Theoretical All-Time Championship
Discussion
Hello everyone. I am kind of interested in people's opinions and ideas about how an ultimate all-time championship could pan out, if only there was time travel, and all the best drivers in history could be placed in the same qualifying sessions and races, in their prime. Of course, it is something that cannot be answered correctly as it can never be tested and it is not easy to estimate using historical data, footage etc, but maybe there can be some interesting discussion and fun anyway.
So I will propose some rules as follows:
- 50 drivers are allocated to 25 teams (no car development allowed, but just the normal set-up work with engineers etc for each race).
- There are only 5 brands of car manufactured and 10 of each are used in the races. The best car is typically 1 or 2 tenths quicker than the next best one, and so on (so the gap between the best and least best car would be between half a second and a second per lap approximately, if the same guy tested the cars).
- We each decide which drivers to place in each car and who should be team-mates with each other (I'm suggesting the team-mates would be considered to be the most closely matched in our estimations - everyone is free to suggest their own line-ups as that is interesting to see in itself, and then you can all make 'predictions' and conclusions about the Championship and individual races at various iconic tracks; but if anyone would prefer to use my selections and go from there without naming their own that is ok too, and general comments without naming 50 drivers are also welcome). The 10 drivers rated the highest go in the least best car, and so on.
- The tyres to be used would be assumed to be fairly durable, allowing drivers to run pretty much at full pace through the races, but they wouldn't last the whole race. The cars would be assumed to be fairly modern, but designed to allow drivers to run closely behind the car in front without significant reduction in performance, and so I'll say that DRS and similar modern aids would not be needed or permitted.
- At each race, there would be separate qualifying sessions, akin to 'top 10 shoot-outs' between the drivers in the same cars. 5 would qualify for race A (the main event), and the other 5 would have to take part in race B. Race A points would be awarded to 20 drivers if enough finished the race - 25pts for 1st, 22 for 2nd, 19 for 3rd, then 17 down to 1 for the others. But for Race B, only the top 6 would score, and the previous real system would be in place - the 10, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1 format. So winning Race B could only ever be as good as coming 11th in Race A.
- The grid orders would be decided using a further two modern style qualifying sessions; one for Race B and then one for Race A.
- The penalties for foul play and deliberately taking out rivals would be quite harsh, both in terms of in-race penalties and possible demotions to Race B for some subsequent races. So hopefully the racing would be fairly clean.
These are my driver pairings (I'm showing the numbers to indicate which of the pair I'm favouring to come out on top, but I'd suggest that in reality, if this was reality, numbers would be based on alphabetical order but with car numbers ending with 1&2, and 9&0 to be handed out using reverse alphabetical order - so in my example Senna 1 and Schumacher 2, and De Angelis 49 and Alboreto 50 for example):
(1: Michael Schumacher, 2: Ayrton Senna
3: Juan Manuel Fangio, 4: Lewis Hamilton
5: Fernando Alonso, 6: Jim Clark
7: Max Verstappen, 8: Alain Prost
9: Gilles Villeneuve, 10: Mika Hakkinen)
(11: Robert Kubica, 12: Nico Rosberg
13: Sterling Moss, 14: Nigel Mansell
15: Keke Rosberg, 16: Sebastian Vettel
17: Niki Lauda, 18: Jackie Stewart
19: Gerhard Berger, 20: Giancarlo Fisichella)
(21: Jean Alesi, 22: Olivier Panis
23: Daniel Ricciardo, 24: Nelson Piquet
25: Emerson Fittipaldi, 26: Jarno Trulli
27: Jenson Button, 28: Jules Bianchi
29: Ronnie Peterson, 30: Heinz-Harold Frentzen)
(31: Jochen Rindt, 32: Rubens Barrichello
33: Stefan Bellof, 34: Charles Leclerc
35: Valtteri Bottas, 36: Kimi Raikkonen
37: Jacques Villeneuve, 38: Alessandro Nannini
39: Felipe Massa, 40: Romain Grosjean)
(41: James Hunt, 42: Juan-Pablo Montoya
43: Alberto Ascari, 44: Mario Andretti
45: Damon Hill, 46: Alan Jones
47: Nick Heidfeld, 48: Jack Brabham
49: Michele Alboreto, 50: Elio De Angelis)
So, feel free to contribute with your own driver line-ups and/or analysis about what would theoretically happen. It's an impossible question, but an intriguing one I think.
If we were to discuss individual races, then although comments about various tracks would be welcome, I would suggest beginning with Albert Park and Interlagos and going from there initially in terms of qualifying and race 'predictions'. I would suggest a minor mid-race rain spell in Brazil could be a realistic enough proposition, if we go into details like that, but of course every contributor could be analysing a different championship based on their own driver parings - remember you should be allocating your best drivers the worst cars to make it interesting among the whole field potentially!
Ok, I hope that makes some reasonable sense (despite being based on an impossibility - but then so are all all-time football discussions and fantasy games and drafts for example). Go ahead when you'd like to add something :-)
So I will propose some rules as follows:
- 50 drivers are allocated to 25 teams (no car development allowed, but just the normal set-up work with engineers etc for each race).
