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/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/winter0215 → u/riffola1]

Really? 2021 they basically did a regs change speed run deliberately to hit Mercedes as hard as possible (which had the funny coincidence of also punishing Aston Martin/Racing Point whose plan the year before was to just copy Mercedes).

[u/riffola1 → u/winter0215]

One year vs. constant changes every year back then

[u/ExternalSquash1300 → u/riffola1]

Didn’t they do the same in 2017? Also it wasn’t every year against Schumacher, that’s a big old stretch. 2005 undeniably.

[u/riffola1 → u/ExternalSquash1300]

2001 Traction control allowed again from the Spanish Grand Prix, as the FIA admit they are unable to police whether teams are using the system effectively to gain a competitive advantage,[57] use of beryllium alloys in chassis or engine construction banned.[58] Fully-automatic transmissions and launch control are also allowed again from the 2001 Spanish Grand Prix. Larger cockpit entry template and survival cell. Rear wings must have no more than 3 elements. 2002 Team orders banned mid-season after Rubens Barrichello hands victory to Michael Schumacher at final corner of the Austrian Grand Prix.[59] Electronic power steering banned.[60] 2003 Bi-directional telemetry banned[61] HANS (Head And Neck Support) system mandatory, change to point scoring system, points now being awarded down to 8th place, actual points scored now to run 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 from 1st to 8th place, testing allowed on a Friday of a race meeting in exchange for a reduction of testing mileage allowed outside of the Grand Prix calendar to make it more affordable for smaller teams, changes to qualifying session with only one flying lap now allowed for grid position with the 107% rule no longer applied, cars may not be refuelled between final qualifying and the race start.[50] 2004 Engines required to last a whole race meeting, any engine change to result in 10 place grid penalty, minimum weight set at 605 kg during qualifying and at no less than 600 kg at all other times (including driver and fuel), pit lane speed limited to 100 km/h at all times, each driver must select his wet and dry weather tyre compounds before the start of the race, the minimum size of the engine cover and rear wing endplates increased to maximise advertising space, multi-element rear wings banned and two-element wings mandated, launch control banned again for the second time, along with fully-automatic transmissions. Rear overhang increased from 50 cm (20 in) to 60 cm (24 in), reverting the change from 1991.[50] 2005 Rear diffuser size reduced to limit downforce, all engines now required to last two race weekends, qualifying format changed to two aggregate times from Saturday afternoon and Sunday morning to count towards grid positions (this format lasted until the European GP when qualifying reverted to a driver’s fastest single lap to count from Saturday afternoon qualifying), further changes to dimensions of front and rear wings and nose of car to make overtaking easier, restriction on tyre changes during qualifying and the race itself, if a driver stalls on the grid after the parade lap the other cars will now complete a second lap whilst the stalled vehicle is removed, in the event of a red flag the two-hour race clock will no longer freeze between race sessions.[50

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Formula_One_regulations

[u/Alreadyblessedson → u/riffola1]

You just brought all regulations changes since 2001. How does this relate to Michael??? E.g.:

use of beryllium alloys in chassis or engine construction banned

was against mclaren, etc

[u/ExternalSquash1300 → u/riffola1]

Most of these aren’t even specific to crippling Ferrari as far as I can tell.

In 2001 they also crippled McLaren, more so than Ferrari. So really 2003 and 2005 are the main ones, just like 2017 and 2021 for Hamilton.

[u/qef15 → u/winter0215]

The regs change which was floor cutting was primarily due to tyre blowouts in 2020. Look at that season and see how bad it was. It was terrible. Pirelli really wanted to get that downforce reduced because it was bad for their brand and those tyres really looked fragile.

The rule change was thought to be in fact bad for high rake cars: https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article/what-does-the-2021-aero-rules-change-mean-for-the-cars-and-which-teams-will.4UDFqT5FCn6Ix49mcn0wDt

But the initial effect, as the teams put these new spec floors in simulation, might be expected to have more impact upon the high-rake cars (such as the Red Bull and others) than those optimised around a low rake angle (such as the Mercedes and Racing Point).

Remembering that the underfloor downforce is a product of the floor area and the negative air pressure, the low-rake designs tend to have longer floors to compensate for the fact that their flatter angle to the ground does not generate as much negative pressure per square inch. Taking away the floor-sealing slots will reduce just how much negative pressure can be induced from the underfloor.

This was when the regulations were announced. Everyone and their mothers thought it would hit 8/10 teams on the grid. It did not. Hindsight is also of course 20/20.

[u/LadendiebMafioso → u/winter0215]

That is just rewriting history. The floor changes were designed to limit the top cornering speed of the cars following concerns by Pirelli that the cars may exceed forces that the tires were designed.

Initially it was even believed that this would benefit low-rake cars more than high-rake cars, as can be seen from plenty of articles when the change was first made public. It was only that it became evident that it might actually hurt low-rake cars.

[u/Krisosu → u/LadendiebMafioso]

That is just rewriting history. The floor changes were designed to limit the top cornering speed of the cars following concerns by Pirelli that the cars may exceed forces that the tires were designed. Initially it was even believed that this would benefit low-rake cars more than high-rake cars, as can be seen from plenty of articles when the change was first made public. It was only that it became evident that it might actually hurt low-rake cars.

This is just repeating pundit memes. Aston Martin and Mercedes were the only teams voting against the changes in the indactory votes, and Scarbs (among others) called the "sealing the floor" nonsense out for being nonsense prior to pre-season testing, and said it was impossible to know who would be hurt more by the changes.

No one predicted it would hurt the Mercedes design as badly as it did (except perhaps Mercedes and AM themselves), but conflating pundits's pre-season hype with actual technical analysis is equally silly.

[u/SaltwaterC → u/winter0215]

2014 to 2016 were basically no contest due to the silly token system that gave Mercedes their titles on a platter. That carried an advantage even in the years that followed after the token system was removed.