Stirling Moss: Vettel is a modern day Fangio
18 February, 2012
Sir Stirling Moss
Feb 18 (Reuters) Red Bull’s double world champion Sebastian Vettel reminds Stirling Moss of Juan Manuel Fangio, the Argentine all-time great who denied the Briton a Formula One title with his dominance in the 1950s.
Sebastian Vettel
Speaking to reporters at a Motor Sport magazine Hall of Fame event, the ‘greatest driver never to win the Formula One crown’ poured praise on the fresh-faced 24-year-old German with the mischievous grin.
“Vettel is a modern Fangio, really, in Formula One. I can’t see, other than his natural ability, how he is that good, how he can be that good,” said the 82-year-old Briton, his walking stick poised by his side.
“I think Vettel is quite outstanding, but then he has got the best car, which is fair enough because normally the best driver gets the best car.
“Fangio went around and took what he wanted and one took whatever was left.
“Where we’re lucky is that Vettel has a great sense of humour. He is a damn good world champion. I can think of a lot of other people who get to that position and they don’t give back as much as they get out, but he really does.”
Moss was runner-up in the Formula One championship four times while Fangio, regarded by many as the greatest driver of all time and the Englishman’s team mate at Mercedes in 1955, won five titles.
Vettel dominated last season, taking his second successive crown with four races to spare and chalking up 11 wins from 19 races.
McLaren’s British duo Jenson Button and Lewis Hamilton, both champions, will be among the German’s main rivals when the new season starts in Australia on March 18, and Moss felt that he would rather ‘put his money’ on the former.
Juan Manuel Fangio
“Their problem is that they’re up against a better outfit. The Red Bull is so good, it’s enormously difficult to be as good as that is and I don’t think they are yet,” said the octogenarian who survived a three-storey plunge down a lift shaft in 2010 and only formally retired from racing last June.
“Vettel is outstanding. They (the McLaren drivers) are up there, but not as far as he is.
“Lewis does funny things, so one can’t be sure,” he said. “I would put my money on Jenson. Yes I would. Lewis is terrific, he really is exceptionally quick, but Jenson thinks about certain things better than Lewis will,” said Moss, who was always a real racer living life to the full.
“Like when it’s raining and whether or not to go in for a change of tyres. For all those sorts of things he has a better understanding of it, and experience is a lot of it.”
In a year of ‘ugly’ new cars, Moss – looking forward to a vacation cruise from Hong Kong to Dubai on a liner that he hastened to quip was not Italian – said the Ferrari was ‘hideous’ and hoped it had a facelift over the course of the campaign.
“Can you think of an ugly car that ever won anything?,” he mused.
“There’s the saying that if it looks right it probably is. That’s what worries me about the Ferrari because it doesn’t look very nice, but maybe it’s particularly effective.”
Related posts:
- Sir Stirling Moss at Monaco prints for sale
- Stirling Moss not impressed by Schumacher
- Stirling Moss: Schumacher is “past it”
- Video: Silver Arrows from Fangio to Schumi
- Sir Stirling Moss in intensive care
@F1 Follower 1991
what abt 2006?
Just to add, Alonso in 2005 only finished off the podium twice all season long apart from one other time in which he retired, thats only 1 more time than Vettel in 2011, can you please explain how that does not mean he wasnt dominant in any way during the season?
Because everyone was saying Vettel’s season was pretty dominant and well ALonso’s results werent much worse?
@quattro_T
Basically you have just clarified what i was already trying to say, As you and a couple of others were saying that the Reanult wasnt a much superior car than the Ferrari?
That is what i was talking about, the R25 and the MP4-20 were the class of the field in 2005, That is what i was saying, i said the Renault was the most complete package on the grid, which is was, and the Mclaren the fastest car on the grid which it was.
As far as im concerned to get 133 points in a season your car needs to be pretty dominant, you were stating that Alonso was in a Renault car that was no more superior than the Ferrari of 2005 /2006 when that is clearly not the case. True the Renault wasnt up to the pace ultimately of the Mclaren however a flawed car like the McLaren was súrely means it cant mean it was the best car on the grid?
Thats like saying the Brabham BMW’s in the 80′s that were ridiculously faster than the rest of the grid were dominant cars because they were faster than everyone else.
You state the DNF’s were pretty even between both cars, which is true however you fail to mention the numerous amount of times Raikonnen was given grid penalties for engine changes due to reliability issues which ultimately cost him the championship.
Regarding the constructors points, i wouldnt rate Fisichella in the same league as the other 3 drivers, he’s a mark webber that doesnt really get the job done, his 5 retirements state that as most were of his own doing too.
@F1 Follower 1991
I refer you to quattro_T’s comments below
‘much superior’ car is a bit of a muchness & too superior in my book too
@F1 Follower 1991
Regarding your 2 points.
1. Define dominant please. In my book, no way the Renault was dominant those years. Now, the Red bull has been dominant 2010 & 2011. Please look at the stats for those seasons (qualy and race results) and you will see what I consider to be domination. Then review the stats for Renault 2005 and then tell me Renault was dominant!
Just a few (really) quick stats:
* Qualy results over whole 2005: Renault 7 poles – Mclaren 7 poles
Hint: Renault had no clear speed advantage over Mclaren (you said it yourself)
* Reliability measured as total number of DNFs: Renault 11 DNFs – Mclaren 12 DNF
Hint: The number of DNFs indicated Renault had (very) slight reliablity advantage
* Final constructor standings: Renault 191 – Mclaren 182
Hint: Both cars were very evently matched, i e NO domination what so ever. Also remember that Montoya was replaced by De la Rosa/Wurz for 2 races probably loosing Mclaren a few points on those occations so 182 probably should be couple points more
This is by no means a scientificly water-proof comparison but will give you a hint that Renault by no means was dominating Mclaren neither speed-wise nor reliability-wise. Both using M tyres…
2. I was not implying that MS used to make execuses – only stating that FA does not, in response to visz963s’ post.
yeah i was just kidding
to make another point that Alonso makes the best out of his under-performing car last year…Doesnt anyone remember the “start” offs on the grid? Mind you he avg 4th and 5th respectivley on the grid.
Alonso is a beast off launches. The car itself was reliable but reliable to win because it lacked speed. He was making Vettel nervous because you dont know what to expect. (Watch post interviews)
Just give Alonso a competive car and it will be 1st place all day for the man. Trust that!
@ Evel
“When I think of Moss I think of a man that moves his mouth without using his brain and who will always be second place man.”
Have you ever seen an elderly man chew? Hilarious! Your quote got me thinking and laughing when you mentioned that. lol… well said m8.
Alonso also won his 2-titles (almost 3) in 2010 yet no praise. But everyone nows secretly that they love Alonso. Its just tuff to love him so much when u see him lose with Ferrari.
damn, even an 82 year old man doesnt save a breath to insult the looks of Ferrari. SMH
Cry more, I like it.
visz963, who let you in here?
Alonso is lame. You have been deceived by his marketing tricks and self praise and dirty speeches about Vettel. You are fooled.
Buy his merchandise and live content.
@F1 Follower 1991:
Regardless of how you want to look at it, Alonso didn’t have machinery at his disposal like Schumacher or Vettel had during their glory years, I don’t care what you say.
The R25/26 were competitive cars, reliable, fast enough, but they waren’t the fastest in the field, no f-ing way.
Renault did have Alonso behind the wheel, and that made the difference in the crucial moments.
Now, I’m not trying to take anything away from Kimi, Schumacher, Vettel, they’re great all champions, I’m just saying that Alonso fought these guys in inferior machinery, that’s all.
And he won, as far as I’m concerned.
@Butterfly
If you had looked, what i said the McLaren was the fastest package of the 2005 season, of course being the fastest youd expect Kimi to be the dominant package when it comes to quali and fastest laps as most of the season proved.
But just because the car was very fast doesnt mean it was the best overall package, as Sennauno said it was clearly the most reliable as well as being the 2nd fastest car on the grid meant that Alonso could easily take advantage when the McLaren retired which it did a lot during the 2005 season, hence Raikonnen missing out on the title.
@F1 Follower 1991:
Just watch the qualifying for Monaco: McLaren smashed Renault by half a second. That doesn’t sound like the R25 was the best package, mate.
Just to add to that, the R25 was considered the BEST car on the grid due to it being the best all round package during the 2005 season, The McLaren was considered the FASTEST car, however due to it being very fragile and unreliable it cost Kimi the title, of course these cars were both much faster than the Ferrari.
If you think the Ferrari was dominant and a better car in 2005 just because they had won the previous 4 WDC’s you really need your head testing!
What? The regs dramatically changed in 2005 by the FIA, just because Ferrari were dominant up to 2004 how does that instantly mean they are going to be dominant in 2005 too?
Thats like saying the Ferrari/McLaren cars would be dominant in 2009 due to them having great success in 2007/2008 but they didnt because of the double diffusers, just like the reg changes in 2005.
Ferrari won 1 race all season in 2005 at Indy, and that was only due to all the Michelin rivals pulling out leaving them racing Jordan and Minardi? How is that not proof enough they were on the backfoot with a bad car?
you are kidding me right? the regs dramatically changed in 2005 by the FIA, just because Ferrari were dominant up to 2004 how does that instantly mean they are going to be dominant in 2005 too?
Thats like saying the Ferrari/McLaren cars would be dominant in 2009 due to them having great success in 2007/2008 but they didnt because of the double diffusers, just like the reg changes in 2005.
Ferrari won 1 race all season in 2005 at Indy, and that was only due to all the Michelin rivals pulling out leaving them racing Jordan and Minardi? How is that not proof enough they were on the backfoot with a bad car?
Ask any knowledgable F1 fan/analyst and they would say the R25 and R26 and that beast of a McLaren in 2005 were much bettter cars than the ferrari. fact.
@Sennauno
You are kidding me right? Just because Ferrari was the dominant car from 2000 through to 2004 doesnt mean for 2005 and 2006 it makes them instantly dominant still, the FIA changed the regs for 2005 dramatically, Bridgestone tyres were much inferior than the Michelins and Renault and Mclaren took advantage of that too.
Thats like saying because Ferrari was dominant in 2007 and 2008 with McLaren it instantly made them both superior in 2009? But it didnt because of the double diffusers, just like the change of regs in 2005.
Show you otherwise? the only race they won all season in 2005 was Indy because of Ralf’s crash causing all michelin teams to pull out on tyre concerns! if thats not proof enough they had made a bad car and were on the backfoot i dont know!
2006 they were more equal however you ask any F1 Analyst they would still say the R25 and R26 along with the Mclaren mp4-27 from 2005 were much better cars than the ferrari.
The 2005&06 Renault was a much faster car than the ferrari for all of 2005 and all bar the final few races of 2006.
2006 was a great year for alonso/Schuey.
Alonso matured and Schuey overcame his lack of qualifying pace with outstanding race pace (sound familiar?).
I wish Schuey hadnt retired in 06. He would have been champion in 2007 and 2008 while still getting to race the hamiltons and vettels at the front.
And, in 2005 Kimi has a monster of a McLaren at his disposal. Newey-designed, of course.
@F1 Follower 1991
1. Much superior car????? your off your head!…in what way was Alonso’s Renault a much superior car, can you quantify that claim? The way i remember it, that Ferrari had just won the last…how many WDC’s? 2000? 2001?2002?’03 & 04? and suddenly in 05 the Renault is a much superior car?? dude, the Renault was the more RELIABLE, the Ferrari was actually the quicker…please, show me otherwise. Thats the biggest hogwash ive heard you say..and thats saying smthing:)
@quattro_T
I agree with most apart from 2 of your points:
1. Alonso was in a much superior car for his 2WDC years than Schumi, the R25 and R26 were masterpieces of the regs at the time, even after the mass damper device was banned for use by them by the FIA, they still had a superior pace, If you remember it was the McLaren that was fighting Renault in 2005 and Kimi should of won the title had it not been the unreliable and fragile nature of the car. If you remember Michelin tyres during those two seasons were much superior than the bridgestones.
2. The other point was the excuses, ive never heard in all my time Schumacher make excuses for a bad race or a lack of race pace, i only ever heard him say “we were not good enough” or “we were not fast enough” thats not really excuses but stating the facts.
@quattro_T:
Thanks mate, you said it all.
@visz963
Your “reasoning” is so flawed and your “facts” are so off that almost no point getting into a debate with you… Just a few quick (verifiable) facts:
a. Alonso arrived at last race 2010 as a world champion. He did so in a car that was ~1 sec slower througout the year, than the red bulls.
b. Alonso was world champion at last race 2010, until the imcompetent Ferrari race personell gave it away to red bull by bringing him in too early.
c. Alonso did actually beat M Schumacher to world champion and became youngest ever single and double w champion. He beat both Schumacher AND Ferrari to title at very young age in a none-dominant car (Renault)
d. Alonso very seldomely makes excuses. He barely states the facts, namely that the Ferrari is well behind the fastest cars performance wise – and keeps outperforming that joke to a car week-end after week-end.
e. Unlike M Schumacher, Alonso is a champion with conscience. He does not like to win by driving fellow drivers off the road, like Schumacher did when winning his titles. For more info ask, D Hill, J Villeneuve, Frentzen…
f. At Schumachers time, teams were allowed to test much more. Hence drivers could spend more time testing/with engineers. Nowdays inseason testing is not allowed, so your last point is void as well.
He cannot do what he was hired for. To win with a car that is not superior. All he can do is struggle and make excuses. In this, he is no different from Massa. Ferrari could save that money and invest it in the car; then they could win titles with cheap drivers and a better car.
Schumacher did not make excuses when he was at Ferrari. Instead he sat in the car for 10 hours a day and worked with the engineers. He also had a technical background that Alonso is lacking. He was woth the money.
@visz963
Lol, is Alonso crap?
Well that “crap” has been beating Hamilton for two years now (2010 and 2011) in a slower car. Much slower car in 2011 than 2010. What does that say about Hamilton? Below crap?