- There are only 5 brands of car manufactured and 10 of each are used in the races. The best car is typically 1 or 2 tenths quicker than the next best one, and so on (so the gap between the best and least best car would be between half a second and a second per lap approximately, if the same guy tested the cars).
- We each decide which drivers to place in each car and who should be team-mates with each other (I'm suggesting the team-mates would be considered to be the most closely matched in our estimations - everyone is free to suggest their own line-ups as that is interesting to see in itself, and then you can all make 'predictions' and conclusions about the Championship and individual races at various iconic tracks; but if anyone would prefer to use my selections and go from there without naming their own that is ok too, and general comments without naming 50 drivers are also welcome). The 10 drivers rated the highest go in the least best car, and so on.
- The tyres to be used would be assumed to be fairly durable, allowing drivers to run pretty much at full pace through the races, but they wouldn't last the whole race. The cars would be assumed to be fairly modern, but designed to allow drivers to run closely behind the car in front without significant reduction in performance, and so I'll say that DRS and similar modern aids would not be needed or permitted.
- At each race, there would be separate qualifying sessions, akin to 'top 10 shoot-outs' between the drivers in the same cars. 5 would qualify for race A (the main event), and the other 5 would have to take part in race B. Race A points would be awarded to 20 drivers if enough finished the race - 25pts for 1st, 22 for 2nd, 19 for 3rd, then 17 down to 1 for the others. But for Race B, only the top 6 would score, and the previous real system would be in place - the 10, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1 format. So winning Race B could only ever be as good as coming 11th in Race A.
- The grid orders would be decided using a further two modern style qualifying sessions; one for Race B and then one for Race A.
- The penalties for foul play and deliberately taking out rivals would be quite harsh, both in terms of in-race penalties and possible demotions to Race B for some subsequent races. So hopefully the racing would be fairly clean.
These are my driver pairings (I'm showing the numbers to indicate which of the pair I'm favouring to come out on top, but I'd suggest that in reality, if this was reality, numbers would be based on alphabetical order but with car numbers ending with 1&2, and 9&0 to be handed out using reverse alphabetical order - so in my example Senna 1 and Schumacher 2, and De Angelis 49 and Alboreto 50 for example):
(1: Michael Schumacher, 2: Ayrton Senna
3: Juan Manuel Fangio, 4: Lewis Hamilton
5: Fernando Alonso, 6: Jim Clark
7: Max Verstappen, 8: Alain Prost
9: Gilles Villeneuve, 10: Mika Hakkinen)
(11: Robert Kubica, 12: Nico Rosberg
13: Sterling Moss, 14: Nigel Mansell
15: Keke Rosberg, 16: Sebastian Vettel
17: Niki Lauda, 18: Jackie Stewart
19: Gerhard Berger, 20: Giancarlo Fisichella)
(21: Jean Alesi, 22: Olivier Panis
23: Daniel Ricciardo, 24: Nelson Piquet
25: Emerson Fittipaldi, 26: Jarno Trulli
27: Jenson Button, 28: Jules Bianchi
29: Ronnie Peterson, 30: Heinz-Harold Frentzen)
(31: Jochen Rindt, 32: Rubens Barrichello
33: Stefan Bellof, 34: Charles Leclerc
35: Valtteri Bottas, 36: Kimi Raikkonen
37: Jacques Villeneuve, 38: Alessandro Nannini
39: Felipe Massa, 40: Romain Grosjean)
(41: James Hunt, 42: Juan-Pablo Montoya
43: Alberto Ascari, 44: Mario Andretti
45: Damon Hill, 46: Alan Jones
47: Nick Heidfeld, 48: Jack Brabham
49: Michele Alboreto, 50: Elio De Angelis)
So, feel free to contribute with your own driver line-ups and/or analysis about what would theoretically happen. It's an impossible question, but an intriguing one I think.
If we were to discuss individual races, then although comments about various tracks would be welcome, I would suggest beginning with Albert Park and Interlagos and going from there initially in terms of qualifying and race 'predictions'. I would suggest a minor mid-race rain spell in Brazil could be a realistic enough proposition, if we go into details like that, but of course every contributor could be analysing a different championship based on their own driver parings - remember you should be allocating your best drivers the worst cars to make it interesting among the whole field potentially!
Ok, I hope that makes some reasonable sense (despite being based on an impossibility - but then so are all all-time football discussions and fantasy games and drafts for example). Go ahead when you'd like to add something :-)
Some further clarifications on car design in this fictional scenario:
I'd be thinking that they should be decent quality, and not too hard or unpredictable to drive, but with no driver aids like traction control or active suspension. Maybe going back to semi-automatic gearboxes, and in general trying to leave scope for drivers to make a decent difference themselves. Probably the same engine in every car, and a fairly similar basic chassis design at least.
I suppose the gap between best and worst car could be under 0.4 seconds in places like Monza or Monaco in general, but getting up around 0.8 seconds potentially at least for a Suzuka or Spa qualifying lap.
