22 best (current) F1 drivers

[Bazza]

Vettel could be another Nelson Piquet with 3 championships in 3 best cars. We don't know he mettle until he gets a car to struggle in or he gets a teammate who's at his prime.

He's had a team-mate at his prime - Webber in 2010 was viewed by Ferrari as the stronger driver until the very last race (something which ironically cost Webber and Ferrari the championship). Same with 2009 (and to an extent the first half of this year, see Monaco and GB), but that year everyone was overshadowed by the Brawns. Now if you're talking about a driver that only won with the best car....

The fact is, last year Vettel was most definitely not THE DRIVER. That would be either Nando for wringing so many tents out of his F2012, or Hamilton for wringing the life out of the McLaren (no pun intended).

Basically anyone would agree that if Nando was in the RB8 he would have won this year, not only because the F2012 was such a dog at the beginning, but also because the RB8 was still being developed so effectively throughout the year.
Same thing would go for Hamilton; there's no question he would have been a massive threat this year is the car wasn't failing on him so often.

[Websta]

As F1Technical's equivalent of Godwin's law takes effect, I will argue that:

We have similar standards of evidence for Vettel's talent as we do for Hamilton. Both have impressed in substandard cars (STR3 and 09Mclaren), Vettel has beaten a known quantity in Webber in a similar fashion to Hamilton beating Heikki (and I believe Webber is faster), both have performed under pressure and both have shown a lot of skill in overtaking and race craft. What we have seen is how Hamilton has performed in a strong but not dominant car in 2010/2011 and it was good/impressive but nothing transcendent.

Hamilton's fantastic debut against Alonso in 2007 seems to be the main ammunition used by proponents of Hamilton against those who say Vettel is the best. I think it is unfair for them to then argue that Hamilton would have managed the domination of 2011 had he swapped seats with Vettel, yet not consider whether Vettel would have replicated Hamilton's 2007 success. I think he could have.

blah, blah, blah, I think Vettel cannot be precluded from the top tier of drivers simply because he has achieved success in very strong cars, especially as that statement isn't entirely accurate either.

[xDama]

Raikkonen & Schumacher in B-class, but Hamilton in A.

Yeah because Raikkonen can drive around problems, and deal with a car not fully with his liking. Wait...he cannot. He is quick, but not always quick like I stated.

Also Schumacher in B is way overrated.

Then again he's not so quick. Grosjean is faster. I'd put him between A and B. He does have some A class qualities, though speed is no longer his strong suit.

Grosjean was faster on some occasions, mostly qualy, but Raikkonen scored double the amount of points he did, so where does that speed advantage suit in? The only result that counts, is the one when you cross the finish line. In those terms, Raikkonen destroyed Grosjean in 2012. That + the fact that he was one of the best, not to says thé best in wheel-to-wheel racing this year, while being immensely consistent. F1 is more then only raw speed, it's about the total package. Hence the reason why Hamilton lost more championships, than winning.

[Nando]

Hamilton's fantastic debut against Alonso in 2007 seems to be the main ammunition used by proponents of Hamilton against those who say Vettel is the best. I think it is unfair for them to then argue that Hamilton would have managed the domination of 2011 had he swapped seats with Vettel, yet not consider whether Vettel would have replicated Hamilton's 2007 success. I think he could have.

To change things up a little.

Would Alonso or Hamilton struggle to get into Q3 at Monaco while their teammate (in Hamilton´s case a world champion) puts it on pole?
(regardless of what condition the car is in)

Have you ever seen a scenario like that with any of those two? Have you see one with Vettel? I have.

[Rikhart]

It would help for people to comment here, to actually have witnessed the 2012 season, because Raikkonen blew grosjean out of the water, speed wise, in every race grosjean managed not to crash. Couldn´t care less about qualy pace btw, when he would qualify 4/5 places behind grosjean and come out ahead at the end of the race, every single time. Also, the lotus was an overrated car, it was 4th best car behind mclaren, redbull, ferrari and sauber, yet Raikkonen comes 3rd in the championship with an amazing comeback season (after 2 years away), and yet people dont rank him top tier? Really, go and rewatch the season.

[mnmracer]

Hamilton's fantastic debut against Alonso in 2007 seems to be the main ammunition used by proponents of Hamilton against those who say Vettel is the best. I think it is unfair for them to then argue that Hamilton would have managed the domination of 2011 had he swapped seats with Vettel, yet not consider whether Vettel would have replicated Hamilton's 2007 success. I think he could have.

To change things up a little.

Would Alonso or Hamilton struggle to get into Q3 at Monaco while their teammate (in Hamilton´s case a world champion) puts it on pole?
(regardless of what condition the car is in)

Have you ever seen a scenario like that with any of those two? Have you see one with Vettel? I have.

Let's see:
- Vettel with a wrong set-up, 2/10ths off top-qualifier Webber in Monaco.
- Hamilton with a wrong set-up, 8/10ths off Button in Spa.
- Alonso with the right set-up, 4/10ths off top-qualifier Trulli in Monaco.

