Valentino Rossi
Discussion
D_Mike said:
I think Rossi is a bit more like Clark than Senna... I think Senna was slightly less good than Clark. If you look at the statistic through the majority of his career when Clark finished he finished 1st. When he didn't his car broke.
Or maybe Stewart?
I seem to recall a totally dominant drive the the old 'Ring in the rain and mist one year as well as a couple of other years when he was quite sublime in the dry.
Successful in many different cars over the years but if you take F1, driving at a time when reliability was prayed for rather than expected, he won 27 out of 99 GP and spent several seasons swapping wins and championships with Emerson Fittipaldi - 2 excellent drivers in comparable equipment.
To some extent Schumacher's record of recent dominance has been greatly aided by reliability not so consistently available in earlier times.
Back then the drivers would be recipients of whatever luck dealt them - a bit like Raikonnen really.
What Rossi's ride reminded me of (now I've remembered to mention it) was Senna's F1 at Donington...in the year (or so) before traction control was invented, he was going around the OUTSIDE of others around Redgate or Hollywood, in the wet, ever-so-slightly sideways. Unbelievable car control...Rossi ditto on-bike, which is possibly even more impressive.
LongQ said:
I think Rossi is a bit more like Clark than Senna... I think Senna was slightly less good than Clark. If you look at the statistic through the majority of his career when Clark finished he finished 1st. When he didn't his car broke.
Or maybe Stewart?
Actually in terms of statistics, both Senna and Stewart only come 6th and 7th in the all time list.
If you take the wins, poles, fastest laps, DNF, podiums and victory-pole-fastest lap all as a percentage of races started, of all the multiple world champions:-
1st = Fangio
2nd = Schumacher
3rd = Ascari
4th = Clark
5th = Prost
6th = Senna
7th = Stewart
8th = Hakkinen
9th = Lauda
10th = Piquet
11th = Brabham
12th = Fittipaldi
13th = G.Hill
The great thing about Rossi is that he seems like a really nice bloke as well. The footage of him at the weekend shows him making time for everyone, always with a smile on his face. Top Talent, Great Bloke, loaded, having fun.... if you tell me he has a gorgeous girlfriend, I may have to go kill myself!!
In 1993, Senna's car (and most of the other cars that day) had MORE technical gizmos on them than they do today. They were banned for 1994.
Although Senna made full use of his traction control that day, he actually hated all these driver aids as he felt it diminished his skills.
Stewart's win in the rain and fog at the old Nurburgring was in 1968. He finished over 4 MINUTES ahead of the second place man.
Although Senna made full use of his traction control that day, he actually hated all these driver aids as he felt it diminished his skills.
Stewart's win in the rain and fog at the old Nurburgring was in 1968. He finished over 4 MINUTES ahead of the second place man.
aeropilot said:
Actually in terms of statistics, both Senna and Stewart only come 6th and 7th in the all time list.
If you take the wins, poles, fastest laps, DNF, podiums and victory-pole-fastest lap all as a percentage of races started, of all the multiple world champions:-
1st = Fangio
2nd = Schumacher
3rd = Ascari
4th = Clark
5th = Prost
6th = Senna
7th = Stewart
8th = Hakkinen
9th = Lauda
10th = Piquet
11th = Brabham
12th = Fittipaldi
13th = G.Hill
One thing you've missed which will skew those results though...the level of competition they had.
Schumacher, while undoubtedly dominant, has not had any first-rate competition for the last 3-4 seasons, not in a car-driver combination...which will naturally elevate his position in the list.
In contrast, 5th through 10th all existed in bun-fight times, where they were trading wins with rivals...not enough info on the older guys to say how many of them that was true for. Clearly if you're one of two "greats", you'll only get half the stats that Schumacher has.
aeropilot said:
Actually in terms of statistics, both Senna and Stewart only come 6th and 7th in the all time list.
If you take the wins, poles, fastest laps, DNF, podiums and victory-pole-fastest lap all as a percentage of races started, of all the multiple world champions:-
1st = Fangio
2nd = Schumacher
3rd = Ascari
4th = Clark
5th = Prost
6th = Senna
7th = Stewart
8th = Hakkinen
9th = Lauda
10th = Piquet
11th = Brabham
12th = Fittipaldi
13th = G.Hill
I think there are some big problems with defining a 'fair' comparative system. Each driver relates very much to the era in which they drove and his record can be influenced greatly by significant changes of technology during his career.
Fangio, Ascari and those who drove pre the 1960's were surely extremely brave and very skilful. But there were few of them and not so many championship races as later developed. Not many factory teams either, even compared with today. And of course some of Fangio's more memorable races involved his car failing before you took over a team mate's car to win the race(for example). Remarkable in itself but very rare in the modern era, other than after the odd mass shunt at the start where a number one may have taken a spare for the re-start.