That would seem about as much of a 'perfect situation' as feasibly possible, if aiming to give drivers in all cars a decent chance, even if in literal terms it would seem fairer to give them all the same car. Qualifying (including in the 10 car shoot-outs to make Race A or Race B, among drivers in the same cars) should be vital, but race pace, racing skills, consistency and suchlike would ultimately be making the difference. I'd imagine the championship winner should achieve it more like Keke Rosberg (with few wins) rather than Nico Rosberg (with just his team-mate as rival).
I'd be thinking that they should be decent quality, and not too hard or unpredictable to drive, but with no driver aids like traction control or active suspension. Maybe going back to semi-automatic gearboxes, and in general trying to leave scope for drivers to make a decent difference themselves. Probably the same engine in every car, and a fairly similar basic chassis design at least.
I suppose the gap between best and worst car could be under 0.4 seconds in places like Monza or Monaco in general, but getting up around 0.8 seconds potentially at least for a Suzuka or Spa qualifying lap.
That would seem about as much of a 'perfect situation' as feasibly possible, if aiming to give drivers in all cars a decent chance, even if in literal terms it would seem fairer to give them all the same car. Qualifying (including in the 10 car shoot-outs to make Race A or Race B, among drivers in the same cars) should be vital, but race pace, racing skills, consistency and suchlike would ultimately be making the difference. I'd imagine the championship winner should achieve it more like Keke Rosberg (with few wins) rather than Nico Rosberg (with just his team-mate as rival).
I'll leave things for others to reply, if anyone wants, after this but I did have a think about what I might set as the initial Driver Championship Odds using my driver list and rules from post 1, and came up with this:
9/2 - Rindt, Schumacher
5/1 - Kubica
11/2 - N.Rosberg, Senna
13/2 - Fangio, Hamilton
7/1 - Barrichello
8/1 - Alesi, Alonso
9/1 - Bellof, Clark, Panis
10/1 - Hunt, Leclerc, Ricciardo
12/1 - Ascari, Bottas, Mansell, Montoya, Moss, Piquet, Raikkonen, Verstappen
16/1 - Andretti, Brabham, Fittipaldi, Heidfeld, Hill, Jones, Prost, K.Rosberg, Vettel
18/1 - Bianchi, Button, Lauda, Nannini, Stewart, Trulli, G.Villeneuve, J.Villeneuve
22/1 - Alboreto, Berger, De Angelis, Fisichella, Frentzen, Grosjean, Hakkinen, Massa, Peterson
I thought all drivers in the same cars ought to be fairly closely matched pace wise, but that was my take on the likelihood each driver might win the overall championship eventually anyway!
9/2 - Rindt, Schumacher
5/1 - Kubica
11/2 - N.Rosberg, Senna
13/2 - Fangio, Hamilton
7/1 - Barrichello
8/1 - Alesi, Alonso
9/1 - Bellof, Clark, Panis
10/1 - Hunt, Leclerc, Ricciardo
12/1 - Ascari, Bottas, Mansell, Montoya, Moss, Piquet, Raikkonen, Verstappen
16/1 - Andretti, Brabham, Fittipaldi, Heidfeld, Hill, Jones, Prost, K.Rosberg, Vettel
18/1 - Bianchi, Button, Lauda, Nannini, Stewart, Trulli, G.Villeneuve, J.Villeneuve
22/1 - Alboreto, Berger, De Angelis, Fisichella, Frentzen, Grosjean, Hakkinen, Massa, Peterson
I thought all drivers in the same cars ought to be fairly closely matched pace wise, but that was my take on the likelihood each driver might win the overall championship eventually anyway!
Edited by Yours Trulli on Friday 26th October 10:53
I'm beginning to suspect I might soon be of a mind to be reducing those odds for Leclerc and/or moving him 'up' into a worse car, as well as lengthening the odds for Vettel and/or moving him 'down' into a better car!
Or in other words maybe it'll begin to seem more and more feasible to call Leclerc one of the best ever F1 drivers soon! Although it's a bit soon based on one race (Bottas also outperformed Hamilton in Australia but we just have more of a historical idea about that pairing).
Or in other words maybe it'll begin to seem more and more feasible to call Leclerc one of the best ever F1 drivers soon! Although it's a bit soon based on one race (Bottas also outperformed Hamilton in Australia but we just have more of a historical idea about that pairing).
Intriguing, and a good parallel to the real action.
I’m going to have think a bit more about my answers, but shooting off your initial list there are a few things I couldn’t countenance:
- Prost & Verstappen in the same ballpark. Sorry, never in a million years, or at least until the next comet swings by: Verstappen is a young tyro, but still an ingenue. Prost did it in the toughest era ever.
- no Scheckter? People like Grosjean, Frentzen and Heidfield? No deal. Those sort of guys should never be near all time lists and even Ricciardo, Bottas level guys have work to do. Guys like Andretti and Scheckter did it in a vicious era and often had to use cerebral tactics to push on for their championships.
- Both Rosbergs should be on it: one was a cool, nonchalant maverick who bullied the hell out of the turbo broncos, the other a less talented son but who developed the willpower to overcome that deficit against one of the fiercest competitors in F1.
As I say interesting, but will take a bit of time to crystallise in my head. Siffert, Bonnier, Hill Snr, even Patrese - it’s a tough juggling act.
