Nigel Mansell vs teammates (surprising)

[Apocalypse2112]

Mansell has a great reputation. But when you look at his stats against teammates they are not that flattering at all.

De Angelis beat him five years in a row.

Very spectacular driver, always amazing to watch and his very dangerous overtake on Berger at Hermanos Rodrigues in 1990 was one of the most memorable ever... many great battles with Senna too... but these stats are rather surprising (considering his reputation). Piquet won the 1987 title and Mansell was unlucky. Also the Adelaide 1986 was bad luck. I'll give him that.

But I just recently watched the whole 1985 season and Rosberg made him look like an amateur. After he won Silverstone (Rosberg and Senna collided) he got more self confidence. Prost totally demolished him 1990 on Ferrari (again Mansell had plenty of DNF's so the total points is a bit misleading).

Don't get me wrong though he was a CART champ and a F1 world champion. Hell of a driver with lots of wins and poles. But he drove top cars throughout his (almost) whole career. maybe not the GOAT that the UK media has led us to believe?

PS: This is NOT intended to be a negative post. Loved Mansell and I miss drivers like him. Just some objective thoughts.

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

That is the same guy who somehow made Villeneuve v Frentzen in 1997 go to... Frentzen.
I am unsure how much I trust those numbers.

 

[Apocalypse2112]

I was wondering the 1994 Australia because Mansell won that race. And how could it be given to Hill.

This was the explanation. At least it's a different approach and this is how the guy has composed these statistics.

 

[bi11y]

"before Schumacher forced him off to retirement" LOL

I overheard someone on the train after qualifying this year "teaching" less knowledgable fans about how Schumacher stole Hills championship and that he crashed Hill out...

I had a thought that the 1994 season was quite manipulated with penalties for Schumacher and that it should not have even got to the decider situation...

and secondly, this "popular" anti-Schumacher vitriol point of view of the situation is in contrast with peer commentary in the day such as Jackie Stewart who claimed Hill should have not driven into a closing gap and should have waited later... No surprise that to this day Hill never engages when other commentators try to bring it up... it was an incredibly clumsy and late overtake attempt that would be probably be penalised in more modern driving standards.

back to the topic,
'Our Nige' was referred so enthusiastically by Murray Walker? was a fan favourite for the hysteria of the commentator excitement, and at times very competitve and exciting driver to watch .. never a GOAT contender except perhaps in the rosy coloured glasses of some UKcentric punditry...

 

[Pete Conway]

I was wondering the 1994 Australia because Mansell won that race. And how could it be given to Hill.

This was the explanation. At least it's a different approach and this is how the guy has composed these statistics.

View attachment 722677

The bloke that reaches the flag first is the winner, not the bloke that was running ahead until he had an accident.

 

[Neilski]

The bloke that reaches the flag first is the winner, not the bloke that was running ahead until he had an accident.

Yeah - I guess that as soon as you see the words "unreliability and unluck corrected" you should stop reading any further
Handing Hill that race is just astonishing...

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

I was wondering the 1994 Australia because Mansell won that race. And how could it be given to Hill.

This was the explanation. At least it's a different approach and this is how the guy has composed these statistics.

Yup. He gave Australia 1997 to Frentzen, because, Villeneuve had a poor start and was behind Frentzen when Villeneuve got punted off in T1. He also gives the German GP to Frentzen, as Frentzen was in 5th when he got pushed off the track.
However, as Villeneuve never got higher than 6th in that race, he also gave it to Frentzen, as he was better according to it.

I know it is a different approach, but damn it's weird.

 

[JeffreySc]

This is the case when Frentzen was both lucky and deserved at the same time

 

[Apocalypse2112]

I agree that win is a win. That 1994 Hill/Mansell is wrong.

Other than that I think it's pretty interesting statistics.

Shouldn't be taken too seriously. Just an alternative way of doing it.

Weirdest is the 1987 when Nelson won the championship. But then again he wasn't the same driver after the huge crash at Tamburello / Imola. He lost his "depth vision" and shouldn't been allowed to even race. He kept the problem secret from everyone. But Mansell screwed things up.

Did you know that Mansell claimed that Honda installed microchips to his car to make it self destruct because they (supposedly) wanted Piquet to win. That's pretty ridiculous and paranoid stuff. 1:35 in this video.

 

[Pete Conway]

I agree that win is a win. That 1994 Hill/Mansell is wrong.

Other than that I think it's pretty interesting statistics.

Shouldn't be taken too seriously. Just an alternative way of doing it.

Weirdest is the 1987 when Nelson won the championship. But then again he wasn't the same driver after the huge crash at Tamburello / Imola. He lost his "depth vision" and shouldn't been allowed to even race. He kept the problem secret from everyone. But Mansell screwed things up.

Did you know that Mansell claimed that Honda installed microchips to his car to make it self destruct because they (supposedly) wanted Piquet to win. That's pretty ridiculous and paranoid stuff. 1:35 in this video.

Indeed they did mention that at 1:35, but, well, they didn't, they actually said that Mansell didn't defend Honda when it was suggested that this was the case, again I see it as a bit of Mansell bashing as there isn't any proof.
It's just hearsay unless someone can come up with a video clip where Mansell responds or doesn't respond when asked.

 

[WALEAD1999]

to be honest nigel its one of my fav driver in f1 history after the real GOAT of formula 1 and motorsport arton senna and my hero felipi massa he gave to williams everything and ofc ferrari but he is unlucky in some seasons like 1986 in last race a puncture lost his win champion

 

[Antony Snook]

People say compare drivers to team mates but some drivers will not let another driver in the other seat. Ayerton Senna probably the best driver of his Generation and a GOAT in some people's opinion like mine would not let Derick Warwick be his team mate at Lotus. Because Dereck could beat him, So he drove bad cars throughout his career. You could have a driver like Nico Hulkenberg driving a HASS a car so bad getting it to the finish is a task. He deserves a better team and HASS don't look like they are going to improve. The Politics of team and engineers on each side of the garage and team strategy will always play into this.

 

[Antony Snook]

to be honest nigel its one of my fav driver in f1 history after the real GOAT of formula 1 and motorsport arton senna and my hero felipi massa he gave to williams everything and ofc ferrari but he is unlucky in some seasons like 1986 in last race a puncture lost his win champion

Yes Nigel deserves another one or 2 tittles. But he had problems with team mates like Piquet at Williams (1st time in 80's) Becuse Williams wanted Nelson to be lead driver. He ran to Ferrari and came back on #1 status.

 

[Antony Snook]

I agree that win is a win. That 1994 Hill/Mansell is wrong.

Other than that I think it's pretty interesting statistics.

Shouldn't be taken too seriously. Just an alternative way of doing it.

Weirdest is the 1987 when Nelson won the championship. But then again he wasn't the same driver after the huge crash at Tamburello / Imola. He lost his "depth vision" and shouldn't been allowed to even race. He kept the problem secret from everyone. But Mansell screwed things up.

Did you know that Mansell claimed that Honda installed microchips to his car to make it self destruct because they (supposedly) wanted Piquet to win. That's pretty ridiculous and paranoid stuff. 1:35 in this video.

I hate it when people say team mates are equal. The team will favor one over the other. Just have 2 or more children and you will see them fight for attention and love of parents.

 

[Antony Snook]

Mansell spent most of the career with Patrese as team mate, Because Patrese would accept Mansell at the team leader and not challenge him, And help him. Other team mates saw his as a rival and someone they had to beat. Sometimes it is like you are not on the same team.

 

[Antony Snook]

That is the same guy who somehow made Villeneuve v Frentzen in 1997 go to... Frentzen.
I am unsure how much I trust those numbers.

Numbers are just Numbers. I consider the GOAT Senna but his race win numbers are low compared to Prost and Hamillton. Team Politics and strategy is also a factor.

 

[Antony Snook]

We Must remember after a stint in America doing INDY when Mansell was considered better than the others due to a F1 tittle. He returned to F1 in a McLaren that had the tub modified for his larger frame. And had a bad run and retired the car, leaving test driver MARK BLUNDELL (Not Sky TV commentator Martin Brundle) to take the reins and finish the season off.

 

[Pete Conway]

People say compare drivers to team mates but some drivers will not let another driver in the other seat. Ayerton Senna probably the best driver of his Generation and a GOAT in some people's opinion like mine would not let Derick Warwick be his team mate at Lotus. Because Dereck could beat him, So he drove bad cars throughout his career. You could have a driver like Nico Hulkenberg driving a HASS a car so bad getting it to the finish is a task. He deserves a better team and HASS don't look like they are going to improve. The Politics of team and engineers on each side of the garage and team strategy will always play into this.

Perhaps then Senna mellowed to inter team rivalry in the early 90's then, because there's a driver interview where both Senna and Mansell sit side by side and Senna claims that Prost is a coward because he wouldn't allow Senna or Mansell in the other car at Williams.
As for Senna being the GOAT... Fangio claimed that Jim Clark was probably the finest naturally talented driver he had ever seen.
And...
Brundle was in a battle for the F3 championship with Senna and both were looking to go up to F1, how close is Brundle to being the GOAT... without a Championship or even an F1 win, but he nearly had Senna in the lower catergory

 

[Pete Conway]

We Must remember after a stint in America doing INDY when Mansell was considered better than the others due to a F1 tittle. He returned to F1 in a McLaren that had the tub modified for his larger frame. And had a bad run and retired the car, leaving test driver MARK BLUNDELL (Not Sky TV commentator Martin Brundle) to take the reins and finish the season off.

Mansell was right to walk away from that McLaren... the team scored 15 DNF's that season

 

[Apocalypse2112]

Mansell had the best teammates in history, we have to give him that.

World champions

Rosberg, Prost, Hill, Hakkinen, Andretti, Piquet.

Prost had only five world champion teammates

Rosberg, Hill, Senna, Lauda, Mansell.

But Prost beat 'em all. Actually he outscored Senna both 88 and 89. 88 points system was just different. Not saying he was better, Senna was definitely faster but Prost was (imho) the best complete F1 driver in modern history. Unbelievably smart tactician, very few mistakes and had the magic ability to make the car last.

That era was so amazing and competitive. 1985 had seven world champions on the grid.