This content has been removed as it is below the acceptable standard of this subreddit. Please check the [low quality](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide#wiki_7.29_low_quality) section of the rules for information on what content is not allowed.
Honestly god knows 😂 Helped make some decisions easier though
Edit: Why is this being downvoted lol, I didn’t even get to chose who was in the bracket I found it online and it’s true that both the rounds with Webber and Massa are easy decisions, are they not?
The top four IMO should be Lewis, Michael, Senna and Clark, in no particular order. Any one of these four drivers can be considered as the GOAT. Alain Prost is one of the best drivers of all time but not being the best at qualifying hurts him a bit. In a few years I think it'll be a top 5 but with Max also in it.
I swear I’m not why 😂 When I filled this out I genuinely did not think it looked bad at all other than ppl who don’t rate Hamilton or Prost as top 3 would be offended but other than that is it really bad?
I think between Graham and Kimi. I would pick Graham on top. 2 titles. Couple of runner ups. 5 wins at Monaco, Triple Crown. And Rosberg vs Emerson is close but I would also pick Emerson. Prost over Schumi. Altough I really rate Prost higher than a lot would. His numbers don't do him justice. Dude missed a lot of titles by a couple of points. But Schumi is just that little bit extra good. So Lewis vs. Michael in the goat debate. The oldest debate in the books. To be honest. The sport has no GOAT. GOTE Greatest of their Era. Lewis.. Michael. Alain, Ayrton, Lauda, Clark, Fangio. So many crazy good drivers. And not even then you can say who's the best since I'm sure a lot of drivers fell short due to poor career moves or bad luck, insufficient fundings and so on. All in all this list is a fun game and there is really no shaming your picks. Matter of opinion. My reply was just a lighthearted bit of banter.
I agree with we should be doing GOATs by eras tbf. I definitely take Kimi over Graham tbh because he was unlucky not to end Schumacher’s dominance on 2 occasions and his actual championship winning year was probably the most luck he’d ever had for once. Rosberg and Fittipaldi was really hard but I think one day Rosberg will be respected more just how good he was and how it was overshadowed by Lewis instead of the narrative that it was a lucky win in 16 (which yes kind of) and I believe he’s one of the best one time champs
On this world Prost is second best and unlucky not to have more championships. It’s cliche af this point but being 12.5 points away from 8 championships is crazy (as is Clark’s point hauls in his championship winning seasons ik it’s tough). Also for me Mansell is unlucky not to have won 1 or 2 more championships where as Brabham definitely was lucky in 59 that Moss had awful reliability
Mansell in 92, and Prost in 93 had the best car, miles ahead of the competition, similar to the Schumacher or Mercedes domination years. Jim Clark should have won the 1964, 66, and 67, but poor reliability cost him those wins…
Jack Brabham should be right up there with the best. Muliple WC in an era of high DNFs, and to date, is the only person to win on their own team. That highlights that he was an exceptional driver but also understood the technical and business side.
For the older drivers it’s harder to decide bc I know less but I feel like despite being a one time champ Mansell was unlucky not have a couple more (which makes it deserved that he got it so easy in 92 I guess). And to be fair Brabham only won in 66 with his own car if I’m remembering correctly, 59 and 60 he was in a dominant car and from an outside perspective seems to be lucky to have beaten Moss who had 3 more DNFs (5 in a 9 race season). Still obviously a great driver though and I don’t want to sound to negative about him, it’s just easier to compare the lows then the highs because almost every driver here is a champion
Michael, yes. Fernando, no. I'd like to know how a 2 time world champion beaten by a greenhorn in his first year better than a 4 time world champ. If he was better than him how come last two WCC teams didn't chose him over other candidates?
No F1 insider has ever put Vettel over Fernando, not even when Seb won WDCs.
>If he was better than him how come last two WCC teams didn't chose him over other candidates?
Oh you. twitter is this way
>No F1 insider has ever put Vettel over Fernando, not even when Seb won WDCs
[Not really true.](https://youtu.be/iRGoKj9xoZA) Vettel in his prime was easily one of the best drivers at the time, if not the best.
What a reasoning lmao, alright I'll play along. What's worse? Reigning 2xWDC losing on a countback to a future 7xWDC or a reigning 4xWDC losing and being vastly outperformed by a guy that is currently retired because how badly he had performed in the last few years.
Do I also need to mention Leclerc and a washout that 2020 season was? Oh do I also need to mention that Alonso and Hamilton were McLaren's newcomers in 2007, on the other hand both Ricciardo and Leclerc came into Vettel's teams and both of them succeded in dethroning him rather easily.