I’m going to have think a bit more about my answers, but shooting off your initial list there are a few things I couldn’t countenance:
- Prost & Verstappen in the same ballpark. Sorry, never in a million years, or at least until the next comet swings by: Verstappen is a young tyro, but still an ingenue. Prost did it in the toughest era ever.
- no Scheckter? People like Grosjean, Frentzen and Heidfield? No deal. Those sort of guys should never be near all time lists and even Ricciardo, Bottas level guys have work to do. Guys like Andretti and Scheckter did it in a vicious era and often had to use cerebral tactics to push on for their championships.
- Both Rosbergs should be on it: one was a cool, nonchalant maverick who bullied the hell out of the turbo broncos, the other a less talented son but who developed the willpower to overcome that deficit against one of the fiercest competitors in F1.
As I say interesting, but will take a bit of time to crystallise in my head. Siffert, Bonnier, Hill Snr, even Patrese - it’s a tough juggling act.
Thanks Tiger, and yeah feel free to post up your list of names etc whenever.
It's of course all guesswork to a degree, but educated guesswork I suppose.
I'm not so much suggesting Verstappen is already as great as Prost, as that I'm feeling in the same car, even though an impossible scenario to test, I think he could rival him...perhaps being quicker on average but not quite as savvy and refined in races.
So it's a bit of a different take on 'greatest' lists in that sense, but yeah you could well perceive that Prost could come out on top against Verstappen as he currently is (even in a complicated system where 8 other drivers have the same car and only 5 of the 10 qualify for the main race each time!).
It's of course all guesswork to a degree, but educated guesswork I suppose.
I'm not so much suggesting Verstappen is already as great as Prost, as that I'm feeling in the same car, even though an impossible scenario to test, I think he could rival him...perhaps being quicker on average but not quite as savvy and refined in races.
So it's a bit of a different take on 'greatest' lists in that sense, but yeah you could well perceive that Prost could come out on top against Verstappen as he currently is (even in a complicated system where 8 other drivers have the same car and only 5 of the 10 qualify for the main race each time!).
The whole premise is flawed by the list of drivers. Some of them have no place being on a list of mediocre drivers let alone an all time list!
As for some of the odds you appear to have calculated??! Er, just no.
The simple answer is that each race and the championship would be fought out between: Fangio, Schu, Ham, Prost, Senna, Clark, Lauda, Moss, Ascari, G Hill, Black Jack and probably JYS and Mika Hak.
And that is being extremely harsh on Mario, Emmo, P Hill, Big John, Rindt, Piquet and Alonso!
Oh, one exception to all of the above...if it rained...
None of them would see which direction Gilles went. Yes, that includes Hamilton, Senna and Schumacher.
Hunt, Jody, Alan Jones, Button, Niko, Farina, Hawthorn, Musso, Gurney, Ronnie, Kimi, Collins - these guys would all be midfield to lower field in brutal reality.
Max, Rubens and the other crap in your list? Strictly F2.
As for some of the odds you appear to have calculated??! Er, just no.
The simple answer is that each race and the championship would be fought out between: Fangio, Schu, Ham, Prost, Senna, Clark, Lauda, Moss, Ascari, G Hill, Black Jack and probably JYS and Mika Hak.
And that is being extremely harsh on Mario, Emmo, P Hill, Big John, Rindt, Piquet and Alonso!
Oh, one exception to all of the above...if it rained...
None of them would see which direction Gilles went. Yes, that includes Hamilton, Senna and Schumacher.
Hunt, Jody, Alan Jones, Button, Niko, Farina, Hawthorn, Musso, Gurney, Ronnie, Kimi, Collins - these guys would all be midfield to lower field in brutal reality.
Max, Rubens and the other crap in your list? Strictly F2.
I want to keep this friendly and light hearted if possible, and maybe I'll sit back and just let people post anyway without trying to respond to everything.
I will say that when I discuss football, I can probably often come over as being a nostalgic one (rating plenty of former players over recent ones!), while here it seems so far to be the opposite (although one guy said re: Leclerc on another thread I noticed that every generation gets better/faster which I don't necessarily see to be the case, or why it should be talent wise, as hard to gauge it is in a sport like this).
I may be lacking some older names that could at least be making the lower reaches of my attempt at a field of 50 though, and the fact I'll be younger than a fair amount of you (certainly if you watched some of these names in real time - and I'm not saying you need to have to include them obviously, just that it gives more scope to think of them or remember them) can play a part.
I will say though that it seems highly unlikely that Verstappen would not be worth a place at all. Highly unlikely really in my opinion. It seemed at one stage that people were being quick to start the Senna comparisons but lately his pace (compared to a Ricciardo who'd had the better of multiple champion Vettel...even if the Red Bull helped Vettel a lot obviously and maybe the one he drove in alongside Ricciardo was less suited to him due to regulation changes) seems to place him in the upper bracket to me. I guess we'd have a better idea if he ever ended in the same team as Hamilton or something like that. I'd agree he can be impetuous and is not a 'perfect driver' or something, but his pace and some of his overtaking skills too just say to me that he'd probably compete well alongside most team-mates who could have had (if thinking back about all Formula 1 drivers all-time). It's difficult of course because drivers diminish as they get older, but I tried to go with those who seemed at their best to be worth a place to me. No problem to make different lists though - that's why I opened the thread. No reason to disrespect others choices (mine, or others) and turn things into unpleasant arguments. I hope saying this in itself doesn't do that, but I'm just thinking in terms of everyone's choices going forwards - feel free to say "no way, I'd not have had this guy" but try to respect the other posters and the drivers themselves if you can!
