worst tyres? if anything depending on the race the bridgestone was the tyre to be on or it was at least on par with the goodyear for most of the year

He didn't drive for Minardi or heaven forbid the short lived Lola team

I agree. Damon's title defence of 1997 should not be on this list.

​@@Scullery_Denizen the list is not rating the drivers skills.... just a bad following year and yes 97 was disappointing for Hill

@@Scullery_Denizen I think it was the time when Frank Williams decided that a driver having won the WDC with his car, he has to leave to prove the world, it was his car, not the driver making the WDC... Thus, Damon went off options I assume...

You didn't mention the worst. Just pull the Rosberg😅

The McLaren was nowhere at the start of 2009. I don't have any defence for Hamilton's actions with the stewards, but considering that his teammate, Kovalainen finished 13th in the WDC that year, coming 5th in the WDC was an impressive feat. You can point out the 10 consecutive non-scoring finishes but after the German GP, Hamilton never took the chequered flag without also being on the podium. That being said, I think the whole video's premise is a bit flawed - most of these "poor" title defenses were not due to the driver losing ability or slacking off - they were due to car issues (either reliability or raw pace)

Wow!You must be a kind of genius or something, I never knew the car had an impact in motorsport. Where can I read your thesis?

I would say: without the right car, you don’t have in your own hands

That’s why Verstappen is a fraud

​@@holdencaulfield8429I'm not reading his thesis if his punctuation is that bad throughout. I dread to think how his reference system looks...

Well when Ferrari won their first Constructors title with Schumacher they weren't the best car on the grid. You must've been born in the 2000's with logic like that, same goes for Kimis world title.

That is a fantastic story

Mansell won the Indycar championship in 1993, not in F1 that year.

Neither driver was fired by Williams. Mansell quit because he found out that they were trying to sign Prost behind his back. Williams was left with egg on his face when he tried to placate him later but found out that Nigel wasn't having any of it. That's how Hill came to be the one to take his seat. Hill wasn't fired either. Williams simply didn't take up the option to renew his contract, an action FW came to admit years later as being one of his biggest mistakes.

I thought this was pretty self explanatory but Damon Hill was competing in F1 in 1997. Nigel Mansell was not competing in F1 in 1993 that's why Damon is on the list but Nigel isn't. Even if Nigel counted as someone eligible for the list he went and won the INDYcar championship in the year after he won the F1 championship and is the only person ever to be the F1 world championship and the INDYcar world champion at the same time so I wouldnt class that as a bad year

And almost won a race

Another fun fact: Honda used John Judd to develop CART IndyCar engines for their short-lived initial run in the series in 1986 & 1987, thanks to the Brabham relationship. They were badged as "Brabham Honda" and "Honda West". Judd continued supplying engines to teams without the Honda name after Honda left at the end of 1987, and did so through 1992.

Wrong... There's no new regulations, just that the Championship was "moved" to a different category Alfa Romeo withdrew from Formula One because they have been running a car that's 13 years old, long overdue for a replacement, which they couldn't afford to make. The organizers were wary that with Alfa gone, Ferrari would have no opposition in Formula One, but BRM promised that in 1952, they will, finally, compete for a full season with their Type 15 V16 car. But BRM co-founder Raymond Mays, knowing that Fangio is now without a ride, wanted to sign him to the team, practically, at all costs. So he decided to withdraw the cars entered for the non-championship Turin GP in April 1952, just so that the BRM V16 could be fettled with in preparation for Fangio's test drive, to make sure it won't have problems (which always plagued the damned car), and convince the Argentinean to sign up to them for the year... Little did they know that their withdrawal in that race at Turin would have far-reaching consequences... At Turin, with the BRM becoming a no-show, Ferrari won. This only confirmed the worst fears of the race organizers. They can't rely on any promise from BRM, as they can't even show up in a race, let alone to fight Ferrari. The French organizers at this point had already decided to run their major races to Formula 2 regulations, as there were more competitors there. And after Turin, the rest of the organizers followed suit; the 1.5L supercharged/4.5L unsupercharged Formula is practically dead. But hey, BRM did manage sign Fangio, and Gonzalez, right? But that's not it. Maserati signed Fangio and Gonzalez for the Formula 2 team, so, Fangio and Gonzalez raced for BRM in Formula 1 races and Maserati for Formula 2 (the one which now counts for the World Driver's Championship). BRM entered Fangio and Stirling Moss at the Ulster Trophy at Dundrod in June 7, and the next day, there's a Formula 2 race at Monza, where Fangio was entered by Maserati. Fangio didn't want to disappoint either team, so, he raced at Dundrod, and also planned to race at Monza, with a plan to catch a plane to Milan, but that plan didn't work out. Ultimately, Fangio hitched a ride with Louis Rosier, who competed at Dundrod, flew with him to Paris, after which, Rosier can only help Fangio by lending him a car. Fangio drove all night from Paris to Monza, just in time for the race. Badly exhausted, Fangio crashed and suffered a neck injury which sidelined him for the rest of the season...

@@jcgabriel1569 I would say switching to engines with only 2 litres instead of the 4,5 litres before counts as "new regulations" but I see your point.

ah but mansell got more pole positions than alain but looking back at it mansell would of done better as the car suited him more

@alexlazebat839 not many poles to go for when Senna was around. Prost got twice as many points as Mansell, which is pretty damning, especially as he was a newcomer to the team.

@@adhominemsis-t.australisensis the team was based around prost nigel got paid $1 million to be no.2

Still scored three wins. Hardly the worst tbh

That was because of the 2005 tyre rule.

He was definitely first best at staying alive.

Schumi finished 3rd in 2005

@@Sam-rl5hs if you only see the standings. Truth is he was out of contention after the first race. Also he took 1st place in usa wirh 6 cars at the starting grid...

@@manoliswec5674 dude a season rankings doesn't change in in one race

@@Sam-rl5hs bro take a minute to see the points gap between 3rd to 5th that year and youll get it

My parents call me Mr Stop & Go F1 but my actual name is Rhys

@@stopgof1 like john rhys davis from sliders! cool! i'm michael, ni ce to meet you.

Well when Ferrari won their first Constructors title with Schumacher they weren't the best car on the grid. You must've been born in the 2000's with logic like that, same goes for Kimis world title. So no you're pretty much wrong. There are more instances too but that would probably break your brain.

@@bzilla1090 majority is about the car. i believe your statements because there's no denying that. but really, f1 is about building the best race car and racing them against other ones in a game of 4d chess. it's not like Indy, and the drivers making the difference rarely happens.

@@metalchap oh it happens buddy, you might be new to F1 to know it matters, that's why laptimes exist, sure the car matters, but when you're finishing the race 12 seconds ahead of your teammate in the same equipment it matters. That's where your talent is measured. When Williams BMW and Ferrari went head to head at the peak of Williams power they basically had the faster car, the BMW V10 like the turbo 4 of the 80's was the most powerful engine on the grid, along with McLaren Mercedes, where McLaren lost the battle was reliability where BMW and Ferrari were impeccable. I can give you hundreds of examples. Just because you have a fast car doesn't mean you win, you can put Stroll and that idiot Sargeant in the Red Bull and they wouldn't win the World Championship. Pretty simple

@@bzilla1090 point taken.

The Honda was much better than the KTM and Aprillia in 2019. But yes the motogp rider has a much greater importance in performance than drivers in F1 today

Hard to equal that when everything above 12 cylinders was banned from F1 shortly there after

#JusticeForNigel

Damon was competing in F1 the year after he won the title Nigel wasn't. Simple as that

@@stopgof1 yes true but his reign was worst because he was in a shit team yet as I said Schumacher in 05 was a poor defence and he was still in a top team

Every damn Brit, apparently.

How else could you say it???

@@RoboticPope Oh, I don't know, maybe the Italian way... Are you this ignorant?

@@needfoolthings Not speaking Italian makes one ignorant? Why didn't you just answer my question instead of attempting to insult?

@@RoboticPope Because you can look it up easier than I can use phonetic alphabet so that you can read it. Ignorant is not an offense.

He absolutely did. He's definitely not the best person in the world, but only complete dunce can deny his driving skills.

You are a dellusional air head if you insult Piquet..

Not the best person in the world, but a great driver This can't be disputed

#stillwecry SIMPLY, SIMPLY LOVELY 🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡🧡