Magneto’s Ferrari Driver Rankings

The Magneto piece looks more like a listing than a ranking to me.

Among the missing drivers, André Simon, Harry Schell, Paul Frére, Eugenio Castellotti, Cliff Allison, Andrea de Adamich, Johnathan Williams, Luca Badoer ?

 

Yes, Paul Frère did 3 GP for the Scuderia in 56.

A ranking that puts Fangio only in 11th position behind some drivers that didn't win much looks very subjective to me.
I don't know what were the criteria. Maybe the tifosi' fav drivers? I read some here rave about Alesi !!!

 

I have only glanced at this issue of Magneto so far and I'm not privy to the criteria used but I would suggest Andretti (since you mention him) is relatively far down the list because one doesn't think of him primarily as a Ferrari driver. In F1, I first think of him in the Lotus 79 and then in various Indycars. Whatever the criteria, it clearly isn't talent or accomplishments even if everything beyond achievements in Ferraris are discounted.

As an aside (and I don't have the article I read it in immediately to hand), but I once read that Enzo Ferrari had employed something over 200 Factory drivers in his lifetime and had outlived about half of them but only one (I think), Piero Taruffi, had pre-deceased him of natural causes.

Missing (off the top of my head!): Andrea De Adamich, Mika Salo, Luigi Villoresi, Paul Frere, Jonathan Williams, Derek Bell, Pedro Rodriguez (I assume it is Ricardo in the list), Nani Galli, Stefan Johannson, Luca Badoer, Gianni Morbidelli, Ivan Capelli, Nicola Larini and no doubt some others.

Edit to add that I when I was typing this only the initial post was there

 

All I know is that your head is better than mine !!

I had forgotten a few of your finds. What about Raymond Sommer ?

 

Well... Subjective, I know, but I believe that Ricardo was the faster (and more committed of the two) at the time (1961) which is why Ferrari took him rather than Pedro. Pedro got better (and more committed to racing) as time went on. But then he had 10 years more than Ricardo in which to do so and who knows where Ricardo might have got to or what he might have achieved given another 10 years. But then that's true of many drivers in that period.

 

My head isn't so good on what was a Factory entry and what wasn't in the 1950s but I'm sure you're right. I also thought I had read Castellotti on the list which is my excuse for omitting him!

 

Jo Ramirez came to Europe thanks to the Rodriguez brothers and knew them well.
He made his way up in F1 and ended in a managerial position at McLaren.
In his book, he rated Ricciardo above Pedro, saying he would have been like Senna: truly exceptional.

 

Who ever did it wasn't completely stupid. Firts 4 names are correct, first two in the correct order, the others not quite sure. Alonso's position is ridiculous, he's completely insignificant in Ferrari's history, and Alesi should be much, much higher. Massa was also much more important tha Rubens.

 

I see that as a very good criteria.

I don't think I can do much wrong in chosing Fangio, Lauda and Prost in my team.

 

Pedro drove 4 GPs for the Scuderia in 1969.

All his other Ferrari outings were under the NART banner.

 

Whatever the criteria is, it clearly isn't in order of best drivers. I suspect the criteria isn't defined because it is impossible to do so. I imagine it is something akin to the most archetypal Ferrari driver. In which case, there are two, in Ferrari history, that are at the top of that list and they are Nuvolari and Villeneuve (although Nuvolari, being pre-F1 World Championship, is not included here). The two Enzo most favoured, who would still give everything even when bits were falling off the car. Not just what they did but the way they did it. Regardless, I'm sure that no-one would end up with the same 50 drivers in the same order as Magneto. But never mind, it gave them an excuse, if one were needed, to fill a few pages of the magazine with Ferrari drivers and that gets no complaints from me.

 

If that's a ranking, then that's one of the worst lists I've seen. Under my own opinion only of course.

Gilles getting ranked so highly I believe only comes from his tragic death. Had he lived to continue his career, he wouldn't be in anyone's top 5. That's not to say he didn't have some greatness, but there are better drivers than him.

Alonso 9th? What he was able to achieve between 2010 and 2013 was nothing short of incredible. Vettel becomes a 4x champ and everyone recognized that Alonso was the best driver during that time. Very nearly won 2 championships with inferior cars.

Prost 12th??? What does that guy need to do to get some respect. I swear the same people the crucify Schumacher for being ruthless are the ones that overlook Prost for not being ruthless enough. Took the fight to Senna in 1990 when the McLaren was arguably the better car.

A driver that SHOULD be this list is Luca Badoer. He was pretty terrible as a race driver, but his role as a Ferrari test driver was pivotal in their success through the 2000s.

 

I call that "the James Dean effect": guys who reach fame because of their spectacular death.

Gilles Villeneuve entered the Ferrari mythology because of the circumstances of his fatal accident.

The stats don't support his reputation.

 

That really isn't true. I followed his Ferrari career at the time. On that list, Von Trips, Rodriguez, Musso, Giunti, Ascari, Collins, Bandini and de Portago (have I missed any?) all died racing Ferraris. As for stats, unlike say a 100m race, the stats depend upon the car as well as the driver. But I would contend that Villeneuve is where he is on that list not because of what he did but because of the way he did it and because that was the way Enzo Ferrari liked it to be done.

If it were about stats then I suspect Schumacher (in absolute terms) and probably Ascari (in percentage terms) would be way out front.

I suggest that perhaps Alonso is 9th and Prost 12th because large parts of their careers (and success) were not in Ferraris and neither ended their Ferrari careers on happy terms.

However, for the avoidance of doubt, I am not saying the list is in the order I would put it or even defending the order it is in. I'm merely hypothesising why some drivers might be where they are on the list. Regardless, I don't take it in any way seriously. It is just something to fill a few pages of a magazine.

 

Same criteria as the Rock N Roll Hall of Fame:

Whoever the owners like are ranked first.

 

Gilles Villeneuve died at a time where there were far less racing caualties than in the past, so that made an impact.
Also the accident that killed him was mediatised and broadcasted live, so was really shocking for many.
Villeneuve was also the darling of the crowd because of his juvenile look, the ideal poster boy.
In spite of his apparent cool exterior, his "do or die" attitude is what ultimately cost him his life.
Following the Imola incident, he wasn't in the right frame of mind when he set off for that fateful lap, IMO.

 

I can't really disagree with any of that except that, if you are suggesting that Imola contributed to his fatal accident then, who knows, but I don't personally believe it. I think it was just one of those things that could have happened at any time when there is a misunderstanding between two cars at speed on track. In that regard it is often forgotten, but worth noting, that a similar incident in the French Grand Prix that year, again involving Jochen Mass, resulted in his car ending up in a spectator area, although fortunately without and fatalities.