Top 20 Greatest F1 drivers

[nicanary]

Originally Posted by FastDB2s

Nicanary - if you read one of my earlier posts I mentioned Gurney & Phill Hill, etc.

bjohnsonsmithn - I forgot about his 1960 championship - its tea break & I am not at home so not near any books, the 1966 world championship was a 1st as a constructor / driver, also with a below par GP engine, more reliable than others though.

sorry, just got lost by all the posts. These are good points about Jack Brabham - I'm not knocking him, but just pointing out that he had THE car in 1959/60, and his choice of engine in 1966 was a very shrewd selection.

No-one was really ready that year; the ferrari was not as powerful as they claimed, the maserati was a weighty old sports-car engine, the BRM H16 was late to the party, the weslake was late etc etc...so jack was up and running... and good luck to him.

[FastDB2s]

Originally Posted by davyboy

He was better than Clark on a bike

Who cares about bikes - nasty deathtraps.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Jack Brabham won it thrice, 1959, 1960 and 1966; the last time in his own car.

And he could have won it again in 67 (nearly), and 1970....

Its actually quite amusing to read some of the comments from people who weren't alive in the 1960's and 70's when you have actually lived in period and followed the sport at that time.

Daily life and expectations, resources and the social climate was completely different from what it is today and trying to judge the way people chose, the choices they made and the way poutcomes eventuated by todays standards is a nonsense.

Life WAS different back then and trying to apply 21st century values to something that happened forty or fifty years ago just doesn't work.

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

And he could have won it again in 67 (nearly), and 1970....

Its actually quite amusing to read some of the comments from people who weren't alive in the 1960's and 70's when you have actually lived in period and followed the sport at that time.

Daily life and expectations, resources and the social climate was completely different from what it is today and trying to judge the way people chose, the choices they made and the way poutcomes eventuated by todays standards is a nonsense.

Life WAS different back then and trying to apply 21st century values to something that happened forty or fifty years ago just doesn't work.

That's why it's useless trying to compare...

[formerf1champ]

Originally Posted by nicanary

Agreed, with reservations. Denny could be really up for it some days, and on others he seemed to hold back somehow.

My reference to Roy Salvadori regards the fact that in 1957 and 58 he had actually out-performed Black Jack in WC events, even though Jack was part of the furniture at Coopers. So anoraks will say it was likely that HE would have been champ for Cooper in 59. All supposition.

Jack was a fighter, but although some reminiscences will say he indulged in "speedway" behaviour on corners, he was in no way a "dirty" driver. He was completely fair, but just used his extensive knowledge of dirttrack racing to extend his repertoire. Nobody ever put in a complaint, to my knowledge.

Yes, excellent! Did you know, in two posts, you have offered more insight into what kind of driver and what type of competitor Sir Jack was that all the articles, books, radio discussions from motorsport journo's that I've come across over 23 years put together? I figured he'd be pretty straight-down-the-line as a driver, otherwise he'd be spoken of in a similar way Clark, Villeneuve, Senna are. He's obviously a statesman, icon over here, but is rarely in the public eye. It's hard to get an idea of what he was like on the track. Good stuff.

[nicanary]

Originally Posted by formerf1champ

Yes, excellent! Did you know, in two posts, you have offered more insight into what kind of driver and what type of competitor Sir Jack was that all the articles, books, radio discussions from motorsport journo's that I've come across over 23 years put together? I figured he'd be pretty straight-down-the-line as a driver, otherwise he'd be spoken of in a similar way Clark, Villeneuve, Senna are. He's obviously a statesman, icon over here, but is rarely in the public eye. It's hard to get an idea of what he was like on the track. Good stuff.

Well,it's very kind of you to put it that way, but I've never met the guy. Any observations from me are based on a lot of reading, and being around at that time. I also tend to select my reading from respected authoratitive writers like Doug Nye and Nigel Roebuck, who generally give you a pretty accurate picture.

