I watched EVERY SEASON of F1 and worked out the GOAT is _____ 

correct - would not recommend - thank you

​@@MrVsGaragelmao

But it told us that Button is the GOAT. He is litterally always ahead of himself by many steps. Infinity loops for the win ;)

It is more than a numbers game. It is about being the best with technology of the time and drivers of your own eara. IROC (International Race of Champions) is the best as you have drivers from all levels of motorsport compete in identical vesicles.

Why has this comment got 1k likes and 4 replies💀 Hamiltons the goat

Don't care. Lauda beat him. Therefore Lauda is the GOAT.

@@wingracer1614Jenson beat Lewis, therefore Jenson is the goat

​@@wingracer1614Lauda was an amazing driver, however Prost was still growing in 1984. In 1985 Prost beat Lauda convincingly, although Lauda suffered some reliability issues that year as far as I can recall.

Schumacher was way past his prime on his second stint (with that neck injury too) that hurts him in this list. Verstappen had a Renault-engine ruined season too which damages his ranking here... But very nice video-idea :D

@@wingracer1614senna beat them both on a mercedes

The brian david gilbert special

magma

magmaaa

Schumacher ALSO is the prime example of why the "equal machinery" mentioned in this video is nonsense. In that era there was NO equal machinery for any team all first drivers had better equipment. Also Schumacher for instance had some time with software traction control that his team mates did not have. As that was illegal it was uploaded to the car from the pit wall during formation laps and deleted from the car during the race. It is the reason why communication car to pit wall currently is one directional, car to pit wall only.

This is true but let's be real, Irvine, Rubens, Massa, etc. were not on Michael's level. He had that number 1 status for a reason. If Ferrari could have found someone better, they would have kicked him to the curb in a heartbeat which is basically exactly what they did when Kimi became available.

The comparison between Senna and Prost is very telling of the shortcomings of this method. Senna and Prost were teammates in very different phases of their development as drivers. Prost was the best version of himself, while Senna was still a long way to achieve his peak. The Senna of 1991 to 1994 was arguably the most skilled F1 driver the world has ever seen. Had they been teammates in this period, Senna would have blown Prost away. And Prost knew it. That is why he retired so gracefully when Renault (who was looking to enter the Brazilian market) forced Frank Williams to take Senna for 1994. He didn't want to have Senna as teammate again because he knew he would face a much better Senna and there would be no doubt as to who was the best.

Nonsense... He was way better then his teammates therefore they added that clause, not the other way around! Same as giving a teammate a worse car. Why would ANY team do that!?

@@hound83 It's not about giving a driver "a worse car", it's about giving one driver a better one. Schumacher was given updates first. At some races his car would have literally been more advanced, but also he was therefore given addition time to come to grips with these things. Earlier in this current season Perez has beaten Max on track. Red Bull know he's not going to be a true rival to Max over the course of the season (much like with Ferrari and Irvine etc), but they didn't request him to move over in the way that the 2nd Ferrari drivers were requested to (and the same goes for Hakkinen/Coulthard, Hamilton/Bottas etc). Schumacher is obviously a titan in F1, but he still received special treatment that many other legendary drivers haven't been afforded.

I've always used it too. It's ALSO fun to push it to the extreme because you get some interesting but also very silly results

True but I think it isn’t always accurate though. The team isn’t always giving equal treatment and in the past, things like reliability and funding can hamper a head to head outside of how good the drivers really are.

It isn’t really accurate tho. How about rookie drivers (i.e., max vs daniel)

The comparison between Senna and Prost is very telling of the shortcomings of this method. Senna and Prost were teammates in very different phases of their development as drivers. Prost was the best version of himself, while Senna was still a long way to achieve his peak. The Senna of 1991 to 1994 was arguably the most skilled F1 driver the world has ever seen. Had they been teammates in this period, Senna would have blown Prost away. And Prost knew it. That is why he retired so gracefully when Renault (who was looking to enter the Brazilian market) forced Frank Williams to take Senna for 1994. He didn't want to have Senna as teammate again because he knew he would face a much better Senna and there would be no doubt as to who was the best.

@@user-dd4ib5eb1i I agree that Senna was better than Prost later (certainly 1993 showed that - my favourite out of all of his seasons). And he is, still for me, the greatest of all time along with Clark. I think head to heads like any other method of measurement is not totally reliable because there are always so many variables that come into play. An example of that is the whole Hamilton/Alonso in 2007; both had equal points, Lewis lead on 2nd places, Alonso signed for the team as No.1, conflicts between Ron and Alonso, the politics of Alonso trying to blackmail Ron into giving him No.1 status.....the list goes on and on. Head to heads show Alonso beat Hamilton that season while you'd expect that from a double world champion. Not easy when Ron reportedly said "We're not racing Ferrari, we're racing Fernando!" I suppose that was more to do with the fact that the constructors didn't matter any more and Lewis was his man. Regardless, much as I rated Senna extremely high, I still rated Prost as another legend as he was incredibly measured and smooth and calculating. Then again that's why I love things like this, it's not perfect it gives you a different perspective and insight

No. Nelson Piquet is the most underrated champion. Prost often receives the credit that he is due. Piquet never receives. People have the guts to put him behind Mansell, whom he beat for the championship as teammates and who only won one title, while Piquet won three. That's actually probably the reason. The British press never forgave him for defeating Mansell in 1987. It also doesn't help that fact that he is a dick.

@@user-dd4ib5eb1i its all based on opinion me thinkz. When you say he's a dick, its already opinion. You have to look at the stats, Nelson was better than Mansell, but not on Prost/Senna level.

@@KevinHwoarang I'm not discussing who was better. I'm discussing who is the most underrated. And it is Piquet. As I said, he never gets the credit he is due. Prost often does. And I think Piquet was more or less on Prost's level. The stats until 87 indicate that. And Prost blocked Piquet in 1988 at McLaren and lobbied for Senna because he shat his pants in fear of having to share the team with Piquet after he saw what he did to Mansell at Williams. Context: Honda wanted to appoint the other driver and wanted either Piquet, Senna or Nakajima. Ron Dennis vetoed Nakajima, so the choice was among the two Brazilians and Prost thought that it would be easier to beat thhe younger, unexperienced Senna.

@@user-dd4ib5eb1iyeah, he’s an idiot but was one hell of a driver…

@@danielsgrunge exactly

True. That time was something magical.

figma balls

Which is ridiculous. When the point system changes you'd have to take different decissions in equal circumstances. When you potentially gain 2 points from 8 to 10 for a P2 to P1 move at the risk of a DNF the calculation is a lot different than when it is from 18 to 25. Just plain and simple mathematical game theory. Some outcomes of finishing orders in races form the past would have been different had the point system been todays point system.

@@endthisnonsense7202 i agree with you, tactically it should have changed the championship. But I do believe also that Prost who was an extremely consistent driver would have definitely benefited a lot from the new point system. All in all I am not surprised that Prost is in the discussion for the goat.

It should be considered that there were fewer races in a season back then.

​@@alanpassos468 What is measured here is full season wins/draws/losses versus team mates. The number of races is irrelevant for such a comparison.

@@endthisnonsense7202 Well, it certainly influenced strategies, just like you stated it did when the scoring system changed.

Yeah, but this was more entertaining 😂

All info considered, in my opinion that absolute greatest of all time is Niki Lauda. Won a world championship, almost died in a crash, returned in record time, won another championship the next year, retired and then came back,to beat Alain Prost for his third title. No other champion has won a championship after surviving a life threatening crash and no other driver has come out of retirement and been competitive enough to claim a championship. 🐐

​@@innes2892You could say he wouldn't have crashed and had to deal with the near death experience if his skill level was higher

@@DeLaCroix1211 name a driver that hasn’t crashed.

Moreover, he didn't even need to plot the graph. With the proper algorithm he could get the desired conclusion from the spreadsheet

nah bro you're the maddest lad I've ever seen because what the fuck

As a fellow F1, MotoGP & WorldSBK enthusiast and also a stats nerd, I salute you!

And for this reason, Rosberg made sure he beat Hamilton in his prime.

Thank you! Honestly when I started this I thought it would take 2 weeks. After 4 weeks had gone I realised I was in too deep to quit 😂

@@MrVsGarage sweet sunk cost fallacy thingy right ?

🐐

Fun fact- he’s the only teammate Hamilton has never out-qualified at Silverstone

Prost was the better driver in every year they raced together.

Prost was more consistent hauling in more points. But Senna was the quicker driver, especially in the wet and qualifying.

Imo the fact Prost topped this list, and the fact Senna clearly bested him as teammates, confirms to me that Senna is really the true GOAT

Thank you! Just making the best stuff I can, I'm glad I can be considered along with the top guys

Then you didn't listen to the video carefully. He took into account the instances the drivers could not start a race due to incidents outside of their control. Leclerc did not start in 2021 in Monaco due to a driveshaft system error discovered on the morning. I guess that's why in his point system Leclerc bested Sainz twice then.