But like I hinted at I think it'd be interesting to discuss which tracks certain drivers might do better on than their team-mates (you can use your own lists rather than mine for that too of course) and all that sort of thing - which might do best in qualifying which the way I've suggested things would be even a bit more important for the Championship I think, in terms of getting into the main race and getting a good grid position in it.
As for the odds, maybe you realised this, but they are based on the top group of drivers having the worst car (marginally) and the last group having the best one (with in between in between obviously).
I will say that when I discuss football, I can probably often come over as being a nostalgic one (rating plenty of former players over recent ones!), while here it seems so far to be the opposite (although one guy said re: Leclerc on another thread I noticed that every generation gets better/faster which I don't necessarily see to be the case, or why it should be talent wise, as hard to gauge it is in a sport like this).
I may be lacking some older names that could at least be making the lower reaches of my attempt at a field of 50 though, and the fact I'll be younger than a fair amount of you (certainly if you watched some of these names in real time - and I'm not saying you need to have to include them obviously, just that it gives more scope to think of them or remember them) can play a part.
I will say though that it seems highly unlikely that Verstappen would not be worth a place at all. Highly unlikely really in my opinion. It seemed at one stage that people were being quick to start the Senna comparisons but lately his pace (compared to a Ricciardo who'd had the better of multiple champion Vettel...even if the Red Bull helped Vettel a lot obviously and maybe the one he drove in alongside Ricciardo was less suited to him due to regulation changes) seems to place him in the upper bracket to me. I guess we'd have a better idea if he ever ended in the same team as Hamilton or something like that. I'd agree he can be impetuous and is not a 'perfect driver' or something, but his pace and some of his overtaking skills too just say to me that he'd probably compete well alongside most team-mates who could have had (if thinking back about all Formula 1 drivers all-time). It's difficult of course because drivers diminish as they get older, but I tried to go with those who seemed at their best to be worth a place to me. No problem to make different lists though - that's why I opened the thread. No reason to disrespect others choices (mine, or others) and turn things into unpleasant arguments. I hope saying this in itself doesn't do that, but I'm just thinking in terms of everyone's choices going forwards - feel free to say "no way, I'd not have had this guy" but try to respect the other posters and the drivers themselves if you can!
But like I hinted at I think it'd be interesting to discuss which tracks certain drivers might do better on than their team-mates (you can use your own lists rather than mine for that too of course) and all that sort of thing - which might do best in qualifying which the way I've suggested things would be even a bit more important for the Championship I think, in terms of getting into the main race and getting a good grid position in it.
As for the odds, maybe you realised this, but they are based on the top group of drivers having the worst car (marginally) and the last group having the best one (with in between in between obviously).
I know its just a fantasy thing, and so practically doesn't really enter into it, but I don't think that the skillset of the likes of Jim Clark and Stirling Moss (who incidentally is my choice for best driver ever) would transfer to a modernish F1 series. It's just not about pure car control anymore.
I think the last couple of posts, in combination, maybe sum up why it is probably a bit of a fallacy I am making if I think we can make really good estimations about this lol!
But as I said, it's really just your best guesses I'm asking for, if we were lucky enough in some parallel universe to be able to experience all of these great drivers in their primes competing with each other in not dissimilar cars (albeit with some a little better/faster than others as I think we'd all agree the top 50 drivers would not all be on the same level overall, or even similar for outright pace especially if we assume the cars would not be narrowing the difference drivers can make quite so much as modern ones can).
We can look at it as them all being born in the same era if that helps, and concentrate on the pure driving ability. Questions like how Fangio managed to be so competitive at his age in his day, and whether he wouldn't in a more modern car and sport, or whether he would and that hints he was better than Michael.....would be valid things to think about though I think. Or if thinking of a time-machine type scenario, then it'd at least be necessary for the drivers to be allowed to acclimatise to the cars they were to be driving and to receive some advice about training routines etc.
Again on Verstappen, it's not what he's achieved but what you believe he's demonstrated he could achieve. He's not really had the opportunity to challenge for a championship yet, but when the Red Bull has been competitive he's won races so map that over a season and I don't see why he wouldn't be challenging - it doesn't seem like it'll happen this season of course but again that's more about the car differences.
So far I probably seem like a Max-fanboy or something but it's not really the case. I'm probably more of a fan of the guy in my user name even. I'd think it can be questionable that he (Trulli) makes the list too by the way, even if he hasn't been singled out by name yet. But I also felt the qualifying system might help him vs others in his batch of drivers, and I think a difference would be also that in reality he was often in worse cars than those around him when he qualified particularly well so that could over-emphasise his deficiencies in races compared to others maybe. In this scenario he'd be in a better car than the really elite drivers at least, no less suited to race set-up (maybe the Jordan was at times for example). I'm sure that outright qualifying pace wouldn't be the main decisive factor in such a championship though still. And Trulli himself I still see as a relative outsider (hence his odds I posted). I'd also be more of a fan of various others drivers than Max overall - Jules Bianchi, Button, Kubica to name a few. I think Kubica's current form is probably pretty irrelevant here by the way given his limitations now, although it'll be interesting to find out how good Russell might be able to be eventually.