Lovely anecdote in this month's Motor Sport about Jim Clark. When the circus was in Sydney for the Tasman Series race, Jim would use the workshop of local ace Leo Geoghegan. He was mooching around one day, so Leo asked him to cut his mum's lawn. He duly obliged, the job taking about two hours, and the mum had no idea who Jim was!

Can you imagine some of the precious dears of today doing that, without a PR man nearby or a photo-opportunity? Mind you, I wouldn't let Pastor Maldonado near my lawn - I reckon he couldn't wash up without wrecking the dinner service.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by nicanary

Lovely anecdote in this month's Motor Sport about Jim Clark. When the circus was in Sydney for the Tasman Series race, Jim would use the workshop of local ace Leo Geoghegan. He was mooching around one day, so Leo asked him to cut his mum's lawn. He duly obliged, the job taking about two hours, and the mum had no idea who Jim was!

Can you imagine some of the precious dears of today doing that, without a PR man nearby or a photo-opportunity? Mind you, I wouldn't let Pastor Maldonado near my lawn - I reckon he couldn't wash up without wrecking the dinner service.

They weren't all so pious in the past... he'd have been brave enough to let James Hunt near his mom let alone his lawn ?

[deeks6]

Originally Posted by BSchneiderFan

Clark at the top. We can debate the rest.

Absolutely!

- Hamilton ahead of Brabham ... major joke
- Villeneuve ahead of any world champion ... major joke (couldnt even beat his teammates)
- If Moss or Mansell are in the Top 10, you can simply put it down to "but they're British"
- We all know they are going to have Senna at No 1

[bjohnsonsmith]

This is my list; if you don't like it, c'est la vie.

1. A.Senna
2. Fangio
2. Clark
4. Schumacher
5. Ascari
6. Lauda
7. Stewart
8. Prost
9. Moss
10. Brabham

11. G.Hill
12. E.Fittipaldi
13. N.Piquet
14. G.Villeneuve
15. Vettel
16. Alonso
17. Peterson
18. Hakkinen
19. Rindt
20. M.Andretti

[deeks6]

Due to the ridiculous amounts of argument that can and will be generated by individual assessments, I will go with "favourite" drivers (with apologies to anyone I didnt see (Fangio et al)

1. Jim Clark - majestic car control in an era when you really needed it, modest, sporting
2. Sebastien Vettel - really love the way this guy pulled his head in and ddecided he was going to be the best ... great personality too
3. Alan Jones - called a spade a f*n shovel, gritty, sporting, could drive anything fast
4. Keke Rosberg - used to love watching him battle the turbo cars ... all the "flair" of Gilles Villeneuve without the danger
5. Mario Andretti - so professional, so good in anything he drove, so underrated by anyone outside of USA
6. Jack Brabham - barracked for him because he was Australian but he was really good too. For those who wonder how good, consider this - in 1966 he won the WDC in a car he built but he beat 7 past or future WDC's (Clark, Surtees, Hulme, Rindt, Stewart, G. Hill, P.Hill and a couple of handy non WDC,s in Gurney and McLaren) ... no other driver has done that.
7. Dan Gurney - bit like Andretti, could win in anything and did. The only driver Jim Clark feared on the track, Jack Brabham said when he was in form he was unbeatable and, with cleverer decisions could have won 3 WDC's.
8. Damon Hill - probably the most underrated F1 driver of all time ... good strike rate. Made a few mistakes but was always having a go. the Hungary loss in the Arrows is the greatest injustice ever in F1 ... nearly cried.
9. Alain Prost - thought he was an uppity Frenchman before I met him at Calder and he was anything but that. Awesome driver in every aspect too
10. Frank Gardner - not because he is Australian but because he had the funniest wit of all time. Would have won many races if he had decent equipment.

[deeks6]

Originally Posted by FAS33

I think the drivers today would run laps around those champions who've raced in the passed, doesn't mean their greater though.