Others benefited when Cooper and Chapman turned things upsidedown with rear engine cars. The mid '60's found people running around trying to get 3ltr engines working (or whatever else they could find that might have enough go.)
Clark struck gold with the Lotus heyday. Early users of the DFV suddenly gained a distinct advantage and so on. By the end of the 60's and into the 70's chassis design principles had settled down and the DFV and derivatives became almost ubiquitous, Ferrari excepted, amongst the front runners. So that was about as close as you could get to a standard package, the only other variable being tyre supplier with Goodyear the only real choice for regular honours.
From the mid 70's different engine manufacturers became involved and the whole thing changed shape once again to the extent that teams had periods of dominance, based frequently on the power of their engines and, like Mclaren, the strength the team had in gaining wins and perpetuating success by having 2 leading drivers. That in turn offered those drivers significantly improved opportunities.
And so it went. On into the times of huge budgets and, most likely, the budget buying the success. And of course scoring systems changing and likewise the number or cars qualifying (affecting the potential for pole positions due to traffic) and the number in the race but likely to retire. In many ways I guess today's races look somewhet overcrowded towards the end with so few cars dropping out!
Finally you have to consider at what point in their careers the drivers landed a competitive drive. For some, like Schumacher, it was quite early. Whereas for someone like Nigel Mansell it was quite late, making it very diffcult to recover the numbers in any form of statistical analysis.
Astounding as Schumacher's record is in the modern era he has had the benefit latterly of creating and working with a dominant team in terms of outright speed and at a time when that co-incided with a period of remarkable reliability, compared with earlier times.
On the other hand another couple of years like this one may see him slide down the table ... well, maybe not bu you know what I mean. It's a bit like being selective with Speed Camera stats really.
Maybe, but statistics based on percentages against races is the only way to compare across era's.
The fact that Schuey has won the most Grand Prix is largely irrelevant, because he has competed in more than any other multiple champions, but as a percentage of wins against races he’s not top, he’s only 3rd.
For those of an anorak disposition, these percentages making interesting reading.
Of the multiple champions only, the leading three in each category as follows:-
Wins against Races:
1.Fangio 41.38%
2.Ascari 40.63%
3.Schumacher 37.5%
Podiums against Races:
1.Schumacher 62.05%
2.Fangio 60.34%
3.Prost 53.54%
Poles against Races:
1.Fangio 58.62%
2.Clark 44.44%
3.Ascari 43.75%
Fastest Laps against Races:
1.Ascari 40.63%
2.Fangio 39.66%
3.Clark 38.89%
Lowest DNF rate against Races:
1.Schumacher 20.98%
2.Fangio 24.14%
3.Prost 26.77%
Victory, Pole & Fastest Lap against Races:
1.Ascari 21.88%
2.Clark 15.28%
3.Fangio 12.07%
Wins from finishes, against Races:
1.Ascari 76.47%
2.Fangio 54.55%
3.Clark 53.19%
Podiums from finishes, against Races:
1.Ascari 100.0%
2.Fangio 79.55%
3.Schumacher 78.53%
It’s this last aspect of Ascari’s stat’s that amaze. Every Grand Prix he finished, he finished on the podium..!!
And notice Fangio is the only one to feature in each one.
>> Edited by aeropilot on Tuesday 26th July 23:11
>> Edited by aeropilot on Tuesday 26th July 23:17
The fact that Schuey has won the most Grand Prix is largely irrelevant, because he has competed in more than any other multiple champions, but as a percentage of wins against races he’s not top, he’s only 3rd.
For those of an anorak disposition, these percentages making interesting reading.
Of the multiple champions only, the leading three in each category as follows:-
Wins against Races:
1.Fangio 41.38%
2.Ascari 40.63%
3.Schumacher 37.5%
Podiums against Races:
1.Schumacher 62.05%
2.Fangio 60.34%
3.Prost 53.54%
Poles against Races:
1.Fangio 58.62%
2.Clark 44.44%
3.Ascari 43.75%
Fastest Laps against Races:
1.Ascari 40.63%
2.Fangio 39.66%
3.Clark 38.89%
Lowest DNF rate against Races:
1.Schumacher 20.98%
2.Fangio 24.14%
3.Prost 26.77%
Victory, Pole & Fastest Lap against Races:
1.Ascari 21.88%
2.Clark 15.28%
3.Fangio 12.07%
Wins from finishes, against Races:
1.Ascari 76.47%
2.Fangio 54.55%
3.Clark 53.19%
Podiums from finishes, against Races:
1.Ascari 100.0%
2.Fangio 79.55%
3.Schumacher 78.53%
It’s this last aspect of Ascari’s stat’s that amaze. Every Grand Prix he finished, he finished on the podium..!!
