WIth team orders, Mika could have won 4 times. Coulthard took him out twice the year before he won. The year which would have been his 3rd championship, reliability got him. Schumacher himself said that Mika was the only guy who could drive with him. My vote is Jacques, Piquet or Keke.
Yep-he kept his word to Ferrari, was burned by Pironi who didn't keep his word at Imola, the rest we know.....
Phil Hill was a much better endurance racer than he was an F1 racer, he was fortunate to have win in 1961. Von Trips should have won that year Keke Rosberg was equally fortunate to have won in 1982.
+1 either Ferrari driver should have won in 1982, but we know what happened. The thing that got me about 82 was how fast the Renault's were in the hands of Prost and Arnoux, yet for reliability they didn't get the job done either.
Yep, will Pironi met his own fate in 1987 but more importantly crashing at Hockenheim when he had the title in the bag. The blame on Imola rested at the feet of Marco Piccinni who at the time was the team Manager and Pironi's best man at his wedding.
from the first list: villeneuve. He just had the best car around at the time and I don't recall him performing after that title... Hill was actually pretty good. He would have probably had 2 titles if MS hadn't secured one of his titles by crashing into him. Then again, he is my favourite driver for some reason and I might not be entirely objective about it. Also, he did do at least one extremely good race in that Arrows car. Was that in hungary? Sad he didn't win that race due to some sort of mechanical failure. From the second list: Alonso or Hakkinen. Both just happened to have a great team of engineers behind them who suddenly whipped out the best compromise while the other teams seem to have failed miserably. *edit* everything is relative of course. they are/were all better drivers than most of us could ever dream of being. just felt I had to say that. sorry.
I agree on both counts word is that Von Trips knowing he needed to win the race asked Tazio Nuvolari what he needed to do to win, Tazio said if you can keep your foot flat at this point (where he eventually left the track !!) he would win ... the rest is history Phil Hill was a good endurance racer and proved it many times
I'm no JV fan, but I think his efforts in 2000 were better than 1996 or 1997. That said, Patrick Head commented that JV made VERY hard graft of the 1997 season in what was clearly the best car.
found it I think, it was actually Musso and Hawthorn in '58 where Musso kept his foot hard on the floor at the Muizon bend at Rheims as he had to win to claim the prizemoney to pay off a gambling debt. I'm sure there is more to the Von Trips issue, will keep digging but the Musso account is probably what I recalled and mixed it with my admiration of Tazio led to a rubbish post sorry
I don't get this thread. How do you look at either of those lists and pick "least talented"? Every one of those Champions was a damned-good driver. If anything I'd be more likely to say that any top two-thirds driver up to the early 80's would kick the crap out of today's drivers, physically and professionally.
Exactly what don't you get? Some drivers won the WC purely because their car was so dominant, or because of unusual circumstances. A good example would be Damon Hill in the Renault. Other drivers won it because of pure talent. A good example would be when Schumey won his first in the Ford V-8 powered Benetton.
I don't like this thread much either. Even if I did take part earlier. But, having had time to think, and to look it over ---- What we have really got here is a bunch of internet poseurs having lunch over the memory of champions whom we could never touch on the ordinary open road no matter if they had only a Mini-Cooper and we were equipped with a brand new 427 Corvette. It is practically in as bad taste as saying that Pavarotti was fat, and absolutely just as silly. IMHO. James
Wow, some of you people crack me up. No one is putting a gun to your head to respond, so why do you waste your precious time responding? You actually take the time to create a post stating that you don't like this thread. Unbelievable! Your comparison to Pavarotti, and him being fat is absolute nonsense. Do you believe it is in bad taste to compare Pavarotti to other opera singers? Is there something wrong with doing so? I am comparing WCs to other WCs.
We certainly try, but we just have to accept that we can only do the best we can with what we are dealt. It (this thread) makes about as much sense as all the astologists sitting in an amphitheatre and debating on whether or not Pluto is a planet. I take the time because you also have done. James
Please explain why you think this. I am comparing World Champions to each other. You keep spewing out nonsense that has absolutely no relation to my topic.
yes...i was going to say the same thing...nigel and keke had balls the size of grapfruits! amazing they could even fit in the car. these two are examples of the heroics and driving style that we have long since said good bye to. oh how good we had it in those days and what a great driver talent pool at the top level... pcb
OK, maybe I am being a little impolite. But, please allow me to spew forth a little more in the way of explanation... However, after the sun sets again and again, I think that most of us enthusiasts must finally realize that such comparisons are really meaningless. It has been tried for many years - Tazio Nuvolari vs. Fangio, Stirling Moss, Jackie Stewart...Carraciola, Andretti (1,2 or 3), etc.... It is all just rhetoric. We only sit in the stands and watch them go around. We really are in no position to judge who was "best" and who was just "lucky" in a given race - let alone who might have outdone who given an AutoUnion V16 versus a Lancia Ferrari versus the six-wheel Tyrell. Hence the point about Pluto - we only sit in the stands and watch them go around. Debating on whether it is a planet or not is futile. Debating who was more talented or who was best is also futile. Especially when many of these lost their lives for our sport. Of course, in all good humor, James
Then by your argument, debating about anything in F1 in truly pointless, because whatever happens, happens. Whatever happened, happened. That's a pretty boring stance to take. I guess you can apply your view on any topic at all. I like threads like this so I can hear other people's opinions and views that may, or may not differ from my own. True, they are meaningless in the sense that they will not change anything, but it gives me an opportunity to discuss what I love.
This is a discussion forum and we are debating opinions. No one said there has to be a right or wrong answer, we are all merely offering up our individual views. Frankly I think this is an interesting topic.