[mnmracer]

It would help for people to comment here, to actually have witnessed the 2012 season, because Raikkonen blew grosjean out of the water, speed wise, in every race grosjean managed not to crash. Couldn´t care less about qualy pace btw, when he would qualify 4/5 places behind grosjean and come out ahead at the end of the race, every single time. Also, the lotus was an overrated car, it was 4th best car behind mclaren, redbull, ferrari and sauber, yet Raikkonen comes 3rd in the championship with an amazing comeback season (after 2 years away), and yet people dont rank him top tier? Really, go and rewatch the season.

For completeness, Räikkönen was out-race-paced 3 times this year.
But that is just as often as Vettel and Alonso, and less then Hamilton.

Kimi's problem this year is that he was only on the podium 7 times, so in our memory, it's not like he was always there. But when you actually look back at the year, his consistency, and -as the numbers show- his dominance over his team-mate, show why he is considered top tier by most.

[mnmracer]

Did someone actually down-vote me for answering a question on factual results?

[mnmracer]

OT attempt:
:Tier 1:
Vettel
Alonso
Hamilton
Raikkonen

:Tier 2:
Robert Kubica (uninjured)
Webber
Button
Massa (if he can hold his form)
Rosberg
Schumacher (2nd career form)
Nico Hulkenberg
Sergio Perez
Romain Grosjean
Pastor Maldonado

:Tier 3:
Tom Kristensen
Kamui Kobayashi
Heikki Kovalainen
Jaime Alguersuari
Robin Frijns (expect at least tier 2)
António Félix da Costa (expect at least tier 2)
Valteri Bottas
Will Power

[Nando]

Kubica in Tier 2. Now that´s funny.

[Lurk]

Let's see:
- Vettel with a wrong set-up, 2/10ths off top-qualifier Webber in Monaco.
- Hamilton with a wrong set-up, 8/10ths off Button in Spa.
- Alonso with the right set-up, 4/10ths off top-qualifier Trulli in Monaco.

2/10th off? I don't know what year you are talking about but this year he was 8/10ths off Webber on a 3.3km track. While Hamilton was 8/10th off on a 7.0km track.

edit: my bad, no time in Q3 (but by his own choice because of bad setup choice)

[FW17]

edit: my bad, no time in Q3 (but by his own choice because of bad setup choice)

So when you know you are wrong, delete the post.

[mnmracer]

Let's see:
- Vettel with a wrong set-up, 2/10ths off top-qualifier Webber in Monaco.
- Hamilton with a wrong set-up, 8/10ths off Button in Spa.
- Alonso with the right set-up, 4/10ths off top-qualifier Trulli in Monaco.

2/10th off? I don't know what year you are talking about but this year he was 8/10ths off Webber on a 3.3km track. While Hamilton was 8/10th off on a 7.0km track.

edit: my bad, no time in Q3 (but by his own choice because of bad setup choice)

If you want the relative numbers, all you have to do is ask:
Webber:Vettel was +0.265% off in Monaco
Button:Hamilton was +0.763% off in Spa
Trulli:Alonso was +0.572% off in Monaco (0.509% in '03)

Not sure how that changes the answer though.

[FW17]

OT attempt:
:Tier 1:
Vettel
Alonso
Hamilton
Raikkonen

Everyone seems to be on Kimi's case these days, but somehow i see kimi the same as he was in 2009. A few days like monaco saturdays on a stretch and he will be screaming never again.

[DaveKillens]

Everyone has their own personal criteria for assessing one driver against another. What's more important, raw pace, race pace, racecraft, ability to handle pressure, courage, or risk management? Those are just a few categories that can be considered, but rarely do we see any one driver checking all the boxes.

We could go on forever pursuing the perpetual bench-racer's argument on whether one racer is better than another, but it's like calculating the last numeral in pi, it just goes on forever. We've all seen the debates (for example) where one person states that Alonso is better than Hamilton because ... yadda yadda yadda, and the retort of "yabut", and then a response listing different characteristics. And we've seen drivers who are absolutely unbeatable in a car to their liking, but struggle mightily when it isn't. That is just one example where one driver looks foolish in comparison to his teammate, despite a rational and logical explanation for the difference in performance.

Even when I look back to the history books it sometimes doesn't seem to make sense. Alain Prost definitely is one of the greats, yet he won more races that he obtained pole positions. Does that make him a slow qualifier, or is it relevant that many times he was up against Senna, who was willing to risk it all to qualify on the pole? Even when it comes to Fangio, arguably the greatest Formula One driver of all, in what is arguably the greatest performance of all time, the 1957 German Grand Prix at Nürburgring, started on pole with fuel tanks half full, yet was passed by two other cars at the start of the race. A slow starter?

So all this leads to my personal opinion that just like a car, it's a series of compromises, where some characteristics are traded off against other characteristics to wind up with a driver who finds success. Who knows, maybe Grosjean has it in him to be the greatest driver of all time, but right now his priorities are not optimal, maybe if he prioritizes risk management over aggression at the starts we would see improved results. And even that is a fluid and changing situation. People change, most of us learn from our mistakes and improve. Hamilton had a disastrous year in 2011, yet 2012 was one of his best ever, he was a changed man.

Personally, I gave up on this debate, all I look for is a driver who finds the correct balance of priorities to find success.