I think if the drivers of today jumped in a 1960s F1 car (or 50s or 40s or30s) they would sh*t themselves ... no downforce, skittish handling, make a mistake and you probably die. However they would adapt with practice and be as quick.

If the drivers of yesteryear were to jump into a modern F1 car, they would probably stop the car 100m before the first corner they came to because of the brakes and pass out with the G forces cornering. However, with practise they would adapt and be as quick.

[deeks6]

Originally Posted by FastDB2s

Interestingly G.Hill had to work at being a world class driver, Clark largely didn't know where his god given came from.
Lotus mechanics used to change brake pads on Clark's car even though they were hardly worn, because Hill's were always worn out, 'it was embarasing' they reckoned !

During the Tasman series, I think it was Warwick Farm, Jim posted a practice time over a second faster then Graham. In the pits, Graham noticed that Jims car was set up differently and got a bit peeved. He demanded that they set his car up the same as Jims and set off for the next practice. After he came back running 1.5 seconds slower than his own time, he asked them to change it back ...

I do feel sorry for all those fans too young to have seen Clark in action

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by deeks6

Absolutely!

- If Moss or Mansell are in the Top 10, you can simply put it down to "but they're British"

Hardly.

[FastDB2s]

Originally Posted by deeks6

I think if the drivers of today jumped in a 1960s F1 car (or 50s or 40s or30s) they would sh*t themselves ... no downforce, skittish handling, make a mistake and you probably die. However they would adapt with practice and be as quick..

If they didn't manage to injure themselves or write off the car beause of poor brakes, wonderful low grip tyres & skittish handling

Originally Posted by deeks6

If the drivers of yesteryear were to jump into a modern F1 car, they would probably stop the car 100m before the first corner they came to because of the brakes and pass out with the G forces cornering. However, with practise they would adapt and be as quick. .

Most would mentally adapt after a day or so, its just a mental thing to start with, coping with the braking distances & cornering abilities.
After the initial shock the fitness levels would be pushed up after all these guys were immensely talented and 'serious' professionals, by that I mean the antics are not heard of today as the modern drivers have no 'soul'.
G.Hill hadn't driven a car, any car until some ridiculous late age, he was more interested in rowing, Clark had been around machinery, albeit farm machinery all his life.
Talking of talent, Chapman was a good pilot, not a GP pilot but nevertheless a good one.

[FastDB2s]

Originally Posted by deeks6

During the Tasman series, I think it was Warwick Farm, Jim posted a practice time over a second faster then Graham. In the pits, Graham noticed that Jims car was set up differently and got a bit peeved. He demanded that they set his car up the same as Jims and set off for the next practice. After he came back running 1.5 seconds slower than his own time, he asked them to change it back ...

According to his mechanics G.Hill could be / was a stroppy git with a little black book of settings, often they put the settings to Hill's settings then put them to Chapman's settings, this eventually culminated in a large argument with Chapman saying they were his cars ...

[formerf1champ]

Originally Posted by nicanary

Well,it's very kind of you to put it that way, but I've never met the guy. Any observations from me are based on a lot of reading, and being around at that time. I also tend to select my reading from respected authoratitive writers like Doug Nye and Nigel Roebuck, who generally give you a pretty accurate picture.

Should've just taken the credit "Yes, I am the font of all F1 knowledge..."

Originally Posted by nicanary

Lovely anecdote in this month's Motor Sport about Jim Clark. When the circus was in Sydney for the Tasman Series race, Jim would use the workshop of local ace Leo Geoghegan. He was mooching around one day, so Leo asked him to cut his mum's lawn. He duly obliged, the job taking about two hours, and the mum had no idea who Jim was!

As you drive through the street, you notice a random guy, mowing what is supposedly his lawn. Then later find out it's one of the best racing drivers of all time!

Originally Posted by deeks6

Absolutely!
- If Moss or Mansell are in the Top 10, you can simply put it down to "but they're British"

I think Mansell is put down because he's British. He is as legit a Top 10 driver than anybody else. His 30 wins are equal to, or maybe override Schu's 90.

