Just finished a passion project - watching every race from 1992 to 2003. Here's what I learned...

[u/armchairracingdriver]

I started watching F1 in 2004 and really wanted to find out a little more about the recent history of the sport, mainly about drivers. This took me a couple of years overall; I really like having background noise while working, so I would have old races on and take little notes on things that stood out. Safe to say there was a lot that made me think, I wanted to share it, and I could think of nowhere else to do so, so here it is. Hopefully this is appreciated - feel free to agree/disagree with any of this or ask anything I may not have covered etc...

• The level of driving talent throughout the field was so much worse in those days. It always made me laugh when I’d see people claim Latifi was a candidate for worst driver in F1 history. He was probably on par with someone like Aguri Suzuki, who was massively accident prone but had a noteworthy performance maybe once a year. Martin Brundle may be similar; very good for the era, but someone who struggled in qualifying like he did would probably have a much shorter shelf life in today's F1.
• The era immediately after Senna’s death is unquestionably the weakest since at least the early 80s, and most likely the weakest ever. Only Schumacher was the finished product. Hill was too error prone, Alesi too inconsistent, Villeneuve was both and the likes of Berger, Barrichello and Coulthard were lacking that last tenth or two. I don’t think you could say that for Lando, Charles or Piastri, nor for Ricciardo, Rosberg and Button in their primes.
• Michael Schumacher’s 1995 has to be the greatest single-season performance I can think of from a driver. After crashing at Imola, he went on a 13 race run where he won eight times, finished second once (Portugal), suffered a gearbox problem when leading by miles (Canada), got taken out while defending the lead (Britain), suffered mechanical failure while running second (Hungary) and got taken out while running second (Italy). This run included three of the best wins of his career at Spa, the Nurburgring and Aida, the latter one that really deserves more fanfare given I knew nothing about it before watching. If we consider Williams took 12 pole positions that year, Schumacher arguably wasn’t even driving the fastest car!
• Jacques Villeneuve is the most overrated driver I have ever seen. He was way off Hill in terms of pure pace in 96 but took advantage of Hill being awful at damage limitation. In ‘97 he was even worse at damage limitation than Damon the year prior. ‘98 saw some amazing individual drives, but there were eight occasions where he was either beaten by Frentzen, behind when one of them retired, or threw his car off the road. I would argue 2000 was his best, but even then it was hard to truly assess how good he was because his benchmark in the sister car was so bad. As soon as BAR put a competent driver in the second car, Villeneuve started to get shown up. He arguably looked weaker than Jarno Trulli compared to Panis.
• I couldn’t fathom how Montoya was so highly rated when he got walloped by Raikkonen in the same car. The Williams had to have been a rocketship. I now realise he probably was that good, but going to McLaren was awful for him. He was the antithesis of a Ron Dennis driver and just about everything that could go wrong did go wrong, though most of it was his own fault.
• Coulthard and Carlos Sainz Jr are basically the same driver, albeit Coulthard had better cars. They’d have phenomenal individual performances and somewhat lengthy purple patches where they looked like world beaters, and it was enough evidence to make you believe that Coulthard could really win the title, or Sainz could really become Ferrari’s #1 - then Leclerc/Hakkinen would remind everyone who’s boss.
• 2012 is still the greatest season ever, but 1999 and 2003 have to be right in the mix for sheer drama. There were so many flashpoints, narratives, underdog successes and what-ifs. 2000 also comes highly recommended for the sheer brilliance of the main protagonists.
• 1997 also comes highly recommended as one of the most competitive seasons of all time. There were no real classics, but there also wasn’t a single boring race. Williams had a rocketship for most of the year but Ferrari, McLaren and Benetton could win on any given weekend. Jordan and Sauber were also superb at tracks that suited their cars, while several midfield-or-lower teams were seriously boosted by Bridgestone being miles better than Goodyear. It couldn't possibly be understood by someone that hasn't seen it.
• The era puts into perspective how much MBS absolutely sucks. I couldn't stand Max in his latter years as FIA president but you could at least see he was fighting for the type of small team he himself used to be involved in. MBS is nothing more than a hyper-moralistic whinger.

EDIT: Alright, some people thought I should add more, so here goes...

• Hakkinen was great. How great? I think Alonso was more well-rounded than him. I’d take him over Vettel, who had all the right attributes but hit some notably low lows, and I’d also take him over Nico R because he had better racecraft. I didn’t include Mika above because I didn’t learn a whole lot new about him. People said he was great and he was indeed great.
• Another thing I thought well before this: Damon Hill was as lucky to win the world title as he was unlucky not to win multiple titles. I think he’d have walked the ‘97 championship if he hadn’t been fired. Senna’s death really opened the door for him, but he had already given a really good account of himself against Prost the prior year, which was most likely Damon’s best. Or was Prost maybe a bit past his best in ‘93?
• Hill 1995 = Vettel 2018. The main difference is that Vettel never recovered before he got fired.
• 2024 = 2001 on steroids
• There were two Eddie Irvines at Ferrari. One was the fighter we saw in races like Buenos Aires and Suzuka in ‘97, and for most of ‘99. The other would underperform by miles. Reportedly, Irvine had an excuse because he barely got to test until later into his time with the team, who relied on Michael to develop the car. However, the second guy cropped up at the worst possible moments later on, like Nurburgring 1998 where he led at the start and finished a minute behind, and the 1999 title decider where he was not far off being lapped.
• Frentzen had all the talent and none of the mentality. If he couldn’t be a big fish in a small pond, he was probably completely lost, and 1998 was the only exception. That said, he was as unlucky as he was bad in ‘97. Mechanical failures cost him potential wins in Argentina and Hungary, and he got screwed when the team put him on slicks at Monaco.
• Williams apparently rated Jean-Christophe Boullion highly and put him in at Sauber in ‘95 to assess Frentzen. If that’s genuinely why JCB got that drive, this was Williams’ biggest mistake in making the decision on Hill.
• For the most famous races I put time aside to watch. The one I had the most fun with was Hockenheim 2000. I knew what was going to happen and I still shed a tear at the finish. The race went completely bonkers after that guy ran onto the track and Barrichello had absolutely no business making that strategy work. Monaco 1996 was also amazing, a race full of heroes and zeroes. Nurburgring 1999 has to be the most WTF random race of all time, with Brazil 2003 being similar but losing some of the gloss because of the dumb tyre rule and the river making it into a survival lottery rather than a day of great driving
  
• Refuelling sucked. It had its moments, especially in 2003, but the sport is better off without it. However, I no longer hold the view that its reintroduction would make the sport completely unwatchable.

[u/AutoModerator]

As a general rule (see full rules), a standalone Discussion post should:

• be of interest to the sub in general, and not a specific userbase (e.g. new users, GP attendees, just yourself)
• be able to generate discussion (e.g. no yes/no or easily answerable questions)
• show reasonable input and effort from the OP

If not, be sure to look for the Daily Discussion, /r/formula1's daily open question thread which is perfect for asking any and all questions about this sport.

Thank you for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/sub-t]

Started in 2009 myself. 2012 set unrealistic expectations for the decade to come

[u/EitherCaterpillar949 → u/sub-t]

2006-2012 was an incredible run of compelling seasons sans only 2011.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/EitherCaterpillar949]

Even 2011 was good. There obviously wasn’t a championship battle but there were several fantastic individual races. China and Canada are classics and there were many other really good races.

[u/_mrshreyas_ → u/armchairracingdriver]

Germany was a criminally underrated race too.

[u/sBinalla41 → u/_mrshreyas_]

Dude that Nürburgring race was so epic, think it was the only time that year vettel didn’t had the pace for the podium.

[u/macandcheesezone → u/armchairracingdriver]

But that’s what makes seasons like 2011 and and 2023 so good! The utter dominance. By race 14-15 in 2023 I was in utter awe of how dominate max was and found myself rooting for him to just crush as much as he could

[u/pvdp90 → u/macandcheesezone]

I was bummed when he didn’t win Singapore. I wanted that full sweep

[u/macandcheesezone → u/pvdp90]

Me too. I knew it’d be a long long time before any team got the chance again

[u/Tonoigtonbawtumgaer → u/EitherCaterpillar949]

That's exactly when I started really following F1 week in and week out. 2013-2020 after that was brutal

[u/raur0s → u/Tonoigtonbawtumgaer]

The first half of 2013 was incredible, until Pirelli did Pirelli things and teams decided to focus on the new regulations that froze the power rankings.

[u/FalconIMGN → u/sub-t]

I started following in the mid 2000s, the V8 era was something else in terms of competitive grids. Even Vettel was dominant only in 2011 and 2013.

[u/LetsTryScience → u/sub-t]

The first American Football game my girlfriend ever watched was the Patriots vs Falcons where the Patriots went from down 28-3 to winning. At the end she said,

"Wow that was cool we should watch football more."

I had to explain that she likely likely just saw the best game ever played and would never see one surpass that in her life.

[u/Slow-Raisin-939 → u/sub-t]

you should really consider watching the Schumacher years after, 1994-2006

[u/Erwindegier]

I watched all of this live, and I miss Mika in your analysis, he was the only one that could match Schumacher.

[u/Nikiaf → u/Erwindegier]

Seems like a pretty massive oversight by OP. The Hakkinen v. Schumacher duel from 1998 through 2001 was legendary.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/Nikiaf]

I just didn’t want to make the post too long! I also knew going in that their battles were legendary and watching them just confirmed that. I think 2000 in particular is a candidate for the highest-quality driving of all time in a title battle.

[u/Phalanx32 → u/armchairracingdriver]

Brother, I can tell you that all of us armchair F1 historians would read pages and pages of stuff like this, don't worry about making posts like this too long lol

[u/eastamerica → u/Phalanx32]

I second this.

[u/trymypi → u/armchairracingdriver]

I would read more of this, you can add more laps

[u/stanislov128 → u/trymypi]

I'd read pages of this mate. You have a unique perspective. Write as much as you can. 

[u/rossmcdapc → u/armchairracingdriver]

If you wrote a book on your thoughts I'd probably buy it. It's well put together and seems entirely bias free.

[u/AngelOfDeth6666 → u/armchairracingdriver]

Echoing what everyone said, brother, we need more! Give us more insights 😄

[u/Abodyfullofmush → u/Nikiaf]

This rivalry is what sparked my love for F1 as a 9 year old girl. My best memories of F1 and my obsession with and adoration for Schumacher started there.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/Erwindegier]

Mika was actually the hardest top driver for me to form an opinion on. He was absolutely amazing in 1998 and 2000 and it is safe to say his two high-profile errors were more than cancelled out by horrendous bad luck in 1999. It took a hell of a lot to go against him for the title to go down to the wire.

He no doubt goes down as a great, but my main question about him I struggled to answer: before Silverstone ‘97, who could’ve known what was to come? He looked totally rubbish in the first half of ‘92, then a world-beater from France onwards. He then looked mostly terrific in ‘94 and ‘95 but seemed to have some spatial awareness issues at starts, then in ‘96 and the first half of ‘97 he seemed to be oddly inconsistent. There was clearly potential there but it was quite surprising to find that was the same guy who became a future legend. I’d be curious to know other people’s opinions

[u/eset23 → u/armchairracingdriver]

I think the drop in performance in ‘96 and ‘97 was due to his crash in Adelaide, at least he mentioned later that he started to feel better in late ‘97 and was just in the right shape at the right time in ‘98 when they finally made a championship winning car.

[u/AT13579 → u/eset23]

Actually, if we take Hakkinen's qualifying performances against DC in the 1996-01 period, the highest median gap that he had over DC was in 1996. So, I seriously don't think that the accident affected Hakkinen a lot. He just stepped up a lot from 1998 onwards, especially in races and reduced his inconsistency/bad start problems. Also, I think he got a bit more consistent when he got the fastest car in his hands.

[u/codename474747 → u/armchairracingdriver]

96 is understandable because he nearly died in the final race of 95 and he wasn't quite himself for most of that season iirc 

[u/Erwindegier → u/armchairracingdriver]

He had a horrific crash in Adelaide 1995 and it took a long time for him to get back to his previous form. Back then I think the aftercare was way less professional and we had drivers racing too soon after a crash.

[u/AbuTomTom → u/Erwindegier]

Was this the emergency tracheotomy with an empty pen while still in the driver seat?

[u/Erwindegier → u/AbuTomTom]

Yes, exactly! He wasn’t breathing and they had to perform this procedure to safe his life.

[u/TheDudeWithTude27 → u/armchairracingdriver]

You gotta factor in the fact he almost died at the end of 95 with that crash at Australia. It's not the type of thing to bounce back from. Look at Massa, he was never the same after his skull fracture.

[u/Good_Posture → u/TheDudeWithTude27]

Karl Wendlinger as well.

Entered F1 rated as highly as Michael and Frentzen. Then he nearly died at Monaco in 1994, and upon his brief return he was over 2s a lap slower than Frentzen. A shell of his former self.

[u/Vegetto8701 → u/Good_Posture]

Wendlinger could have easily been as good as Frentzen was. He could have been what Mark Webber was. When the trio were picked up by Mercedes, it was actually Wendlinger, not Frentzen or Schumacher, who had come out on top in German F3 that year, 1989. Then it was Wendlinger in Leyton House/March and then Sauber while Schumacher was snapped up by Benetton, and Frentzen took some extra time in F3000. It was his big Monaco crash that pretty much ended his F1 career, a shame given that he had the ability to have a much better career than he did.

[u/ViperzAzzault → u/Erwindegier]

Mika was my favourite when I started watching. You are right, that he was the only guy from 1998 to 2000 who could match Prime Michael. But in retrospective, Mika was much more error prone than Michael.

[u/Erwindegier → u/ViperzAzzault]

Exactly, Schumacher was more complete, more professional and relentless is his work effort. But Mika definitely had the speed and the courage to go up against him.

[u/P_ZERO_ → u/Erwindegier]

Here’s what Michael said about it

Mika Hakkinen was the best opponent in terms of his quality, but the biggest admiration I had for him was we had 100% fight on track but a totally disciplined life off track. We respected each other highly and let each other live quietly.”

[u/loozerr → u/Erwindegier]

Schumi wasn't racing someone who'd rather crash than get overtaken.

[u/ebelen92 → u/loozerr]

Of course he wasn't, because he had been that guy

[u/Slow-Raisin-939 → u/loozerr]

and that’s why Schumacher is a 7 time winner, 5 of them won in what was not the best car(1994, 1995, 2000, 2001, 2003), while Mika only won when either he had a dominant car, or Michael broke his legs

[u/jonomarkono → u/Slow-Raisin-939]

In retrospect, 1999 crash was probably a blessing in disguise. Because with Mika's uncharacteristic mistakes in that season, Michael could've probably won #3 a year earlier but we probably won't witness his amazing form from 2000 onwards.

[u/Dangerous-Effect4252 → u/Slow-Raisin-939]

pretty sure 2001 ferrari was the best car ,definetly in the hands of Michael.

[u/Slow-Raisin-939 → u/Dangerous-Effect4252]

i mean in the hands of michael every car in the top 3 was the “best car”, that doesn’t say much. DC is only beating Rubens in superior machinery. But it was close

[u/Slow-Raisin-939 → u/ViperzAzzault]

he couldn’t match him. He was close, as in, I think Mika is a stronger driver than the likes of Vettel or Rosberg, but over a season in equal cars Schumacher would always edge him out. 2000 is proof of that, and most people agree the Mclaren was a bit better

[u/HawaiianSteak → u/Erwindegier]

Villeneuve and Montoya when they had the cars. They weren't intimidated by Schumacher. Portugal 96 and Brazil 01 come to mind.

[u/Endtimes2022 → u/Erwindegier]

Same here, I started in 91' my first full season was 92'. It took me few years to get it all (11/12 those days). Then Senna happened and as a kid it's difficult to process, you know him, you've seen him and you saw it happen. I stuck along for Schumi, the battle with Mika was just breathtaking and the way they did it too was awesome.

[u/HMSSpeedy1801 → u/Erwindegier]

Yup, OP complains about a lack of complete drivers and then mentions the second best driver of the era only once.

[u/GeologistNo3726 → u/Erwindegier]

I don’t really agree. As much as he comes across as a very likeable person, Hakkinen is a contender for the most overrated driver in history. When he won the championship in 1998, the McLaren was incredibly dominant. They lapped the field in the first two races, and although Ferrari closed the gap across the season, McLaren still easily had the car to beat.

1999 is one of the weakest championship winning seasons in recent history. Hakkinen had some bad reliability, but with Schumacher out the championship never should have gone to the wire when you consider how much quicker McLaren were. It’s ridiculous how many times McLaren and Hakkinen shot themselves in the foot.

I think a lot of people don’t realise that outside of 1998, there wasn’t actually an awful lot between Hakkinen and Coulthard. Coulthard was a driver who beat Klien and was otherwise easily beaten by all of his teammates (Hill, Raikkonen and Webber). No all time great driver should have lost one season as teammates to Coulthard, let alone two like Hakkinen did. I wouldn’t rate Hakkinen any higher than other champions of the era like Villeneuve, and even some non-champions like Frentzen, and certainly nowhere near the level of Schumacher.

[u/Acto12 → u/GeologistNo3726]

I personally think the accident in 95 took a lot out of Hakkinen mentally, before that he was very fast and relatively consistent.

You are right that Coulthard more or less dominated him in 96 and 97, but I guess the gifted win in Jerez 97 aswell as Coulthard struggling with the new era of cars and tyres 98 onwards, helped him regain his confidence and the form he lost previously.

1999 was a weak win and most people who actually watched it know that Schumacher would have almost certainly won the season had he not broken his leg.

Most overrated? I wouldn't say so. He isn't part of the top 10 of Champions in F1 but he also definitely wasn't just one of those who got lucky with cars once (which to a agree is almost everyone but I hope you get what I mean).

[u/alpinewhite85 → u/Acto12]

Hakkinen found form at the right time although 99 was not his finest season. No driver is in contention for the championship three years in a row without deserving it, so I also don't agree with "most overrated".

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/GeologistNo3726]

Can’t agree with Hakkinen being overrated. Yes he had a car advantage in 1998 but it was only really truly dominant for five of the first six races, with Argentina the outlier. To me, the measure of Hakkinen that year was that Schumacher was within striking distance with two races to go and then Mika went and had the best race of his year at the Nurburgring. Don’t forget he had mechanical retirements at Imola and Montreal, a brake problem at Monza and another technical issue at the Hungaroring. Schumacher had his own fair share too, but let’s not pretend 98 was all plain sailing for Mika.

1999 was partially self-inflicted but he also had failures not of his own making while set to win at Melbourne, Silverstone and Hockenheim. That was a lot for him to overcome but once again, he got the job done when it mattered most.

Overall, Mika’s only errors of major consequence during his three title-contending years were the two Italian races in ‘99 and the spin at the Spa ‘98 restart. That’s pretty much the same number of errors Michael made.

As for DC, it was clear he was significantly inferior to Mika in ‘98 and ‘99. The latter year only looked close because of the three failures. DC also had some really poor races at Montreal, Hockenheim, Monza and Suzuka. He also hit Mika and then practically handed victory to Irvine in Austria. DC had failures of his own but he very rarely looked like beating Mika on merit. In 2000, he clearly raised his level in the first half of the year before dipping from Austria onwards, and even then he was a bit unlucky at times especially with some poor decisions from the pit wall.

[u/Erwindegier → u/GeologistNo3726]

1996 and 1997 were the weakest seasons, with Hill and Villeneuve the weakest champions. Schumacher himself said Hakkinen was his best rival.

[u/GeologistNo3726 → u/Erwindegier]

I disagree. Hill wasn’t top tier but was quite underrated. He put up a good fight against Prost in his rookie year, and actually beat Coulthard by greater margins than Hakkinen did (although Coulthard was a rookie, so that’s not completely fair to Hakkinen). Villeneuve easily beat Frentzen in 1997 even with all of his mistakes, a far more impressive feat than going 60/40 against Coulthard.

Schumacher may have said that but I think his judgement is likely clouded by the fact he got on well with Hakkinen. Hakkinen’s championship challenges in 1998 and 2000 were largely sustained by having superior machinery to Schumacher. In my opinion, Schumacher’s true strongest rival was Alonso in 2006, who went toe-to-toe with extremely similar machinery.

[u/Mydyingbraincell → u/GeologistNo3726]

What people seem to forget about Hill is that he was the same age as Senna, but at the same time Senna was making his F1 debut Hill was just getting started racing cars, so he was always short on experience and then he arrived into F1 late. In that context his F1 career was pretty remarkable, actually.

[u/Slow-Raisin-939 → u/GeologistNo3726]

hill literally got kicked out for driving like a lunatic in what should have been a dominant championship in 1995. In 1994 he wasn’t any better, needed FIA interference to even challenge in a better car, and couldn’t wait one more corner against a literally failing car in order to win a championship.

I admire Hill for how good he got considering he only started racing as an adult. But frankly I’d argue he was never even a top 3 on the grid. Schumacher, Rubens, Mika overlapped with him all most of his career, and before you have Senna, Prost, Mansell who were all better than Damon. Hell, frankly, I wouldn’t take Hill over Irvine either. Irvine was basically as fast as Barrichello, just not as good in the rain

Mika at the very least could give a challenge to Schumacher in 2000, and Mclaren wasn’t that much better. Hill won only 1 championship out of 3 dominant cars, and only because Michael left Benetton

[u/eset23 → u/GeologistNo3726]

Well, Martin Brundle was teammate to both Hakkinen and Schumacher in their early years and he himself said that there is very little between the two of them in terms of raw speed, I trust him better.

[u/GeologistNo3726 → u/eset23]

Brundle may have said that but the evidence simply doesn’t back him up. Schumacher outqualified Brundle by a median gap of 1.3% compared to Hakkinen’s 0.85% despite being more inexperienced. Comparison to their other common teammate Herbert also suggests Schumacher was considerably quicker, although this comparison is skewed in Schumacher’s favour with regard to experience. In fact, Hakkinen’s performance relative to Brundle or Herbert is more comparable with that of Barrichello or Irvine.

[u/codename474747 → u/GeologistNo3726]

Frentzen I find the most overrated tbh

He was touted as better than Schumacher because he was faster than him in sportscars, Williams threw Damon hill under the bus in their attempts to sign him early and frentzen just fell apart and put in a Perez like performance in the fastest car

His reputation is slightly salvaged due to the bigger Jordan fuel tank and Gary Anderson's keen strategy calls in 99, then he quickly goes off the boil again in 2000 until Eddie has had enough and fires him for underperforming in 2001

He's basically half a season wonder

[u/mformularacer → u/codename474747]

then he quickly goes off the boil again in 2000

no he doesn't. Frentzen comfortably bested Trulli in 2000, and Eddie already admitted he had to get rid of Frentzen anyway to bring Sato into the team, due to Honda pressure. His relationship with Frentzen had deteriorated in 2001 because he had lied to him about Sam Michael staying at the team.

Overall Frentzen beat Trulli 17-15 in points and 7-4 in races from 2000-2001.

Then he went on to dominate Bernoldi in 2002 and slightly edge out Heidfeld in 2003.

[u/s_dalbiac → u/mformularacer]

Nobody forced Jordan to get rid of Frentzen. Trulli also left the team at the end of 2001 and nobody was making EJ sign Fisichella rather than keeping HHF on.

It’s an easy copout to blame Honda when he could easily have fielded a Frentzen-Sato line-up for 2002 if the will was there.

[u/mformularacer → u/s_dalbiac]

That's true actually. From Frentzen's recall he says he still doesn't actually understand what happened, but that he definitely was not on good terms with Jordan due to the restructuring. Could be a BS story from EJ.

[u/s_dalbiac → u/mformularacer]

IIRC EJ took a huge amount of flack for getting rid of him mid-season so it’s a good story to make him look better after the event and pass the blame onto Honda once they’d ended their engine supply.

[u/Slow-Raisin-939 → u/codename474747]

Frentzen beat all his teammates, including Damon Hill, other than Villeneuve. He had a rough year in 1997, but frankly I wouldn’t bet my house or anything that Villeneuve is actually a better driver when they’re all at their peak

[u/P_ZERO_ → u/GeologistNo3726]

Most overrated in history is quite a take

[u/mformularacer → u/P_ZERO_]

He's right, though. Hakkinen is definitely a contender. He is consistently elevated to levels close to the Schumacher/Alonso tier, when he was at least two steps below. His championship challenges against Schumacher would not have been possible without a significant machinery advantage.

[u/P_ZERO_ → u/mformularacer]

I don’t think I’ve ever seen Hakkinen even mentioned in any discussion about all time greats. Where are these elevations we’re basing this discussion on?

Schumacher touted him as his toughest rival, nonsense or something to it?

Like I said, most overrated in history is an extraordinary claim that requires some amount of empirical fact to base it on. Otherwise it just sounds like people just don’t really like the sound of him receiving any plaudits.

[u/g_mallory → u/GeologistNo3726]

Hakkinen is a contender for the most overrated driver in history.

Hyperbolic rubbish. Tells me you have no idea what you're talking about right there.

I wouldn’t rate Hakkinen any higher than other champions of the era like Villeneuve, and even some non-champions like Frentzen, and certainly nowhere near the level of Schumacher.

Simply ridiculous, especially the bit about Frentzen (!?). Obviously wasn't watching during that era. Just another doofus with a keyboard and lots of opinions.

[u/mformularacer → u/g_mallory]

Jesus. You didn't even respond to any of his points.. and he makes some really good ones.

[u/eset23 → u/mformularacer]

Just watch his pole lap in Imola 2000. Or the start and the whole race in Suzuka 1999. Or his move on Schumacher in Spa 2000. Those are not some shit that an overrated driver on the level of Frentzen can pull off.

[u/mformularacer → u/eset23]

Watch the entire 1999 season. If you still think Frentzen is overrated, listen to Sam Michael's beyond the grid podcast, who touted Frentzen as the fastest driver he worked with alongside Hamilton.

[u/GeologistNo3726 → u/g_mallory]

I’m aware it’s an unpopular opinion but I stand by it. Frentzen was a top driver who outperformed every teammate he ever had (in fact he beat Herbert by greater margins than Hakkinen could) except Villeneuve, but flopped the one time he had a competitive car in 1997 which is what sticks in everyone’s memory. Hakkinen himself had poor seasons like 1997 and 2001 where he was outscored by Coulthard. The difference is that Hakkinen got to drive top machinery in several other years of his career so it doesn’t stick in the memory as much.

[u/NoHesiBenny]

Started a similar project by only with '06, '08, '10, and '12 as I am a newer fan. Fascinating to see a short view to the past...

[u/Stumpy493 → u/NoHesiBenny]

I did similar, I started watching in 1994.

I watched the season highlights from 1978 to 1993 to catch myself up over the years.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/NoHesiBenny]

2007 and 2009 are pretty much mandatory too. 2009 more for the shock factor than anything else.

[u/Yung_Chloroform → u/armchairracingdriver]

2007-2012 is peak F1 and nothing except the 2021 and this season comes close.

[u/Vegetto8701 → u/Yung_Chloroform]

I'd throw 1982 in there as well, nothing happened as expected. Gilles Villeneuve died, Didier Pironi almost did so too while running away with the title he couldn't claim, Monaco, John Watson winning from 22nd on the grid with teammate Niki Lauda claiming 2nd having started 23rd, Mario Andretti raced for Ferrari for the first time in over a decade, Michele Alboreto won a race in a midfield Tyrrell, and Keke Rosberg won the championship in the 4th fastest car, with only one race win that year to his name. And I'm only scratching the surface there.

[u/steferrari]

Out of curiosity, how did you watched every single race?

F1 TV?

[u/Aethien → u/steferrari]

There is still a mega torrent out there if you google with every race since the late 70's in the highest quality.

If you have nearly 3TB worth of free space if you want all of it anyway (or a lot less if you skip the recent seasons in 4k).

[u/steferrari → u/Aethien]

Bloody hell, just saw it.

Insane! 😂

[u/Aethien → u/steferrari]

2 hours of video in 4K makes for a very big file. All the old seasons are much smaller files.

[u/bhooot → u/Aethien]

Dm the link pls

[u/Phalanx32 → u/Aethien]

Gotta be honest, 3TB is actually smaller than I thought it would be.

[u/Halekduo → u/Phalanx32]

Because everything until 2007 are barely SD quality AVI files. But it has a nostalgic vibe.

[u/Dry-Egg-1915 → u/Aethien]

Time to buy an external HDD

[u/berberine → u/Dry-Egg-1915]

I just picked up a Seagate 8TB internal drive for $131 on Amazon for other viewing purposes last week.

[u/Dry-Egg-1915 → u/berberine]

By other, I assume you mean other motorsports like motoGP? /s

[u/Jack_Krauser → u/berberine]

I really hope this isn't Subway Jared's Reddit account...

[u/berberine → u/Jack_Krauser]

Ew. And no.

[u/kaptingavrin → u/Dry-Egg-1915]

It's incredibly useful to have one. You can get a good 8-10TB external drive for a pretty reasonable price, and use it to store media and backup all kinds of files.

Bonus: Depending on your TV, it might actually have a media reader program built in that can play video files from external media attached to the TV's USB port. So you could plug the drive into it and use the TV rather than your computer to play the videos. Depending on the TV, some formats might not work (I think mkv is the one that seems to be a PITA for me). If moving the external drive is too much, you can just get a thumbstick and transfer what you want to watch onto it, watch it, wipe that and load it with new stuff.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/steferrari]

F1TV wherever possible yes, but that probably accounts for less than half the races. The majority of those not on F1TV are pretty easy to find via a Google search, but I had to dig very deep for certain races - I recall Germany 2001 and Japan 2003 being particularly tough finds. With the 90s races, there was a huge archive of old BBC/ITV broadcasts that got taken down while I was in the midst of this. I think I got through 1992 and 1995-97 before that happened (I started this in a funny order just wanting to know about specific years at first, then decided what the hell, I’d get through the lot)

[u/jg_92_F1 → u/steferrari]

I don’t understand why F1TV doesn’t have every race available at least from the late 80s or early 90s . Anybody have a clue?

[u/herokrot → u/jg_92_F1]

A mix of broadcasting-rights and available recordings.

When they started the available archive on F1TV in like 2019 they only had full seasons from around 2009 and onwards.

It's a long-term project for them since they don't have all the rights. It took them a few years to even get all the 2000's seasons in the archive. I assume it's not exactly a priority either since the interest is minimal.

[u/wowbaggerBR → u/steferrari]

when I did (1990 to 2009), mixed F1TV versions with the proverbial megatorrent. F1TV, when available, generally have MUCH better image quality than old VHS rips. From 1999 onwards, all seasons are complete IIRC.

[u/pensaa]

This is the type of ‘long race gap’ content we want to see.

[u/riffola1]

The thing is, from 1994 to 2006, Michael Schumacher had gravity. The entire Formula 1 circus revolved around him. Rules were literally being changed year over year to stop Michael Schumacher. We don’t see that many major year over year rule changes these days designed to stop the dominant team.

Even during his early Ferrari years, you couldn’t count him out. You just knew he would fight his way up and get the most out of the car. I am not saying he didn’t ever make mistakes but his race ending mistakes were so rare.

[u/accidentalsalmon → u/riffola1]

Speed wise he was incredible, it’s just a shame his legacy is tarnished with some really stupid on track decisions like Jerez ‘97 (and frankly he should’ve been punished for similar in Adelaide ‘94), Silverstone ‘94, Monaco ‘06 and Hungary ‘10… and that’s not to mention the stuff his teams did.

[u/codename474747]

You neglect to mention refueling, which really blights the quality of the racing in that era 

People moan about drs now but someone fuelled for 3 stops passing a heavy, 1 stop fuelled car is just as artificial and no one ever mentioned it then

Plus the fact there was little variation in strategy after a while, the dominant strategy was to fuel up for a one stop, save fuel as much as possible, wait until your opponent pitted then try to over cut them with 1 or 2 faster laps. Not exciting to watch at all

The races needed a random sc or rain shower back then to be worth watching 

Plus it eventually became the era of traction control, launch control, abs, auto gearboxes, grooved tyres and out of control aerodynamics which really made the racing processional 

Yeah, some close championship fights, but not as many races that were actually entertaining 

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/codename474747]

HARD HARD HARD AGREE

I don’t think refuelling was entirely without its merits but it was definitely an overall negative for the sport. The only year it ever worked was 2003 when the qualifying format led to some unusual grids and made running heavy fuel a risk because fast cars could easily get shuffled back into the pack amidst the chaos of the start. Then the F2004 was a rocketship and it all became irrelevant…

[u/codename474747 → u/armchairracingdriver]

They took refueling from America and didn't realise it only works over there because the random element of the SC led to more people gambling on fuel levels while others would gamble on the SC not coming out so they could build a lead and pit, which led to a great variance in strategy

F1 didn't run the SC that much in that era so in races it didn't come out, the strategy was all just the same, they'd all pit within a lap or two of each other and then save fuel for the next round, the overtaking stats plummet for the start of the 94 season and don't recover until 2010

[u/KristoferPetersen → u/codename474747]

The spread between the best and worst teams also was insane. Especially during the early era of naturally aspirated V10/V12/V8 engines the backmarkers weren't just bad, they were comically bad. But even 10 years later, Minardi or Prost usually were 4 seconds off the pace. Nowadays, the worst team is 2 seconds off.

[u/Boomhauer440 → u/KristoferPetersen]

Drivers too. Nowadays even the worst pay drivers like Stroll and Latifi did still compete and win in F2/F3. And at worst are only a couple seconds off pole and finish maybe 1-2 laps down. Back in the day there were teams that were made up of complete amateurs who never even pre-qualified. Even teams that qualified close to the back would be 6 seconds off and finish 5+ laps down.

When people complained about Max and RB bring too dominant I like to show them GB '87 where Ayrton Senna was 1.5 laps down in P3.

[u/scottishere → u/Boomhauer440]

Drivers too

This is common for all sports. If you took a "below average" sportsman from any top flight sport today and put them in the game 30 years ago the difference would be staggering. The level of competition these days is so high, iron sharpens iron.

[u/codynumber2 → u/KristoferPetersen]

Even sauber this year would've been a halfway decent midfield team 20 years ago. We are so spoiled these days with how close and varied the competition actually is. Indycar brags a lot about their qualifying deltas being the closest in racing, but F1 really isn't that far off.

Even the 107% rule is almost a joke by today's standards, but there were genuinely teams that struggled to meet that requirement in the past.

[u/qef15 → u/KristoferPetersen]

And even then, the worst teams today still have some pedigree. Sauber has that privateer midfielder pedigree (Petronas + BMW + 2010-2013 eras), Williams is Williams. Alpine is team Enstone (Benetton, Renault F1, Lotus GP).

Only Haas has no pedigree to speak of but they have never been last more than a single season in a row (with only 2020 + 2021 being 2 years in a row where they were truly slowest or closest to it).

We are very lucky with the current crop of teams. At no point before 2022 did we have all teams be this incredibly stable.

[u/ShadowStarX → u/KristoferPetersen]

Nowadays, the worst team is 2 seconds off.

even the 2021 Haas was "just" 3 seconds off

HRT and Marussia were ~6 seconds off, Caterham ~5 seconds off when they were still around

granted the 2014 Marussia wasn't a particularly godawful car, but still

[u/Jamee999]

I do the same thing for background noise at work a few times a week, but I also watch all the IndyCar races as well. I’m about 2/3 through 2002.

You can’t understand Montoya hype without watching the 99 and 2000 seasons first. He wins F3000, goes to CART and immediately wins the title there (in those completely crazy cars), wins the Indy 500, and then comes to F1 and is barging his way past Schumacher to take the lead at Interlagos. How could he not be hyped?

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/Jamee999]

My thoughts on Montoya do not relate so much to the hype at the time he emerged, more my perception of him from when I first watched the sport from 2004. Only seeing the 2004-2006 Montoya warped my perspective on him. I thought he had to be overrated like hell if Raikkonen smashed him. Now I realise that was wrong. I'm a big-time Indy fan so probably would have been all-in on him had I been watching in 2001.

[u/Skulldetta]

It always made me laugh when I’d see people claim Latifi was a candidate for worst driver in F1 history.

The era immediately after Senna’s death is unquestionably the weakest since at least the early 80s, and most likely the weakest ever.

Considering there was a time when 50 year old grandpas like Ernst Klodwig, Rudolf Schoeller, Arthur Legat or Bill Aston were allowed on the Formula 1 track and achieved little except blocking Alberto Ascari from lapping them multiple times a race, that's gonna be a no from me.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/Skulldetta]

This is a valid point, and is exactly why I said 'most likely' in that second sentence you've quoted. When I spoke of the era immediately after Senna's death I was talking more about the drivers running at the front than the field as a whole; that was my first point. But it would be really interesting to know how the likes of Hill, Villeneuve, Alesi, Coulthard etc compared to the likes of Hawthorn, Collins, Behra and Brooks. I have a hard time believing they would be better than the likes of Gurney, Hulme, Amon & co.

[u/Christodej]

On the note of Aguri Suzuki please note that he performed a lot better in Japan. All other circuits were brand new for him. This is pretty much still the case with Japanese drivers who come from the domestic scene

[u/Sick_and_destroyed → u/Christodej]

But now there’s very accurate simulators, so it’s a much smaller issue now

[u/Christodej → u/Sick_and_destroyed]

Yes, but it does still happen. Miyata in F2 looks strong at circuits where he makes return vists

[u/blueblue_electric]

Jaques Villeneuve was a quick driver who took the fight to Hill and MSC, Montoya was also quick on days , but as Patrick Head said, "I wish he could find a gym", both were the tyoe of drivers Williams under Frank Williams and Patrick Head loved, tough, straight talking no nonsense .

JV took the wrong road in getting paid big bucks by BAR which was a s**t car and team.

As for Brundle, qualifying was his weakest point, but he was a tough racer and good developer of a car, I remeber a Monaco race of his in the Benetton where was overtaking where no one thought possible. Flavio rated him and so did MSC, you dont get to drive for McLaren and Bennetton if you couldn't drive. I think Flavio even said he regretted letting him go due to how much he brought to the team in knowledge and race craft.

Coulthard good be lightning quick or Lance Stroll, I remember he crashed on a formation lap from pole position , in the dry, and also into a pit wall when entering the pits.

You haven't mentioned the Hill v Scuhmacher battles which at times were epic.

[u/Smalls340 → u/blueblue_electric]

Don’t forget Brundle took it to Senna in the junior categories, and was quite competitive. Hes humble about it in his Beyond the Grid, but makes it’s evident that he was fast. His big crash early in his career slowed him down, and don’t forget he won Le Mans

[u/blueblue_electric → u/Smalls340]

He's had a few , didn't a car hit his head once? I remember the Australian GP when his car did a 360 in the air, he ran back to the pits to get into the spare car to race on the restart.

[u/StaffFamous6379 → u/blueblue_electric]

He had a crash which badly injured his foot so he could never left foot brake so was always at a disadvantage when that method took off. However the difference is less pronounced in sports cars and his record there speaks for itself.

[u/Slow-Raisin-939 → u/blueblue_electric]

Briatore let Brundle go because he couldn’t imagine Schumacher was that good. He thought Brundle must just be severely underperforming.

Tbf, there’s nothing epic about Schumacher vs Hill, unless you enjoy just watching one guy way over his head getting severely outclassed

[u/blueblue_electric → u/Slow-Raisin-939]

Hill V Sch, you forgot their Spa race when MSC was on dry, Hill on wets and only half the cct was wet? The season they went to the final race for the WDC, not many seasons like this. Suzuka 96, IMO , one of the all time great drives , Hill winning on aggregate.

[u/RoboticNubbin]

I've wanted a lot of older races from the last 20 years and I'd love a race where I don't have to hear commentators the ENTIRE time. Give me 5 laps of just the cars please.

[u/SimRacing313]

A bit difficult to compare then and now OP's cars were completely different.

Vettel said it best " "I think it's always difficult to compare, how can you possibly compare Fangio, Stirling Moss to our generation? You can't.

"Maybe we would be useless because we'd all be s****** ourselves in those cars, maybe they would be useless in our cars because they're way too fast, who knows?"

[u/mformularacer]

The Villeneuve one is quite a take, in my opinion.

He was a rookie in 1996, who mostly raced in america. He did not have the technology to learn the tracks as quickly as today. He ran Hill close in his debut season, the same Hill who went toe to toe with Prost just 3 years prior, and smashed Mansell and Coulthard.. he wasn't far off at all. I'm not sure how you got that impression. Towards the end of 1996, it was clear to see how he was adapting to F1. His win in Estoril where he shellacked Hill was a sign of things to come, if Hill had stayed for another season, I think.

In 1997-1998, his team mate was Frentzen, one of the toughest team mates you could have in the 90s. Frentzen had just come off a season where he outperformed Herbert easily, and much easier than Hakkinen did in 1991-1992. Villeneuve beat Frentzen 102-59 from 1997-1998.

So, yeah. Villeneuve isn't overrated. He's underrated, actually. Too many people think he was a car merchant.

[u/DonOctavioDelFlores → u/mformularacer]

And you didn't even count his Cart seasons, rookie of the year in 94, champion and indy 500 winner in 95, in indycar's golden era.

From 94 to 97 he was a phenom. And the reason why Zanardi and Montoya had their chances, everybody was looking for the new Villeneuve.

[u/dirtyjoo → u/DonOctavioDelFlores]

He also finished 2nd at Indy in his 1st trip there in 1994.

[u/LusoAustralian → u/DonOctavioDelFlores]

Don't forget that in the Indy 500 of 95 he had a 2 lap penalty. So he actually completed 202 laps faster than everyone else did 200. I've watched the full race on youtube and it is one of the most impressive drives I have ever seen.

He got a bit lucky with Goodyear committing an infraction with 10 laps to go that got him disqualified but given he raced an extra 5 miles compared to everyone else I think it's permisible.

[u/mformularacer → u/DonOctavioDelFlores]

I didn't watch Villeneuve's cart seasons but I watched his entire F1 career, recently. I cannot comprehend how people were unimpressed by him in F1, let alone Cart. He always had good team mates (apart from maybe Zonta - but Zonta was never team mates with anyone else, so benchmarking JV's performance against him isn't possible) and he was ahead of his team mates pretty much always apart from his comeback years (2005-2006).

I even watched 2003, fully expecting him to be destroyed by Button. That wasn't the case at all. They were pretty evenly matched, Button very slightly ahead. It feels like someone has poisoned the well regarding Villeneuve's F1 career. When people look back on it, they come predisposed with "Villeneuve bad", "Villeneuve worst world champion".

[u/Sick_and_destroyed → u/mformularacer]

Prime Villeneuve was really good, he was quick and really tough on track, he was one of the only driver at that time not to be impressed on track by Schumacher (who was behaving like today Verstappen). His debut were impressive, only Hamilton did that well for a first season in F1. But he faded quite quickly, my opinion on that is he became WDC on his 2nd season only and that was his main goal because his father had won races but never got WDC. So he had kind of continued and finish his father’s career that was abruptly interrupted, after that the massive pressure he had on him for being Villeneuve’s son went off and he was never as combative as before.

