planetf1.com

I have been having this debate with my mates over the past two weeks about who the best young British driver is. I think it's Lando, but some believe it's George, and there are even a few who believe it's Alex.

This is a really hard question to answer because we can’t really compare Russell’s F1 performances to anyone other than his teammates, who we also can’t compare to anyone in the F1 field.

The only comparable is F2 and Russell won that fairly comfortably.

JN23 wrote:This is a really hard question to answer because we can’t really compare Russell’s F1 performances to anyone other than his teammates, who we also can’t compare to anyone in the F1 field.

The only comparable is F2 and Russell won that fairly comfortably.

But Russell was in a better team than Norris and making less of a big jump up to F2. With those factors in mind I found Norris' F2 year the more impressive.

It's between those two anyway. I think them, Max and Charles will be fighting the majority of the championships out for the next 15 years or so.

Can't currently split Lando and Russell.

Russell is a beast, needs to be recogised. He's shining in a frikin Williams

I think that Albon is the best Thai-British driver...

Hard to choose between Lando and George. I gave the edge to George basically for having spent this long in the Williams and having dominated his team mates.

IIRC he has never been out-qualified by his team mate at Williams and has not been beaten in a race that often.

Mort Canard wrote:Hard to choose between Lando and George. I gave the edge to George basically for having spent this long in the Williams and having dominated his team mates.

IIRC he has never been out-qualified by his team mate at Williams and has not been beaten in a race that often.

If a post-injury Kubica and Latifi are deemed to be equal to or superior to Sainz, then you have point. But only then.

Easy George Russell unfortunately for him he's in the Williams.

The performance of the Mclaren makes Lando in your face right now, but if you follow Russell especially his consistency.

I think it's between Norris and Russell, the main card for Norris I feel is his inexperience and being in a better F1 car than Russell, Norris is about potential.

However I feel that pre F1 Russell achieved more, Norris won everything up to F3 but Russell won at a higher level in GP3 and F2, Norris felt that level when he raced in F2, I feel his second place in the series was flattered a bit by the unreliability of the cars.

In F2 generally speaking Norris was little better than his teammate Camara, a year later Camara's new teammate Latifi also was little better then him, but like Norris also finished second in the series. Latifi is presently getting beat by Russell by half a second in qualifying, nothing new for Russell as he also beat Kubica and his F2 teammate Aitken by the same level after also dominating the GP3 qualifying.

This is a similar thing we saw with Leclerc in qualifying with GP3 and F2, then beat Ericcson by 4 tenths in F1 and also beat Vettel, we also see this with Verstappen beating the likes of Gasly and Albon by half a second, I see Russell on a similar path.

In the last 2 years we've seen Norris being well beaten by Russell in F2 then lost out to Sainz last year so for me he has more to prove at this present time like beating Sainz.

pokerman wrote:I think it's between Norris and Russell, the main card for Norris I feel is his inexperience and being in a better F1 car than Russell, Norris is about potential.

However I feel that pre F1 Russell achieved more, Norris won everything up to F3 but Russell won at a higher level in GP3 and F2, Norris felt that level when he raced in F2, I feel his second place in the series was flattered a bit by the unreliability of the cars.

In F2 generally speaking Norris was little better than his teammate Camara, a year later Camara's new teammate Latifi also was little better then him, but like Norris also finished second in the series. Latifi is presently getting beat by Russell by half a second in qualifying, nothing new for Russell as he also beat Kubica and his F2 teammate Aitken by the same level after also dominating the GP3 qualifying.

This is a similar thing we saw with Leclerc in qualifying with GP3 and F2, then beat Ericcson by 4 tenths in F1 and also beat Vettel, we also see this with Verstappen beating the likes of Gasly and Albon by half a second, I see Russell on a similar path.

In the last 2 years we've seen Norris being well beaten by Russell in F2 then lost out to Sainz last year so for me he has more to prove at this present time like beating Sainz.

I agree with this, Russell is the pick of the three at the moment for me. Based on F2 form and what he's been able to do in a tail end F1 car I don't see any reason to rate him lower than Leclerc, he's just not had the opportunity to show his talent at the front of the field yet.

There is a generation of drivers coming through now in the 20-24 sort of age bracket who look really promising, some of whom are still in F2. For me only Max Verstappen has proven himself thus far to have genuine star quality, it'll be interesting to see which of the others can prove they are at his level. Russell and Norris are in that mix for sure, sadly I think Albon is not.

pokerman wrote:I think it's between Norris and Russell, the main card for Norris I feel is his inexperience and being in a better F1 car than Russell, Norris is about potential.

However I feel that pre F1 Russell achieved more, Norris won everything up to F3 but Russell won at a higher level in GP3 and F2, Norris felt that level when he raced in F2, I feel his second place in the series was flattered a bit by the unreliability of the cars.

