Mark Webber on the favourites for 2014 and who's the best driver he'd raced against

Ah of course, since it's called Wdc that means that the driver is the one and only variable that is related in getting wdc points. The sum of wdc points are used for wcc but don't tell anyone.
Or better yet: see the wcc points? That's how much better the Rbr was. They are called wcc points for a reason.

You can't judge a car for it's WCC points as a good driver will get WCC points to the team (Vettel won the WCC by himself this year). Essentially you could never win the WDC in a bad car as winning means you have the most points towards WCC...so cirkular logic. It's like some on the board saying that you can only judge Vettel when he doesn't have a winning car and still wins but thats impossible as even winning in a Marussia means he's winning in a winning car that was the best in that race because it won

But in Webber´s hands the RBR was no dominating car.

Like I alluded to, I don't rate Webber in any of the recent seasons.  Bar Red Bull, who took him prior to a dominant period with Newey, no top team committed to him as a no1 driver.

Seb is merely a lot better than Webber is exactly the same way that Alonso is against Massa.

That to me leaves the Jury out on Seb and how he rates against Alonso, Hamilton and Kimi.  Kubica also has the jury out on Seb.

1. How many Formula 1 race wins did Red Bull Racing have prior to Vettel's employ?

 

2. How many WCCs did Red Bull Racing win prior to Vettel's employ?

 

Go ahead, I'll wait for your answer.

What about before exhaust blowing and Newey? I'm waiting too!

And before you go on about the "clamping down of the exhaust blowing":

I don't care what they say, there is still a massive amount of blowing on an F1 car. - Button

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/111874

Edited by prty, 19 December 2013 - 09:34.

What about before exhaust blowing and Newey? I'm waiting too!

Well Newey didn't have a single win with RBR before Vettel and Vettel didn't drive RBR before exhaust blowing....ofcourse you could also say that how many times did Vettel win in a RBR prior to 2009 rules and personel and it would be as valid a point as what you just wrote.

Was the bookies favourite going into the last race of 2010.

 

Are you saying you can be great unless you're a WDC? 

 

Best of the nearly men for mine - would beat button in the same car.

He may have been the bookies favorite, I wouldn't know about that or care really

Yes you could be a great without winning a WDC, Sterling Moss was a great to most people.

Best of the nearly men, again I don't really know or care.

Hes an average driver who had a few very good races and a decent year in 2010 but from there he has managed to make a great car look average.

Like I alluded to, I don't rate Webber in any of the recent seasons.  Bar Red Bull, who took him prior to a dominant period with Newey, no top team committed to him as a no1 driver.

Seb is merely a lot better than Webber is exactly the same way that Alonso is against Massa.

 

That to me leaves the Jury out on Seb and how he rates against Alonso, Hamilton and Kimi.  Kubica also has the jury out on Seb.

Does your logic only apply to Seb I wonder?

Is the jury not "still out" on those other drivers you metnioned?

Well Newey didn't have a single win with RBR before Vettel and Vettel didn't drive RBR before exhaust blowing....ofcourse you could also say that how many times did Vettel win in a RBR prior to 2009 rules and personel and it would be as valid a point as what you just wrote.

So it appears that both technical grounds and the driver came at the same time then! Romulan's approach is ignore the technical part and attribute all to Vettel (since they are called WDC points), whereas in reality it should be more like the other way around

Edited by prty, 19 December 2013 - 09:42.

So it appears that both technical grounds and the driver came at the same time then! Romulan's approach is ignore the technical part and attribute all to Vettel (since they are called WDC points), whereas in reality it should be more like the other way around

Yes you could say that...

Vettel has driven full seasons since 2008 and every season he has won with the current personnel of that team and with the regulations for that year. So yes you are ofcourse right, he can only win with a car that is according to regulations and with a team with personnel.

Edited by Module, 19 December 2013 - 09:48.

Red Bull/Newey did not win until after they hired Vettel. 
 

Red Bull is just a brand. And maybe the upcoming holidays are a good time to read up on what Newey achieved before he had Vettel drive one of his cars.

Red Bull is just a brand. And maybe the upcoming holidays are a good time to read up on what Newey achieved before he had Vettel drive one of his cars.

He won 6 x WCC in the 1990's co-designing cars with Head.

