So are you praising Hamilton or Russell there? I’m not sure

@@nedzosf1gridboxyeah sorry my English is trash. I’m saying that Russell won 2022 and 2024, and Hamilton won 2023 in their battle as teammates. And this season Russell just crushed him. The two point difference in total points don’t mean anything.

Yea

Great to hear you enjoyed it!

Carmilton fan?

Why’s that?

If that’s your opinion then ok, but they won the constructors title and every single pundit and expert has said that car was at points miles better than anything else and in the last two thirds of the season dominant

agreed, harsh on Piastri I mean he won two races in his second season and challenged the senior driver in more than 1 race. Lando probably lacked some assertiveness at times but called it in Hungary - was never really in the title fight anyway

Farina had two retirements that year. Fangio had three, doesn’t count

Forgot about that lol

Schumacher lost to Rosberg in points but not by much and he was more unlucky. Also he was 41-43 years old

​@nedzosf1gridbox yh that's why I don't factor that time into his career. Also even though I'm a fan of the guy as you said he's supposed to be "the goat" because people love rating the best ever or whatever. In any case based of that I have to be critical even though I don't think he is the greatest.

Sainz, kicked prime Ricciardo out of his own team. Look at Schumacher, it’s a similar situation where the better drivers get worse teammates

I mentioned that in the video about Watson but you’re massively underestimating him

Glad you enjoyed it lol. Which was your favourite part/take?

I mean in general I would say I enjoy this,and your channel as a whole because you're not like most other channels where they either have a h ate boner for some drivers,or are afraid of saying anything controversial so always stay in the center. I appreciate you for saying the hard truthsTM Your infatuation with pastor is kind of funny,but I totally understand that as well,Im a bit like that with Kvyat,I will not stop saying he wasnt actually as bad as everyone says purely because hurr durr torpedo.Not saying he was one of the greats or anything,but he beat everyone's favourite aussie in his first year in the team dammit,yet everyone remembers him as "the russian guy who constantly crashed into other people"

@RikaRikaItsumika that’s a really nice well put together comment. Thanks for the compliments and I agree with Kvyat, i was planning on doing a video on him a few months ago

Hardly any other driver in history has struggled in their first title fight this late in his career. As I said, most championship calibre drivers establish themselves within the timespan Lando has had. If you look at the modern greats, Verstappen was shoeing championship potential in his second season, Lewis in his first, Vettel in his first full season, Jenson button took a while to get going but still showed great potential in his fifth year. Raikkonen third year, Alonso second, I could go on. Experience isn’t an issue. Maybe the reason he didn’t have that level of a car before 2024 is because he didn’t really deserve it. He didn’t really mature over the season, I’d argue he got worse. Imola, Miami and co were great whereas he was struggling at times to get in the top five in the late season. That car was undoubtedly the best for at least 15 rounds this year, he got 4 wins. Wow. Yes Ferrari and Mercedes were faster on occasion but I’ve accounted for that in the video and here. I’m not being dramatic or hating, I have no reason to do so. I also talked about Lando being dropped IF he continues his poor form in a championship level car into the whole of 2025. A car that wins the constructors championship and has the pole positions that it has with every credible source saying it was comfortably the fastest car, probably is the fastest car over the season

@@nedzosf1gridbox So its a low C tier for not looking like a great? You're comparing him to all time great drivers and then calling it a failure and bottle job worthy of being dropped that he didnt match up to them. I dont really get it and thats where I think it turns from fair criticism into hate cause its just applying different standards. The only way you can get race winning and championship experience is by competing at the top. I don't think he's a great either but the idea he's on the verge of being dropped if he had another year like this is just farcical when he's demolishing a highly rated rookie and the team just won the WCC after 26 years. Not having the car because he didnt deserve it also a joke. McLaren as a team have been slowly building up from a terrible starting point while he's been there. Perhaps he should get partial credit for that too? He and the team are loyal to each other and there isnt a strong way to compare him to other drivers cause of that. You can assume the car was easily the best and that piastri is a weak teammate and use that to make his season look bad, but do we actually know that? Maybe the teams at the top were quite close, Piastri IS a pretty good driver (The teams certainly seemed to think so) and Norris has actually had a good but not exceptional year. Either way this is getting a bit long winded now but the most important thing while doing ratings is to apply the same standard to everybody and that's my main criticism here, it seems pretty random.

@Loryk93 I did not say he was on the verge of being dropped you’re taking what I said out of context and I’ve explained why before so I won’t again. I’m applying the same criteria to everyone. You’re repeating yourself and what you said in the last comment when you said “how do we know it’s the fastest car?”. I’ll remind you of the same stuff I mentioned before. It won the constructors championship despite the two drivers underperforming It got nine pole positions, the most of any team or driver in the hands of Norris. Even when he underperformed Every single expert other than Lando himself says that car was the most well rounded and overall fastest car across the season. Norris undoubtedly underperformed, the fact you’re saying losing the title by 70 points in the best car is a good season is very poor analysis. Norris and Piastri are both good drivers, I don’t doubt that but they need to regroup and start performing next year like I said. If they’d have had any of the other top four teams’ drivers bar Perez in their car they would’ve won. I apply the same standards to everyone, Lewis is C tier for underperforming compared to where the car should’ve been along with others. Lando has potential but at the moment isn’t mentally strong enough to win a title. If he drastically improves his mental capacity then yes, otherwise no. His peaks in Zandvoort and maybe Singapore were impressive and he performed to a level expected, otherwise he was middling or downright awful in races like Brazil where he went from the front row to P6 while max went from 17th to first

@@nedzosf1gridbox Dude i'm not even saying the car wasnt the best or that Lando definately had a good season, you're missing the point. I'm saying its easy for the margin of dominance to be really exaggerated sometimes and that the comments about him being dropped and having an utterly awful season are dumb hyperbole. I stand by that and you did say if he didnt improve next season he deserved to be dropped. At least own your words if you're gonna upload your opinions for public viewing like this. I wouldnt have even made a comment if you just said "Lando didnt manage to make a strong title challenge and disappointed considering the car - B tier" or something but you didnt. You got his number of wins wrong, hardly spoke at all about the good parts of his season, completely ignored probably his best and most mature drive of the season, and then said that hyperbole and ranked him 12th. Your logic is completely backwards sometimes too, starting with a conclusion. For example you're going with "Norris underperformed + "Car got 9 poles" = "the car must be clearly the best." You see how we can just flip this around and come to the opposite conclusion, yeah? "Car isnt clearly the best" + "Lando got 9 poles" = "Lando had a good season." In both cases we're starting with a biased statement so its not very useful. Its just terrible logic to be honest and kind of kills any credibility you have to be making analysis. You're saying we know he underperformed because he didnt win more races and the championship in the best car.. and the reason we know its the best car is because it won the constructors championship and got 9 poles despite him underperforming. Its classic circular logic you're using. At the end of the day the main comparison should be to your teammate, so Piastri should be in F tier honestly if you're being consistent in your logic and ratings, cause he got 0 poles in the best car and ended up miles behind his teammate, right? He's raced in nearly 50 races, so if you compare him to the greats at this point and assume he had the dominant car this year, then Piastri looks like an all time stinker (I dont actually think that but its consistent with what you're saying against Norris). You keep citing expert opinions but have you seen any expert opinions saying Lando had an utterly awful season? Most seem fairly complementary to me. Almost every ranking i've seen from journalists, insiders and hell, even other channels like yours has him 3rd to 5th on their list. Behind Verstappen and Leclerc and around the same as Russell and Sainz. Sure this is your opinion here but you're citing 'experts' when actually your list is the one with a glaring difference on it. I've said my piece now cause honestly I dont even think Lando had a great season but I'm tired of this narrative that it's a total failure to have not won 10+ races and the championship considering the other factors. He did fine, he made some mistakes (particularly his starts which were a big problem), the team made some mistakes, he got a bit unlucky at times and his title rival is probably the fastest and one of the most complete drivers of all time, imo. Though for the record I actually agree with you the whole 'title battle' thing was really overhyped and didnt help the situation. He still destroyed his teammate, got some invaluable experience of fighting at the front, did brilliantly in qualifying and brought home the constructors.

Yea

Why?

I’m going to return to that style of video over Christmas, I have two scripts on the go

in case you bring up favorism, Bot constantly got quicker car updates than zhou, which is a fact rahter than the conspiracy theories claimed by Prost.

I still think Bottas was more consistent

@@nedzosf1gridboxSorry if I didnt make myself clear, I agree Bot is better than Zho, but by same logic Senna was better than Prost because speed matters. Speed is more fundamental than points. Give you an example Senna can still race in today's F1 while Prost has 0 chance due to the speed difference. Nor also didnt do super bad, Pia who had 5 straight poles in F2, something similar to Lec, only beat Nor 6 times included sprints in quali. The amazing thing is Nor also convincingly beat Pia in long runs though lacking in race craft. How good is the redbull car vs. Mcl is hard to tell since Per might be totally washed up like Webber was, and it made Vettel like a god but actually he had much better equipment than ppl thought at the time. From another angle we can think how much more can Ver beat Pia using the same car?