In F2 generally speaking Norris was little better than his teammate Camara, a year later Camara's new teammate Latifi also was little better then him, but like Norris also finished second in the series. Latifi is presently getting beat by Russell by half a second in qualifying, nothing new for Russell as he also beat Kubica and his F2 teammate Aitken by the same level after also dominating the GP3 qualifying.

This is a similar thing we saw with Leclerc in qualifying with GP3 and F2, then beat Ericcson by 4 tenths in F1 and also beat Vettel, we also see this with Verstappen beating the likes of Gasly and Albon by half a second, I see Russell on a similar path.

In the last 2 years we've seen Norris being well beaten by Russell in F2 then lost out to Sainz last year so for me he has more to prove at this present time like beating Sainz.

F2: Norris was 18 and in his rookie season. Latifi was 24 years and in his 4th full season in F2 plus two more with mixed F2/FR3.5 programs. Their F2 achievements are not really similar.

George Russell is like Vandoorne: good but not excellent.
Albon is average in F1 terms.
Norris may become an outstanding F1 driver.

Edit: fighting head-to-head with Sainz alone is more of an achievement than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi.

My personal feeling is that Russell is the quickest, but it's really impossible to tell when he's being compared to a string of no-reference drivers at the back of the field.

I'm confident Albon is the slowest.

Lando is performing as well as any of them right now, and I honestly think he is at least going to end up on the same sort of level as Button. Russell has the special something though, he has a whiff of Alonso in the Minardi about him, and already has the best team on the grid on his side.

I don't think his statement upon being confirmed as a Williams driver next year was an accident, someone, somwhere wanted him elsewhere.

It's a close call between Norris and Russel but having watched the '18 F2 series where him and Russel were the class of the field I'm giving it to Russel. He has a terrific blend of speed and consistency and was so self-assured - and is the same now despite the car handicap. Norris was probably quicker more spectacular on occasion but when it came to the driver needing to adapt to the race as it unfolded and deal with changing situations, Russel always seemed to shine. I started watching the series because I was interested in the hype around Norris but came away thinking Russel edges it.

DOLOMITE wrote:It's a close call between Norris and Russel but having watched the '18 F2 series where him and Russel were the class of the field I'm giving it to Russel. He has a terrific blend of speed and consistency and was so self-assured - and is the same now despite the car handicap. Norris was probably quicker more spectacular on occasion but when it came to the driver needing to adapt to the race as it unfolded and deal with changing situations, Russel always seemed to shine. I started watching the series because I was interested in the hype around Norris but came away thinking Russel edges it.

What you describe was exactly the combination of experience advantage and team advantage that Russell enjoyed.

Norris had 1 season of European F3. Russell had two of them before he even entered GP3.

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:

DOLOMITE wrote:It's a close call between Norris and Russel but having watched the '18 F2 series where him and Russel were the class of the field I'm giving it to Russel. He has a terrific blend of speed and consistency and was so self-assured - and is the same now despite the car handicap. Norris was probably quicker more spectacular on occasion but when it came to the driver needing to adapt to the race as it unfolded and deal with changing situations, Russel always seemed to shine. I started watching the series because I was interested in the hype around Norris but came away thinking Russel edges it.

What you describe was exactly the combination of experience advantage and team advantage that Russell enjoyed.

Norris had 1 season of European F3. Russell had two of them before he even entered GP3.

I'm aware of that, and yes possibly if they'd done another season together in F2 Norris would have triumphed - who knows. But even allowing for their relative experience, Russel still stood out to me. Like someone who know exactly where they're going and how they are going to get there. Maybe Norris has more potential, I don't know, but Russel really impressed me in that F2 year and has continued to do so in F1. Granted his teammates haven't set the bar as high as Norris for comparison but he's doing everything you could reasonably expect and I'd love to see him in that Merc in '22.

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:

pokerman wrote:I think it's between Norris and Russell, the main card for Norris I feel is his inexperience and being in a better F1 car than Russell, Norris is about potential.

However I feel that pre F1 Russell achieved more, Norris won everything up to F3 but Russell won at a higher level in GP3 and F2, Norris felt that level when he raced in F2, I feel his second place in the series was flattered a bit by the unreliability of the cars.

In F2 generally speaking Norris was little better than his teammate Camara, a year later Camara's new teammate Latifi also was little better then him, but like Norris also finished second in the series. Latifi is presently getting beat by Russell by half a second in qualifying, nothing new for Russell as he also beat Kubica and his F2 teammate Aitken by the same level after also dominating the GP3 qualifying.

This is a similar thing we saw with Leclerc in qualifying with GP3 and F2, then beat Ericcson by 4 tenths in F1 and also beat Vettel, we also see this with Verstappen beating the likes of Gasly and Albon by half a second, I see Russell on a similar path.

In the last 2 years we've seen Norris being well beaten by Russell in F2 then lost out to Sainz last year so for me he has more to prove at this present time like beating Sainz.

F2: Norris was 18 and in his rookie season. Latifi was 24 years and in his 4th full season in F2 plus two more with mixed F2/FR3.5 programs. Their F2 achievements are not really similar.

George Russell is like Vandoorne: good but not excellent.
Albon is average in F1 terms.
Norris may become an outstanding F1 driver.

Edit: fighting head-to-head with Sainz alone is more of an achievement than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi.

Like I said the defence for Norris is that he's young and inexperienced and that seems for you to hold more sway than a driver that's acheived more thus far.

The only driver that Sainz has been able to beat in F1, apart from Norris, is Kvyat who presently is getting beat by Gasly, these are facts, Russell being no better than Vandoorne is not a fact.

pokerman wrote:

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:

pokerman wrote:I think it's between Norris and Russell, the main card for Norris I feel is his inexperience and being in a better F1 car than Russell, Norris is about potential.

However I feel that pre F1 Russell achieved more, Norris won everything up to F3 but Russell won at a higher level in GP3 and F2, Norris felt that level when he raced in F2, I feel his second place in the series was flattered a bit by the unreliability of the cars.

In F2 generally speaking Norris was little better than his teammate Camara, a year later Camara's new teammate Latifi also was little better then him, but like Norris also finished second in the series. Latifi is presently getting beat by Russell by half a second in qualifying, nothing new for Russell as he also beat Kubica and his F2 teammate Aitken by the same level after also dominating the GP3 qualifying.

This is a similar thing we saw with Leclerc in qualifying with GP3 and F2, then beat Ericcson by 4 tenths in F1 and also beat Vettel, we also see this with Verstappen beating the likes of Gasly and Albon by half a second, I see Russell on a similar path.

In the last 2 years we've seen Norris being well beaten by Russell in F2 then lost out to Sainz last year so for me he has more to prove at this present time like beating Sainz.

F2: Norris was 18 and in his rookie season. Latifi was 24 years and in his 4th full season in F2 plus two more with mixed F2/FR3.5 programs. Their F2 achievements are not really similar.

George Russell is like Vandoorne: good but not excellent.
Albon is average in F1 terms.
Norris may become an outstanding F1 driver.

Edit: fighting head-to-head with Sainz alone is more of an achievement than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi.

Like I said the defence for Norris is that he's young and inexperienced and that seems for you to hold more sway than a driver that's acheived more thus far.

The only driver that Sainz has been able to beat in F1, apart from Norris, is Kvyat who presently is getting beat by Gasly, these are facts, Russell being no better than Vandoorne is not a fact.

So then surely you'd think Norris was the better driver? Given that he has achieved more at a higher level...

Or does context like Norris being in a better car matter...

If context does matter then surely Norris being less experienced and driving for a less successful team would also matter?

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:

pokerman wrote:I think it's between Norris and Russell, the main card for Norris I feel is his inexperience and being in a better F1 car than Russell, Norris is about potential.

However I feel that pre F1 Russell achieved more, Norris won everything up to F3 but Russell won at a higher level in GP3 and F2, Norris felt that level when he raced in F2, I feel his second place in the series was flattered a bit by the unreliability of the cars.

In F2 generally speaking Norris was little better than his teammate Camara, a year later Camara's new teammate Latifi also was little better then him, but like Norris also finished second in the series. Latifi is presently getting beat by Russell by half a second in qualifying, nothing new for Russell as he also beat Kubica and his F2 teammate Aitken by the same level after also dominating the GP3 qualifying.

This is a similar thing we saw with Leclerc in qualifying with GP3 and F2, then beat Ericcson by 4 tenths in F1 and also beat Vettel, we also see this with Verstappen beating the likes of Gasly and Albon by half a second, I see Russell on a similar path.

In the last 2 years we've seen Norris being well beaten by Russell in F2 then lost out to Sainz last year so for me he has more to prove at this present time like beating Sainz.

F2: Norris was 18 and in his rookie season. Latifi was 24 years and in his 4th full season in F2 plus two more with mixed F2/FR3.5 programs. Their F2 achievements are not really similar.

George Russell is like Vandoorne: good but not excellent.
Albon is average in F1 terms.
Norris may become an outstanding F1 driver.

Edit: fighting head-to-head with Sainz alone is more of an achievement than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi.

Like I said the defence for Norris is that he's young and inexperienced and that seems for you to hold more sway than a driver that's acheived more thus far.

The only driver that Sainz has been able to beat in F1, apart from Norris, is Kvyat who presently is getting beat by Gasly, these are facts, Russell being no better than Vandoorne is not a fact.

