I know lists like that are very subjective and should not be taken seriously, but this is one is too much already.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...et=132&page=12
Button - 16th (!!!!!)
But guys like
Jack Brabham - 20th
Jochen Rindt -18th
Lewis Hamilton - 21st
Keke Rosberg - 24th
Not to mention that they have invented a new driver name - Bruce McClaren.
One could hardly make a worse list.
Comments?
this is a load of BS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLarenQuote:
28. Bruce McClaren
30.8.1937 to 2.6.1970
New Zealand
Grands prix: 101
Wins: 4
World Championships: none
McLaren was a precocious talent and a former youngest championship points scorer before he was usurped, appropriately, by Lewis Hamilton for McLaren. Killed testing a McLaren CanAm car at Goodwood. The name lives on although McLaren had no connection to the team that now bears his name under the stewardship of Ron Dennis.
Quote:
The current team was formed by the merger of Bruce McLaren Motor Racing with Ron Dennis's Project Four Racing in 1981. Shortly after the merger, Dennis organised a buyout of the original McLaren shareholders to take full control of the team. McLaren is part of McLaren Racing,
As you say subjective, but certainly some extremely strange picks and placings.
had signed to drive a ferrari before 1980 but lost the drive because they wanted an american driverQuote:
23. Alan Jones
2.11.1946
Australia
Grands prix: 116
Wins: 12
World Championships: 1 (1980)
Powerful and brave, looked more like a rugby player than a Formula One driver. Splendid relationship with Sir Frank Williams brought a first world title for the British team. But they were the glory days and there was only one more good season and a third place in the championship before his career petered out at Arrows and the ill-fated Lola-Haas outfit.
http://www.dahmus.org/blogimg/fry-se...-did-there.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Pretty hilarious. The writer was obviously having a romance explosion at the thought of Button.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Jenson wouldn't be in my top 100 before this year. Winning six races in a half-season and the WDC gets him into the 70s--maybe.
I just noticed that they didn't even get the country of the grand prix that GV was qualifying for right.
surely they could of gotten an expert to do this and not the editors 12 year old kid that lives in the basement?Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Unfortunately media pushes modern drivers in front of old ones. You are living now and everything today is the best. So it is normal to push the current champion so far ahead. Although I like Jenson very much, in my opinion neither he, nor Lewis should be that close to Jack Brabham, if I am correct, a three times world champion?
The P1 IMO is also very subjective. Clark might have been most talented, I can't know, but when I check the stats I see two WDC against 5 for Fangio and 7 for MS.
That link doesn't work?
this is a case of 1/2 of what you read is bull and the other 1/2 is all Sh*t
vettel toro rosso ring a bellQuote:
McLaren was a precocious talent and a former youngest championship points scorer before he was usurped, appropriately, by Lewis Hamilton for McLaren.
in fact i would put vettel on the list as the main test driver developing this year's car when mark was out with the broken leg
I always think with these lists, of 'best of' that you can't quantify drivers who are still currently racing, as the assessment can only really be made after their F1 career is over.
There is absolutely no way to properly compare drivers, so any list is purely subjective based on the bias of the author and whichever driver gets them horny.
what the hell kinda lists are you talking about??? :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by motetarip
Er the driver lists that people seem to get so emotional over..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
I wish we could put all those drivers in a Formula Ford race (from when there driving abilities were at their peak).
We can't agree who the best drivers racing today are, so what chance do we have of comparing drivers who never raced each other.
wiki quote:
McLaren was a precocious talent and a former youngest championship points scorer before he was usurped, appropriately, by Lewis Hamilton for McLaren. Killed testing a McLaren CanAm car at Goodwood. The name lives on although McLaren had no connection to the team that now bears his name under the stewardship of Ron Dennis.
I'm pretty sure that Kimi Raikkonen was the first driver to usurp the youngest winner record. When interviewed, I remember he could not name the car Bruce was driving in 1959. I am not going to look it up, as this list is not worth the trouble.
hilarious reading. Jenson 16th best ever. apparently, better tha Fittipaldi, Pironi, Gilles Villenueve, Surtees, Andretti, Hamilton, jack Brabham, Rindt, Hunt, Pironi and Juan Pablo Montoya. Now, I think all of the afforementioned are better than Button. And, even more comedic, where's Mr.Raikkonen? Had a look, and i couldnt see him. maybe its just me and im going insane. Rubens Barrichello is 37th, yet Kimi is not even in the top 50. Gerhard Berger and Alboreto are apparently better than Kimi also.
Now, who here agrees with that?
Kimi's 13th ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateDanGTR
thanks, sorry everyone, ignore my above post.Quote:
Originally Posted by elis
still, stupid list.
Would've been nice to see Nuvolari on the list, but I guess they're only counting from 1950 onwards.
Also, Wolfgang von Trips, although not a WDC, came much much closer to achieving it (1961) than many drivers on this list.
