Thread by @ConservativeLA

I understand that Lewis Hamilton is arguably the top two of the modern era, but the GOAT stuff is a bit of a stretch.

Also, Senna deserves special mention not because he's dead, but because he made use of the engine specs in a technically observable way. He blipped through the corners in a way that nobody else did. He understood the specs as nobody else did.

That is a particular, adaptive genius. But still, if Jim Clark had been around longer, he would have won in literally anything he drove, just as he did before he died pointlessly.

I will leave it to others to argue for Fangio, because there is an argument to be made there, as well.

Stewart said, IIRC, Fangio and Rindt, but most of all Clark.

Clark was effortlessly quicker in everything he drove. The perfect match for Chapman's coffins on wheels. He drove for eight years and dominated.

And in those days, every race was an opportunity to make money, which is what killed him. Not fair to compare his era (or Fangio's) with Senna, and unfair to compare Senna to Schumacher and Hamilton.

But the real balls-out guys were those who drove for Chapman post-Clark. That was a skill set mostly consisting of stomping down ones natural fear of an evil race car.

I for one am very happy that safety has been ascendant in motorsports (except for IndyCar on ovals, which is like Monza banking and let's be surprised when people die, SAFER barrier or not.