A F1 driver comparison...

[HAZZAGTR]

Now, imagine this picture with Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, and Schumi. Whos who? And who will win? Are these two championships (1986/2010)similar?

Edited by HAZZAGTR on Friday 25th December 13:32

[elster]

I don't quite understand the question, all the drivers are different.

You can't compare like with like.

[kiteless]

HAZZAGTR said:

For me, if you substitute Piquet for ze German in the image, and add Hakkinen, and you end up with the best F1 drivers in the last 30-odd years.

[AJS-]

It's a very spurious comparisson, but I quite like it.

Alonso - Piquet. Bit slimey, very clever, not the fastest but with odd flashes of briliance.

Schumacher - Prost. Arch strategist, blindingly fast when he needs to be but happy to win by half a second or half a minute.

Hamilton - Mansell. Head down hard charging mania of Mansell, but the same flaw of bouncing the car around perhaps a bit too much, and of getting bogged down if he's not at the front. He might yet prove to be a Senna, but only time will tell.

Vettel - Senna. Very fast, huge talent and able to get results when others have better equipment. Perhaps even able with time, to make a team competitive.


I could very easily have got Vettel and Hamilton the wrong way around, perhaps Hamilton will mature to be more of a Senna, and perhaps Vettel will always just be a hard charging bulldog. Only time will tell.

[AJS-]

kiteless said:

HAZZAGTR said:

For me, if you substitute Piquet for ze German in the image, and add Hakkinen, and you end up with the best F1 drivers in the last 30-odd years.

Does that mean you would put Mansell ahead of Piquet?

[Alfanatic]

AJS- said:

kiteless said:

HAZZAGTR said:

For me, if you substitute Piquet for ze German in the image, and add Hakkinen, and you end up with the best F1 drivers in the last 30-odd years.

Does that mean you would put Mansell ahead of Piquet?

Good point. I know I habitually would, but then again, Piquet was certainly worth his three titles, and he was a real charger in the early days, one who didn't seem to mind hanging the tail out either... Was Piquet better than his reputation?

[hot metal]

AJS- said:

kiteless said:

HAZZAGTR said:

For me, if you substitute Piquet for ze German in the image, and add Hakkinen, and you end up with the best F1 drivers in the last 30-odd years.

Does that mean you would put Mansell ahead of Piquet?

Any day.

[AJS-]

Alfanatic said:

AJS- said:

Does that mean you would put Mansell ahead of Piquet?

Good point. I know I habitually would, but then again, Piquet was certainly worth his three titles, and he was a real charger in the early days, one who didn't seem to mind hanging the tail out either... Was Piquet better than his reputation?

I would say he's better than his reputation. Or at least he is in the shadow of Prost/Senna when people think of GP in the 80s. One of my early, and favourite memories of F1 is the pass on Senna at the Hungaroring. Worth a youtube.

He didn't really grow old gracefully as I remember, but still a hell of a driver in his day.

[AlpineWhite]

AJS- said:

Hamilton - Mansell. Head down hard charging mania of Mansell, but the same flaw of bouncing the car around perhaps a bit too much, and of getting bogged down if he's not at the front. He might yet prove to be a Senna, but only time will tell.

Vettel - Senna. Very fast, huge talent and able to get results when others have better equipment. Perhaps even able with time, to make a team competitive.


I could very easily have got Vettel and Hamilton the wrong way around, perhaps Hamilton will mature to be more of a Senna, and perhaps Vettel will always just be a hard charging bulldog. Only time will tell.

That's a difficult one, isn't it. From the top of my head, I'd put it the other way around. I have the impression of Vettel as one who wins from the front of the grid, but struggles a little when he's lower down the pack.

As you say, time will tell!

[AJS-]

The reason I put it that way round is the style of driving. Vettel generally looks quite smooth and sympathetic to the car as was Senna, while Hamilton really hits the kerbs and throws the car around a la Mansell. That said Hamilton doesn't seem to have suffered in terms of reliability the way Mansell did, so maybe my perception is wrong.

