Best F1 Driver Never to be Champion?

I've had this debate a few times with different people, and it's usually throws up some interesting opinions.

My vote goes to either JJ Lehto or Jean Alesi, and on balance Lehto just nicks it because I think he would have gone on to do a lot more in F1 if he hadn't have got injured, and his Le Mans win counts as a big plus also.

I'm open to counter argument and other nominations....

Pedro Diniz without a doubt.

My vote goes to either JJ Lehto or Jean Alesi, and on balance Lehto just nicks it because I think he would have gone on to do a lot more in F1 if he hadn't have got injured, and his Le Mans win counts as a big plus also.


Lehto was extremely talented and never really had the opportunity to prove his worth. But on the basis of what he was able to accomplish, I don't see how you could even mention him in the same breath as:

Stirling Moss
Tony Brooks
Wolfgang von Trips
Ricardo Rodriguez
Pedro Rodriguez
Chris Amon
Jacky Ickx
Peter Revson
Stefan Bellof
Jo Siffert
Carlos Reutemann
Kimi Raikkonen
Mark Donahue
Mike Hailwood
Gilles Villeneuve
Ronnie Peterson

As for Alesi, a crowd favorite, clearly talented, but a squandered talent.

Kimi, but Now that Diniz has been mentioned, I think I'll have to go with Tora Takagi.

There is a case to be made for half the grid from any season, what if they were better funded, wrong team at the wrong time etc.
Moss will come up, but of the recent crop I think Kimi gets it, I have a sinking feeling that he will probably retire with no WDC. Thats racing.

Nah Kimi's still young. He'll get that title man.

Selby

Always thought Gerhard Berger was a very good racing driver!

I dunno, Dan,

I think Draven is on to something. There is a bit of Peterson in Kimi.
He seems to be hard on cars.

And eventually the tabloid lifestyle will catch up with him.

It is a simple fact that to be dominant as a driver, one must have a single-minded obsessiveness about their career. One must be nearly monk-like, and that despite his profound talent and blinding speed is something Kimi is not.


In 1977, he would have been WDC, in 2007 and beyond, I'm doubtful.

Moss, Villeneuve and Peterson seem to be the most popular choices for this, so it's nice to see some different names put forward. Berger was demolished on pace by Senna, failing to even finish 2nd to him regularly in either 1990 or 1991 when Ayrton won the title. Likewise Alesi was only about equal with Berger throughout their time working together. Another name I'd like to put forward is Elio de Angelis - maybe not a frontrunner in this category, but people forget that he outperformed Mansell by a fair margin at Lotus.

Stefan Bellof, without a doubt.

I'm inclined to say Stirling Moss as perhaps being the greatest driver never to have won a world championship. That said, I have a feeling that if cirumstances had been different Francois Cevert, Gilles Villeneuve and Gerhard Berger could have have been world champions. Perhaps Alesi could have made it to being world champion and the probability is that if he had gone to Williams in '91 he would have retired with multiple titles to his name.

Yep. For me, the first name that springs to mind is Moss, then Gilles.

Hans-Joachim Stuck :)

I've borrowed EERO's list (with apologies for plagiarism) and added a few comments:

Stirling Moss - he's the one, no doubt in my mind.
Tony Brooks - always under-rated, but a supreme natural talent.
Wolfgang von Trips - would have been champion in '61 but for the Monza crash.
Ricardo Rodriguez - not sure about him. Very fast, but bit too wild?
Pedro Rodriguez - great sports car driver.
Chris Amon - the poor guy didn't even win a Grand Prix!
Jacky Ickx - came close in 1970, but Rindt and the Lotus 78 were supreme.
Peter Revson - don't know. Liked him, but WDC material?
Stefan Bellof - sadly, he never had time to show what he could have achieved.
Jo Siffert - in the same bracket as Pedro Rodriguez in my mind.
Carlos Reutemann - he'd be near the top of my list, but perhaps too moody?
Kimi Raikkonen - I'm still a believer. It will happen, maybe even next year.
Mark Donahue - no, see Pedro Rodriguez and Siffert.
Mike Hailwood - no, never as good in cars as he was on bikes.
Gilles Villeneuve - yes, definitely in my top three.
Ronnie Peterson - ditto.

Stirling tops my list followed by Alesi and Gilles V

Moss

I don't think Alesi ever had the temperament to win titles, although his raw talent was undeniable.

For me, it is probably Gilles Villeneuve and Stirling Moss.

We have indeed debated this often but it is good to see a few newer names thrown in. However, for me, it was, is, and probably always will be Moss. I agree also with those who have mentioned Brooks, Peterson and Gilles Villenueve.

