Daniel Ricciardo: The Best Overtaker in Formula One?

[2112]

I would agree, at the time that was how he earned our respect. Everyone, including me, thought he was the best we'd ever seen. And if he had walked away from that crash, lived a long happy life and had a long career, we'd probably have rated him about the same as we rate Schumacher now.

I respectfully disagree.

Yes, both drivers started out in inferior cars in their careers but Senna overcame much more than Schumacher had to in that he started his career in vastly inferior cars. When Senna was put in a superior car he was a very superior driver whom, due to his past performances, one knew could take a bucket of bolts out on the track and do very well with it.

The same cannot be said for Schumacher. All of his championships came in superior cars and when faced with driving inferior cars he was merely field filler as shown by his performances with Mercedes in which he only recorded one podium and one fastest lap in three years. Senna, on the other hand, used a vastly inferior Toleman and nearly won the rain shortened Monaco race, almost chasing down Prost in the process. When Senna tested for a Williams at Donnington in 1983 he ran the very same car that Keke Rosberg ran and was quicker than Rosberg in his own car. This was not a one-time deal for Senna.

When Senna tested for Penske during his contract stalemate he ran the Penske car at Phoenix. He ran a few laps that everyone, including Emerson Fittipaldi, and backed-up by Senna, that were relaxed at best, just trying to get used to the car on an oval. He set times that would have put him up front if he were qualifying.

Senna could make lemonade out of granite. Schumacher could make lemonade sweeter.

 

[Ari Antero]

When Senna tested for a Williams at Donnington in 1983 he ran the very same car that Keke Rosberg ran and was quicker than Rosberg in his own car

Your claim above is placebo.
Weather in Donington was ideal for a young Senna having his first Formula One test. Car Senna used in 1983 was FW08Cs, a development of the car with which Keke Rosberg had won the 1982 World Drivers’ Championship. It is obvious that when a development car is used which nobody else have driven you are faster than anyone had ever driven a Williams at Donington. I doubt that Senna as rocky was faster than 1982 World Drivers’ Champion but ofcourse we will never know Keke did not drive at Donington this day in 1983.

 

[Fat-Alfie]

Is it too late to cast my vote?!

 

[gamer19]

Yeah Faty, I was thinking the very same.

Although Max is always in mod "I will never ever let anyone (including my own team mate and even if he's obviously faster) pass me" Daniel should handle this situation better. Way better.

 

[Ari Antero]

Yeah Faty, I was thinking the very same.

Although Max is always in mod "I will never ever let anyone pass me (including my own team mate and even if he's obviously faster" Daniel should handle this situation better. Way better.

Rule is clear and when you read them you understand who is to claim

 

[gamer19]

Care to explain ?
If you talking about moving under the breaking... that's allowed now.

 

[Ari Antero]

Care to explain ?
If you talking about moving under the breaking... that's allowed now.

"More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. If a driver has moved off the racing line while defending their position, they may move back but must ensure there is at least one car’s width between their own car and the edge of the track."

Edge of the track is white line and Mad Max don`t ensure there is at least one car’s width between their own car and the edge of the track.

 

[gamer19]

Ok. Seems like I didn't read the rule book careful.
Shame on me, guess I was having too much of that damn so-called "real life" on my hands lately...

 

[Ari Antero]

It was fun to watch as long as it lasted

 

[2112]

Your claim above is placebo.
Weather in Donington was ideal for a young Senna having his first Formula One test. Car Senna used in 1983 was FW08Cs, a development of the car with which Keke Rosberg had won the 1982 World Drivers’ Championship. It is obvious that when a development car is used which nobody else have driven you are faster than anyone had ever driven a Williams at Donington. I doubt that Senna as rocky was faster than 1982 World Drivers’ Champion but ofcourse we will never know Keke did not drive at Donington this day in 1983.

1) What? If I can make sense of your words you are saying that Senna drove a car that Rosberg drove, drove it faster but it does not count because "nobody else have driven...", yet you say that Rosberg drove it the year before to win the championship. "Development car" means nothing unless there is anything that proves it was a superior car than when Roseberg drove it as the term "development" can mean a myriad of things in racing. What "development" modifications were made to the car itself? Or was the term used to define a vehicle that development drivers, such as Senna, could test so the team could compare numbers to their paid drivers.

Your term "development" is used as an excuse to explain why Senna drove the car so quickly.

2) It did not matter what car Senna drove, he usually drove it faster than anyone else. His record speaks for itself. Sure, if he had not passed at Imola it is possible that his abilities would have fallen as he aged; age always wins. Yet, as a driver he was able to take a good car and turn great times. With a great car he was nearly unbeatable. The only challenge he had was a driver who was nearly as good as him and more than once team orders prohibited him from beating Prost.

I will repeat myself: His drive in the Toleman at Monaco was one of, if not the, greatest drives ever. In a vastly inferior car, in the rain (rain skills do translate into dry skills), he nearly caught Prost. If the race had not been red-flagged he would have caught Prost.

Name on driver other than Senna that could have done what he did at Monaco, or had done what he did. Surely not Schumacher.

 

[Ari Antero]

1) What? If I can make sense of your words you are saying that Senna drove a car that Rosberg drove, drove it faster but it does not count because "nobody else have driven...", yet you say that Rosberg drove it the year before to win the championship. "Development car" means nothing unless there is anything that proves it was a superior car than when Roseberg drove it as the term "development" can mean a myriad of things in racing. What "development" modifications were made to the car itself? Or was the term used to define a vehicle that development drivers, such as Senna, could test so the team could compare numbers to their paid drivers.

Your term "development" is used as an excuse to explain why Senna drove the car so quickly.

Name on driver other than Senna that could have done what he did at Monaco, or had done what he did. Surely not Schumacher.

Williams FW08C a development of the car with which Keke Rosberg won the 1982 World Drivers Championship at Monaco 1983. Keke is driving faster then nobody else have driven including Senna Prost etc. with Williams FW08C at Monaco. Could it be for the same reason why Senna was driving faster then nobody else have driven with Williams FW08C at Donington which is that Senna Prost etc. was not driving with Williams FW08C at Monaco in 1983? One other thing is that Senna was never able to be the World Drivers Championship with the car which was not one of the fastest cars in F1 like Keke did with no turbo car in 1982 and claiming that Senna as rocky was faster then Rosberg etc is silly.

 

[2112]

Williams FW08C a development of the car with which Keke Rosberg won the 1982 World Drivers Championship at Monaco 1983. Keke is driving faster then nobody else have driven including Senna Prost etc. with Williams FW08C at Monaco. Could it be for the same reason why Senna was driving faster then nobody else have driven with Williams FW08C at Donington which is that Senna Prost etc. was not driving with Williams FW08C at Monaco in 1983? One other thing is that Senna was never able to be the World Drivers Championship with the car which was not one of the fastest cars in F1 like Keke did with no turbo car in 1982 and claiming that Senna as rocky was faster then Rosberg etc is silly.

I truly am having a hard time following you in the first part of your post, perhaps it is a language thing but:

Well, since I saw both of them race multiple times, I don't think I am being silly, I am merely stating what I saw between the two drivers and your argument about Keke's championship in '82 falls on it's face when you know that the "faster" cars were turbos, in their infancy in F1, and were notoriously unreliable at that time. That is the reason why the majority of the field were still using Cosworths with a few Alfa's and Matra's thrown in.

The "faster" cars were very successful in qualifying, where they did not have to rely upon reliability, but were prone to break: I saw Renault, at Long Beach, for five years, turn blistering times but then end up at the side of the track smoking because the engines failed. Your "faster" cars were, indeed, faster, but not as good or reliable as the Cosworth. Your argument has no merit.

Your comment about Senna being in the "fastest" cars is also disingenuous: What do you consider "fastest"? The cars with the best lap times or speed trap speeds? Has it occurred to you that Senna made them the best cars in the grid? Aside from Prost his teammates were either middle to back of the pack racers, or up and comers like Hakkinen (who had one podium in his season with that "fast" car) and Hill (who had a fairly successful season prior to Senna's death but had no wins in his career until after Senna died), but not nearly as successful as Senna or even Prost when they were teamed. Both were good drivers in their own right as shown by future championships, but were no Senna. Prost was Senna's only true competition and when you have two champions racing good cars they are going to make the cars look like the best in the history of Evar. Put Jonathan Palmer and Andrea De Cesaris in those seats and lets see how "fast" those cars are.


By your metric Hamilton wins because his car is superior. Yet, how is Bottas doing against the rest of the competition? I see he was a close second in the driver's championship last year and nipping at the heels of Hamilton this year, not to mention being so far ahead of Vettel that Vettel may as well just pack it in.

Right?

I mean the Merc is so superior all Bottas has to do is get in and the car drives itself, just like Senna did when he raced...

Senna made good cars great, Schumacher drove great cars.

 

[Warlord_Gonagy]

I truly am having a hard time following you in the first part of your post, perhaps it is a language thing but:

Well, since I saw both of them race multiple times, I don't think I am being silly, I am merely stating what I saw between the two drivers and your argument about Keke's championship in '82 falls on it's face when you know that the "faster" cars were turbos, in their infancy in F1, and were notoriously unreliable at that time. That is the reason why the majority of the field were still using Cosworths with a few Alfa's and Matra's thrown in.

The "faster" cars were very successful in qualifying, where they did not have to rely upon reliability, but were prone to break: I saw Renault, at Long Beach, for five years, turn blistering times but then end up at the side of the track smoking because the engines failed. Your "faster" cars were, indeed, faster, but not as good or reliable as the Cosworth. Your argument has no merit.

Your comment about Senna being in the "fastest" cars is also disingenuous: What do you consider "fastest"? The cars with the best lap times or speed trap speeds? Has it occurred to you that Senna made them the best cars in the grid? Aside from Prost his teammates were either middle to back of the pack racers, or up and comers like Hakkinen (who had one podium in his season with that "fast" car) and Hill (who had a fairly successful season prior to Senna's death but had no wins in his career until after Senna died), but not nearly as successful as Senna or even Prost when they were teamed. Both were good drivers in their own right as shown by future championships, but were no Senna. Prost was Senna's only true competition and when you have two champions racing good cars they are going to make the cars look like the best in the history of Evar. Put Jonathan Palmer and Andrea De Cesaris in those seats and lets see how "fast" those cars are.


By your metric Hamilton wins because his car is superior. Yet, how is Bottas doing against the rest of the competition? I see he was a close second in the driver's championship last year and nipping at the heels of Hamilton this year, not to mention being so far ahead of Vettel that Vettel may as well just pack it in.

Right?

I mean the Merc is so superior all Bottas has to do is get in and the car drives itself, just like Senna did when he raced...

Senna made good cars great, Schumacher drove great cars.

Well, by your argument, then Irvine and Barrichello should've been challenging Schumacher the whole time, right?

 

[gamer19]

Put Jonathan Palmer and Andrea De Cesaris in those seats and lets see how "fast" those cars are...

Awww c'mon... Andrea de Crasharis was actually quite fast driver. When he was not busy crashing his car at every race, he sadly just wasn't always in best teams - at their best times. Plus, like I said... he did crash, a lot.

Senna made good cars great, Schumacher drove great cars.

Wth ?!?
Ok, slow down, I think you hyperventilate now. Or something.
What did Schumi did to his team mates... it's as same if not even worst than Senna did to his. Remember Herbert ? Brundle ? Patrese ? Verstappen (senior) ? Irvine ? Barrichello ? He beat them all fair and square.
And I'm not a Schumi fan, I'm actually one of his worst nemesis - Jacques Villeneuve ! Just being realistic. Try it sometimes, it's good for your conscious.

 

[2112]

Well, by your argument, then Irvine and Barrichello should've been challenging Schumacher the whole time, right?

No. Irvine and Barrichello were fair drivers in great cars. Barichello was mediocre in everything but the Ferrari and the Brawn. He challenged for the championship once, and "managed" to attain 3rd in seasons that his teammate won the championship in a clearly superior car. Irvine was probably a better driver than Barichello but was beaten in his best season by a superior car and driver. Other than that one outlier season he was a mediocre driver with mediocre results.

Neither Barrichello or Irvine could even hope to be compared with Senna, Prost or even Schumacher. The best comparison for them would be...Perhaps Watson (who was probably a better driver than both on a mediocre team), or de Cesaris. Mildly successful but not to the point that anyone was adoring them for their feats of excellence.

 

[2112]

Awww c'mon... Andrea de Crasharis was actually quite fast driver. When he was not busy crashing his car at every race, he sadly just wasn't always in best teams - at their best times. Plus, like I said... he did crash, a lot.

Wth ?!?
Ok, slow down, I think you hyperventilate now. Or something.
What did Schumi did to his team mates... it's as same if not even worst than Senna did to his. Remember Herbert ? Brundle ? Patrese ? Verstappen (senior) ? Irvine ? Barrichello ? He beat them all fair and square.
And I'm not a Schumi fan, I'm actually one of his worst nemesis - Jacques Villeneuve ! Just being realistic. Try it sometimes, it's good for your conscious.

He beat them all fair and square because they were on the team to lose to him, not beat him. None of those drivers will be remembered for their driving in a couple of decades. Schumacher was challenged once, if you discount his first year at Ferrari, by Barrichelo, but other than that the rest of the drivers were seat fillers hired to keep the other teams off of Schumachers back.

Schumacher never, ever, raced with a teammate who was as successful as Prost or Senna, or even Petersen. Did Schumacher ever have a teammate who was a multiple world champion? How about a teammate who was a current world champion, or even a champion?

 

[Ari Antero]

He beat them all fair and square because they were on the team to lose to him, not beat him. None of those drivers will be remembered for their driving in a couple of decades. Schumacher was challenged once, if you discount his first year at Ferrari, by Barrichelo, but other than that the rest of the drivers were seat fillers hired to keep the other teams off of Schumachers back.

Schumacher never, ever, raced with a teammate who was as successful as Prost or Senna, or even Petersen. Did Schumacher ever have a teammate who was a multiple world champion? How about a teammate who was a current world champion, or even a champion?

Dr. Andrew Bell, who headed the Sheffield Methods Institute research team, says that on average over the period 1979 to 2014, 86 percent of the performance of a driver/car combination stems from the car/team and 14 percent from the driver.

The Top 10 F1 drivers of all time, regardless of what they were driving.

"There are no surprises that Fangio is ranked so highly, as he is widely acknowledged as the best there has ever been, and this statistical analysis doesn't even take into account his age. Fangio's best years were stolen by WW2. When he drove his FIRST F1 race, he was 38 years of age, an age by which most drivers are retired. Alain Prost retired at 38, Jack Brabham won his last title at 40, Jackie Stewart (36), Niki Lauda (35), Nelson Piquet (35) and Ayrton Senna (31). That the computer analysis looked only at the results he achieved, the teams he drove for and the performance he extracted from the cars he drove and came up with the same result as everyone else isn't a surprise. What is sad is that we didn't see Juan Manuel Fangio at anything like his best. He drove all but seven of his Formula One events AFTER the age of 40 years. His five titles were won at 41, 43, 44, 45 and he is still the oldest person to win a Formula One drivers title winning his fifth at 46 years, 41 days in 1957."