Updated "Greatest Drivers Ever Listing"

[Rambo]

Starts per win (5 wins or more):

1) Fangio 2.13
2) Ascari 2.38
3) *M.Schumacher 2.86
4) Clark 2.88
5) Stewart 3.67
6) Prost 3.88
7) Senna 3.93
8) Moss 4.125
9) Da.Hill 5.23
10) Mansell 6


11) Brooks 6.33
12) Farina 6.6
13) Lauda 6.8
14) Hakkinen 8.05
15) Piquet 8.87
16) Brabham 9
17) Hunt 9.2
18) Jones 9.67
19) *J.Villeneuve 9.82
20) Rindt 10
21) E.Fittipaldi 10.29
22) Andretti 10.67
23) Collins 10.67
24) *Coulthard 11.08
25) G.Villeneuve 11.17
26) Scheckter 11.2
27) Reutman 12.17
28) G.Hill 12.29
29) Peterson 12.3
30) Hulme 14


This is the method I settled on when this subject comes up. I like updating my list now and again.

No doubt this will cause a myriad objections, but there you go...

[Adam43]

24) *Coulthard 11.08
25) G.Villeneuve 11.17

There are lies, damn lies and statistics.

[Adam43]

Interesting list though. I make mine up as I go along!

[Rambo]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore

There are lies, damn lies and statistics.

I never got to see Gilles in action. From what I've read, he was fast but a bit... daft, at times. DC is, well, rather boring.

But that's the trouble comparing drivers from different eras. C'est la vie!

[R]

If Senna hadn't let Berger win in Japan '91, he would be ahead of Prost on that list.

It's an interesting statistic though. But in terms of "greatest drivers", there are heaps of other factors to consider as well. Such as the competitiveness of their cars, reliability (which has improved over the years), and the competition around at the time.

Interesting to see that someone like Tony Brooks, who is seldom mentioned on a "greatest drivers" list, is as high as 11th here. In that respect, this is also an interesting statistic, because it makes you consider drivers who you may not otherwise have thought of in this context. Thanks for sharing.

[paul-collins]

Originally posted by Rambo
I never got to see Gilles in action. From what I've read, he was fast but a bit... daft, at times.

Well, then, probably what you've been reading is rubbish.

There are a few excellent books on GV out there. As well, an excellent article recently appeared in Motorsport (it was the cover article two or three months ago).

GV may have looked rash at times, but this was mostly during practice, as he was busy discovering the exact limits of the car at each sector of the track. During the race he could be extremely canny when required, as well as out-and-out fast.

The Ferraris he had to drive were, for the most part, cr*p.

[senna12]

I agree. "Daft" is not a word I would ever use to describe Gilles.

As usual, statistics rarely tell the whole story, and are too often misleading.

[EERO]

Consider that the careers of Mansell, Senna and Prost overlapped so much and the odds that one of them would win were 2 out of 3.

[Adam43]

Generally I like the starts per win ratio. I feel it is a better indicator than most wins or just totals. However as with most statistics it can only at best reveal a trend or give an indication.

It is surprising that Hakkinen gets so high after it took so long to get a win.

One thing is common to all in the list. They are all great drivers...

[Rambo]

It took Mansell something like 100 races to get his first win. Hak and Schuey jnr scored sooner than that, I think.


"daft" as in headstrong and impetuos, not stupid. Perhaps a little overconfident in his own car control. Didn't mean to offend any of his fans.

[R]

When Hakkinen did start winning, he never really looked back, did he...

Originally posted by EERO
Consider that the careers of Mansell, Senna and Prost overlapped so much

That's true, and you can add Piquet to that trio as well.

[macdaddy]

Great post, Rambo! I hope you don't mind, but I stole your idea and posted a similar list in the CART forum. You'll find four of these drivers made both lists.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Rambo
It took Mansell something like 100 races to get his first win. Hak and Schuey jnr scored sooner than that, I think.

I think Mansell won his 72nd race (about there anyway) Hakkinen his 96th and M.Schu his 18th.

[Mr V]

I do believe that Schuey jr won his 70th race.

[senna12]

Originally posted by Rambo
It took Mansell something like 100 races to get his first win. Hak and Schuey jnr scored sooner than that, I think.


"daft" as in headstrong and impetuos, not stupid. Perhaps a little overconfident in his own car control. Didn't mean to offend any of his fans.

No offense taken. I should point out that, IMHO, Gilles was never overconfident in his car control. Frankly, it was far superior to anyone elses, and he knew it.

Adam is right, things such as these only provide a general clue as to a persons ability, that is, that he is among an elite group. There are just too many circumstances surrounding and affecting each era, that you can't make any definitive conclusions from it, at least when deciding who is ultimately the best.

[Jordi]

Gilles' racing will never be told by statistics...

He just knew exactly where, what and how was his car, he was real confident in his driving... he only didn't have control when his tyre failed at Imola 1980, for example...

But of course, if go by stats, it's probably fair 75%... Fangio, Clark, Ascari, Schumi...

It also makes me think of a lot of "what if?" What if Clark, Rindt or Ascari had lived more than they did...?

[R]

Indeed. Clark vs Rindt vs Stewart would have been awesome in the early 70's, and perhaps Ascari would have been the one with the 5 championships, and not Fangio. "What if" indeed...

[Rambo]

Originally posted by macdaddy
Great post, Rambo! I hope you don't mind, but I stole your idea and posted a similar list in the CART forum. You'll find four of these drivers made both lists.

I'll hop across now to have a look at it.

Interestingly enough, I converted some CART/IndyCar seasons points to F1 scoring a while back... I might see if I can find the numbers and put them up for a laugh.

[f1manoz]

I see no point in Greatest Drive threads as each individual has different criteria as to why who was best, and there are also millions of other factors which seperate drivers from the 1950s to the drivers of today..

Jim Clark was best!

[Rambo]

Here we are! Maybe I should convert some F1 seasons to CART scoring, too...

2000
De Ferran 48 (168)
Tracy 46 (134)
Andretti 45 (127)
Fernandez 44 (158)
Moreno 43 (147)
Montoya 41 (126)
Castroneves 41 (129)
Brack 33 (135)

1999
Montoya 88 (212)
Franchitti 72 (212)
Tracy 54 (161)
Fernandez 42 (140)
Andretti 41 (151)

1998
Zanardi 106 (285)
Franchitti 55 (160)
Vasser 50 (169)
Fernandez 43 (154)
Andretti 37 (112)

1995
Unser 60 (4 wins, 2 seconds) (161)
Villeneuve 60 (4 wins, 1 second) (172)
Tracy 41 (115)
Andretti 36 (123)

1993
Mansell 75 (190)
Fittipaldi 66 (183)
Tracy 64 (157)

cp the championship winning F1 scores for the same years: 2000 - 108, 1999 - 76, 1998 - 100, 1995 - 102, 1993 - 99


This was originally done before the end of the 2001 season. I'll do that one later.

[Rambo]

2001:

De Ferran: 60
Brack: 57
De Matta: 45
Andretti: 44
Castroneves: 42
Papis: 33
Franchitti: 30
Carpentier: 26
Dixon: 25
Moreno: 21
Gidley: 18

[freud]

According to Mr. Rambo:

9) Da.Hill 5.23
15) Piquet 8.87
21) E.Fittipaldi 10.29
24) *Coulthard 11.08
25) G.Villeneuve 11.17

What more can I say...

[Kenny W.]

Has anyone done a wins per finnish stat?

[Red]

Originally posted by EERO
Consider that the careers of Mansell, Senna and Prost overlapped so much and the odds that one of them would win were 2 out of 3.

Hmmm.... interesting. After several threads :If Schumacher retired what a competitive championship woul it be" I wonder what if Schumacher didn't race at all. Can you imagine comments like "Considering that Button/Ralf/Pablo/Fissi careers pretty much overlapped.... etc.