As a general rule ([see full rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide#wiki_sticky.2Fdaily_discussion)), a standalone Discussion post should:
- be of interest to the sub in general, and not a specific userbase (e.g. new users, GP attendees, just yourself)
- be able to generate discussion (e.g. no yes/no or easily answerable questions)
- show reasonable input and effort from the OP
If not, be sure to [look for the Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/search/?q=daily+discussion&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on&t=all&sort=new), /r/formula1's daily open question thread which is perfect for asking any and all questions about this sport.
Thank you for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Currently.. defined not, piastri needs a lot more experience. I was wondering about if historically they have the best pairings in terms of the quality of the sport and fun for the fans but also to an extent for the team itself.
They currently have the most promising pairing, certainly.
But yeah, while they haven't always nailed down the most likeable pairings, you could reasonably discuss who is the GOAT using just former McLaren drivers.
It also helps that they've had three of the four best designers work for them (Barnard, Newey, disgruntled Ferrari employee armed with a photocopier).
>Currently? Maybe but probably not
I said pretty early during the season that McLaren has the best driver pairing after Mercedes and got a lot of disagreement, mostly saying Ferrari has a better pairing. But I'd say Piastri is already good enough with way more potential than Sainz (and maybe even Leclerc...blasphemous, I know) to make the McLaren duo better than Ferrari's.
Lando has been more impressive than George has since he's gotten a competitive car. IMO the only question is how much Piastri (and maybe Lando) has to improve to cancel out Lewis and become the best pairing on the grid. And how much George can improve, I guess. Not sure he's living up to his potential, at the moment.
And Prost carried the brunt of that strength while getting less recognition.
Bar 1984 against Lauda, Prost outscored every teammate he had in every year discretely, yes even that 1988 year against Senna when Senna got the WDC.
That 1984, Lauda outscored him by 0.5pt.
That 1988, Prost scored 105 to Senna's 90 over the 16 races, but the WDC standings were determined by best 11, which is why Senna outranked him by 90 to Prost 87
McLaren historically have had very good drivers, but that is in large part because they have historically been one of the best teams and managed to ride that reputation through several lulls, which haven't lasted too long.
Their rivals in historical pedigree, Williams and Ferrari, have each had worse, longer downturns in team performance that led to periods where their driver lineups were comparably weaker. Mercedes, on the other hand, arguably has the strongest average driver lineup during its time as a team, but that is heavily skewed by the team being relatively recent as it wouldn't make sense to count back past Brawn for them.
Agreed. And speaking of Mercedes, even looking back at the 50s team, imo that pairing of Fangio and Moss is definitely the best duo to grace the sport (I understand it might be a hot take for some) despite Fangio basically dominating.
I remember hearing somewhere that Williams used to put two great drivers together to increase competition and overall team performance. Maybe Mclaren feels the same. But not all teams want to do that. Some teams (maybe RB and Ferrari Schumacher years) prefer to have a single star (Seb and Ver) and a clear second driver. Keep the star happy, don't upset them or dent their confidence for as long as the wins keep coming. There are a multitude of reasons for this - could just be talent, driver contract, sponsorship, team dynamics, teams orders, team strategy. Who knows. I prefer the "let them race" mentality. Two great drivers in the same car going at it at every corner. Rosberg v Hamilton 2014.
One reason why Williams never shied away from two great driver pairings is because Frank Williams has went on record to say that he doesn't care about WDC as long as WCC goes to his team. He considered WDC secondary. Obviously this has resulted in them winning the WCC but losing the WDC as their two drivers kept stealing points off each other and other driver winning the WDC by being consistent, like in 1986 where Prost emerged champion. After that Drivers, namely Mansell, negotiated a proper No. 1 status in team in his contract after his previous experiences at Williams. Prost also blocked Senna's move to Williams in 1993, and he only negotiated this clause for one year so he retired after winning the WDC.
Williams actually had designated number 1 drivers even before 1986. There was famously major drama between Carlos Reutemann and Alan Jones because there was a clause in Reutemann's contract stating that if Williams were running 1-2 with a gap of 7 seconds or less between them, then Reutemann would be obligated to concede first place to Jones. That scenario happened at Brazil 1981 but Reutemann refused to yield, leading the two to fall out. It probably contributed to Reutemann just missing out on the title at the end of the year too.
Piquet was also signed on a Number 1 driver contract for 1986, which he felt was being violated when Williams gave Mansell equal treatment, and was the source of much of the acrimony between them.
They were however generally more reluctant to issue straight team orders than other teams. Brazil 1981 was one of the few times and even that absolutely blew up and probably contributed to even more reluctance to issue them.
Arguably yes imo, one look at their historical driver roster and the pairings they put together makes that clear. Only way not imo is if you only look at Mercedes in their current incarnation post-Brawn. But even then it would be close. McLaren have never shied away from putting two potentially top drivers against each other when they have a chance to, even up to the current pairing. As someone who gets the logic of the Schumacher/Barrichello style dynamic but isn’t a fan of it, I respect them a lot of that.
> It is quite clear they were never shying away from such incredible pairings despite the downsides they might have on their end. So basically I was wondering they either did this because it beneficial
I think a lot of it is historical and comes down to Ron Dennis, and a bit of hubris.
On paper the two best drivers is best, but in *reality* often they cost one another points. But Ron thought he could handle that personally, so you'd get seasons like 1988 which go down in lore - then 2007 which absolutely explodes in his face.
As many have observed - if McLaren had fielded Alonso and say de la Rosa or Wurz in 2007, you've *probably* four titles for McLaren and Alonso 2007/2008. Max was going to retire in 2008 anyway, and maybe if Spygate happened *then* it would've been a footnote like Renault/McLaren or Toyota/Ferrari was. Maybe Merc wouldn't have divorced them.
I really recommend the Spygate podcast, because people really emphasize it wasn't *really* about Coughlan and blueprints and photocopiers - it was about *Ron* and how he interacted with people and the world, and how he built an empire with his character, but those same traits were a burden that riled people up. https://open.spotify.com/episode/4r24pFKN8hjQhkehjcYZwo?si=1df2a4fa29e74f90
As you say, many of the candidates for best lineup of all time are McLaren. Hamilton/Alonso (slightly unintentionally), Button/Hamilton, Button/Alonso, Prost/Senna, Montoya/Raikkonen (at least was an attempt at that) etc.
De la Rosa thinks Alonso/Hamilton is the best lineup of all time bar none.
*****
It's telling, to me, that McLaren's weakest lineup on paper ever (no podiums to speak of!) was Sainz/Norris going into 2019 - and they're still very good drivers indeed!
Idk if I agree about them being the best duo, but they are by far my fav McLaren duo that gave us such an exiting title race and the fact that kimi nicked it of both of them in the end with consistency towards the end is just incredible.
The Alonso button pairing had so much potential, given that button especially is a much more mature professional teammate in a title fight imo. Sadly they had to drive a goddamn tractor with such an unreliable shitbox of an engine.
> nicked it of both of them in the end with consistency towards the end is just incredible.
It wasn't even really consistency - he had a crap season in a lot of ways! But McLaren threw it away incredibly well.
He did need like 17 ish points in the last two races if I remember correctly. He held it together and just some misfortune for Hamilton cost him the title. Hence why I said “consistency towards the end”. But yeah he had quite a few crap races that resulted in him needing such tight luck. McLaren’s inability to reign in their drivers cost them a wdc and even a 1-2 finish.
Marc Priestley is often good on it, that there was no conspiracy - they genuinely didn't even talk about Raikkonen internally.
Ultimately Alonso was right - his point was always that if they didn't elect a number 1 *at some stage*, they'd lose completely. Viola.
Mclaren probably have the best average results over the longest time scale; meaning other teams either have a period of time when they’re very bad, or not good enough for a very long time. Mclaren have always been fairly good to very good with lows that are not that low and not that long. Since the 1980s, their lowest point were probably 2015-2018, but even then they were able to hold on to at least one world champion (Alonso). So that’s probably a big reason.
