Like I say, lemme know how the ligthing is as I'm still learning how best to use them. Also- Villeneuve, Lauda in 76 and Clark pretty much go against the whole "can't do that cos they got hurt/died" thing. One day I'll make a decent video...

I agree. Brabham definitely deserved the title in 1959 over that pylon Brabaham.

1956 - Final race of the season at Monza - Peter Collins pits from 1st place (enough points to win the championship) to let Fangio take over his car, thus sharing the points and allowing Fangio to take the title. Collins has to have the 1956 season.

"How did Rindt do in 1970?" Died and still took the title. Can't argue with that.

I tend to think 86 was the year Mansell missed out on the title by being too good a driver. If he hadn't kept his car out of the wall, the race would have been stopped and he'd have had the points he needed.

"Prost's still got five" *laughs in 4 time world champion*

2010 SHOULD have been either Alonso or Webber, but Webber threw away his chance by crashing in Korea, and Alonso was a victim of Ferrari being, well, Ferrari.

I am still angered that Zsolt Baumgartner never got his due championship.

2008 is a tricky one for me, only because of the Singapore race. Yes, Lewis had a brilliant season and very much deserved the title that year, but Crashgate in my eyes cost Massa the race win at Singapore and the crucial points for the championship in the end. Still a great season for both of them. EDIT: Still it's already 13 years old so we should move on

I would’ve put Raikkonen for 2005

1999 should've been Frentzen - he was in contention down to the 14th round at the European Grand Prix at Nurburgring, where he was leading comfortably until his electronics failed. Hakkinen went onto the wrong tyres and got lapped and Irvine had a 28 second pit stop due to confused mechanics. Frentzen got the pole and was only 10 points behind Irvine at the start of the race and the Ferraris didn't score any points that race. If Frentzen had won, he would've been level on points with Hakkinen and Irvine. Coulthard also led but stayed on dry tires for too long and went off the track in the wet. Fisichella took the lead and spun off, Ralf Schumacher took the lead and got a puncture, then Herbert took the lead and won. 1999 European GP was one of the most dramatic races of the 1990s. Also, 1987 should've gone to Mansell - he won more races that season than Piquet. 1986 should've also gone to Mansell - he lost by only 2 points after his tyre exploded at Adelaide and he had 4 retirements compared to Prost's 2. Mansell was brilliant at Williams in those 2 years.

I`m surprised you didn't mention Mansell in 1986. Loosing the title because of a tyre failure is pretty bad...

I really disagree with 2010. Webber lost the title because he crashed in korea on his own. Alonso deserved it way more that year. But it was vettel, who got so many pole position. So I would either go vettel or alonso in 2010. And why didn't you bring up kimi in 2005? he has some really great performances and lost due to the typical reliability of that time? I don't mean you really should have done it, but you can consider it. And the true champion of 2007 is neither kimi, alonso or hamilton. It is markus winkelhock

76-Lauda 03-Montoya (Was cooking with all the momentum till BS tire ruling. BS penalty at Indy, But it would've been super close between JPM/kimi/msc that year) 07-Hamilton (totally self-destructed, but was the fastest that year) 16-Hamilton (was faster than Rosberg, lost on reliability)

"How did Rindt do in 1970" f Saddest of championships in my book.

Actually yelling "NO!" Repeatedly at the screen about 1994 (less so, but also, 1986 - without the Tyre blow-up, Mansell wins) if you're going to use this insane standard, you've got to get a little crazy. You've got to unleash your inner fanboi and layout the gut feelings. "Clearly Hill deserved to win, but he got taken out by the evil Michael." That's your gut talking. I can hear it. Let it out!!!!

Your choice for 2008 was quite interesting considering Massa’s engine failure while leading in Hungary and Ferrari messing up his pitstop in Singapore, which did have a bigger effect in the championship then the debacle at Spa.

86 should be Mansell. 82 Pironi.