But as I said, it's really just your best guesses I'm asking for, if we were lucky enough in some parallel universe to be able to experience all of these great drivers in their primes competing with each other in not dissimilar cars (albeit with some a little better/faster than others as I think we'd all agree the top 50 drivers would not all be on the same level overall, or even similar for outright pace especially if we assume the cars would not be narrowing the difference drivers can make quite so much as modern ones can).
We can look at it as them all being born in the same era if that helps, and concentrate on the pure driving ability. Questions like how Fangio managed to be so competitive at his age in his day, and whether he wouldn't in a more modern car and sport, or whether he would and that hints he was better than Michael.....would be valid things to think about though I think. Or if thinking of a time-machine type scenario, then it'd at least be necessary for the drivers to be allowed to acclimatise to the cars they were to be driving and to receive some advice about training routines etc.
Again on Verstappen, it's not what he's achieved but what you believe he's demonstrated he could achieve. He's not really had the opportunity to challenge for a championship yet, but when the Red Bull has been competitive he's won races so map that over a season and I don't see why he wouldn't be challenging - it doesn't seem like it'll happen this season of course but again that's more about the car differences.
So far I probably seem like a Max-fanboy or something but it's not really the case. I'm probably more of a fan of the guy in my user name even. I'd think it can be questionable that he (Trulli) makes the list too by the way, even if he hasn't been singled out by name yet. But I also felt the qualifying system might help him vs others in his batch of drivers, and I think a difference would be also that in reality he was often in worse cars than those around him when he qualified particularly well so that could over-emphasise his deficiencies in races compared to others maybe. In this scenario he'd be in a better car than the really elite drivers at least, no less suited to race set-up (maybe the Jordan was at times for example). I'm sure that outright qualifying pace wouldn't be the main decisive factor in such a championship though still. And Trulli himself I still see as a relative outsider (hence his odds I posted). I'd also be more of a fan of various others drivers than Max overall - Jules Bianchi, Button, Kubica to name a few. I think Kubica's current form is probably pretty irrelevant here by the way given his limitations now, although it'll be interesting to find out how good Russell might be able to be eventually.
My list for what it's worth, first 32 are all the F1 World Drivers Champions, IMHO they all deserve to be there. Next 9 are the drivers with most F1 wins who never won a world championship. Last 9 are my wild cards, they are drivers from older eras where the risks were higher but there were far fewer races in a season. Hence, I'd rate Tony Brooks 6 wins (38 starts) over five years in the 1950's considerably higher than, say, Mark Webbers 9 wins (217 starts) from 2001-2013. A couple of the wildcards also had promising careers cut short by tragedy. Rudolf Caracciola and Tazio Nuvolari should probably also be in there but not strictly F1. Sorry, Max is certain to make the list but he's not there yet.
Juan Manuel Fangio
Lewis Hamilton
Alain Prost
Sebastian Vettel
Jack Brabham
Jackie Stewart
Niki Lauda
Nelson Piquet
Ayrton Senna
Alberto Ascari
Graham Hill
Jim Clark
Emerson Fittipaldi
Mika Häkkinen
Fernando Alonso
Giuseppe Farina
Mike Hawthorn
Phil Hill
John Surtees
Denny Hulme
Jochen Rindt
James Hunt
Mario Andretti
Jody Scheckter
Alan Jones
Keke Rosberg
Nigel Mansell
Damon Hill
Jacques Villeneuve
Kimi Räikkönen
Jenson Button
Nico Rosberg
Stirling Moss
David Coulthard
Carlos Reutemann
Rubens Barrichello
Felipe Massa
Ronnie Peterson
Gerhard Berger
Mark Webber
René Arnoux
Jacky Ickx (8)
Tony Brooks (6)
Jacques Laffite (6)
Gilles Villeneuve (6)
Bruce McLaren (4)
Dan Gurney (4)
Peter Collins (3)
Didier Pironi (3)
Wolfgang von Trips (2)
Juan Manuel Fangio
Lewis Hamilton
Alain Prost
Sebastian Vettel
Jack Brabham
Jackie Stewart
Niki Lauda
Nelson Piquet
Ayrton Senna
Alberto Ascari
Graham Hill
Jim Clark
Emerson Fittipaldi
Mika Häkkinen
Fernando Alonso
Giuseppe Farina
Mike Hawthorn
Phil Hill
John Surtees
Denny Hulme
Jochen Rindt
James Hunt
Mario Andretti
Jody Scheckter
Alan Jones
Keke Rosberg
Nigel Mansell
Damon Hill
Jacques Villeneuve
Kimi Räikkönen
Jenson Button
Nico Rosberg
Stirling Moss
David Coulthard
Carlos Reutemann
Rubens Barrichello
Felipe Massa
Ronnie Peterson
Gerhard Berger
Mark Webber
René Arnoux
Jacky Ickx (8)
Tony Brooks (6)
Jacques Laffite (6)
Gilles Villeneuve (6)
Bruce McLaren (4)
Dan Gurney (4)
Peter Collins (3)
Didier Pironi (3)
Wolfgang von Trips (2)
Mellow Yellow said:
My list for what it's worth, first 32 are all the F1 World Drivers Champions, IMHO they all deserve to be there. Next 9 are the drivers with most F1 wins who never won a world championship. Last 9 are my wild cards, they are drivers from older eras where the risks were higher but there were far fewer races in a season. Hence, I'd rate Tony Brooks 6 wins (38 starts) over five years in the 1950's considerably higher than, say, Mark Webbers 9 wins (217 starts) from 2001-2013. A couple of the wildcards also had promising careers cut short by tragedy. Rudolf Caracciola and Tazio Nuvolari should probably also be in there but not strictly F1. Sorry, Max is certain to make the list but he's not there yet.