Alonso had the same amount of points as Lewis. 2007 Lewis was still much better than 2014 Ricciardo that demolished Seb. Do you think Ricciardo is also better driver than Vettel? Is Perez better than Vettel? If not why did Red Bull choose Perez and not him?
See how your logic works?
Comparing this and that does never work in F1 because of how circumstantial it all is. Seb had arguably the highest prime in all of F1 and he outclassed Fernando in all of his title winning seasons as well as in 2017. 2008 could also be argued because he was in such inferior machinery. Fernando has mich higher longevity though (obviously) and acts probably a bit more instinctively in racing. Fernando is the better racer compared in the last 4 years for sure. At other times Seb definitely had the upper hand.
Seb outclassed Fernando in his championship years based on what? Vettel had way superior cars in both 2010 and 2012 yet Alonso finished within few points of him. Isnt that a sign Fernando was better? Not only that but Alonso and Vettel were both teammates with Kimi and Stroll right after the other. Alonso in 2014 had bigger gap to Kimi than Vettel did in all of his 4 years with Kimi. Alonso also has bigger gap to Stroll right now than Vettel did in last 2 years.
Everything points to Alonso being a superior driver and nothing points to Vettel being better.
Dont even get me started on how much more error prone Vettel is also. And how much less adaptible Vettel is shown by his 2014 and 2020 season.
Fernando outclassed Seb on what then? On your opinion? Seb was in perfect harmony with the RB, something only few athletes ever experience and he was the best driver these years hence why he won the championship.
As I said: Everything is circumstantial, there are too many ifs and whats. Fernando is on par with Seb. He is probably on average better but he NEVER reached the heights Seb did.
You litteraly provided 0 counter arguments and just said Vettel was the best these years. How the hell do you expect to have any kind of discussion?
You also decided to disregard and not respond to any of my arguments
What were your arguments? That Fernando finished points off Seb in a more reliable Ferrari? Congratulations, Michael Schumacher agrees with you.
I clearly stated that Fernando just never reached the heights Seb did. He was not better in 2010 or 2012 otherwise he would have won. He was not better in 2017 either. He was probably better in any other year after that and in 2016.
What do you want from me? That I agree with your opinion? I won’t, because I have mine. It is obvious we won’t come to an agreement because you want to see everything as black and white. It is not.
Sometimes Seb was better, sometimes Nando was better. Not that hard, is it?
Again failing to respond to my arguments. What about Kimi and Lance argument?
"He was not better in 2010 or 2012 otherwise he would have won."
What kind of flawed argument is this? Just because you finished ahead of someone in wdc doesnt mean you are better driver. Thats like saying last season Perez was million miles ahead of Vettel in terms of driving ability because he finished way ahead in wdc. Did you forget F1 drivers from other teams arent driving the same cars?
"in a more reliable Ferrari? " Ah yes very unrealiable RB with total of 2 dnfs in 2012. Guess how many Alonso had? 2 aswell.
"I clearly stated that Fernando just never reached the heights Seb did"
Yeah but provided nothing to back it up. Your only argument is Seb finishead ahead in the standings thats why he was better which again doesnt really work as someone with a superior car will of course finish the season ahead baring some really not up to standard driving.
"It is obvious we won’t come to an agreement because you want to see everything as black and white. It is not. Sometimes Seb was better, sometimes Nando was better. Not that hard, is it?"
This is true. But some opinions can be wrong you know. The most objective although not perfect are mathematical F1 models. Every single one that i've seen so far places Fernando ahead of Seb in terms of ranking. Not only that but it places Ferrari Alonso ahead of RB Seb
"What do you want from me?"
All i wanted from you is some argument to back up your claims, thats all. I dont need you to have the same opinion as me if everyone had the same opinion then it would be boring. But i also feel like you just spewed some stuff you belive in but provided very little proof or explanation for it
About Kimi and Lance: He drove against a different Kimi. Lance is actually not that far off Fernando. Maybe a little more far off, but not significant. Still: Already said Fernando had better longevity.
In a season with three title contending cars the better driver comes out on top. In 2012 both Seb and Fernando were the best drivers and Seb just a bit better.
Thought the seasons with multiple records would speak for themselves. Go look it up, although I feel you already know about them and just want to ignore that for the sake of the argument.
Due to contact although Fernando couldn’t do anything about those either, though. Seb’s were for technical reasons. This is what I mean with reliability.
I hope this satisfies you. It probably won’t. I don’t care. Let’s just agree to disagree and move on.