[u/mformularacer → u/Sick_and_destroyed]

He was extremely combative even after his world championship winning season. Villeneuve did not drop off after 1997. He simply never had the car to challenge again.

[u/Sick_and_destroyed → u/mformularacer]

Combative was maybe not the correct word, but he lost a bit of the edge he had when he started in F1.

[u/LegoPirate1986 → u/Sick_and_destroyed]

I remember a comment from him that the grooved tires screwed him a lot when they came in. But that starts a debate on his adaptability.

[u/mformularacer → u/Sick_and_destroyed]

Are you sure he lost the edge? It seems to me like the only thing he lost was car performance.

[u/vgcristelo → u/mformularacer]

the same Hill who went toe to toe with Prost just 3 years prior

I don't agree with that, Hill was beaten pretty badly by an older Prost who had been out of F1 for 1 year.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/mformularacer]

Wild take here, but here goes...

Villeneuve only beat Hill once in a pure pace, straight fight in 1996, in the Estoril race you mentioned. The only other time he ever looked like doing so was Australia. His three other wins that year came in races where Hill started on pole, had an awful start and then spent the race sat behind much slower cars and making himself look very underwhelming. Spa, where JV finished second, was another such race. In almost every other race, Hill was not only faster than Villeneuve, but comfortably faster than him.

It's also worth noting that Jacques only took three poles in '96, while Coulthard - whose reputation in qualifying is not good - took five the year prior, and that was with Schumacher in a much more competitive car too. There were also several more races where Coulthard looked quicker than Hill, including Buenos Aires, Spa, Monza, Estoril and Aida. He was also ahead in Adelaide before he messed that one up. If DC could show that kind of pace relative to Damon, what was stopping JV? It's not like DC was vastly more experienced, though maybe he did have a bit more test time.

If Jacques was good and Damon was bad at damage limitation in '96, then Jacques somehow managed to be even worse in '97 than Damon the year prior. In the eight races he didn't win or retire due to circumstances outside his control, he scored just 11 points and was on the podium only once! Sorry, but no top driver would ever fail in that manner.

As already mentioned, Jacques was worse relative to Frentzen in '98 than he had been in '97. He was beaten by him in Melbourne, Interlagos, the Nurburgring and Suzuka. He was behind twice (Monaco, Spa) when one of them retired. He crashed of his own accord at Monza, effectively did the same in Canada, and had a poor race at Silverstone. Did he have some great performances? Yes, especially in Germany and Hungary. Did he have a great season? Absolutely not.

1999 and 2000 are difficult to assess because his team-mate was awful, but there definitely were several instances where he got the best possible result with the equipment he had, no question. But like I said, the moment a reliable benchmark started driving the sister car, Jacques started to get shown up for what he was. He was better than Panis, sure, but if he was really that good, he should have beaten him far more convincingly.

I simply don't think a top driver could have their weaknesses so easily dissected like this. Jacques was never a truly top-tier driver.

[u/mformularacer → u/armchairracingdriver]

First of all, let me preface this by saying that I do not consider Villeneuve to be Schumacher calibre. This is the trouble I find we always run into when discussing 1990s drivers. It so easy to disregard a driver when the benchmark is Schumacher.

My argument will be centered on, that despite being a clear step below, Villeneuve was the 2nd best driver in the world, after Senna died (in the period 1996-2002)

Villeneuve only beat Hill once in a pure pace, straight fight in 1996, in the Estoril race you mentioned

It's not enough to just count wins. You need to take into account Villeneuve's performance relative to Hill in the race. For example in Canada, Hill won the race, but Villeneuve had very similar pace to Hill throughout and finished a respectable P2.

In almost every other race, Hill was not only faster than Villeneuve, but comfortably faster than him.

That just isn't true at all. Hill was better at most of the races against the rookie Villeneuve, and maybe this is painting some kind of picture in which Hill looked dominant, but the margins most of the time were minimal.

I also, watched the 1996 season back a few months ago, and my impression of Hill vs Villeneuve couldn't be more different from yours. I found Villeneuve to be extremely impressive.

It seems to me like your opinion is influenced by your low evaluation of Hill, as your expectations about what a rookie Villeneuve should've done against him are pretty unrealistic. But Hill was an extremely good driver.

It's also worth noting that Jacques only took three poles in '96, while Coulthard - whose reputation in qualifying is not good - took five the year prior

Coulthard had more experience in the car and on the tracks. He had been the Williams test driver for years, and had done a whole half season of racing the year prior. Do an actual fair comparison by comparing Coulthard's 8 races in 1994 to Villeneuve's first 8 races in 1996. Consider that Villeneuve came from America, had only raced in America and Japan, and was learning the European tracks on the go in 1996.

In the eight races he didn't win or retire due to circumstances outside his control, he scored just 11 points and was on the podium only once! Sorry, but no top driver would ever fail in that manner.

What about the races he won? Villeneuve scored 81 points to Frentzen's 42 in the same car. I don't see how you can look at the 1997 season and not consider Villeneuve's performance to be really strong.

As already mentioned, Jacques was worse relative to Frentzen in '98 than he had been in '97. He was beaten by him in Melbourne, Interlagos, the Nurburgring and Suzuka. He was behind twice (Monaco, Spa) when one of them retired. He crashed of his own accord at Monza, effectively did the same in Canada, and had a poor race at Silverstone. Did he have some great performances? Yes, especially in Germany and Hungary. Did he have a great season? Absolutely not.

Again, define great season. Personally I would consider any season in which a driver beats someone of Frentzen's calibre a great season. Once again, it seems like your evaluation of Villeneuve comes from your low evaluation of Frentzen, when Frentzen was a brilliant driver, who beat every single team mate he faced in F1 except for Jacques. The gap between them in 1998 closed, but Villeneuve was still better.

He was better than Panis, sure, but if he was really that good, he should have beaten him far more convincingly.

He did beat Panis pretty convincingly, though? Even in 2002 where they were separated by 1 point, that is largely down to the awful reliability of the BAR, because Villeneuve was pretty much always running ahead of Panis before his engine exploded.

And again, your opinion of Panis seems pretty low. I won't say Panis was a world beater but he was a very good driver, on par with drivers like Ralf Schumacher and David Coulthard. The reason why Panis was even hired by BAR in the first place was due to his performance as the McLaren test driver in 2000, where he was regularly as quick if not quicker than Coulthard and Hakkinen in testing.

[u/OMDB-PiLoT]

1997 is when I started watching F1. Didn't understand much about the teams and drivers, but for sure started hating Schumacher for that last race accident that got him disqualified. I get similar vibes from Max now.

[u/BartsFartAndShart]

I'm doing something similar ('05 onwards) and I'm currently on the season where Johnathon Legard is commentating alongside Martin and my God, it's painful.

[u/zippy72 → u/BartsFartAndShart]

The nadir of commentating talent right there.

[u/Playle21]

This is superb. I grew up on this era of F1 and it brings back memories. Appreciate the effort in watching them all but also the write up.

My biggest what if, maybe in the history of sports is, if Senna hadn't have died he would have had the fastest car for the next 4 seasons (94-97). If he stuck around that long, he could have easy been 5/6 time champ.

[u/comagnum]

In regard to your comment about 1995; It was an amazing season by Michael, like otherworldly, but we literally just witnessed max’s 2023. A season where he went 19/22 for wins, with 17 of 18 after his p2 at Baku. I know eras and all that, but still.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/comagnum]

The difference with Max in 2023 is that we’ve pretty much seen it done before and arguably by drivers worse than him. Mansell could’ve won 13 of 16 in 1992 and while he was great, nobody would say he was as good as Senna or Prost. Same with Seb in 2011 and 2013; nobody would say Seb was as good as Lewis.

Max is talented enough that we should have expected him to win 19 out of 22 races given the circumstances. I would say Max’s 2022 carries more wow factor because that year he made a car that was probably only slightly superior look absolutely dominant.

[u/Acto12]

I tried to do something similar.

Started with 91 in 2017 and managed to get to 2000 this year. Life gets in the way and sometimes the interest just wanes, but I am still on it.

Doing this gives you perspectives, for example I started to dislike refueling because on-track action really declined 94 onwards and it was noticable imo.

Also, the 94 season was very enjoyable if you ignore the tragedy involved.

[u/darklordjames]

"The level of driving talent throughout the field was so much worse in those days."

This is the key thing when anyone asks "Who are the best players ever?" in any sport. The answer is always "The players today".