Webber was so washed he was better than Seb in 2010, the only season they fought on semi-equal terms and even then had sabotage

i just saw you explained it second later.

I’ll try and keep it shorter in the future

​@@nedzosf1gridbox Sweet. 20mins? It's easier to pick up new viewers & watch times, 1hr is a big commitment. All the best from Canberra 🇦🇺

Fair point

It gives an idea as to who was the better driver. Sure, Senna played the system best but that doesn’t mean he had the better season. Just ask NASCAR fans in 2024 if the guy who wins the title is always the best and most deserving driver

@@nedzosf1gridbox 'the better driver'? dont you think the better driver would score more points according to the rules?

@@nedzosf1gridbox looking at the stats, senna literally won 8 races versus prost's 7......prost had 4x 2nds vs senna 3 = Top 11 results Senna 'didnt play the system' he scored 1 more win than prost = bet him fair and square. Prost scoring more points is irrelevant as they were racing to the best of 11

because that is how many points were scored in total and that's an indicator of how good of a season a driver has had. for most of those seasons, drivers can only think to score the most points possible, since dropping points was rare and a luxury. from this, we can conclude that due to the fact that senna crashed out of the lead twice, causing him to lose a shit ton of points, prost had a better 1988. this is not counting senna's non-podium performances, but they do contribute as well

It was after Abu Dhabi, Doohan is there. I forgot Norris won the last race hence why i said three. Alonso was inconsistent too in the middle part of the year. Ricciardo was just incredibly underwhelming with no redeeming races. Lawson meanwhile is closer in race trim

What do you mean by that?

@nedzosf1gridbox Like when you mention drivers from the 70s/80s. It'd be cool if you give more background info so we actually care about them and their times beyond the names and the driver.

@DaYapGuy that’s fair enough, I’ll take that into account while scripting my next video

@nedzosf1gridbox Thanks !

I don’t know how I overlooked this

Yea

He killed Nasr and Wehrlein’s career by getting seats they deserved and had arguably the biggest dose of nepotism in recent f1 history

@@nedzosf1gridbox Yes, I agree that they were both miles ahead, but Ericsson wasn't a complete waste of time, just completely anonymous. Sure he's remembered by that one line from Grosjean's engineer, but at least he isn't remembered for anything wrong he did. He did outscore Sirotkin and Hartley in his last year (although in a better car, but sort of proportional) and overall I think he was just kinda there. On a side note, you seriously put the guy that crashed at pit entry in China for being too distracted with the steering wheel in S tier?

Why is my decision wrong?

@@nedzosf1gridbox SMH Checo > Leclerc? Tell me what metric Checo is better than Leclerc at?

None of my top 5 of all time come from the 2010s, although three make the top 10

@@nedzosf1gridbox and my top 5 doesn’t include Senna so it’s fun to talk about in F1 unlike other sports are so much more cut and dry. Especially after watching this video and being reminded again who was racing against who. I think the disparity in driver ability today is much greater today than in previous decades and the bottom tier are undoubtedly better than the bottom tier in decades past, like most other sports.

That’s one season and although he beat him it wasn’t a destruction

@@duncanwirth5941 Much better than who?

Thanks for the compliment mate, happy to hear you liked it!

Kubica signed a Ferrari deal in 2012 but was cancelled after his 2011 rally accident

It was Checo actually, made sense as he was a Ferrari academy driver and had Ferrari engines in the Sauber, but he decided to go to McL instead

Glad you enjoyed it!

At his peak Daniel was a solid driver, but would not have won titles in any situation other than with a dominant car and a subordinate teammate

@@nedzosf1gridbox thats fair enough but you know whenever danny ric won a race, it was a blockbuster

bro perez is a race winner too. Anyone can if your teammate is booted and you got the fastest car

Absolutely

I agree

Hulkenberg has had bad luck with the teams hes been on but is still proving now he can out drive the performance of a car. Its too bad he isn't on a top team he deserves a podium and a win but i don't think he will get them at Audi.

