FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[McLaren Fan]

First, I'm not entirely sure in which section this thread should go. It's partly about Formula One's history, but many of the teams that will be talked about are still racing. The moderators can have a think about it and move it if they so choose.

I thought it would be an interesting to ask who Formula One fans believe is the greatest team in the sport's history. Personally, I feel there has been adequate discussion about who is the greatest driver ever and that this is unfair. Formula One is a team sport after all. The teams provide the drivers with the personnel etc. that they require to race and, just as there can be debate about drivers' skills, engineers et al. have skills as well and it would be interesting to get fans' views on them. Moreover, not every Formula One fan necessarily supports a driver. Although there are drivers I have very much liked, my main desire (with the exception of Senna) is to see McLaren be fastest in testing, practice and the race, have the best strategy in qualifying to allow the team to dominate every race and win both championships.

Anyway, to business. As much as I would love to say McLaren were the greatest team, I've got to be impartial. For me, Lotus are the greatest team in Formula One. Even though the team is long gone and had not been a serious force in Formula One since the early 1980s, the amount of innovation they brought to the sport is unrivalled. Even if some of the theories and ideas were not exclusively Colin Chapman's, he used them much better than anybody else. Formula One is what it is today because of Lotus' innovation. They have also had some top drivers, not least the iconic Jim Clark. 13 championships over 489 races is a record not to be sniffed at as well.

Second, for me, would be McLaren. Although perhaps not quite as revolutionary as Lotus, the team has contributed a hell of a lot on the technological front. McLaren also have a pretty decent record in other forms of motorsport as well. Had Bruce McLaren not died, it would no doubt have been even better. He had plans to produce road cars, for instance, but sadly they died with him. Bruce McLaren's story is also pretty uplifting as well. Despite not coming from a particularly wealthy family and been disabled for some of his life, he was a very good racing driver, a fantastic engineer and got his own racing team going. I would say the team is very iconic as well. When you think of the glory days of Formula One, you think of the Senna-Prost war etc. and in terms of iconic drivers you cannot beat Ayrton Senna. In terms of success, 22 titles and 162 (+) wins from 649 Grands Prix speaks for itself.

[FerrariFan63]

By default the greatest formula one team ever would be the one with the largest number of championships, race wins, etc. There would need to be strong reasons not to go for this default. I can't see such reasons.

[McLaren Fan]

By default the greatest formula one team ever would be the one with the largest number of championships, race wins, etc. There would need to be strong reasons not to go for this default. I can't see such reasons.

Well you're as blind as a bat then. I should seek medical help if I were you.

[welshie]

By default the greatest formula one team ever would be the one with the largest number of championships, race wins, etc. There would need to be strong reasons not to go for this default. I can't see such reasons.

That would only be valid if all teams had been in F1 for exactly the same period of time. Which they haven't

[FerrariFan63]

By default the greatest formula one team ever would be the one with the largest number of championships, race wins, etc. There would need to be strong reasons not to go for this default. I can't see such reasons.

Well you're as blind as a bat then. I should seek medical help if I were you.

Well that's constructive comment from you then.

Fundamentally, if you want to talk about "The Greatest Formula One Team Ever", then you need some sort of objective measure of greatness. The purpose of being in F1 is to win races and championships.

You can talk about innovation, but how do you measure this objectively and accurately? One person's stunning innovation is another person's boring development. And innovation is not always productive. The Life W12 engine was innovative, as was the BRM H16 engine. And Tyrrell's six wheeler. But they didn't win any championships.

If you quote highly subjective criteria for evaluating "greatest", then what you end up with is "my greatest formula one team", a personal choice. And the more you stray from the fundamental aim of F1, winning races and championships, the less your reasoning supports a claim of "The Greatest Formula One Team Ever", but should really be used to support a claim of (e.g.) "The most innovative formula one team ever". Something different.

It is particularly important to choose objective criteria to judge greatness in a situation where personal biases and prejudices would otherwise be the dominant factor in affecting people's claims and choices. E.g. there is no way you would ever say that Ferrari was the greatest team ever even if they'd won every championship and every race up to now. And that's more about you than about Ferrari and its' place in F1 history.

[FerrariFan63]

By default the greatest formula one team ever would be the one with the largest number of championships, race wins, etc. There would need to be strong reasons not to go for this default. I can't see such reasons.

That would only be valid if all teams had been in F1 for exactly the same period of time. Which they haven't

Disagreed. Greatness is something that is built up over time.

But what happens if we only consider the number of race wins and championships in the last ten years then? All the top teams have been in F1 for that time?

Or, what happens if we only consider the time when both Ferrari and McLaren have been in the championship?

Ferrari: 14 Constructors', 9 Drivers' = 23 championships in total

McLaren: 8 Constructors', 12 Drivers' = 20 championships in total

So somehow we should ignore Ferrari's six drivers' championships and two constructors' championships before McLaren entered the sport, because somehow this doesn't contribute to their "greatness"?

[welshie]

I never mentioned McLaren. I never said Ferrari weren't a great team. I never said Ferrari weren't the most successful F1 team in history. So try not to get too pent up too quickly.

I personally don't think one team can be legitimately named as the greatest, but in my own opinion it would be Lotus. However there have been many great teams throughout history

[FerrariFan63]

I never mentioned McLaren. I never said Ferrari weren't a great team. I never said Ferrari weren't the most successful F1 team in history. So try not to get too pent up too quickly.

Given your followup to my post, what other conclusions are there? I mentioned numbers of championships and races, and you only mentioned time. And, yes, you never mentioned McLaren. But if you're talking about the counts of championships and races not being valid because not all teams have been in F1 for the same time, then it's perfectly valid to consider the records of other teams, McLaren and Williams being the obvious contenders.

I personally don't think one team can be legitimately named as the greatest, but in my own opinion it would be Lotus. However there have been many great teams throughout history

Why would you say Lotus? Which definition of "great" leads to this conclusion?

[McLaren Fan]

By default the greatest formula one team ever would be the one with the largest number of championships, race wins, etc. There would need to be strong reasons not to go for this default. I can't see such reasons.

Well you're as blind as a bat then. I should seek medical help if I were you.

Well that's constructive comment from you then.

Your first comment on this thread was hardly conducive of a discussion on the matter.

You can talk about innovation, but how do you measure this objectively and accurately? One person's stunning innovation is another person's boring development.

Relativism simply strangles intelligent debate on any matter. The world functions on basic, intrinsic principles. But feel free to take a relativist position: it means I'm correct too, for all truths are relative to each individual.

...the more you stray from the fundamental aim of F1, winning races and championships, the less your reasoning supports a claim of "The Greatest Formula One Team Ever", but should really be used to support a claim of (e.g.) "The most innovative formula one team ever". Something different.

That statement presupposes there is more than one aim in Formula One, which is indeed true. For example, the sport is also meant to be about the best engineers in motorsport producing the best technology in motorsport. I don't regard other teams with a large bank balance copying the intellectual property of somebody else as equal to or better than actually coming up with the idea in the first instance.

Innovation can be good and bad, but more often than not it's the former. Just because ideas aren't successful does not mean they are bad. Avant-garde ideas can take time and money to perfect. The Renault RS10 only won a single Grand Prix, but it was very apparent that with some more research etc. normally-aspirated engines would soon become obsolete.

It is particularly important to choose objective criteria to judge greatness in a situation where personal biases and prejudices would otherwise be the dominant factor in affecting people's claims and choices. E.g. there is no way you would ever say that Ferrari was the greatest team ever even if they'd won every championship and every race up to now. And that's more about you than about Ferrari and its' place in F1 history.