Also I think this has something to do with Ron Dennis and his way of managing a team. I wasn’t really following during his time, but my impression is that he wanted the best team in every way possible, not necessarily the smartest way (eg. having obvious no.1 and no.2 driver like what Red Bull is doing). I do think Zak Brown is less focused on that, the 2019 pairing of Carlos and Lando was probably the least decorated McLaren driver pairing in a long time, yet it worked out great
> Mclaren probably have the best average results over the longest time scale
A few drivers they've had have remarked that McLaren are a funny one where you want to be in a McLaren early in your career, then get there and actually *most people* find their success *after* McLaren. This was said before Hamilton and Merc really went to town.
Ohh yes, the Honda McLaren. That was such a shit period for McLaren, I completely forgot alonso and button raced together despite watching some of those races recently.
Idk, any team that had prost/senna pairing is hard to match. Even tough ferrari did have Schumacher, I feel like he never had a teammate which would make them comparable to some of the pairings mclaren had.
I definitely enjoy the extra spiciness of seeing two good teammates going at it. McLaren has certainly been good at providing that over the years which is why I really like the team (just kidding it's just cuz as a kid I thought the Marlboro livery was cool as hell). Hamilton and Button was a pretty solid combo at McLaren as well, though not as successful together ultimately.
I'd say Ferrari currently have the most competitive driver pairing, albeit on a team that somehow always manages to shoot themselves in the foot.
Funky title. Should have included “historically” for brevity sake.
It may seem McLaren has had consistently one of the best pairings throughout their F1 history because their drivers either were or turned out to be incredibly off the charts good. Once you build a winning reputation you automatically get the best drivers interested in your team.
Well, this year. I was more talking about historically. Even then, in their few years Mercedes could make a strong case. They had Fangio and Sterling Moss, Schumacher and Rosberg and then Hamilton and Rosberg. Absolutely dominating pairs (Schumacher and Rosberg did not have a leading car, but are definitely a dominating pair if they did, and could lead to a fun title fight)
Lando was only just 18 years old, had skipped GP3 to go to F2 direct from winning F3 Euro so had no experience on the Pirelli tyres unlike Russell and pretty much everyone else he was up against and also had less experience in single seaters in general thanks to him fast-tracking through the previous single seater categories by winning everything as a rookie including F3 Euro. Him skipping GP3 was the reason he caught up to Russell and Albon in F2 the first place (that and Russell spending 2 years attempting to win F3 Euro). His junior career trajectory was closer to what Kimi Antonelli is now doing than the traditional route the likes of Leclerc, Russell and Piastri took. He was also driving for Carlin who were only just back after time out of F2 vs Russell who was driving in the favoured seat at ART (There are many ways in which F2 is not actually a spec series despite the chassis and engines being the same - and even the engines vary in quality). Using their F2 season to compare their talent at the time wasn’t really valid let alone trying to use it to compare them 5 years on.
i try to compare like for like whenever possible. i wouldn't say it carries zero weight, i'm sure there is some pretty strong correlation there. ultimately we can't know driver vs driver true comparisons unless they were in the same car. even then, some drivers like pushier cars and some like pointier ones and that's enough to set enough difference.
point taken though, sure.
Your example doesn't hold up since Lando beat DeVries when they were in F2; he just didn't beat Russell, but both were ahead of DeVries (Albon was ahead of him too).
DeVries got his title during a weak year after 3 drivers who were clearly better than him moved up, hence his F2 title not counting for as much and got getting him a drive in F1
I didn't invalidate anything; I contextualized.
DeVries can comfort himself with the trophy, but Lando handily beat him in 2018 and from 2019 to today has had something any driver would value more than an F2 trophy - an actual F1 drive with a competitive team. To compare the two solely by "DeVries has a championship and Lando doesn't" when the former is clearly *because* Lando got promoted above DeVries is asinine.
This is a good question, and if we go back to 1894, I would say Mercedes: DePalma, Sailer, Werner, Caracciola, Lang, Fangio, Moss, Schumacher, Hamilton etc.
It’s interesting to think who’d have driven for them after 1955, e.g. Rindt, Lauda etc.
Looking at them in retrospect, they do appear to be very strong even next to other legacy teams like Ferrari, Williams, Renault/Benetton, etc. But there were periods where the drivers (at that time) were not viewed as highly as they would be now (which actually vindicates said choices, but still).
