Who's best? 1995 British GP Brits!
- This topic has 10 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
I’ve just had my copy of F1 Racing through the door and flicked eagerly to a feature shared by Blundell, Brundle, Coulthard, Herbert and Hill discussing the 1995 British GP among other things. It’s a very interesting read with a final discussion prompt of: “So, who is the fastest of the five of you?” Nobody gave a proper answer; so I thought I’d ask the F1 Fanatics their opinions!
Clearly “fastest” or “best” is subjective, but I was thinking it through and couldn’t come to a clear answer.
I may be slightly unfair here as I know very little about his background, but I’d place Mark Blundell as 5th in this little ranking. A solid driver, but never truly lit up F1. Perhaps it was because he didn’t have the car to do so. To give him his due, he certainly held his own against Brundle in the 1993 Ligier.
I was then torn between Brundle and Herbert for number 4. But for me Herbert pips Brundle to 3rd. Brundle never won a race, which perhaps was unlucky. Herbert and Brundle shared the misfortune of having Michael Schumacher in the sister car whilst driving the best car of their career at Benetton. Brundle was clearly capable as shown by his consistent points scoring across many teams
Following that, for me Johnny Herbert takes 3rd, as he never really lived up to the clear potential he had before his F3 accident. He was certainly not as consistent as Brundle, but his highs were certainly higher than Martin’s were. He took three victories, all of which fell into his hands, but “to finish first, first you must finish”.
Despite Hill generally being quicker as team-mates, I feel this was because DC was a little wet behind the ears, so even though he can claim a WDC in 1996 and a couple of runners up spots, I feel DC is/was actually a better driver than Hill.
None of these drivers were legends, but all extremely competent nontheless:
1: Coulthard
2: Hill
3: Herbert
4: Brundle
5: BlundellWhat do you think?
@ben-n You are spot on really. Herbert & Brundle were both handicapped by accidents that broke both ankles (1988/1984), without those they would probably have both eclipsed Hill and been much more prominent in F1 by the time Coulthard joined in, so much so that he would have found it much harder to establish his career. Hill did start quite late though, in that respect his career was very similar to Bruno Senna, but where Hill got the breaks (a dominant Williams post-Senna), Senna did not (Brawn 3rd driver behind Rubens).
http://www.sniffermedia.com/blog/2013/09/02/race-that-shook-the-world-brands-3000-1988/ – Foitek sounds a lot like Maldonado, and that F3000 didn’t have crash tests in 1988 is just crazy in retrospect.
@fastiesty – I had forgotten about Brundle’s accident, but remember him being very close to Senna on occasion in junior categories, so perhaps he didn’t live up to his full potential. I certainly rate him very highly.
That’s a very interesting article as well, thank for that, really good read.
I never rated Coulthard or Brundle that high, the former especially compared to his best results. On a similar note, I tend to downrate Hill despite thinking he deserved his title. Blundell was clearly the worst looking at his results, but I’ve always liked Herbert and I think he would have been the best of them if he hadn’t been unlucky with his crash and had had better cars at his disposal.
Let’s not forget Herbert won Le Mans in ’91 and finished second three more times in ’02-’04. He has had some success in ALMS.
Of the four I’d rate Coulthard the highest. Fought against tough teammates but was always worth mentioning next to them. Had he been in Hills Williams I’m pretty sure he would be champion too…
I wonder if none of them gave a proper answer because they didn’t want to mention the 6th Brit in the field in the form of Eddie Irvine ;)
Brundle probably rates highest in my books, could have quite easily won a few races – he is often regarded as the toughest of Schumacher’s teammates.
The reason I asked the question was because it was one that I really struggled to answer, so I’m glad that three separate people have rated three different drivers highest!
@brickles – afraid I wouldn’t rate Irvine higher than any of them except Blundell. Although to be fair he was faster than Herbert in the 2000 Jaguar R1.Irvine had problems around that time with Sectarianism, didn’t he? They showed the British flag one race when he was on the podium and afterwards he received death threats (although I think that was a bit later, Argentina 97 according to Wiki). Irish politics and the relationship of Ireland with the British government is an extremely sensitive issue, even more so before the Good Friday agreement. Probably political motivation in the decision to exclude Eddie from the list of Brits to avoid a whole host of problems.
Anyway nobody has yet put Hill at number 1, which I find a bit unfair. Obviously looking at my avatar you can tell that I am a fan of his, but I think that what he achieved in F1 is underrated in a lot of quarters and he doesn’t get the credit he deserves.