'82 based on finish positions vs retirements Pironi? '86 "And Look At That!!!" Mansell

The ones I would change: 50: Fangio 56: Collins 58: Moss 61: Von Trips 64: Hill 67: Clark 68: Clark 76: Lauda 81: Reutemann 82: Villeneuve 84: Prost 86: Mansell 87: Mansell 88: Prost 89: Senna 90: Prost 94: Hill 99: Irvine 03: Raikkonen 05: Raikkonen 06: Schumacher 07: Hamilton 08: Massa 10: Webber 12: Alonso 18: Vettel

It’s such a petty thing to drag stuff like this on for over a decade. Massa isn’t a champion. Senna lost in 1989. Raikkonen never won a championship at McLaren. It’s a shame all of it happened the way it did, but that’s how it is.

Pretty much agree with all of them here tbf, the only one I'd argue is 1986, Mansell lost the title (lead the championship going into Adelaide) because of a puncture about 20 laps to go. I think he was also sat in the right position to win the title too but idk, it's a toss up between him and Prost for consistency

Brazil 2008 wasn't only justice for Spa, it was also Toyota taking a gamble which made them gain positions despite Glock slipping behind Hamilton and Vettel, *where he was before those two pitted for inters,* on the final lap. Glock still gained net race time, just not enough for Ferrari to luck into the title at the final race for a second year in a row. Also, "for every two races Lewis won Rosberg won three" -- that's not true? Lewis won 10 races, Nico won 9. Lewis also had more poles, and even more podiums! He simply lost three qualifying sessions (China, Russia and Belgium) and one race win (Malaysia) due to engine problems, whilst Nico had no engine problems all year.

12:31 *2012* yeah I remember that guy *AlSonso,* too bad he only lasted one season... I think he started a Deckchair business afterwards and went on to become a memorable meme.

Pironi 82 for me. I'm a Gilles fan, but even had Gilles lived, I think 82 would have been dominated by both drivers. I think he finished equal 2nd in the championship with Wattie despite missing everything after FrenchGP. People say he was lucky to win Imola, but that indirectly led to him not starting Zolder so theoretically they cancel each other out.

I'd argue 2005, Raikkonen (Mclaren) and 2008, Massa (Ferrari). But hey, on the internet you always find someone to disagree with.

The 77 season (Lauda) would have been interesting if Jody Scheckter's Wolf had not suddenly become unreliable. The 79 season (Scheckter) could've gone to Gilles Villeneuve. An argument could be made for Jacques Laffite that season as well. The 81 season (Piquet) belonged to Carlos Reutemann if he had finish well in Vegas. The 83 season (Piquet) easily could have gone to Alain Prost. The 84 season (Lauda) easily could have gone to Alain Prost if Monaco went the distance with Senna winning in the Toleman. Prost would have had 6 points for 2nd place instead of 4.5 points for the half distance win. Mansell could have had 2 WDCs. Senna could have had 4 WDCs. Both Schumacher and Hamilton could have had 8 WDCs each.

Mansell deserved the title in 1986. He'd won more races than any driver that year. A tyre blowout on the last race cost him the championship by 2 points.

For 99 Irvine is imo the least of deserving a world title. Didnt win a single race on merit. Australia: won because mclaren and schumi reliability issues Austria: won cause dc spun mika round Hockenheim : teamorders with Salo Sepang: teamorders with schumi. 2003: montoya, made fewest mistakes of all title contenders. 2005: kimi 2008: massa 2010: vettel (sorry, webber made more mistakes) 2016: i agree on rosberg (lewis made more mistakes at beginning of season)

LOL Just found this. Of all the years to do this topic, you were, my friend, a year ahead of your time! I think it would be hard to argue that 2021 was THE MOST controversial year in F1 Championship history. Great stuff

Comment without watching the video: I am sure Vettel is not keeping all 4 of his titles

1983 you could argue that Prost deserved to be champion he won he most races and only lost by two points. 1984 deserved to be Prost, Prost won 7 races to Lauda's 5. Lauda only finished ahead of Prost three times where both cars finished and one of those was South Africa where Prost started from Pit Lane, in France he finished ahead of Prost because Prost got a bad pit stop and Canada where Prost had mechanical problems. So without these mechanical issues Lauda would potentially have never finished a race ahead of Prost. Prost got the bulk of the mechanical problems, won more races and lost by half a point. He deserved to win. 1986 the argument for Mansell deserving to win doesn't simply come from the tyre blowing; but also from the classy way he copped it on the chin and congratulated Alain Prost for winning for the Championship. For someone as passionate and competitive as Mansell that was a top class performance. 1994 has to be Senna. Surely on the same basis as Villeneuve being deserved winner of 1982, the deserved winner of 1994 was Senna. If Hill managed to challenge Schumacher to the end then Senna would have done at least as well and likely won. 2010 you could argue that Alonso deserved to win but for poor strategy from Ferrari in last race.