1996 Williams he was on gardening leave when the car won WCC

1997 is atributed to him as it was a iteration of the 1996 car and the last he had input in

1998 he won with McLaren WCC, the only one he won without Head before Vettel

He moved to RBR in 2005 and designed the 2006 car but it still took him till 2009 and Vettel to get the first win.

Then came Vettel in 2010, after 13 years and he has since won 4 WCC's on the trot

Prty, you didn't answer my questions:

 

 

 

 

Red Bull/Newey did not win until after they hired Vettel. 
 

Right, because the influence of an engineer (or rather technical team) is immediate. I though common sense answers those questions.

With your logic, when Red Bull wasn't dominating in the first part of 2009, that means that Vettel was not driving well then, right? Same when the car wasn't stable in the first part of 2012 and he fell behind Webber (well, it's the case here actually), or when the 2013 tyres didn't suit the car.

You didn't answer about the exhaust blowing though

He won 6 x WCC in the 1990's co-designing cars with Head.

 

1996 Williams he was on gardening leave when the car won WCC

1997 is atributed to him as it was a iteration of the 1996 car and the last he had input in

 

1998 he won with McLaren WCC, the only one he won without Head before Vettel

 

He moved to RBR in 2005 and designed the 2006 car but it still took him till 2009 and Vettel to get the first win.

 

Then came Vettel in 2010, after 13 years and he has since won 4 WCC's on the trot

Newey also designed Vettel's 2008 Toro Rosso that he won his first victory with that year. Toro Rosso also beat RBR in the standings that year (Identical chassis, I believe, with Webber & Coulthard Driving the RBRs). Though I'm not digging into the role reliability played in 2008, it also gives us a hint of Vettel's high pedigree.

That said, plenty of folks still aren't convinced on just HOW good Vettel is versus the current field. Latest is the controversial and outspoken Eddie Irvine, who also takes some digs at Lewis: 

http://www1.skysport...ent-too-showbiz

"Vettel's record is amazing, though he has kept the best car pretty much every year which Michael didn't have," the Ulsterman added.

"The one thing about Michael was when he won his first two championships he felt, 'This is boring, I'm going to go to Ferrari and re-build Ferrari' and that was very admirable. He struggled there for four years before he won another championship.

"Vettel just staying at Red Bull winning trophies is boring. I don't see what he's trying to prove. Okay, he's going to collect a lot of championships, but you know what, who cares?"

Edited by PoleMan, 19 December 2013 - 13:34.

Newey also designed Vettel's 2008 Toro Rosso that he won his first victory with that year. Toro Rosso also beat RBR in the standings that year (Identical chassis, I believe, with Webber & Coulthard Driving the RBRs). Though I'm not digging into the role reliability played in 2008, it also gives us a hint of Vettel's high pedigree.

 

That said, plenty of folks still aren't convinced on just HOW good Vettel is versus the current field. Latest is the controversial and outspoken Eddie Irvine, who also takes some digs at Lewis: 

http://www1.skysport...ent-too-showbiz

That is kind of the point I'm making as the ones I answered to were on the line of "it's just the car" and "it's Newey". Not to diminish Neweys achievements but he realy had only one WCC to his name from a car designed solely in his name before Vettel, now he has 5 and is the most succesful designer.

"It's just the car" viewpoint is mostly driven by English media, beats me why they want to underline that it's not about the German driver beating British drivers, nor the Austrian registered team beating British teams but about the British designer being out of this world.... And ofcourse by unfairly sabotaging the "half-british" Webber

Edited by Module, 19 December 2013 - 14:01.

Newey also designed Vettel's 2008 Toro Rosso that he won his first victory with that year. Toro Rosso also beat RBR in the standings that year (Identical chassis, I believe, with Webber & Coulthard Driving the RBRs). Though I'm not digging into the role reliability played in 2008, it also gives us a hint of Vettel's high pedigree.

 

And the driveabilty of the detuned Ferrari V10 over the V8s probably played some part. I agree though, it was one of, if not the, best drives of the modern era for a rookie in a team of that stature. Just think of the pressure on him in those conditions. The main reason so many people are unwilling to acknowledge this is because they don't like Vettel as a person. That drive is right up there with Senna/Toleman folklore IMO. Now look what he's done 5 years later, total domination. What more can he do to prove the doubters wrong? He'd probably have to win a championship in a Marussia before some would give him his dues. Dislike him for his attitude but not for his achievements. It's not like Vettel pulling the stunt on Webber won him the title like Schumi did in 94, he just wanted to win. As much as it annoyed me at the time as a fan of Webber 'the bloke' I can look back impartially and in the knowledge that team orders are bullshit and that he deserved to win that one.

Edited by Tenmantaylor, 19 December 2013 - 13:56.

 

 

Best of the nearly men for mine - would beat button in the same car.

Why do you think this, may I ask?

Why would Kimi Raikkonen call a 48 year old when he is drunk?

I hope it's to take the piss with Irvine

Why would Kimi Raikkonen call a 48 year old when he is drunk?

 

I hope it's to take the piss with Irvine

"Hey Eddie, just thinking, we both went into the last race of the season with a Ferrari, but which one came out with the title?"

I am going to be REALLY stupid and make a driver comment and not my usual car - related ones!

I think the most significant part of Mark Webber's comments was about the predictabilty and " loadabilty "(my interpretation)  of Vettel and Alonso versus Hamilton.

I think that , whatever his talents, Hamilton is too high maintainance for modern F1 teams who must deliver every other week for most of the year.

Hamilton seems to  moan  and groan too much and  he comes across so anguished and self analysing in intervews. If he is really like that in a team he is not an ideal driver in modern, deliver every race, F1.

By " loadabilty" I mean the team can just stick the driver in the car, tell him the best technical srtategy even if its not driving at 10/10ths and they know he will do his very best every lap without complaint. Vettel and Alonso appear, at least from public/radio comments , to have that abilty,Hhamilton does not.

And the driveabilty of the detuned Ferrari V10 over the V8s probably played some part. I agree though, it was one of, if not the, best drives of the modern era for a rookie in a team of that stature. Just think of the pressure on him in those conditions. The main reason so many people are unwilling to acknowledge this is because they don't like Vettel as a person. That drive is right up there with Senna/Toleman folklore IMO. Now look what he's done 5 years later, total domination. What more can he do to prove the doubters wrong? He'd probably have to win a championship in a Marussia before some would give him his dues. Dislike him for his attitude but not for his achievements. It's not like Vettel pulling the stunt on Webber won him the title like Schumi did in 94, he just wanted to win. As much as it annoyed me at the time as a fan of Webber 'the bloke' I can look back impartially and in the knowledge that team orders are bullshit and that he deserved to win that one.

they only had that in 2006 though, and with a cossie.

And the driveabilty of the detuned Ferrari V10 over the V8s probably played some part. I agree though, it was one of, if not the, best drives of the modern era for a rookie in a team of that stature. Just think of the pressure on him in those conditions. The main reason so many people are unwilling to acknowledge this is because they don't like Vettel as a person. That drive is right up there with Senna/Toleman folklore IMO.

Really? Let's better post the stats of Red Bull chasis in the wet before Monza.

2007 Nurburgring: Webber 3rd, Coulthard 5th, Speed and Liuzzi spun off

2007 Fuji: Coulthard 4th, Liuzzi 9th, Webber and Vettel crashed into each other while running 2nd and 3rd.

2007 China: Vettel 4th, Liuzzi 6th, Coulthard 8th, Webber 10th

2008 Monaco: Webber 4th, Vettel 5th, Coulthard and Bourdais retired.

The Ferrari engine was better and it was Monza, so 1+1=2. A good drive, but nothing different to what he's doing now: controlling the race in the front with the best car.

Edited by prty, 19 December 2013 - 16:00.

Really? Let's better post the stats of Red Bull chasis in the wet before Monza.

 

2007 Nurburgring: Webber 3rd, Coulthard 5th, Speed and Liuzzi spun off

2007 Fuji: Coulthard 4th, Liuzzi 9th, Webber and Vettel crashed into each other while running 2nd and 3rd.

2007 China: Vettel 4th, Liuzzi 6th, Coulthard 8th, Webber 10th

2008 Monaco: Webber 4th, Vettel 5th, Coulthard and Bourdais retired.

 

The Ferrari engine was better and it was Monza, so 1+1=2. A good drive, but nothing different to what he's doing now: controlling the race in the front with the best car.

Your point is that because the chassis got one podium in Nurburgring in 2007 with Webber and the rest of the times it was a midfield or lower midfield car it was the best car in Monza 2008?