Originally Posted by deeks6

9. Alain Prost - thought he was an uppity Frenchman before I met him at Calder and he was anything but that. Awesome driver in every aspect too
.

Of all the stuff I've seen or ever come across, despite some seemingly weaknesses, not that there will ever be conclusive proof of who is the greatest driver ever. But I have a hunch Alain is actually the best driver of all time.

[FastDB2s]

Originally Posted by formerf1champ

As you drive through the street, you notice a random guy, mowing what is supposedly his lawn. Then later find out it's one of the best racing drivers of all time!

I think Mansell is put down because he's British. He is as legit a Top 10 driver than anybody else. His 30 wins are equal to, or maybe override Schu's 90.


Of all the stuff I've seen or ever come across, despite some seemingly weaknesses, not that there will ever be conclusive proof of who is the greatest driver ever. But I have a hunch Alain is actually the best driver of all time.

Isnt that 'the greatest' drivers of all time

Mansell raced in a period when there were several greats, Piquet, Senna, Prost, etc, were involved in the sport, (the pole shoot outs were awesome), his pole record & race record are overshadowed by his lack of 'charisma', liked a car with massive front end grip & had the balls to take advantage of that, like by (some) of his engineers for it.

Prost is underated, not always the fastest (because he didnt need to be), often but not always right at the front at the start / midle of the race (because he didnt need to be), good in the changing conditions of the race / car / weather, etc, able to read a race then. The 'Professor' was there at the end of the race when it counted, 51 race wins, same as Clark if you take into account Clark's championship & non championship GPs (49) & 2 Indy wins but in an era when 16gp's a season.
another Clark then!.

[formerf1champ]

Originally Posted by FastDB2s

Isnt that 'the greatest' drivers of all time

Mansell raced in a period when there were several greats, Piquet, Senna, Prost, etc, were involved in the sport, (the pole shoot outs were awesome), his pole record & race record are overshadowed by his lack of 'charisma', liked a car with massive front end grip & had the balls to take advantage of that, like by (some) of his engineers for it.

Prost is underated, not always the fastest (because he didnt need to be), often but not always right at the front at the start / midle of the race (because he didnt need to be), good in the changing conditions of the race / car / weather, etc, able to read a race then. The 'Professor' was there at the end of the race when it counted, 51 race wins, same as Clark if you take into account Clark's championship & non championship GPs (49) & 2 Indy wins but in an era when 16gp's a season.
another Clark then!.

Either you're agreeing with me, or you're not completely dismissing my opinon?

[nicanary]

It's awfully quiet on all my regular forums at the moment - something tells me that the missus let him watch the Spa qualifying in return for doing the big monthly shop this afternoon. (It's PAYDAY!)

There have been various mild disagreements on this thread about whether the number of championships won, or the total number of races won, constitutes the right to "greatness". As the more wise amongst us have said, you can't compare different eras, when either cars were less reliable or there was no real competition.

We've had a list of win ratios (#45), but has anyone got a database which shows the ratio of wins per finish? In other words, discounting those races where the car broke down. (I've just realised that the old 1950s habit of car-sharing does mess that one up a little bit, but all the same...). I reckon it would put drivers like Fangio and Clark even further ahead, and don't be surprised if a certain S.Moss suddenly makes an appearance.

You're really great if you always win, whatever the circumstances. Or are you? (Alberto Ascari's wins were all in the F2 period of 1952/53 - the ferrari 500 was easily the best car, and he was team leader. Nuff said. yet everyone and his dog says he was deffo one of the greats, thus showing how you simply can't come up with a definitive system for judging).

now I'm talking in circles.....

[FastDB2s]

Originally Posted by formerf1champ

Either you're agreeing with me, or you're not completely dismissing my opinon?

I totally agree

[Paradise City]

Again, like other stats, I don't see championships as definitive, it's a net one casts and is a general guide, IMO. I couldn't say Jacques Villeneuve was a superior 'great' than Stirling Moss without grinning for example.

[deeks6]

Originally Posted by formerf1champ

I think Mansell is put down because he's British. He is as legit a Top 10 driver than anybody else. His 30 wins are equal to, or maybe override Schu's 90.

Seriously? Much as I used to enjoy "our Nige" that is just crazy. He deservedly won a WDC in probably the most dominant car in the championship history but lets put his career in perspective:

- In 4 years as a teammate to Elio de Angelis, he scored roughly half (38) the points that Elio did (73) and was comprehensively beaten in 3 out of the 4 years. As fine a driver that de Angelis was, I dont hear him being mentioned in Top 10 or even Top 100 despatches

- Against Keke Rosberg at Williams ... beaten again. Keke went on to join Alain Prost and get thrashed

- Against Nelson Piquet, he took one of the 2 years together but was outscored over the 2 years 143-131. Yet many of you guys are rating him ABOVE Piquet who won 3 WDC!

- He beat Gerhard Berger at Ferrari but that year, the Ferrari was notoriously unreliable. Berger outqualified him 9/7 to show their raw speed comparison. Again, Gerhard would be rated a very good F1 driver but hardly Top 10 material.

- In 1990, he was comprehensively thrashed by Alain Prost. No shame in that as Prost is most certainly one of the legends but, if Nige was one of the greats he would have been a tad closer

Nige was an entertaining, gritty fighter but was prone to mistakes and probably a bit hard on his equipment. However, when people such as Murray Walker and Nigel Roebuck and other assorted British-centric "experts" rate him above the likes of Jack Brabham, Fernando Alonso, Mika Hakkinen, Mario Andretti, Nelson Piquet, Jochen Rindt, Graham Hill, Sebastien Vettel, Alan Jones, Emerson Fittipaldi etc, I cant really take them seriously because both the statistical and physical evidence just does not stack up.

[FAS33]

and the moral of the thread is, you can't compare different era's and Ayrton Senna is the best Pilot of All time

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by deeks6

Seriously? Much as I used to enjoy "our Nige" that is just crazy. He deservedly won a WDC in probably the most dominant car in the championship history but lets put his career in perspective:

- In 4 years as a teammate to Elio de Angelis, he scored roughly half (38) the points that Elio did (73) and was comprehensively beaten in 3 out of the 4 years. As fine a driver that de Angelis was, I dont hear him being mentioned in Top 10 or even Top 100 despatches

- Against Keke Rosberg at Williams ... beaten again. Keke went on to join Alain Prost and get thrashed

- Against Nelson Piquet, he took one of the 2 years together but was outscored over the 2 years 143-131. Yet many of you guys are rating him ABOVE Piquet who won 3 WDC!

- He beat Gerhard Berger at Ferrari but that year, the Ferrari was notoriously unreliable. Berger outqualified him 9/7 to show their raw speed comparison. Again, Gerhard would be rated a very good F1 driver but hardly Top 10 material.

- In 1990, he was comprehensively thrashed by Alain Prost. No shame in that as Prost is most certainly one of the legends but, if Nige was one of the greats he would have been a tad closer

Nige was an entertaining, gritty fighter but was prone to mistakes and probably a bit hard on his equipment. However, when people such as Murray Walker and Nigel Roebuck and other assorted British-centric "experts" rate him above the likes of Jack Brabham, Fernando Alonso, Mika Hakkinen, Mario Andretti, Nelson Piquet, Jochen Rindt, Graham Hill, Sebastien Vettel, Alan Jones, Emerson Fittipaldi etc, I cant really take them seriously because both the statistical and physical evidence just does not stack up.

That's a pretty fair summary for me.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by formerf1champ

I think Mansell is put down because he's British. He is as legit a Top 10 driver than anybody else. His 30 wins are equal to, or maybe override Schu's 90.