1984: piquet could've won the title if the MRD was more reliable. Easily the fastest driver and combo that year.

Never thought watching someone fill out an Excel spreadsheet would be interesting, thought provoking and cause arguments. Nice work.👍👍👍

1991 should've been Mansell, allowing for reliability. Also, 2016: Lewis effectively didn't take part in 4 qualy sessions yet took more poles & victories than Nico.

I always had the opinion that Lewis missed out on the title when he deserved it in 2007 and won it when he probably didn’t in 2008. But 2008 was such a roller coaster season with so many variables I think both were deserving.

I would've given 86 to Mansell tbh. He'd overcome Piquet who was expected to trounce him and but for the tyre in Australia

Brilliant video once again Aidan. Thanks as always

1988 is the only one you could reasonably argue, but similar to the nascar playoffs system with people arguing who the real champion was each year scoring more points overall the rules were already established going into the season and the drivers can race differently according to the system.

I agree with you on the Prost/Senna stuff, Prost scored the most points defacto he should have won, Senna should have been banned for Suzuka but Senna probably should have won it the year before.

"The winner will be the winner... When he wins." Space Ghost Coast to Coast Participation trophies... Like Bernie tried to do in '09.

12:49 Not sure how you came up with this stat given that Lewis won 10 races to Nico's 9. He also had more podiums and Head to head results were 10 each. That season was decieded by Hamilton's engine blow up in Malaysia.

If someone deserved to win a title, they would have done so

Nice video, couple of my takes: - Peter Collins gave up his drive to Fangio in 56, essentially costing him the WDC - In 1977 Andretti retired twice because, on orders from Colin Chapman, they didn't put enough fuel in - 81 Renault was too unreliable, as it was in 83, so Prost for both years - 84 Prost - 86 Mansell - 87 Mansell - 88 Prost - 90 Prost (DQ for Senna was in order) - 97 Schumacher (what he did in that Ferrari was nothing short of amazing, despite Jerez. He got punted of at the Nurburgring, would have had enough points to score second in Jerez otherwise) - 99 Schumacher - 06 Schumacher (Engine failure at Suzuka) - 07 Hamilton - 10 - 12 Alonso - 16 Hamilton (he was extremely unlucky the 1st 4 races and of course Malaysia)

1972: Jackie Stewart could have deserved it. He won four races to Fittipaldi's five and lost by 16 points but he missed a race that Emerson won due to a bleeding ulcer and lost a podium in Germany where Fittipaldi DNF'd when Jackie got wrecked by Regazzoni on the last lap. 1982: Villeneuve did not win a race and was killed in race 5 of 16 race season. Rosberg only won one race. Villeneuve's Ferrari teammate Didier Pironi won three races and lost by 5 points due to a career ending crash 5 races before the end of the season when he slammed unsighted into the back of another car in the rain at Hockenheim. 1986: Mansell led Prost by 6 points going into the last race in Australia and blew a tire at 180 MPH while running second to hand the title to Prost. 2003: Montoya was neck and neck with Schumacher with two races to go. He got a bogus drive through penalty at Indianapolis to finish 6th with Schumacher winning and then his car broke in Japan ending his chances. 2007: Lewis Hamilton led Kimi by 7 points going into the Brazil finale but a faulty gearbox put him out of the points so Kimi won the race and the championship. Lewis also lost a chance to clinch the title the race before when he spun and hit the pit wall in China while leading the race.

Arguments for Massa in 2008: Crashgate. It triggered the pitstop where THAT hose malfunction happened. Also, Hungary. Two instances of terrible luck. Regarding 2003, you should have expanded upon why MSC was the one who deserved it over the other two. Without the Michelin controversy, Raikkonen or JPM would have won the WDC, and Williams would have obtained the WCC.

Alan Jones should have won in 1979. The point system introduced that year (and only for that season) meant that his dominance for most of the season was cancelled out by not getting enough points at the start of the season.