A very thought provoking idea from Draven and EERO likening Kimi to Ronnie; a distinct possibility, I agree, although I've said before that I felt Kimi is quite possibly the most naturally talented driver since Jim Clark. It is also much harder for a driver to break a car now, so maybe Kimi will still make Champion at least once.

I don't agree with the suggestion of Stefan Beloff, quite simply because he was too fast for his own good. Sadly, it was surely only a matter of time before the inevitable happened. I don't think he was ever going to allow himself the time to mature enough to know when to slow down, and that's one of the attributes required to become a World Champion. He was a brief, but very bright, shooting star.

Gilles Villeneuve IMO... I havent seen any footage on some of the older guys so i cant comment.

I think Alesi would not be champion even if they were given the right car.

I think even if ALesi went to Williams hed have had more wins no doubt but i doubt hed have won the championship.

As for Kimi, there is still time and i think he will be champion one day

Stirling Moss in a walkaway. In fact, Moss is the only non-champion F1 driver who is in the argument for the title of best-ever F1 driver, period. Not that I'd personally vote for him, but he's in the argument...

t is also much harder for a driver to break a car now

Considering JPM's pre-2005 reputation as a car-breaker, and the team's support of Kimi after his shoulder injury, the number of failures Kimi had compared to JPM calls this into doubt, although in general I agree due to rev-limiters.

It could have been Alesi and Patrese in the 1992 Williams, and (assuming its pace wasn't down to Mansell's hard work in developing the Active Suspension and semi-automatic gearbox) I'd expect Jean to come out on top in that battle.

Stirling Moss is arguably the greatest driver of all time - indeed Nigel Roebuck uses him as the example of "does the Championship really matter".

I'd say he's the best non-champ by a distance.

In this order for me:
Moss
Villeneuve
Regazzoni
Reutemann
Brooks.

IMO can't list drivers who didn't feature in the standings nor any who didn't win a race.

stefan bellof for me as well ;-)
and for kimi, he'll get his title, no sweat...

Von Trips probably. But he didnt have the chance.

I refuse to say Stirling Moss, he was a good driver but I found him to be extremely arrogant and pompous. Hence why I dont rate him.

Ive never rated Alesi as one of the top drivers of the past 10-15 years!

Stirling Moss was unlucky to win a title but look at the oppostion he faced at that time!

Stefan Bellof, definately! Anyone who could clinch the Nordschleife lap record should become a saint let alone WDC!

Easy. Gilles. He would have won the championship many times had he not had that tragic accident. And Alesi too. Going to Williams would have made him a better driver, calmed him down, - thats all he needed because he always had the speed.

Gilles for me. Played the good team-mate in '79 and '82 could have been the year for him. :(
I agree with the Bellof suggestions as well. Favorite memory of him was that wet Monaco race. He and Senna were just brilliant.

Moss, Gilles, Peterson, Cevert, and Kimi

Jean-Pierre Jarier would have been a shoe in,in a decent car.
John Watson like wise.
Mike Thackwell if he'd hung around.
Johnny Servoz-Gavin likewise.
Riccardo Patrese if he'd driven like he did in the first Arrows.
And my all time favourite Vittorio Brambilla ,if only there was nothing to crash into on tracks like other cars ,armco and catch fencing and the like.

I think it is difficult question. These drivers should be divided to three groups.

Villeneuve, Peterson and Moss were able to drive good cars but not winning championships. They still had years left before having serious accident (Villeneuve and Peterson died, Moss was seriously injured).

Then there's drivers like Reutemann and Ickx who had full career but not winning the title.

Last is drivers like Bellof who died before he really got a chance to show what he can do in a top car.

von Trips? Rich kid who nearly got lucky in a dominant car. Servoz-Gavin is another whose career was essentially halted for medical reasons, although Cevert seemed like the stronger Stewart team-mate. Cevert is another name to consider - he would've been among the 1974 championship favourites.

Gilles and Stirling, of course, but what about Dan Gurney?

He's one of the great all-rounders, could make 'em cars and could drive 'em too pretty quick!

Dan's greatest title will always be that of "he was the only driver Clark ever feared"... (or something to that effect, can't remember the exact quote)

For me , my list is..

Swervine
Katayama
Berger
Alesi
and Brundle

Savage racers!

Was Gilles Villeneuve really championship material?

Yes he was a race-winner, but I'm not sure he'd have had the consistency required for the big prize.

Although he could have had a chance in 1979 if he'd ignored team orders - but he would not have gone back on such an agreement.

Stirling Moss

I am surprised DC hasn't been mentioned thus far. He may not be the best non-champ but he has scored more points than any non-WDC.

