Your Top Seven Drivers of 2010 - part IV (final standings)

It may have been on a par with the Ferrari pace-wise, in Lewis'hands at least, but it wasn't reliable enough.

And that would be race pace versus one lap pace...

Based on this new information from McLaren: http://www.f1fanatic...nd-fastest-car/ , that indeed the McLaren was the second fastest car on the grid I am revising my rating of the top seven drivers.

This may well be the honest view of the factory, it may well be a bit of PR to inflate the apparent performance of the car (better to tell the world you built the second best car of the season rather than the third best).

But ultimately it's a big PR blunder.

They are basically saying that Hamilton and Button, their WDC-winning best-of-British driver pairing, couldn't beat Alonso, Ron Dennis' nemesis (well, one of several), despite having a better car. Oops.

It may have been on a par with the Ferrari pace-wise, in Lewis'hands at least, but it wasn't reliable enough.

...also, in Lewis' hands at least.

This may well be the honest view of the factory, it may well be a bit of PR to inflate the apparent performance of the car (better to tell the world you built the second best car of the season rather than the third best).

But ultimately it's a big PR blunder.

They are basically saying that Hamilton and Button, their WDC-winning best-of-British driver pairing, couldn't beat Alonso, Ron Dennis' nemesis (well, one of several), despite having a better car. Oops.

Admirable PR indeed...

...also, in Lewis' hands at least.;)

Back to lewis the carbreaker I see

Hamilton had a great season up Monza, then it sort of went down hill.

But you could say the same for Alonso, he had an avrage season up to germany then drove great rest of the season. How you draw your conclusion that Hamilton didn´t have a stellar season is beyond me. Either you just don´t like Hamilton or you´re just remembering the races from monza onwards

the view of the factory is PR...but flawed PR that any honest fan who paid attention can see right through. They crunch the numbers of Alonso/Massa in qualifying and race pace vs numbers of Lewis/Jenson in qualifying and race-pace and equate that as the 25 been better than F10 as if the driver input across the board was constant and equal all year. Which we simply know it wasnt. Thats just Tim Goss covering his ass, he was in charge of the 25.


As for Kubica being the clear best last year, I dont see it at all... Rosberg has just as much a shout, if not better. Rosberg beating his 7times WDC teammate>>>Kubica beating his paydriver rookie teammate. Perhaps Schumacher wasnt that rusty and it was Rosberg that was just uber quick. Any pure facts to argue against that? Rosberg made few mistakes overall also.

If Jenson had being in the Renault and put in the performance he put in this season, you might say he is the clear best considering Jenson made zero mistakes apart from being relatively slow. But if he had Petrov for a teammate, the speed issue wouldn't likely surface at all....and you will all be looking at a guy who handily beat his teammate and made zero mistakes. Think about that.

As for Kubica being the clear best last year, I dont see it at all... Rosberg has just as much a shout, if not better. Rosberg beating his 7times WDC teammate>>>Kubica beating his paydriver rookie teammate. Perhaps Schumacher wasnt that rusty and it was Rosberg that was just uber quick. Any pure facts to argue against that? Rosberg made few mistakes overall also.

If Jenson had being in the Renault and put in the performance he put in this season, you might say he is the clear best considering Jenson made zero mistakes apart from being relatively slow. But if he had Petrov for a teammate, the speed issue wouldn't likely surface at all....and you will all be looking at a guy who handily beat his teammate and made zero mistakes. Think about that.

I think both Rosberg and Kubica were very consistent and constantly getting the best from the car, the reason I think Kubica get's the edge was because he had higher high points and more memorable moments. I don't think anyone is calling Kubica great because he crushed Petrov, he's getting the attention for his performances in Australia, Monaco, Spa, Singapore and Japan all the while being consistently in the points.

Back to lewis the carbreaker I see ;)

Hamilton had a great season up Monza, then it sort of went down hill.

But you could say the same for Alonso, he had an avrage season up to germany then drove great rest of the season. How you draw your conclusion that Hamilton didn´t have a stellar season is beyond me. Either you just don´t like Hamilton or you´re just remembering the races from monza onwards

Absolutely true, they all have not been faultless. Alonso´s Monaco was despicable, so was Silverstone and his bad start in Australia. Lewis having been off it from Monza onwards and then twice overtaken by Alonso in two consecutive races - I didn´t think I would see that ever happen.
This is also what I base my "Alonso over Hamilton" judgement on, not that Alonso was terrible in the first half and Lewis out of sorts in the second half, but that Alonso pressured/outwitted/outdrove Hamilton twice.
Yes of course, the tyres....

Apart from that Alonso/Hamilton scenario, maybe people are right in putting Kubica so high up, he was the least faulty driver of the top echelon - well no, also Rosberg was relatively faultless.

Vettel was not a genius either, if I take Turkey and Spa I don´t know how just it is that this man became WDC. And, mind you, I am a fan of Vettel´s positive sides, which are plenty.

As for Kubica being the clear best last year, I dont see it at all... Rosberg has just as much a shout, if not better. Rosberg beating his 7times WDC teammate>>>Kubica beating his paydriver rookie teammate. Perhaps Schumacher wasnt that rusty and it was Rosberg that was just uber quick. Any pure facts to argue against that? Rosberg made few mistakes overall also.

I was watching Schumacher onboard camera this season and what I was seeing was Schumi having terrible time driving. I dont know if that was related to the car not to his liking or Schumacher 3 years break period. From that my thinking is that it wasn't Rosberg that good but rather Schumacher's troubles.

Also another brick to build my opinion is when Rosberg, Hamilton and Kubica were in karting, Rosberg was the slowest. It doesn't mean it has to be the same in F1 as it is a completely different car, but just another something ...

Let's see if Rosberg can still beat Schumacher next year...

Too bad the results are not ascending >< descending, would be easier to read in one glimpse !
But interesting !

Based on this new information from McLaren: http://www.f1fanatic...nd-fastest-car/ , that indeed the McLaren was the second fastest car on the grid I am revising my rating of the top seven drivers.

1. Vettel
2. Alonso
3. Webber
4. Kubica
5. Rosberg
6. Hamilton
7. Button

Hamilton now drops behind Rosberg. I had based my original list on the premise that Hamilton had put the third best car into fourth place. This changes as now he had put the second place car into fourth which demonstrates Hamilton as an underperforming driver given the equipment provided.

Wow thats huge

Lets forget that without the mechanical DNF's Lewis would have been WDC

Wow thats huge

Lets forget that without the mechanical DNF's Lewis would have been WDC

You are forgetting about Vettels mechanical DNF's.

Edited by thuGG, 02 December 2010 - 12:21.

...also, in Lewis' hands at least.;)

So two gearbox problems and a faulty front wheel rim are his fault?

You are forgetting about Vettels mechanical DNF's.

Everyone knows the Red Bull was by far the fastest car so what point are you trying to make?

Everyone knows the Red Bull was by far the fastest car so what point are you trying to make?

So what? That doesn't change the fact that if we would exclude mechanical DNF's of both drivers, Vettel would still be a WDC. It's logical reasoning.

(...)Relative to Kubica it would be interesting to see, we have no direct comparisons. How good is the Renault, how good the Mercedes? I would still assume Schumacher is much better than Petrov, thus, the Mercedes may not have been that much better than the Renault at all, if these two cars were not indeed evenly matched at all.

From James Allen website:

It was a very close one between Kubica, Nico Rosberg and Jenson Button and if I was carrying this list on, I’d put them in that order. The reason I’d put Kubica a fraction ahead of Rosberg is that he finished just six points behind in the table in a car which was slower for most of the season. I’ve checked the data with various engineers and the Mercedes was faster on the whole.

Overall Mercedes had better car. And from my point of view, Kubica did better job in that Renault than Rosberg in Mercedes. I have no doubt about it. And it's not about that Kubica smashed Petrov. Robert had few brilliant races, proving his great class, like in Monaco. Have you seen his onboard from Monaco? It was madness! Do you really think that someone could squeeze more in that Renault? Well, I don't think so...

So what? That doesn't change the fact that if we would exclude mechanical DNF's of both drivers, Vettel would still be a WDC. It's logical reasoning.

Comparisons were being made between the Ferrari and McLaren, then you threw Vettel into the mix

I'm sure Renault was equal over the whole season. First few races Mercedes with an advantage, later in the year Renault was on par or better in a few races (Montreal, Valencia, Spa etc.)

wasn`t mercedes based on last year`s wcc brawn?
if yes, i can even assume that both drivers underperformed this year with only 3 podiums of rosberg.
look at 2009. how many podiums did rosberg achieve in a car with ddd advantage? and take under consideration that he was driving against rbr and brawn duos and trulli, glock in toyotas.
so maybe merc was capable of more, but renault? no way, man. from pr poit of view losing to renault would have been a disaster for last year champions, thats why they had to develope their car till the end.
at the beggining of the season i wasn`t able to find differencies between r30 and r29 and few people thought renault had unveiled last year car.
at preseasonal tests it looked slower than few other teams and i`m not sure if other driver than kubica would have been able to qualify that car in front of sutil or barichello for example.
so, why people claim renault and merc were even is really beyond me.

Edited by barni, 02 December 2010 - 13:29.

Too bad the results are not ascending >< descending, would be easier to read in one glimpse !
But interesting !

I´ll prepare the charts in descending order on the weekend, at the moment I haven´t got enough time on my hands. Stay tuned!

So two gearbox problems and a faulty front wheel rim are his fault?

No, just saying in Button´s hands that did not happen....

From James Allen website:



Overall Mercedes had better car. And from my point of view, Kubica did better job in that Renault than Rosberg in Mercedes. I have no doubt about it. And it's not about that Kubica smashed Petrov. Robert had few brilliant races, proving his great class, like in Monaco. Have you seen his onboard from Monaco? It was madness! Do you really think that someone could squeeze more in that Renault? Well, I don't think so...

True, Monaco was brilliant and a true testament to Robert´s strength.

Someone? Quite a few could have squeezed the same: Alonso, Trulli, Hamilton, for example.

No, just saying in Button´s hands that did not happen....

Why?

Nonsense

Edited by Bonaventura, 02 December 2010 - 13:49.

No, just saying in Button´s hands that did not happen....

Because Lewis has a history of being a car breaker?

wasn`t mercedes based on last year`s wcc brawn?

This year and last year is a different story. We all know for what reason the Brawn had the big advantage the last year and all was gone this year.

Based on this new information from McLaren: http://www.f1fanatic...nd-fastest-car/ , that indeed the McLaren was the second fastest car on the grid I am revising my rating of the top seven drivers.

1. Vettel
2. Alonso
3. Webber
4. Kubica
5. Rosberg
6. Hamilton
7. Button

Hamilton now drops behind Rosberg. I had based my original list on the premise that Hamilton had put the third best car into fourth place. This changes as now he had put the second place car into fourth which demonstrates Hamilton as an underperforming driver given the equipment provided.

And webber being third in the best car plus not losing anything like as many points to reliability as hamilton demonstrates what?

And webber being third in the best car plus not losing anything like as many points to reliability as hamilton demonstrates what?

Well, it's a good new reason to bash Lewis

And webber being third in the best car plus not losing anything like as many points to reliability as hamilton demonstrates what?

Proves a bit of bashing going on again

Guess who are the three drivers Sir Frank Williams currently rates the most?

look at 2009. how many podiums did rosberg achieve in a car with ddd advantage? and take under consideration that he was driving against rbr and brawn duos and trulli, glock in toyotas.

True fact: Sauber was the first team to copy the F-duct this year. How much of an advantage did they get?

Rosberg and Kubica were vanishingly close this year, it's true. In the end, I have to give it to Rosberg if for no other reason than that a car in which he scored two podiums in the first four races was ripped out from under him because his teammate was not fast enough in it (and this is Keith Collantine's data reading, not mine). Of all the things Kubica had to deal with, that was not one of them.

But while we're on the subject of things that are "beyond" us, I'm wondering if anyone really thinks James Allen would put Rosberg in his 2010 top 5 when Rosberg made such a fool of him this year.

Guess who are the three drivers Sir Frank Williams currently rates the most?

Who could that be?

Everyone knows the Red Bull was by far the fastest car so what point are you trying to make?

He is countering your point about DNFs ...

If you remove Lewis DNFs , then remove Seb DNFs too ...

If Seb did not have DNFs .. Whether Lewis DNFs or not will not even matter! Seb was so far ahead.

BTW according to the new info - McLaren wasnt as bad as their drivers made it out to be

Guess who are the three drivers Sir Frank Williams currently rates the most?

Making it very exiting!!!

I would say Maldonado, Hülkenberg and Barrichello.

Making it very exiting!!!

I would say Maldonado, Hülkenberg and Barrichello.

I would say Vettel, Hamilton and Barrichello (because he is Williams driver).

I would say Vettel, Hamilton and Barrichello (because he is Williams driver).

You are right on 2 out of 3. His list indeed includes Vettel and Hamilton. Sadly Barrichello is not one of them. Keep guessing.

I would say Vettel, Hamilton and Barrichello (because he is Williams driver).

And Bobby Kubica

You are right on 2 out of 3. His list indeed includes Vettel and Hamilton. Sadly Barrichello is not one of them. Keep guessing.

Must be Kubica, when a Kubica fan (zawisza) posted the question with a " "

Edited by Bonaventura, 02 December 2010 - 17:20.

You are right on 2 out of 3. His list indeed includes Vettel and Hamilton. Sadly Barrichello is not one of them. Keep guessing.

I guess Alonso is the third.

Must be Kubica, when a Kubica fan (zawisza) posted the question with a " "

My traces left a clear message Mr Winnetou.

I guess Alonso is the third.

Mmm, or Rosberg I guess.

He is countering your point about DNFs ...

If you remove Lewis DNFs , then remove Seb DNFs too ...

If Seb did not have DNFs .. Whether Lewis DNFs or not will not even matter! Seb was so far ahead.

BTW according to the new info - McLaren wasnt as bad as their drivers made it out to be

What do you expect with the fastest car? If Seb didn't win this year's world championship minus his car failing him then all things considered that would've been quite a poor season from him.


What new info is that? Surely not Tim Goss's defense of what was clearly not the best car.

Mmm, or Rosberg I guess.

SFW apparently didn't even vote for Rosberg last year, when Nico scored every last point Williams got. Why would he do so now?;)

Making it very exiting!!!

I would say Maldonado, Hülkenberg and Barrichello.

Without knowing the answer I would say the same

SFW apparently didn't even vote for Rosberg last year, when Nico scored every last point Williams got. Why would he do so now?;)

Sir Frank, bless him, always had a blind spot on (his) drivers. Far too big a wedge of the Williams operating budget in his opinion apparently. The "we are an engineering company" became all-pervading and the evidence supports that. The treatment of drivers as disposable - Mansell, Hill and plenty more over the years shows that they (mainly Sir Frank I believe) are of the opinion that there are other drivers who can get the job done just as well for less money.

Rosberg flattered last year's car IMHO. After 4 years of loyal service Nico got for his troubles some rather offhand parting shots from his former employers. Sad the whole driver relationship thing at Williams I think. I really would like to see them come to the front again but it's just not at all likely now. The decline was due to bigger issues than just drivers though.

Yes on the top drivers I believe the RedBull was such a superior car that both drivers should be regarded as not quite front rank. Both were terribly inconsistent and made some really bad mistakes, as did Hamilton and Alonso. Button lacked for speed, all importantly against his teammate which leaves 2 other drivers to seriously rate at the top, Kubica and Rosberg. For me, a Nico fan, I have to rate Robert as number one, superb aggression and consistency, Rosberg, amazing saves to consistently qualify the car well despite tyre issues, just not there (yet) but still growing I believe. But my rankings are for 2010 only, not talent or potential or any other thing.

Kubica. Rosberg, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel, Button, Webber.

I would expect McLaren and Hamilton to bounce back soon as the boy despite a penchant for dumb and dumber, really is a class act. Alonso is also annoying with his arrogant self belief but a very tough competitor and also mega quick. 2011 could be even better than 2010 if Merc pick up their act.

Edited by Muz Bee, 02 December 2010 - 20:52.

True fact: Sauber was the first team to copy the F-duct this year. How much of an advantage did they get?
Rosberg and Kubica were vanishingly close this year, it's true. In the end, I have to give it to Rosberg if for no other reason than that a car in which he scored two podiums in the first four races was ripped out from under him because his teammate was not fast enough in it (and this is Keith Collantine's data reading, not mine). Of all the things Kubica had to deal with, that was not one of them.

But while we're on the subject of things that are "beyond" us, I'm wondering if anyone really thinks James Allen would put Rosberg in his 2010 top 5 when Rosberg made such a fool of him this year.;)

what i mean is, for example, if rosberg had not gone for fastest lap in aus 2009, eating his tyres, he would have probably finished that race on podium. your sauber argument is not valid, because, to be honest, 2009 williams was podium capable car with fully integrated dd difuser from the very beginning. ok, perhaps toyota was better car, maybe even a winning one (first 4 races), but their drivers didn`t deliver, so virtually rosberg had only 4 faster cars ahead in the first half of the season (toyota eliminated themseves in bahrain by their strategy mess and, let`s say, very weak drives of the drivers).

as for the changes in the car, that were made towards ms, you`re right, that didn`t help nico, but was it done for pr advantages (you know: 7xwdc selling your road cars) or maybe the team just didn`t believe in nico? you choose the answer.

Edited by barni, 02 December 2010 - 21:26.

1. Hamilton
2. Alonso
3. Vettel
4. Webber
5. Rosberg
6. Kubica
7. Button/Kobayashi

your sauber argument is not valid, because, to be honest, 2009 williams was podium capable car with fully integrated dd difuser from the very beginning.

The point of my argument is that not every team integrates a technological advance equally well. The FW31 had other issues, including an aero problem that actually caused the car to lose speed the longer it stayed out. By the time that fault was fixed, the double-D advantage was gone. So no, I don't think the 2009 Williams was "podium-ready" from the word go.

And webber being third in the best car plus not losing anything like as many points to reliability as hamilton demonstrates what?

,
Perhaps I have Webber rated to high, as much as I dislike Webber his performance against the best driver on track, Vettel, was impressive so I had him ahead of Kubica. I wouldn't disagree to much with switching Kubica and Webber.

Hamilton did well early on but faltered once again at the critical time when the championship battle heated. And having now confirmed by McLaren that theirs was the second fastest car, a tenth faster than the Ferrari on race pace, it puts Hamilton into a much different light. He underperformed the car. He should have been ahead of Alonso if he had been skilled enough to extract car's full potential.

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 02 December 2010 - 23:31.

,
Perhaps I have Webber rated to high, as much as I dislike Webber his performance against the best driver on track, Vettel, was impressive so I had him ahead of Kubica. I wouldn't disagree to much with switching Kubica and Webber.

Hamilton did well early on but faltered once again at the critical time when the championship battle heated. And having now confirmed by McLaren that theirs was the second fastest car, a tenth faster than the Ferrari on race pace, it puts Hamilton into a much different light. He underperformed the car. He should have been ahead of Alonso if he had been skilled enough to extract car's full potential.

Your arguments are laughable. There's no clear 2nd and 3rd best car. The Ferrari and McLaren have been very close all year and the fact that you create your ranking on this supposed car order says enough. It's like you haven't been watching all season and simply create a list based on a comment from a McLaren employee. Why did you wait for this comment from McLaren anyway? They already finished 2nd in the constructors championship. For you that must be more than enough reason to claim Hamilton underperformed.

,
Perhaps I have Webber rated to high, as much as I dislike Webber his performance against the best driver on track, Vettel, was impressive so I had him ahead of Kubica. I wouldn't disagree to much with switching Kubica and Webber.

Hamilton did well early on but faltered once again at the critical time when the championship battle heated. And having now confirmed by McLaren that theirs was the second fastest car, a tenth faster than the Ferrari on race pace, it puts Hamilton into a much different light. He underperformed the car. He should have been ahead of Alonso if he had been skilled enough to extract car's full potential.

Everybody could see that the McLaren was extremely difficult to drive, especially after the introduction of the EBD
perhaps the McLaren was faster on some tracks with long straights, but the car was c**p in tight slow corners on bumpy tracks and at the end in the wet, too
What brings a faster car if the drivers can't keep it on the track?
So, if Lewis has underperformed, what did Button?
If Lewis could not extract the full potential of the car, who on earth could?

Edited by Bonaventura, 02 December 2010 - 23:52.

Your arguments are laughable. There's no clear 2nd and 3rd best car. The Ferrari and McLaren have been very close all year and the fact that you create your ranking on this supposed car order says enough. It's like you haven't been watching all season and simply create a list based on a comment from a McLaren employee. Why did you wait for this comment from McLaren anyway? They already finished 2nd in the constructors championship. For you that must be more than enough reason to claim Hamilton underperformed.

Come on now, Ferrari didn't finish second because they were basically a one driver team. If you were watching all the races (and I know you were!) you know this. The Mclaren data is very clear, over the season they had the second best car. They should know. And yes I rely partly on the car order when thinking about ranking the drivers as it is a factor, I don't see why this is laughable.

As well Hamilton had benefitted from non-calls this season which helped his point total. Weaving, passing the safety car, racing in the pits, free quali lap in Montreal etc. This also takes away from his relative standing in my view.

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 03 December 2010 - 00:00.