Interesting discussion. Although in my mind, Mansell definitely won it in 86, and Senna in 88. As for 99 - I would have given it to Frentzen. He was the 'outsider' that year - but he was driving a Jordan, and if he had not had that retirement in Germany.....

Schumacher in 94 was worse than what he did in 97 should have been disqualified from the championship it was on par with what senna did

My picks: 1950: Giuseppe Farina 1951: Juan Manuel Fangio 1952: Alberto Ascari 1953: Alberto Ascari 1954: Juan Manuel Fangio 1955: Juan Manuel Fangio 1956: Peter Collins (dude gave up his own race and championship to give Fangio a chance to win the title) 1957: Fangio 1958: Stirling Moss 1959: Tony Brooks (or Moss as well, but for me he's vice champ) 1960: Jack Brabham 1961: Wolfgang von Trips 1962: Graham Hill 1963: Jim Clark 1964: Graham Hill (he lost the championship for the same reason Prost lost it in 1988) 1965: Jim Clark 1966: Jack Brabham 1967: Jim Clark 1968: Graham Hill 1969: Jackie Stewart 1970: Jochen Rindt 1971: Jackie Stewart 1972: Emerson Fittipaldi 1973: Ronnie Peterson (too many DNFs without being his own fault) 1974: Carlos Reutemann (best season in F1 history? I understand you guys that are surprised, but for me it seemed so. Other possible are Lauda, Peterson and Scheckter, he was far better that year at Tyrrell than in 1979, my vice champ) 1975: Niki Lauda 1976: Niki Lauda 1977: James Hunt (surprise no.2. Andretti was also fantastic, vice champ for me) 1978: Mario Andretti (but I think Peterson could win it hadn't he died) 1979: Gilles Villeneuve (vice champion Jacques Laffite for me) 1980: Alan Jones (Pironi was a beastas well that year, vice champ for me) 1981: Alan Jones (he's underrated like no one else that guy. Laffite again vice champ) 1982: Didier Pironi 1983: Rene Arnoux (Ferrari had 10 poles that year, they were the best of all. Prost a decent second in the championship. That's a difficult one, because, despite Ferrari being the fastest, Brabham had the most powerful F1 engine ever and Renault was a fantastic chassis as well. But I don't change my mind) 1984: Alain Prost 1985: Alain Prost (Keke, Senna, de Angelis, Alboreto and Mansell were also great (they're basically ranked as of mine) 1986: Nigel Mansell 1987: Nelson Piquet (yes Mansell had 6 wins but Piquet was great that season. Also it can't be him not becoming champion at least once) 1988: Ayrton Senna (although deep inside I feel Prost deserved it) 1989: Ayrton Senna 1990: Ayrton Senna 1991: Nigel Mansell (it really feels like Lauda's season in 1977 for Senna) 1992: Nigel Mansell 1993: Alain Prost 1994: Damon Hill (that season was probably the most disgraceful in F1 history, I'll never understand how Benetton wasn't disqualified completely after that) 1995: Michael Schumacher 1996: Damon Hill 1997: Jacques Villeneuve 1998: Mika Hakkinen 1999: Mika Hakkinen (okay, yes, you're right, Irvine lost it because of a terrible pitstop and yes, Schumacher had his injury and, yes, who knows what would Frentzen do if he didn't retire at Nürburgring, BUT, people forget how many times he retired because of failures and the chances he gave to all of them. Frentzen's drive that year was for me one of the best from a driver ever. Irvine was finally good, but it was because he should be good. Also, really, would you ever think of Irvine becoming champion?!?!?! It's like science fiction film!) 2000: Michael Schumacher (but I think that if Mika didn't retire at Indianapolis he may had gotten him) 2001: Michael Schumacher 2002: Michael Schumacher 2003: Michael Schumacher (but Williams was the best car and if McLaren had cleared things with the infamous MP4/18 Kimi would blow up the competition... but they didn't) 2004: Michael Schumacher 2005: Kimi Raikkonen 2006: Fernando Alonso 2007: Lewis Hamilton 2008: Lewis Hamilton (it's amazing how he beat a car that was better and people claim he only wins with the best car) 2009: Jenson Button (just because of the car, otherwise it had to be Vettel) 2010: Mark Webber (wouldn't be bad for a number two driver) 2011: Sebastian Vettel 2012: Fernando Alonso (but Lewis had the fastest car and retired three times while leading because of failures and because Hulkenberg ended him) 2013: Sebastian Vettel (okay, he won 13 times, but Merc was almost as fast as the RB was) 2014: Lewis Hamilton (Rosberg could be the one but had many problems at Singapore and Silverstone I think they were) 2015: Lewis Hamilton 2016: Nico Rosberg (yes, Lewis was better and had too much of a bad luck. Yes, Lewis had 10 wins and it's insane that he still didn't become champion. Yes, he left F1 like a coward, he knew he'd lose again. But Rosberg was too consistent and fought so hard to beat the driver that ranks probably only lower than Senna and Fangio and that's why he's the driver I admire the most after Lewis) 2017: Sebastian Vettel (the team and his faults ruined him) 2018: Lewis Hamilton 2019: Lewis Hamilton 2020: Lewis Hamilton 2021: Lewis Hamilton (okay, it was the absolute robbery that one. F1 smellt money and popularity and used it as well as the fact that they had the driver who they always promote challenging for the title. And of course they didn't leave that chance to dethrone Lewis to let go just like that)