@Al
well its gotta be said, Hill pushed Schumi for the 1994 title thanks to the FIA…in 1995 Schumi walked away with the title. Look if you want things in black and white ok yes Damon Hill was a rival to Schumacher, yes he was…i’d prefer to call him ‘his nearest rival’:) …but seriously those of us who were watching that era know that Schumacher was in a different league to Damon. I put Damon with Villeneuve as 2 drivers who rose to challenge Schumi in superior machinery…and were able to muster a championship whilst Schumi was busy in instalation mode at Ferrari. They arent by any means or will be remembered by historical standards part of the ‘greats’. World champions…yes
I totally agree with Sir Moss in that Schumacher lacked the competition comparable of l previous Formula 1 era’s. Hakkinen was definately his great rival
@Sennauno
You are correct, Mika was Schumi’s greatest rival, Schumi admiited that himself. Are you not forgetting Damon Hill? Those two had a serious rivalry, 94&95.
As for the comment about JV being a rival. He was a rival for 1 season, the same could be said of DC and every other F1 driver. They are all rivals. @Evel. Choose your rivalries carefully.
@evel
I think you should be the one keeping your mouth closed. From your response i gather that you have very little idea of what decent Formula 1 competition consists of. You cannot seriously consider Senna as a rival of Schumacher as..if you didnt know, Senna died in 1994. The 2 years they were in F1 together is hardly considered a rivalry…Schumacher was a noob…he mightve RACED with Senna as he did with Prost but he wont be remembered as a rival of either. Much the same as Senna raced with Niki Lauda at the end of his career but was not a rival
Your consideration of Button & Villeneuve is a bit perverse…Villeneuve was merely a solid average driver who stole a championship off Schumacher. Rival he is but to be boasting of Jacques Villeneuve as a rival, you really arent adding much substance to your cause…& Button? well Button really wasnt around to rival any of Michaels WDC’s…he was on the grid at the time…and was a ‘will be champion’ in hindsight….but cant be considered as a rival as even when Button won his title and was at the front of the grid, Schumacher was in retirement…
Even though i disagree with Sir Stirling regarding Vettel, i respect the fact that he RACED with JMF & he has every right to draw comparisons & have his mouth open. Its Sir Stirling Moss…have a bit of respect
Alonso….well yes…he did race him to the 2005 and 2006 championships but to be fair, reality was that Schumacher was already in his twighlight years. As ive said in the past, Hakkinen was Schumacher’s only real rival
Oh, and I get the same impression (i.e., trolling) when visz963 starts writing crappy text.
LOL Bitterfly whining again that someone calls not Alonso the best driver.
Time to give up. Alonso is crap.
let the season start kimi,lewis,alonso,jenson,schumacher also have the same desire for winning.lets hope vettel’s dominance ends soon.and I hate Niki lauda and now this stupid idiot who are **y for sebestian vettel
This guy should keep his mouth closed.
I place no value in his comments ever since he stated that Schumacher won eight championships only because he was lucky and had no real competition.
I suppose Hakkinen, Senna, Villeneuve, Button, Alonso etc. weren’t tough competitors.
Let’s not forget Schumi won his first title in ’94 and his last in 2004 – surely there must have been some decent competition in that time frame Moss?
Now Vettel, after winning 2 championships in what was clearly the best package is the new Fangio.
That’s a little premature.
Alonso was in the same boat as Vettel not too long ago and has also won 2 championships – is he the next Fangio too. After all it’s widely accepted amongst the drivers themselves that Alonso is the best at the moment.
Schumacher’s 7 titles mean nothing however Vettel only has to win 2 to make him the best thing since sliced bread.
I’m not saying Vettel’s not good but let’s see how he stacks up in a car that’s not miles ahead of the competition before we bestow him with such high praise.
When I think of Moss I think of a man that moves his mouth without using his brain and who will always be second place man.
He’s tried to put down Schumacher on numerous occasions probably out of jealousy.
Of the greats of the past, it’s always a pleasure to listen to Jackie Stewart and Nikki Lauda.
However, when Stirling Moss starts talking, I just get the impression he’s trolling.
Please let the season start… Tired of hearing all the old time drivers praising or putting down one driver or the other. Nobody really knows whats going to happen this season and whose car is fast.
RBR were outstanding last season, but can they repeat that kind of perfection again this year?
Alonso won 2 titles and has gone without a title for 5 years now. Who knows what will happen with Vettel?
All this talk and predictions are worth nothing and just fill up space for the news media
The difference is Fangio was a man and a real racing driver, of the old ilk. He also had the knack of being in the right team at the right time which made his long standing record of 5 titles possible. I hope Vettel dosent have the same ability…i am very VERY sick of his finger look at Vettel in that picture. I cant wait to see him without such a superior car
…old already!
Right, and that means nothing to those who know nothing about Fangio.