So then surely you'd think Norris was the better driver? Given that he has achieved more at a higher level...

Or does context like Norris being in a better car matter...

If context does matter then surely Norris being less experienced and driving for a less successful team would also matter?

Norris' teammate Camara finished 6th in the series despite missing 2 races because of injury, whilst Russel's teammate Aitken finished 11th in the series.

The following year Aitken managed to finish 5th in the series in the Campos team, not exactly a top team whilst Camara finished 4th with top team DAMS, the team that enabled Latifi to finish 2nd in the series.

Again I would say playing the inexperienced card to give a driver more credit than a driver who won at a higher level, also let's not forget that Russell was a rookie champion both in GP3 and F2.

pokerman wrote:

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:

pokerman wrote:I think it's between Norris and Russell, the main card for Norris I feel is his inexperience and being in a better F1 car than Russell, Norris is about potential.

However I feel that pre F1 Russell achieved more, Norris won everything up to F3 but Russell won at a higher level in GP3 and F2, Norris felt that level when he raced in F2, I feel his second place in the series was flattered a bit by the unreliability of the cars.

In F2 generally speaking Norris was little better than his teammate Camara, a year later Camara's new teammate Latifi also was little better then him, but like Norris also finished second in the series. Latifi is presently getting beat by Russell by half a second in qualifying, nothing new for Russell as he also beat Kubica and his F2 teammate Aitken by the same level after also dominating the GP3 qualifying.

This is a similar thing we saw with Leclerc in qualifying with GP3 and F2, then beat Ericcson by 4 tenths in F1 and also beat Vettel, we also see this with Verstappen beating the likes of Gasly and Albon by half a second, I see Russell on a similar path.

In the last 2 years we've seen Norris being well beaten by Russell in F2 then lost out to Sainz last year so for me he has more to prove at this present time like beating Sainz.

F2: Norris was 18 and in his rookie season. Latifi was 24 years and in his 4th full season in F2 plus two more with mixed F2/FR3.5 programs. Their F2 achievements are not really similar.

George Russell is like Vandoorne: good but not excellent.
Albon is average in F1 terms.
Norris may become an outstanding F1 driver.

Edit: fighting head-to-head with Sainz alone is more of an achievement than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi.

Like I said the defence for Norris is that he's young and inexperienced and that seems for you to hold more sway than a driver that's acheived more thus far.

The only driver that Sainz has been able to beat in F1, apart from Norris, is Kvyat who presently is getting beat by Gasly, these are facts, Russell being no better than Vandoorne is not a fact.

In addition to what Mikey already posted, two more things:
- beating Kvyat alone is more than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi
- as for achievements: Norris won European F3 in his first year, while Russell spent two years in the category without coming even close to winning it
So, putting Russell ahead can only rest on the single F2 season where Russell had an experience advantage and a team advantage.

But of course we are trading opinions here - like we did with Vandoorne at the time. And actual racing will show us who is right.

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:

pokerman wrote:I think it's between Norris and Russell, the main card for Norris I feel is his inexperience and being in a better F1 car than Russell, Norris is about potential.

However I feel that pre F1 Russell achieved more, Norris won everything up to F3 but Russell won at a higher level in GP3 and F2, Norris felt that level when he raced in F2, I feel his second place in the series was flattered a bit by the unreliability of the cars.

In F2 generally speaking Norris was little better than his teammate Camara, a year later Camara's new teammate Latifi also was little better then him, but like Norris also finished second in the series. Latifi is presently getting beat by Russell by half a second in qualifying, nothing new for Russell as he also beat Kubica and his F2 teammate Aitken by the same level after also dominating the GP3 qualifying.

This is a similar thing we saw with Leclerc in qualifying with GP3 and F2, then beat Ericcson by 4 tenths in F1 and also beat Vettel, we also see this with Verstappen beating the likes of Gasly and Albon by half a second, I see Russell on a similar path.

In the last 2 years we've seen Norris being well beaten by Russell in F2 then lost out to Sainz last year so for me he has more to prove at this present time like beating Sainz.

F2: Norris was 18 and in his rookie season. Latifi was 24 years and in his 4th full season in F2 plus two more with mixed F2/FR3.5 programs. Their F2 achievements are not really similar.

George Russell is like Vandoorne: good but not excellent.
Albon is average in F1 terms.
Norris may become an outstanding F1 driver.

Edit: fighting head-to-head with Sainz alone is more of an achievement than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi.

Like I said the defence for Norris is that he's young and inexperienced and that seems for you to hold more sway than a driver that's acheived more thus far.

The only driver that Sainz has been able to beat in F1, apart from Norris, is Kvyat who presently is getting beat by Gasly, these are facts, Russell being no better than Vandoorne is not a fact.

