtees, Brabham, Amon, Gurney, Andretti. This is an immense list of Formula One superstars that in my view is yet to be matched. Just imagine if none of them had of been killed in racing, and that Von Trips and Moss were still in F1 at the time, it would have been a pretty ultimate line up for a few 'ultimate seasons' that we would still talk about now, maybe more so than the mid/late 80s.

I see your point, and I agree with you that there's an over-fixation on the 80s (probably because most of the guys here will have started watching around then, which is fair enough), but there are still a couple of flaws with the 60s:

1) There were still a lot of "field filler drivers", certainly more than today. And if there weren't, grids would be very small. If you want to take quality over quantity, then fine, but when you've got grids in the low teens, it does take something away from it. IMO

2) Those guys that you list didn't all peak at the same time. For instance, Clark was dead and the likes of Surtees, Gurney and Hill were past their best by the time Andretti started competing regularly. Though equally there were some underrated or "forgotten" drivers like Piers Courage, Johnny Servoz-Gavin and Mike Spence

F1 was much more of an endurance event back then as well, which is something to bare in mind. Finishing and winning had a lot more to do with reliability than raw talent, and the variation in car performance was still quite big at times. And the circuits could often be aimed towards this now - I honestly don't believe the Nordschliefe would suit modern F1, because it just wouldn't work. I've not watched any full 50s or 60s races (because they weren't broadcast live anyway) but I get the impression it was all a bit...dull

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Bonanza

We have a similar situation now; Hamilton, Vettel, Alonso, Webber, Button, Massa, Rosberg, Schumacher, Kubica and young stars of the future like Hulkenberg, Petrov, Perez and ofcourse Kobayashi. Considering the list of quality that is coming through the ranks; Ricciardo, Vergne, Bianchi, Gutierrez, Bird, Aleshin etc.......we have the prospect of a list that is almost as good as the above stewart-era ultimate line up.

I agree there, there are a number of drivers who are considered average now, like Sutil and Massa, who would have been near greats plonked in to several of the eras of the pay driver. Kamui Kobayashi is more than just a star of the future, if Sauber come up with a good package next year he will become a star of today. While this is a reflection on the cars too, you've just got to look at how last year Hispania were woefully of the pace but still within 107% ...

Off topic comment alert I have to type this or my brain will explode! I have a slightly unusual concern - a greater number of quality drivers are coming through, but reaching the inevitable bottleneck for getting in to F1. The problem is that there is nothing that is a genuine one below F1. GP2 doesn't have the status Formula Two did in the 70s. That, in my view, is going to be a big problem for F1 - it's not primary school, it's finishing school. GP2 isn't a finishing school for F1 for several reasons - look at Kobayashi's performance in F1 despite his mediocrity there, and how some drivers have great difficulty adapting to F1. You can't prepare drivers by having only 30 minutes of FP time and without near-F1 length races. Thanks for reading, you've been a wonderful audience. Don't forget to try the veal and tip your waitress. We now return you to the topic

[Bonanza]

Originally Posted by jab

I see your point, and I agree with you that there's an over-fixation on the 80s (probably because most of the guys here will have started watching around then, which is fair enough), but there are still a couple of flaws with the 60s:

1) There were still a lot of "field filler drivers", certainly more than today. And if there weren't, grids would be very small. If you want to take quality over quantity, then fine, but when you've got grids in the low teens, it does take something away from it. IMO

2) Those guys that you list didn't all peak at the same time. For instance, Clark was dead and the likes of Surtees, Gurney and Hill were past their best by the time Andretti started competing regularly. Though equally there were some underrated or "forgotten" drivers like Piers Courage, Johnny Servoz-Gavin and Mike Spence

F1 was much more of an endurance event back then as well, which is something to bare in mind. Finishing and winning had a lot more to do with reliability than raw talent, and the variation in car performance was still quite big at times. And the circuits could often be aimed towards this now - I honestly don't believe the Nordschliefe would suit modern F1, because it just wouldn't work. I've not watched any full 50s or 60s races (because they weren't broadcast live anyway) but I get the impression it was all a bit...dull

1) Yes, currently we are in a great stage of extremely few 'field fillers', especially when compared to the 70s, 80s and particularly the 90s. However in the late 60s the grids were far smaller anyway (usually around the 16 figure but varying) so we got less grid fillers than the three decades afterwards. In fact, it was only since the magical 26 that we really got larger numbers of grid fillers. But the low number of entries back then was not a good thing for sure. I'd like to make it plain that whilst there was a large number of great drivers back then as there is now, I'd want to watch a race in today's era. I only think the line up at the front end was slightly better in the late 60s because they had to deal with more (unsafe cars, unsafe tracks, more difficult cars IMO...etc). Obviously that shouldn't take anything away from the current crop, but rather the contrary to the 60s front end field.

