1. Hill (Damon)
2. Button
3. Berger
4. Massa
5. Rosberg
6. Hulkenberg
7. Perez
..
10. Barrichello
1. Hill (Damon)
2. Button
3. Berger
4. Massa
5. Rosberg
6. Hulkenberg
7. Perez
..
10. Barrichello
Define modern era as the time span when F1 drivers weren't dying like flies.
What criteria defines a journeyman racer?
A bit harsh to omit Vettel, he's as good as any on that list.
The summer break can't be over soon enough.
The common definition it is somebody who is talented enough to hang around in the series for quiet a long time without necessarily being a pay driver. This driver sticks around long enough in order to achieve success by the virtue of long experience or by luck with some stars simply aligning his way. This is quite different from the drivers whom we regard as sports truly great. Most of the truly good drivers have been on the podium steps starting with their first full time season in in F1. Prost, Senna, Schumacher, Alonso (*his second season), Hamilton and Vettel. Granted there were exceptions. Hill has done pretty well in his very first season at F1, and that's why I put him at the top.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Vettel, the guy who won Toro Rosso's first ever and the last GP in 2008, and who won the first ever GP for Red Bull in 2009, beating Red Bull's own veteran driver, guy we know as Webber, can't be regarded as a journeyman IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyL
PS: My bad, I should have put Webber somewhere up on the list. Somewhere near Massa and Rosberg. Oh how the mighty have fallen. It's been only two years..
To me, a journeyman racer is someone who is with a different team just about every other season, may win a race or two, but without ever being in serious contention for a world championship.
De Cesaris springs to mind here, as do Boutsen, Alesi, Heidfeld, Herbert, Brundle, Trulli or Fisichella.
Drivers like Hill or Button, who have won a championship or have at least come agonizingly close (Massa, Webber) , do not meet the journeyman criteria, IMO.
My definition of a journeyman racer is similar, someone who's not a top driver but who spends a fairly long career in mostly midfield teams, just a standard rent a driver who will do a decent job but is unlikely to excel, someone like Adrian Sutil.Quote:
Originally Posted by gm99
But this would also be a paid driver, not bringing money. So I don't know if there are any real journeyman racers anymore. Even Sutil brought money. Seems to be a thing of the past. Maybe people like Salo, Herbert, Verstappen, and yeah, de Cesaris, Heidfeld and Brundle.
I think winning the WDC removes a driver from the journeyman list. Hill, Button and to a lesser extent Villeneuve were 'weak' world champions compared to the greats but they were champions none-the-less and beat all comers. In any given year you can't do better than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by gm99
Gerhard Berger and Riccardo Patrese are the epitome of a 'journeyman' in my book. Good enough to win on their day but never in with a realistic chance of beating a champion over the course of a full season.
Heidfeld must surely be the king of the journeymen. 183 starts over a 12 year career, was a regular points-scorer in most years, and even took 13 podiums, yet no-one can remember a single thing he ever did.Quote:
Originally Posted by gm99
I think this is the best definition for a journeyman. I also have to say, you cannot call any world champion or runner ups, journeymen. Even with a better car than the rest of the grid, to string together a world championship title is more work than we can imagine. To fall short of a world championship title by a few points, also takes a huge amount of skill and work, some bad luck and great disappointment. Hence, personally would not consider Hill, Button, Massa, Irvine or Barrichello to be journeymen. I admit, there is some question mark on Barrichello and Rosberg who were runner up to their teammates. To be a little strict, we could say only runner ups to champions in a different car counts. This would not be entirely fair to Barrichello whom l thought could have won the year Button won given the right level of support. Both were good enough to win it.Quote:
Originally Posted by gm99
So a journeyman is a driver who changes teams all the time, but a driver of equal skill who sticks with the same team for a long time is not? I disagree.
Is any driver who tried to get to the front but failed to do so because there are better drivers a journeyman? I ask this question because there is danger that we may call drivers like Heiki Kovalainen journeymen.Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
I am thinking a journeyman is not interested in being the best but just interested in the pay or a chance to drive a car. Hence they are typically paired to support a stronger driver with realistic chances of achieving success. Another type of journeyman is one that has a drive [that better drivers should have] because he has connections.
It shouldn't matter if it was short or long. The underlying characteristic is they are never going to win anything but hang around somehow.
Don't we have a journeyman racer on the forums here? :D
But depends on the criteria - I can understand that "journeman racer" is not your all-time legend, but kind of a mid-level/upper-midlevel talent, who had a long-lasting career (a decade, or more). But what do we rate, what is the criteria? Driver skills or results? Because yeah - Irvine may have been a title contender, but there is no way I would rate him higher than, say, Heidfeld as a driver.