In addition to what Mikey already posted, two more things:
- beating Kvyat alone is more than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi
- as for achievements: Norris won European F3 in his first year, while Russell spent two years in the category without coming even close to winning it
So, putting Russell ahead can only rest on the single F2 season where Russell had an experience advantage and a team advantage.

But of course we are trading opinions here - like we did with Vandoorne at the time. And actual racing will show us who is right.

It's the level of the beatings you need to take into account, Leclerc beating Ericcson wasn't a big thing however the level of the beating was.

Russell has been destroying teammates for going on 4 years now, I daresay he also did the same in European F3 which by the way wasn't a spec series it was an arms race were money talked as witnessed by the spending of Lance Stroll.

After several complaints about the money spent in the series they looked to sort it out and it was much calmer when Norris won the series, even then fair play on him beating the Prema cars, however many of the top drivers moved out of the series into GP3.

After F3 Norris looked like a superstar but I would say the last 2 years he's stalled a bit which you can put down to inexperience but that runs out this year.

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:

pokerman wrote:I think it's between Norris and Russell, the main card for Norris I feel is his inexperience and being in a better F1 car than Russell, Norris is about potential.

However I feel that pre F1 Russell achieved more, Norris won everything up to F3 but Russell won at a higher level in GP3 and F2, Norris felt that level when he raced in F2, I feel his second place in the series was flattered a bit by the unreliability of the cars.

In F2 generally speaking Norris was little better than his teammate Camara, a year later Camara's new teammate Latifi also was little better then him, but like Norris also finished second in the series. Latifi is presently getting beat by Russell by half a second in qualifying, nothing new for Russell as he also beat Kubica and his F2 teammate Aitken by the same level after also dominating the GP3 qualifying.

This is a similar thing we saw with Leclerc in qualifying with GP3 and F2, then beat Ericcson by 4 tenths in F1 and also beat Vettel, we also see this with Verstappen beating the likes of Gasly and Albon by half a second, I see Russell on a similar path.

In the last 2 years we've seen Norris being well beaten by Russell in F2 then lost out to Sainz last year so for me he has more to prove at this present time like beating Sainz.

F2: Norris was 18 and in his rookie season. Latifi was 24 years and in his 4th full season in F2 plus two more with mixed F2/FR3.5 programs. Their F2 achievements are not really similar.

George Russell is like Vandoorne: good but not excellent.
Albon is average in F1 terms.
Norris may become an outstanding F1 driver.

Edit: fighting head-to-head with Sainz alone is more of an achievement than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi.

Like I said the defence for Norris is that he's young and inexperienced and that seems for you to hold more sway than a driver that's acheived more thus far.

The only driver that Sainz has been able to beat in F1, apart from Norris, is Kvyat who presently is getting beat by Gasly, these are facts, Russell being no better than Vandoorne is not a fact.

So then surely you'd think Norris was the better driver? Given that he has achieved more at a higher level...

Or does context like Norris being in a better car matter...

If context does matter then surely Norris being less experienced and driving for a less successful team would also matter?

Norris' teammate Camara finished 6th in the series despite missing 2 races because of injury, whilst Russel's teammate Aitken finished 11th in the series.

The following year Aitken managed to finish 5th in the series in the Campos team, not exactly a top team whilst Camara finished 4th with top team DAMS, the team that enabled Latifi to finish 2nd in the series.

Again I would say playing the inexperienced card to give a driver more credit than a driver who won at a higher level, also let's not forget that Russell was a rookie champion both in GP3 and F2.

Exactly. Russell had done GP23. He was already used to being in the paddock and following the F1 circus. That's a big advantage over Norris who was two years younger and making a bigger jump.

Anyway, I think Norris/Russell is open for debate and completely unknown. I do think your reasoning for trying to undermine the reasons somebody might lean towards Norris is completely bogus though.

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Paolo_Lasardi wrote: F2: Norris was 18 and in his rookie season. Latifi was 24 years and in his 4th full season in F2 plus two more with mixed F2/FR3.5 programs. Their F2 achievements are not really similar.

George Russell is like Vandoorne: good but not excellent.
Albon is average in F1 terms.
Norris may become an outstanding F1 driver.

Edit: fighting head-to-head with Sainz alone is more of an achievement than beating post-injury Kubica and Latifi.

Like I said the defence for Norris is that he's young and inexperienced and that seems for you to hold more sway than a driver that's acheived more thus far.

The only driver that Sainz has been able to beat in F1, apart from Norris, is Kvyat who presently is getting beat by Gasly, these are facts, Russell being no better than Vandoorne is not a fact.

So then surely you'd think Norris was the better driver? Given that he has achieved more at a higher level...

Or does context like Norris being in a better car matter...