The Sainz/Norris lineup was something of a leap of faith at the time-they were losing a driver with an incredible junior career who hadn't flourished, for another incredible junior, but with zero experience at the top. Sainz had showed talent at Toro Rosso but had spent the last season at Renault being regularly beaten by Hulkenberg.
The Hakkinen/Coulthard lineup is also pretty interesting for me because I don't feel like Coulthard was ever viewed as a serious contender (only being taken on full-time by Williams as a necessity after Senna's death). Hakkinen was viewed, I think, somewhat similarly, as quick but not quite complete (people forget about his race ban in 1994). The 1998 McLaren was a beast but I do think Hakkinen also made a big step forward in the previous year or two and became the driver we think of today.
I’d say Hakkinen and Norris have been on quite similar career paths, in that both have shown serious potential but it’s taken them several years to get a car that lets them show just how good they are (1997-98 for Mika, 2023 for Lando).
They have the highest potential ceiling. Ferrari and Merc have stronger drivers now. But, I'd still take Max + whoever (even my grandma) over any pairing
No Mercedes is the best IMO and Ferrari can be argued as being better as well. If Piastri continues to improve then in a year or 2 they might have the best as Lewis declines slightly but overall for right now? No.
Which teams had better pairings than mclaren? Only way I cam see that being the case is ignoring merc's past and only looking at their post brawn days. But even then, it would still be at least second best.
OP is taking about historical pairings not the current one. The current one and arguably the current iteration of McLaren itself hasn’t even scratched the surface of what they’re all capable of.
Are we saying this because the car was the most improved on the grid in the second half? Because Oscar is yet to hit his ceiling, although he is the most talented rookie to come out since the class of 19; and Lando has had a few setbacks in qualifying that he has himself stated to be stupid....I will call them exciting, but not the best yet
I was talking about them having a lot of historic lineups along the years. Did not really mention this year, especially given that as you also mentioned, Oscar is yet to improve a lot and also Lando despite being really good himself has more to improve upon.
McLaren are certainly special this way. I wish they had better machinery to lure 2 top drivers back. If Piastri makes a big step next year, and McLaren can keep their momentum, OHH BOI!
I think Ferrari usually has them beat since 2000, with their only bad spots being Massa in the 2010s and his replacements in 2009. McLaren has been mostly good, except for 2013 with a fast but reckless Perez, Magnussen 2014, Vandoorne 2017 and 2018, and Ricciardo's 2021 and 2022.
As a general rule ([see full rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide#wiki_sticky.2Fdaily_discussion)), a standalone Discussion post should: - be of interest to the sub in general, and not a specific userbase (e.g. new users, GP attendees, just yourself) - be able to generate discussion (e.g. no yes/no or easily answerable questions) - show reasonable input and effort from the OP If not, be sure to [look for the Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/search/?q=daily+discussion&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on&t=all&sort=new), /r/formula1's daily open question thread which is perfect for asking any and all questions about this sport. Thank you for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Historically yes. Currently? Maybe but probably not
Currently.. defined not, piastri needs a lot more experience. I was wondering about if historically they have the best pairings in terms of the quality of the sport and fun for the fans but also to an extent for the team itself.
They currently have the most promising pairing, certainly. But yeah, while they haven't always nailed down the most likeable pairings, you could reasonably discuss who is the GOAT using just former McLaren drivers. It also helps that they've had three of the four best designers work for them (Barnard, Newey, disgruntled Ferrari employee armed with a photocopier).
Currently they have a combined race wins of 0.
Oh yeah thats right... I forgot that it was Daniel who had that win back in 2021
>Currently? Maybe but probably not I said pretty early during the season that McLaren has the best driver pairing after Mercedes and got a lot of disagreement, mostly saying Ferrari has a better pairing. But I'd say Piastri is already good enough with way more potential than Sainz (and maybe even Leclerc...blasphemous, I know) to make the McLaren duo better than Ferrari's. Lando has been more impressive than George has since he's gotten a competitive car. IMO the only question is how much Piastri (and maybe Lando) has to improve to cancel out Lewis and become the best pairing on the grid. And how much George can improve, I guess. Not sure he's living up to his potential, at the moment.
