‘There are three certainties in life: death, taxes, and F1 fans arguing about who was the best.’
Fangio, Senna, Schumacher, Hamilton are all legends, but can we compare them? Formula 1 has evolved beyond recognition, making direct comparisons pointless yet irresistible.
From technology to team dominance, too many factors separate each era. So, who is the GOAT? Let’s break it down.
The Evolution of Formula 1: Why Comparisons Are Flawed
1. Technological Advancements
Cars – Today’s F1 machines are hybrid, aerodynamically refined, and data-packed. Fangio raced in a leather cap without seatbelts.
Tyres – Cross-ply rubber vs modern compounds that degrade by design. Different eras, different strategies.
Safety – Early drivers raced with a fire extinguisher as their only hope. Today’s Halo device has already saved lives.
2. Changing Rules & Race Formats
Endurance races vs. modern two-hour sprints.
Refuelling was once key; now it’s banned.
Point systems keep changing, making title tallies misleading.
3. Competition & Team Dominance
Fangio had few full-time rivals; Hamilton and Verstappen faced 20-car grids packed with elite talent.
Some incredible drivers never had a title-winning car – ask Stirling Moss.
Conclusion: No Single ‘Greatest’
Every F1 great dominated their era. But comparing them? That’s like arguing whether a jet or a steam train is faster – interesting but ultimately futile.
‘In the 1950s, F1 drivers were gladiators. Today, they’re finely tuned athletes with personal chefs. Different battlefields, same war.’
