The World Driver of the Best Car Championship

[maximilian]

OK, so it was fun to see the underdogs win in the beginning, but by now, they have become the favorites, and quite frankly, Button/Brawn winning near every race now is not much more entertaining than Ferrari or McLaren winning each time.

Of course, nowadays, many people are falling over themselves, praising Jenson Button for his absolute brilliance and World Championship talent, etc.

But the truth is, Jenson and Rubens just a few months ago were THIS close to never seeing a F1 ride again... just footnotes of the 2009 season, 2 careers that were about to fizzle out, more or less unnoticed by a vast majority of casual fans, who already forgot about those 2... as people tend to forget veteran backmarker drivers as "washed up".

The premise of this thread is... while people love to talk about a "World Driving Championship", it is really more a "World Driving the Best Car Championship", and this season once again beautifully illustrates this - unless you sit in the right car, it doesn't matter how good you are as a driver... you just don't have a chance to contend.

Sure, you may be Fernando Alonso, arguably the most accomplished driver currently active, but driving this year's Renault, you're just plain out of luck - no matter how much talent you have, and how hard you try.

Remember Robert Kubica? He was supposed to be talented, and the next big thing, a contender to be Champion. But, driving the dismal BMW this year... he has been all but forgotten in the rear of the midfield. Not to mention "quick" Nick.

Nico Rosberg? Hailed as a super talent, and he shows flashes of brilliance even in the Williams... who would doubt that he wouldn't be already Championship material, had he driven for McLaren last season? But he didn't. And here he is, with a mere 7.5 points for Williams.

It often depends on a driver's good luck and connections whether he catches the lucky ride to the Championship-winning car, or whether he is condemned to race a career in relative mediocrity, never getting that fast car. One who comes to mind there is Derek Warwick, who could have had Nigel Mansell's career, if he went to Williams at the right time, instead of staying at Renault. Is Felipe Massa really that good? There are probably 10 other drivers who could have mounted a championship challenge last season, if they were driving his Ferrari. Is Hamilton really a wunderkind? Put him in a Toro Rosso for a season, and let's see if his career doesn't pull a Bourdais at the end of the year. He's not looking so hot this year even driving a less than stellar McLaren.

Meanwhile, you could put almost ANY driver with reasonable talent into the 2 Brawns, and they'd be tearing it up, winning races, and suddenly being talked of as the best guys out there - if Heidfeld and Fisichella were driving for Brawn this year, I doubt the team's results would have been much different - because it's the car that counts, much much more than the driver. Take a look at the "driver's" standings... 1/2 Brawn/Brawn, 3/4 Red Bull/Red Bull, 5/6 Toyota/Toyota... merely a coincidence? I think not.

[drewdawg727]

Agreed. They should try a race where they put Sutil and Piquet in the Brawns. That would prove everything.

[ioan]

Yep, the car's performance is worth at least 75% of the results and this is why I watch F1, because of the technology and it's also why I mainly support a team no matter the drivers.

[N. Jones]

OK, so it was fun to see the underdogs win in the beginning, but by now, they have become the favorites, and quite frankly, Button/Brawn winning near every race now is not much more entertaining than Ferrari or McLaren winning each time.

Of course, nowadays, many people are falling over themselves, praising Jenson Button for his absolute brilliance and World Championship talent, etc.

But the truth is, Jenson and Rubens just a few months ago were THIS close to never seeing a F1 ride again... just footnotes of the 2009 season, 2 careers that were about to fizzle out, more or less unnoticed by a vast majority of casual fans, who already forgot about those 2... as people tend to forget veteran backmarker drivers as "washed up".

The premise of this thread is... while people love to talk about a "World Driving Championship", it is really more a "World Driving the Best Car Championship", and this season once again beautifully illustrates this - unless you sit in the right car, it doesn't matter how good you are as a driver... you just don't have a chance to contend.

Sure, you may be Fernando Alonso, arguably the most accomplished driver currently active, but driving this year's Renault, you're just plain out of luck - no matter how much talent you have, and how hard you try.

Remember Robert Kubica? He was supposed to be talented, and the next big thing, a contender to be Champion. But, driving the dismal BMW this year... he has been all but forgotten in the rear of the midfield. Not to mention "quick" Nick.

Nico Rosberg? Hailed as a super talent, and he shows flashes of brilliance even in the Williams... who would doubt that he wouldn't be already Championship material, had he driven for McLaren last season? But he didn't. And here he is, with a mere 7.5 points for Williams.

It often depends on a driver's good luck and connections whether he catches the lucky ride to the Championship-winning car, or whether he is condemned to race a career in relative mediocrity, never getting that fast car. One who comes to mind there is Derek Warwick, who could have had Nigel Mansell's career, if he went to Williams at the right time, instead of staying at Renault. Is Felipe Massa really that good? There are probably 10 other drivers who could have mounted a championship challenge last season, if they were driving his Ferrari. Is Hamilton really a wunderkind? Put him in a Toro Rosso for a season, and let's see if his career doesn't pull a Bourdais at the end of the year. He's not looking so hot this year even driving a less than stellar McLaren.

Meanwhile, you could put almost ANY driver with reasonable talent into the 2 Brawns, and they'd be tearing it up, winning races, and suddenly being talked of as the best guys out there - if Heidfeld and Fisichella were driving for Brawn this year, I doubt the team's results would have been much different - because it's the car that counts, much much more than the driver. Take a look at the "driver's" standings... 1/2 Brawn/Brawn, 3/4 Red Bull/Red Bull, 5/6 Toyota/Toyota... merely a coincidence? I think not.

Your argument to me seems to be that the car is greater than the driver.
If so, I think it is a little bit of both. Some guys could take a crap car and put it on the podium consistently while other drivers can take a good car and find every way possible to miss the podium on a regular basis.

[Garry Walker]

Yep, the car's performance is worth at least 75% of the results and this is why I watch F1, because of the technology and it's also why I mainly support a team no matter the drivers.