I am surprised DC hasn't been mentioned thus far. He may not be the best non-champ but he has scored more points than any non-WDC.

He has certainly stayed around long enough to achieve that.

The reason DC hasn't been mentioned is, I suspect, because he was completely destroyed by Hakkinen and then Raikkonen.

o On getting close but never making it - Stirling Moss, Ricardo Patrese or John Watson.

o On wins etc... probably Irvine, Berger.

o On mad raw talent - Bellof, Villeneuve, Brundle... Yes Brundle, anyone see his drive in the Jag at Silverstone in the early 1990s + the only teammate to ever really put it to Schuey.

Sterling it has to be !
a great driver ! such a gentleman too !

no not moss.

alesi and ickx are good calls though, berger too come to that

Stirling Moss (Sublime, brilliant, only driving for predominatelyBritish teams hurt him, as did of course his near fatal accident)

Chris Amon (Wrong place, wrong time... all the time!)

Stefan Bellof (If he was with us longer we'd be talking about the era of Senna/Prost/Mansell/Bellof...)

Gilles Villeneuve (We prematurely lost potenially the ultimate hero - fast, passionate, gifted, brave, loyal, thought about the team - we'll never see his type again...)

Jean Alesi (Passion - probably too much.... But when he was on fire - awesome)

Kimi Raikkonen (It feels weird to put him in this group - long overdue)

Giancarlo Fisichella (I still don't think his full talent is being exploited...)

Rubens Barichello (Too long as no.2)

Coulthard has been in either the best or 2nd best car for much of his F1 career, in an era of high reliability and consistant performance, and is one of the few drivers to have raced under the top-8-scoring system, so his points total slightly flatters him. He's a very good driver, perhaps top 50 of all time overall, but I wouldn't put him in contention for this award. Of the current drivers only Raikkonen is really in the frame.

Gerhard Berger had 10 wins and a ton of podiums so that would be my vote --I think Barrichelo would rate pretty high too -- And when you think about who their teamates were for awhile -- Berger {Senna} Barrichelo {Schumacher} They look even better.

Some interesting names cropping up as well as usual suspects so to speak.

If people are gonna talk about the likes of Irvine, Brundle and Berger as candidates then I'll add JPM to that list. He's had an off year but he's proven in the past he can get poles, win races from the front, win races from battling with others and got close to winning the WDC.

The only guy he's looked suspect up against in his whole career so far is Kimi, whereas some of the drivers mentioned (Berger included) struggled against several drivers. On that basis JPM is a worthy inclusion to this category.

Fisichella?!?

Gerhard Berger had 10 wins and a ton of podiums so that would be my vote --I think Barrichelo would rate pretty high too -- And when you think about who their teamates were for awhile -- Berger {Senna} Barrichelo {Schumacher} They look even better.

Yeah, too bad they were absolutely destroyed by those teammates.
Definitely WDC material. *cough*

My list would be like:

Gilles Villeneuve
Jacky Ickx
Stirling Moss
Chris Amon
Stefan Bellof
Kimi Räikkönen

And some others that I forgot.

Due to my age I won't say anything about Villeneuve and others that drove before him - it would be based only on what I've read.

On what I've seen - it's Alesi.

I don't agree with the suggestion of Stefan Beloff, quite simply because he was too fast for his own good. Sadly, it was surely only a matter of time before the inevitable happened. I don't think he was ever going to allow himself the time to mature enough to know when to slow down, and that's one of the attributes required to become a World Champion. He was a brief, but very bright, shooting star.

My humble apologies for suffering the mental aberration of spelling Bellof's name incorrectly, but all you guys that keep mentioning him, do you seriously think he would ever have lived long enough to be the best F1 driver 'to be' or 'never to be' a champion? Possibly the fastest but not the best, and therein lies the rub. Look at the way he died and at some of his previous accidents. He was spectacularly too fast and too uninhibited. Sadly, he was never going to make it, but then he wouldn't have been Stefan, would he?

I suppose threads like this will always run and run, but if this one was to include a poll, then it looks like Moss would be the winner, as he should be.

FWIW, I don't think drivers who are still racing should be included because they still have a chance, well, some of them, notably Räikkönen.

Interesting that after just half a season, Rubens is now consistently out-qualifying and out-racing the "great" Jenson Button - I think Rubens is a fair bit better than most people give him credit for!