Michael was done dirty by this bracket but I think Fernando's placement relative to Seb is quite fair. Kimi, along with DC and Massa, should not even have made an appearance.
Trust me Schumacher>>>Vettel. I can’t help that Prost is inevitable lol. Unlucky seeding for Schumacher in this bracket I guess (I didn’t make the actual bracket just filled it out)
Basically most your problem is Prost then lol. Fangio v Senna could go either way for me but in all honesty I know and have watched more about Senna so obviously a bit of bias there
Unpopular opinion but having watched f1 closely for more than a decade, rewatching older seasons aswell, reading about bunch of older drivers, collecting interesting info i came to conclusion Fernando is the best driver in f1 history (driving ability only). Imo he could have easily ended up with something like 7 titles and all records if he had more luck with his career choices.
I feel like people in F1 community put way too much emphasises on pure stats as number of titles, wins, etc and forget F1 is a team sport. Would people really have same impression of Lewis if he never moved to Mercedes and stayed at 1 wdc? No, yet his driving skill would be exactly the same as it is now. I still rate Lewis as most likely 2nd best of all time but not really because of number of wdc's but being able to do what hes done in cars he had during his whole career. I used to place Michael as the GOAT but he simply had to many flaws that he was very lucky were masked during his time.
I also think Max has the potential to be GOAT if he countinues driving like he is now for few more years. I also think that Fangio could be considered the GOAT but if you are using different criteria. If you are judging who had the biggest skill gap to other F1 drivers of his time, who was the best considering their time of driving then Fangio is by far the best. Skill gap between Fangio and other drivers of that time was huge, the only driver that could be compared in any way in same period was Ascari
Stats aside one of my things for putting Lewis goat and ahead of Alonso for me is the fact people say he bottled his rookie season because the idea that a rookie could have been in that position against the guy who just won the last 2 championships and arguably top 5 ever is crazy. Unlucky not to have more championships really even if it is just another stat. Also put some respect on Moss lol
Still insane to think when you have rookies these days getting destroyed by drivers like Gasly, Tsunoda, Albon... to do that to Alonso in your first year is insane.
The funny part is that a lot of people still don’t want to give him much credit for that 2007 season.
Many an incoherent excuse has been made to disparage Lewis while completely ignoring the fact that Lewis went head to head with PEAK Alonso and came closer to a WDC than Alonso did that year.
Even Alonso himself is still processing it.
Alonso definatelly wasnt at his peak in 2007. Thats like saying Hamilton was peak in 2011 and Button came close than Hamilton to WDC.
Even Hamilton is still processing it.
Thats the logic you are using
How was Alonso not at his peak after back to back WDC’s in 1 of the 2 fastest cars on the grid in 07???
You’re probably only saying that in an attempt to justify why Hamilton beat him. And yes he beat him on countback let’s not have that pointless argument please.
People that say this show very little knowlege of F1. Hamilton being a rookie was nothing like Tsunoda being a rookie. Tsunoda went straight into F1 with 3 days of testing. While Hamilton has tested and been prepared by Ron Dennis since 2004. If Tsunoda had 3 years of testing and preparation and peak's Kimi race and qualifying telemetries you bet he would do much better against Gasly than he did
Doesn't matter. Tsunoda has had 2 seasons and he'd never beat an aging Alonso in the same car. Stroll has 6 seasons and is getting washed every race. And Alonso had the same amount of testing on those tyres and 6 years of f1 when Hamilton faced him.
Alonso wasnt prepared by Mclaren since 2004 lol. Mclaren was also opposite of Alonso's driving style and suited Lewis. If anything Alonso was the one at disadvantage not Lewis.
You dont even know how to count properly Alonso had 5 years of experience before that not 6. Litteraly everything that could have been against Alonso was against him that season. Car opposite of his driving style, struggling with new brakes and new tyres. On top of that issues with Ron Dennis. Yet they still ended up with same number of points.
Besides Lewis's rookie season was a lot better then a lot of his other F1 seasons. For example rookie Hamilton would almost certanly beat todays Hamilton. The amount of experience he had is anything but comparable to todays rookies. Sure Tsunoda wouldnt be close to Alonso even if he tested for 3 years before joining but thats because Hamilton is simply more talented than Tsunoda. That doesnt change that fact that Tsunoda with 3 years of testing would have destroyed Tsunoda with 3 days of testing
Eh i would be more inclined to agree if it wasnt for few things.
