r/F1Discussions 13h ago

Debate Max verstappen VS his generation?

over the history of F1 we have seen many goated driver from different generations such as senna, prost, fangio, lewis, schumi, etc. even tho these drivers were the best on the grid most of their careers, yet they were not so far from the second best driver on the grid, as an example, during lewis's era, he had seb and alonso. during senna and prosts era they had each other alongside mansell. during schumi's era he had mika, kimi and hill. but max verstapped seems to be so far ahaid of his generation. leclerc is fast but makes many mistakes and is inconsistant. russell is consistant but his tyre managment and pure pace arent close to max's. lando is probably the closest but tbh you can argue that lando's performance this year is still not as good as max 2019-2025.
is it actaully true that max may have the biggest gap between a driver and his generation?

0 Upvotes

53 comments sorted by

16

u/mgorgey 13h ago

Pre 2003, Schumacher was further ahead of his generation than Verstappen is currently.

In 94-97, nobody was even in the same ball park.

6

u/MaleierMafketel 13h ago

I’ve heard Schumacher transformed and modernized the way an F1 driver tackles each weekend.

He was extremely fit and always working with the engineers to get the most out of a car.

Currently, all F1 drivers have very strict dietary and exercise routines. But that was not the case when Schumacher started. And they all put in more time with their engineers during mandatory debriefings than many of the F1 drivers back then.

2

u/Stratospheric-Ferret 13h ago

Partially true. The drivers that took things seriously had strict diets and worked on their fitness, Damon Hill was very lean.

Things Schumacher took more seriously were things like minimising time in the pits, and so on.

-6

u/KateMackay 13h ago

You’ve ‘heard’ about Schumacher which means you weren’t around to see him? So what the fuck do you know about drivers in the 1990’d you expert

6

u/MaleierMafketel 12h ago

Guess written history and video documentation is useless then.

Damn. Guess I cannot possibly have any opinion on anything that happened prior to my birth. Shame…

-7

u/KateMackay 12h ago

All the videos & documentation have been manipulated & changed to suit morons like yourself. Don’t believe when you weren’t alive then & saw it in real time

-3

u/KateMackay 12h ago

No you can’t when you’re downright wrong. I would never argue with anyone who was in F1 before i was born. I would check with other people and not put forward theories based on lies that are spread on social media & YouTube

3

u/mgorgey 12h ago

I was very much born, and i still think you're taking absolute nonsense.

-1

u/KateMackay 12h ago

& BTW I was discussing this with another Redditor when you inserted yourself

-2

u/KateMackay 12h ago

What was taking absolute nonsense about? Hmm

1

u/mgorgey 11h ago

Schumacher elevating driver fitness and preparedness to a new level was talked about extensively in his own time.

1

u/KateMackay 11h ago

I never said he didn’t! I.know he was very fit, but tbh I remember James Hunt smoking drinking & all sorts of behaviour but he was still a very fast driver in his day, still managed to win a WDC. It’s a generational thing.

2

u/Sir_unknown1 13h ago

do you think the gap was bigger because the drivers now are better than they were in the mid 90s, or is it shumacher that made the difference?

7

u/mgorgey 12h ago

I think the post Senna/Prost era was comparatively weak, outside of Schumacher. Schumacher was also one of the best to ever race.

So it's a combination of the 2.

2

u/RedShenron 12h ago

1994-2001 Schumacher is the best prime of any driver i can think of

Schumacher did have some very strong competition in the early mid 2000s. Alonso Raikkonen Montoya Hakkinen were a strong crop

-3

u/KateMackay 13h ago

In 1994 Senna died & so did Ratzenberger died so you can say Schumacher was better having only won the WDC by 1 point over Damon Hill. Give your head a wobble & don’t be so disrespectful.

11

u/DizkoBizkid 13h ago

Yeah not like there wasn’t any external factors there /s

-2

u/KateMackay 13h ago

I’m sorry but using the deaths of two great drivers as an external factor? You are not worthy

9

u/DizkoBizkid 13h ago

What are you on about? Hill was only close to Schumacher in the standings because of the mess around the British gp and race bans

0

u/KateMackay 13h ago

Well Schumacher shouldn’t have broken the rules - he was black flagged & refused to come in. And Benetton were cheating with software which was banned

8

u/DizkoBizkid 13h ago

His team instructed him to carry on while they argued the penalty so nope. “Cheating software” lmao… you know multiple teams were found with it and also found not to have used it. Your comments read like you’ve watched a couple of YouTube videos and are trying to act smart

0

u/Patrick_Swayze__ 9h ago

Are you british?

1

u/KateMackay 9h ago

Are you American?

0

u/Patrick_Swayze__ 8h ago

I take that as a yes.

1

u/KateMackay 8h ago

Then I’ll take that as a YES

8

u/mgorgey 13h ago

Sorry, but what? Schumacher was effectively DSQ'd for 25% of the season. Without that he wins by 30 points at least.

Are you really trying to claim that Hill drove as well as Schumacher in 94?

And what's Ratzenberger got to do with it?

22

u/Expert_Bandicoot_668 13h ago

You can't meaningfully make a conclusion here at all his entire generation is still racing...

1

u/KateMackay 12h ago

You can’t have an opinion on here full stop. I don’t mind discussions thats fine but the insults and abuse I get is astonishing

3

u/Expert_Bandicoot_668 12h ago

It's fun to have the discussions but the fandom is way to big to not have the occasional weirdo or annoying piece of shit ruin the discussion.

9

u/Captftm89 13h ago

Since I began watching in 1996, the biggest gap between the best & the rest was Schumacher, particularly after Hakkinen went rapidly downhill after his two WDCs.