Juan Manuel Fangio
Lewis Hamilton
Alain Prost
Sebastian Vettel
Jack Brabham
Jackie Stewart
Niki Lauda
Nelson Piquet
Ayrton Senna
Alberto Ascari
Graham Hill
Jim Clark
Emerson Fittipaldi
Mika Häkkinen
Fernando Alonso
Giuseppe Farina
Mike Hawthorn
Phil Hill
John Surtees
Denny Hulme
Jochen Rindt
James Hunt
Mario Andretti
Jody Scheckter
Alan Jones
Keke Rosberg
Nigel Mansell
Damon Hill
Jacques Villeneuve
Kimi Räikkönen
Jenson Button
Nico Rosberg
Stirling Moss
David Coulthard
Carlos Reutemann
Rubens Barrichello
Felipe Massa
Ronnie Peterson
Gerhard Berger
Mark Webber
René Arnoux
Jacky Ickx (8)
Tony Brooks (6)
Jacques Laffite (6)
Gilles Villeneuve (6)
Bruce McLaren (4)
Dan Gurney (4)
Peter Collins (3)
Didier Pironi (3)
Wolfgang von Trips (2)
Thanks. Any idea as to how you'd perceive they should be paired up, or split up into groups of 10 to determine which cars they get allocated in my scenario? Perhaps according to the order listed pretty much? I thought it was worth asking anyway to clarify.Juan Manuel Fangio
Lewis Hamilton
Alain Prost
Sebastian Vettel
Jack Brabham
Jackie Stewart
Niki Lauda
Nelson Piquet
Ayrton Senna
Alberto Ascari
Graham Hill
Jim Clark
Emerson Fittipaldi
Mika Häkkinen
Fernando Alonso
Giuseppe Farina
Mike Hawthorn
Phil Hill
John Surtees
Denny Hulme
Jochen Rindt
James Hunt
Mario Andretti
Jody Scheckter
Alan Jones
Keke Rosberg
Nigel Mansell
Damon Hill
Jacques Villeneuve
Kimi Räikkönen
Jenson Button
Nico Rosberg
Stirling Moss
David Coulthard
Carlos Reutemann
Rubens Barrichello
Felipe Massa
Ronnie Peterson
Gerhard Berger
Mark Webber
René Arnoux
Jacky Ickx (8)
Tony Brooks (6)
Jacques Laffite (6)
Gilles Villeneuve (6)
Bruce McLaren (4)
Dan Gurney (4)
Peter Collins (3)
Didier Pironi (3)
Wolfgang von Trips (2)
I can keep track of drivers voted for in terms of the lists of 50 anyway, in alphabetical order.
At this early stage it's like this:
2 Votes
Fernando Alonso
Mario Andretti
Alberto Ascari
Rubens Barrichello
Gerhard Berger
Jack Brabham
Jenson Button
Jim Clark
Juan Manuel Fangio
Emerson Fittipaldi
Mika Hakkinen
Lewis Hamilton
Damon Hill
James Hunt
Alan Jones
Niki Lauda
Nigel Mansell
Felipe Massa
Stirling Moss
Ronnie Peterson
Nelson Piquet
Alain Prost
Kimi Raikkonen
Jochen Rindt
Keke Rosberg
Nico Rosberg
Ayrton Senna
Jackie Stewart
Sebastian Vettel
Gilles Villeneuve
Jacques Villeneuve
1 Vote
Michele Alboreto
Jean Alesi
Rene Arnoux
Stefan Bellof
Jules Bianchi
Valtteri Bottas
Tony Brooks
Peter Collins
David Coulthard
Elio De Angelis
Giussepe Farina
Giancarlo Fisichella
Heinz-Harald Frentzen
Romain Grosjean
Dan Gurney
Mike Hawthorn
Nick Heidfeld
Denny Hulme
Graham Hill
Phil Hill
Jacky Ickx
Robert Kubica
Jacques Laffite
Charles Leclerc
Bruce McLaren
Juan-Pablo Montoya
Alessandro Nannini
Olivier Panis
Didier Pironi
Carlos Reutemann
Daniel Ricciardo
Jody Scheckter
Michael Schumacher
John Surtees
Jarno Trulli
Max Verstappen
Wolfgang von Trips
Mark Webber
I can adjust obviously later if the Schmacher omission was not deliberate!
At this early stage it's like this:
2 Votes
Fernando Alonso
Mario Andretti
Alberto Ascari
Rubens Barrichello
Gerhard Berger
Jack Brabham
Jenson Button
Jim Clark
Juan Manuel Fangio
Emerson Fittipaldi
Mika Hakkinen
Lewis Hamilton
Damon Hill
James Hunt
Alan Jones
Niki Lauda
Nigel Mansell
Felipe Massa
Stirling Moss
Ronnie Peterson
Nelson Piquet
Alain Prost
Kimi Raikkonen
Jochen Rindt
Keke Rosberg
Nico Rosberg
Ayrton Senna
Jackie Stewart
Sebastian Vettel
Gilles Villeneuve
Jacques Villeneuve
1 Vote
Michele Alboreto
Jean Alesi
Rene Arnoux
Stefan Bellof
Jules Bianchi
Valtteri Bottas
Tony Brooks
Peter Collins
David Coulthard
Elio De Angelis
Giussepe Farina
Giancarlo Fisichella
Heinz-Harald Frentzen
Romain Grosjean
Dan Gurney
Mike Hawthorn
Nick Heidfeld
Denny Hulme
Graham Hill
Phil Hill
Jacky Ickx
Robert Kubica
Jacques Laffite
Charles Leclerc
Bruce McLaren
Juan-Pablo Montoya
Alessandro Nannini
Olivier Panis
Didier Pironi
Carlos Reutemann
Daniel Ricciardo
Jody Scheckter
Michael Schumacher
John Surtees
Jarno Trulli
Max Verstappen
Wolfgang von Trips
Mark Webber
I can adjust obviously later if the Schmacher omission was not deliberate!
Yours Trulli said:
Thanks. Any idea as to how you'd perceive they should be paired up, or split up into groups of 10 to determine which cars they get allocated in my scenario? Perhaps according to the order listed pretty much? I thought it was worth asking anyway to clarify.
His list is purely in order of numbers of championships (then chronological order among those with equal numbers), then race wins, I realise now. The Brooks/Webber comment was already a good clue it wouldn't be in order of priority or according to allocation of team-mates or cars anyway to be fair!So, yeah, it's just whether it was brain fade, not realising Schmuacher wasn't on the top of it, or something to do with some kind of disqualification from the list I suppose....
f
k a duck, I missed Bruce and Brooks!!!
Both inexcusable - esp as the only racing picture in my house is Moss and Brooks in the Vanwalls up Eau Rouge!
I hesitate to suggest that Tony would be middle to lower order in honesty, as much as it pains me as he could keep Moss, Hawthorn and Jack honest most of the time!
Where to place Bruce? God knows! I suspect he would not challenge for the overall championship with the top ten, however, on any given race day he could give everyone a fight.
If it came to each driver starting out in a base equal car and developing them through the season - then I have no doubt at all that by the end of the season Bruce would be in the best car.
Hmmm, know what I’ll make a call there. Put Moss and Bruce in the same team, with everyone in equal base cars at the start of the season. Moss would be champion at the end.
A Schumi/Lauda combo would try to match it but the Rat would have punched Michael out by race 3.
Prost and Senna would only care about beating each other, no matter how mature either of them were.
Clark and Fangio would be an almost unbeatable combo if the cars were not being developed through the season or if they started the season with the best car.
Ascari and Farina would kill each other.
A balls out wet Silverstone (any config) with Hamilton and Gilles starting at the back in equal cars would be the highlight of the season.
There is quite a lot of fun to be had with pondering on the pairings.
But no, Max wouldn’t make the list by a very long shot. He isn’t in the same league as any of these chaps.
k a duck, I missed Bruce and Brooks!!!Both inexcusable - esp as the only racing picture in my house is Moss and Brooks in the Vanwalls up Eau Rouge!
I hesitate to suggest that Tony would be middle to lower order in honesty, as much as it pains me as he could keep Moss, Hawthorn and Jack honest most of the time!
Where to place Bruce? God knows! I suspect he would not challenge for the overall championship with the top ten, however, on any given race day he could give everyone a fight.
If it came to each driver starting out in a base equal car and developing them through the season - then I have no doubt at all that by the end of the season Bruce would be in the best car.
Hmmm, know what I’ll make a call there. Put Moss and Bruce in the same team, with everyone in equal base cars at the start of the season. Moss would be champion at the end.
A Schumi/Lauda combo would try to match it but the Rat would have punched Michael out by race 3.
Prost and Senna would only care about beating each other, no matter how mature either of them were.
Clark and Fangio would be an almost unbeatable combo if the cars were not being developed through the season or if they started the season with the best car.
Ascari and Farina would kill each other.
A balls out wet Silverstone (any config) with Hamilton and Gilles starting at the back in equal cars would be the highlight of the season.
There is quite a lot of fun to be had with pondering on the pairings.
But no, Max wouldn’t make the list by a very long shot. He isn’t in the same league as any of these chaps.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff