Unpopular Motorsport Opinions

[MatskiMonk]

My guy really said this like Marcus ****ing Ericsson didn't just win the Indy 500 lmao

He also said about a third of F1 were the best, since the year 2000 that would equate to about 40 drivers. Off the top of my head there's probably about 10-15 Le Mans winners? 3 or 4 Indy 500 winners, maybe 2 Indycar/Champcar champions... 2 or 3 touring car champions, 2 or 3 SuperGT champions, 2 or 3 Rolex 24 winners.. though now we might be double counting people like Montoya, Alonso and Kobayashi.

A third doesn't seem like a terrible estimate.

 

[NICKname]

He also said about a third of F1 were the best, since the year 2000 that would equate to about 40 drivers. Off the top of my head there's probably about 10-15 Le Mans winners? 3 or 4 Indy 500 winners, maybe 2 Indycar/Champcar champions... 2 or 3 touring car champions, 2 or 3 SuperGT champions, 2 or 3 Rolex 24 winners.. though now we might be double counting people like Montoya, Alonso and Kobayashi.

A third doesn't seem like a terrible estimate.

That's a bad metric. None of the 3+ time champions ever won another major championship. The more talented and successful an F1 driver is, the less likely it is they'll ever attempt to compete in another championship. Most of those drivers are not the best F1 has to offer at all. Kobayashi, Ericsson and Sato aren't even close to being in the best 33% of F1 drivers.

 

[MatskiMonk]

That's a bad metric. None of the 3+ time champions ever won another major championship. The more talented and successful an F1 driver is, the less likely it is they'll ever attempt to compete in another championship. Most of those drivers are not the best F1 has to offer at all. Kobayashi, Ericsson and Sato aren't even close to being in the best 33% of F1 drivers.

Maybe, I wasn't the one that introduced it as a metric. In terms of what the best F1 has to offer is, that just becomes a case of where you draw the line. Of the 120-ish F1 drivers there have been since 2000, only about 28 have won a race, call it 25%, or a quarter. If you say good enough to get a podium at least once, it's more like 40%. If you were to adjust those stats to 'more than one win or podium' (to rule out the flukes), you get ~16% and 31% respectively. I still don't find it unreasonable to suggest that only a third of F1 drivers can really be considered the best.

Ultimately you are right, there are some excellent F1 drivers that will probably never actually prove the depth or breadth of their driving ability outside of F1. Whether people then regard them as the greatest drivers, or just the best F1 drivers is up to them - but the latter certainly doesn't automatically imply the former IMHO.

 

[toastet]

Problem with F1 and those successful driver statistics is always that you won't win without the best car(s). There are those very few days were a Ricciardo in a McLaren, Ocon in a Alpine, Gasly in a AT, Vettel in a Toro Rosso or even Maldonado in a Williams can (most times luck a) win but that is highly uncommon and in most cases just the result of fails of the fastest teams. I don't think there is another road racing series with this problem for such long times.
We also saw the potential for Sato sometimes at Honda and with very good driving in the really bad Super Aguri. Same for Kobayashi with unbeliveable overtaking abilities at Sauber but they never had the chance of a win in F1 due to bad cars. I still can't believe until today that Kamui never got another F1 cockpit when there are drivers like Mazepin, Latifi, Stroll, Tsunoda in F1.

 

[Carbonox]

I find red/white to be one of the dullest color combinations imaginable for a racing livery.

 

[TheCracker]

Problem with F1 and those successful driver statistics is always that you won't win without the best car(s). There are those very few days were a Ricciardo in a McLaren, Ocon in a Alpine, Gasly in a AT, Vettel in a Toro Rosso or even Maldonado in a Williams can (most times luck a) win but that is highly uncommon and in most cases just the result of fails of the fastest teams. I don't think there is another road racing series with this problem for such long times.

Is that really a problem though?

It might be for drivers trying to come up through the ranks, but F1 has a drivers and a teams championship. The teams, especially those with manufacturer backing want a return on their investment, both financially and the effort of those back in the factory. They don't want it to be fair, they want to dominate. Always have done, always will do.