For me it is a mix of all, so everyone from Barrichellos and Webbers to Verstappens and Salos of this world fit in. They may have slightly varying talents, big variety in terms of results and overall career 'fate', but overall still fit into the main criteria - not among the brightest talents of your generation, but still had a recognizable career and hanged around for a while.
I can understand that people want to make a special "World Champion clause". Because it is a special "height" achievement, the goal of everyone. Even if some WDCs easily may not be more talented than several "journeyman" category drivers were. But we can debate about criterias forever.:D
I personally think everyone is INTERESTED in success, otherwise they would not have gone through the hardships of establishing a racing driver career all throughout the minor formula categories.. Of course people can have varying levels of motivation at different stages of careers. By the "motivation" criteria Räikkönen is the epitome of a journeyman driver, for the last two seasons at least. He may be a WDC, but he is just hanging around there and not achieving a great deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Using the traditional definition of journeyman, we would be looking for those drivers who are beyond the apprentices but not at the level of the master craftsmen. In F1 terms, to me that would be those drivers who have performed at a consistently decent level for a number of years, but never shown the spark of brilliance that indicates the potential to be a champion. So someone like Hulkenberg would not be a journeyman, nor Button even before he won the championship, as they have put in performances at various times displaying that potential.
Kovalainen? I don't know, I think maybe he could fit the description.
The problem is that lots of drivers showed potential at some stages in their careers indicating "they could be championship contenders in the right circumstances". Even someone like Alex Wurz in 1998. As for Kovalainen, he beat Fisichella in 2007 on his debut season, making quite a fair amount of people wonder whether he could give Hamilton a run for his money at McLaren.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyL
Dividing line is not an easy task to make, it will always be subject to personal criteria. Also it seems "journeyman racer" can have a bit of a negative echo - "Agh, this useless past-it driver hangs around for years, achieves nothing, and is blocking the seats from young guns" as it is sometimes used in a derogatory manner.
The WEC racing teams probably recognized this. Rebellion was the best team that would hire him.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyL
I think this line of thinking would suggest that drivers who's career ebbs and flows into various modes. One mode where they have produced their best and are serious contenders and a real threat of winning the ultimate goal [WDC]. Another mode where their performance has deteriorated to mediocre levels due to self problems, poor machinery, bad luck, superceded talent level etc and they are obviously blocking the potential of a new young gun occupying their seat. I am sure you can think up other modes if you want.Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
If we go by this modal approach to defining the journeyman, then it probably should not matter whether they are WDC or not. It should be a case of what mode their career is at the time of making the assessment whether they are journeymen or not.
Then we can use phrases like:-
Raikonen is in journeyman mode at the moment as Bottas et al is waiting in line for that seat at Ferrari. Button is in journeyman mode at the moment as Magnussen is waiting in line for that seat at Mclaren. Drivers that pay for their seat but are not good enough to get a seat on the back of their own talent and are not rookies may be considered journeymen.
The thing is, l am not sure this is the correct way to make this judgement. When a driver has attained the ultimate goal of being WDC, they should not be considered journeymen because the have intrinsic value or the experience of winning a WDC which is very valuable to the team that employs them. At Mclaren, the input of Button and Alonso to the development of the Mclaren is invaluable compared to having a rookie in the seat with less experience. Hence, it is fair to say driver not at the competitive edge at the moment but assisting in developing a car, are doing valuable work and are not in the journeyman mode as it were.
Similarly, motivation must be measured with consideration to the team and car's potential to take the battle to the sharp end. Hence if a car is half a second to one second off the pace of the leading car, then one would expect motivation to be low for a driver that has tasted the sharp end in their career. Kimi, Button and Alonso comes to mind on this one. I exclude Alonso from this group as he is exceptional based on him pushing his Mclaren to the pits at Hungary.
Basically I agree with this. I am personally not fond of linking "journeyman" title to specific drivers, it is more of a description of status. Ralf Schumacher was an exciting fast driver in 1999, while got a huge paycheck for unspectacular performances in 2007 (his last year in F1). Same driver, but as different situation in a career as it can be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Of course, considering "journeymen drivers" (who are they? Experienced unspectacular performers?) still get hired by teams and usually get paid for their services, they still offer value for teams. As you also mention in another paragraph.
Classical paydrivers normally do not last over the age of 30 years and fizzle out sooner or later, even though Pedro Diniz and Pastor Maldonado have had lengthy enough careers to consider them somewhat journeymen.
Putting Button in that category as a world champion, albeit a very lucky one, is a bit harsh I think.
Rosberg as well, he's definitely a better driver than lots of previous World Champions so I wouldn't begrudge him a title in the future.
Don't know how Maldonado didn't make that list with him being the worst driver on the grid in all. In fact, I think Maldonado should win the title of the worst driver to ever win a F1 race.
The funny thing is that teams still have faith in the fool:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120229
Err define 'lots' - more than 3 perhaps? So name 3 drivers who are previous world champions who would have done a worse job than Rosberg in the dominating piece of machinery he is fortunate (by dint of nationality) to be driving in the first place. Hint: do not even attempt to include Hill (father or son), Mansell, Hulme, Hakkinen, in your list.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Scheckter and Villeneuve perhaps though I'm sure you'll get robust arguments in favour of both.
As a matter of fact 'definitely' can't be applied in your assertion as comparisons of different driving eras, often requiring different skill sets, is at best problematic - at worst fallacious.
Hard to beat Vittorio Brambilla in that category - who else managed to crash on the slow-down lap of his only GP victory?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
To imply that Rosberg has done a bad job by saying "worse job" is a bit farcical given that he is up against one of the greatest drivers of his generation and possibly one of the greats of all time (tbd).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintexmemory
Villeneuve, Raikkonen would both have done a worse job and I genuinely think that Rosberg would have taken them to the cleaners. I also think Rosberg would beat Button and, potentially, Vettel in a straight fight. Lets not remember that Rosberg is the only one to beat Michael Schumacher in the same car (albeit an over the hill version). Schumacher was always full of praise praise for how good Rosberg is and so is Hamilton. He's no slouch and I think he's one of the best drivers of this generation. He reminds me of a Mika Hakkinen - one of the best drivers but just missing that little something to keep him from being the absolute best.
I'm unsure why you are so hell bent on excluding Hill, Mansell, Hulme, Hakkinen in the list. Perhaps you could expand?
Haha yeah true but I still give it to Maldonado.Quote:
Originally Posted by gm99
Frankly car racers have historically been pretty disappointing in this area. On two wheels it's a different story. At the last British Superbike round at Thruxton, the Superbike race winner crashed on the slowing down lap. In the discussion afterwards, both of Eurosport's expert pundits admitted to doing the same: James Whitham once crashed into a wall I think; and James Haydon threw his Harris Yamaha down the road after finishing 9th in a 500cc Grand Prix race, it caught aflame, burned to the ground and was delivered back to the pits in a bucket. I remember after a Yamaha R6 Cup race (the last of the season) a few years ago, seeing 3 separate crashes on the slowing down lap; there may have been more, I couldn't see the whole circuit!Quote:
Originally Posted by gm99
This is an area F1 drivers really need to work on :)
If Rosberg is that good, how good isn´t Hamilton then. Is that your Point.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
:-) Ha haQuote:
Originally Posted by AndyL
My personal definition of a journeyman racer is someone who is talented enough (often barely) to progress through the sport for many years without necessarily having to be a pay driver. Maldonado does not fit this criteria IMHO. In 2012, he won a GP, but despite having a car capable of reaching a podium in at least some GPs, he ended the 2012 WDC in 15th place. He has been for four years in F1 now, but his mistakes on track continue on frequent basis. So I don't necessarily disparage the journeymen. They're a lot better than the rest. They're basically very good racers who have to live in the shadows of truly great of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
I think an important criteria for a journeyman is that they are paid to drive. They are suppose to absorb resources which ought to be expended on other more deserving drivers.Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
I think drivers that pay to driver do so to have the opportunity to showcase their talent so that they may get an opportunity to driver in a top team. Hence, a paying driver is not automatically a journeyman. However, they become a journeyman if they are not impressing and are very unlikely to progress into a top team. But still somehow manage to generate the funds to occupy a seat in a mid-field team for a number of seasons.
On Maldonado, the jury is out. He is having a frustratingly bad patch at the moment. He is an F1 GP winner. A win that was not by luck but hard earned. Like Romain in 2010 and 2011, who crashed into everyone and was criticized heavily, Maldonado is having his spell which l think is really the man kicking himself for leaving a team on the raise to one finding its feet. He made a silly mistake leaving the Williams which has turned out to be a revelation in 2014, for struggling Lotus and that must really hurt.
As much as one would say he is looking quite ugly on the track at the moment, one must admit that in a car that suits him perfectly, he can win races. It is just darn hard to see the sort of mistakes that he is making at the moment. It just makes me cringe.