Your point is that because the chassis got one podium in Nurburgring in 2007 with Webber and the rest of the times it was a midfield or lower midfield car it was the best car in Monza 2008?

If that's your interpretation from it, no wonder some of Vettel fans have a bizarre perspective

That is kind of the point I'm making as the ones I answered to were on the line of "it's just the car" and "it's Newey". Not to diminish Neweys achievements but he realy had only one WCC to his name from a car designed solely in his name before Vettel, now he has 5 and is the most succesful designer.

 

"It's just the car" viewpoint is mostly driven by English media, beats me why they want to underline that it's not about the German driver beating British drivers, nor the Austrian registered team beating British teams but about the British designer being out of this world.... And ofcourse by unfairly sabotaging the "half-british" Webber

I was actually agreeing with you, to the extent that Vettel truly is something "special." I think that's clear, and I could deduce that myself from very early on.

But is the dominance he's shown in the past 4-5 years truly emblematic of his superiority over the rest of the field or due more to the fact that he's driving Amazing Newey Machines tailor-made for him? I'm more in Irvine's camp in thinking that Seb should take his trophies and set up shop at another good team unconnected with Newey to answer remaining questions about "was it more him or the car?" He'll obviously do what he likes, but I think questions will persist until he goes elsewhere. Schumi showed how bold and confident he was to leave Bennetton for Ferrari, who hadn't been champs for years. But where I disagree with Irvine is that all Michael did was move the gang from Flavio's lair over to Maranello. He "did it again," so to speak, but with the same core of engineering geniuses from his championship years. Still mightily impressive, but if Seb went to another team and took Newey and Horner along, I don't think he'd get a lot of credit. Villeneuve, Hill, even Patrese for a time in '91, looked pretty handy in Newey cars, so I think if Seb really wants to convince his critics, he'll do it minus Newey. But he'd have to care enough about what they say, and I get the sense he doesn't give a rat's bum. 

If that's your interpretation from it, no wonder some of Vettel fans have a bizarre perspective

Whats bizarre? You post results where the chassis at best is one year earlier 3rd in a wet race and the other times 4-9th and still conclude that:

 

A good drive, but nothing different to what he's doing now: controlling the race in the front with the best car.

Where in your post did you prove anything else than that the car was midfield at best?

Whats bizarre? You post results where the chassis at best is one year earlier 3rd in a wet race and the other times 4-9th and still conclude that:

 

 

Where in your post did you prove anything else than that the car was midfield at best?

The best running positions of the chassis were:

3rd, 2nd, 4th, 4th

That means the car was a podium finisher in the wet, quite different to your "midfielder at best", and a really far cry of "he won with a Minardi". With the advantage of the Ferrari engine over the Renault engine, in Monza of all circuits, it's not a great leap to think that a podium finisher can turn into a race winner. Damn, even Bourdais qualified 4th

 

Edited by prty, 19 December 2013 - 16:47.

The best running positions of the chassis were:
 
3rd, 2nd, 4th, 4th
 
That means the car was a podium finisher in the wet, quite different to your "midfielder at best", and a really far cry of "he won with a Minardi". With the advantage of the Ferrari engine over the Renault engine, in Monza of all circuits, it's not a great leap to think that a podium finisher can turn into a race winner. Damn, even Bourdais qualified 4th

1. How many Formula 1 race wins did Red Bull Racing have prior to Vettel's employ?

 

2. How many WCCs did Red Bull Racing win prior to Vettel's employ?

 

Go ahead, I'll wait for your answer.

Romulan logic? I thought they had progressed to post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 19 December 2013 - 17:49.

To mu knowledge no results have ever been determined by "running order" so the thing stands that the chassis once one year ago managed a podium. Bourdais managed just that in qualy, outside top 3.

There were other Ferrari engines + Mercedes + Renault so a genuinely can't understand how having a engine that others had in a car that had been average would suddenly transform it to the best car of the grid

Of course running order matters. Let's say that two Red Bull chasis are running 2nd and 3rd, and suddenly they crash into each other. The performance that the car has in it had nothing to do with the fact that they crashed. So it does stand, sorry.

I thought that the point with the engine was obvious, but apparently not. The main team had a bottleneck with the engine, which Toro Rosso didn't have. It shows that the Red Bull chassis was indeed quite good in the rain.