If context does matter then surely Norris being less experienced and driving for a less successful team would also matter?

Norris' teammate Camara finished 6th in the series despite missing 2 races because of injury, whilst Russel's teammate Aitken finished 11th in the series.

The following year Aitken managed to finish 5th in the series in the Campos team, not exactly a top team whilst Camara finished 4th with top team DAMS, the team that enabled Latifi to finish 2nd in the series.

Again I would say playing the inexperienced card to give a driver more credit than a driver who won at a higher level, also let's not forget that Russell was a rookie champion both in GP3 and F2.

Exactly. Russell had done GP23. He was already used to being in the paddock and following the F1 circus. That's a big advantage over Norris who was two years younger and making a bigger jump.

Anyway, I think Norris/Russell is open for debate and completely unknown. I do think your reasoning for trying to undermine the reasons somebody might lean towards Norris is completely bogus though.

What came first the chicken or the egg, I think you will find that it was my post that was critiqued first, then I'm not allowed to reply?

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote: Like I said the defence for Norris is that he's young and inexperienced and that seems for you to hold more sway than a driver that's acheived more thus far.

The only driver that Sainz has been able to beat in F1, apart from Norris, is Kvyat who presently is getting beat by Gasly, these are facts, Russell being no better than Vandoorne is not a fact.

So then surely you'd think Norris was the better driver? Given that he has achieved more at a higher level...

Or does context like Norris being in a better car matter...

If context does matter then surely Norris being less experienced and driving for a less successful team would also matter?

Norris' teammate Camara finished 6th in the series despite missing 2 races because of injury, whilst Russel's teammate Aitken finished 11th in the series.

The following year Aitken managed to finish 5th in the series in the Campos team, not exactly a top team whilst Camara finished 4th with top team DAMS, the team that enabled Latifi to finish 2nd in the series.

Again I would say playing the inexperienced card to give a driver more credit than a driver who won at a higher level, also let's not forget that Russell was a rookie champion both in GP3 and F2.

Exactly. Russell had done GP23. He was already used to being in the paddock and following the F1 circus. That's a big advantage over Norris who was two years younger and making a bigger jump.

Anyway, I think Norris/Russell is open for debate and completely unknown. I do think your reasoning for trying to undermine the reasons somebody might lean towards Norris is completely bogus though.

What came first the chicken or the egg, I think you will find that it was my post that was critiqued first, then I'm not allowed to reply?

Of course you are. My issue is not that you responded it's then your response doesn't logically track.

Poker,

Russell destroying teammates - well, if the teammates are weak enough, that really is a non-issue. Anyone on the grid and several drivers more would have "destroyed" Kubica and Latifi these two seasons.

Your argument about EuroF3 and being in the right team is a little too convenient. Actually, it makes Norris F3 title even more impressive as he was not driving for the dominant team ...

Compare their first four years in racing F3 and higher:

First year:
Russell 2015 Euro F3 6th
Norris 2017 Euro F3 Champion

Second:
GR 2016 Euro F3 3rd
LN 2018 F2 Vice-Champion

Third:
GR 2017 GP3 Champion
LN 2019 F1 McLaren

Fourth:
GR 2018 GP2 Champion
LN 2020 F1 McLaren

In other words: Norris is experience-wise now where Russell was during his GP2 campaign ...

I wonder how long Russell's qualifying streak will last. Will he reach 50 wins over his teammate in a row?

But he's had relatively weak and slow benchmarks also.


Right now Norris has the chance to shine in a pretty good car and Russell doesn't. Ultimately, regardless of who I think is better (Russell), Russell is in the catbird seat with a path to a kool team called Mercedes. Even at this early stage I pretty much expect Russell to bag at least 1 WDC. However, Norris is the sort of character with the charm to match his ability to find himself in some advantageous positions in the future. He'll be an attractive proposition for many teams.

Obviously this is all quite longterm projection - who knows, really?

So, a question for the people who currently think Russell is the better driver: If Norris is able to match or beat Ricciardo next year, do we assume by default that he's better, or do we assume that Russell is a Verstappen level driver?

Russell dominated the Virtual Grand Prix series. I don't know what more proof you need that he is the best driver

Exediron wrote:So, a question for the people who currently think Russell is the better driver: If Norris is able to match or beat Ricciardo next year, do we assume by default that he's better, or do we assume that Russell is a Verstappen level driver?

That would be quite a big jump to make that conclusion when by the end of next year, Russell will still only have had Kubica and Latifi as teammates.

I personally think Russell is slightly better than Norris, but that is mainly based on guesswork right now.

I see Russell as being pretty consistent (to a strong level) whereas Norris seemed to go missing during some races last year but maybe has the more a higher ceiling when he performs well. Norris might become more consistent though with a bit more experience.