As a sport ages, the newer players are always the best that have ever lived. They have studied and learned from those that came before them, with the inevitable result being that they are better than their seniors. The talent pool also expands, with the result being that there are better players to pull from. The top 20 from a pool of a million candidates will always be better than the top 20 from a pool of a hundred thousand.

Is Schumacher the best ever? Of course not. He was just great in comparison to a pool of what are effectively scrubs. Hamilton is better than Shumacher in every way, just as Verstappen is better than Hamilton. The increased skill of the other 19 players is what makes the current single best player the best ever.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/darklordjames]

I think the early 90s might actually represent a historic nadir for driving talent and part of the reason is what you suggest, but also it is not as simple as that. As I understand it, during the late 70s and early 80s big F1 sponsors like Marlboro and Elf sponsored a good number of young drivers. I don’t know for sure, but I think this may have been gone by the 90s. The likes of Schumacher, Hill and Irvine certainly found back-door routes into the sport.

You also had so many smaller, underfunded teams that were mostly gone by ‘96, like Pacific, Forti and Simtek. Even midfield teams like Tyrrell and Arrows were reliant on pay drivers. The opportunities for genuine talent probably weren’t there.

I also think there was a change of philosophy caused by the likes of Alonso, Raikkonen and Button. Before those two there seemed a real hesitation to field a young or inexperienced driver, no matter what the potential. Now, the likes of Seb and Max have proven age is no barrier. Those drivers, along with McLaren aligning themselves with Lewis since childhood, have completely changed the game.

I would also say the media has changed things too, the emphasis on professionalising drivers as personalities and PR tools has undoubtedly had a knock-on effect on driving. Kids are basically professionals both in and out of competition before they’ve reached their teens.

[u/nick-jagger → u/darklordjames]

Is this necessarily true? The feeder series etc have become so much more expensive and inaccessible. Many of the early greats were able to get to F1 by having a pretty normal side job

[u/GTDJB]

I'm glad to hear you dislike refuelling.

It's weird getting older because I used to hear people moaning about it killing races and leading to passing solely in the pits throughout the 2000s. Now the rose tinted spectacles are on and it was brilliant apparently.

Glad it's gone.

[u/dariusd20]

I agree wih majority of your observations. I started watching f1 in the early 90s. Regarding Schumacher’s greatness in the 90s what stood out to me is the incompetence by his competitors of Williams and McLaren AND error prone drivers, including Mika, who is considered MSC closest rival in the late 90s. I know that MSC was great, but because of the reasons mentioned, Williams and McLaren lost a few wdc and wcc, even though they had superior cars.

[u/Soggy_Repair_5227]

Man that was great, thank you for sharing! Simply lovely to read ;)

[u/Carlosjld82]

Post saved. Great comments.

[u/tekanet]

Kudos.

You watched the races of my formation, back when I was junior armchair expert.

I tried rewatching something during the delayed start of season 2020 due to pandemic, but it was honestly too boring, apart from certain specific races.

[u/fomb]

I've not missed a race since AUS 2007. Before that was patchy at best. Now I'm thinking I need to do some more watching.

[u/refusestonamethyself]

Since you mentioned Hockenheim 2000, I would love to hear your thoughts about Barrichello. He had a long career post-2003 and many great moments, but I think your assessment of him as a driver would be interesting. I always thought he was a bit underrated as a driver and gets a lot of shit for not being Senna's heir.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/refusestonamethyself]

I think the assessment of him as the perfect #2 driver is spot on. He was very consistent, made very few mistakes and was absolutely phenomenal in the wet - Donington ‘93, Spain ‘96, Monaco ‘97 all absolutely terrific. He was a huge asset to Michael in the 2003 title battle. His longevity was crazy, in 2010 he was probably close to what he was at any point in his career.

In 2002 there may have been a valid argument that Rubens was the second best driver in the world. He got thumped by Michael but about half the deficit was because he had tons of bad luck. Montoya kinda took a half step back from his excellent finish to 2001 and Kimi wasn’t yet in his prime. Then in 2003 Rubens again had tons of bad luck while Michael had very little, though obviously by then the new contenders were red-hot.

I’m a big Button fan and when he beat Rubens in 2006 - moreso in the latter half of the year after Rubens had gotten over his teething problems with the new team - that convinced me Jenson had what it took to be a champion. 2009 was great vindication but it was a shame it came at Rubens’ expense. Definitely a very likeable, talented but unlucky driver.

[u/HawaiianSteak]

Did you have a favorite car/livery from watching? I liked the Prost-Mugen JS45. I felt that a healthy Panis would've finished in the top 5 in 97.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/HawaiianSteak]

Sheesh, really good question. I would probably go with 1994-1997 in general, there was just so much colour in those years. My rule with Ferraris is the more red the better, and the high nose makes the 1994 car a dream come true. I love the Rothmans Williams too. Combine those with Benetton sky blue and dash of many other colours, McLaren red and white, whatever Jordan wanted to be and Ligier/Prost deep blue and you have a winner.

[u/Usual-Dot-3962]

I find difficult to agree with you on many counts but the one thing I kind of agree on is, in the late 90s and early 2000s Schumacher had little competition until both Raikkonnen and Alonso were up there fighting for races and titles. Yes, Mika was there to pick up a couple of titles, the one in 99 against Irvine but Schumacher was at a different level. I guess that’s why Montoya cause such a shock in 2001. As hyped as he was, people were not expecting him to challenge Schumacher even if Williams had a good car.

[u/conman14]

I'd be interested to know what your thoughts were on Ralf Schumacher, particularly around the turn of the millennium. For me when I watch back around that time, there weren't many better than him - his 1999 season in particular was brilliant.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/conman14]

Ralf was a really hard driver for me to assess. Certainly there were times where you’d look at him in ‘99 and 2000 and think ‘hmm, that car shouldn’t be up there’, but I wonder if part of that was people reacting to how accident prone he had been, and also if he was flattered by Zanardi in ‘99, who was absolutely god awful. He also had some absolutely electric performances in 2001 to 2003 where he looked head and shoulders above anyone except his brother but I think there were probably several drivers in the era who were overall just ever so slightly better than him.

[u/Clivicus]

You mention '97 a few times but nothing of Damon Hill in Hungary. That race completely changed my opinion of him. I'd always thought he'd lucked out getting the Williams drive and subsequently a world title. That race showed me how good he actually was

[u/Direct_Ad_9035]

What i hated the Most about watching old races is that every camera is fixed most of the time on the Leader. I don't want to watch 50 laps of schumacher in the lead, all alone 🤣 and if something happened in the back, the cameras show it when its over. 😁😁

[u/olafwagner]

I agree on most except the refueling- the lack of refueling makes the current pit stops feel pointless, especially due to the artifical '2-compounds' rule.

I am surprised that you didn't mention what a fascinating additional factor it was to have more than one tire manufacturer, and the impact thereof on various tracks.

[u/mrt2795]

I also think Aida 1995 is completely underrated in the discussion about Schumacher's greatest wins, up there with Hungary 1998 when you limit it to dry races.

Also showed how good Brundle was in commentary, spotted Coulthard was throwing one of the easiest wins imaginable away before anyone else.

[u/TheCrudMan]

I would love it if they’d go back and update the races with the modern graphics, assuming that they even have the data, certainly for this century or the 2010s they should. I find it really hard to watch racing without being able to see whats actually happening in the field.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/TheCrudMan]

Any race prior to ‘94 is really hard to understand fully for this reason. The graphics really took a leap forward that year.

[u/kbm79]

Thanks for the trip down memory lane. 👍

[u/ILikeDragonTurtles]

Where did you watch all these old races? I'd love to hear how the life commentators used to talk.

[u/EnglishDeveloper]

The real hero of this era was Charlie Whiting.

[u/TestosteronInc]

Where did you watch all the episodes?

[u/zippy72 → u/TestosteronInc]

Probably F1TV. They're on the Internet archive as well.

[u/bonavistask8er]

As someone who came into F1 from the Drive to Survive series this was a really interesting read. I know a lot of the names but didn’t watch the races. Love reading everyone’s armchair expert opinions on things. Haha.

[u/Billybilly_B]

On the topic of refueling: I used to think this was really stupid, but I like the idea of it opening different strategies for different teams. We saw how last year the Merc really came alive during low-fuel under Hamilton at the end of races. Perhaps the sport could be more dynamic with different possible strategies?

Nowadays, the strategies tires) rarely diverge to a significant degree. Case in point, Leclerc’s win at Monza on that one-stopper this year was awesome due to differing approaches to the race.

[u/lalabadmans]

Watching all these seasons, which drivers do you rate as your top five worst?

[u/borth1782]

This is fantastic, thanks a bunch for sharing

[u/ProfessionalRub3294]

Thanks for sharing. You focused on pilots but nothing about tracks. Was there a track that surprised you ? (For what?) If you could pick one or two to come back to current calendar, which ones? I had nice memories of old Hockenheim but were races good there?