Senna was never that fast over a race distance, or overly so in qualifying over Prost. I don’t know where this notion comes from

@nedzosf1gridbox best example is 89. The 2 races Senna crashed, he was well ahead of Prost, so points scored really don’t capture their difference in speed. It seems the Ergast Motor Racing Data does not go back for 80s, but if anyone has their 90% average lap times per race, or their average race finishing time difference, you will know what I mean even if you don’t have the time to watch race by race. Prost scored many second places but finsihed half a minute behind. I think speed is much more fundamental than points, imagine if you had 10 cloned Sennas and 10 Prosts in the same car racing for 100 years, the WDC result won’t be 1:1 like 88 and 89, it will be more like 100:0 to Senna due to the fundamental speed difference. Amazon (AWS Insight) had a fastest F1 driver rank and Senna is first even including today's drivers while Prost was the only other driver from 80s in the top 20 about 0.5 second behind. Quote from a twitter poster: ”Senna was hit by a Berger at the start in Brazil, putting him in 11th at the flag; had a mechanical failure while leading in Phoenix, giving the win to Prost; engine failure in Canada with just 3 laps left; broken differential before even starting in France; jammed gearbox while leading Silverstone, that put him off; engine failure at Monza while leading with just 9 laps left, handing the win to Prost; crashed out by a black flagged Mansell in Estoril; DSQ’d from the win in Suzuka.” Other than these races, Senna never lost to Prost. Alonso cant do that to Hamilton nor can Fangio do that to Ascari.

@@Hmhm_racer using AWS to prove your points does the opposite

@nedzosf1gridbox care to elaborate why u say so? I have 88 89 each race's quali data and it is close to 0.5 gap b.w prost and senna. What do u think their gap is?

@Hmhm_racer AWS also said Heikki Kovalainen and Jarno Trulli were in the top ten drivers of all time

Yep

Fair. Glad you enjoyed it!

Great to see you stayed the whole way through, I knew he got a few pole positions but never knew if he was better than he seemed

I implore you to watch my video on him: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eYGtqHZ8rZ5nqsksi=55nXDRyuu7dF1YKZ This details the reasons why. Essentially he’s overhated and never truly got a chance to prove himself

Vettel fell off hard after 2013

Where would you rank Seb? He is my fav driver of all time but I'm not sure if I could put him in the Top 10 due to his latter years. If he retired after like 2017 then I think he would easily be in the Top 10 though.

@@nedzosf1gridbox I'd say he fell off after 2017. If you rewatch the 2017 season or just skim through some highlights, Seb was arguably the best driver that year. His failed 2018 title challenge was more on him than Ferrari but 2017 was almost entirely Ferrari letting him down.

@@craigshilo4137 Seb is hovering between 11-15th for me

@@craigshilo4137 to add, it obviously wasn’t his best years but he certainly had an overperforming stint at Aston Martin. Also don’t forget how good he was in 2015

@@mauriceabdalla7397 Prost was Lauda’s risk management style of driving on steroids. Sacrificed qualifying for race pace, and with more reliable machinery, and a normal points system, without Suzuka 1990 too would’ve been a seven time champion. Could’ve had three titles for Renault but reliability fucked him, and at McLaren only lost to Lauda on merit by one point. The only reason he lost to senna in 88 was the dropped scores taking away nearly two race wins worth of points, and even without Suzuka 89 would’ve won the title because Ayrton retired in Adelaide. We’ll never know how 1990 Japan would’ve panned out but he would’ve had a chance. The only thing senna had over him was banzai qualifying laps, but Prost had ruthless consistency in an era of bad reliability. Lewis isn’t ranked higher because if you look at how the rest of these top guys (Senna, Prost, Fangio etc), none of them lost on merit to a teammate who wasn’t also top 10 material ever, apart from Lauda to John Watson in 1982 and 83. No one else lost to a non-top ten driver apart from Lewis, who has lost to three of them, Button, Rosberg and Russell, all of whom are great drivers but should not have beaten a so called GOAT across a season, especially as easily as Jenson did in 2011. Even at their worst the likes of Schumacher, Prost, senna and co never lost to non-iconic teammates. For me, while his prime is amongst the best, I can’t ignore the fact that Lewis cannot do anything special in the non-fastest car in any given season (he was getting outperformed by kovalainen in the first half of 2009) and every other time he’s been error prone and worse than the likes of button or Russell. Put it this way, Schumacher never lost to Barrichello or Massa, senna and Prost never lost to the likes of Gerhard Berger or their other less successful teammates. As for Verstappen, I don’t want to succumb to recency bias. Verstappen now is in a very similar position to what Sebastian Vettel was in 2013, coming off the back of four successive titles and unprecedented dominance. Even though he has the same or better numbers than Prost or senna, you have no qualms with him being outside the top ten. That’s why I can’t put max there yet. I don’t want him to do a Seb and never seriously compete for a title again and then drop down the pack. It’s easier to rank drivers whose careers have finished for this reason. If max goes on to win for another four years, absolutely he’ll overtake those in front of him but I can’t right now for the reasons I’ve just detailed