As for the argument, there is an obvious list - in my preferred order:

1 - Dan Gurney ... Jack Brabham even states that he only won the 66 title because Dan left to build cars - otherwise he was to retire. Dan also left Ferrari just as they got a Title winning car for 61 then repeated the dose by leaving BRM as they made a title winning car in 62. had he stayed with Brabham, he could have won both 66 and 67 - he was clearly a better driver than Denny Hulme. rated by Clark, Brabham as one of the best.
2 - Stirling Moss - I guess is obvious because of his good strike rate but that is equalled by his poor finishing rate.
3 - Wolfgand von Trips - would have been World Champ but for fatal accident
4 - Didier Pironi - accident in 82 missing last 2 or 3 races cost him a title.

They would be the most obvious. Others to be considered are many -

Bruce McLaren
Jackie Ickx
Pedro Rodriguez
Peter Revson
Francois Cevert
Carlos Reutemann
Ronnie Peterson
Chris Amon
Gunnar Nilsson
Gilles Villeneuve
John Watson
Rene Arnoux
Stefan Bellof
Elio de Angelis

I doubt that any of the above group could have won for various reasons but that is a never ending argument. Rest in peace those of them who have departed and thanks for the memories.
Amen

Stirling Moss, without a doubt.

My Top 5:
Moss
Raikkonen
G Villeneuve
Peterson
Alesi
Pironi

Chris Amon could possibly be the best driver not to win a race (or maybe Bellof for that matter) but IMO I wouldn't say either was the best driver never to be champion.

I had considered Amon but agree with the last post on that one. Perhaps to be more meaningfull we should only consider drivers who no longer have the chance to be WDC. Raikkonen clearly still has a great chance. After Moss i think i would consider Peterson who would have won the WDC in 78 if his contract had not precluded him from racing Andretti and had not been tragically killed. At the time he said this regarding the agreement.
"I'm going to McLaren next year", he said. "It's not announced yet, but Mario knows, Some of these people," he sighed, "who say I should forget our agreement now... I don't understand them. I had open eyes when I signed the contract, and I also gave my word. If I break it now, who will ever trust me again?"

Winning the World Championship is not the be-all-and-end-all of a drivers career.
There are many Champions who won it almost be default, after all someone is going to end up with the most points at the end of the year, no matter what happens during the season.
Too much emphasis is placed on what is a mere title, when greatness has to earned by something more than points.
I agree with JT, Belloff was not the complete deal in terms of being champion, neither was Gilles. Like many others it was about beating the man in front and if that meant winning the race, fine, but it was the 'racing' that really mattered. Do it well enough and often enough and titles would come, but they would a bonus.

I'm glad Brundle's name arose, I think he's a serious candidate. For my money, he's the best driver never to win a race.

Agreed. In my time at least.

I'm glad Brundle's name arose, I think he's a serious candidate. For my money, he's the best driver never to win a race.

Almost right! I think Chris Amon has that 'honour' if you can call it that!

Yeah, too bad they were absolutely destroyed by those teammates.
Definitely WDC material. *cough*

My list would be like:

Gilles Villeneuve
Jacky Ickx
Stirling Moss
Chris Amon
Stefan Bellof
Kimi Räikkönen

And some others that I forgot.
The point was that their teamates were two of the best drivers of all time and Berger and Barichello would surely have had many more victories had their teamates been anyone else -- surely if Senna or Schumacher were the teamates of your list those drivers would have been destroyed by Senna or Schumacher too.

Jacky Ickx! :)

Martin Brundle is by far the best driver of the past 30 years not to have won a race.

Moss and Villeneuve for me.

Gilles would have been world champion in 1979 but for overheating in Belguim and following team orders at Monza.

Ronnie could have been there too but he often was with the wrong team.

I think Bellof might well have matured over time if he had had the chance. Gilles certainly did.

I agree that there should be different category for those who had full careers and those who had their careers end early.

There have been lots of good drivers mentioned but I'm not sure that they would have been world champions.

Tom Pryce, Tony Brise and Ricardo Rodriquez are 3 others who might have had what it takes to get to the top if given the chance.

Francois Cevert could have been as well but not Johnny Seroz-Gavin. Certainly not Berger or Alesi even though they were very good drivers.

As much as I adored Gilles skills and acrobatic style (I maintain JPM is the only driver of recent years that bears any resemblance to GV, just that modern day F1 has no place for an elbows out type driver as it only just about did 25 years ago), I also have reservations about his ultimate credentials that might have made him a WDC.

I think that 1982 may have been too much for him and there were clear insinuations that Maranello was starting to get behind Pironi.

The '83 Ferrari was arguably as good as the '82 car in comparison to it's chief rivals so Gilles may have had his chance then.