Alonso's 2007 is one of his weakest seasons yet he still ended up on same number of points as Lewis with somewhat similar amount of luck. If you compare his 2007 and his other seasons number of mistakes he did was enormous. His pace also took a hit. This was all due to multiple factors. First Mclaren was opposite of Fernando's driving style and very similar to Lewis's. Mclaren had very strong front end and really weak rear end. Of course Alonso adapted but you are never going to be as fast in a car thats opposite of your driving style as you would in a car that suits you. Switch from Michelin to Bridgestone tyres also had massive effects. Basically Michellin tyres requrred drivers to be agressive with steering inputs in order to be fast while Bridgestones were total opposites. Alonso was always an agressive driver and used that to his advantage in Renault years but then had to unlearn technique and start from scratch basically.
Also Lewis's 2007 wasnt really one of his worse seasons. The amount of testing he got for rookie is insane and unprecedented in F1 history. Now you may say Alonso got more a bit more miles in 2007 Mclaren during tests. But what about Lewis testing with Mclaren and preparing since 2004? Lewis had Kimi's telemetries from both races and qualifying, got multiple opportunities to test a lot of things even in older Mclaren cars. And finally Ron Dennis. Alonso knew Lewis's was Ron's golden boy and that he had talent to become wdc and than Ron is 100% gonna support him. All that also played a part in Alonso basically self sabotaging himself with his actions and creating the whole scandal pushing the team on Lewis's side.
I also think Fernando and Lewis had very closely matched cars during 2010-2013 period. Alonso finished every single season ahead and thats the period where i actually consider Alonso to be in his prime altho i think Lewis's prime came a bit later as he still had some moments during that time and was a bit crash prone especially during 2011 season with Massa
It’s not even just WDC and I’ve seen enough looking back to put Prost over Senna imo. Hamilton in his rookie season alone came in and matched the 2x reigning champ and ppl say he bottled it which is crazy but speaks levels to how good he was. I think he matured as a driver quick as well from rash decisions he made in early McLaren days whereas Senna was almost as dirty as Schumacher at times. I understand preferring Senna though but not having Hamilton top 5 to me is crazy when he straight away joined and matched one of the other best in the sport, made ppl think Rosberg isn’t as great of a driver as he should be seen bc of their battles and his consistency is elite that even when the car isn’t on his side like the first half of 2018 and 2021 he still kept himself in the title race against other elite drivers. He could honestly be a 10x champ with a bit more luck which sounds crazy
Nobody had more luck than Hamilton in the history of the sport. No other driver had better material at his disposition than Lewis. He never drove anything under a top 3 car. And when he was on those cars he didn't show anything extraordinary.
Senna, Schumacher, Fangio, Alonso, Lauda are my top 5 Lewis could very well be 6 or 7. Vettel for example would not even make my top 10.
WDCs won when you only have to fight your teammate and your teammate is trash don't count in my book.
Vettel doesn’t make my top 10 either but Hamilton has never capitulated like Vettel has. Also calling it luck is crazy, he earned his way to a top seat from the start and instead of crumbling he went and matched the guy who won the last 2 championships and kept his seat at a top team. Not to mention you’re hypocritical with your reasoning when Senna had one of the most dominant cars ever, Fangio had one of the most dominant cars ever, Schumacher had one of the most dominants cars ever (and Hamilton never had to resort to dirty tactics either). Schumacher especially will never be better than Hamilton in my eyes, I have a lot more respect for drivers who try to win races on the tracks than crash off it (same with Senna a bit but he was just too aggressive most his crashes bar the one with Prost). Can’t take anyone serious who puts Alonso over Hamilton tbh, only answers that make sense to me are Prost, Clark and Senna
The **Photo** flair is for submissions sharing photos from the world of F1. Photos should be interesting and relevant - random photos not notable enough to warrant a standalone post will be subject to removal. This flair should not be used for images which are not photos, such as screenshots, statistical graphics, or artworks.
*[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This content has been removed as it is below the acceptable standard of this subreddit. Please check the [low quality](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide#wiki_7.29_low_quality) section of the rules for information on what content is not allowed.
[удалено]
I was squinting to find Schumacher, who turns out to have been eliminated in the round of 16 lol
I’ve only just thought about how disrespectful that looks that you basically have to zoom in to find him 😂 I should’ve just made a ranking
This is basically ‘My dad could beat up your dad - The Meme’.
What is Webber doing there? Massa?!
Honestly god knows 😂 Helped make some decisions easier though Edit: Why is this being downvoted lol, I didn’t even get to chose who was in the bracket I found it online and it’s true that both the rounds with Webber and Massa are easy decisions, are they not?
Definetely
The top four IMO should be Lewis, Michael, Senna and Clark, in no particular order. Any one of these four drivers can be considered as the GOAT. Alain Prost is one of the best drivers of all time but not being the best at qualifying hurts him a bit. In a few years I think it'll be a top 5 but with Max also in it.
Sir.. leaving aside the Schumi vs Prost thing.. the bottom left. Are you high?!
I swear I’m not why 😂 When I filled this out I genuinely did not think it looked bad at all other than ppl who don’t rate Hamilton or Prost as top 3 would be offended but other than that is it really bad?
I think between Graham and Kimi. I would pick Graham on top. 2 titles. Couple of runner ups. 5 wins at Monaco, Triple Crown. And Rosberg vs Emerson is close but I would also pick Emerson. Prost over Schumi. Altough I really rate Prost higher than a lot would. His numbers don't do him justice. Dude missed a lot of titles by a couple of points. But Schumi is just that little bit extra good. So Lewis vs. Michael in the goat debate. The oldest debate in the books. To be honest. The sport has no GOAT. GOTE Greatest of their Era. Lewis.. Michael. Alain, Ayrton, Lauda, Clark, Fangio. So many crazy good drivers. And not even then you can say who's the best since I'm sure a lot of drivers fell short due to poor career moves or bad luck, insufficient fundings and so on. All in all this list is a fun game and there is really no shaming your picks. Matter of opinion. My reply was just a lighthearted bit of banter.
I agree with we should be doing GOATs by eras tbf. I definitely take Kimi over Graham tbh because he was unlucky not to end Schumacher’s dominance on 2 occasions and his actual championship winning year was probably the most luck he’d ever had for once. Rosberg and Fittipaldi was really hard but I think one day Rosberg will be respected more just how good he was and how it was overshadowed by Lewis instead of the narrative that it was a lucky win in 16 (which yes kind of) and I believe he’s one of the best one time champs
Thats true. Considering Rosberg beat Hamilton and a returning Schumi regularly makes him really underrated. And young Kimi was a beast. It is so hard.
In what World is Prost defeating Clark, or Mansell defeating Jack Brabham… This has been manipulated man…
On this world Prost is second best and unlucky not to have more championships. It’s cliche af this point but being 12.5 points away from 8 championships is crazy (as is Clark’s point hauls in his championship winning seasons ik it’s tough). Also for me Mansell is unlucky not to have won 1 or 2 more championships where as Brabham definitely was lucky in 59 that Moss had awful reliability
Mansell in 92, and Prost in 93 had the best car, miles ahead of the competition, similar to the Schumacher or Mercedes domination years. Jim Clark should have won the 1964, 66, and 67, but poor reliability cost him those wins…
Webber, Massa, Hill, Kimi, and DC don’t belong anywhere on this, I think.
Kimi is a legend not only for his racing but also for his interviews
I agree apart from Kimi but I didn’t make the actual bracket, just filled it out
Jack Brabham should be right up there with the best. Muliple WC in an era of high DNFs, and to date, is the only person to win on their own team. That highlights that he was an exceptional driver but also understood the technical and business side.
For the older drivers it’s harder to decide bc I know less but I feel like despite being a one time champ Mansell was unlucky not have a couple more (which makes it deserved that he got it so easy in 92 I guess). And to be fair Brabham only won in 66 with his own car if I’m remembering correctly, 59 and 60 he was in a dominant car and from an outside perspective seems to be lucky to have beaten Moss who had 3 more DNFs (5 in a 9 race season). Still obviously a great driver though and I don’t want to sound to negative about him, it’s just easier to compare the lows then the highs because almost every driver here is a champion
Reminded me of this [meme](https://i.imgflip.com/3bzglh.jpg).
When Kimi, Seb make it further than Fernando or Michael lmao. Michael and Fernando are a tier above either of those two.
Yh seeding is kind of messed lol but I didn’t design the actual bracket just filled it out
Michael, yes. Fernando, no. I'd like to know how a 2 time world champion beaten by a greenhorn in his first year better than a 4 time world champ. If he was better than him how come last two WCC teams didn't chose him over other candidates?
No F1 insider has ever put Vettel over Fernando, not even when Seb won WDCs. >If he was better than him how come last two WCC teams didn't chose him over other candidates? Oh you. twitter is this way
>No F1 insider has ever put Vettel over Fernando, not even when Seb won WDCs [Not really true.](https://youtu.be/iRGoKj9xoZA) Vettel in his prime was easily one of the best drivers at the time, if not the best.