Exediron wrote:So, a question for the people who currently think Russell is the better driver: If Norris is able to match or beat Ricciardo next year, do we assume by default that he's better, or do we assume that Russell is a Verstappen level driver?

If he has a clear edge over Ricciardo then he's the shizzle, and assuming Russell is still toiling around in a Williams at the back then, based on the consistent proof of ability given the opportunity, Norris should be given the nod — though this isn't to say that Russell won't be just as or more impressive given the same opportunity.

Frankly, I think we have a very special generation of young drivers who will round into their primes in the next 2-3 years.

Exediron wrote:So, a question for the people who currently think Russell is the better driver: If Norris is able to match or beat Ricciardo next year, do we assume by default that he's better, or do we assume that Russell is a Verstappen level driver?

As for a comparison to Verstappen, if Lando beats Ricciardo then it would make sense at least to elevate him to a level where we wonder if he is in the same ballpark as the likes of Verstappen and Hamilton. It must be said though that for the most part Verstappen was quite a lot quicker than Ricciardo for the last year or so of their time together, but he still lacked maturity and sometimes missed out on opportunities which instead Ricciardo capitalised on. It would have to be a pretty decent whoopin' to be sure Lando would be in such a bracket, but even if he just beats Ricciardo then I think we'll have seen enough to conclude that Norris is the nuts. However, Russell is still the chap with the pathway to the Black Panther, though his stock doesn't rise with Lando's in this scenario without himself really doing anything.

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:Poker,

Russell destroying teammates - well, if the teammates are weak enough, that really is a non-issue. Anyone on the grid and several drivers more would have "destroyed" Kubica and Latifi these two seasons.

Your argument about EuroF3 and being in the right team is a little too convenient. Actually, it makes Norris F3 title even more impressive as he was not driving for the dominant team ...

Compare their first four years in racing F3 and higher:

First year:
Russell 2015 Euro F3 6th
Norris 2017 Euro F3 Champion

Second:
GR 2016 Euro F3 3rd
LN 2018 F2 Vice-Champion

Third:
GR 2017 GP3 Champion
LN 2019 F1 McLaren

Fourth:
GR 2018 GP2 Champion
LN 2020 F1 McLaren

In other words: Norris is experience-wise now where Russell was during his GP2 campaign ...

They actually both started car racing in 2014, Norris a year later with actual single seater racing.

Going into their first season of F3 racing, Russell had 1 season of single seater racing taking in 40 races, in contrast Norris had 2 seasons of single seater racing taking in 111 races so Norris actually had far more experience.

Going into their F2 campaigns Norris had competed in 144 races, Russell had competed in 120 races, Russell's greater experience was only in having competed at and won at a higher level than Norris.

Exediron wrote:So, a question for the people who currently think Russell is the better driver: If Norris is able to match or beat Ricciardo next year, do we assume by default that he's better, or do we assume that Russell is a Verstappen level driver?

If he beats Ricciardo then he's proven himself at a higher level than Russell with Russell only having the potential argument, so the roles will have been reversed.

Both are very promising, seemingly in control at all times, cool headed and fast.

However, I witnessed (in the flesh) Norris do something at Silverstone in F2 which I have never seen Russel approach, in 5th climbing up through the field after a poor qualifying and on the penultimate lap he passed the guys in 3rd & 4th in one manoeuvre at a point on the circuit not considered an overtaking spot.

OK, the guys in front were fighting but Norris set up the pass and executed it, it was a stand out moment, the kind that makes you sit up in your seat and take notice. That one moment was 'special'.

Having said that, Russel, also climbing up after a poor qualifying, finished ahead

Russel was quicker that day but it was also clear why, his car (dominant that year) was planted through the fast corners (e.g. Abbey complex), Norris was obviously working much harder to maintain that speed, his car was moving around a lot.

Battle Far wrote:Both are very promising, seemingly in control at all times, cool headed and fast.

However, I witnessed (in the flesh) Norris do something at Silverstone in F2 which I have never seen Russel approach, in 5th climbing up through the field after a poor qualifying and on the penultimate lap he passed the guys in 3rd & 4th in one manoeuvre at a point on the circuit not considered an overtaking spot.

OK, the guys in front were fighting but Norris set up the pass and executed it, it was a stand out moment, the kind that makes you sit up in your seat and take notice. That one moment was 'special'.

Having said that, Russel, also climbing up after a poor qualifying, finished ahead

Russel was quicker that day but it was also clear why, his car (dominant that year) was planted through the fast corners (e.g. Abbey complex), Norris was obviously working much harder to maintain that speed, his car was moving around a lot.

I stipulate again if Russelll had a domnant car then why did his teammate Aitken, a Renault junior driver, only finish 11th in the series, also why would he be qualifying so poorly in such a car?

pokerman wrote:

Battle Far wrote:Both are very promising, seemingly in control at all times, cool headed and fast.