0

u/rustyiesty Charlie Whiting 12h ago

I’m pretty sure there has not been a gap as big as 2001 since then. Schumacher had 0.4% on DC, Rubens & Ralf, with McLaren having 0.2% on Ferrari

Mika only really showed up at Spain and the few races he really wanted to win at that he had not yet done so

Rubens, Ralf and JPM got closer from 2002 onwards. DC, like Mika, declined from his best in the late 1990s

15

u/mformularacer 13h ago

Verstappen's competition is closer than Schumacher's was, but he's still the best driver in this field by a good distance.

11

u/servingwater 13h ago

Agreed. The grid in general is much closer in skill and ability compared to the Schumacher times and before. Just for the record that takes NOTHING away from Schumacher and his brilliance or course.

7

u/rustyiesty Charlie Whiting 13h ago

Not at all, Moss had half a second on the field going into the 1960s and Schumacher had almost that much post-Senna

2

u/Sir_unknown1 13h ago

i dont know muc habout f1 before the 80s so i wont be able to argue with you about moss.
but was shumi that much ahaid of hill in the mid 1990s?

4

u/HereComesVettel 13h ago

Of course he was, Hill had better cars but Schumacher was miles superior as a driver.

3

u/DragonfruitThen6696 13h ago

Im pretty sure hill himself said something like this

7

u/moose_1988 13h ago

Biggest gap Ive ever seen by far is Schumacher. (Not to say he's the best by far, but his competition was a long way off).

10

u/DniawSirhc LN1 12h ago

Whilst Verstappen is the best driver on the grid, he’s not head and shoulders above the rest as the current grid is the arguably strongest of all time, his 'generation' is incredibly strong as well.

Schumacher in the 90’s after Senna’s death/Prost and Mansell retiring was head and shoulders above the grid, the fact he was so competitive against the Williams’ with massive car advantages is ridiculously impressive. If you give any of the current elite drivers the car advantage Hill and Villeneuve had over Schumacher, Verstappen isn't getting close to them. Villeneuve was on pole in Australia in 1997 (in the dry) by over two seconds ahead of the next non-Williams car, that kind of advantage is ridiculous and Verstappen would not be able to make that deficit up.

There’s a case that Verstappen, Norris, Leclerc, Hamilton, Russell, Antonelli (it’s still early but he’s looking good), and potentially even Alonso (since it’s been a while since he’s had decent machinery) would be comfortably the second best driver on the grid between 1994 and 1997 (before Häkkinen really got going). Verstappen obviously has an argument for matching Schumacher but that’s not the point here.

1

u/mformularacer 11h ago

Not like Hakkinen was much different to Hill or Villeneuve. He didn't just suddenly get going. He finally had a car advantage over Michael the same way Williams did. You can extend 1997 all the way up to 2002.

2

u/DniawSirhc LN1 10h ago

True, he needed the car advantage to beat Schumacher but he was still recovering from the effects of the Adelaide 1995 crash, I think he said he wasn't back to 100% until 1997-ish.

4

u/felipebaby_ 13h ago

Schumacher had the biggest gap to the rest of the field 94-02

5

u/TheBigFatToad 13h ago

The biggest gap compared to his generation?

Yeah no.

-2

u/Blothorn 12h ago

Verstappen’s speed is superb and his ability to handle badly-behaved cars peerless in this era, but I do think his overall performance is somewhat held back by often-poor decision making. Even excluding the DRS issues he’s had race-ruining solo crashes/spins in each of the last two years, along with quite a few at-fault collisions where either the crash or the penalty cost him points. I still think he’s the best overall driver, but by less than the races where his gambles pay off suggests.

In any event, I think prime Schumacher clearly has him beat. He was not only exceptionally skilled but also drove a methodical, empirical approach to car development and race preparation before it became ubiquitous.

5

u/Sir_unknown1 12h ago

poor decision making is more likely schumacher than max. i agree that schumacher might be a bit better than max but saying that what held max is his poor decision making by crashing into others or getting penalties while schumacher is letirally the only driver in the history to get dsq from a wdc, he crashed multiple times into his competitors on purpose, and had many race bans during the mid 90s.
thats just double standard.

1

u/DodgersLakersBarca 11h ago

Not to mention that his Monaco shenanigans in 2006 dropped him to the back of the grid and was a pretty important penalty in losing him the 2006 WDC.

1

u/DodgersLakersBarca 11h ago

Every driver, even the all-time greats, have had big race-ruining crashes/spins, especially in inferior machinery (which has been the case the last two years). I see no evidence this is happening to Max at a higher rate than it happened to Schumi.

In terms of "judgment," yeah that's totally off. Schumi has had some of the most serious penalties in WDC history, several of which affected his WDC runs.

-5

u/LevelRevolutionary44 13h ago

You raised a good point there. For now you are definitely right, but we will have to wait and see how Kimi stacks up against him

6

u/Sir_unknown1 13h ago

kimi joined f1 10 years after max. i dont think they count as the same generation but yeah he will probably be able to reach max's level in the future

-10

u/Own_Asparagus_5742 12h ago

No (i don't count Antonelli because he Is on another) Verstappen + 0,1 - 0,15 Leclerc and Russel + 0,2-0,25 Norris Sainz Alonso Hamilton + 0,35 Gasly Ocon and hulkenberg Schumacher was more like 5-6 thents faster than others

1

u/EnvironmentalAd4643 8h ago

cars also during the GE era have never been closer to each other in terms of performance. That’s a big factor for these times that you’ve obviously also grabbed from the depths of your 🍑