I know this is all assumptions, but i think for Gilles to really have had a pop at a tile he would have needed to sign for McLaren (as they were always after him!!). Then although he wouldn't have known it at the time he would have had 3 years of Tag Porsche turbo powered cars to enjoy!! ;)

That Peterson quote is quite revealing (sort of opposite to Johnny Herbert's remarks or indeed most of Schuey's teammates remars about accepting the contract they signed that may have held them back a bit!)

Chikey we could conceivably have ended up with Ronnie AND Gilles in McLarens' in the early to mid 80's!!

In the most part the inclusion of Moss, Ronnie, Gilles and Alesi are quite justified by everyone.

If you take their ability, what they showed us they could do, then subtract the fact that they never had the right car/situation at the right time then it's that part that suggests they are some of the best drivers never to clinch a title.

in my estimation it was stirling moss.he .could drive sports cars as well.you may not be old enough to remember him.

Fisichella?!?

Trulli is in his group too IMO

Going back to my original list on the first page of the thread, Clearly Moss belongs on the list, and though I never saw him race (I may be old, but I'm not THAT old) probably heads it.

Peterson was brilliant (and I was fortunate to see him race and win), but I contend he would never have been WDC, no matter what car he drove, and the more i consider it after the initial thoughts, I feel the same way about Kimi.

Jacky Ickx's is the name I keep returning to. He made some bad choices for cars. Had he stayed with Brabham for 1970, he might have had an early jump on the title that Rindt might not have overcome. Remember an olsd and wiley Black Jack was in the running for much of the season in the BT33; an Ickx in his prime would have been tough to beat, even by Rindt in a Lotus 72.

For 1973, back at Ferrari the 312b3, the first Ferrari moncoque was tough to develop, but by early '74, was clearly the the class of the field and Lauda and Ickx's former Ferrari teammate Reaggazoni, (of whom he had always had the measure) were the revelation of the season.

Jacky ended up at Lotus in '75 when the 72 was a lame duck and later at Ensign, a saddly underfunded effort. He deserved better after leaving Ferrari, and should have been WDC.

I wouldn't include von Trips or Pironi - both of those came close to winning the championship as much by default as anything. Wolfgang hadd a dominant car and a fairly mediocre team-mate, while Pironi was also in the right place at the right time with the only one of the tubros to have decent reliability (albeit not at Monaco.....).

Thinking of Pironi, it of course reminded me that both Giles and then Didier were both robbed of the WDC by accidents in 1982. Giles of course dying at Zolder and Didier suffering horific injuries at Hockenheim. I have come across a very comprehensive tribute website to Didier. For those who are interested the addy is http://www.didierpironi.net/index2.htm

He's never driven in so much as a single F1 Grand Prix, but Tom Kristensen could have been world champion in the right car, I believe.

However, he was probably right not to forsake the ultra-successful career he's had in favour of tugging round at the back in Minardis.

I'm not sure Gilles would've won the 1982 title. It's possible considering how the team did from the rest of the year, but he only had 6 points (from a race with a weakened field) when he went to Zolder. 1983 might've been his year, we'll never know.

Kristensen would probably have been solid but world champion material? I have doubts.

The People who i have seen in my life time: Irvine, Herbert, Berger Alesi, Salo

On Rep: Moss, Villeneuve.

I'd rank David Coulthard as a better driver than Irvine, Herbert, Berger, Alesi and Salo, yet I'd not consider him a likely world champion.

stirlings drive in the 55 mille miglia has to stand as the drive of the century .

DC has had plenty of opportunity to win WDC and failed.

Agreed sideways - he had the best car at least twice, and the second-best car several times more, and never won more than 2 races in a season. Very good driver, but not among the top 28 of all time (there've been 28 world champions, which is why I chose that number).

I must say, there have been some very odd names cropping up in this thread.
Very few, I'm afraid who could seriously be considered 'the best driver never to be champion'. In fact I might add one even more 'odd' name. ME!!

I must say, there have been some very odd names cropping up in this thread.

well to add to that:
JPM - i lieu of his move to nascar, maybe not a challenger for the top spot on this list, but in the came close and never won it catagory he deserves mention for his 2003 season. well if Kimi's up there why not JPM too.

should i duck for cover now?:)

If we want to be absolutely precise in our answer to the question that this thread topic poses, then unquestionably the best driver never to have been world champion would have come from the era prior to the inception of the world championship !