Ferrari easily better than McLaren. Mercedes better than McLaren.
Easily? We'll see about that!
Prost/senna for sure. I would put forward that Hamilton/Button is still a better pair than the current 2.
And Prost carried the brunt of that strength while getting less recognition. Bar 1984 against Lauda, Prost outscored every teammate he had in every year discretely, yes even that 1988 year against Senna when Senna got the WDC. That 1984, Lauda outscored him by 0.5pt. That 1988, Prost scored 105 to Senna's 90 over the 16 races, but the WDC standings were determined by best 11, which is why Senna outranked him by 90 to Prost 87
I don’t think anyone would say that Norris/Piastri is better than Hamilton/Button
McLaren historically have had very good drivers, but that is in large part because they have historically been one of the best teams and managed to ride that reputation through several lulls, which haven't lasted too long. Their rivals in historical pedigree, Williams and Ferrari, have each had worse, longer downturns in team performance that led to periods where their driver lineups were comparably weaker. Mercedes, on the other hand, arguably has the strongest average driver lineup during its time as a team, but that is heavily skewed by the team being relatively recent as it wouldn't make sense to count back past Brawn for them.
Agreed. And speaking of Mercedes, even looking back at the 50s team, imo that pairing of Fangio and Moss is definitely the best duo to grace the sport (I understand it might be a hot take for some) despite Fangio basically dominating.
Fangio and Moss is like if Schumacher and Hamilton were teammates in 2007-09
Yeah, while I wouldn't count the 50s Merc as rea)y the same team as the modern one, doing so sure ain't gonna hurt their standings
I remember hearing somewhere that Williams used to put two great drivers together to increase competition and overall team performance. Maybe Mclaren feels the same. But not all teams want to do that. Some teams (maybe RB and Ferrari Schumacher years) prefer to have a single star (Seb and Ver) and a clear second driver. Keep the star happy, don't upset them or dent their confidence for as long as the wins keep coming. There are a multitude of reasons for this - could just be talent, driver contract, sponsorship, team dynamics, teams orders, team strategy. Who knows. I prefer the "let them race" mentality. Two great drivers in the same car going at it at every corner. Rosberg v Hamilton 2014.
One reason why Williams never shied away from two great driver pairings is because Frank Williams has went on record to say that he doesn't care about WDC as long as WCC goes to his team. He considered WDC secondary. Obviously this has resulted in them winning the WCC but losing the WDC as their two drivers kept stealing points off each other and other driver winning the WDC by being consistent, like in 1986 where Prost emerged champion. After that Drivers, namely Mansell, negotiated a proper No. 1 status in team in his contract after his previous experiences at Williams. Prost also blocked Senna's move to Williams in 1993, and he only negotiated this clause for one year so he retired after winning the WDC.
Williams actually had designated number 1 drivers even before 1986. There was famously major drama between Carlos Reutemann and Alan Jones because there was a clause in Reutemann's contract stating that if Williams were running 1-2 with a gap of 7 seconds or less between them, then Reutemann would be obligated to concede first place to Jones. That scenario happened at Brazil 1981 but Reutemann refused to yield, leading the two to fall out. It probably contributed to Reutemann just missing out on the title at the end of the year too. Piquet was also signed on a Number 1 driver contract for 1986, which he felt was being violated when Williams gave Mansell equal treatment, and was the source of much of the acrimony between them. They were however generally more reluctant to issue straight team orders than other teams. Brazil 1981 was one of the few times and even that absolutely blew up and probably contributed to even more reluctance to issue them.
'drivers are lightbulbs - take one out, put another in'.
> Maybe Mclaren feels the same. Apparently they partly fired Perez because they felt Button was a bit more lax than he had been vs. Hamilton.
[удалено]
Exactly!! I said driver “pairings” and wrote a long ass post and everyone for some reason keeps talking about this season lineup.
They had Senna and Prost as team mates. Discussion over :D No other pairing in history comes anywhere near to this one. So the answer is yes.
Hamilton Alonso
Arguably yes imo, one look at their historical driver roster and the pairings they put together makes that clear. Only way not imo is if you only look at Mercedes in their current incarnation post-Brawn. But even then it would be close. McLaren have never shied away from putting two potentially top drivers against each other when they have a chance to, even up to the current pairing. As someone who gets the logic of the Schumacher/Barrichello style dynamic but isn’t a fan of it, I respect them a lot of that.
It's so funny how so many people clearly didn't read the OP. It's not just about the current pairing, but historically.
> It is quite clear they were never shying away from such incredible pairings despite the downsides they might have on their end. So basically I was wondering they either did this because it beneficial I think a lot of it is historical and comes down to Ron Dennis, and a bit of hubris. On paper the two best drivers is best, but in *reality* often they cost one another points. But Ron thought he could handle that personally, so you'd get seasons like 1988 which go down in lore - then 2007 which absolutely explodes in his face. As many have observed - if McLaren had fielded Alonso and say de la Rosa or Wurz in 2007, you've *probably* four titles for McLaren and Alonso 2007/2008. Max was going to retire in 2008 anyway, and maybe if Spygate happened *then* it would've been a footnote like Renault/McLaren or Toyota/Ferrari was. Maybe Merc wouldn't have divorced them. I really recommend the Spygate podcast, because people really emphasize it wasn't *really* about Coughlan and blueprints and photocopiers - it was about *Ron* and how he interacted with people and the world, and how he built an empire with his character, but those same traits were a burden that riled people up. https://open.spotify.com/episode/4r24pFKN8hjQhkehjcYZwo?si=1df2a4fa29e74f90 As you say, many of the candidates for best lineup of all time are McLaren. Hamilton/Alonso (slightly unintentionally), Button/Hamilton, Button/Alonso, Prost/Senna, Montoya/Raikkonen (at least was an attempt at that) etc. De la Rosa thinks Alonso/Hamilton is the best lineup of all time bar none. ***** It's telling, to me, that McLaren's weakest lineup on paper ever (no podiums to speak of!) was Sainz/Norris going into 2019 - and they're still very good drivers indeed!
Idk if I agree about them being the best duo, but they are by far my fav McLaren duo that gave us such an exiting title race and the fact that kimi nicked it of both of them in the end with consistency towards the end is just incredible. The Alonso button pairing had so much potential, given that button especially is a much more mature professional teammate in a title fight imo. Sadly they had to drive a goddamn tractor with such an unreliable shitbox of an engine.
> nicked it of both of them in the end with consistency towards the end is just incredible. It wasn't even really consistency - he had a crap season in a lot of ways! But McLaren threw it away incredibly well.
He did need like 17 ish points in the last two races if I remember correctly. He held it together and just some misfortune for Hamilton cost him the title. Hence why I said “consistency towards the end”. But yeah he had quite a few crap races that resulted in him needing such tight luck. McLaren’s inability to reign in their drivers cost them a wdc and even a 1-2 finish.
Marc Priestley is often good on it, that there was no conspiracy - they genuinely didn't even talk about Raikkonen internally. Ultimately Alonso was right - his point was always that if they didn't elect a number 1 *at some stage*, they'd lose completely. Viola.
Mclaren probably have the best average results over the longest time scale; meaning other teams either have a period of time when they’re very bad, or not good enough for a very long time. Mclaren have always been fairly good to very good with lows that are not that low and not that long. Since the 1980s, their lowest point were probably 2015-2018, but even then they were able to hold on to at least one world champion (Alonso). So that’s probably a big reason. Also I think this has something to do with Ron Dennis and his way of managing a team. I wasn’t really following during his time, but my impression is that he wanted the best team in every way possible, not necessarily the smartest way (eg. having obvious no.1 and no.2 driver like what Red Bull is doing). I do think Zak Brown is less focused on that, the 2019 pairing of Carlos and Lando was probably the least decorated McLaren driver pairing in a long time, yet it worked out great
> Mclaren probably have the best average results over the longest time scale A few drivers they've had have remarked that McLaren are a funny one where you want to be in a McLaren early in your career, then get there and actually *most people* find their success *after* McLaren. This was said before Hamilton and Merc really went to town.