Perhaps I'm also prejudiced by the tabloid lionising of the "British bulldog."

[kiteless]

AJS- said:

kiteless said:

HAZZAGTR said:

For me, if you substitute Piquet for ze German in the image, and add Hakkinen, and you end up with the best F1 drivers in the last 30-odd years.

Does that mean you would put Mansell ahead of Piquet?

Excellent question. And difficult to reason against if considering WDC's won.

What I would say, however, is that Mansell lost 2 WDC's through tyre (Adelaide) and wheelnut (Estoril) failures; not through any failing on his part as a driver.

[AJS-]

kiteless said:

AJS- said:

Does that mean you would put Mansell ahead of Piquet?

Excellent question. And difficult to reason against if considering WDC's won.

What I would say, however, is that Mansell lost 2 WDC's through tyre (Adelaide) and wheelnut (Estoril) failures; not through any failing on his part as a driver.

If I remember right, Piquet chose to pit at Adelaide, apparently throwing his championship had Mansell not had the puncture. I don't remember the wheelnut incident, and this probably doesn't apply here, but I do think Mansell was especially hard on cars.

I would also say that championships are not won and lost on a certain incident. I would agree that Mansell was probaby faster than Piquet on any given lap most of the time, all other things being equal, but Piquet was consistent and a thinking driver, and better able to conserve his car and this, IMO earned him his 3 championships.

It is also arguably true that Piquet faced less stiff competition for his first two titles - Prost and Senna not yet in the game. But he beat Lauda, Jones, Rosberg fair and square, which is no mean feat.

[freedman]

AJS- said:

kiteless said:

AJS- said:

Does that mean you would put Mansell ahead of Piquet?

Excellent question. And difficult to reason against if considering WDC's won.

What I would say, however, is that Mansell lost 2 WDC's through tyre (Adelaide) and wheelnut (Estoril) failures; not through any failing on his part as a driver.

If I remember right, Piquet chose to pit at Adelaide, apparently throwing his championship had Mansell not had the puncture. .

Mansells puncture was before Piquet pitted, and he was called in by the team for safety reasons

And losing his wheelnut at Estoril didnt lose him the championship, even giving him the points for a win he would still have fallen short by a dozen points

Edited by freedman on Wednesday 30th December 08:57

[Alfanatic]

Piquet's main rival for his 1983 championship was a young and very fast Prost in a Renault. His main rival in 1987 was his team mate Mansell, if I recall correctly. I believe Mansell's challenge ended when he crashed in practice in Japan and hurt his back, excluding him from the race.

[oilspill]

Above drivers were also team mates much of the time and took more points of each other than schumacher had to contend with from team mates blatantly playing second fiddle and pulling over when needed.
Schumacher would have been lucky to win 1 WC if he was up against the above quality. Mansell kicked his arse in qualifying aged 42 semi retired IIRC.

[groomi]

HAZZAGTR said:

Now, imagine this picture with Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, and Schumi. Whos who? And who will win? Are these two championships (1986/2010)similar?

Edited by HAZZAGTR on Friday 25th December 13:32

Technically there are 4 world champions in that picture (admittedly before some of them had made the achievement), so I suppose Vettel should be swapped for Button.

Therfore:

Senna = Schumi
Prost = Button
Mansell = Hamilton (Spurious one that)
Piquet = Alonso

[oilspill]

kiteless said:

AJS- said:

kiteless said:

HAZZAGTR said:

For me, if you substitute Piquet for ze German in the image, and add Hakkinen, and you end up with the best F1 drivers in the last 30-odd years.

Does that mean you would put Mansell ahead of Piquet?

Excellent question. And difficult to reason against if considering WDC's won.

What I would say, however, is that Mansell lost 2 WDC's through tyre (Adelaide) and wheelnut (Estoril) failures; not through any failing on his part as a driver.