I would support Ferrari at all cases, except if they hired Alonso or Vettel.

But the truth is of course that cars matter simply too much. No one sane would think Button is suddenly the best driver because he has been so successful this year.

[ioan]

Your argument to me seems to be that the car is greater than the driver.
If so, I think it is a little bit of both. Some guys could take a crap car and put it on the podium consistently while other drivers can take a good car and find every way possible to miss the podium on a regular basis.

When was the last time a crap car was on podium because of driver merit?
Rubens last year? Or Heidfeld in Malaysia this season? Both on exceptional circumstances.

Or maybe MS in 2005?

Not to many occasions, certainly not enough to prove a point.

[Sleeper]

This has been the case for about a century now. The only championship it couldnt apply to is F2 which is a centrally run spec series. It baffles me that people talk about it as if it was a new development, but you never saw Moss winning championship races in a Connaught in the 50's, and Nuvolari only challenged the Mercedes and Auto Union dominance in his Alfa at the Nordschleif, a place where the ability to run closer to the limits than any one else could gain you 3/4 of a minute.

At the end of the day, the drivers still got to do the job, and I seriously doubt that Sutil or Piquet could have won 2, let alone 5, of the first 6 races like Button has.

[Hondo]

For pure racing there's a lot to be said for Formula Ford.

[christophulus]

The car is the deciding factor in F1, a crap car will get you nowhere. It's only when the cars are fairly equal already that the driver comes into play.

However, Button has really seized his opportunities so far. It's perfectly easy to waste a good car so he deserves a lot of credit. Could another driver do the same in his position? Some could, yes, but you could argue that Button would have had a shot the past two years in a McLaren/Ferrari.

The Brawn is the superior car but won't be all season so well done to them for striking early.

[wmcot]

This is exactly what makes F1 different from most other racing "spec" series. It takes a combination of a good car, a good driver, and a good strategy to win. This is exactly why I watch F1 and ALMS rather than IRL, NASCAR and other spec series'.

(Before I get all the comments on NASCAR, the chassis and tires are spec, the engines are not - making it mostly spec.)

[wmcot]

For pure racing there's a lot to be said for Formula Ford.

Depends on your definition of "pure" racing.

[F1boat]

This is exactly what makes F1 different from most other racing "spec" series. It takes a combination of a good car, a good driver, and a good strategy to win. This is exactly why I watch F1 and ALMS rather than IRL, NASCAR and other spec series'.

(Before I get all the comments on NASCAR, the chassis and tires are spec, the engines are not - making it mostly spec.)

The funny thing is that sometimes F1 is more closely contested than the IRL or NASCAR. I believe that in every sport you need a good car and a good team to win. To me all F1 drivers are special and some are very special. Jenson was considered to be a very good driver prior to 2007 and now is fulfilling his promise - finally.

[Storm]

Button winning all the races is quickly getting boring. If Turkey does not see a different winner (which I doubt, unless Ferrari have improved that much) I may lose interest in this season.

[Hondo]

Depends on your definition of "pure" racing.

I'm talking about the guys that do the hobbyist, weekend kind of competitions. Bought the car, keep it in their garage, and make every race they can.

I'm excluding the young gunfighters looking to make a name for themselves on their way up.

[F1boat]

Button winning all the races is quickly getting boring. If Turkey does not see a different winner (which I doubt, unless Ferrari have improved that much) I may lose interest in this season.

Well, for me it is interesting - but it will be hard for Jenson to win again...

[Ranger]

Well, for me it is interesting - but it will be hard for Jenson to win again...

When has it ever been hard to win in the best car on the grid?

[wedge]

When has it ever been hard to win in the best car on the grid?

When you make mistakes and your nearest rival does a better job than you.

[F1boat]

When has it ever been hard to win in the best car on the grid?

I believe that in Turkey RBR and Ferrari will be very close to Brawn GP. I am sure that Jenson will win more races, but in Turkey it will be really hard...

[Sleeper]

Button winning all the races is quickly getting boring. If Turkey does not see a different winner (which I doubt, unless Ferrari have improved that much) I may lose interest in this season.
Personally I reckon RBR and Brawn will be neck and neck in Turkey.

[F1boat]

And Ferrari might also be close!

[maximilian]

This is getting well off-topic, but this year has been a little hard to predict as far as form curves - I heard a lot of talk about how quick RedBull would be in Monaco, using their new diffusors... and they really weren't any better than before, it seems. Also... Toyota taking the front row in one race, and the back row in another? The unprecedented fall of BMW? Not to mention the Ferrari and McLaren disasters so far...

The only speed that's been really constant have been the Brawns. I am almost more impressed by their reliability than their speed at this time. There just hasn't been any hint of technical problems yet so far, has there? Any glitches at all, even in practice?

[ioan]

The only speed that's been really constant have been the Brawns. I am almost more impressed by their reliability than their speed at this time. There just hasn't been any hint of technical problems yet so far, has there? Any glitches at all, even in practice?

Brawn had several gearbox problems in FP and even during the Oz GP. They also had cooling problems in Bahrain and had to cut the rear bodywork as a solution.

They had problems but they knew how to solve them or drive around them, unlike others.

[nigelred5]

Well, for me it is interesting - but it will be hard for Jenson to win again...

LOL. Who is seriously going to challenge them in general and Button specifically for the remainder of the season other than maybe RedBull? even wiht the rear aero updates, they are simply out front. I've never been a fan of Button's but I'm pretty confident he'll win AT LEAST 1 more race before they go into safe mode collecting just enough points to stay ahead. They aren't exactly underfunded, and they will have further updates.

I'll be the first to admit that I openly stated I never thought Button would be in a position to back up his fluke win at Hungary with BAR again, but he really isn't with the same team. I never would have imagined he would have ended up with a Merc. engine on a team led by Ross Brawn. I've never been highly impressed with JB, but he's suffered JV's similar fate until this year- That of an excessively oversalaried driver in a crappy car for an ineffectively run team.

