"Current F1 Field Is Best Ever"?

[JHS 1]

It seems around these parts that some people look back fondly of their memories of F1 in the 70's-80's.

"F1 today is rubbish!" they claim "The days of Prost, Senna, Piquet and Mansell were best," others claim.

Jackie Stewart has had a bit to say (as ever when he's ever asked about anything ) about today's grid, calling the current F1 grid the "best ever" and has compared Vettel to Jim Clark.

Link.

Thought this may develop a bit of debate. Do you agree with what Jackie is saying?

For me it's difficult to compare seeing as I wasn't alive when the likes of Senna and Prost were racing. But certainly in the last ten or so years I've followed F1, it's the best I've known.

[AleHop 0]

Probably the best ever but maybe the new F1 technical regulations are helping a bit with more teams in the fight.

Mercedes, McLaren, Ferrari, Red Bull and Renault have won in the last 5 years.

Same for Alonso, Raikkonen, Hamilton, Button and Vettel.

[Autumnpuma 0]

Every season has it's Clark, Senna, Prost, de Cesaris and Brambilla.

[Port-A-Loo 0]

They're the best for each other, which is why it's competitive.

Looking at the careers of the 27 drivers who raced in 2010:

18.52% of the drivers have won a championship.

22.22% of the drivers have won a race, but not a championship.

14.81% of the drivers have scored a podium, but never won a race or a championship. This means 55.56% of all drivers have finished on the podium at least once in their careers.

The other twelve drivers have an average career-best finish of 8.5. Individual bests range from P4 (Sutil) to P14 (Chandhok, Senna, and di Grassi).

All drivers other than Mark Webber, Lucas di Grassi, Bruno Senna, Sébastien Buemi, and Sakon Yamamoto (81.48%) have won at least one non-karting championship during their careers.

Not bad at all. Can't compare among eras, though.

[Max Mosley 2]

Today's drivers are the best ever for sure. The stats prove it: you get 25 points for a win nowadays.

Thought this may develop a bit of debate. Do you agree

No I don't and no it won't. I'm going to have to disagree with you. Of course, it's all debatable...

[Rainmaster 7]

We have a strong grid. Probably stronger in overall depth of quality than a lot of other years, but it's difficult to know for sure. I think the talent at the front is very good as with most years but the difference in quality is in the middle, where there are a lot of strong guys fighting it out for mid-grid positions. It is (or was, thanks to the news teams) also true that even the guys at the back seem less accident prone than in some of the 'golden years'.

Like Stewart said though I don't think there is any fundamental difference in the modern grid and the guys of the past, they're all cut from the same cloth. The difference in quality, if there is one, is probably due to these guys improving their training regimes, understanding how to get the most from their bodies, the development of simulators, the increasing fear of crashing the cars because of the increasing costs etc.

[Port-A-Loo 0]

Today's drivers are the best ever for sure. The stats prove it: you get 25 points for a win nowadays.

If only your arguments about spec-cars had as many facts backing them up

[HandyNZL 1]

The cars are all alot closer, and the best drivers are in them, not in some sucky Peugeot powered car having their skill masked by Sh#tty engineering. If anything, todays ENGINEERS are the best ever.

It's all relevant, and irrelevant.

[BradSpeedMan 6]

If anything, todays ENGINEERS are the best ever.

nicely put... while performing miracles being handicapped with no usage really of new technology

[dribbler 6]

I do care whether this all may be true. I have no idea how to prove or disprove it though. I'll crack open a beer and worry about something else.

[Max Mosley 2]

Of course, if we had spec cars then we could prove it - by comparing lap times from different eras!

[Argento Reloaded 1]

You can find many indicators to prove it right or wrong. I tend to agree about this era is the vest. Why? Because, tech evolution in any sense of the word. Nevertheless if you take race wins the Senna, Prost, Mansell era is the strongest with #2,3 and 4th in the stats. Enjoy today, the past is gone and tomorow...who knows maybe Sutil will be a champ!!!!

[yurp 0]

Apples and Oranges.

What matters is how good the guys in F1 are compared to the rest of us numpties - and yes in 2010 we had the pleasure of witnessing quite a few outstanding racers competing alongside each other in F1. The fact that we had 6-7 top drivers in top cars wa a treat and rarely do circumstances give us such a treat. We would only have been better off if Kubica had had Massa's seat.

If you put those drivers in competition with drivers who used the technologies of other times it's hard to compare them across the generational divide.

