Most unworthy f1 champion?

[NewMetalSystem]

Agent Orange said:

NewMetalSystem said:

So if you flip those, the least worthy would be someone who only won the World Championship once, and only won one race in that season, so you're talking Hawthorne or Rosberg.

Keke unworthy? Not sure I'd agree that but he certainly benefited from a large amount of luck.

When considering Keke you really should take into account that Rosberg was driving a car that was 3 years old and non-turbo'd. The Renaults, Brabhams and Ferraris were all turbo'd, either current or just a year old and had at apparently 100-150bhp in race trim advantage over the Williams Keke was driving.

But to counter that his team mate Reutemann was seemingly a far faster driver and had he not of retired very early in the season would've almost certainly finished ahead of Keke.

I'm just going off statistics. But obviously that doesn't tell the full story.

[Eric Mc]

Mr_Thyroid said:

Eric Mc said:

Is a World Championship the only way to value a driver's ability? Back in those days it wasn't considered so important. In the modern age, due to the rise of TV, money and Bernie, Formula 1 has come to absolutely dominate motor sport. Before the 1980s it was just another series. At certain times it was by no means the most important. Winning Indianapolis or Le Mans was more prestigious than being World Champion.


Claiming that Jim Clark was an unworthy champion is pretty shocking to my eyes, particularly when you consider how other drivers rated him during his lifetime.

Maybe back then human values such as magnanimity and sportsmanship were just as important in judging a driver as much as how many points they put on the board.

Judging the qualities of a person based on points scored in a championship which was just looked on as one of many is pretty pathetic, in my opinion.

I'm confused about whether you're now agreeing with my point or not. I was just making a frivolous statistical point about a World Championship based on so few events - I never mentioned any particular driver, certainly Jim Clark was not in my mind.

Absolutely not agreeing with you. Numbers only tell a fraction of the story.

Do you base your judgement always only on points? How do you rate Moss?
How do you rate Chris Amon?

[Halmyre]

Mr_Thyroid said:

I'm confused about whether you're now agreeing with my point or not. I was just making a frivolous statistical point about a World Championship based on so few events - I never mentioned any particular driver, certainly Jim Clark was not in my mind.

It's not Clark's fault that there were so few events in the calendar; besides, six wins out of nine races entered is not to be sniffed at. A championship is a championship. If you win one, you've beaten all your competitors, who took part in exactly the same number of races.

[Mr_Thyroid]

Eric Mc said:

Absolutely not agreeing with you. Numbers only tell a fraction of the story.

I think you'll find you are agreeing with me.

[thiscocks]

Agent Orange said:

Keke unworthy? Not sure I'd agree that but he certainly benefited from a large amount of luck.

When considering Keke you really should take into account that Rosberg was driving a car that was 3 years old and non-turbo'd. The Renaults, Brabhams and Ferraris were all turbo'd, either current or just a year old and had at apparently 100-150bhp in race trim advantage over the Williams Keke was driving.

The williams was a good car wether it was an evolution of an older car or not. Still one of the best chassis on the grid at the time.

Agent Orange said:

But to counter that his team mate Reutemann was seemingly a far faster driver and had he not of retired very early in the season would've almost certainly finished ahead of Keke.

Not sure how you worked that out. Reutemann was soundly beaten by Jones over a season so no reason to think Rosberg couldnt beat him. Judging by how quick Rosberg was that year I very much doubt Reutemann would have beaten Keke in 82.

[Agent Orange]

thiscocks said:

Not sure how you worked that out. Reutemann was soundly beaten by Jones over a season so no reason to think Rosberg couldnt beat him. Judging by how quick Rosberg was that year I very much doubt Reutemann would have beaten Keke in 82.

Are you sure about that? I though Reutemann finished ahead of Jones in 81?

Don't get me wrong at all - Keke was and remains a big F1 hero of mine along with Alan Jones. Aged 10 or I used to sit in awe watching the way he drove. He LOOKED unbelievably fast with the car moving all over the place.

I just think with the benefit of hindsight Reutemann was superior driver and would've won in 82. We'll never know of course as they only raced and finished one race together which was the South African GP (funnily enough on my 11th birthday!) in which Reutemann finished 2nd and Keke 5th having qualified 8th and 7th respectively.

[thiscocks]

Yes agree CR was v fast (Jones beat him in 1980 easily but CR was ahead in 81, although both only won 2 races that year) and would have been up there in 82 but still think Keke would have beaten him- that Williams and Roaberg seemed to suit one another v well. If he wasnt driving for a british team he might have finished 1982. Sadly he happened to be an Argentinian and into politics- his loss!

Remember a quote from Villneuve somthing along the lines of "bloody hell did you see Carlos's time?" at Monza 1981 qualifying. He split the two Renaults at a power track in the Williams Ford, not bad!

Times:
1 16 René Arnoux Renault 1'33.467 -
2 2 Carlos ReutemannWilliams/Ford 1'34.140 0.673
3 15 Alain Prost Renault 1'34.374 0.907
4 26 Jacques Laffite Ligier/Matra 1'35.062 1.595
5 1 Alan Jones Williams/Ford 1'35.359 1.892
6 5 Nelson Piquet Brabham/Ford 1'35.449 1.982
7 7 John Watson McLaren/Ford 1'35.557 2.090
8 28 Didier Pironi Ferrari 1'35.596 2.129
9 27 G.Villeneuve Ferrari 1'35.627 2.160

Edited by thiscocks on Monday 8th December 13:36

[Finlandese]

Reutemann was fast, but the fact is that he was outqualified By Keke 0 - 2. He would´ve probably been fast enough to deny Keke the WDC, but there is no data to suggest that he would´ve beaten Keke over the season.

Edited by Finlandese on Monday 8th December 16:34

Edited by Finlandese on Monday 8th December 16:40

[Finlandese]

It´s good to remeber that no driver won more than two races in 1982, and that Williams was arguably the FIFTH fastes car on the grid (Renault, Brabham, Ferrari, McLaren).

Very few season have had books written about them twenty years later..

[LDM]

Finlandese said:

It´s good to remeber that no driver won more than two races in 1982, and that Williams was arguably the FIFTH fastes car on the grid (Renault, Brabham, Ferrari, McLaren).

Very few season have had books written about them twenty years later..

I wonder if anything like that will happen again.

[FourWheelDrift]

LDM said:

Finlandese said:

It´s good to remeber that no driver won more than two races in 1982, and that Williams was arguably the FIFTH fastes car on the grid (Renault, Brabham, Ferrari, McLaren).

Very few season have had books written about them twenty years later..

I wonder if anything like that will happen again.

Up until the 2nd half of the season and then Vettel's late run of successive wins 2012 looked like being a similar year - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Formula_One_seas...

7 different winners in the first 7 races and 8 different winners during the season.

[entropy]

Europa1 said:

EskimoArapaho said:

Schermerhorn said:

The FIA did everything they could that year to stop Schumacher winning. How many races was he banned for again? It was a joke.

Ignoring a black flag is not a joke. Ever.

Cannot agree more. Racing rules exist for a reason; no competitor is above them.

If you're referring to the 1994 British GP then indeed it was a joke and utter farce.

Drivers were passing cars on the parade lap earlier in the year and nothing was done about it.

When it came to penalizing Schumi the stewards completely fked it up. Schumi should have started from the back of the grid but it was too late so the stewards wanted Schumi to a time penalty in the pits whereas Benetton reckoned the penalty should be added at the end of the race. That meant the black was shown for a couple of laps and then withdrawn.

Schumi would serve the penalty but he would eventually be disqualified.

Earlier that year Flavio Briatore wrote a letter slagging off Max Moseley. Considering what we now know of Mad Max's ego is it any wonder the FIA had a vendetta on Benetton conspiracy theory exists?

[EskimoArapaho]

entropy said:

That meant the black was shown for a couple of laps and then withdrawn.

You can't withdraw a black flag: "A black flag orders a particular driver to return to his pit within the next lap and report immediately to the Clerk of the Course".

How else can a race organiser remove a driver from the race? There has to be an unequivocal and absolute rule on this. Schumacher thought he was above it.

(IMHO, if you ignore a black flag, you should be disqualified from the season.)

[Coatesy351]

Harji said:

Coatesy351 said:

wibble cb said:

unworthy = least successful, while still winning the title, Rosberg snr?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keke_Rosberg#The_shar...

only 1 win all year, but enough for the title.

I agree

Well , don't look at just stats. Keke drove the only non-turbo car that season, not the fastest car at all and as Patrick Head said and I'll para-phrase him, "Keke drove every race lap like a qualifying lap, rarely did his car come out of the corner facing the straight way"

So he drove like a beast in a slower car, flat out every lap, and accumulated more points than anyone else, how is that not deserving?

Keke Rosberg "I was probably the fastest I'd ever been in my career. I just refused to accept that anybody could beat me and to stay with the turbos I was prepared to take massive risks."

Didn't Rosberg go to Mclaren in 1986 and the pundits said how fast rosberg would be, only to be soundly trounced by Prost.

[Finlandese]

Coatesy351 said:

Harji said:

Coatesy351 said:

wibble cb said:

unworthy = least successful, while still winning the title, Rosberg snr?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keke_Rosberg#The_shar...

only 1 win all year, but enough for the title.