I don't know about deserved or not, but two years that come to mind are 94 an 2008, because they have to do more with stewarding or out of track matters (different than a mechanical failure where you can always blame the team/car). In 2008 we had the crashgate Singapore scandal, which is the only proven case of race fixing in F1. If you take that race out of the standings, Massa wins the championship that year (which probably Lewis won't miss so much at this point) And in '94 you had a very fishy Benneton team and their shaenanigans, with FIA half assedly investigating them (but also giving them some race bans for fuel rig equipment that was modified) probably just to piss off bigger teams like Williams and Mclaren that had been dominant until then. That one in particular stings to me because Briatore and Schumacher would prove later in their careers that they weren't characters filled with sportmanship. Add Reutemann in '81 when he lost the championship in that last silly race at the Las Vegas parking lot and that's a wrap :)

Mansell should've won '86-'87 '86: Puncture in Adalaide '87: Back go snap in Suzuka

For 94, whether or not he had the opportunity or not, Damon deserved that more than Micheal. Micheal did what he did on purpose. You know it, I know it, everyone with eyes knows it. Chicken shit move.

Love how you put deserved as a mix of lower and upper case letters

94 - I get your point Schumachers ban was the only reason Hill managed to pull close but MS did play dirty that year in general (Silverstone + Adelaide) which to me reduces “deserving”. Also Hill was stepping into some awfully big shoes. 17 - Hamilton, Barcelona (though I’m probably a biased British bloke and remembering spa 14) Agree with your Prost + Senna thoughts

Other candidates for worthy champions in my opinion: *1951 - Jose Froilan Gonzalez* Had he competed in, and won, the 1951 Belgian Grand Prix, he would have been world champion *1966 - Lorenzo Bandini* Bandini lost 2 wins in 1966 with mechanical issues in USA & France (both whilst holding an enormous lead), and Ferrari didn't even attend Great Britain or Mexico *1982 - Didier Pironi* The title fight was between the two Ferraris and, much like Villeneuve, Pironi had his career ended in a high speed crash. The fact that we got to see more of his season sort of helps too *1985 - Michele Alboreto* Leading the championship with 6 rounds to go, but mechanical failures from Ferrari meant he didn't finish the final 4 rounds of the season *1986 - Nigel Mansell* The infamous tyre explosion at the final round at Adelaide cost him the chance to Britain's only F1 world champion of the 1980s *2005 - Kimi Raikkonen* McLaren and Raikkonen were the combination to beat pretty much from Round 1, and could have easily had 10 race wins in the season

Mansell would have won in '86 if not for that tyre failure in Adelaide

Stirling Moss had a good shot for the WDC 1956, or even Peter Collins, had it not been for Collins , lending his car to Fangio at the titile decider at Monza. And also in my book. Reutemann 1981, Regazzoni 1974 (probably), Mansell 1986, Montoya 2003

I think the only one I was surprised about was 86, was expecting you to have put Mansell.

Omg, I can't believe you think Farina deserved his championship!!! fAnGiO wAs rObBeD

Interesting thoughts!

great video, really interesting

Pretty good video considering the recent TNL chat in the F1 channel

Damn straight Brabham deserved his. Who else designed, built, managed and drove it to the championship.