 

[Liquid]

I find red/white to be one of the dullest color combinations imaginable for a racing livery.

If you're a poor team going for a basic livery, white is horrendous. Black is by far the better choice.

 

[IcySlivers]

The driver assist era of Formula 1 is the weakest and lamest of all eras. Too much reliance on assists, not as impressive as the turbo hybrid era even. Hamilton is better then Schumacher. Finally, Monaco is a ****** track that needs to either be removed entirely or massively updated.

 

[sillybilly]

The driver assist era of Formula 1 is the weakest and lamest of all eras. Too much reliance on assists, not as impressive as the turbo hybrid era even. Hamilton is better then Schumacher. Finally, Monaco is a ****** track that needs to either be removed entirely or massively updated.

Oh that's some good 'unpopular' opinions!

I will counter with my rationale to disagree.

The amount of telemetry and data that 'assist' the driver these days makes as much of more difference to performance to when they had a switch for launch control or traction control. It's a little more subtle but back then the team with the best traction control system my have a big advantage - now the team with the bests systems for monitoring engines / tyres etc and helping the driver adjust is also a huge advantage.

Schumacher won a race with a clutch and H pattern gearbox - he was a serious contender in more eras than Hamilton, competitive (wins or poles or podium) in 1992 and in 2012, we have to wait a few more seasons to see if Hamilton can be the fastest guy around a difficult circuit in 2027.

Monaco is a pure test of driving skill, there is no where to hide and no track limits to exploit - if a driver can keep within their ability and the machine and prove themselves the best on a day. Schumacher's fastest qualifying lap in 2012 there is just epic demonstration of skill.

I think Schumacher was probably a little better but Hamilton is amazing and still seems to be getting better so he might end up better in the end, objectively I don't think it is fair to compare.

 

[IcySlivers]

@sillybilly
Having data is one thing, the driver still has to actually drive the car. The assist (like traction control) was doing actual work, without traction control the driver has to do that work. Someone giving you some information isn’t the same as needing to have the ability to control the car.

I think time will prove Hamilton is one of the greats. An 8th title isn’t out of the question imo.

Monaco seems to be based almost entirely on qualifying, which makes the race itself rather boring to watch. Nothing is really going to change barring mechanical failures or crashes because there’s basically no chance for overtakes.

 

[merseyxshore]

Monaco is a pure test of driving skill, there is no where to hide and no track limits to exploit - if a driver can keep within their ability and the machine and prove themselves the best on a day. Schumacher's fastest qualifying lap in 2012 there is just epic demonstration of skill.

This is true, but also true of any street circuit. Massive amounts of skill involved to get a good lap time, and I understand the historical significance and the importance as a celeb magnet for the sport, but for actual racing it's terrible. It's more like a tarmac rally stage than a racing circuit, especially with the size of modern F1 cars. I'd actually rate it if Monaco was used as the qualifying for a race at a proper circuit, or a new qualifying-only weekend or something haha

 

[Liquid]

Monaco is still the biggest challenge to a Grand Prix driver but it's a one-lap challenge. The Grand Prix is 78 individual one-lap challenges. That doesn't make for good racing. Racing has outgrown Monaco. And if you're worried about not having a good street circuit in F1, we have Singapore.

 

[toastet]

They could ditch Monaco and make 1 or 2 mandatory one make races for the active F1 drivers + maybe some ex F1 driver as guest starters during the historic Monaco GP weekend.

 

[Samus]

Monaco should be a once every four years event. Keeps it existing, keeps it special and doesn't clog up the calendar with a non-race every year. Only problem is which race you rotate with it that doesn't happen every fourth year.

 

[toastet]

Just add it on top in leap years

 

[TheCracker]

You've got to see Monaco as an event rather then just a Sunday afternoon race. You may well not get the best racing there, but there's always something notable that happens over the course of the weekend. But cutting the calender down to 20 races and running certain ones every other year wouldn't be a bad thing at all.

i've been thinking for years they could quite easily make a proper overtaking spot at Monte Carlo by cutting out the Nouvelle Chicane and putting in a new one just before Tabac. There's already the space and infrustructure to do so.