2) Unfortunatly you're right; many I mentioned would see fatality on the race track in their time. But, If all had lived, we could have seen an even greater field of drivers. Sadly though, the 'gladiator' reputation drivers back then got was because of the unsafe nature, and so we would never see the afforementioned.

And yes, I agree with you in that maybe some of the racing then may have been a bit dull (I've not seen much of it but I get the jist). Then again maybe a procession was much more exciting back then because you were a metre away from the track or sat in the branch of a tree.....

I'd certainly say that the drivers in the sixties were the 'gladiators' of Formula One, and that they are sat on that pedastle because back then F1 was harsh. Now F1 lives in happier times, and IMO putting drivers on that same pedastle is hard. However, I love the class of 2010 and I think I'll love the class of 2011 even more, and there's no doubt in my mind that this latest era is fantastic, and could well become the 'golden age' of Formula One.

[GolddustMini]

its interesting when you read about some of the old 50-60s races where the leader won by minutes rather than seconds, imagine that now, hamilton finishing 4mins ahead of his closest rival, it wouldnt be hailed as 'brilliant' and 'other worldly' it'd be seen without the rose tinties and probably be something along the lines of 'cheat' or 'dull, hes got the best car'

[sweetchuk]

In terms of pure and sole F1 potential, Stewart might have summed it up fairly, if not entirely accurately.

You need to remember too, that back then F1 was not a fully funded professional sport for an individual, and the pittance a lot of drivers got compared to today meant they had to look outside of F1 to get both more money and exposure to more potential sponsorship.

That meant competing in entirely different classes and in the process, in my opinion, becoming a more skilled & better driver than they would have been had they stuck solely to F1.

Take Jacky Ickx for example ... the guy is probably, along with Sir Stirling, one of the greatest all round drivers the world has ever seen, or will ever see.
He not only won at Le Mans multiple times from the late 60's to the end of the 70's whilst simultaneously competing in Formula 1 (and where he nearly won the F1 title twice) and then on into the early - mid 80's with Sportscars, he won the Bathurst 1000 as well in 1977 (where he had only a day or two to practice in a car he had never driven before, and where he was doing lap times the same or quicker than drivers who drove them full time, and who were familiar with the circuit), then won the Can Am championship in '79, then the old bugger had the hide to turn around and win Paris - Dakkar Rally in '83!

Sir Stirling is no less impressive too.

I sincerely doubt a modern F1 driver could hold a candle to those top level old school drivers, most of whom competed and adapted by necessity - at the same time as their F1 career was happening - at world class or world championship winning levels in multi motorsport disciplines.

From that point of view, I would not class the modern F1 driver group talent as the equal of those great fields of years gone by, if overall driving talent was the sole determining factor.

However, if F1 skill was the sole determining factor, then today's lot is certainly up there as a group of pooled F1 talent.

[ptclaus98]

Potentially, as far as world championship potential, and race winning potential, paired with a 24(22?) car count, absolutely. And you can argue till the cows come home about whether or not some of these guys would have the bravery necessary to succeed in yesteryear, but the fact remains that they don't have to worry about it, so it's irrelevant. If there was no other way, I doubt they would cower away. The whining is mostly just posturing anyway.

Also the fact that they don't drive everything under the sun. In most cases they're contractually bound not to do so. and if they are allowed, it's usually not to do anything more than the odd rally in a safe little hatchbacks. Even if they are allowed to do so, it's looked down upon by the bosses.

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by GolddustMini

its interesting when you read about some of the old 50-60s races where the leader won by minutes rather than seconds, imagine that now, hamilton finishing 4mins ahead of his closest rival, it wouldnt be hailed as 'brilliant' and 'other worldly' it'd be seen without the rose tinties and probably be something along the lines of 'cheat' or 'dull, hes got the best car'

^^^^^

[old man]

I have just read through this interesting debate and think that sweetchuck says much that I can agree with. Comparing drivers and even races over the years that I have watched there are many memorable races in F1 but lots of equally memorable achievements in other classes.