And Leclerc beat Sainz in 2022 by a larger points difference, so they drawn on wins, Leclerc takes it on points I assume

@@piwo647 you mean the driveshaft error that was caused BY A DRIVER ERROR CRASH the day before? it's 100% Leclerc's fault he did not start Monaco

⁠@@Jwm367t He beat Sainz 14-6 in race results that season, he was clearly better in 2021

Lauda beat Prost in 1984 and Senna beat Prost in 1988. And Senna could've beaten him in 1989 if not for a black-flagged Mansell crashing into him in Portugal and Balestre's shenanigans in Suzuka. That said, the comparison between Senna and Prost is very telling of the shortcomings of this method. Senna and Prost were teammates in very different phases of their development as drivers. Prost was the best version of himself, while Senna was still a long way to achieve his peak. The Senna of 1991 to 1994 was arguably the most skilled F1 driver the world has ever seen. Had they been teammates in this period, Senna would have blown Prost away. And Prost knew it. That is why he retired so gracefully when Renault (who was looking to enter the Brazilian market) forced Frank Williams to take Senna for 1994. He didn't want to have Senna as teammate again because he knew he would face a much better Senna and there would be no doubt as to who was the best.

Yes, thank you for the history lesson. The 1988 season I think Prost had more points but Senna had more race wins and so won the championship. Prost was very consistent in terms of bringing home points over the course of a season, Senna was the quicker driver but on a clear track without back markers Prost could hold his own. In qualifying and in the wet Senna was an undisputed king, no one could get near him. I remember those days quite clearly, I've been watching f1 since 1985.

​@@user-dd4ib5eb1i couldn't have said it any better 🤝

​@orvilleclisby6748 it was also drop scoring so it favored aggressive race craft

No

@@joshharrison619 Yesss

Prost não podia ver chuva , Senna era lendário sobre a agua

I coooould but at that point we're in danger of going from "silly idea" to "actual work"

​@@MrVsGarageI feel like you probably already crossed that threshold by most people's assessment

The comparison between Senna and Prost is very telling of the shortcomings of this method. Senna and Prost were teammates in very different phases of their development as drivers. Prost was the best version of himself, while Senna was still a long way to achieve his peak. The Senna of 1991 to 1994 was arguably the most skilled F1 driver the world has ever seen. Had they been teammates in this period, Senna would have blown Prost away. And Prost knew it. That is why he retired so gracefully when Renault (who was looking to enter the Brazilian market) forced Frank Williams to take Senna for 1994. He didn't want to have Senna as teammate again because he knew he would face a much better Senna and there would be no doubt as to who was the best.

This channel is for taking small F1 ideas like this and spending months pushing them to the extreme!

The comparison between Senna and Prost is very telling of the shortcomings of this method. Senna and Prost were teammates in very different phases of their development as drivers. Prost was the best version of himself, while Senna was still a long way to achieve his peak. The Senna of 1991 to 1994 was arguably the most skilled F1 driver the world has ever seen. Had they been teammates in this period, Senna would have blown Prost away. And Prost knew it. That is why he retired so gracefully when Renault (who was looking to enter the Brazilian market) forced Frank Williams to take Senna for 1994. He didn't want to have Senna as teammate again because he knew he would face a much better Senna and there would be no doubt as to who was the best.

I'm glad, thank you! ✖️✖️♥️♥️

I could, but I believe I've seen other people making similar videos. I'd rather find a new angle on it, maybe something like what happens if World Champions aren't allowed to compete anymore

​@@MrVsGarage That sounds interesting. The one I suggested was just an example. Since you have all the data now, it should be just a matter of coming up with an idea.

​@@MrVsGarage Also, I appreciate your unique content and trying new approaches. So please keep doing what you're doing!

The fact that prost isn't in your list 🇬🇧🤡

@@zbou23 It´s his opinion. A lot of drivers even don´t have Prost in their top5.

@@justinharper6909 A lot of people are retarded, what's youre point?

@@justinharper6909 a lot of drivers are wrong

​@@realdaddydagoth69 brother thinks his opinion matters more than ACTUAL drivers who have driven ACTUAL REAL F1 Cars 💀

A comment with a titbit... ELO is not an acronym. It's a name and is written like Elo

It would be interesting but as we start to look even wider it becomes more and more difficult to research and come to a conclusion. I know people who have (literally) written books about how F1 careers would have been different without DNFs, if other events were included, using different points systems.. etc.

The comparison between Senna and Prost is very telling of the shortcomings of this method. Senna and Prost were teammates in very different phases of their development as drivers. Prost was the best version of himself, while Senna was still a long way to achieve his peak. The Senna of 1991 to 1994 was arguably the most skilled F1 driver the world has ever seen. Had they been teammates in this period, Senna would have blown Prost away. And Prost knew it. That is why he retired so gracefully when Renault (who was looking to enter the Brazilian market) forced Frank Williams to take Senna for 1994. He didn't want to have Senna as teammate again because he knew he would face a much better Senna and there would be no doubt as to who was the best.

Prost is on a whole other level when you look at any kind of stats. Obviously not the top of any record tables but when you look into who he had to beat it's mind blowing

Sadly I can't edit that fast 😅

@@MrVsGarage Damn, I feel that. But you can reply to comments fast

Kimi still wins with the current system, by more points actually. But instead of tied 2nd place, Alonso beats Hamilton who then comes third.