I think Mansell was on for a championship when he did his back in Practice in Japan last race of season, late 80s (bad memory cant be bothered to look it up)
Without bad luck Mansell would have been 3 x WC and much highly thought of, then if he had seen some of the luck schumacher saw, your'e possibly looking at 4 or 5 WCs, shame. Shumacher also saw Prost retire and Senna killed before he became WC. Now imagine any of the above's total WCs with their two main rivals gone before they got started.
I personally dont rate drivers in the amount of championships clocked up. But schumacher would have had a tough time racing against the above at their prime.

[oilspill]

groomi said:

HAZZAGTR said:

Now, imagine this picture with Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, and Schumi. Whos who? And who will win? Are these two championships (1986/2010)similar?

Edited by HAZZAGTR on Friday 25th December 13:32

Technically there are 4 world champions in that picture (admittedly before some of them had made the achievement), so I suppose Vettel should be swapped for Button.

Therfore:

Senna = Schumi
Prost = Button
Mansell = Hamilton (Spurious one that)
Piquet = Alonso

How many World Champions did schumacher compete with for titles and win?


At shumachers peak that photo would be.

Senna= schumi
Prost=Hill
Mansell=Villeneuve
Piquet=Hakkinen

Doesn't look too clever does it.

[mattikake]

AJS- said:

kiteless said:

AJS- said:

Does that mean you would put Mansell ahead of Piquet?

Excellent question. And difficult to reason against if considering WDC's won.

What I would say, however, is that Mansell lost 2 WDC's through tyre (Adelaide) and wheelnut (Estoril) failures; not through any failing on his part as a driver.

If I remember right, Piquet chose to pit at Adelaide, apparently throwing his championship had Mansell not had the puncture.

Piquet was aware of a vibration in his car and by this time Williams knew that Rosberg and Mansell had both retired through tyre blow-outs. Piquet chose to pit on the advice of the team - better to live to fight for another WDC than possibly die chasing this one...

AJS- said:

I don't remember the wheelnut incident, and this probably doesn't apply here, but I do think Mansell was especially hard on cars.

It was at Hungaroring, not Estoril. Mansell's wheel nut came of with about 3 laps to go nursing a 30-something-second lead to Piquet. It would be a bit harsh to blame Nige for that one.

AJS- said:

I would also say that championships are not won and lost on a certain incident. I would agree that Mansell was probaby faster than Piquet on any given lap most of the time, all other things being equal, but Piquet was consistent and a thinking driver, and better able to conserve his car and this, IMO earned him his 3 championships.

It has been argued by many a Brazillian that Piquet was never the same after his head injury at Imola '87. Until then, and except for brief periods in '86, Piquet was much closer to Mansell's pace than the rest of 1987 would suggest... which is actually very close to being empirically correct.

AJS- said:

It is also arguably true that Piquet faced less stiff competition for his first two titles - Prost and Senna not yet in the game. But he beat Lauda, Jones, Rosberg fair and square, which is no mean feat.

...and so, perhaps up until Imola '87, Piquet may well have been the star he looked in that Brabham...

Anyway on topic

I say
Senna = Hamilton, clear class of the field
Piquet = Alonso, steady and reliable
Mansell = Button, demon overtaker, long time to win first WDC and race, ste cars all career etc.
Prost = Schumi, too many WDC's:talent. Nah not really, but it's abot as close as I can get.

Vettel? Who's that?

Senna = Schumi, on track
Piquet = Vettel, smooth consistent.
Mansell = Hamilton, British bulldog never give up charger.
Prost = Alonso, complete driver

[AJS-]

The argument that Schumacher is not a great driver because he didn't beat as many world champions is a bit silly. In 15 years he won 7 WDCs, there were simply less for him to beat.

He beat Hill, Alonso, Villeneuve, Hakkinen, Raikonen and Button who have all won titles, and in his early career he beat Prost, Senna and Mansell in certain races too.

F1 drivers are, give or take, the best 20 odd racing drivers at the peak of their career at any given time, and although luck comes into every WDC you don't win 7 without a bit of talent as well.

Sure he had the best car, but he also made Ferrari the best car and the best team over 4 seasons.