@@nedzosf1gridbox Interesting read, hard to disagree with your analysis on Prost as I do believe his raw talent and ruthless metronomic way of always doing *just* enough to win should place him higher in the public's pov. However, the arguments on if they used the modern points system he would've won more, doesn't hold merit in my books. The rule book didn't change randomly at any stage during any season he was racing (looking at you AD '21) so it shouldn't matter. As for Hamilton, I agree he should never have been beaten by those teammates, maybe bar Rosberg in '16 as he somehow elevated himself to become a worthy world champion, something the likes of Barrichelo could never dream of (2009 was his only real opportunity and he never grabbed it). Only discourse I would have is your angle of why he isn't better than those ahead of him. LH is my favourite driver ever and I understand he isn't anywhere near perfect. Without the team's backing, a capable car, and a motivated mindset, he just always seems to struggle, which those you ranked ahead of him never lacked. I just think it's a shame that the way you looked at things means he is inevitably never going to move forward and is probably going to be viewed as 'worse' than Verstappen, even if he ends up winning the next 3 championships in a 2023 dominant style. Anyways, appreciate the opinion and glad to be educated.

@ if Lewis won the next three championships in dominant fashion he’d move ahead of senna but no higher because everyone in front of him took every opportunity they had. The best drivers truly outperform the expectations of every car they drive, and Lewis can’t do that. I appreciate you explaining you’re a fan of his, although I do believe that shouldn’t alter your opinions, I’m a neutral so I don’t have this problem

@@nedzosf1gridbox what would change between Lewis & Senna beyond him becoming a 10 time world champion? Sure, he’d be more *dominant* but that surely doesn’t justify being better than someone who took (nearly) every opportunity he got? Also was your reasoning on why Prost>Senna also applicable to why Lauda>Senna? And where do you see Max finishing his career, assuming he ends up on potentially 6 or 7 world championships, and would the narrative of how he won those championships change anything (i.e. if he had another season like this one) (Bonus Q - do you see anyone on the current grid breaking into the top 10)

@mauriceabdalla7397 the thing is senna like Lewis didn’t take every chance. And while I don’t think highly as much of only being good in dominant cars, doing so nine times out of eleven is more impressive than senna’s record. As to the senna Lauda point you’re correct

These two statements contradict each other

@@nedzosf1gridbox Yes it is contradiction. It means it should be Bottas > Massa

@madjayax731 if that’s your opinion fair enough

I have to disagree. F1 was just as professional. It was less competitive in terms of field spread but the guys at the top were just as good as today. The worst era for field spread and competition was the mid 1990s (see Jean-Denis Deletraz, Giovanni Lavaggi, Taki Inoue and others). If you put Hamilton or Verstappen in a 1950s car and they tried to compete in a race from the time they would crash and die. The truth is that although the eras were different, it’s easy to hold drivers to the same standards as now because you look at the guys at the top and compare them. Also, Fangio literally sits in the top ten drivers of all time in terms of finishing percentages, he reached the end of 86% of races he started. There are no drivers from the 1950s who have a similar amount of starts as him with that high a finishing rate. Giuseppe Farina has 79% and Ascari has 71% from half to two thirds of the races which should work in their favour but it doesn’t. Fangio was a master of nursing unreliable cars to the end, he had a higher finishing percentage than Sebastian Vettel

@nedzosf1gridbox well, we're just going to have to disagree. Much less consistency needed in the 50s and 60s to compete at the front. Put Fangio in a 2024 F1 car, how is he going to cope with 6G cornering, 1000hp and actual wheel to wheel racing? How many racers in the 1950s went through junior formulas forming their talent and proving they deserve their seats? How many teams back then were a few blokes in a small garage doing it as a hobby? Way less consistency/talent to compete at the front IMO. Agree to disagree I guess.

@ruserification742 I think this is an interesting conversation because your first point about fitness is fair. Drivers didn’t always go through junior formulas, some did but often the ones who went on to be champions in the 1950s and early 60s established themselves either before the war (WW2) in Grand Prix racing or did club racing. For example Fangio won Turismo Carretera (modern day Argentine touring cars) in the early 1940s and then moved to European competition in the latter half of the decade. Farina was established before the war, Ascari more so from 1946-50, Mike Hawthorn started on bikes and did Formula Two. Junior series existed back then but there were so many regional ones and essentially F1, endurance racing and other events saw drivers switch readily between them so there wasn’t one concrete path to the top. There weren’t many privateer teams especially during the 50s, the likes of Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Mercedes, Talbot-Lago, Gordini, BRM, HWM, Cooper, Alta and co all had varying amounts of engineers with the big names having more. Only during the mid to late 1960s did drivers essentially make a one-man band approach and do it all themselves. Glad I could answer your questions and I hope some misconceptions have been clarified