That's a pretty pathetic remark to make because it's just so easy to say, no matter how untrue you know it may be. There is a difference between judgement and bias. If I were as biased as you suggest, why did I not claim McLaren were the greatest Formula One team ever and type out an incredibly long panegyric? Further, the remark exposes a contradiction in your logic: your relativist position means that my view, however incorrect it is to you, is equally correct nonetheless.

[McLaren Fan]

Or, what happens if we only consider the time when both Ferrari and McLaren have been in the championship?

Ferrari: 14 Constructors', 9 Drivers' = 23 championships in total

McLaren: 8 Constructors', 12 Drivers' = 20 championships in total

So somehow we should ignore Ferrari's six drivers' championships and two constructors' championships before McLaren entered the sport, because somehow this doesn't contribute to their "greatness"?

Well, again, that argument presupposes that Formula One revolves around only the number of titles you have. Although an important factor, on its own it is much too narrow.

[bud]

quality not quantity

by Ferrarifans measure Stirling Moss is s***!

[cap-dude]

^^Too true

For me, its either Lotus or Williams. Lotus for the parternship that was Colin Chapman and Jim Clark. Unfortunatly, reliability lost Lotus a lot of races back in the day, but when the finished, Clark always made sure it was at the front, and Chapman always made the car that could do it. Its just sad that Lotus aren't around anymore. Truly one of the greatest racing teams ever, and I can only hope we'll see them back again one day.

Williams as well deserves a mention. The 3rd most successful team in history, and its still a private owned team and proud of it. Williams really exist, simply to race in F1, and its great that no matter what, today they're still fighting in F1. They're not as fast as most of us would like, but thats racing unfortnatly. But not only that, what Williams has achieved, they've done so in such a short time. In only they're 4th year of racing, they won the world championship. Today, if a team did that, could you imagine peoples reaction to it. During the 90's Williams were dominant.

Really, Ferrari have won the most championships. So I think its unfair not to say, they are a supreme team. You don't win 16 championships for no reason, do you.

[welshie]

^^Too true

For me, its either Lotus or Williams. Lotus for the parternship that was Colin Chapman and Jim Clark. Unfortunatly, reliability lost Lotus a lot of races back in the day, but when the finished, Clark always made sure it was at the front, and Chapman always made the car that could do it. Its just sad that Lotus aren't around anymore. Truly one of the greatest racing teams ever, and I can only hope we'll see them back again one day.

Williams as well deserves a mention. The 3rd most successful team in history, and its still a private owned team and proud of it. Williams really exist, simply to race in F1, and its great that no matter what, today they're still fighting in F1. They're not as fast as most of us would like, but thats racing unfortnatly. But not only that, what Williams has achieved, they've done so in such a short time. In only they're 4th year of racing, they won the world championship. Today, if a team did that, could you imagine peoples reaction to it. During the 90's Williams were dominant.

Really, Ferrari have won the most championships. So I think its unfair not to say, they are a supreme team. You don't win 16 championships for no reason, do you.

[billindenver]

Greatest ever. Well, if you are looking for the greatest of any racing team...regardless of which venue, there is only one criteria in my mind. Racing is about winning...and winning is the only reason for racing to exist. So, the greatest team is simply the team who has won the highest PERCENTAGE of the races they have entered. That way a team who hasn't been around as long as Ferrari is still judged on their particular performance over time. I am afraid I don't care enough to do the research on which team owns the title of most winning team of all time....I will leave that to others.

I would also casually glance at which team the drivers all strive to be on...but then that is a right now best team, not an all time best team. In this case, however, I suspect they would be one and the same and probably wearing red.

Quality over quantity is a great measure if you are judging women, or movies, or the greatest car manufacturer....but when judging a sport whose entire purpose is to win races.....quantity is exactly what it is all about, there is no such thing as quality. Besides, who is to say which championship has more quality than another? Oh...the homers who worship a particular brand I assume. But if objective.....wins over entries is the only judge. If you aint first...you're last.

[bud]

Bill out of curiosity for example who would you call the greatest NBA Basketballer of all time? I and many say Michael Jordan, but his stats are not he greatest.....