To only get started in F1 at the age of 32, to only start racing cars at 24 and then be world champion just over a decade later is simply nothing short of remarkable in my eyes. Also the mental strength and fortitude he showed after Imola 94 is something that again, I don’t feel he receives enough credit for. At the start of 94 he was clearly the number two driver in the team, but then after Senna’s death he was hoisted into the position of number one driver in the best team of the early 1990s, something that must have been an enormous challenge for him. Yes he was inconsistent and he made errors, notably in 1995 but in 1994 and 1996 he drove fantastically. When he was at his best, he was very, very good. Suzuka 94, beating Schumacher in the wet, on merit? Not many people have done that. I have to put him at number 1 for these reasons, not just because he is one of my favourites. And of course, he did something none of the others did, and won a world title.
I find it hard to rate DC, undoubtedly a good driver but he had very good cars in 1995, 1998, 1999 and 2000 and he never challenged for a world title. People like to throw the old inexperience card at DC for his mistakes in 95, but in actual F1 terms Damon wasn’t that much more experienced. I think Damon would have beaten him in 96, the same way he did against Villeneuve. DC was an excellent number two to Mika, but Mika always had the clear edge when the car was capable of winning world championships.
Brundle and Herbert both had very bad accidents, and neither of them really got a good opportunity in a decent car (well Herbert had the 1995 Benetton, but by all accounts that car was very hard to drive and the whole team was set up around Schumacher anyway). Both also had success in sportscars. I think I’d just give the edge to Johnny, I’m not too familiar with Brundle’s F1 career in the 80s, and Johnny of course managed to win three F1 races.
So my order would be: Hill, Coulthard, Herbert, Brundle, Blundell.
Irvine had problems around that time with Sectarianism, didn’t he? They showed the British flag one race when he was on the podium and afterwards he received death threats (although I think that was a bit later, Argentina 97 according to Wiki). Irish politics and the relationship of Ireland with the British government is an extremely sensitive issue, even more so before the Good Friday agreement. Probably political motivation in the decision to exclude Eddie from the list of Brits to avoid a whole host of problems.
It was the other way around. They showed the Irish tricolour instead of the Union flag at Argentina and his family received death threats from some Unionist groups. Besides, Irvine self-identifies as Irish, so I doubt he would have wanted to be a part of this.
Anyway, I would rate Hill the highest. He was very much the team leader at Williams after Senna’s death and really rose to the challenge. He beat Coulthard and Villeneuve during their respective times as teammates (though their inexperience may have come into play there) and of course nearly won for Arrows. Very few drivers have made it into F1 after turning 30 and therefore after supposedly reaching the peak of their driving ability. In fact, since 1990 only 12 have done so and most of them were pay-drivers who were, well, Délétraz, Lavaggi, Ide et al. Seeing what Damon achieved at what would normally be a very late stage of an F1 driver’s career makes me wonder what he might have achieved had he entered the sport at an earlier age than he did. The only teammates that did truly beat him were Eric van de Poele (though only qualifying can really be judged as they were in the dying Brabham team. Eric was slightly more experienced than Damon as well but still a very good driver that deserved a better car), Alain Prost (not surprising), Ayrton Senna (hard to say that really, given how brief their time together was) and Heinz-Harald Frentzen (the less said about 1999 the better perhaps).
You are right, it was the Irish flag that was shown, my mistake. I knew he’d had problems with threats made against him and his family and got a bit confused with the details. And yes he considers himself Irish rather than British from what I gather.
Blundell, Brundle, Coulthard, Herbert and Hill
1. Hill: The most underrated world champion in my book. An absolute hero for Williams in the early 90’s with a wicked turn of pace. On his day, as good as anyone. The best of this bunch.
2. Coulthard: Quick, but never really achieved what he should have unfortunately. On his day he could beat Hill, The Schumachers, Hakkinen, Villeneuve and Montoya. That’s no mean feat.
3. Herbert: Again another guy who never really fulfilled his potential, but his record of 3 F1 wins, a Le Mans win and 3 2nd places at Le Mans is remarkable. His performance in qualifying at Monza in 94 is one of my all time best F1 memories.
4. Brundle: Sad he is only here, but he had a knack of being in the right car at the wrong time. A World Sportscar Championship and a Le Mans win is probably scant consolation to him, he would probably trade it all for an F1 win.
5. Brundell: A true journeyman. Ok at Ligier in 93, solid in sport cars and Indycar, probably achieved what he should have.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.