What I’ve learnt from this is that Ralf Schumacher has become an 8 time world champion in the who deserved it world

82 - Pironi surely! I reckon the decision to put Rosberg in 2016 was largely influenced by not wanting to be seen as a Hamilton fanboy ☺ I find it hard to say Rosberg actually deserved it more but I'm glad he got it.

How did you miss Mansell in 1986? "And look at that!"

1950 - Fangio 1951 - Gonzalez 1952 - Ascari 1953 - Ascari 1954 - Fangio 1955 - Fangio 1956 - Collins 1957 - Fangio 1958 - Moss 1959 - Brooks 1960 - Brabham 1961 - Von Trips 1962 - Hill 1963 - Clark 1964 - Hill 1965 - Clark 1966 - Brabham 1967 - Clark 1968 - Hill 1969 - Stewart 1970 - Rindt 1971 - Stewart 1972 - Fittipaldi 1973 - Stewart 1974 - Regazzoni 1975 - Lauda 1976 - Lauda 1977 - Lauda 1978 - Peterson 1979 - Villeneuve 1980 - Jones 1981 - Reutemann 1982 - Watson 1983 - Prost 1984 - Prost 1985 - Prost 1986 - Mansell 1987 - Piquet 1988 - Senna 1989 - Senna 1990 - Prost 1991 - Senna 1992 - Mansell 1993 - Prost 1994 - Hill 1995 - Schumacher 1996 - Hill 1997 - Villeneuve 1998 - Hakkinen 1999 - Hakkinen 2000 - Schumacher 2001 - Schumacher 2002 - Schumacher 2003 - Raikkonen 2004 - Schumacher 2005 - Alonso 2006 - Alonso 2007 - Hamilton 2008 - Massa 2009 - Button 2010 - Webber 2011 - Vettel 2012 - Alonso 2013 - Vettel 2014 - Hamilton 2015 - Hamilton 2016 - Rosberg 2017 - Hamilton 2018 - Hamilton 2019 - Hamilton 2020 - Hamilton 2021 - Verstappen :) :) :)

What was the year that Mansell should have won it but his tyre blew up? 1986?

Massa engine in Hungary 08? Untouchable that day. Massive swing in the points because of it

For 2012 I’d argue Seb should still get it because of the manner in which it was acquired. It was Given to him by his good friend Michael Schumacher as a parting gift to his young friend. Also Seb had a blinder of a race at Intelagos which is what won him the championship in the end.

I could argue all day why Graham Hill (and Clark too) deserved the 1964 title before Surtees, why Carlos Reutemann clearly deserved it before Piquet in 1981, why John Watson/Pironi/Prost all could have been deserving champions in the strange season of 1982 (Lauda too in fact), Mansell deserved it in 1986 and how the Raikkonen of 2005 was the deserved champion (surprise, surprise...). But let's not go there. No, just reduce it all to who would be world champion if the one who led the most laps that season won it. Asterisks indicates they weren't champion that year in reality. 1950 Farina 1951 Fangio 1952 Ascari 1953 Ascari 1954 Fangio 1955 Fangio 1956 Moss* 1957 Fangio 1958 Moss* 1959 Moss* 1960 Brabham 1961 von Trips* 1962 Graham Hill 1963 Clark 1964 Clark* 1965 Clark 1966 Brabham 1967 Clark* 1968 Stewart* 1969 Stewart 1970 Stewart* 1971 Stewart 1972 Stewart* 1973 Peterson* 1974 Lauda* 1975 Lauda 1976 Hunt 1977 Andretti* 1978 Andretti 1979 Gilles Villeneuve* 1980 Piquet* 1981 Prost* 1982 Prost* 1983 Piquet 1984 Prost* 1985 Senna* 1986 Mansell* 1987 Mansell* 1988 Senna 1989 Senna* 1990 Senna 1991 Senna 1992 Mansell 1993 Prost 1994 Schumacher 1995 Schumacher 1996 Damon Hill 1997 Jacques Villeneuve 1998 Hakkinen 1999 Hakkinen 2000 Schumacher 2001 Schumacher 2002 Schumacher 2003 Schumacher 2004 Schumacher 2005 Raikkonen* 2006 Alonso 2007 Hamilton* 2008 Massa* 2009 Button 2010 Vettel 2011 Vettel 2012 Vettel 2013 Vettel 2014 Hamilton 2015 Hamilton 2016 Hamilton* 2017 Hamilton 2018 Hamilton 2019 Hamilton 2020 Hamilton So, Stirling Moss is suddenly a three time world champion, Jim Clark is a four time world champion (as many as Fangio who has one less), Jackie Stewart wins five straight titles in 1968-1972 and holds the record titles at the time of his retirement, Prost has four titles like in real history but only his 1993 title is the same, Senna wins five titles and matches Stewart's record - and Senna wins his firs title in 1985 with Lotus(!). Mansell is a three time champion rather than just one (for those of you who know your history you'll know that the Adelaide puncture and Hungaroring wheelnut coming off six laps from the finish denied Mansell both titles). Schumacher wins the same seven titles he did. Hamilton wins his rookie title and wins seven straight 2014-2020 and is an eight time world champion. Notice how after 15 seasons (1990-2004) having the most leading driver as champion Kimi Raikkonen broke that trend in 2005. This is also why I believe he deserved the 2005 title. We can also notice how in the last 31 seasons (1990-2020) 27 have been won by the driver who led the most laps that season. 2021 Laps led chart 6/23 races: 1. Max Verstappen 251 laps 2 Lewis Hamilton 84 laps 3. Sergio Perez 21 laps 4. Valtteri Bottas 19 laps 5. Sebastian Vettel 4 laps 6. Charles Leclerc 1 lap So if the "most-laps-led-almost-always-champion" trend is anything to go by it's looking very good for Max Verstappen right now. Hamilton needs to lead more races throughout to catch up... And in this era of the cars rarely breaking down I'd say the most-laps-led is a fairly accurate indication of who's going to be champion.

1988 has to be Senna - 8 wins to 7, 13 poles to 2, 3 DNFs to 2, 7-5 in races they both finished. There was the Round 1 DQ, when he drove amazingly for half the race before being told he shouldn't have started! Plus, he had already won the championship before the final round. All drivers race to the points scoring system in play - we can't use that as a reason for making the champion less 'deserving!'

My tuppence: 1959: Tony Brooks. Went to the wire against Brabham, probably drove better than him but handicapped by the front engined Dinos compared with the rear engined Coopers but it was Brooks being cautious at Watkins Glen and pitting to assess some damage to his car that cost him the championship that year. 1981: Carlos Reutemann. Led the championship most of that season but threw it away at Las Vegas. For the amount of races he won, more than some F1 World Champions, he was champion material. 1983: Alain Prost. If Renault weren't so riven with in-fighting and politics and got really behind Alain he could have won the championship that year. He was more interesting to watch that the points accumulator Piquet. 1986: Nigel Mansell. If only that tyre hadn't blown; Williams pit strategy cost him the championship. 1987: Nigel Mansell. Won more races that year than Prost or Piquet. Honda favouring Piquet and giving him special treatment coupled with the accident in Mexico cost Mansell.

Hamilton lost about 80 points in 2016 due to bad luck, engine issues, people taking him out, and just stuff he couldn't control in general, so he 100% deserves the 2016 title imo. 2010 is Alonso again imo, almost won in the 3rd fastest car which only him again in 2012 has it ever been seen since. 2007 is a tough one for me, Alonso should have won with a race or 2 spare if not for his tactics in Hungary, but then again Hamilton had his tactics there too. It is still funny to this day though how Kimi snuck up and beat them both, just consistency and a late-season charge from Ferrari allowed that

Would love a video comparing each year had it been decided on modern points system

The Prost-Senna stuff and the comment about Spa 2008 were spot on. Tbh, I don't like it when people say "if the FIA didn't disqualify Senna in Suzuka, he would've won the championship" when there were two races after Suzuka but he was already so far behind on points. It would probably have changed his attitude, however - as might losing the 1988 title, so overall, to give Prost 1988 and 1990 but give Senna 1989 seems about right. And anyone that claims Massa deserved the 2008 title is talking shit. The FIA did everything to ensure he won and Hamilton didn't - including the ludicrous Spa penalty - without which, Hamilton would have won the title before Brazil. And that's to say nothing of the grid and race penalties he got for incidents which would be non-stories if it was Massa commiting them.

Nice video, part of a what if series you started before?

Prost should’ve had ‘83 and ‘84. Lost 83 at finale due to decision at Renault to give him exploding engines for the last few races after he announced going to McLaren for 84. , missed out in ‘84 on points countback to Laura who bored the pants off a global audience by trotting round at 85% pace all season.

2007 and 2016 - Hamilton - 2007 if he didn't have the engine issue in Brazil. 2016 - the engine failure, won more races and Rosberg took him out in Spain. And they ended up swapping the engineers half way through for some BS reason.

You're 100% right about 1988

I would go with mansell deserved for 86 and 87

I agree with the 86 Mansell comments. I would have liked to know how 87 would have turned out if Mansell did win in 86... and if he would have gone to ferrari...

I would have changed this: 1950 - Fangio 1962 - Clark 1978 - maybe Peterson 1983 - maybe Prost 1984 - maybe prost 1987 - maybe Mansell 1988 - Senna 1990 - Senna 1994 - Imparcial, love it

When the current point system was brought in I remember someone did a countback of all the previous champions and the only one that changed was 99, Irvine should have been champ, also can't agree about 79, Enzo allegedly told Giles to let Jody pass for the championship because Jody was leaving and it would be Giles turn next. And well 82 could have been either Giles or Didier and finally Masa over Hamilton anytime cause he's just so much nicer:)

1982 - I don't think you should have retconned Villeneuve back to life and then awarded him the title. 1990 - If Senna had won in 1989, it would have meant the incident at Suzuka had never happened and cost him a chance at the title. As a result, 1990 Suzuka doesn't happen as it was payback for 1989.

1989- Prost had a 16 point lead going into Suzuka. Had senna not been disqualified, he would have gone into Adelaide still 7 points down in a race he didn't score points in.

As the Williams fan you are, watching you get closer to 94, I was so surprised to see you put Schumacher haha.

Honestly think one that was glossed over is 2014 - IMO that could've gone to Rosberg, I personally think he had a better season overall, but was let down by the engine failure at Abu Dhabi. The twist of the blade was the double points race though.

To finish first, first you must finish. Need to remember that although I understand the premise of this video

The NASCAR championship format in a nutshell:

Happy birthday sir Jackie Stewart as well today

Lighting is vastly improved. perhaps a bit more fill light to knock down the shadows a bit. Hope the hay fever calms down a bit soon.

1976 is pretty spot on. Lauda was way ahead before Germany, and his crash meant Hunt could catch up Plus had Lauda decided to finish in Fuji he most likely wouldve won regardless. With that said though both Hunt and Lauda deserved the title, and Lauda no doubt would be a 5 time champion at least had his crash never happened.

Personally I have a few changes 94 - Senna lives that’s his 97- Frentzen 99- Irvine 09 - Barichello

I’d have given ‘86 to Nigel due to the tire. ‘97 to Schumacher due to the cross team orders between Williams and McLaren and ‘08 to Massa due to the fact that Singapore should have been retrospectively struck from the record due to crash gate.

1982, personally I don’t think Villeneuve would have took or deserved it, he only had one finish before hid fatal accident, Rosberg or Piquet.

Fangio legit "deserved" the first 8 consecutively. 1950 he won every race he finished while Farina had a p4 finish - Fangio also retired from the lead several times. 1952 he missed due to injury. 1953 he had a horribly underspecced car. Dude won half of the races he entered - he's 100% the GOAT. Note that 52 and 53 accounted for all but 2 of Ascari's career race wins and both of his titles - even the great Ascari couldn't compete with Fangio in proper equipment.

Massa lost in 2008. Senna lost in 1989. Lewis failed to snatch 2016 title. Lauda COULD won 1976 but prefers to lost it than risking being dead. Did they deserve said titles? Absolutely. But did they win it? No. Does that make Lewis in 2008, Prost in 1989, Rosberg in 2016 and Hunt in 1976 not a real champion? Fuck no, they fought for the title and end up winning. People need to accept that their idols don't always have the best of days.

I disagree with Prost in 86 and Lewis in 08, Mansell was robbed by a tyre blowout, while Massa for me was the best driver in 08