Sticking to F1, I was at Aintree when Moss won in the Mercedes and the excitement that I remember was whether or not Fangio would get past him, I was there again when Moss won in the Vanwall that he took over from Brooks and in that case the excitement was whether or not Moss would bring the car up from 9th to win. I was also at Silverstone in 56 when Fangio won but have had to read up on the race to remember things whereas the Aintree races stick in the memory. There are lots more but space and common sense prohibit a list, my point is that each era has its excitement and mechanical problems were much more a part of the scene in the past than now.

For me the comments by Stewart are quite understandable and he is in a better position to compare than I am but the season we have just enjoyed is certainly the best in the modern era, I looked forward to it at this time last year and 2011 is a great prospect.

As to drivers, well we simply do not have the opportunity to compare them in a variety of cars which is something I regret very much, the thought of Hamilton, Button, Vettel or Alonso in an LMP1 or DTM car is mouthwatering but conversly McNish or Kristensen in a top F1 car would be worth seeing and there are lots of drivers who never made F1 or the top level of LMP or DTM that have the skill but never got the break.

Comparisons of this nature make interesting reading when the day job is quiet and we are all in reflective mood

[Pingguest]

I think its very difficult, if not impossible to say whether the current field is the best ever. At least the top drivers seem to be very competitive in terms of pace. However, the current generation have very little experience with developing the car, as essential parts are standardized or homologated. From this perspective the 2013 looks very interesting already.

[Peralta]

I don't question the quality i.e. Pace of the current drivers but I do question their courage/bravery when every driver complains about the wet weather conditions and we have to start a race with the safety car something unheard of back in the day. Does anyone remember Fuji 1976. Brave drivers back then. I also wished these current drivers had the mid 80s cars with 1000 bhp racing in this beautiful state of the art tracks. Just wished they didn't have so much run off area so that this quality field of great drivers would respect these tracks. Isn't that why we used to idolize race drivers, that element of death sick as that may sound.

[Marbot]

No more of this sort of thing either:



Probably not allowed these days under the current regulations.

The stewards would definitely be having a look at it.

20.3

"A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track."

[sizzle]

Originally Posted by Marbot

No more of this sort of thing either:



Probably not allowed these days under the current regulations.

The stewards would definitely be having a look at it.

20.3

"A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track."

[Marbot]

No doubt a bit of 'deforestation' would have to be carried out too.

[chunder]

For me I think you can compare like with like to some extent.

You can only compare though with guys who have spanned the ages.

Look at someone like Rubens, he is still on the pace now 10 years and more after he started and he raced with Schuey, Hakkinen Hill and Villeneuve and was pretty much a quick guy through it all. Says to me this modern lot are good but the cars are easier to learn.

Someone like Black Jack was a champion through the ages in the very early rear engined days to the relatively underpowered but well put together Repco cars.

For me the glory days are the mid 70's the height of DFV vs Ferrari. So many cars, drivers and teams could win. Who can imagine a Hesketh situation these days?

But the height of their powers was the mid 80's. Huge power in a lightswitch delivery. No power steering, manual shifting where a missed shift literally blew it up, adjustable boost, loads of different tyres, proper, proper tactics (not loads of overpaid berks sitting in an office doing it for you, seat of the pants stuff instead) totally different engines in race and qually, some awful tracks with bumps, proper walls and unsafe bits.

The mastery of a Prost, the speed of a Berger, Mansell or Rosberg, the artistry of Senna, the relative horribleness of Zakspeed, RAM or Osella,.

Great days indeed

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by Marbot

No more of this sort of thing either:
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/5765/33dlhc1.jpg
Probably not allowed these days under the current regulations. The stewards would definitely be having a look at it.
20.3 : "A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track."

That's one loophole I noticed; I remember the rule for GPLRank being "on or over the track".

[E.B]

Probably get penalised for the chicane he by current standards had likely missed whilst in the air.

I think had the judgement call over Jackie Stewart's been referenced to brevity and general 'testicular fortitude' of the drivers now and those from the seventies, sixties and prior would have been very different a story.

In general (yes, motor racing is still dangerous, but I am talking in general terms) the majority of race incurred injuries these days could be fixed with a manicure.
[/cynical mode]
But the call was that the current drivers are better, not braver.
They are all better when in a decent car.

Originally Posted by Marbot

20.3

"A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track."

.... that is Webber in trouble with the stewards at Valencia then.....

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by E.B

They are all better when in a decent car.

What makes them all "better when in a decent car"?