Edited by prty, 19 December 2013 - 18:59.

He was off to a slow start and let the rookie get the jump on him.  He was better at the end of the season but it was too little to late especially when he spun in the rain in Japan and put the car in the wall.  It must have been a very frustrated and bitter Alonso racing at McLaren.

 

An 'on his game Alonso' in 2007 would probably have squashed Hamilton like a bug.  Just look at how much trouble Hamilton has had vs lesser drivers (than Alonso) such as Button and Rosberg for example.

 

Yeah riiiiight!....Except Alonso he got a big fright from a rookie -  who trounced him! ..that's what 'appened in 2007!

The general consensus was -  Alonso 'will rape' Hamilton...I thought so too BTW

Edited by Fatgadget, 19 December 2013 - 20:30.

Of course running order matters. Let's say that two Red Bull chasis are running 2nd and 3rd, and suddenly they crash into each other. The performance that the car has in it had nothing to do with the fact that they crashed. So it does stand, sorry.

 

I thought that the point with the engine was obvious, but apparently not. The main team had a bottleneck with the engine, which Toro Rosso didn't have. It shows that the Red Bull chassis was indeed quite good in the rain.

In many of the races running order and who leads at what point isn't the endresult but can depend on many other things. There is a reason why a grand chelem is so seldom seen eventhou there has been many dominant cars in the past. Mostly one race sees several different drivers in diferent positions that don't reflect the endresult, luckily as otherwise racing would be pretty boring.

With what you say about the engine being the bottleneck and about the chassis you make several assumptions that aren't based in real results. The assumption that the engine helped and it was the bottleneck has it's only base in that Vettel was able to win as the rest of the results are what they had been before.

I'm not saying that he won in a Minardi or anything like that, he had a good car as you have to have to win, and was lucky with hamilton 15th, the safetycar and other aspects but that's the only way a midfield car can win. I'm arguing against you saying that he only won because he had the BEST CAR

But in Webber´s hands the RBR was no dominating car.

I wonder, if the driver lineup for the last 5 years at Red Bull had been say Buemi and Webber, would we view the Red Bull cars as dominant?

Would we have ever even seen the cars true potential?

In many of the races running order and who leads at what point isn't the endresult but can depend on many other things. There is a reason why a grand chelem is so seldom seen eventhou there has been many dominant cars in the past. Mostly one race sees several different drivers in diferent positions that don't reflect the endresult, luckily as otherwise racing would be pretty boring.

 

With what you say about the engine being the bottleneck and about the chassis you make several assumptions that aren't based in real results. The assumption that the engine helped and it was the bottleneck has it's only base in that Vettel was able to win as the rest of the results are what they had been before.

 

I'm not saying that he won in a Minardi or anything like that, he had a good car as you have to have to win, and was lucky with hamilton 15th, the safetycar and other aspects but that's the only way a midfield car can win. I'm arguing against you saying that he only won because he had the BEST CAR

Sure it can depend of many things. This is why I isolated the reason of crashing with each other, and said that's one of the exceptions in which the cause of DNF has to do nothing with car performance, right?

If you see quotes from Red Bull back then, they were threatening Renault with switching manufacturers because the engine was quite underpowered. Which wasn't the case with Ferrari. So sorry again but no assumptions.

I'm not saying it was you who said he won in a Minardi, but several people in this forum did. About only winning because he has the best car, I'm not saying that either. I'm saying that he showed he can control races from the front in the best car, but many drivers can do that. There is not enough information of him at the moment when fighting in different circumstances. If he succeeds then, I'm prepared to change my opinion, but until then, I stand by saying he didn't show anything special so far, no matter how many WDCs he has.
 

Sure it can depend of many things. This is why I isolated the reason of crashing with each other, and said that's one of the exceptions in which the cause of DNF has to do nothing with car performance, right?

 

If you see quotes from Red Bull back then, they were threatening Renault with switching manufacturers because the engine was quite underpowered. Which wasn't the case with Ferrari. So sorry again but no assumptions.

 

I'm not saying it was you who said he won in a Minardi, but several people in this forum did. About only winning because he has the best car, I'm not saying that either. I'm saying that he showed he can control races from the front in the best car, but many drivers can do that. There is not enough information of him at the moment when fighting in different circumstances. If he succeeds then, I'm prepared to change my opinion, but until then, I stand by saying he didn't show anything special so far, no matter how many WDCs he has.
 