Nuvolari.
Carraciola.
Rosemeyer.
Seaman.
etc...

well to add to that:
JPM - i lieu of his move to nascar, maybe not a challenger for the top spot on this list, but in the came close and never won it catagory he deserves mention for his 2003 season. well if Kimi's up there why not JPM too.

should i duck for cover now?:)

Come out from under your cover because i agree, though there is still time left ;)

Agreed sideways - he had the best car at least twice, and the second-best car several times more, and never won more than 2 races in a season. Very good driver, but not among the top 28 of all time (there've been 28 world champions, which is why I chose that number).
yes, thats why DC did'nt get put in my list. He had the best car and never really took advantage of it. Whereas Herbert only had the best car for a year but never really managed to fit in with benetton, he was never really given the chance he deseverd. Irvine also had the best car in 1999, but schumacher was there to beat him in some of the early races of that year before his silverstone crash, could have won the championship had schumacher not been there or been there the whole season. But then again i have always thought that schumacher would have won the championship that year.
Alesi and berger always had the cars at the wrong time. They were with ferrari before they became a winning team again and with benetton when they began their downfall.
Salo, also never really had the car to shine in, he did well taking shcumacher's place in 1999. He should of had a good drive the year after.

I'm not sure Gilles would've won the 1982 title. It's possible considering how the team did from the rest of the year, but he only had 6 points (from a race with a weakened field) when he went to Zolder. 1983 might've been his year, we'll never know.

One of those "what if's" isn't it. 6 points when he died, to Pironi's 10, but then Didier went on to score a further 29 over the next 7 races before his accident. The focus obviously shifted to Pironi once Gilles died so it's fair to assume Gilles would have got the job done. (Remembering that Keke won the WDC on 44 points).

As i said, "what if". Something the fans were sadly robbed of seeing.

i agree, Giles would have got the job done that year and so would Didier after Giles death as Keke was really not in the hunt prior to the two tragic accidents and Ferrari were looking to dominate the end of the season. I also agree with he previous poster regarding
Nuvolari.
Carraciola.
Rosemeyer.
Seaman.
etc...
Rosemeyer is one of the all time greats in my opinion and i have a fantastic bronze model of him on my desk in the Auto Union. For anyone intersted in his career, see this link
http://www.ddavid.com/formula1/rose_bio.htm

Zanardi
Peterson
Alesi
Berger

Will it end up being Hamilton?

Regarding the previous post, I disagree with all as possibilities except maybe perhaps Peterson. Alesi and Berger were never any better than very good and Zanardi didn't have too good a time in F1 the second time to justify his inclusion. I can't remember what he was like during his first stint.

I am positive Lewis will be champion. Maybe this year, maybe not. But eventually i reckon he will.

I agree about Alesi. Don't think he was champion material. Berger could have been i reckon. I think he was a very good driver. The problem he had was that the bulk of his career was during the Senna-Prost-Mansell-Piquet-Schumacher era. To be the best you have to beat the best. The best in his era are rated as some of the best of all time.

Once Lewis eradicates the errors he'll be all set. Kimi used to be pretty wild for example, he threw it away in quali in 2003 a lot for instance, but he calmed. I think people forget how young and inexperienced Lewis is, there will be more calamitous days to come yet I'm sure. It's whether you learn from them. But he has all the other tools needed.

Dan Gurney


... by a country mile

I had a great time reading some of the early posts in this thread and seeing Kimi prominently mentioned. I think it he is now vindicated for winning the WDC but he could almost as easily have 3 by now as well.

I think it is extremely unfortunate that we never got to see him and Schumacher in the same car.

Don't think it would have been much of a contest really.

Bruce McLaren.

Easily I could say Carlos Reutemann, his 1981 campaign was quite messed up with team orders, 1st/2nd driver's role and the unexpected tyre provider change at his team, and even a gesture of nobility to not repeat Alan Jones manoeuvre over Piquet the previous year.

But I consider Stirling Moss as the best F1 Driver who can't win a champ.

But I consider Stirling Moss as the best F1 Driver who can't win a champ.
Absolutely, no question about it, forget F1 just drive a portion of the Mille Miglia route and try to picture your self averaging 100 mph, mind blowing. I would add one of the most under rated drivers of all Redman, given a competative car and the chance he never had.

Absolutely, no question about it, forget F1 just drive a portion of the Mille Miglia route and try to picture your self averaging 100 mph, mind blowing. I would add one of the most under rated drivers of all Redman, given a competative car and the chance he never had.

Surely it has to be Moss?

I wonder if we'll be mentioning any of todays drivers in a similar thread in 30 years...

Only if Hamilton never wins it, James Allen will join the forum just to remind us ;)

:laugh:

Crikey, I thought this was a new thread at first! :laugh:

Even if Lewis doesn't win this year, I would still say Moss. Except maybe for '58, I don't think there was ever a year when he was in the best car. Okay, that was his choice because he was very patriotic, but some of his drives were truly heroic and he always, always got the most out of any car he was driving.