 

[Liquid]

Monaco should be a once every four years event. Keeps it existing, keeps it special and doesn't clog up the calendar with a non-race every year. Only problem is which race you rotate with it that doesn't happen every fourth year.

That is a less offensive solution if it means dumping one of the other snoozefests once in a while.

 

[sillybilly]

@sillybilly
Having data is one thing, the driver still has to actually drive the car. The assist (like traction control) was doing actual work, without traction control the driver has to do that work. Someone giving you some information isn’t the same as needing to have the ability to control the car.

I think time will prove Hamilton is one of the greats. An 8th title isn’t out of the question imo.

Monaco seems to be based almost entirely on qualifying, which makes the race itself rather boring to watch. Nothing is really going to change barring mechanical failures or crashes because there’s basically no chance for overtakes.

The traction control doesn't drive the car, there is still lots of scope for drivers to do the wrong thing with the 'go' pedal in a car with TC. It reduces wheel spin due to throttle but it won't save the driver if they go in to hot, try to carry too much speed or get on the power too early (they will just understeer off the road)...

The data these days goes into control systems that has selectable engine mapping and torque fill distribution (the power applied by the MGU-K is not simply switched on and off) in combination with mega downforce and mega tyres ends up with these cars in most situations being just as easy to driver or easier. There are a few circumstances they could get tricky, but programmed throttle mapping or torque-curves or 'not-a-loop-hole-systems' mean they driver needs to have a setting wrong or make a big mistake to spin out. You can see how progressively they start to slide in some situations a curious thing with clever control systems (although NOT traction control) seem to prevent the power overwhelming the grip too quickly...

Look for footage of drivers in the 50 and 60, now they were amazing 'drivers' the modern guys are 'pilots'...

Hamilton is already one of the greats, but he can win another 5 titles and he still isn't better in all ways than Fangio.

You disrespect Schumacher's legacy for driving with traction control but that misses a key point that many of his greatest performances were in non-traction control cars such as Spain 1996, Spa 97 and 98, Hungary 98... the years in traction control cars actually aided his rivals more than him and without traction control he would have been even further ahead.

 

[IcySlivers]

@sillybilly
Lots of misinterpretation here:

Never said traction control drives the car. But it does help, there’s no denying that. It’s literally in the name, it helps control the traction, hence traction control.

Never “disrespected” Schumachers legacy, I was talking about the driver assist era as a whole. Saying Hamilton is better then him isn’t disrespectful, it’s just true.

Drivers of the 50s and 60s couldn’t compete with the drivers of today imo, but we’ll never really know so it’s just speculation.

 

[TheElbows]

When it comes to the drivers of the earlier eras...I don't think you can compare them because the series itself was so wildly different. The F1 drivers of the 1950's and 1960s would be more likely to be driving rally or Dakar stuff today. They would be out yacht racing around the world, etc. Motortsport then was more of a "Gentleman's adventure!' kind of thing. I could more see them driving around Isle of Man than a modern F1 circuit, etc. I think the "type" of guy who drives in F1 is just in different worlds now.

Like a lot of other modern things, the modern F1 driver is a politically correct, carefully cultivated machine, and a serious athlete. I can guarantee you they have better stamina, physical conditioning, probably better reflexes, etc...and they're mostly boring as hell.

F1 drivers of that era were often a close knit group of friends. They vacationed with each other, knew eachother's families, and they all faced death together. Very much adventuring sportsmen compared to the modern crop. Two totally different eras for sure.

You can say the same about most modern sports - it's inevitable that as money and time increase, the "romance", or the original nature of the sport is destined to change. The sport will be more successful, more safe, more tightly knit with regards to rules, regulations, governing bodies, etc. The results tend to be more "impressive" with regard to stats, speed, power, etc. etc. etc...but vastly more sterile, often reducing the character of the sport itself.

 

[IcySlivers]

^ very fair and reasonable assessment

 

[sillybilly]

@sillybilly
Lots of misinterpretation here:

Never said traction control drives the car. But it does help, there’s no denying that. It’s literally in the name, it helps control the traction, hence traction control.

Never “disrespected” Schumachers legacy, I was talking about the driver assist era as a whole. Saying Hamilton is better then him isn’t disrespectful, it’s just true.

Drivers of the 50s and 60s couldn’t compete with the drivers of today imo, but we’ll never really know so it’s just speculation.

Ok, I was a bit confused when you wrote "The assist (like traction control) was doing actual work, without traction control the driver has to do that work."

Yes, in some ways the assist era cars were easier to drive but they had less grip due to inferior aerodynamics and tyres so I would only say you can compare to other cars of the same year.

I disagree with casting generalisations over and era and disagree with comparing across eras as @TheElbows points out above.

Saying Hamilton is better than Schumacher is an opinion that is easy to understand but also easy to suggest rational reasons of alternate opinions, saying "it's just true" is trying to make it sound like a fact and that is just not true.

Hamilton can be your favourite driver of all time. I disagree with the whole 'greatest-of-all-time' hyperbole and think it is just disrespectful to the different eras.

Despite disagreeing with overall comparison of different eras there is still and interesting fascination with sports statistics and it is fun to sometimes compare those and some other points. You can find some records that support Hamilton being the greatest but other points that he is not better other drivers

• Schumacher achieved 7 titles in the least number of races and seasons ever.
• Schumacher scored podium in 1992 and 2012, a gap of 20 years.
• Schumacher was competitive (wins or podiums) in a wider range of cars including c1992 manual gearbox car, c2000 V10s, c2012 V8s
• Clark has more grand clems
• Fangio won the title for 4 different manufacturers
• Brabham won the title with his own team

Ok after that diatribe, I have a new 'unpopular opinion' to add:
The drivers these days have almost no gravel traps and have safe tarmac run-off areas everywhere and is easiest to driver era of F1 because they use these in practice sessions to exceed and learn the limits of the car, in the past drivers needed to use their skill to keep within the limits of the car and track.

 

[IcySlivers]

@sillybilly
Ya statistics and numbers are very interesting,

Sir Lewis Hamilton:

World Championships, 7
Career wins, 103
Most wins in a debut season, 4
Most wins with the same team, 82
Most wins at the same GP, 8 (Hungary, British)
Most wins at different circuits & GPS, 31
Most wins from pole position, 61
Most seasons with a win, & most consecutive seasons with a win, 15
Most Pole Positions, 103
Most poles in a debut season, 6
Pole positions at most different Grands Prix,
30
Most career points, 4323.5
Most points in a debut season, 109
Most points in a season, 413
Most consecutive points finishes, 48
Most podium finishes, 188
Most races lead, 181
Most laps led, 5423

Hamilton also set the record for the fastest lap ever recorded in F1 history at a whopping average of 164.267 miles per hour (or 264.362 kilometers per hour) with a lap time of one minute, 18.887 seconds.

Edit:
Lewis Hamilton – 8 lap records
Lewis Hamilton currently holds the record for the most lap records. He has been the fastest driver to ever race a lap in Imola, Portimao, Monaco, Hungary, Zandvoort, Sochi, Suzuka and, Jeddah Corniche Circuit

And this is just a smattering of his records, there are way more. So if you’d like to talk about statistics and numbers, Lewis is statistically the better and more successful driver when compared to Schumacher.

 

[NICKname]

Lewis Hamilton – 9 lap records
Lewis Hamilton currently holds the record for the most lap records. He has been the fastest driver to ever race a lap in Imola, Portimao, Monaco, Hungary, Zandvoort, Sochi, Suzuka and Yas Marina, Jeddah Corniche Circuit

Verstappen has the lap record at Yas Marina, actually.

 

[IcySlivers]

Verstappen has the lap record at Yas Marina, actually.

Oh ****, none of the sites or the wiki seem to list this. Noted.