Declare a tie and continue another day?

Like I alluded to, I don't rate Webber in any of the recent seasons.  Bar Red Bull, who took him prior to a dominant period with Newey, no top team committed to him as a no1 driver.

Seb is merely a lot better than Webber is exactly the same way that Alonso is against Massa.

 

That to me leaves the Jury out on Seb and how he rates against Alonso, Hamilton and Kimi.  Kubica also has the jury out on Seb.

It is a circle jerk issue though.  How do you rate Alonso?  By his performance against against Piquet Jr.?  Fisi?  Massa?  Or the rookie Hamilton where he lost - in which case, did he fail to make the cut?  Or is the jury still out?

Same applies to all of the drivers with the possible exception of Hamilton, but even there you have some inconsistency. 

I think Mark's interview was well done in that it cut to the chase.  The series WDC champion is determined by points earned by the driver/car combination that performs the best on race day.  It is fine for fans to add their personal criteria and make judgments (or hold out on making them) if they want.  But these personal whims are immaterial to the series and the recorded history of the sport.  I think that is what Mark is saying. 

Declare a tie and continue another day?

1. How many Formula 1 race wins did Red Bull Racing have prior to Vettel's employ?

 

2. How many WCCs did Red Bull Racing win prior to Vettel's employ?

 

Go ahead, I'll wait for your answer.

"Romulan's approach is ignore the technical part and attribute all to Vettel . . ."

"Right, because the influence of an engineer (or rather technical team) is immediate. I though common sense answers those questions . . . "

If you wish, you may search my entire history.  What you won't find is me diminishing the value of Adrian Newey or Red Bull in any way.  I've asked you two simple questions, can you give me the simple answers?

Edited by Romulan, 19 December 2013 - 21:23.

It is a circle jerk issue though.  How do you rate Alonso?  By his performance against against Piquet Jr.?  Fisi?  Massa?  Or the rookie Hamilton where he lost - in which case, did he fail to make the cut?  Or is the jury still out?

 

Same applies to all of the drivers with the possible exception of Hamilton, but even there you have some inconsistency. 

 

You know I personally hate the mundane driver/combo analysis and the blind worship of the blanket results, and prefer to judge on relative performance and my own very subjective observations, but this I really agree with.

If you judge Seb as unproven for the last few years against Webber, you have to use the same criteria against Alonso, who has had Massa as his teammate for a dogs age. Its rare that top drivers are direct teammates, Senna/Prost is the exception not the rule, we never got Schumi/Mika, and its unlikely we will get Lewis/Seb or Alonso/Seb.

Its irrelevant anyway, as 2014 both Alonso and Seb get new challenges and we will no doubt learn more. Fans like myself who judge more on performance in teammate comparisons than quantity of WDC's are going to be given a lot more data to work with next year, to decide who ranks where in terms of driver ability.

Edited by sennafan24, 19 December 2013 - 21:28.

If you wish, you may search my entire history.  What you won't find is me diminishing the value of Adrian Newey or Red Bull in any way.  I've asked you two simple questions, can you give me the simple answers?

0 and 0.

Answer me this, how many races did Webber win at Red Bull before the 2009 regulations?

Vettel and RB grew together, both are very strong and key variables to their success. Seb I do not think would have won 4 in a row with another team, but I also do not think outside 2 or 3 other drivers, that anyone on the grid would have a decent chance of winning 4 in a row in a RB.

Simply, it works both ways guv

The Symonds bit about Alonso was in a AMuS interview.  Dau found it and posted the links in the "unregulated aero thread".  You'll have to translate it.  It's in part two.  Basically, Symonds says they decided that Alonso was worth a half second in the car.  And that it was "expensive" Ha!  So it's relative to the other team car or what the car can do... not necessarily to what other car / drivers combo's can do - or over a full race distance.  It pretty much matches what happened at Ferrari, tho.  Anyway, pretty interesting.  I just found the timing of when Symonds and his staff were discussing it and the whole blow up over Alonso's comments when he first tested the McLaren.  So. all credit to Dau for some fascinating info:

dau, on 13 Dec 2013 - 04:39, said:

I remember an interview where Pat Symonds said that the 2012/13 cars have much more downforce than those in 2003. And he was talking about the Marussia. Don't know where that was, maybe i'll find it.