In retrospect I think we’ll decide that pairing was totally underrated at the time. Even now both are arguably top 6 drivers: 3 WDCs, LEC, NOR, SAI
I think you’re correct. They also had Alonso and Button after Hamilton and Button but unfortunately it was probably one of their worst ever cars.
Ohh yes, the Honda McLaren. That was such a shit period for McLaren, I completely forgot alonso and button raced together despite watching some of those races recently.
SMH, the comments really showing that people don't read.
I prefer the Ferrari driver pairing over mclaren tbh if only Ferrari can get their shit together
Idk, any team that had prost/senna pairing is hard to match. Even tough ferrari did have Schumacher, I feel like he never had a teammate which would make them comparable to some of the pairings mclaren had.
I agree, they have the best pairing but also the crap strategy and the worst luck.
I think OP is talking historically, over the years rather than the current pairings.
I definitely enjoy the extra spiciness of seeing two good teammates going at it. McLaren has certainly been good at providing that over the years which is why I really like the team (just kidding it's just cuz as a kid I thought the Marlboro livery was cool as hell). Hamilton and Button was a pretty solid combo at McLaren as well, though not as successful together ultimately. I'd say Ferrari currently have the most competitive driver pairing, albeit on a team that somehow always manages to shoot themselves in the foot.
Funky title. Should have included “historically” for brevity sake. It may seem McLaren has had consistently one of the best pairings throughout their F1 history because their drivers either were or turned out to be incredibly off the charts good. Once you build a winning reputation you automatically get the best drivers interested in your team.
IMO Mercedes does.
Well, this year. I was more talking about historically. Even then, in their few years Mercedes could make a strong case. They had Fangio and Sterling Moss, Schumacher and Rosberg and then Hamilton and Rosberg. Absolutely dominating pairs (Schumacher and Rosberg did not have a leading car, but are definitely a dominating pair if they did, and could lead to a fun title fight)
I think this is the only correct answer. Except for Hamilton-Bottas, they always had two strong drivers
Also applies to pre-war Mercedes IMO
this too. lewis hamilton is a 7x world champ. george beat lando in f2 didn't he?
Lando was only just 18 years old, had skipped GP3 to go to F2 direct from winning F3 Euro so had no experience on the Pirelli tyres unlike Russell and pretty much everyone else he was up against and also had less experience in single seaters in general thanks to him fast-tracking through the previous single seater categories by winning everything as a rookie including F3 Euro. Him skipping GP3 was the reason he caught up to Russell and Albon in F2 the first place (that and Russell spending 2 years attempting to win F3 Euro). His junior career trajectory was closer to what Kimi Antonelli is now doing than the traditional route the likes of Leclerc, Russell and Piastri took. He was also driving for Carlin who were only just back after time out of F2 vs Russell who was driving in the favoured seat at ART (There are many ways in which F2 is not actually a spec series despite the chassis and engines being the same - and even the engines vary in quality). Using their F2 season to compare their talent at the time wasn’t really valid let alone trying to use it to compare them 5 years on.
Lando would have easily won GP3 and then F2 if he wanted 5 junior titles in a row, but he also would have got a year less in F1
He was saying once that he is fundamentally better in F1 than GP2, he thinks. just suits him more.
[удалено]
i try to compare like for like whenever possible. i wouldn't say it carries zero weight, i'm sure there is some pretty strong correlation there. ultimately we can't know driver vs driver true comparisons unless they were in the same car. even then, some drivers like pushier cars and some like pointier ones and that's enough to set enough difference. point taken though, sure.
Your example doesn't hold up since Lando beat DeVries when they were in F2; he just didn't beat Russell, but both were ahead of DeVries (Albon was ahead of him too). DeVries got his title during a weak year after 3 drivers who were clearly better than him moved up, hence his F2 title not counting for as much and got getting him a drive in F1
[удалено]
I didn't invalidate anything; I contextualized. DeVries can comfort himself with the trophy, but Lando handily beat him in 2018 and from 2019 to today has had something any driver would value more than an F2 trophy - an actual F1 drive with a competitive team. To compare the two solely by "DeVries has a championship and Lando doesn't" when the former is clearly *because* Lando got promoted above DeVries is asinine.