Edited above post

 

[sillybilly]

@IcySlivers
I think you missed the point of most is not all.
Comparing the drivers isn't fairly done by simply comparing a number of absolute statistics.
There is no driver that can be best of all statistics and there is NO best driver of all time.

However, for entertainment sake, here are some extra context to consider with absolute records of Hamilton are benefitted by:
Most dominant team of all time, better than any Ferrari and better than the 1988, 1989 McLaren
More wins per season to take advantage of a dominant or competitive car 20-21 races per year compared to 15-17 for Schumi, Prost, Senna - this contributes to all records except counts of season titles etc are potentially 15-20% enhanced?

For Most wins at a circuit 8 is equalled with Schumi, but Schumi also has 2 tracks he won 7 times, and 3 tracks won 6 times, interestingly Schumi and Hamilton both have 10 tracks that they have won 5 times or more, next best is Prost and Senna with 2 tracks more than 5 wins and Graham Hill and Vettel have 1 track with 5 wins.
Points are bloated by points scoring systems compared to Schumacher who spent several early years only getting points for the top 6 positions and only 10 points for a win.

Records like most poles at different circuits are difficult to compare to Schumi, Prost, Senna who just didn't race on crazy long calendars.

Schumi's percentage statistics are considerably diluted by the 3 year comeback, however the highlights of a podium and a fasted qualifying time in Monaco 2012 showed he still had some serious skill even after having years off. Otherwise the percent statistics for the first career Schumi is on many measures still better than Hamilton.
In Schumi's first 15 full seasons he scored in the top 3 of the WDC 13 times which is better than Hamilton achieved. That included 1999 when he missed 1/3 of the season due to a broken leg, and he return race he was so dominantly in a league of his own it was almost comedy that he had to slow so much to allow his team mate to take the win as a title contender.

Many of the outright records Hamilton are records that Schumi held previously - some are only a little over, others are starting to get increased markedly, but one point about Schumi's career that he absolutely smashed previous records :
7 WDC for Schumi from 5 for Fangio - an increase of 140%
91 wins for Schumi from 51 for Prost - an increase of 178%
To match this increase Hamilton will need 10 Drivers Titles and about 160 wins.

You can't compare across eras, but you can compare drivers that raced together. Schumi and Hamilton were both clearly as good or better than everyone they raced against - Schumi raced against about 150 other drivers in F1 due to slightly larger grids and turn over in the 90s, while I think the competitor count for Hamilton is between 80 and 90.... so Schumi was measured on track over his career with almost 20% of all 771 drivers to ever compete in F1, while Hamilton has maybe bested about 11% of the drivers.

Beyond statistics Schumi changed the sport more than any other driver and that's partly a lucky accident of being the driver at the right time for the sport becoming more professional and a more serious approach to training and consistent performance - he combined the styles of Senna and Prost to recalibrate so many records to new benchmark levels.

Hamilton's is massively talented and relentless in pursuit of success and in addition to this his off-track work for inclusion, equality and environment is awesome but I'm not sure if it make him better F1 driver.

 

[merseyxshore]

Sebastien Loeb is probably a better overall driver than all of them anyway...

 

[toastet]

Loeb, Röhrl, Ekström, Kristensen, ...

 

[Liquid]

Sebastien Loeb is probably a better overall driver than all of them anyway...

Loeb, Röhrl, Ekström, Kristensen, ...

Different disciplines, as I have outlined somewhere else before. Pinnacle of rallying, pinnalce of sports cars, pinnacle of open-wheelers. The three cannot be merged into one overall title.

 

[IcySlivers]

@sillybilly

Good post, but we’ll just have to agree to disagree. In a certain sense numbers and statistics are all we have to go on. I think Hamiltons numbers and statistics are the most impressive of any driver.
It’s fine if you, or anyone else, doesn’t think Hamilton is the best driver of all time, for me he is the GOAT. This thread after all is the “unpopular opinions” thread, and at least around here, my opinion certainly fits the bill. People here love to hate on Hamilton for some reason.