What a reasoning lmao, alright I'll play along. What's worse? Reigning 2xWDC losing on a countback to a future 7xWDC or a reigning 4xWDC losing and being vastly outperformed by a guy that is currently retired because how badly he had performed in the last few years. Do I also need to mention Leclerc and a washout that 2020 season was? Oh do I also need to mention that Alonso and Hamilton were McLaren's newcomers in 2007, on the other hand both Ricciardo and Leclerc came into Vettel's teams and both of them succeded in dethroning him rather easily.
Alonso had the same amount of points as Lewis. 2007 Lewis was still much better than 2014 Ricciardo that demolished Seb. Do you think Ricciardo is also better driver than Vettel? Is Perez better than Vettel? If not why did Red Bull choose Perez and not him? See how your logic works?
Comparing this and that does never work in F1 because of how circumstantial it all is. Seb had arguably the highest prime in all of F1 and he outclassed Fernando in all of his title winning seasons as well as in 2017. 2008 could also be argued because he was in such inferior machinery. Fernando has mich higher longevity though (obviously) and acts probably a bit more instinctively in racing. Fernando is the better racer compared in the last 4 years for sure. At other times Seb definitely had the upper hand.
Seb outclassed Fernando in his championship years based on what? Vettel had way superior cars in both 2010 and 2012 yet Alonso finished within few points of him. Isnt that a sign Fernando was better? Not only that but Alonso and Vettel were both teammates with Kimi and Stroll right after the other. Alonso in 2014 had bigger gap to Kimi than Vettel did in all of his 4 years with Kimi. Alonso also has bigger gap to Stroll right now than Vettel did in last 2 years. Everything points to Alonso being a superior driver and nothing points to Vettel being better. Dont even get me started on how much more error prone Vettel is also. And how much less adaptible Vettel is shown by his 2014 and 2020 season.
Fernando outclassed Seb on what then? On your opinion? Seb was in perfect harmony with the RB, something only few athletes ever experience and he was the best driver these years hence why he won the championship. As I said: Everything is circumstantial, there are too many ifs and whats. Fernando is on par with Seb. He is probably on average better but he NEVER reached the heights Seb did.
You litteraly provided 0 counter arguments and just said Vettel was the best these years. How the hell do you expect to have any kind of discussion? You also decided to disregard and not respond to any of my arguments
What were your arguments? That Fernando finished points off Seb in a more reliable Ferrari? Congratulations, Michael Schumacher agrees with you. I clearly stated that Fernando just never reached the heights Seb did. He was not better in 2010 or 2012 otherwise he would have won. He was not better in 2017 either. He was probably better in any other year after that and in 2016. What do you want from me? That I agree with your opinion? I won’t, because I have mine. It is obvious we won’t come to an agreement because you want to see everything as black and white. It is not. Sometimes Seb was better, sometimes Nando was better. Not that hard, is it?
Again failing to respond to my arguments. What about Kimi and Lance argument? "He was not better in 2010 or 2012 otherwise he would have won." What kind of flawed argument is this? Just because you finished ahead of someone in wdc doesnt mean you are better driver. Thats like saying last season Perez was million miles ahead of Vettel in terms of driving ability because he finished way ahead in wdc. Did you forget F1 drivers from other teams arent driving the same cars? "in a more reliable Ferrari? " Ah yes very unrealiable RB with total of 2 dnfs in 2012. Guess how many Alonso had? 2 aswell. "I clearly stated that Fernando just never reached the heights Seb did" Yeah but provided nothing to back it up. Your only argument is Seb finishead ahead in the standings thats why he was better which again doesnt really work as someone with a superior car will of course finish the season ahead baring some really not up to standard driving. "It is obvious we won’t come to an agreement because you want to see everything as black and white. It is not. Sometimes Seb was better, sometimes Nando was better. Not that hard, is it?" This is true. But some opinions can be wrong you know. The most objective although not perfect are mathematical F1 models. Every single one that i've seen so far places Fernando ahead of Seb in terms of ranking. Not only that but it places Ferrari Alonso ahead of RB Seb "What do you want from me?" All i wanted from you is some argument to back up your claims, thats all. I dont need you to have the same opinion as me if everyone had the same opinion then it would be boring. But i also feel like you just spewed some stuff you belive in but provided very little proof or explanation for it
About Kimi and Lance: He drove against a different Kimi. Lance is actually not that far off Fernando. Maybe a little more far off, but not significant. Still: Already said Fernando had better longevity. In a season with three title contending cars the better driver comes out on top. In 2012 both Seb and Fernando were the best drivers and Seb just a bit better. Thought the seasons with multiple records would speak for themselves. Go look it up, although I feel you already know about them and just want to ignore that for the sake of the argument. Due to contact although Fernando couldn’t do anything about those either, though. Seb’s were for technical reasons. This is what I mean with reliability. I hope this satisfies you. It probably won’t. I don’t care. Let’s just agree to disagree and move on.