I had a great time reading some of the early posts in this thread and seeing Kimi prominently mentioned. I think it he is now vindicated for winning the WDC but he could almost as easily have 3 by now as well.


:laugh: Clearly my job as a psychic is in jeopardy!

So much for my Kimi comments two years ago, and frankly, I'm glad I was wrong.

Patrese and Alesi come to mind.

...but only very briefly. ;)

Sakon Yamamoto, sorry i mean Sterling Moss

Sterling Moss

I wish people would get his name right! It is Stirling, like the place, not the silver or our currency!

It is "Sir Stirling Moss", anyway!

Talking about the last 10 years only, I reckon it must be Juan-Pablo Montoya (too bad he gave it up so early) Second on the list would be Frentzen or Button, also worth mentioning: Ralf Schumacher, Trulli and DC.

I'd have to say Sir Stirling Moss, Francois Cevert, definitely Jacky Ickx, H-HF in '99, AAARRRGGGHHH! So many to choose from!!!!! I think I'll leave it at that.

Kimi Raikkonen - I'm still a believer. It will happen, maybe even next year.

Can I borrow that crystal ball of yours to see who wins next year strider? :laugh:

Talking about the last 10 years only, I reckon it must be Juan-Pablo Montoya (too bad he gave it up so early) Second on the list would be Frentzen or Button, also worth mentioning: Ralf Schumacher, Trulli and DC.

Frentzen could have done it. He is a very talented driver when his head's right and EJ managed to get the best out of him. The Jordan was almost good enough that year, but just not quite.
DC was flattered by his cars... he's a great driver but was always usurped by his team mates.
Button doesn't even get on the scale for me. Most of his F1 career has been lacklustre, particularly those days went Ant had the BAR top of the charts on the Friday only to see Jenson do nothin with the car over the weekend. Barrichello seems to be getting most of the action at Honda at the moment too.

I thought Jenson was brilliant in '04. To say he did nothing with the car over the weekend is staggering. He was third in the WC that year remember, behind the utterly dominant Ferrari, had many podiums and some fantastic drives. Monaco and Hockenheim spring to mind. I really beleive he got the absolute maximum out of that car, which is all any driver can do surely?

It's also wrong, in my opinion to say most of his career has been lacklustre. His first year in the Williams was impressive, especially considering it was only his third year racing cars. Ok the two years at Renault were disapointing but since '03 I think he has been consistently on it and got the most from the car. Last years dreadful Honda was an example of this, he never gave up.

As for Frentzen, he had a chance in a dominant car and did absolutely nothing with it, getting slaughtered by Villeneuve, himself hardly a great. Frentzen impressed me in '99, but the Jordan that year was their best ever car, and he only had to worry about the retiring and fed up Damon.

In case you hadn't guessed, I wouldn't speak of Button and Frentzen in the same breath, but it is interesting to see others take on rating drivers.

I wish people would get his name right! It is Stirling, like the place, not the silver or our currency!

It is "Sir Stirling Moss", anyway!

Very Very sorry, my mistake !!!

DC was flattered by his cars... he's a great driver but was always usurped by his team mates..


gotta agree actually, would he've driven cars like Toyotas, Jaguars, let alone Arrows' or Prosts throughout his career, I dont think many of us would be mentioning his name in a thread as such, he would be more like in the Panis/Fisichella league, probably.

Thinking about it, I would much rather add Salo to the list, he was a gladiator and quick as hell too. Too bad he hardly suited Toyota's image, I think with him the team coulda achieve greater things.


Button doesn't even get on the scale for me. Most of his F1 career has been lacklustre, particularly those days went Ant had the BAR top of the charts on the Friday only to see Jenson do nothin with the car over the weekend. Barrichello seems to be getting most of the action at Honda at the moment too.

Button is a true fighter and the consitancy of his laptimes during races is almost MS-like, some of his qualifying laps are also unexplainable, he earned quite an amount of points with those qualities. You can mention 2004 as someone did, but I would also not forget about 2006 when, from Hockenheim onwards, he scored more points than anyone else (including the title contenders) .. he already won a mini-WC there and then.

As for some of Ant's hotlaps... they are hardly anything to go by considering the engine-rule of that year. On the other hand, when Davidson was to jump in for Sato in Malaysia he was ridiculously off Button's pace (over 1 second in both qualifying sessions) and there was hardly a good excuse for that as Honda arrived to Malaysia with a car that was only known to Davidson. He tested it for 3 days in Europe while Button was laying on some beach somewhere between Australia and Malaysia. If there was any reason to belive that Davidson could do a better job than Button Honda would know it already. They know Davidson belongs to the Sato league, and thats not the Button league for sure.

