This entry is now closed for comments.
All I can add to this, is this.......iI'm really looking forward to Murray revealing who the remaing drivers are.
% Career starts from the front row. Again giving drivers who were taken from us too early some comparison. Michael enjoyed the most dominant cars too.1 Juan Manuel Fangio 92.31%2 Jim Clark 65.75%3 Ayrton Senna 53.70%4 Sebastian Vettel 48.91%5 Alain Prost 42.57% Lewis Hamilton 42.57%7 Jackie Stewart 42.00%8 Michael Schumacher 38.80%9 Damon Hill 38.52%
Qualifying, test of raw speed and talent. questions need to be asked why schumacher was out qualified regularly by drivers who don't even appear in anyones top 20 whilst he had a top car.1 Juan Manuel Fangio 55.77%2 Jim Clark 45.21%3 Alberto Ascari 42.42%4 Ayrton Senna 40.12%5 Sebastian Vettel 35.87%6 Stirling Moss 23.88%7 Michael Schumacher 22.74%8 Lewis Hamilton 21.78%
If schumacher was so great, why couldn't he win titles against Alonso in the inferior Renault in 2005 2006? Why didn't Michael test himself against a decent team mate? why did he retire when Kimi was signed?Can you imagine Moss, G.Hill, Prost and Senna doing that?Why is his qualifying record so poor as a % when he had the most dominant cars in history? I'll tell you why, he was flawed (genius)
@117 But that's what I think is unfair when people almost mark him down for what he did over those 5 years at Ferrari. He dominated the sport in a way that had never been seen before, he can only beat what is on the grid alongside him. @119 I agree everyones top 5 will always be different, but I think M Sch more than most wont be considered THE #1 for the sheer margain of victory he used to enjoy.
btw guys i havent watched f1 in 1990s i only started watching in 2007 so apologys for my factual inaccuracies thx ;)
They were all very brave drivers back then , but what Lauda did was truly heroic. I for one am glad the sport has moved on from those dark days , to be a much safer sport , while keeping up the excitement , but do we really have drivers as brave as Lauda now? I think not..
@107 and @123 - completely agree with these comments.The problem with "greatness", is that it is subjective. Everyone looks for their evidence in different places. Many from past era's were great (IMO), but died before they had a chance to rack up the stats (eg: Jim Clark and G Villeneuve), so will never have the chance to prove it to some people.
Could someone interview Bernie, Ron Dennis or Ross Brawn and ask them for their top 20? This article about Lauda was nice. Quite insightful.
Well let's not spilt hairs then guys. The title of this is F1s greatest drivers, not champions. For me there are a couple of drivers who were not champions who come under that category. I doubt Murray will include James Hunt but Murray included Gille Villenueve because of some GP victories and performances that defied description. Ok maybe he was crazy to some of his peers, but certainly not all!
PART 2>>Ask Moss if he would race today if he had the capacity- I'd expect him to say yes- and to fancy his chances. More hypothetical for a modern driver to be transported back to a 50s/60s race, but I don't think many would honestly expect to effectively compete. Some exceptions immediately spring to mind- Gilles Villeneuve, perhaps Senna.
You might argue that a win rate of 25% in the "old" days (up to some time in the 60s???) is a similar level of achievement as 90% today. There was much more random intervention through reliability, accidents, and even just the general conditions of the track and the variance between competitiors.>>>see part 2
We're having some problems displaying the comments at the moment. Sorry. We're doing our best to fix it.
You must sign in to rate comments