I agree

Well , don't look at just stats. Keke drove the only non-turbo car that season, not the fastest car at all and as Patrick Head said and I'll para-phrase him, "Keke drove every race lap like a qualifying lap, rarely did his car come out of the corner facing the straight way"

So he drove like a beast in a slower car, flat out every lap, and accumulated more points than anyone else, how is that not deserving?

Keke Rosberg "I was probably the fastest I'd ever been in my career. I just refused to accept that anybody could beat me and to stay with the turbos I was prepared to take massive risks."

Didn't Rosberg go to Mclaren in 1986 and the pundits said how fast rosberg would be, only to be soundly trounced by Prost.

The McLaren was designed to understeer by John Barnard, which was just like Alain liked it, but did not suit Keke at all.

http://www.mclaren.com/formula1/blog/alan-henry/ke...

Edited by Finlandese on Tuesday 9th December 08:08

[entropy]

EskimoArapaho said:

You can't withdraw a black flag: "A black flag orders a particular driver to return to his pit within the next lap and report immediately to the Clerk of the Course".

How else can a race organiser remove a driver from the race? There has to be an unequivocal and absolute rule on this. Schumacher thought he was above it.

(IMHO, if you ignore a black flag, you should be disqualified from the season.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_British_Grand_Prix

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2014/07/10/1994-british...

James Allen's book: Michael Schumacher/The Edge of Greatness also mentions the black flag withdrawn when Benetton argued with officials.

[Halmyre]

entropy said:

EskimoArapaho said:

You can't withdraw a black flag: "A black flag orders a particular driver to return to his pit within the next lap and report immediately to the Clerk of the Course".

How else can a race organiser remove a driver from the race? There has to be an unequivocal and absolute rule on this. Schumacher thought he was above it.

(IMHO, if you ignore a black flag, you should be disqualified from the season.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_British_Grand_Prix

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2014/07/10/1994-british...

James Allen's book: Michael Schumacher/The Edge of Greatness also mentions the black flag withdrawn when Benetton argued with officials.

The f1fanatic article mentions that the black flag was out for two laps before it was withdrawn, so why did Schumacher ignore it? Were Benetton telling him to "stay out while we sort this"?

[EskimoArapaho]

entropy said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_British_Grand_Pr...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2014/07/10/1994-british...

James Allen's book: Michael Schumacher/The Edge of Greatness also mentions the black flag withdrawn when Benetton argued with officials.

Schumacher chose to ignore the black flag. The race organisers had nothing left in their armoury after he ignored it. When they stopped waving it at Schumacher, it was not because they withdrew the sanction.

Benetton were already arguing with the race organisers about a lesser penalty when the black flag was given. At that point there was only one reasonable/professional thing to do, and MS did not do it.

I vividly remember the 'WTF' commentary during the race. Pundits were gob-smacked and unsure of what happens when a driver chooses to ignore a black flag - because "it never happens" at this level of racing. Flags are not a negotiable instruction that a team can think about, they are direct and absolute instructions to the drivers.

It was despicable behaviour. The 'punishment' for it was even worse.

[entropy]

EskimoArapaho said:

Schumacher chose to ignore the black flag. The race organisers had nothing left in their armoury after he ignored it. When they stopped waving it at Schumacher, it was not because they withdrew the sanction.

Benetton were already arguing with the race organisers about a lesser penalty when the black flag was given. At that point there was only one reasonable/professional thing to do, and MS did not do it.

I vividly remember the 'WTF' commentary during the race. Pundits were gob-smacked and unsure of what happens when a driver chooses to ignore a black flag - because "it never happens" at this level of racing. Flags are not a negotiable instruction that a team can think about, they are direct and absolute instructions to the drivers.

It was despicable behaviour. The 'punishment' for it was even worse.

Benetton were not arguing over a "lesser penalty".

Schumi should have originally started at the back of the grid for passing Hill but this did not happen.

To make up for this error it was decided Schumi would be penalised a time penalty. This was when the black flag came out. However the exact nature of this was unclear. Officials reckoned it was a stop-go penalty whereas Benetton were fighting over a post race time penalty and the black flag was withdrawn.

When the arguments finished Schumi eventually served his penalty.

You claim "it never happens" when it comes to ignoring black flags well in the 1989 Portugese GP Nigel Mansell was black flagged and ignored it. He too claims he didn't see it and eventually ruined Senna's race by running into him.

[FourWheelDrift]

Sometimes drivers really do not notice or so they say, such as Alesi running out of fuel during the 1997 Australian Grand Prix because he didn't look at his pit board or the many waving pit crewing every time he passed by as he said their position was just at a change up point and he was always concentrating on the change up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQN49SnvJ_o


As for Schumacher and Mansell above, we will probably never know the truth if they saw them or not.