F1 WDC since 1980 - Who won it, who should've?

[Non stop]

80 Jones OK
81 Reutemann
82 Gilles, just cause I love him
83 Prost because I hate Piquet
84 Lauda
85 Prost
86 Prost because Mansell and Piquet did like Alonso and Hamilton in 2007
87 Piquet
88 Senna
89 Senna because was robbed inSuzuka by Balestre and Prost
90 Senna because he had huge balls to revenge
91 Senna
92 Mansell
93 Prost
94 Senna because he would have done better than Hill
95 Senna - Hill just missed out & Senna was so superior!
96 Senna - Hill would not have beaten his team mate!
97 Villeneave
98 Senna - would have been in a Mc Laren again with uncle Ron
99 Senna - would have been in a Mc Laren again with uncle Ron
00 Schuey
01 Schuey
02 Schuey
03 Schuey
04 Schuey
05 Alonso, because had consistency, although Kimi deserved it too
06 Alonso, even if Schuey engine said "enough" at Suzuka...
07 Kimi, deserved for shutting up and just driving
08 Hamilton, Im not a Massa fan
09 Button (His smooth style is not spectacular enough for me but Ill give it just for his last race...)


This would have left this WDC summs:
Senna 9
Prost 4
Shuey 5
Lauda 3
Piquet 1
Jones 1
Mansell 1
JV 1
Kimi 1
Alonso 2
Hamilton 1
Button 1
Gilles 1
Reutemann 1

[raindog]

Senna wins 5 championships from '94 onwards? This is taking speculation and fantasy to new heights.
I would think, in almost anyone's books, except the most ardent hater, Mansell should've had 3 and maybe 4. But anyone can manipulate a list like that to suit their own favourites.

[jab]

80 Jones
81 Piquet
82 Pironi
83 Piquet
84 Lauda
85 Senna
86 Senna
87 Senna
88 Senna
89 Senna
90 Senna
91 Senna
92 Senna
93 Senna
94 Senna
95 Senna
96 Senna
97 Senna
98 Senna
99 Irvine
00 Senna
01 Senna
02 Senna
03 Senna
04 Senna
05 Senna
06 Senna
07 Senna
08 Senna
09 Senna

[Belatti]

noname, in your post Shuey has 4 and not 5 titles

BTW, with Senna winning from 94 till 99.... I Dont think Schuey would be in Ferrari to win from 2000 till 2004... it doesnt seems right


@ jab..... ahahahahahaha, that would have happened with a less thirsty and stronger Renault Turbo in the 80s and with Senna in Williams from 92 till 97, then in McLaren till 2000 and then in Ferrari till 2009... but not quite sure about 2005... hehehe

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by raindog

Senna wins 5 championships from '94 onwards? This is taking speculation and fantasy to new heights.
I would think, in almost anyone's books, except the most ardent hater, Mansell should've had 3 and maybe 4. But anyone can manipulate a list like that to suit their own favourites.

Eh? this thread isn't about people's favourites otherwise I'd somehow have made JPM a triple WDC!!

It's a sensible discussion about highly likely alternative titlists based on the form and momentum they won/lost in a given year.

Everyone keeps banging on about so and so won because they scored the most points. Well that's blatantly obvious, but I restate there are several clearcut cases when the fastest driver/car combo didn't win the title for some reason or another.

Please continue discussion in spirit it's meant to be in!!

[maximus]

Originally Posted by jab

80 Jones
81 Piquet
82 Pironi
83 Piquet
84 Lauda
85 Senna
86 Senna
87 Senna
88 Senna
89 Senna
90 Senna
91 Senna
92 Senna
93 Senna
94 Senna
95 Senna
96 Senna
97 Senna
98 Senna
99 Irvine
00 Senna
01 Senna
02 Senna
03 Senna
04 Senna
05 Senna
06 Senna
07 Senna
08 Senna
09 Senna

I like Irvine in 99.

[Knowlesy]

Originally Posted by chunterer

RESURRECTION TIME!

2008 Hamilton won it but it's fair to say that on the balance of the season, it really was Felipe Massa's year.....

No, no, no chuntz.

I agree with you on lots but you deserve a scolding for that my friend.

[Graz]

Originally Posted by chunterer

Year Champ Who should've Who would've
1980 Jones Piquet Gilles ?
1981 Piquet Reutemann Gilles ?
82 Rosberg Pironi Gilles ?
83 Piquet Prost Would Gilles have taken it again?
84 Lauda Prost Alboreto (car let him down)
85 Prost Prost
86 Prost Mansell
87 Piquet Piquet
88 Senna Prost
89 Prost Senna
90 Senna Prost Mansell (led loads didn't he?)
91 Senna Senna
92 Mansell Mansell
93 Prost Prost
94 Schuey Hill Senna?
95 Schuey Hill If still alive Senna
96 Hill JV ditto above
97 JV JV ditto above
98 Hakkinen DC DC
99 Hakkinen Schuey Schuey?
2000 Schuey Hakkinen Hakkinen/DC
01 Schuey Schuey
02 Schuey Schuey
03 Schuey JPM JPM/Kimi
04 Schuey Schuey
05 Alonso Kimi Kimi

Here's my 2 cents. First name is who did, second is who should have

Year Champ Who should've Who would've
1980 Jones Jones
1981 Piquet Reutemann
82 Rosberg Pironi or Gilles - the 182C was easily the best car
83 Piquet Prost
84 Lauda Prost
85 Prost Prost
86 Prost Mansell - Williams totally blew it
87 Piquet Mansell - Piquet was not the same after his Imola crash. Mansell should have taken advantage
88 Senna Senna
89 Prost Senna
90 Senna Prost - there was not enough belief or organisation within Ferrari
91 Senna Mansell - the Williams was dominant. By half season, Mansell ahd caught up after early reliability issues
92 Mansell Mansell
93 Prost Prost
94 Schuey Schu - he was quickest, tho the car was probably illegal
95 Schuey Schu
96 Hill Hill
97 JV JV
98 Hakkinen Hakkinen
99 Hakkinen Hakkinen
2000 Schuey Schu
01 Schuey Schu
02 Schuey Schu
03 Schuey JPM - once Ferrari had the tyre rules changed to hamper Michelin, JPM faded.
04 Schuey Schuey
05 Alonso Kimi - McLaren reliability was awful
06 Alonso Alonso
07 Kimi Hamilton - McLaren panicked and blew it
08 Hamilton Hamilton - even though the FIA did all it could to help Massa win
09 Button Button - he was never seriously threatened

The moral of the story? Usually, he who deserves to win the title does so. I notice some of the other posts included Senna 'had he still been alive.' Wha? Sure, I may as well start throwing in Clark, Fangio etc.

[Tim the Grey]

1994?TGF should have been booted out, and Hill handed the gong.
The FIA sent a CLEAR message to everyone, it's fine to take other drivers out to stop them taking your title. Back in Suzuka in 1990... Shuey learned it well.
1986 was Mansell's year. But perhaps NOT a Goodyear!

Gilles? Maybe 1979, if he'd broken his word. Then 1981, and 1982, with a bit of luck, and if he'd lived, 1985?

But that's fantasy land...

[chunterer]

Was the Ferrari that good a car in '85? I recall that it was in '83 and for a lot of '84 and then they had a lean time until 1990

[Jimmy Magnusson]

It was OK. Fairly reliable, I think, but that may just be my mind playing tricks. Nothing compared to the McLaren, sure (or rather, Prost's McLaren! Anyone else who found that a bit suspect, the way all problems with reliability seemed to hit Lauda and only Lauda?), and with a better driver it could at least have challenged Prost. I still think Prost would have won, though. But Senna was still a bit rough around the edges back then, and I wasn't too impressed by the way he threw away third in the championship in the final race.

However, there's really only one title that I think really should have gone to someone else, and that's Hill in 1994.

[Graz]

Originally Posted by chunterer

Was the Ferrari that good a car in '85? I recall that it was in '83 and for a lot of '84 and then they had a lean time until 1990

Prost was always fairly in control in 85 really. The 85 Ferrari was ok but the McLaren was better (as was Prost over Albert)

[jab]

Originally Posted by chunterer

Was the Ferrari that good a car in '85? I recall that it was in '83 and for a lot of '84 and then they had a lean time until 1990

It was quick enough to give Alboreto the lead in the championship for most of the season. It was only when in the key rounds towards the end that some reliability issues crept in - if they hadn't, Alboreto could well have been champion

[Graz]

Originally Posted by jab

It was quick enough to give Alboreto the lead in the championship for most of the season. It was only when in the key rounds towards the end that some reliability issues crept in - if they hadn't, Alboreto could well have been champion

I honestly think Prost would have prevailed regardless. Ironically, the big turning point was Monza when Alboreto's engine blew and pretty much finished his championship challenge there.

[db120176]

I think Jones would have been champion in 1981 had it not been for Reutemann disregarding team orders at Brazil and Jones' own mid season slump

[krt917]

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

If I led every race of the year, but the car broke down in every single one of them would it be true to say

a) I could have been world champion, but the car wasn't reliable enough
or b) I should have been world champion?

I say a)

To say b) denigrates the achievement of whoever actually did it

This debate reminds me of a football manager who loses 2-nil and then says afterwards "but we were the better team" - no they weren't - scoring goals is the objective - much like in racing it's winning races, scoring points that actually count.

I disagree. I can see your point about not denigrating certain champions, but I think it's also fair to say some were more deserving - and some more lucky - than others. Assuming you didn't keep blowing the engine up, I'd go for answer b) in your hypothetical title fight.

Originally Posted by Stargazer7

Nevertheless, I think Gilles should have won the 1979 championship when he "let" Jody Schecter win it because Jody was named first driver.

I looked 1979 up recently and was surprised to find that, until the last two races (once the title had been won), Jody had the upper hand. He was 7-6 up in qualifying, and hadn't made daft mistakes like not pitting with an obviously punctured tyre at Zandvoort, as Gilles had.

Agree that Villeneuve would probably have won a title had he not died in 1982, but I think it's difficult to speculate on that sort of thing. So, I'll stick to what we know happened and who I thought was unlucky/deserving etc.

1981 - Reutemann should have won it, but blew it. Can't blame Piquet for that, but I think he was a tad fortunate it was Carlos he was going up against in the final round.
1982 - Several different drivers could have won it, but I think Rosberg was a deserving champion, having taken the fight to the turbos.
1984 - Prost should have won the title. Looking back at the races, he lost more points through poor reliability (and he wasn't a car breaker) than Lauda. And he won seven races to Lauda's five.
1987 - Mansell blew Piquet away, and Nelson was lucky to pick up two of three races he did win. It's probably fair to say Mansell, Senna and Prost all performed better than Piquet in 1987.
1989 - I'd give it to Senna - more wins, and Prost's defence at Suzuka was a bit daft.
1990 - Prost - Senna should have been stripped of the title after the Suzuka shunt.
1997 - Up until Jerez I would have said Schuey deserved it, but after that move, I'm glad JV took it.
2003 - Lots of people seem to think Kimi or JPM should have won the title, but I'd stick with Schuey on this one. He won more races and made more of what he had than the others, I believe.
2008 - Lewis made far too many mistakes really, and I think Massa did the better job. I can't help but feel if an Alonso or Schuey had been in the Ferrari or McLaren that year they've have won it by miles.

[climb]

80 Jones OK
81 Villeneuve
82 Pironi
83 Arnoux - the most spectacular that year
84 Lauda
85 Alboreto
86 Prost
87 Piquet
88 Prost, because he made more points than Senna
89 Prost
90 Prost (any comment useless)
91 Senna
92 Mansell
93 Prost
94 Schumacher
95 Senna
96 Senna
97 Schumacher
98 Hakkinen
99 Irvine - wasn't for ferrari sabotage...
00 Schumacher
01 Schumacher
02 Schumacher
03 Schumacher
04 Schumacher
05 Alonso,
06 Schumacher
07 Kimi
08 Massa
09 Button - ran alone many races, could he lose?


This would have left this WDC summs:
Senna 3
Prost 5
Shuey 7
Lauda 1
Piquet 1
Jones 1
Mansell 1
Kimi 1
Alonso 1
Massa 1
Button 1
Pironi 1
Irvine 1
Villeneuve 1

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

If I led every race of the year, but the car broke down in every single one of them would it be true to say

a) I could have been world champion, but the car wasn't reliable enough

or

b) I should have been world champion?

Neither, if different compromises were made in the design of the car it would probably be more reliable but slower. Which perfectly illustrates one of the huge problems with all this what if stuff.

[Marbot]

Winning any F1 championship is going to be car dependent. You were never going to win one in a Minardi (slow) or, at the opposite end, a pre-Brawn era 90s Ferrari (unreliable).

You can only do the best with what you've got and make the most of the times when the car is quick. Some have managed to do that, while others have not.

[nobster]

1981 should have been Alan Jones.
If Imola 1994 had not happened then 1994, 1995, 1996 and maybe 1997 Ayrton Senna ( if he had stayed on with Williams )

[SennaTheGreat]

Originally Posted by nobster

If Imola 1994 had not happened then 1994, 1995, 1996 and maybe 1997 Ayrton Senna ( if he had stayed on with Williams )

If I am right was Ayrton not given a 3 year (94/95/96) deal with an option of a 4th (97) year?

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by SennaTheGreat

If I am right was Ayrton not given a 3 year (94/95/96) deal with an option of a 4th (97) year?

That maybe so but he was strongly considering finishing his career at Maranello from '97.

However, Ayrton would in all likelihood not have won in '94, there was simply too much to do. Williams benefited greatly when the dominant Schuey/Benetton package had to be banned from a few races because it all got a bit dull because he didn't have a decent rival.

Had Ayrton still been around, whilst undoubtedly the FW16 would have improved much quicker, he would have struggled to close a 20 point gap.

I have no doubt that he would have annihilated the field in '95, '96, and, had he stayed, in '97 though.

[Bononi]

Well, maybe he did it in another universe... in the multiverse ! ?)

[SennaTheGreat]

One thing, how many points did Damon have to catch up going into Imola?

[Chatters]

Originally Posted by climb

80 Jones OK
81 Villeneuve
82 Pironi
83 Arnoux - the most spectacular that year
84 Lauda
85 Alboreto
86 Prost
87 Piquet
88 Prost, because he made more points than Senna
89 Prost
90 Prost (any comment useless)
91 Senna
92 Mansell
93 Prost
94 Schumacher
95 Senna
96 Senna
97 Schumacher
98 Hakkinen
99 Irvine - wasn't for ferrari sabotage...
00 Schumacher
01 Schumacher
02 Schumacher
03 Schumacher
04 Schumacher
05 Alonso,
06 Schumacher
07 Kimi
08 Massa
09 Button - ran alone many races, could he lose?


This would have left this WDC summs:
Senna 3
Prost 5
Shuey 7
Lauda 1
Piquet 1
Jones 1
Mansell 1
Kimi 1
Alonso 1
Massa 1
Button 1
Pironi 1
Irvine 1
Villeneuve 1

Don't mean to pick you up on a technicality but under your system TGF would actually have 8 championships, not 7