We can compare fairly well to the previous few years though (10 or so), since technology hasn't changed all that much and a reasonable idea of the number of top drivers in F1 can be figured out.

I would agree that the field of 2010 was one of the best if not the best of the last decade - that's as far back as I'm willing to go though.

Better or worse than the heros of old? - No one can ever really say.

[Persevere 0]

I'll give Jackie Stewart his due for not acting his age and re-imagining some earlier moment as the only golden period. This past season did impress with the quality of talent on the grid irrespective of errors in judgment by all.

I would write more but I'm suddenly feeling all weepy and nostalgic: damn Mike had to go an remind me of de Cesaris...

[JHS 1]

I think it's also important to look at the new guys on the grid or the ones who are knocking on the door and will surely soon make a break through.

With the likes of Hulkenberg, Kobayashi, Perez, Vergne, Ricciardo, di Resta, Bianchi, etc, etc I think things will only get even better as this decade progresses.

[monza gorilla 1]

I'm trying to work out who is the Brambilla of the current crop. Could be Petrov.

[Kopite Girl 0]

Certain similarities such as more than one champion on the grid do compare to past drivers. I think Mike answered this one beautifully. While I don't think today's grid are necessarily the best ever (its impossible to generalise such a statement as Sir Jackie has), you cannot compare this grid with any other in history. Different cars, different fitness levels, different rules, different work ethics, different mentalities, different personalities, just different. However, that's not to say i don't think there are talented and exciting drivers in today's F1. I just think its a lot more business like and clinical than yesteryear. And that I mean for F1 as a sport.

[dribbler 6]

Ah, mans thirst to pigeon hole, understand, organise and label.

What are we trying to achieve here?

Chalk tastes bad in sandwiches. I always told my teacher that, whilst he wrote equations in cheddar.

[HandyNZL 1]

Ah, mans thirst to pigeon hole, understand, organise and label.

What are we trying to achieve here?

Chalk tastes bad in sandwiches. I always told my teacher that, whilst he wrote equations in cheddar.

Not sure about that, but are all Dribblers the same, or is the best ever?

[yurp 0]

Not sure about that, but are all Dribblers the same, or is the best ever?

...the best ever what? Eating chalk sandwiches? Dribbling?

[JHS 1]

I think perhaps that some drivers are better than they really seem too.

I'll explain myself. Clearly Jim Clark was a very very talented driver, maybe one of the best ever. But on his way to 25 victories and 2 titles, did he face as stiff opposition as the likes of Vettel, Hamilton, Kubica, etc?

I'd say he didn't. In those days there was still an element of the "gentleman driver" that has since been eliminated from the sport.

Maybe there are drivers who are as quick as or even a bit quicker than Schumacher right now, but I personally doubt we'll see the feat of 7 World Titles happening again simply due to how increasingly competitive the sport is becoming.

[Kopite Girl 0]

I see your point James. But, regardless, it was still as competitive as today. Graham Hill, Mike Hailwood, John Surtees, Dan Gurney, Phil Hill, Innes Ireland, Jackie Stewart and more were Clark's competition. Its impossible to judge yesterday's standards to today's. Completely different cars, completely different conditions.

F1 today is more structured around the team. F1 yesterday was more structured around the driver.

[maure 1]

F1 today IS rubbish... but it is not so because Vettel is this or Clark is that. You can't compare F1 on account of drivers alone and, more so, when they matter so little.

[maure 1]

... but I personally doubt we'll see the feat of 7 World Titles happening again simply due to how increasingly competitive the sport is becoming.

It's only a fad that started strong in 06 by forcing in the illusion of competition. Watch again the races and you will see the progressive intrusion of FIA driven races/seasons and its increasing pandering to daytime soap audiences.

After Schumacher took it all year after year, it appeared desirable to have a new champion every season. The fad will end when it cashes out. Then, the business will script up a different fad...

[Port-A-Loo 0]

Meh. You can rationalize anything. NASCAR drivers are better than F1 drivers because they have to beat 42 other drivers instead of 23. People who buy used cars are bad Americans because it doesn't count toward gross domestic product. Etc.

The problem with really outlandish theories is that the only proof is often that "it would make sense if this were the case." Yes, it would make sense that the FIA wanted a new champion every year and the drivers are all actors and the thrilling conclusions of 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2010 were all scripted. Ask for anything to support that claim and I couldn't find you it.