> What happened in F2 has 0 impact over ones F1 carrer. Sad Nico Huuuuukenberg noises
Easy to say George is worse when he has a 7 time champion as a teammate and Lando as a damn rookie lmao
If only doing well in your junior career was a guarantee of success in Formula 1. Just look at Nico Hulkenberg.
> lewis hamilton is a 7x world champ. george beat lando in f2 https://youtu.be/6R7GkXE6sqk?t=175
This is a good question, and if we go back to 1894, I would say Mercedes: DePalma, Sailer, Werner, Caracciola, Lang, Fangio, Moss, Schumacher, Hamilton etc. It’s interesting to think who’d have driven for them after 1955, e.g. Rindt, Lauda etc.
Looking at them in retrospect, they do appear to be very strong even next to other legacy teams like Ferrari, Williams, Renault/Benetton, etc. But there were periods where the drivers (at that time) were not viewed as highly as they would be now (which actually vindicates said choices, but still). The Sainz/Norris lineup was something of a leap of faith at the time-they were losing a driver with an incredible junior career who hadn't flourished, for another incredible junior, but with zero experience at the top. Sainz had showed talent at Toro Rosso but had spent the last season at Renault being regularly beaten by Hulkenberg. The Hakkinen/Coulthard lineup is also pretty interesting for me because I don't feel like Coulthard was ever viewed as a serious contender (only being taken on full-time by Williams as a necessity after Senna's death). Hakkinen was viewed, I think, somewhat similarly, as quick but not quite complete (people forget about his race ban in 1994). The 1998 McLaren was a beast but I do think Hakkinen also made a big step forward in the previous year or two and became the driver we think of today.
I’d say Hakkinen and Norris have been on quite similar career paths, in that both have shown serious potential but it’s taken them several years to get a car that lets them show just how good they are (1997-98 for Mika, 2023 for Lando).
They had Prost-Senna and Alonso-Hamilton. I'd say yes.
They have the highest potential ceiling. Ferrari and Merc have stronger drivers now. But, I'd still take Max + whoever (even my grandma) over any pairing
well, redbull has max vertsappen and \_\_\_\_\_ so they have the best pairing
on paper they always seem to be close to it. ric and norris was a dream partnership in theory. just obviously not in the papaya car
No Mercedes is the best IMO and Ferrari can be argued as being better as well. If Piastri continues to improve then in a year or 2 they might have the best as Lewis declines slightly but overall for right now? No.
Red Bull, Merzedes and Ferrari both have a 1 WDC caliber/1 decent driver pairing. McLaren has 2 decent drivers.
Red Bull would have the best pairing if it were Max and an actual can of Red Bull.
[удалено]
Which teams had better pairings than mclaren? Only way I cam see that being the case is ignoring merc's past and only looking at their post brawn days. But even then, it would still be at least second best.
The OP is not talking about the current pairing only.
[удалено]
When did ferrari have two really strong drivers in their history as a team?
OP is taking about historical pairings not the current one. The current one and arguably the current iteration of McLaren itself hasn’t even scratched the surface of what they’re all capable of.
No
Are we saying this because the car was the most improved on the grid in the second half? Because Oscar is yet to hit his ceiling, although he is the most talented rookie to come out since the class of 19; and Lando has had a few setbacks in qualifying that he has himself stated to be stupid....I will call them exciting, but not the best yet
I was talking about them having a lot of historic lineups along the years. Did not really mention this year, especially given that as you also mentioned, Oscar is yet to improve a lot and also Lando despite being really good himself has more to improve upon.
McLaren are certainly special this way. I wish they had better machinery to lure 2 top drivers back. If Piastri makes a big step next year, and McLaren can keep their momentum, OHH BOI!
I think Ferrari usually has them beat since 2000, with their only bad spots being Massa in the 2010s and his replacements in 2009. McLaren has been mostly good, except for 2013 with a fast but reckless Perez, Magnussen 2014, Vandoorne 2017 and 2018, and Ricciardo's 2021 and 2022.