Who is the Greatest F1 driver of all time?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

but at the same time, is the overall grid now (and over the last several years) relatively the most talented group of young and most well prepared drivers we have ever seen on a grid?

Don’t be daft. Things were always better in the past.

In those days spirits were brave, the stakes were high, men were real men, women were real women and drivers were real drivers.
Many drivers of course became extremely successful, but this was perfectly natural and nothing to be ashamed of because no one was really crap - at least no one worth speaking of.

[chillibowl]

Just rereading with my rose tinted glasses on and can now see where i went wrong.

[Mike Harte]

Now that it's been clearly demonstrated that Mercedes are a busted flush, it is time to declare that Max V is currently the GOAT?

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Now that it's been clearly demonstrated that Mercedes are a busted flush, it is time to declare that Max V is currently the GOAT?

Er, no. It merely demonstrates that he got away from the traffic lights before anyone else.

[BTCC frog]

In case anyone's actually interested in the order , here is my top 200 drivers of all time:

1. Lewis Hamilton
2. Michael Schumacher
3. Juan Manuel Fangio
4. Jim Clark
5. Jackie Stewart
6. Alberto Ascari
7. Fernando Alonso
8. Alain Prost
9. Stirling Moss
10. Ayrton Senna
11. Niki Lauda
12. Sebastian Vettel
13. Jochen Rindt
14. Jenson Button
15. Nico Rosberg
16. Ronnie Peterson
17. Max Verstappen
18. Carlos Reutemann
19. James Hunt
20. Nelson Piquet
21. Graham Hill
22. Alan Jones
23. Giles Villeneuve
24. Mika Hakkinen
25. Mario Andretti
26. Nigel Mansell
27. Emerson Fittipaldi
28. Daniel Ricciardo
29. Jack Brabham
30. Giuseppe Farina
31. Charles Leclerc
32. Elio de Angelis
33. Jody Scheckter
34. Robert Kubica
35. Nick Heidfeld
36. Jacques Villeneuve
37. Valtteri Bottas
38. Damon Hill
39. John Surtees
40. Kimi Raikkonen
41. Felipe Massa
42. Clay Regazzoni
43. Denny Hulme
44. Keke Rosberg
45. Sergio Perez
46. Jacky Ickx
47. John Watson
48. Bruce McLaren
49. Jacques Laffite
50. Rubens Barrichello
51. Mike Hawthorn
52. Nico Hulkenberg
53. Heinz-Harald Frentzen
54. Jose Froilan Gonzalez
55. Dan Gurney
56. Eddie Irvine
57. Peter Collins
58. Jean Alesi
59. Gerhard Berger
60. Carlos Sainz
61. David Coulthard
62. Jarno Trulli
63. Mark Webber
64. Luigi Fagioli
65. Giancarlo Fisichella
66. Patrick Depailler
67. Chris Amon
68. Jean Behra
69. Juan Pablo Montoya
70. Rene Arnoux
71. Tony Brooks
72. Didier Pironi
73. Heikki Kovalainen
74. Johnny Herbert
75. Kevin Magnussen
76. Romain Grosjean
77. Ralf Schumacher
78. Phil Hill
79. Derek Warwick
80. Wolfgang von Trips
81. George Russell
82. Timo Glock
83. Ricardo Patrese
84. Lando Norris
85. Pierre Gasly
86. Richie Ginther
87. Pedro Rodriguez
88. Maurice Trintignant
89. Marc Surer
90. Eddie Cheever
91. Mika Salo
92. Francois Cevert
93. Thierry Boutsen
94. Kamui Kobayashi
95. Pierluigi Martini
96. Martin Brundle
97. Michele Alboreto
98. Tom Pryce
99. Stefan Johansson
100. Jean-Pierre Jarier
101. Esteban Ocon
102. Patrick Tambay
103. Luigi Villoresi
104. Stefano Modena
105. Luigi Musso
106. Carlos Pace
107. Piero Taruffi
108. Peter Revson
109. Olivier Panis
110. Jean-Pierre Beltoise
111. Paul Di Resta
112. Jo Bonnier
113. Adrian Sutil
114. Alessandro Nannini
115. Christian Fittipaldi
116. Jean-Eric Vergne
117. Stefan Bellof
118. Karl Kling
119. Alexander Wurz
120. Jo Siffert
121. Pastor Maldonado
122. Jochen Mass
123. Gunnar Nilsson
124. Peter Gethin
125. Lance Stroll
126. Ivan Capelli
127. Pedro de la Rosa
128. Stoffel Vandoorne
129. Bruno Giacomelli
130. Alexander Albon
131. Vitaly Petrov
132. Jean-Pierre Jabouille
133. Daniil Kvyat
134. Jules Bianchi
135. Pascal Wehrlein
136. Lorenzo Bandini
137. Felipe Nasr
138. Marcus Ericsson
139. Mark Donohue
140. Karl Wendlinger
141. Giancarlo Baghetti
142. Innes Ireland
143. Eugenio Castellotti
144. Jaime Alguersuari
145. Sebastien Buemi
146. Mark Blundell
147. Louis Rosier
148. Andrea de Cesaris
149. Eric Bernard
150. JJ Lehto
151. Vittorio Brambilla
152. Chico Serra
153. B Bira
154. Roy Salvadori
155. Jonathan Palmer
156. Ludovico Scarfiotti
157. Pedro Diniz
158. Mauricio Gugelmin
159. Tony Maggs
160. Stuart Lewis-Evans
161. Teo Fabi
162. Vitantonio Liuzzi
163. Roberto Moreno
164. Erik Comas
165. Peter Arundell
166. Louis Chiron
167. Ricardo Rodriguez
168. Philippe Streiff
169. Mike Hailwood
170. Aguri Suzuki
171. Hans Herrmann
172. Masten Gregory
173. Cristiano da Matta
174. Tony Brise
175. Reg Parnell
176. Hans-Joachim Stuck
177. Takuma Sato
178. Gianni Morbidelli
179. Marc Gene
180. Jos Verstappen
181. Antonio Giovinazzi
182. Rolf Stommelen
183. Enrique Bernoldi
184. Rudi Fischer
185. Sebastien Bourdais
186. Pedro Lamy
187. Piers Courage
188. Alex Caffi
189. Christian Klien
190. Philippe Alliot
191. Giedo van der Garde
192. Alexander Rossi
193. Robert Manzon
194. Charles Pic
195. Sergey Sirotkin
196. Harry Schell
197. Nicholas Latifi
198. Bertrand Gachot
199. Ukyo Katayama
200. Arturo Merzario