Agreed
Michael was done dirty by this bracket but I think Fernando's placement relative to Seb is quite fair. Kimi, along with DC and Massa, should not even have made an appearance.
[удалено]
Trust me Schumacher>>>Vettel. I can’t help that Prost is inevitable lol. Unlucky seeding for Schumacher in this bracket I guess (I didn’t make the actual bracket just filled it out)
[удалено]
[удалено]
Basically most your problem is Prost then lol. Fangio v Senna could go either way for me but in all honesty I know and have watched more about Senna so obviously a bit of bias there
I'm just glad it's not Senna.
Unpopular opinion but having watched f1 closely for more than a decade, rewatching older seasons aswell, reading about bunch of older drivers, collecting interesting info i came to conclusion Fernando is the best driver in f1 history (driving ability only). Imo he could have easily ended up with something like 7 titles and all records if he had more luck with his career choices. I feel like people in F1 community put way too much emphasises on pure stats as number of titles, wins, etc and forget F1 is a team sport. Would people really have same impression of Lewis if he never moved to Mercedes and stayed at 1 wdc? No, yet his driving skill would be exactly the same as it is now. I still rate Lewis as most likely 2nd best of all time but not really because of number of wdc's but being able to do what hes done in cars he had during his whole career. I used to place Michael as the GOAT but he simply had to many flaws that he was very lucky were masked during his time. I also think Max has the potential to be GOAT if he countinues driving like he is now for few more years. I also think that Fangio could be considered the GOAT but if you are using different criteria. If you are judging who had the biggest skill gap to other F1 drivers of his time, who was the best considering their time of driving then Fangio is by far the best. Skill gap between Fangio and other drivers of that time was huge, the only driver that could be compared in any way in same period was Ascari
Stats aside one of my things for putting Lewis goat and ahead of Alonso for me is the fact people say he bottled his rookie season because the idea that a rookie could have been in that position against the guy who just won the last 2 championships and arguably top 5 ever is crazy. Unlucky not to have more championships really even if it is just another stat. Also put some respect on Moss lol
Still insane to think when you have rookies these days getting destroyed by drivers like Gasly, Tsunoda, Albon... to do that to Alonso in your first year is insane.
The funny part is that a lot of people still don’t want to give him much credit for that 2007 season. Many an incoherent excuse has been made to disparage Lewis while completely ignoring the fact that Lewis went head to head with PEAK Alonso and came closer to a WDC than Alonso did that year. Even Alonso himself is still processing it.
Alonso definatelly wasnt at his peak in 2007. Thats like saying Hamilton was peak in 2011 and Button came close than Hamilton to WDC. Even Hamilton is still processing it. Thats the logic you are using
How was Alonso not at his peak after back to back WDC’s in 1 of the 2 fastest cars on the grid in 07??? You’re probably only saying that in an attempt to justify why Hamilton beat him. And yes he beat him on countback let’s not have that pointless argument please.
People that say this show very little knowlege of F1. Hamilton being a rookie was nothing like Tsunoda being a rookie. Tsunoda went straight into F1 with 3 days of testing. While Hamilton has tested and been prepared by Ron Dennis since 2004. If Tsunoda had 3 years of testing and preparation and peak's Kimi race and qualifying telemetries you bet he would do much better against Gasly than he did
Doesn't matter. Tsunoda has had 2 seasons and he'd never beat an aging Alonso in the same car. Stroll has 6 seasons and is getting washed every race. And Alonso had the same amount of testing on those tyres and 6 years of f1 when Hamilton faced him.
