Group Admins

  • Profile picture of Keith Collantine

Group Mods

  • Profile picture of damonsmedley
  • Profile picture of Bradley Downton

F1

Public Group active 1 hour, 27 minutes ago

F1 discussion

The fallacy of the great F1 driver checklist

This topic contains 30 replies, has 15 voices, and was last updated by Avatar of Hamilfan Hamilfan 9 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 31 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #244800
    Avatar of mnmracer
    mnmracer
    Participant

    Two notable examples of ‘different constructor, same team’ are Matra and Tyrrell, with Matra becoming Tyrrell, or Toro Rosso and Red Bull, Red Bull owning and designing Toro Rosso (up to 2008).

    #244801
    Avatar of matt90
    matt90
    Participant

    When did Moss lose to a non-great team mate? And considering the range of cars he drove, most of which he chose purely because they were British rather than the best on the grid, should he not have a couple more ticks for ‘non-great designers’ and ‘moved to a slower team’?

    #244802
    Avatar of mnmracer
    mnmracer
    Participant

    Go ahead and list them if you feel I’ve missed any.

    #244803
    Avatar of Iestyn Davies
    Iestyn Davies
    Participant

    I would say Hakkinen proved himself in a midfield/lower team, the Lotus of the early 90′s before he became McLaren test driver in 1993 (probably deserved the race ride, matching Senna after Andretti got the boot). Though I am relying on Wikipedia there rather than seeing it live at the time. Although now I think the lower F1 grid back then would count more like FR3.5 or GP2 nowadays, maybe excepting the back-markers currently on the grid.

    The team/constructor debate would be negated by Stewart winning the 1965 Italian GP for BRM surely? You could cut that line and make it simpler (flipping the top text around as well), but I really do like how this table has formed and crystallised around the idea of the thread. I would minimise some of the columns that have only one tick, being more stringent in the combined columns.

    Clark was very sporting and it could be said almost too sporting, as he really deserved 4-in-a-row as Vettel has done (but for 2 oil leaks and 23 laps he would have this, one being on the penultimate lap of the season!). There was a row about him winning an Indy 500 when a lap of his didn’t get counted as a team mate in a similar car retired, but Hill won it anyway and I can imagine him not begrudging his friends a victory or championship as happened in history (Hill and Surtees – becoming the first motorbike/F1 champ, and triple crown of motorsport winners).

    Villeneuve was also on the receiving end of team orders! This cost him a shot at the 1979 title, as he was second fiddle to Scheckter, who promptly retired after being thrashed in 1980 (I think his motivation had gone after winning the title, maybe similar to James Hunt?). Alonso has definitely benefitted from team orders in the past, and I would add Hamilton receiving better team treatment at McLaren 07-08 (although Alonso said recently he was only in shape to win 2007 at the end of the season).

    #244804
    Avatar of matt90
    matt90
    Participant

    Well Vanwall wasn’t really established like most top teams when he started there. Neither was Rob Walker Racing. And as I said, I’m not sure he lost to a non-great team mate.

    Also, Moss famously supported Hawthorn when he was nearly disqualified, which probably earns him a tick for ‘respectful’.

    #244805
    Avatar of Max Jacobson
    Max Jacobson
    Participant

    Has everyone actually read the clauses at the bottom of the table? I seem to be seeing a lot of people criticising the results with regards to backmarkers without referring to the “bottom 3rd” rule.

    #244806
    Avatar of Kingshark
    Kingshark
    Participant

    Alonso left a competitive team (Renault) to take on a new challenge with McLaren in 2007. This should count in favor of Alonso, since Renault were better than McLaren in 2005-2006.

    #244807
    Avatar of mike-e
    mike-e
    Participant

    I don’t understand the last column, surely it’s a good thing to win whilst not driving a constructor’s championship winning car? Surely the marks should be reversed for this???

    Other than that, and some things I dissagree with like the classification of a backmarker, being that if a driver managed to drag a backmarker to a couple of reasonable results, its no longer a backmarker. Tolman was a backmarker in my mind and always will be, just like arrows or minardi.

    #244808
    Avatar of mike-e
    mike-e
    Participant

    Sorry I didnt finish my sentence, other than a few things, like that and a few missed marks, good idea, and good easy to understand format.

    #244809
    Avatar of mnmracer
    mnmracer
    Participant

    Also, a lot of people seem to be forgetting the almost being beaten by a weaker team-mate. Silly, yes, but I didn’t come up with it.

    As for proving oneself in a slower team: if going to a team that was slower the year before is all that would take to check that of, it would fail the purpose of those who came up with it, as Vettel moved to the lower-placed Red Bull team in 2009. Vettel, Alonso and Hamiton all three moved to a team that was lower in the rankings the year before, and ended up several classes better the year they arrived. Considering it’s a checkmark made up by Schumacher moving to Ferrari (at least Benetton and Ferrari stayed pretty on par in ’96), I don’t think moving to championship-fighting Red Bulls, McLarens and Mercedes’ to leave behind backmarker Toro Rosso’s, and midfield Renault’s and McLaren’s fall in that category.

    #244810
    Avatar of mnmracer
    mnmracer
    Participant

    Having said that though, this topic is called ‘the fallacy’ of the great f1 driver checklist, not ‘discuss the great f1 driver checklist as if it was valid’ ;-) .

    #244811
    Avatar of JackySteeg
    JackySteeg
    Participant

    Not normally a big fan of these lists, but it’s tremendously refreshing to see Alain Prost on top for once. For a quadruple champion, he is terribly underrated…

    #244812
    Avatar of mnmracer
    mnmracer
    Participant

    For goodness sakes, does no one actually read anything?

    #244813
    Avatar of David-A
    David-A
    Participant

    @mnmracer

    For goodness sakes, does no one actually read anything?

    Nope. The table completely proves beyond doubt who the best current F1 driver is. Jenson Button :P

    He ticks 10 of them: Proved himself in a midfield team (2004/2006), won for more than 1 constructor, won for more than 1 team, won a race in a car not designed by successful designers (Honda RA106), won races under different regs, won from lower on the grid, beaten a champion teammate (’03, ’11), not involved in controversy, won a title under pressure in the second half of the season, and “champion having driven championship winning cars”.

    #244814
    Avatar of Kingshark
    Kingshark
    Participant

    @david-a
    Don’t forget that Jenson also proved himself in a crap car with the Honda RA107, which finished 3rd last in 2007 (a backmarker car).
    Not to mention that JB switched to a slower team for a new challenge (Brawn were faster than McLaren in 2009, yet Jenson chose McLaren for 2010).
    Button, to my memory, also never benefited from team orders or preferential treatment.
    Lastly, Jenson has never been arrogant or disrespectful towards other drivers.

    He ticks 14, more than anyone else, including Prost! :-o

    There’s only one logical conclusion to this all…

    JENSON BUTTON IS THE GREATEST FORMULA ONE DRIVER OF ALL TIME!

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 31 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.