[Aysedasi]

Some interesting names - in interesting places. Such as Robert Kubica, the 34th greatest F1 driver of all time? Leclerc at 31 when he's barely out of his F1 'rompers' and Pedro Diniz actually in the top 200..... I'm taking it with a poinch of salt.

[Greem]

Where's Taki Inoue? This list is incomplete without him.

[52Paddy]

I'd love to sit down for an evening with BTCC Frog and have a few beers and go through your justification for the drivers on that list. Not that I disagree or think you're unentitled to your opinion. I just think it would be interesting. Particularly with the likes of the aforementioned Pedro Diniz and drivers like Ukyo Katayama, Alex Caffi and Enrique Bernoldi!?

[BTCC frog]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Some interesting names - in interesting places. Such as Robert Kubica, the 34th greatest F1 driver of all time? Leclerc at 31 when he's barely out of his F1 'rompers' and Pedro Diniz actually in the top 200..... I'm taking it with a poinch of salt.

I promise that the list was not made to get responses; it is my actual opinion. Maybe Kubica in 34th is a little high, but I think it is reasonable as his teammate for the majority of his career, Nick Heidfeld, is only one place lower. Charles Leclerc may also be a little high, but over the last few years the way he has effectively dominated Vettel (12th) has been extremely impressive, even if Vettel hasn't been at his best.

[BTCC frog]

Originally Posted by 52Paddy

I'd love to sit down for an evening with BTCC Frog and have a few beers and go through your justification for the drivers on that list. Not that I disagree or think you're unentitled to your opinion. I just think it would be interesting. Particularly with the likes of the aforementioned Pedro Diniz and drivers like Ukyo Katayama, Alex Caffi and Enrique Bernoldi!?

I would be happy to justify any drivers on there that you disagree with. I would like to mention, though, that I have not been watching F1 for as long as many people on here (only ten years) so I didn't watch the majority of these drivers live. I have done extensive research into their careers over the last ten years, but I realise it's not the same as experiencing their racing live. Also, I didn't have time to order the entire list exactly until I thought it was perfect; I only took about an hour and a half to choose it. So most of the drivers could probably move up or down up to around ten places (this is obviously not the case for the first 40 or so).

So, in the case of Diniz, Katayama, Caffi and Bernoldi, do you think they should be higher or lower, and by how much?

[S griffin]

Apart from maybe Ascari, my top 10 would be the same, but in a different order. I also wouldn’t put Button 14th ahead of people like Hakkinen and Gilles Villeneuve

[chunterer]

I have several queries but the ones thaþ stood out from your list, if I may...

Ayrton Da Senna Da Silva 10th...

Reut above Jones...

Kimi only 40th...

Keke in the 40s...

JPM must be way ahead of many above him on pure talent, let alone results...

Pryce and Brise are there but not Williamson...

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by chunterer

I have several queries but the ones thaþ stood out from your list, if I may...

Ayrton Da Senna Da Silva 10th...

Reut above Jones...

Kimi only 40th...

Keke in the 40s...

JPM must be way ahead of many above him on pure talent, let alone results...

Pryce and Brise are there but not Williamson...

Reutemann probably had more natural talent than Jonesy, but Jones probably used his talent more

Kimi I agree should be higher and JPM could also possibly be higher

Pryce and Brise probably had more potential than Williamson and only two races in F1 could count against Roger, even in tragic circumstances. But certainly he deserves to be in there more than Diniz!

[BTCC frog]

Originally Posted by chunterer

I have several queries but the ones thaþ stood out from your list, if I may...

Ayrton Da Senna Da Silva 10th...

Reut above Jones...

Kimi only 40th...

Keke in the 40s...

JPM must be way ahead of many above him on pure talent, let alone results...

Pryce and Brise are there but not Williamson...

My reason for the low ratings of Senna and Prost is down to F1metrics. I believe in mathematics when it comes to rating drivers, and F1metrics (which is the best model for comparing drivers, in my opinion), has them down in 20th and 21st. While I think that is too extreme, it is my reason for them being behind the top seven. Senna drops a further place behind Moss because of his dirty tactics, which is also the only reason why Schumacher is below Hamilton.

Reutemann is above Jones because, while Jones outperformed him when they were Williams teammates, Reutemann was almost 40 at that time, so was probably past his best. He was also more successful that Jones before joining Williams. It was very close between them, but I think Reutemann was very slightly better over their entire careers.

Kimi Raikkonen was very quick in McLaren, but since he left he was outpaced by Massa at Ferrari (over the three years, even if he did take a championship), and then was nowhere near the level of Alonso or Vettel when he returned. It made me think that maybe he was actually flattered by the pace of the McLaren, so I don't rate him as highly as most fans do. And this also brings Montoya's rating down, as he was off the pace of Raikkonen (but is still ahead of Ralf Schumacher). Coulthard is also quite low in the list.

For Keke Rosberg, could you specify whether you think he is too high or too low?

And I didn't even consider Williamson for the list, as two races isn't really enough for him to be top 200, in my opinion, even if he did have potential. Tom Pryce did have some success, and his ranking is boosted by the fact that I rate Jarier (100) highly. Tony Brise had ten races (more than Fagioli), so although he didn't really achieve anything, I think that's enough for him to be on the list.