The only purpose of such lists is to create buzz among F1 fans and get some attention for the publication, which it has successfully done. :D Otherwise there is no point in such lists. There are too many good and great drivers, so that it's unfair to pick Top50 of them. For example if drivers like Coulthard and Barrichello are in Top50, then it could be rightly asked, why on earth are they preffered over their contemporaries like Heidfeld, Webber, Alesi, Frentzen, Panis, etc, etc. Such questions can be asked endlessly and all lists can be questioned.
Well, while I agree about the fact that such lists are just for fun, I think that one should check the stats as I find them most reliable. For example, you compare Heidfeld to Coulthard and Barrichello, which is IMO ridiculous. Nick Hedfeld has zero GP wins, the other two are multiple winners. Yes, he is consistent and yes, the cars was not good enough and yes, he might be equally talented. This, however, is irrelevant. You have to check the results. The fact that he has or had potential is not important when you make lists. Does Nick's results come close to the stats of, un, R Schumacher? Nope. Sorry. He is not great at all. Good, solid, yes. Great - no.Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
Same about UltimateDan who was aghast that Button is considered to be better than Montoya. Well, Montoya is a very talented guy who raced with success in different categories, but in F1 he was too inconsistent, never made a real charge for the WDC although in 2005 and maybe 2003 he had the car. To me it is funny that people write off Jenson's achievement because of bad second half of the season, but praise Montoya who lost in 2003 because of bad first half. Not to mention 2005.
So IMO you have to check the stats. Some people really get the lucky break and others do not. But for me a WDC is for sure better than a driver without a single GP win.
No one who knows anything....you might add button is better than Dan Gurney, Hulme, Peterson, Ickx and on and on????????????Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateDanGTR
BTW--Kimi was 13th
If button is 16, then Rubens B deserves either 15 or 17 (and RB has 11 wins/280 races or 2.5% to Button's 7 wins in 171 races or 2.4%)
Well not too bad but obviously the guy is no stranger to Guiness
If we need to just check the stats, then these lists are even more meaningless, because everyone can just easily check the stats and see, who has more wins/titles, etc - what do we need random lists for?Quote:
Originally Posted by F1boat
Heidfeld vs Barrichello/Coulthard - resultswise he may look worse, but I find nothing ridiculous in comparing their driving talent, quite the opposite actually.
Let`s talk about that when Heidfeld wins a race in his career (so, basically, we will never discuss this).Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
I agree - Heidfeld is as, if not a better driver than Rubens and Coulthard, but has never had the chance to show this in a good car whereas the other two had championship winning cars for several years.Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
Nick outraced Kimi and Massa at Sauber, yet missed out on the McLaren seat to Kimi for no real identifiable reason. There is every reason to believe that Nick would be as fast if not faster than Kimi and Massa if given equal machinery.
Like what?Quote:
Originally Posted by pettersolberg29
What reason? Read a bit more!Quote:
Originally Posted by pettersolberg29
If Nick could beat Massa and Kimi in a rubbish Sauber why shouldn't he in a Brawn GP or Ferrari?
Heidfeld beat a rookie Raikkonen. I trust Ron's judgement more than yours. Nick is solid, but is yet to win a single GP. One of the few drivers in the grid not to have a victory. To compare him to a WDC is preposterous. At best, his is on par with Jarno Trulli or Fisichella - good and solid. Spectacular no.Quote:
Originally Posted by pettersolberg29
That's why we need Heidfeld in McLaren - to end all those debates to see, whether he is capable of winning (a) race/races in a top car or pose any kind of a WDC-threat.
IMO he will be a great Nu2 driver in McLaren.Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
Heidfeld would be a great no. 2 for McLaren - consistent, but also in my opinion able to challenge for wins if given the right machinery. I'm not comparing Nick to a WDC - I'm comparing him to Rubens and DC. If Nick and Rubens were partners in Brawn next year, and I would bet everything on Nick beating him over the whole season.
I was simply using the point of beating Kimi to suggest he can be as good. IMO Nick wouldn't be as good as Kimi or Massa, but he would be very close and could certainly beat them on a few occassions (say 30%) if given equal machinery. That's good enough for a 2nd driver.
With this, I can agree. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by pettersolberg29
If Kubica can't beat Nick decisively, I doubt anyone would blow NH away, though I would expect that Lewis, Vettel, Kimi, and Fernando would, over a season, prove to better. Still, IMO it wouldn't be a Hamilton-Kovalainen type of beat-down, or a Rosberg-Nakajima type of beat-down.
There are very few drivers in my opinion who are either way above or way below the others.
Over a whole season, if everyone was given the same cars, I'd say Lewis, Alonso and possibly Vettel would be noticeably quicker, and Nakajima, Grosjean, Buemi and possibly Kovalainen would be way down in the points. Everyone else would be very, very equal.
Actually I may be giving Buemi a dis-service.
Why on earth do people try to compile "top drivers" lists, there is no basis of direct comparison between most drivers from the history of the sport, its a futile gesture that is only going to cause arguments rather than enlightening learned opinion.
PS. Also where was Ricardo Rosset in the list?? :)