Found it, was a two-part interview over at AMuS. Couldn't find an official translation so Google Translate might have to be your friend this time:

http://www.auto-moto...ld-7436558.html

http://www.auto-moto...en-7436562.html

Edited by JSDSKI, 19 December 2013 - 22:20.

That is kind of the point I'm making as the ones I answered to were on the line of "it's just the car" and "it's Newey". Not to diminish Neweys achievements but he realy had only one WCC to his name from a car designed solely in his name before Vettel, now he has 5 and is the most succesful designer. ....

This is just hogwash logic. 

Firstly,  no race car designer - even Bugatti - was or is solely responsible for a car.  Winning or not.  

Secondly, Newey's record in championships and dominating race cars stands alone at the top of the pyramid. 

0 and 0.

 

[1] Answer me this, how many races did Webber win at Red Bull before the 2009 regulations?

 

[2] Vettel and RB grew together, both are very strong and key variables to their success. [3] Seb I do not think would have won 4 in a row with another team, but I also do not think outside 2 or 3 other drivers, that anyone on the grid would have a decent chance of winning 4 in a row in a RB.

 

[4] Simply, it works both ways guv

1. Zero (0)

2. Agreed

3. Hypothetical hair-splitting is acceptable when discussing opinion.

4. I don't understand what you mean by "both ways". 

Edited by Romulan, 19 December 2013 - 22:09.

So you doubt Pat Symond's analysis because ... "seems like a large number". Why do you think he is not capable of doing this kind of analysis with the data he would have had?

Just seems like a big number. I would like to see the reasoning behind this number because i assume it must take many factors into account rather than just pure speed. 5 tenths per lap on pure pace?

And the driveabilty of the detuned Ferrari V10 over the V8s probably played some part. I agree though, it was one of, if not the, best drives of the modern era for a rookie in a team of that stature. Just think of the pressure on him in those conditions. The main reason so many people are unwilling to acknowledge this is because they don't like Vettel as a person. That drive is right up there with Senna/Toleman folklore IMO. Now look what he's done 5 years later, total domination. What more can he do to prove the doubters wrong? He'd probably have to win a championship in a Marussia before some would give him his dues. Dislike him for his attitude but not for his achievements. It's not like Vettel pulling the stunt on Webber won him the title like Schumi did in 94, he just wanted to win. As much as it annoyed me at the time as a fan of Webber 'the bloke' I can look back impartially and in the knowledge that team orders are bullshit and that he deserved to win that one.

Great post.  Actually, I've always rated Vettel for outright speed and talent - especially watching him at Indy in a difficult BMW.  Not so much for cut and thrust part against other drivers in midfield.  His drive at Monza that day was freaking magical.  And I was impressed by his personal style and attitude.  Had grown into a fan. 

All up until Turkey when he took out Weber.  Then the whole Marko thing. Then Multi21 and his comments afterwards when he basically described his right to do what he wanted - no matter the cost or result or the teams needs.  His hysterical screaming over the radio "it's not fair!" while driving the most dominating car in memory.  Just not as cool a personality to me anymore.

Kind of like Schumacher. Great talent.  Unbelievable records.  But he could never control himself in competitive situations.  In his mind, as in Vettel's, the results prove the value or ethics of his actions. Not fond of that attitude.

Edited by JSDSKI, 19 December 2013 - 22:22.

 

3. Hypothetical hair-splitting is acceptable when discussing opinion.

4. I don't understand what you mean by "both ways". 

3. Just my opinion, its impossible to quantify either way. It comes down to what you think/want to believe.

4. RB and Vettel grew together, the team improved into a monster, and Seb evolved into a world class driver. I know you already sort of agree with this

I wonder, if the driver lineup for the last 5 years at Red Bull had been say Buemi and Webber, would we view the Red Bull cars as dominant?

 

Would we have ever even seen the cars true potential?

How about Button or Kimi?  Seems a fairer comparison.

Well snap my suspenders, the coveted f1RacingForever Crown is more valuable than winning races!

 

 

They've got this little do-hickey measuring-stick called championship points.  You see, at the end of each year, they add them all up and the driver with the most points is awarded the Formula 1 WDC.  Because Sebastian's statistics speak for themselves -- there is no need for hype (your disrespect is always noted).

 

Oh, in case you forgot: Sebastian Vettel has four (4) consecutive WDCs.

Yet you speak of disrespect. Practice what you preach. Listen it's just my opinion so keep your panties on. Perhaps you can try reasoning why you agree/disagree rather then act condescending towards others just because they share a different view. That does little to contribute to an intelligent debate. I can appreciate Vettel's success and don't doubt he is a good driver, i just don't know if he is as good as some would like us to believe. How is that disrespectful? I give up!

I understand how people can get confused when a forum member puts words into my mouth (not you, of course).  If I said Tuesday follows Monday, would you accuse me of bad logic?  Because certain forumers believe Vettel just fell into the cockpit of race-winning car -- I find it necessary to point out that RBR did not win a Formula 1 race until after he was hired. 

I have said this in other threads, Seb showed potential in 2008 that he could be a top driver, and that earned him his promotion to the Red Bull team from Toro Rosso. Whilst RB was not thought to be a front runner before 2009 (thanks Troggy  ) they surprised people by having a good car in 2009, and Seb took the bull by the horns and performed very well by any standard, I would say exceptional given his age.

My opinion of Seb as a racer is very high these days, as is my opinion of the competence of the RB team. So there is no real debate between us.

I don't have anything against you - but your post was worthy of derision.  I apologize if it made you uncomfortable.  Fortunately for us, race wins and Formula 1 titles are fact-based.  And, a belief system is not required to measure how drivers are performing.

 

With all due respect,

 

Romulan

I suppose your of the opinion that Schumacher is 7 times the driver that Hamilton is, twice the driver of senna, or 3 times as good as Alonso is then as a result of having 7, 2, and 3 times the WDC of each? Clearly you can see how your logic where facts count for everything and opinions, nothing, fails? Don't answer, it makes do difference to me.

BTW I don't need your respect of sympathy so spare me your reparations.

Great post.  Actually, I've always rated Vettel for outright speed and talent - especially watching him at Indy in a difficult BMW.  Not so much for cut and thrust part against other drivers in midfield.  His drive at Monza that day was freaking magical.  And I was impressed by his personal style and attitude.  Had grown into a fan. 

 

All up until Turkey when he took out Weber.  Then the whole Marko thing. Then Multi21 and his comments afterwards when he basically described his right to do what he wanted - no matter the cost or result or the teams needs.  His hysterical screaming over the radio "it's not fair!" while driving the most dominating car in memory.  Just not as cool a personality to me anymore.

 

Kind of like Schumacher. Great talent.  Unbelievable records.  But he could never control himself in competitive situations.  In his mind, as in Vettel's, the results prove the value or ethics of his actions. Not fond of that attitude.

Tell me which driver's attitude you like and I'll rip them apart before your eyes with hand selected events I will construe as showing their REAL persona - instead of the numerous activities, words and behavior they have shown over the year(s) I have watched them in the sport.

This is what I think Mark has come to realize.  Seb is not defined by 3 events, but by the 9 years he has been around and Mark has known him, on and off track, as a driver and teammate - and in his case, as a person.  He has spewed all kinds of negative things about Sebastian over the years - and some positive things too.  However, he seemed to have a real problem admitting that Sebastian just might be deserving as past champions of his achievements until now.

Edited by bourbon, 20 December 2013 - 04:30.

Tell me which driver's attitude you like and I'll rip them apart before your eyes with hand selected events I will construe as showing their REAL persona - instead of the numerous activities, words and behavior they have shown over the year(s) I have watched them in the sport.

 

This is what I think Mark has come to realize.  Seb is not defined by 3 events, but by the 9 years he has been around and Mark has known him, on and off track, as a driver and teammate - and in his case, as a person.  He has spewed all kinds of negative things about Sebastian over the years - and some positive things too.  However, he seemed to have a real problem admitting that Sebastian just might be deserving as past champions of his achievements until now.

Webber: "Vettel is not the best he is average but the car made the difference" do you think he would say that ? he compared less to Vettel so if he was to put Vettel in the average category that would make him even less, a mediocre one, No, you can't take it as an objective opinion. BUT if Webber won with Sebastian then it would be much more valid because there would be no agenda behind whatsoever.