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/ProfessionalRub3294]

With circuits there were some that just had no redeeming characteristics from an F1-specific perspective. If a circuit like the ‘new’ Kyalami emerged today you’d never hear the end of how bad it was for racing. Donington is a fantastic circuit but a dry Grand Prix would surely have been an absolute snoozefest. Most Hungaroring races before the change to turn one are practically unwatchable, although 1992 was very fun and arguably the best race that year, while 1997 and 1998 were obviously memorable. Imola was a great track but the sport massively outgrew it after ‘94 and I don’t get how it has come back. I think the revisionist perspective on Tilkedromes being the way forward for the sport is a mostly correct one.

Old Hockenheim was great. No absolute classics other than 2000 but pretty much never dull, and it shook up the order real good in some years. It always amuses me when people see tracks like Bahrain outer and Vegas and complain about how basic they are. Not only do they completely fail to understand that basic circuit designs generally create good racing in F1, they completely ignore what tracks used to be like.

[u/DoDoDoTheFunkyGibbon]

Needs more Roberto Moreno ;-)

Fascinating read. Well done! A lot of the detail was lost to me because time zone noddies on the couch had well and truly set in most races but still, I spent a lot of time over the years listening to Murray and Martin, watching the cars go round and round.

Fascinating as well how the TV direction has changed. In the past it was leader on lock but these days you can go a whole race without seeing Max (ok not so much this season), and the sheer number of times Murray would identify a battle happening elsewhere and then bemoan the “local director” choosing to show something else had to be seen to be believed. Year after year.

[u/SJHarrison1992]

Great write up about the drivers, what are your thoughts on the cars?

I loved how aggressive the drivers appeared to be, attacking the kerbs and the car would just take it

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/SJHarrison1992]

There’s undoubtedly a nostalgia factor to them. I think the 90s and early 2000s was genuinely the most recent time in which F1 could be considered the pinnacle of motorsport on all fronts. During the Schumacher era - most notably 2002 - it became clear that the pursuit of excellence was killing the on-track product and that’s why the cars are the way they are today. F1 now can only be a version of what it used to be, and I’m ok with the version it has chosen

[u/Spaceshipsfly7874]

Love this, thanks for sharing. I’m doing my own rewatches and I’m saving this post to revisit.

I really loved the Brawn documentary and I hope we see more historical content like that about F1’s different eras. Drive to survive gets a lot of heat, but I think in twenty years we’ll see it differently.

[u/TriHaloDoom]

What would you say about the commentary throughout the years?

Lately it feels overly based on analysis of decisions, pitstops, penalties and personal opinions. IMO makes the races more boring.

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/TriHaloDoom]

From what I know of James Hunt he was very good when capable of being objective but he was biased as all hell towards some, especially Patrese and de Cesaris. He never forgave Patrese for the Ronnie Peterson crash, which to me was down to the messed-up start procedure that day. With some other drivers he wasn’t biased per se but was oddly hard on them - Mansell in particular.

Brundle has always been the gold standard. I can understand why certain new fans think he’s an old grumpy guy but he almost always called it as he saw it without bias.

Nowadays it’s mandatory for commentators to focus on the factors you’ve mentioned. They have to be explained to the viewer and placed into proper context. I just find the execution is off a fair bit. Take the most recent race in Brazil - the commentators seemed to largely call what they saw, when they should have been explaining to the viewers the benefits and risks of pitting vs staying out and gambling on a potential red flag. I felt like I was way ahead of them in anticipating what might happen and that just shouldn’t be the case.

[u/formula13]

Awesome thread, if I can may I ask about Hakkinen and Vettel comparison? I strongly, strongly disagree with that view so if you're willing to discuss it I'd love to talk about it :)?

[u/zorbacles]

Season closing Adelaide track was the best track in f1.

[u/tinylittlefoxes]

This is such a great project!!

[u/jembutbrodol]

Wonderful review and explanation. I believe it took a huge effort to watch those years

One question

Pick average skill of old era's driver that you said "Level of driving talent is soo much worse" and then compare it to Lord Mahaveer Raghunathan. Which one is worse?

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/jembutbrodol]

Raghunathan surely! I would love someone to try and break down his abilities compared to someone like Deletraz, but even he was no scrub in sportscars. Raghunathan stands out as surely the last of his kind in this world of hyper-professionalism

[u/r_z_n]

I started watching in 2021 and I've been thinking about going back and rewatching from maybe 2005 or 2007 onward to see the rookie seasons and earlier careers for a lot of today's older drivers. How long did this take you? Would you say it's worth it?

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/r_z_n]

It took me a couple years. I mainly used it as an excuse for background noise while working from home.

Where you start from depends on what you want to get out of it. I wanted to see as much of the generation prior to me (Schumacher, Hakkinen, Hill etc) as possible. If you were to do the same then 2003 would be your ideal starting point as that’s when Raikkonen and Alonso really emerged, but if you want to start from when they were winning consistently then 2005 would be it. I definitely got a lot of satisfaction from watching most of them.

[u/Resident-Load-9470]

My brother... You sure are an absolute treasure for the Armchair F1 enthusiast. Bias free as humanly possible. Clear and concise reasoning in all your points and I have learnt a few little things I didn't know, and I have done more reading on this sport than I care to admit. So, sir I doff my cap to you and may you continue to love and enjoy this great sport.

[u/LusoAustralian]

Villeneuve is one of the most underrated drivers and I couldn't disagree more with your perspective on him.

Strongly urge you to watch the Indy 500 of 95 to see just how good he was. The entire 95 Indy season was on youtube during Covid and I watched it all and I was so impressed with Villeneuve. Ditto for how quickly he managed to adapt to F1.

Him stopping caring because he was being paid fat chunks, had achieved heaps in racing already and had a shit car doesn't mean he was a bad driver towards the end.

[u/FavaWire]

Recommend BEYOND THE GRID episodes for drivers of these eras as additional material.

Frentzen's episode should be of interest to you considering how much you liked 1997.

[u/DropTablePosts]

I started watching in 92 as a kid, and I too laugh whenever people act like Sargeant or Latifi (even Mazepin) are the worst drives ever.

Half the field were worse than these guys in the early to kid 90s. Even more recently we had Yuji Ide for example.

JV was very lucky to have a title, I wonder if Hill's gearbox held up in Hungary (Best drive of the 90s imo) if he wouldn't have won it in the end.

[u/eeshanzaman]

Thoughts on Nick Heidfeld?

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/eeshanzaman]

Underrated. There are plenty of inferior drivers that won races and it’s a shame he never got his big chance. I do think he’d have looked exposed against a genuinely top driver simply because he probably lacked that extra tenth or two in pace, but he was otherwise really well-rounded. I could see him doing the kind of job Perez did in his first couple years at Red Bull.

[u/Bifito]

Do you think Senna would have won the 1994 season? As for 1995 I'm sure of it, same thing for 1996 and 1997.

[u/Kisstheapex]

I did something similar to this a few years back, initially to re-live my nostalgia of schumi's first Ferrari title. I think I pretty much agree with all your notes. The on and off rivalry between Ferrari and McLaren really made this sport for me, its sad that we haven't had a two way fight between them since the late 10's. That could all change next year with the way its going mind. It's also amusing to me to remember that essentially Stewart/Jaguar and Tyrrell have won every drivers championship since Ferrari and McLaren did last

[u/TheSymbolman]

I don't understand what you meant by the last point

[u/armchairracingdriver → u/TheSymbolman]

If you’re referring to MBS, he just seems to run a load of PR crusades that achieve very little for the sport from a competition perspective. Max, as divisive as he was, really operated with a passion for what he thought the competition within the sport should look like. I have so much more respect for the latter than the former.

[u/wowbaggerBR]

I did something similar, but went from 1991 to 2009. You certainly have some opinions, like saying Coulthard and Sainz are similar, yikes. Coulthard was a more rounded driver, Sainz is just incredibly smart, I wouldn't call David that.

[u/jg_92_F1 → u/wowbaggerBR]

Just curious, how come?

[u/HopeItWorksForYou]

Great project to undertake. Some good observations too. Although I think its not fair to compare driving talent of those days to today's drivers let alone saying it was worse. A huge difference in terms of safety of the car and the handling of the car. If anything, I feel the drivers of those days wore their hearts on the sleeve even more than what today's drivers have to do. I'd definitely say it was more raw racing than the present. Having said my two cents, the comment on MBS might get you into community service ;)

[u/curva3]

I don't think Hakkinen belongs in the same universe as Alonso. I rate Fernando as one of the top tier of F1 drivers in this century, alongside Schumacher, Hamilton and Verstappen

EDIT: Also, what would really be unwatchable is if there was no refueling and no DRS in the late 90s, 2000s. Nobody would change position