And notice Fangio is the only one to feature in each one.
>> Edited by aeropilot on Tuesday 26th July 23:11
>> Edited by aeropilot on Tuesday 26th July 23:17
One thing you also must remeber is that until about 1974. there were often many F1 races which did not count for World Championship points - so those races hardly ever feature in the stats.
In 1965 for example, there were about 22 F1 races held worldwide. Only about half of them counted for the World Championship.
In 1965 for example, there were about 22 F1 races held worldwide. Only about half of them counted for the World Championship.
LongQ said:
Clark struck gold with the Lotus heyday. Early users of the DFV suddenly gained a distinct advantage and so on. By the end of the 60's and into the 70's chassis design principles had settled down and the DFV and derivatives became almost ubiquitous, Ferrari excepted, amongst the front runners. So that was about as close as you could get to a standard package, the only other variable being tyre supplier with Goodyear the only real choice for regular honours.
But clark died in '68 (I think?) and the DFV wasn't introduced until mid or late '67... and was very unreliable. When he finished with the DFV in '67 I think he won... but it broke a lot.
Probably the most telling comment was from Jeremy Burgess several months ago and he has run bikes for so many years and so many top riders.
"we know what the bike is capable of and we know what the tyres can do....BUT there is often a second a lap that we know is not down to us. I cant account for it except that it must be Vale..."
Not even Doohan
acheived that level of respect.
"we know what the bike is capable of and we know what the tyres can do....BUT there is often a second a lap that we know is not down to us. I cant account for it except that it must be Vale..."
Not even Doohan
acheived that level of respect.aeropilot said:
Clearly if you're one of two "greats", you'll only get half the stats that Schumacher has.
How can you have half the stats...????
Stattistics are statistics.
Read what I said...if there is 1 dominant driver in an era (schumacher), then they will take the vast majority of poles, podiums and wins...so their stats will be very impressive.
But if there are two dominant drivers in the same era(Senna & Prost) competing, then they will split the wins and poles, so appear less impressive (but should still have high numbers of podiums).
Do you see what I was getting at?
I'm not denying that Schumacher is very good, or that Fangio was a legend...but how much REAL competition did either of them have - did they have to fight to record their statistics, or just turn up and drive the best car?!?
Jane Fletcher said:
so we have loeb and rossi, probably the best ever at their sports (and both good looking), while f1 remains in a driver doldrum. alonso has potential and is also good looking. maybe f1 will get better, it needs to.
Loeb is very good but I don't think he's the best ever by a long chalk. I'd like to see Gronholm in the Citroen to get a true comparison these days, because it's only his brilliance that gets that awful 307 anywhere near the front. Martin looked terrific at Ford, but has been completely outclassed at Peugeot. In fact, maybe it would have been better to see Gronholm in a Focus...
I know comparing eras is next to pointless, but Loeb doesn't have the same effect on me as the likes of Toivonen, Vatanen, Rohl, Mikkola and Blomquist had all those years ago. Proper blokes driving proper cars.
Agree with everything about Rossi though - the guy is a genius. If you were to take him out of the equation it would be an incredibly close championship, fought out between a selection of top riders, but he's a class above everyone. I thought Edwards was keeping enough in reserve on Sunday and that Rossi looked rattled, but he was just playing with them again. Was hoping for a Barros win after Bayliss dropped it avoiding Melandri's accident, but it wasn't to be.
D_Mike said:
Clark struck gold with the Lotus heyday. Early users of the DFV suddenly gained a distinct advantage and so on. By the end of the 60's and into the 70's chassis design principles had settled down and the DFV and derivatives became almost ubiquitous, Ferrari excepted, amongst the front runners. So that was about as close as you could get to a standard package, the only other variable being tyre supplier with Goodyear the only real choice for regular honours.
But clark died in '68 (I think?) and the DFV wasn't introduced until mid or late '67... and was very unreliable. When he finished with the DFV in '67 I think he won... but it broke a lot.
Sorry, not as clear as I would have wished. I will confess I had written about the DFV influence with Clark in mind and then realised that was less of a factor for his overall record - but the Lotus record in the 1.5ltr formula was pretty good and benefitted him I believe.
The thing is that the top driver, or perhaps 2 or 3 drivers (assuming 2 competitive teams and one lead driver per team OR sometimes 2 per the McLaren policy) will almost always end up with the best overall package to play with. Sometimes that may not be the case for a season or so. Sometimes drivers mature late or their opportunities arrive late (Mansell, N) or they hang around after their best opportunities have passed (Hill, D), both of which situations will skew the stats for historical analysis purposes. If Schumacher sticks around but stops winning his historic record won't look so hot as I would have done at the end of last season. However he has had so many races, with good results since the early days, that the rate of erosion of his percentages is relatively slow.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff