This thread isn't about who is the greatest driver of all time but the mechanics of actually reaching the conclusion about the answer to that question. What I mean by that is, how do we go about working out the parameters to find out who that is?
I know there are a lot of people out there who say this can't be done for the very reason that it is arbitrary. You can’t for example compare the likes of Fangio with Schumacher yet each have their own place in F1 History among the greats. Most top 10 or top 50 or top whatever lists mostly contain the thoughts of drivers or F1 enthusiasts, journalists or historians for example and are a matter of opinion. What I’m after is more along the lines of a mathematical equation. Something that would iron out the inconsistencies of opinion to produce a better answer.
Now the tricky thing is just how many variables that have to be taken into account to reach the purest answer. An example of the problem is looking at how some world champions got on against their team mates. In some cases the driver was the champion and the team mate in second place meaning that they both had great cars and drove them to the best of their ability. In at least one case however, Emerson Fittipaldi in 1972, he had one of the truly great cars of that era in the shape of the Lotus 72 and yet his team mate failed to score a single point all season which is I believe, the only time this has ever happened.
Then we face the issue of the competition each driver faces and the era within which he drives, modern cars may be quicker and handle far nicer than the cars from the 50s but then all Fangio and Moss had to do was press down on the “loud pedal” for as long as they dared and keep the round rubber things on the Tarmac. What would Moss have made of trying to juggle 7 paddles and gawd knows how many buttons on his steering wheel just to turn into, clip the apex and come out of every corner.
So where do we start?
I know there are a lot of people out there who say this can't be done for the very reason that it is arbitrary. You can’t for example compare the likes of Fangio with Schumacher yet each have their own place in F1 History among the greats. Most top 10 or top 50 or top whatever lists mostly contain the thoughts of drivers or F1 enthusiasts, journalists or historians for example and are a matter of opinion. What I’m after is more along the lines of a mathematical equation. Something that would iron out the inconsistencies of opinion to produce a better answer.
Now the tricky thing is just how many variables that have to be taken into account to reach the purest answer. An example of the problem is looking at how some world champions got on against their team mates. In some cases the driver was the champion and the team mate in second place meaning that they both had great cars and drove them to the best of their ability. In at least one case however, Emerson Fittipaldi in 1972, he had one of the truly great cars of that era in the shape of the Lotus 72 and yet his team mate failed to score a single point all season which is I believe, the only time this has ever happened.
Then we face the issue of the competition each driver faces and the era within which he drives, modern cars may be quicker and handle far nicer than the cars from the 50s but then all Fangio and Moss had to do was press down on the “loud pedal” for as long as they dared and keep the round rubber things on the Tarmac. What would Moss have made of trying to juggle 7 paddles and gawd knows how many buttons on his steering wheel just to turn into, clip the apex and come out of every corner.
So where do we start?