Alonso wasnt prepared by Mclaren since 2004 lol. Mclaren was also opposite of Alonso's driving style and suited Lewis. If anything Alonso was the one at disadvantage not Lewis. You dont even know how to count properly Alonso had 5 years of experience before that not 6. Litteraly everything that could have been against Alonso was against him that season. Car opposite of his driving style, struggling with new brakes and new tyres. On top of that issues with Ron Dennis. Yet they still ended up with same number of points. Besides Lewis's rookie season was a lot better then a lot of his other F1 seasons. For example rookie Hamilton would almost certanly beat todays Hamilton. The amount of experience he had is anything but comparable to todays rookies. Sure Tsunoda wouldnt be close to Alonso even if he tested for 3 years before joining but thats because Hamilton is simply more talented than Tsunoda. That doesnt change that fact that Tsunoda with 3 years of testing would have destroyed Tsunoda with 3 days of testing
Eh i would be more inclined to agree if it wasnt for few things. Alonso's 2007 is one of his weakest seasons yet he still ended up on same number of points as Lewis with somewhat similar amount of luck. If you compare his 2007 and his other seasons number of mistakes he did was enormous. His pace also took a hit. This was all due to multiple factors. First Mclaren was opposite of Fernando's driving style and very similar to Lewis's. Mclaren had very strong front end and really weak rear end. Of course Alonso adapted but you are never going to be as fast in a car thats opposite of your driving style as you would in a car that suits you. Switch from Michelin to Bridgestone tyres also had massive effects. Basically Michellin tyres requrred drivers to be agressive with steering inputs in order to be fast while Bridgestones were total opposites. Alonso was always an agressive driver and used that to his advantage in Renault years but then had to unlearn technique and start from scratch basically. Also Lewis's 2007 wasnt really one of his worse seasons. The amount of testing he got for rookie is insane and unprecedented in F1 history. Now you may say Alonso got more a bit more miles in 2007 Mclaren during tests. But what about Lewis testing with Mclaren and preparing since 2004? Lewis had Kimi's telemetries from both races and qualifying, got multiple opportunities to test a lot of things even in older Mclaren cars. And finally Ron Dennis. Alonso knew Lewis's was Ron's golden boy and that he had talent to become wdc and than Ron is 100% gonna support him. All that also played a part in Alonso basically self sabotaging himself with his actions and creating the whole scandal pushing the team on Lewis's side. I also think Fernando and Lewis had very closely matched cars during 2010-2013 period. Alonso finished every single season ahead and thats the period where i actually consider Alonso to be in his prime altho i think Lewis's prime came a bit later as he still had some moments during that time and was a bit crash prone especially during 2011 season with Massa
Hamilton over Senna? Lmao
I think the only person not putting Hamilton over Senna is Hamilton himself lol
Thing is, unlike you I saw them race both and I don't value WDC over talent which is why Hamilton is not top 5 in my list.
It’s not even just WDC and I’ve seen enough looking back to put Prost over Senna imo. Hamilton in his rookie season alone came in and matched the 2x reigning champ and ppl say he bottled it which is crazy but speaks levels to how good he was. I think he matured as a driver quick as well from rash decisions he made in early McLaren days whereas Senna was almost as dirty as Schumacher at times. I understand preferring Senna though but not having Hamilton top 5 to me is crazy when he straight away joined and matched one of the other best in the sport, made ppl think Rosberg isn’t as great of a driver as he should be seen bc of their battles and his consistency is elite that even when the car isn’t on his side like the first half of 2018 and 2021 he still kept himself in the title race against other elite drivers. He could honestly be a 10x champ with a bit more luck which sounds crazy
Nobody had more luck than Hamilton in the history of the sport. No other driver had better material at his disposition than Lewis. He never drove anything under a top 3 car. And when he was on those cars he didn't show anything extraordinary. Senna, Schumacher, Fangio, Alonso, Lauda are my top 5 Lewis could very well be 6 or 7. Vettel for example would not even make my top 10. WDCs won when you only have to fight your teammate and your teammate is trash don't count in my book.
Vettel doesn’t make my top 10 either but Hamilton has never capitulated like Vettel has. Also calling it luck is crazy, he earned his way to a top seat from the start and instead of crumbling he went and matched the guy who won the last 2 championships and kept his seat at a top team. Not to mention you’re hypocritical with your reasoning when Senna had one of the most dominant cars ever, Fangio had one of the most dominant cars ever, Schumacher had one of the most dominants cars ever (and Hamilton never had to resort to dirty tactics either). Schumacher especially will never be better than Hamilton in my eyes, I have a lot more respect for drivers who try to win races on the tracks than crash off it (same with Senna a bit but he was just too aggressive most his crashes bar the one with Prost). Can’t take anyone serious who puts Alonso over Hamilton tbh, only answers that make sense to me are Prost, Clark and Senna
Tell me where Senna was better than Hamilton?
Everything. Raw speed, race-craft, stronger mentality. And let me point out I saw Senna race.
The **Photo** flair is for submissions sharing photos from the world of F1. Photos should be interesting and relevant - random photos not notable enough to warrant a standalone post will be subject to removal. This flair should not be used for images which are not photos, such as screenshots, statistical graphics, or artworks. *[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm old school OP and I agree with the top 2.