As for Barichello getting the upper hand for the last two races, it was about time wasnt it. One swallow doesnt make summer, the crucial points always came from Button, he got Rubens under control from day one. (to be fair tho, in Montreal Jens was utter rubbish)

The last ten years is too short....
No current driver should be considered ..... So if we went back to the 50's and 60's I think people who were there contemporaries would have said Stirling Moss Dan Gurney and Chris Amon. Jackie Stewart has said Amon was one driver he really regarded. By the 70's we had Jackie Ickx.
Into the 80's and Senna arrived on the scene. None of his contemporaries really shone so much you could say they were worthy champions who somehow missed out.

When we get to the 90's there are many who showed potential but never realised it in spite of the opportunities they had. I don't regard them as major contenders. So Button, Barrichello 'et al' are not there.

In reality it would have to go to Moss with Gurney or Amon as the runner up. All had speed to burn, great versatility, and put together some exemplary races. Very few have ever done that in the last 30 years and not been a F1 champion except perhaps Gilles Villenueve.

[quote=PK Kart]I thought Jenson was brilliant in '04. To say he did nothing with the car over the weekend is staggering. He was third in the WC that year remember, behind the utterly dominant Ferrari, had many podiums and some fantastic drives. Monaco and Hockenheim spring to mind. I really beleive he got the absolute maximum out of that car, which is all any driver can do surely?

It's also wrong, in my opinion to say most of his career has been lacklustre. His first year in the Williams was impressive, especially considering it was only his third year racing cars. Ok the two years at Renault were disapointing but since '03 I think he has been consistently on it and got the most from the car. Last years dreadful Honda was an example of this, he never gave up.
quote]


Totally agree, Honda have let Button down and not the other way, 04 he did wonders and blew JV away and has had the measure of Barichello over the partnership.

When you look at the drivers who are always included in the best drivers of all time lists there are only 2 who that did not win a WDC. They are Sir Stirling Moss and Gilles Villenueve. Although I am a Cdn. and knew Gilles up close in his Atlantic years I would give the nod to Sir Stirling, who I also witnessed racing at his peak.

Moss. But as Stirling says himself, he is strangely more famous now because of the fact that he never won it. In fact it was quite funny when Mansell finally won it, Stirling said he was pleased that Nigel had now got out of his territory.

I think it could only be Stirling Moss.

Gilles Villeneuve was arguably the quickest driver of all time (and my personal favourite), but in terms of a driver who had everything but failed to take the Championship, it has to be Moss.

In my opinion, too much is made of the World Championship nowadays, but that's another thread.

In my opinion, too much is made of the World Championship nowadays, but that's another thread.

Correct.:)

Ultimately a driver in one of the better cars will win the WDC,regardless of who actually 'is' the best driver.But as you say,it's for another thread.:)

I think it could only be Stirling Moss.

Gilles Villeneuve was arguably the quickest driver of all time (and my personal favourite), but in terms of a driver who had everything but failed to take the Championship, it has to be Moss.

In my opinion, too much is made of the World Championship nowadays, but that's another thread.I completely agree with all of that (except that Moss was my personal favourite) and I think the two drivers in question would agree with the last sentence. They were both out-and-out racers who wanted to win every race. Much as I admire Niki Lauda and Alain Prost, I think they took the opposite view and raced to win titles and it worked for them.

I completely agree with all of that (except that Moss was my personal favourite) and I think the two drivers in question would agree with the last sentence. They were both out-and-out racers who wanted to win every race. Much as I admire Niki Lauda and Alain Prost, I think they took the opposite view and raced to win titles and it worked for them.

The WDC is calculated on points scored rather than race wins. Assuming everyone entering the WDC entered to win the WDC, then logic would say that the Lauda and Prost approach was the correct one. If the WDC had been done on race wins only, who's to say that Lauda and Prost wouldn't have been significantly faster [and madder] than Moss/Villeneuve etc... For example, in the early 1970's, Prost was supremely quick, ragged and brave [some would say crazy] during his karting days... a style unrecognizable from his time as an F1 driver.

For example, in the early 1970's, Prost was supremely quick, ragged and brave [some would say crazy] during his karting days... a style unrecognizable from his time as an F1 driver.

A similar argument applies to Jody Scheckter, nearly banned from F1 in '73 for wildness and who beat teammate Villeneuve to the WDC in '79 driving conservatively for points.

Francois Cevert, without his fatal accident, there would have been a (multiple) French World Champion way before 1985.

I agree about it but only in the case of 1974.

Rubens Barichello - massively underrated.