Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
FoxHound wrote:I will get to those points in good time. I apologies, I'm short of time this evening and need coursework sorted as priority.
Needless to say, Montoya was the weakest driver on the list I agree.
But the bottom line here, is Hakkinen and co never had as good machinery for as long as Mr Schumacher. Hence why we have this statistical anomaly/record holder.
And Ferrari was there for MS first, number 2 2nd. Nobody can really dispute that.
It doesn't matter. Hakkinen almost made a meal of what has been given twice. In 99 against Irvine he almost lost the WDC. in 2001 He even lost against his teammate Coulhard.
And Raikkonen is the weakest one among those you mentioned in qualifying.
Last edited by LionKing on 10 Oct 2012, 01:36, edited 1 time in total.
I like these two videos...still struggling to find some other ones! >.<
If someone said to me that you can have three wishes, my first would have been to get into racing, my second to be in Formula 1, my third to drive for Ferrari.
beelsebob wrote:For me... Vettel... This is his biggest strength.
Agreed. If you're talking about just putting it together for one lap, I think this is Vettel territory. Hamilton is quick too, but if it's just a one-lap killer run, I think Vettel's head is stronger. He rarely makes Q3 mistakes.
I used to think Kimi, but after this year, I'm not too sure!
Senna. You just don't put 1+ seconds to Prost, with the same car; at Monaco of all places.
Education is that which allows a nation free, independent, reputable life, and function as a high society; or it condemns it to captivity and poverty.
-Atatürk
Shrieker wrote:Senna. You just don't put 1+ seconds to Prost, with the same car; at Monaco of all places.
Agreed, Senna and Gilles as well as Ronnie.
If someone said to me that you can have three wishes, my first would have been to get into racing, my second to be in Formula 1, my third to drive for Ferrari.
I am never sure whether or not you can compare modern F1 to the F1 of the 70's and 80's. The cars are so different now that I wonder if the fastest from the 80's would be able to compete with the modern driver's who have honed their skills for years in much faster and more sophisticated machinery. It would be sort of like putting a WWII fighter ace into an F-15 and expecting them to go toe-to-toe with the best at Red Flag.
The question isn't about who has the most driver skill - it's who is the fastest. As the current cars are the fastest, I can only see a contemporary driver being considered the fastest of all time as they have the most skill and experience in driving the fastest F1 cars. The evidence suggests that Sebastian Vettel is the best over a single lap - he rarely makes mistakes and is consistently putting his car where it belongs. He is also dominating his team mate who was notorious as a demon qualifier in his earlier career. Lewis Hamilton would be a close second, matching Vettel in raw pace but not in consistency.
That is perhaps a very literal interpretation of the question, but whatever.
FoxHound wrote:I will get to those points in good time. I apologies, I'm short of time this evening and need coursework sorted as priority.
Needless to say, Montoya was the weakest driver on the list I agree.
But the bottom line here, is Hakkinen and co never had as good machinery for as long as Mr Schumacher. Hence why we have this statistical anomaly/record holder.
And Ferrari was there for MS first, number 2 2nd. Nobody can really dispute that.
They always had at least equal equipment and often superior. Newey designed McLarens.....
Hakkinen had a Newey penned McLaren from 1998 to his retirement. raikkonen also had a Newey designed Mclaren till they both left McLaren end of 2006.
Vettel. How you can put LH over Vettel as far as this is concerned, after all both have actually done in real life (or not done), is completely beyond me? So much bias
"There is a credit card with the Ferrari logo, issued by Santander, which gives the scuderia a % of purchases made with the card...
I would guess that such a serious amount of money would allow them to ignore the constant complains of a car that was nowhere near as bad as their #1 driver tried to sell throughout the season.
Heck, a car on which Massa finishes in the podium or has to lift so that his teammate finishes ahead (As we saw often in the final races of the year) is, by no means, a "bad" car."
jdlive wrote:Vettel. How you can put LH over Vettel as far as this is concerned, after all both have actually done in real life (or not done), is completely beyond me? So much bias
I look at their whole careers. Like F3 when he had a strong teammate for the first time.
He also had a championship winning car that year. Took one pole that season, Di Resta took 5.
Also lost out on the title which Di Resta won.
I think if you were to put Hamilton or Alonso or even Kimi in that superior 2011 Red Bull next to Vettel you would get a completely different set of results.
"Il Phenomeno" - The one they fear the most!
"2% of the world's population own 50% of the world's wealth."
jdlive wrote:Vettel. How you can put LH over Vettel as far as this is concerned, after all both have actually done in real life (or not done), is completely beyond me? So much bias
I look at their whole careers. Like F3 when he had a strong teammate for the first time.
He also had a championship winning car that year. Took one pole that season, Di Resta took 5.
Also lost out on the title which Di Resta won.
I think if you were to put Hamilton or Alonso or even Kimi in that superior 2011 Red Bull next to Vettel you would get a completely different set of results.
"There is a credit card with the Ferrari logo, issued by Santander, which gives the scuderia a % of purchases made with the card...
I would guess that such a serious amount of money would allow them to ignore the constant complains of a car that was nowhere near as bad as their #1 driver tried to sell throughout the season.
Heck, a car on which Massa finishes in the podium or has to lift so that his teammate finishes ahead (As we saw often in the final races of the year) is, by no means, a "bad" car."
jdlive wrote:Vettel. How you can put LH over Vettel as far as this is concerned, after all both have actually done in real life (or not done), is completely beyond me? So much bias
I look at their whole careers. Like F3 when he had a strong teammate for the first time.
He also had a championship winning car that year. Took one pole that season, Di Resta took 5.
Also lost out on the title which Di Resta won.
To quote the former engineer of Ayrton Senna:
Toro Rosso's technical director Giorgio Ascanelli explained said that something changed at the European Grand Prix in Valencia: "Suddenly Vettel understood something about how to drive an F1 car quickly. It made a huge difference - not only to the speed he could unlock, but also to his ability to do so consistently."
Speaking of whom, Martin Brundle was giving the Brazilian a run for his money in Formula 3. Should that earn him a place in BBC's Top 20? Or does it mean that judging drivers on their results in junior formulae is silly to say the least?
I don't think junior formulae should be regarded at all. This may sound like a dumb remark, but hear me out.
Firstly, you asked for fastest f1 driver, not fastest driver. There is, in my view, a difference in that there is no such thing as a fastest driver (across categories). We've seen time and time again that different people suit different categories differently - even if it's just a lower version of a category, as opposed to a different kind of racing (eg. DTM va F1, compared to GP2 vs F1). Frentzen, to memory, was kicking the bajeezus out of Schmacher in touring cars.
Junior formulae have never shown to be in any way, shape, or form, to be a true reflection of F1 performance. Look at Giorgio Pantano for instance - he was the one guy Alonso was always afraid of, and called invincible. I'm still more impressed by Alonso's Minardi debut than his Jordan (I think it was Jordan) debut.
Also, people peak at different rates. Hypothetically (I need to indemnify myself here by saying that this is purely a hypothetical statement) we could have been seeing a Di Resta at his peak vs a non-peaked Vettel in F3. Conversely, it could have been a yet-to-bloom Di Resta vs a peak performing Vettel.
Take Martin Brundle. He ran Against Ayrton in F3 - and came a close (it wasn't neck and neck, but it wasn't domination) second in the championship. But he never came close to Ayrton's results in F1. Would you rate him equally fast to Senna, as an F1 driver? I wouldn't. But as an F3 driver, I'd say they're nip and tuck.
mnmracer wrote:Speaking of whom, Martin Brundle was giving the Brazilian a run for his money in Formula 3. Should that earn him a place in BBC's Top 20? Or does it mean that judging drivers on their results in junior formulae is silly to say the least?
Wow. We posted basically the same thing at the same time. Great minds think alike.
About Ascanelli's point - I think that's just an example of a driver beginning to bloom.
I'm not saying Vettel is now a better F1 driver than Di Resta, nor am I saying the opposite. But I'm saying we can't use F3 as any sort of barometer.