And then there was Pedro Diniz, whose placement has been queried by a few people. Maybe he was a bit high, but I think he deserves to be in the top 200. In 1995, he was teammate to Roberto Moreno (163), and generally was at quite a similar level, despite the fact that Moreno had more experience. And Moreno is only a few places behind Diniz on my list. Then, the next three years, he was a bit off his teammates, but these teammates were Damon Hill (38), Olivier Panis (109) and Mika Salo (91), and rereading the list, I think Panis should be higher. And Diniz didn't exactly disgrace himself against these three strong drivers. In 1999, he actually beat Jean Alesi (58) in the points, and while Alesi was clearly the better driver that year, he is also someone who I rate highly. In 2000 he was reunited with Salo and it was a similar story to the last time they were teammates. So while Diniz was beaten fairly comfortably by all his teammates bar Moreno, they were all good drivers, and that is why I don't think Diniz was too bad a driver.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by BTCC frog

My reason for the low ratings of Senna and Prost is down to F1metrics. I believe in mathematics when it comes to rating drivers, and F1metrics (which is the best model for comparing drivers, in my opinion).

As I've said many times before in this (and the GOAT compo threads), this is where I have issues with rankings. For me, you cannot subtract from the equation the emotional element. The degree to which a driver excited you when you watched him go about his work. There is also the difficulty that some drivers, particularly those from earlier eras, didn't get the chance to realise their true 'mathematical' potential, whether through simple bad luck or worse. As a result, a ranking based upon largely upon statistics would never work for me. When I posted, I wasn't scoffing at your list, you're as entitled to your opinion as anyone else, but there are drivers well up on that list while others who I personally would rate far more highly, feature much lower down. I would rate Moreno as a far better driver than Diniz, to use your comparison. The fact that this might not be borne out in the stats is largely irrelevant to me. The simple fact is that no-one is going to agree with anyone else's list.... but the lists generate very entertaining debate!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by BTCC frog

My reason for the low ratings of Senna and Prost is down to F1metrics. [...] Senna drops a further place behind Moss because of his dirty tactics,

Firstly - please do not think this is a criticism of your reasoning, just an observation of how those with in a interest in F1 can reach a conclusion on what they do or don't like.

I notice you place an emphasis on a 'pure' statistical ranking of drivers, but immediately amend that due to an opinion. It is the age-old objective vs subjective analysis.

The rest of your post uses the words:
'was probably', 'I think', 'think that maybe', 'I don't rate', 'in my opinion', 'I rate'

I think [] this shows that no matter how we approach things, an emotional response will be felt to any list. I am guessing that when you produce any sports-based ranking, you immediately have an emotional response to where some of the subjects appear in that ranking - I know I certainly do?

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

For me, you cannot subtract from the equation the emotional element.

Absolutely agreed - and even more so that two (or more) people will have very contrasting emotions regarding an element of sport. We have to accept that while some people may have an emotional response that means they feel a conclusion is obvious, others may not have that same emotional response and see things from a different perspective.

Some people will see Senna as the 'obvious' GOAT - and feel that anyone who thinks otherwise is missing what is clearly in front of them. Likewise with Monaco's value as a circuit, overtakes as a necessity for racing, or any other facet of the sport.

The difficulty (and where I feel emotions can be a hindrance to good conversation) is formulating an argument for why your personal, emotional opinion is founded, when against the counter-argument of a statistical analysis.

[2 litre Touring Car Star]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Oh absolutely, i agree with you. Lewis was the first to benefit from a proper young driver program. Before then there was the Mclaren Autosport driver program but it certainly wasnt to the same level of the support Hamilton benefited from. Obviously since then youve got the Red Bull driver program, which is a bit more 'X Factor'....let a load of kids sign up then just keep the best and cut out the rest, so until they get to F2/F1 its not as focussed as what hamilton had, as a young driver program of a couple ( i think we can class Gary Paffet in the same boat)

Theres no doubt Lewis benefited from the help, but he still needed to have the talent and results to back it up. It would have been very easy for Ron to drop him if the results didnt come in.

After all this time, we agree then.

[BTCC frog]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Firstly - please do not think this is a criticism of your reasoning, just an observation of how those with in a interest in F1 can reach a conclusion on what they do or don't like.

I notice you place an emphasis on a 'pure' statistical ranking of drivers, but immediately amend that due to an opinion. It is the age-old objective vs subjective analysis.

The rest of your post uses the words:
'was probably', 'I think', 'think that maybe', 'I don't rate', 'in my opinion', 'I rate'

I think [] this shows that no matter how we approach things, an emotional response will be felt to any list. I am guessing that when you produce any sports-based ranking, you immediately have an emotional response to where some of the subjects appear in that ranking - I know I certainly do?

Yes, there is always an emotional response. I don't copy the pure statistical rankings exactly because I know they are not perfect. But while I previously rated Senna and Prost 3rd and 4th, seeing them down in 20th and 21st convinced me that they should be lower. But I was still subjective in disagreeing that they should be behind Perez, Hulkenberg and Sainz, so this means there is an element of emotional response. I am allowing F1metrics to influence my ranking, but it is not identical. All the 'I thinks' are because this is obviously not the correct ranking. It is just an opinion (and could even be described as a guess). I am guessing that Raikkonen's pace was flattered by the McLaren, but I don't know, so there is subjectivity here too.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by 2 litre Touring Car Star

After all this time, we agree then.

Lol well that depends on what we are agreeing on!!!!

To my point above, has Lewis benefitted from Mclarens support....yes, of course he has, but at the same time hes had to work his butt off to keep that support and if at any point he wasnt up to the task, he could have been dropped.

So if thats what we agree on, then yes i guess we do :-)

[crmalcolm]

It's the age old science vs art discussion - and long may it continue.

It was described in the GOAT bracket (when comparing Senna with Shcumacher) as:

So there you go - Senna, a romantic, passionate hero and Schumacher, the methodical dominator with a guile of an assassin. Who’s better depends on what your preference and definition of a great driver.

And I think that is where we see the challenge in reaching a definitive conclusion. Some are happy to decide purely on romantic passion, others on methodical approach - and the discussion will always sit in-between the two.

Sport - a true combination of science and art, but never a consistently perfect example of either.

[52Paddy]

Originally Posted by BTCC frog

So, in the case of Diniz, Katayama, Caffi and Bernoldi, do you think they should be higher or lower, and by how much?

As I mentioned (and others), I'm definitely not mindlessly criticising your opinion or means of getting there but, it is a forum for debate after all and I am interested in teasing some things out.

Diniz: I would always rate Moreno higher on the talent sheet. By 1995, Moreno was in his twilight years and landed in a team that had a relatively ancient philosophy towards car design. In fact, the main reason they could afford the season's racing was down to Diniz' connection through 'Parmalat'. Diniz never had that much raw speed and was a classic 'pay driver'. He wasn't exciting to watch or one that displayed a real justification for being there other than as a mid-field/back-marker journeyman (and not even a particularly good one). Moreno, on the other hand, showed real promise in the early 1980s by winning the non-championship Australian GP a few times. His reputation may have been hampered by his unpromising one-off showings with Lotus but he bounced back towards the end of the decade by winning the F3000 title (Diniz didn't impress in lower Formulae). Again, he struggled with bad teams for sporadic appearances until his first, genuine shot at a championship campaign (Benetton 1991) was halted by his pay-off in favour of a certain Michael Schumacher. Then enter Andrea Moda and need we say any more...after F1, he maintained a driving career and even had reasonable success in Champ Cars for a while.

So, regarding the list, I don't think Diniz should be there at all (or, at the very least, people like Diniz should be in the bottom 20) especially when the likes of Sato and Gachot feature far lower. Moreno is probably in the right position overall (give or take a handful of others) but I'm not convinced that certain drivers should be ahead of him e.g. Diniz.

To be fair to Caffi and Katayama, both drivers justify their seat in F1 and mostly had uncompetitive machinery to deal with (this period was littered with teams that would never provide an opportunity to showcase a driver's real talent). And in Caffi's case, there were some promising signs over his career and it's a shame it never materialised into a solid opportunity.

But then there's Enrique Bernoldi? Very little promise from him shown in F3000 at a time when the likes of Bruno Junqueira and Jason Watt were gunning for a seat (and ultimately failed to get one). A short career was all we have to go by and all I can remember from it was Coulthard trying to pass him for 40 laps at Monaco in 2001. In one way, fair play to him for holding off Coulthard (then, an outside chance of being championship victor) but, honestly, it just spoke of how difficult it was to overtake at Monaco and how off the pace Bernoldi generally was...comparing to Verstappen isn't entirely fair given that the Dutchman wasn't exactly anything but a journeyman himself who's career was starting to dwindle off anyway.

But sure, interesting to talk it out!

[BTCC frog]

Fair enough, you've convinced me that Diniz should be below Moreno, although I still think Diniz should be in the top 200, for reasons stated previously.

In terms of Enrique Bernoldi, his position in the list is indeed chosen by comparing to Jos Verstappen. Despite the fact that he was a rookie, I think he was on a similar level to Verstappen (maybe Verstappen was slightly ahead). Admittedly, he was quite a bit off Frentzen the following year, but Frentzen is rated far more highly in 53rd, and could be higher. Holding off Coulthard in Monaco 2001 had very little influence on Bernoldi's placing. Also, his F3000 drives had no influence on his placing as I was unaware of how successful he had been in F3000. I read an interesting Autosport article about Bernoldi recently which I am currently unable to find, although I did find this article that supports your claim:
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/ve...51288/5051288/

[52Paddy]

Originally Posted by BTCC frog

In terms of Enrique Bernoldi, his position in the list is indeed chosen by comparing to Jos Verstappen. Despite the fact that he was a rookie, I think he was on a similar level to Verstappen (maybe Verstappen was slightly ahead). Admittedly, he was quite a bit off Frentzen the following year, but Frentzen is rated far more highly in 53rd, and could be higher. Holding off Coulthard in Monaco 2001 had very little influence on Bernoldi's placing. Also, his F3000 drives had no influence on his placing as I was unaware of how successful he had been in F3000. I read an interesting Autosport article about Bernoldi recently which I am currently unable to find, although I did find this article that supports your claim:
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/ve...51288/5051288/

There you go. And, in Verstappen's case, over his whole career, he had some very eyebrow raising moments that caught attention. His drives with that ailing Simtek in 1995 were a joy to watch and really showed his utter determination early on. It never really worked out for Jos but he gave it a fair shot. Bernoldi was just another driver with financial backing, no talent to show on his way up to F1 and a quick exit once Arrows folded into oblivion. But anyway, while I may disagree with your metrics regarding how driver should be ranked, it does create an interesting discussion. Cheers.

[chunterer]

If I may contribute a bit more about Bernoldi.
He was never considered 'Diniz' level, being very highly rated on the way up in F.Renault and F3.

Iirc he had a nasty shunt in his first F3 season which knocked his confidence and derailed his campaign. He did return to something resembling top form but he'd lost full momentum even if he did get a plum F3000 drive with good backing and then into F1.

For me anyway, he should have had a better chance in F1 as was at least as good, if not better than several countrymen that went onto have a few seasons in F1 or good stints across the pond.

[S griffin]

Bernoldi had shown enough in the junior formulas to prove he deserved a chance in F1 and it helped he had Red Bull backing. And he had his moments like holding off DC at Monaco and repassing Schumi in Malaysia. I think the main problem was he came in in 2001, when 3 superstars (Kimi, JPM and Alonso) were also making their debut. In fact there was a very good Autosport article on Bernoldi recently