I would not have liked to have driven with all the electronic aids the drivers have today, because I feel it would have taken away much of the skill that was required to balance the car. To be able to control wheelspin and traction, to balance oversteer and understeer and to make the car slide when I wanted it to were all happy and gratifying experiences.

When I said this to Michael [Schumacher], he did not agree, explaining that having all the modern gizmos allowed him to concentrate more on the driving itself. I can't understand that, but he certainly has the credentials to prove his point. The effect of technological development on driving style is one reason why it is so difficult to compare drivers of different eras.

Another is the importance of the Championship. When I started racing, the thing that mattered to me was to try to win that day’s race. Then the World Championship was introduced and that became the big prize; even bigger than winning individual races. This is great in one way, but it is not always good for pure racing.

I remember well the championship of 1956, when driving a Vanwall at the last race in Casablanca I had to win, get fastest lap and for Hawthorn not be second to take the Championship title. I did win, did record fastest lap and, with one lap to go, Mike was third. Then Phil Hill, correctly, let him take his second place. The title superseded the race, which I suppose is correct.

Safety is another aspect. At 18, to me, one of the most crucial ingredients was the danger. The bravado of youth, I guess, but it was as important to me, as salt is in cooking! Fortunately, F1 cars and circuits are much safer now, but this has brought with it a change in ethics. Fangio, Clark or myself would never have pushed each other off (as this was too dangerous) or cheated (that was for others) but now it seems to be accepted or tolerated.

For some reason I can accept dirty driving more easily than cheating, providing it is not dangerous. Sometimes it may happen “in heat of the moment”. But Michael’s Monaco decision was not only premeditated, having ascertained that he was still on pole, but stupid as well. Surely he should have bent the nose a bit, got out and thrown his helmet on the ground. We would all have felt sorry for him! He demeaned his status as a world champion.

In my view, Fangio was the best driver there has ever been, but then I am biased. I drove with him and against him. I knew how fast he was, always, whatever car, whatever the conditions. I could beat him in sports cars, but F1 was, and is, the pinnacle. I beat him once in F1, at Aintree in 1955, but I'm not sure that he didn't “allow” that as a gesture. He was humble, a great champion, and a gentleman.

In second, I would go for [Ayrton] Senna, a great natural talent, with some black marks against him, who was killed before he had time to show how truly great he might have been.

Then Jimmy Clark, who was a very polished driver. With Colin Chapman to help him, he became unbeatable.

I would put Michael Schumacher in fourth. He has shown how fast, consistent and talented he is. How he can galvanise a team. He makes mistakes, but is magic in the wet. As I have said, Michael has a few black marks on his record, but that is today's integrity.

Equal with him, but quite different, was Tazio Nuovolari, a man with terrific charisma who would drive the wheels off all his cars - to win.