[F1boat]

nigelred, I meant that it will be tough for Brawn GP to overcome RBR in the fast corners in Turkey. I am pretty confident that Jenson will win in Hungary or Valencia, for example.

[F1boat]

This is getting well off-topic, but this year has been a little hard to predict as far as form curves - I heard a lot of talk about how quick RedBull would be in Monaco, using their new diffusors...

I personally think that the DD might spoil their design, but Monaco is hardly indicative for their pace. They knew that this is not the best circuit for them.

[maximilian]

I personally think that the DD might spoil their design, but Monaco is hardly indicative for their pace. They knew that this is not the best circuit for them.

So I hear... and I hope that's true, for interest's sake in the races to come. Makes one wonder whether it would have been wiser to stick to their previous design, and wait one more race to introduce the new part...

[F1boat]

We'll find out soon enough - but I don't care for the interest, I want Jenson to win again ;) However, if someone is to stop him, I'd prefer to be Kimi.
Still, I am realistic. Red Bull will be strong in Istanbul unless the new DD is really a mistake...

[K-Pu]

I think something really big has to happen to prevent the Brawns from dominating again...

[CNR]

i would like to know how good redbull could have been this year if there rear diffuser had not been deemed illegal

i guess to many changes were made to the car to revert back

[wmcot]

...neck and neck in Turkey.

I'm more of a gizzard man myself! :)

(Too many bones in the neck and very little meat.)

[ioan]

i would like to know how good redbull could have been this year if there rear diffuser had not been deemed illegal

i guess to many changes were made to the car to revert back

Huh???

When was the Red Bull diffuser deemed illegal?

[V12]

When was the WDC NOT won by the driver in the best car? And by best I mean combination of speed and reliability, over the course of the season. Apologies for the long post but here's a season-by-season run down since the start

1950 - The Alfas are all conquering, Farina wins for Alfa.
1951 - Alfas quicker in first half of season, Ferraris quicker in second half - Ferrari's Ascari can't catch up to Alfa's Fangio.
1952 & 53 - Ferrari easily best placed for switch to "F2" regs - Ascari wins both.
1954 & 55 - Mercedes easily best car, Fangio wins both for them.
1956 - Perhaps first time driver makes difference between two evenly matched makes - Fangio wins for Lancia-Ferrari over Moss's Maserati 250F.
1957 - See 1956 - except Fangio in Maserati and Moss in Vanwall.
1958 - Vanwall quicker but Ferrari more consistent/reliable - Hawthorn wins despite Moss being acknowledged as "better" driver.
1959 - Ferrari quicker on the straights, Cooper better in corners, works Cooper more reliable than Rob Walker car so Brabham wins from Brooks (Ferrari) and Moss (RW Cooper)
1960 - Lotus quick, new Cooper quick AND reliable - Brabham wins again.
1961 - Ferrari class of field after change of regs - P.Hill wins.
1962 - Lotus quick but fragile, BRM next quickest and more reliable, G.Hill wins for BRM from Clark's Lotus.
1963 & 65 - Probably the first times since 1956-57 that the driver makes the difference between fairly evenly matched makes - Clark wins.
1964 - Same story as 1962, Lotus unreliable and Surtees takes it for improving Ferrari.
1966-67 - Brabham best placed for switch to 3-litre Formula as the Ferraris are heavy and unreliable, and the Lotus-DFV takes ages to arrive, Brabham & Hulme win.
1968 - G.Hill wins for Lotus despite Stewart being regarded the "better" driver.
1969 - Stewart deservedly wins, BUT he does regard that year's Matra as possibly the best car he ever drove.
1970 - Rindt wins posthumously for Lotus and is quoted as saying "a monkey could win in this car"
1971 & 73 - Stewart wins again in probably not the out and out best car.
1972 - Fittipaldi wins in Lotus, hard to tell whether he transcended the car or if teammate Dave Walker was out of his depth.
1974 - Fittipaldi again in McLaren, in a year of no standout marque I'll give him this one as a "driver" victory.
1975 - Ferrari is probably quickest car but I think Lauda made the difference considering Regazzoni - a good driver - did not come close to finishing 2nd.
1976 - Same story as 1975 really except Lauda got injured and Hunt won.
1977 - Andretti's Lotus is quick but unreliable, Lauda takes an impressive second title in not the out and out quickest car.
1978 - Andretti leads Lotus 1-2 in car he describes as "painted to the road"
1979 - A strange year with first Ligier, then Ferrari, then Renault, then Williams taking their turns as the car to have. Scheckter wins for Ferrari.
1980 - Jones wins for Williams, how good was Piquet's Brabham? With Zunino and Rebaque in the second car it's hard to tell.
1981 - Piquet wins for Brabham, but see above.
1982 - Rosberg wins in very weird year with deaths, injuries, disqualifications or unreliability afflicting virtually all the other contenders.
1983 - Piquet wins in "rocket fuel" Brabham, but Patrese didn't come second, so...
1984 - Lauda heads McLaren 1-2
1985 - Prost defeats the more powerful Williams and Lotuses but McLaren is still probably the best all round car. Ferrari quick but unreliable when it matters.
1986 - No arguments here - Prost wins in what is NOT the best car.
1987 - Piquet heads Williams 1-2
1988-89 - Senna & Prost take turns to head McLaren 1-2
1990 - Senna (McLaren) beats Prost (Ferrari) but McLaren still probably have the edge.
1991 - Williams get quicker and quicker but early season reliability costs them. Senna wins for McLaren.
1992 - Mansell steamrollers everyone in dominant Williams.
1993 - Swap Mansell for Prost
1994-95 - I'll give Schumacher two "Drivers" titles here, was nip-and-tuck Benetton starts 1994 quicker but as Williams get to grips with new low-tech regs they improve.
1996-97 - as in 1992-93, Williams is the car to have, Hill & Villeneuve do the job.
1998-99 - Newey swaps to McLaren, Hakkinen wins two titles.
2000-01 - Hard to tell when Ferrari took over as the "best" car from McLaren, but I'll give Schumacher these two, together with 2003.
2002 & 04 - Both seasons the Ferrari is the class of the field.
2005 - Renault probably have the best combination of speed, tyres & reliability as Alonso wins
2006 - Alonso "earns" this one, beating Schumacher in fairly evenly matched Ferrari.
2007-08 - Ferrari and McLaren fairly evenly matched, so I'd say Kimi and Lewis "earned" these titles.

In conclusion, maybe we've been spoiled by 2006-08, but history shows that more often than not (by an overwhelming margin) the driver of the best car wins the title. OK with the likes of Fangio, Clark, Prost, Senna, Schumacher it just so happened that the best driver was in the best car a number of years.

[ioan]

Great analysis V12! :up:

[Storm]

Good analysis indeed, still it doesn't make seasons like 2002/04 and now maybe 2009, less boring to even after knowing that in F1 the fastest car indeed wins most of the time :)

[Sleeper]

Huh???

When was the Red Bull diffuser deemed illegal?
Red Bull and Renault both originally submitted designs to the FIA last year for DDD's asking if they were leagal, both were told no.

A bit off topic but a footnote to the diffuser disussion that we never really finished. I read not long ago that these two teams were trying for something similar to Brawn but rather than have simple holes cut into the floor they had slits that opened and closed under different presure loads so that they could cut down on drag at high speed. They were told no because thats illegal moveable areo in the form of a flexi-floor.

[Sleeper]

Great analasys V12 (though I'd say that Ferrari hadthe clear best car in 01 as well), backs up what I said on the last page excellently.

[Knock-on]

Red Bull and Renault both originally submitted designs to the FIA last year for DDD's asking if they were leagal, both were told no.

A bit off topic but a footnote to the diffuser disussion that we never really finished. I read not long ago that these two teams were trying for something similar to Brawn but rather than have simple holes cut into the floor they had slits that opened and closed under different presure loads so that they could cut down on drag at high speed. They were told no because thats illegal moveable areo in the form of a flexi-floor.

Agreed with the first part. Renault and RBR submitted designs that were deemed illegal but Brawn and the others submitted ones that were different.

As for the second part, I guess that would have been a reason if it was Renault and RBR that they were found outside of the regulation. Would be interesting to have it confirmed but Flav has gone quiet after all his bluster.

Strange that ;)

[555-04Q2]

1998-99 - Newey swaps to McLaren, Hakkinen wins two titles.

All good dude except for the 99 season. Ferrari had the best car, but only just. Sadly Schumi broke his leg which put himout of contention for the WDC and Swirvin Irvine was no match for Mika for the 99 title. I'd say Mika won that on sheer driving skill.

Otherwise, pretty good analysis :up:

[Ranger]

All good dude except for the 99 season. Ferrari had the best car, but only just. Sadly Schumi broke his leg which put himout of contention for the WDC and Swirvin Irvine was no match for Mika for the 99 title. I'd say Mika won that on sheer driving skill.

McLaren had the best car.

Think about San Marino, Monza, Magny-Cours... all races Mika would have easily won if not for critical driving mistakes, plus Nurburgring where he went to sleep for much of the race. If it weren't for these, Mika would've been some 25+ points up the road.

That was a very scrappy season for Mika.

[CNR]

Huh???

When was the Red Bull diffuser deemed illegal?
http://www.formula1blog.com/2009/03/23/red-bull-says-diffusers-are-illegal/


They said that Red Bull and Renault asked early last season as to a similar aero treatment and were told no by the FIA

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I don't agree.

I think Button is the best driver out there. And probably one of the best of all time.

[555-04Q2]

McLaren had the best car.

Think about San Marino, Monza, Magny-Cours... all races Mika would have easily won if not for critical driving mistakes, plus Nurburgring where he went to sleep for much of the race. If it weren't for these, Mika would've been some 25+ points up the road.

That was a very scrappy season for Mika.

I'm of the opinion that the Ferrari was a slightly better car, I'm talking about 1 or 2% margins here. Just my opinion though. Feel free to slaughter me if you will :p :

[555-04Q2]

I don't agree.

I think Button is the best driver out there. And probably one of the best of all time.

WTF :?:

[Garry Walker]

I don't agree.

I think Button is the best driver out there. And probably one of the best of all time.

Too much magic mushrooms for you lately.

[ioan]

Red Bull and Renault both originally submitted designs to the FIA last year for DDD's asking if they were leagal, both were told no.


Now I see what he was talking about. For whatever reason I understood that it happened this season.

[ioan]

I don't agree.

I think Button is the best driver out there. And probably one of the best of all time.

:rotflmao:

[woody2goody]

I think this is a common misconception about F1 to be honest.

You might look at Barrichello and Button and think they are 'lucky' to be at the front, but remember that Button only had 3-5 actual chances to win a race at all before this year, and only the one he did win was a clear cut chance. Barrichello was arguably the second best Ferrari driver since Mansell and Prost.

Even though they are so-called 'veteran back-markers', they had won 10 races between them, more than a lot of guys have.

If you put Sutil and Piquet in the Brawns then they may have won 2 or 3 all season. Sutil would have won in Monaco and maybe a wet race, and piquet would have won one at some point. I doubt they would have been able to see of RBR and Toyota.

Anyone who doesn't see Vettel's potential and good dry weather driving needs to look closer. Red Bull had no right to be near the Brawns in Australia and Vettel was doing that even before the SCs.

The car does make a phenomenal difference, but look at Hamilton in Monaco and Bahrain. He was pretty quick in both (ignoring his race finish in Monaco) and also look at the last two performances from Massa which I think have been great.

Look at Jarno Trulli's persistent qualifying genius (apart from Monaco :D ). This proves that you can make a big difference as a driver. We know that the difference between Alonso and Piquet is usually around 2-4 tenths. Even against an excellent driver like Fisichella, Fernando was up to 2 tenths faster.

NASCAR.com had a dig at F1 today in their review of the Memorial Weekend's racing. This proves that Monaco in the dry is a bad example to showcase to the American racing viewers in particular.

"Despite a very cool venue, as is the case in most F1 races, the start and the first lap or two are really the biggest attractions in watching. Didn't even get close to achieving that, and you have to have some doubt about a series in which the biggest concern is whether the winner -- who's won five of six events this season (yawn) -- can jog far enough to reach winner's circle."

I challenge Dave Rodman to watch the races in China or Malaysia and find them boring. This could have been the only F1 race he's watched this year. Button's manner of his victories haven't been 'boring' apart from possibly Monaco. There have been three or four teams who have challenged at some point this year apart from Brawn.

I watched the rain-delayed Coke 600 on Monday, and when the racing was taking place, it was an enjoyable race on a track with two or three different racing grooves, but you cannot compare that track, and the ease that you can overtake at Lowe's, with Monaco where even Touring Cars or motorbikes would find it difficult to pass.

It would be nice if a NASCAR journalist could present an opinion of F1 that doesn't take the piss or talk down to the NASCAR fans about it. Make no mistake about it, NASCAR fans are real motor racing fans, so why not talk about the good points of F1, so they can enjoy it as much as we do.

[555-04Q2]

but remember that Button only had 3-5 actual chances to win a race at all before this year, and only the one he did win was a clear cut chance.

I disagree. In 2004 he had a very fast car, yes the Ferrari was bulletproof and Schumi sublime in 2004, but I think it was 6 of the races that season were won by drivers other than Schumi and Button wasnt one of them. He had the car to challenge and win but failed.

[ioan]

I don't agree.

I think Button is the best driver out there. And probably one of the best of all time.

:rotflmao:

[Knock-on]

I disagree. In 2004 he had a very fast car, yes the Ferrari was bulletproof and Schumi sublime in 2004, but I think it was 6 of the races that season were won by drivers other than Schumi and Button wasnt one of them. He had the car to challenge and win but failed.

That's rubbish mate if you don't mind me saying.

There were 3 times Ferrari didn't occupy the top step.

Monaco - Button qualified 3rd and finished 2nd 0.4 seconds behind Trulli.
Belgium - Blow out finished his race
Brazil - Engine failure

Now, I know he should have pushed his car after the engine expired and lifted it on his shoulders with the blown tyre but perhaps you might like to cut him some slack?

That leaves Monaco where the BAR never handled well, yet he qualified 3rd and made it into 2nd (thanks to a Ralf penalty) behind the exceptionally nimble Renault which was the championship winning car in 05.

Jenson was bitterly unlucky in that the 2 races where he could have won, the car broke down and the 3rd was just not a circuit a BAR was going to win on, yet he still only lost out by less than 1/2 a second.

I'm fed up with all the crap about him not maxamising 2004 because he dragged that POS up to 3rd in the championship by guts and willpower half the time.

[ioan]

That's rubbish mate if you don't mind me saying.

There were 3 times Ferrari didn't occupy the top step.

And it was up to Button to do something against that given that he was sitting in the 2nd fastest car.



Monaco - Button qualified 3rd and finished 2nd 0.4 seconds behind Trulli.


How come Trulli managed to win while Button didn't, given that the almighty Ferrari was out?

[Sleeper]

And it was up to Button to do something against that given that he was sitting in the 2nd fastest car.

Not when the Ferrari was as much as 1 second per lap faster than everything else. Schumy cruised to half hi wins because even Rubens couldnt get close to him that year. IMO 2004 was the peak of Schumachers driving prowess.



How come Trulli managed to win while Button didn't, given that the almighty Ferrari was out?
Beacuse the Renaults qualified 1 and 2, and Schumacher got Button off the start (I think, I dont remember all the details).

[Sleeper]

Agreed with the first part. Renault and RBR submitted designs that were deemed illegal but Brawn and the others submitted ones that were different.

As for the second part, I guess that would have been a reason if it was Renault and RBR that they were found outside of the regulation. Would be interesting to have it confirmed but Flav has gone quiet after all his bluster.

Strange that ;)
Its the most likely reason, but I cant guarentee it because its one of those "reliable rumours" that turn up in Autosport and the FIA and Flav arent particularly forthcoming on the details about this in public.

[woody2goody]

Not when the Ferrari was as much as 1 second per lap faster than everything else. Schumy cruised to half hi wins because even Rubens couldnt get close to him that year. IMO 2004 was the peak of Schumachers driving prowess.

Agreed. No-one could get even close to the Ferraris until McLaren got their act together and Raikkonen won in Belgium.


Beacuse the Renaults qualified 1 and 2, and Schumacher got Button off the start (I think, I dont remember all the details).

Trulli's pole lap was widely regarded as one of the all-time great qualifying performances. Jarno also put up a decent defence at the end. He would have beaten Schumacher anyway.

[ioan]

Beacuse the Renaults qualified 1 and 2, and Schumacher got Button off the start (I think, I dont remember all the details).

It was up to Button to qualify better and have a better start in this case.
How is it possible that such a great driver was out-qualified by those pesky Renaults?! :p :

[woody2goody]

It was up to Button to qualify better and have a better start in this case.
How is it possible that such a great driver was out-qualified by those pesky Renaults?! :p :

See my post above Ioan. I doubt anyone could have beaten Trulli that day.

[V12]

Reading some of the discussion on this thread - taking all opinion about who is/was better than who and so on out of the equation, isn't it just more fun when you don't *know* for certain who is doing better? It makes for more interesting discussion, and let's face it would the likes of (Gilles) Villeneuve and Peterson have such the legends surrounding them that they do, if they'd cruised to a handful of championships each in a field of centrally-prepared spec machinery each year?

[f1rocks]

Guys. Please put this to rest.

Jenson has proved this year that he is amongst the very best out there. Winning 5 out of 6 races is something that neither, Alonso, Kimi or Massa have been able to do in dominant cars..

I am a MS fan all the way but Jenson's driving and skill is reminding me so much of MS back in 2004...I have a feeling that he might even break MS's record of 13 wins (the way he is going).

And all credit to him if he does that. He has won races with his brains and also by overtaking other drivers (like Lewis, Alonso etc)..This is something that MS did not have to do much in 2004 in all the races which he won..I cant remember MS overtaking anyone except for maybe the Monza 2004 race (but he did not win it).

Bottom line: Button is a fantastic driver and he might even school Alonso in the same team..

[F1boat]

I agree with f1rocks, although I don't think that Jenson can beat Fred. But I agree that he is fantastic. From what I read here the main criticism for Button is that he hasn't won a race against the best driver ever (MS) with one of the most dominant cars ever (Ferrari F2004). That's retarded. :)

[555-04Q2]

That's rubbish mate if you don't mind me saying.

There were 3 times Ferrari didn't occupy the top step.

Monaco - Button qualified 3rd and finished 2nd 0.4 seconds behind Trulli.
Belgium - Blow out finished his race
Brazil - Engine failure

Now, I know he should have pushed his car after the engine expired and lifted it on his shoulders with the blown tyre but perhaps you might like to cut him some slack?

That leaves Monaco where the BAR never handled well, yet he qualified 3rd and made it into 2nd (thanks to a Ralf penalty) behind the exceptionally nimble Renault which was the championship winning car in 05.

Jenson was bitterly unlucky in that the 2 races where he could have won, the car broke down and the 3rd was just not a circuit a BAR was going to win on, yet he still only lost out by less than 1/2 a second.

I'm fed up with all the crap about him not maxamising 2004 because he dragged that POS up to 3rd in the championship by guts and willpower half the time.

Knockie mate, the BAR was the second fastest car and should have won a race or two at least. I'd bet my house against a moles ar$e that if Schumi was in the BAR in 2004 and Button was in the Ferrari, Schumi would have won at least one or two races.

[F1boat]

So, 555? MS is better than JB - OK! MS is probably the best ever. It doesn't mean anything. JB was third in the final standings of the year. Best of the rest.

[555-04Q2]

So, 555? MS is better than JB - OK! MS is probably the best ever. It doesn't mean anything. JB was third in the final standings of the year. Best of the rest.

But he never won a race, in the second best car, that is the whole point. Others managed it in 2004 but he didnt, regardless of how good MS was or the fact that Ferrari were sh!t hot in 2004. The fact that Button managed to finish third in the WDC ahead of other drivers that won races in 2004 proves my point.

This Button story is becoming like the Kimi excuse syndrome :(

Excuses dont cut it with me, results do ;)

[Knock-on]

All I can say 555 is that Rubens was in the 2nd Ferrari and beat Button by about 30 points. Incidently, Schumacher beat Rubens by about 30 points as well when Schumy was at the height of his career and Rubens was his tail gunner.

This year, in a good car, Button is destroying Rubens when there are no team orders (unless you believe in UFO's and that the moon landing was faked :rolleyes: ) In fact, after 1/3 of the season, Jenson is already 16 points ahead. If this continues, we are looking at a 45 point difference.

Now, the evidence suggests that Jenson is beating Rubens as comprehensivly as Schumy did so I cannot understand this criticism that Jenson should have won a GP or that MS would have done if they swapped cars. It doesn't make sense.

[555-04Q2]

All I can say 555 is that Rubens was in the 2nd Ferrari and beat Button by about 30 points. Incidently, Schumacher beat Rubens by about 30 points as well when Schumy was at the height of his career and Rubens was his tail gunner.

This year, in a good car, Button is destroying Rubens when there are no team orders (unless you believe in UFO's and that the moon landing was faked :rolleyes: ) In fact, after 1/3 of the season, Jenson is already 16 points ahead. If this continues, we are looking at a 45 point difference.

Now, the evidence suggests that Jenson is beating Rubens as comprehensivly as Schumy did so I cannot understand this criticism that Jenson should have won a GP or that MS would have done if they swapped cars. It doesn't make sense.

I believe there are no team orders at Brawn GP. I also believe the Brawn car is better than people think. Rubens is well past his prime (he was a great driver mid-career) if you ask me and shouldnt be used as a yard stick. I do believe however that Button is doing a great job this year. His confidence from having a good car is unbelievable. We havent seen this level of confidence from Button before. He is a totally different animal in a car that isnt #1 though.

I think his problem in 2004 (as with most drivers that year I suspect) was that his brain told him the Ferrari's were too fast so secure second or third place instead. Many drivers have won in less than ideal conditions, when not having the ideal car etc etc. Buttons drive in Spain 2006 is indicative of his ability when the car is good (if I remember correctly he said in the post race interviews that the car worked well in the tricky conditions), but when the car isint up there neither is he.

My point in this thread is that besides Spain 2006 he hasnt done anything special before he took to the wheel of the 2009 Brawn GP, which we all know is the overall best car so far this season. We have one forum member now saying that Button is one of the greatest ever :s hock: If anything doesnt make sense, that does ;)

[555-04Q2]

I really don't care whether Button only won one race before this season or not. What counts is now, then is history IMO... If he does win the championship this season then the past doesn't take anything away from it really does it?

I care. Winning is a measurement of success across all aspects of life, especially sport.

You bring up history. Does a driver suddenly become the best or much better than they were after 8 years of mediocracy? I dont think so. There is something else that changed, in this case, its a great car :up:

[Knock-on]

You say 8 years of mediocracy but I think he has done a good job with less than ideal equipment. You can rubbish his results against his team mates all you want and make the excuses you claim don't cut it but they are facts and results.

Results talk, BS walks as they say and Jenson is proving what I have been saying on these hallowed boards for years.

[555-04Q2]

You say 8 years of mediocracy but I think he has done a good job with less than ideal equipment. You can rubbish his results against his team mates all you want and make the excuses you claim don't cut it but they are facts and results.

Results talk, BS walks as they say and Jenson is proving what I have been saying on these hallowed boards for years.

I have never rubbished Buton's results against his teamates. Mentioning Rubens in my earlier post is the first time I have ever dared try and compare him to a teamate ;)

You say he has done a good job with the equipment he has had, which confirms my statements that he hasnt done anything great up till this season. There is a fine line between a good job and a great job in F1.

I admit that Button is in GREAT form this season so far, you should know that, but he is still a long way from being as good a driver as people are making him out to be.

Its just your opinion vs mine Knockie, it just happens that mine is the right one :D

[K-Pu]

I´ll never understand how can Button be considered one of the best drivers in all the history of F1. If it is by his awesome pace this year, well... Look at where he was in 2008 with a crappy car. Even Alonso in a Minardi (low budget, no manufacturer, last in the pecking order) managed to impress waaay more than Button in last year´s Honda!

When Button was in a good position to do something he couldn´t achieve a win with the 2nd best car. But others did. How can this be understood if he´s better than the rest of the grid (except Schumacher) and has the best car (except Ferrari)? Wouldn´t have it been relatively easy for him to win something? At least easier than winning with another car, and at least easier than winning in 2006, but that was quite surprising even for himself.

And look at his performances when he did not have the 2nd or the best car. He has been the eternal promise (he´s now cracking the Earth with his unstoppable car) and a LOT of people have put him out of F1 too much times to count them all.

In order to rate Button´s driving abilities or Brawn´s superiority: look at the on-board footage. You´ll see how all the cars are somewhat difficult to handle, while the Brawn goes on rails. It needs no corrections, no strange things, nothing. Just aim and the car will do the rest. It may mean something... Ferrari F2004 also went on rails, Williams FW14B is another fine example...

All conquering cars, and IMHO Mansell and Schumacher are better drivers than Button.

[Knock-on]

Your opinion may be right but so are my facts :p :

Mmmmmm

Facts vs Opinion. On this forum, that's Top Trumps in you favour :laugh:

[Knock-on]

K-Pu. Most of your questions have already been answered in this thread.

About the handleing of the Brawn, I suggest you take a look at the onboard footage of Rubens car if you want to see a lot of wheel movement. With Jenson, you are proving one of his strenghts. the ability to be silky smooth and precise around a track.

[Sleeper]

Knockie mate, the BAR was the second fastest car and should have won a race or two at least. I'd bet my house against a moles ar$e that if Schumi was in the BAR in 2004 and Button was in the Ferrari, Schumi would have won at least one or two races.
I wouldnt. Though the BAR was overall the second best it wasnt hugely consistent, there were a number of races were the Renault, McLaren and even on occasion the Williams were definitely better cars. In fact, I remember only three races were he Ferrari wasnt the ultimate car to have, Monaco Hockenheim and Spa. The Renault and McLaren were the cars to have those days.

[F1boat]

But he never won a race, in the second best car, that is the whole point. Others managed it in 2004 but he didnt, regardless of how good MS was or the fact that Ferrari were sh!t hot in 2004. The fact that Button managed to finish third in the WDC ahead of other drivers that won races in 2004 proves my point.

This Button story is becoming like the Kimi excuse syndrome :(

Excuses dont cut it with me, results do ;)

Results?
The results speak that Jenson was third in 2004, behind the all-conquering Ferrari cars. He was the most consistent among all MS rivals and this counts more than a win on a special track (Monte), in a race, hugely affected by cautions (Spa) and a semi-wet race (Brazil).
Not to mention this year...
About Kimi, he is a WDC. This is what the results say. The rest is bla-bla.

[ioan]

I´ll never understand how can Button be considered one of the best drivers in all the history of F1.

That's because you are not a Brit! ;)

[ioan]

Your opinion may be right but so are my facts :p :

Mmmmmm

Facts vs Opinion. On this forum, that's Top Trumps in you favour :laugh:

That's a sudden change of POV! :rolleyes: :rotflmao:

[ioan]

I wouldnt. Though the BAR was overall the second best it wasnt hugely consistent, there were a number of races were the Renault, McLaren and even on occasion the Williams were definitely better cars. In fact, I remember only three races were he Ferrari wasnt the ultimate car to have, Monaco Hockenheim and Spa. The Renault and McLaren were the cars to have those days.

Let's just say that a car isn't great in one race and pants in another. It's just that the driver didn't find the right set-up.

[555-04Q2]

Your opinion may be right but so are my facts :p :

Mmmmmm

Facts vs Opinion. On this forum, that's Top Trumps in you favour :laugh:

I love Top Trumps. First time I've won though :D :up:

[555-04Q2]

With Jenson, you are proving one of his strenghts. the ability to be silky smooth and precise around a track.

:up: Cant argue on that one.

[wedge]

I´ll never understand how can Button be considered one of the best drivers in all the history of F1. If it is by his awesome pace this year, well... Look at where he was in 2008 with a crappy car. Even Alonso in a Minardi (low budget, no manufacturer, last in the pecking order) managed to impress waaay more than Button in last year´s Honda!

When Button was in a good position to do something he couldn´t achieve a win with the 2nd best car. But others did. How can this be understood if he´s better than the rest of the grid (except Schumacher) and has the best car (except Ferrari)? Wouldn´t have it been relatively easy for him to win something? At least easier than winning with another car, and at least easier than winning in 2006, but that was quite surprising even for himself.

And look at his performances when he did not have the 2nd or the best car. He has been the eternal promise (he´s now cracking the Earth with his unstoppable car) and a LOT of people have put him out of F1 too much times to count them all.

In order to rate Button´s driving abilities or Brawn´s superiority: look at the on-board footage. You´ll see how all the cars are somewhat difficult to handle, while the Brawn goes on rails. It needs no corrections, no strange things, nothing. Just aim and the car will do the rest. It may mean something... Ferrari F2004 also went on rails, Williams FW14B is another fine example...

All conquering cars, and IMHO Mansell and Schumacher are better drivers than Button.

Agreed. I thought Schumi was the better driver in 1996 even though Hill was WDC.

But what matters is the here and now, being at the right place at the right time and making the most of your opportunities and Button is doing that.

I'd still put Hamilton and Alonso way ahead of Button.

[ioan]

Another wild generalisation.. Us Brits get a hard time on here for actually supporting our drivers but the whole 'British being best Thing' is only ever flung at us and mentioned by non- Brits :confused:

I think that proves my point really :p : Maybe we are not liked? Who knows? Do we care??

It looks to me that you do care! :p :

[f1rocks]

I'd still put Hamilton and Alonso way ahead of Button.
Wanna have a bet..I think Button will school Alonso. Hamilton is also better than Alonso. Alonso is crap and a 2 time lucky WDC.

Alonso only won 2006 because MS engine failed. And in 2005 Kimi's car failed so many times. He should really have been 0 times WDC...

Button rocks and both Ross Brawn and MS think very highly of him...!!

[K-Pu]

Wanna have a bet..I think Button will school Alonso. Hamilton is also better than Alonso. Alonso is crap and a 2 time lucky WDC.

Alonso only won 2006 because MS engine failed. And in 2005 Kimi's car failed so many times. He should really have been 0 times WDC...

Button rocks and both Ross Brawn and MS think very highly of him...!!

Really? Then how many times should have Button win the WDC? And Hamilton? Alonso, obviously, is a crappy driver who can only impress with an outstanding car, just like that unstoppable force of technology which was the Minardi PS01 or the eight wonder of the world: the Renault R23. Right? Anyway, he only won 2 WDC´s, as you said, because he was lucky. HE didn´t even have to drive because the other competitors were too busy giving him the WDC, yesno?

In the other hand, Button has ALWAYS demonstrated his obvious quality, being unable to win a single race in 2004, having two horrid seasons with Honda, needing more than a hundred raced to win one of them (and a fluke win) and being the eternal promise for... um... 9 seasons?

Of course this is only "a bit" deformed, but it could be as real as your statement, eh?

[555-04Q2]

Results?
The results speak that Jenson was third in 2004, behind the all-conquering Ferrari cars. He was the most consistent among all MS rivals and this counts more than a win on a special track (Monte), in a race, hugely affected by cautions (Spa) and a semi-wet race (Brazil).


WTF :?:

Button was miffed that he hadnt won a race before Spain 2006. It bugged him and he was constantly asked by people why he hadnt won yet, much to his annoyance. In 2004 if you had offered him a win that season instead of third in the WDC, he would have taken the win. Besides, third in the WDC is just second position on the losers log.

[555-04Q2]

I wouldnt. Though the BAR was overall the second best it wasnt hugely consistent, there were a number of races were the Renault, McLaren and even on occasion the Williams were definitely better cars. In fact, I remember only three races were he Ferrari wasnt the ultimate car to have, Monaco Hockenheim and Spa. The Renault and McLaren were the cars to have those days.

Again, WTF :?:

Excuses excuses, f@cking excuses :(

[ioan]

Wanna have a bet..I think Button will school Alonso. Hamilton is also better than Alonso. Alonso is crap and a 2 time lucky WDC.

Alonso only won 2006 because MS engine failed. And in 2005 Kimi's car failed so many times. He should really have been 0 times WDC...

Button rocks and both Ross Brawn and MS think very highly of him...!!

Well, I'm a Ferrari and MS fan, but I think Alonso is one of the best out there, second maybe only to the Ferrari drivers.

[wedge]

Wanna have a bet..I think Button will school Alonso. Hamilton is also better than Alonso. Alonso is crap and a 2 time lucky WDC.

Alonso only won 2006 because MS engine failed. And in 2005 Kimi's car failed so many times. He should really have been 0 times WDC...

Button rocks and both Ross Brawn and MS think very highly of him...!!

What did Button achieve in the first 6 months of crappy Hondas in 2007 and 2008? Rubens beat him.

What has Hamilton achieved so far in a crappy McLaren? He dragged it out of top 16 start position to points paying positions.

If Button is better than Alonso then why did he fail to achieve in defending second place at the 2005 San Marino GP whereas Alonso kept his position and win.

And how about Turkey 2006 where again Alonso held off Schumi in the dying moments? Alonso the lucky WDC? I doubt it.

[jens]

This is what I expected already from the beginning of the season. Endless debates throughout the year, whether Button is as quick as he seems now and how good was he in 2008, 2004, etc... :dozey:

I don't know, what is the big deal with the machinery here. Car has always counted a lot, regardless of the drivers. Button's dominance isn't really much different than say Räikkönen's dominance in the fastest car of 2005. At times in 2001-2003 Williams was faster than anyone else and Montoya and Ralf drove into the distance away from others. In 1996 Hill looked like an unbeatable superdriver. Etc.

By the way, when in another thread I compared JB to MH, then from 1998 I vaguely remember quite similar theories, when Mika started dominating - "he isn't anything special, never achieved anything, now wins only thanks to lucking into a dominant car finally", etc. You know, most of the new is forgotten old. ;)

[ShiftingGears]

Wanna have a bet..I think Button will school Alonso. Hamilton is also better than Alonso. Alonso is crap and a 2 time lucky WDC.

Alonso only won 2006 because MS engine failed. And in 2005 Kimi's car failed so many times. He should really have been 0 times WDC...

Button rocks and both Ross Brawn and MS think very highly of him...!!

No, no no. In 2006, Alonso's car failed more times come raceday than Michael Schumachers did, you are just trawling for excuses. Alonso wouldn't have won the 2006 championship if he didn't drive brilliantly the whole year, admit it.

The 2006 championship had the best title fight in the last five years, Alonso and Schumacher were supreme.