However, I witnessed (in the flesh) Norris do something at Silverstone in F2 which I have never seen Russel approach, in 5th climbing up through the field after a poor qualifying and on the penultimate lap he passed the guys in 3rd & 4th in one manoeuvre at a point on the circuit not considered an overtaking spot.

OK, the guys in front were fighting but Norris set up the pass and executed it, it was a stand out moment, the kind that makes you sit up in your seat and take notice. That one moment was 'special'.

Having said that, Russel, also climbing up after a poor qualifying, finished ahead

Russel was quicker that day but it was also clear why, his car (dominant that year) was planted through the fast corners (e.g. Abbey complex), Norris was obviously working much harder to maintain that speed, his car was moving around a lot.

I stipulate again if Russelll had a domnant car then why did his teammate Aitken, a Renault junior driver, only finish 11th in the series, also why would he be qualifying so poorly in such a car?

I assume you're looking for a more sophisticated answer than because Aitken isn't particularly good?

Dominant or not there is no doubt you would pick a very experienced and successful ART team over a Carlin team new to the series. All things considered and given how good Russell no way should Norris have been able to beat him in F2.

To me, Norris' year was more impressive given all the factors. Russell is very, very good but I see a bit of stardust in Lando.

Paolo_Lasardi wrote: First year:
Russell 2015 Euro F3 6th
Norris 2017 Euro F3 Champion

Second:
GR 2016 Euro F3 3rd
LN 2018 F2 Vice-Champion

Third:
GR 2017 GP3 Champion
LN 2019 F1 McLaren

Fourth:
GR 2018 GP2 Champion
LN 2020 F1 McLaren

Just to flan the flames a little lets see who they were up against:

2015 Euro F3
Rosenqvuist
Giovanazzi
Dennis
Leclerc
Russel


2016 Euro F3
Stroll
Gunther
Russel
Cassidy
Eriksson
Ilott

2017 GP3
Russel
Aitkin
Fukuzumi
Hubert
Alesi
Boccolacci

2017 Euro F3
Norris
Eriksson
Gunther
Ilott
Hughes
Daruvala

2018 F2
Russel
Norris
Albon
de Vries
Markelov
Sette Camara

mikeyg123 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Battle Far wrote:Both are very promising, seemingly in control at all times, cool headed and fast.

However, I witnessed (in the flesh) Norris do something at Silverstone in F2 which I have never seen Russel approach, in 5th climbing up through the field after a poor qualifying and on the penultimate lap he passed the guys in 3rd & 4th in one manoeuvre at a point on the circuit not considered an overtaking spot.

OK, the guys in front were fighting but Norris set up the pass and executed it, it was a stand out moment, the kind that makes you sit up in your seat and take notice. That one moment was 'special'.

Having said that, Russel, also climbing up after a poor qualifying, finished ahead

Russel was quicker that day but it was also clear why, his car (dominant that year) was planted through the fast corners (e.g. Abbey complex), Norris was obviously working much harder to maintain that speed, his car was moving around a lot.

I stipulate again if Russelll had a domnant car then why did his teammate Aitken, a Renault junior driver, only finish 11th in the series, also why would he be qualifying so poorly in such a car?

I assume you're looking for a more sophisticated answer than because Aitken isn't particularly good?

Dominant or not there is no doubt you would pick a very experienced and successful ART team over a Carlin team new to the series. All things considered and given how good Russell no way should Norris have been able to beat him in F2.

To me, Norris' year was more impressive given all the factors. Russell is very, very good but I see a bit of stardust in Lando.

Carlin won the teams title, you don't really do that in an inferior car, the following year Norris' teammate Camara was beaten by his teammate Latifi who's presently getting easily beat by Russell in F1, granted Latifi is a rookie, I've already said this.

Prema dominated F2 in 2016 despite being a rookie team, whilst Carlin in its second season in F2 managed to win 2 feature races with unrated drivers Matshutita and Deletraz, I win more than Norris managed. This year they should already have won one feature race win with rookie driver Tsuonda but for a radio malfunction that ruined a race he was winning easily, Carlin look like a top team to me, Red Bull have placed both their drivers in the team.

DOLOMITE wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 21, 2020 8:46 am

It's a close call between Norris and Russel but having watched the '18 F2 series where him and Russel were the class of the field I'm giving it to Russel. He has a terrific blend of speed and consistency and was so self-assured - and is the same now despite the car handicap. Norris was probably quicker more spectacular on occasion but when it came to the driver needing to adapt to the race as it unfolded and deal with changing situations, Russel always seemed to shine. I started watching the series because I was interested in the hype around Norris but came away thinking Russel edges it.

Still time for Norris, but thank-you George!