Trouble is that in your original assesment you didnt acknowledge it

Didnt he himself say that he struggles a bit to get the most out of the slick tyres over 1 lap in comparison to the grooved tyres

Don't know, did he? Link?

Im sure i read it in your magazine

Were you looking over my shoulder?

I don't work for Autosport.

Autosport provides publication platform for them. Are you suggesting that their credibility is lacking, and Autosport has decended into junkyard level? I think that while imperfect as it cannot answer all questions we have about drivers, and whatever systemic error their rating contains, still it appears to me more reliable barrometer than one based on posters whose forecast is bias based only.

This isn't really the thread for this discussion so I'll be brief; the 'scores' for drivers within a single series pretty much follows WDC results with a few tweaks like points for fastest laps and pole position etc, while the weighting between series is completely unknown. Why is an F1 WDC and runner up position considered greater than a WRC WDC, for example? Castrol does not publish the detail behind their scores.

So it's no more a reliable barometer of one F1 driver to another than the championship pints system and of course in that respect Vettel came out well above Webber.

I assume that is some pub based F1 discussion. Regardless, it seems to have come to the correct findings in the Vettel v Webber saga


Lets elaborate on Japan....
Mark made a driver error in P3 which put him out of qualifying, causing the car to require a lengthy rebuild. Early race pit stops were as a result of the amount of work required to bring the car back to being race ready that would normally have been covered in practice. Further pit stops were as a result of the team, knowing Mark would not be looking at any points, turned the race into a glorified test session, trying out new parts planned for the following race.

In summary a driver error spoilt race weekend.

Anyway, 2009 is behind us and the results are irrefutable. 2010 has not started any differently for Mark. But we are 1/19th into the season. MW has it all in his hands to prove his many critics wrong. As does Vettel to prove them right.

it's probably no better than that.

Fair enough i put 2 and 2 together and made 5

[

gowebber
Australia - Vettel-.DNF. Crash into Kubica.
Webber- DNF. Taken out by Barichello
MiPe
Australia was a racing accident. Horner's position is clear about that, and so is mine. I would assign 70% responsibility to Kubica. Vettel's responsibility - he didn't back off and yield, but then, he is on the track to race, not to play games.

[/quote]
give us mario theissen`s position about that or position of stewards based on data. he simply stepped off the brake in a brainfade while his tyres were shot, look what rosberg did at the same time when was not able to fight for position. as for kubica, believe me he would`ve waited if he had wanted to finish second. he had a chance for a win with new tyres so waiting for better possibility was wasting of time, besides vettel`s fight for position was hopeless in a car that he`d almost lost few turns before. so first of all you must finish race to become champion.

+ 1

I am a Webber fan but I am not one eyed. I have praised Seb numerous times and think he is a very good driver, however I'm trying to point out that Seb did not have all these mechanical failures like some people are trying to make out and that he did make quite a few mistakes last year. Also putting forth the view that Mark was the most consistent in that he was less erratic than Seb and missed a substantial number of points because of things mainly out of his control.

In Australia Seb is penalised by the Stewards for his crash with Kubica. He was behind and tried to pass when his tyres were almost worn out. How is he not to blame here and why was he penalised then?

http://www.crash.net/f1/news/144577/1/vett...ith_kubica.html

In Malaysia in the wet conditions Seb spun out, noone pushed him out. Webber was able to manage the treacherous conditions along with quite a few other drivers.

In Monaco he understeered into the barrier because he was pushing too hard on worn tyres. I suppose thats someone elses fault too?

http://www.planetf1.com/grand-prix/monaco/reports

Of course the Castrol website is going to say Seb was the better driver. As mentioned when you look at WDC points in the end it might appear that way. I am looking at things from a number of different criteria. Ie: consistency during races, not making mistakes, not crashing out of from your own doing, factors contributing to finish position outside of the drivers control etc.

I have stated the facts not just made stuff up. I watch every race , quite often more than once and scrutinise in detail incidents that happen. I'm not saying I'm always right and I admit as someone mentioned i should have added Webber's practice crash at Japan but it was not deliberate I just focused on the fact he started 18th and had 3 problems in the race not of his own doing. I'm sure I have brought that up before anyway and I'm not denying he made a mistake there. I think you need to open your eyes not me and I think I have been pretty accurate and fair. I have no idea where you get plagiarize from. Do you even know what it means?? The definition from dictionary.com

the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work. I am not passing this information off as my own. I quote where I get it from and provide links.

I agree he made a mistake in practice. The fact is Mark was robbed of the chance at potentially scoring some points because of the faulty headrest and puncture. These things are not of his own doing yet he misses out on the chance to score points. he can hardly be criticised for this can he?

The 2009 WDC results say Seb was the victor but things are not as black and white as some people make out. Seb made a number of mistakes in the races that Mark did not. mark also had more problems during races through no fault of his own. Therefor I think Mark has been harshly criticised by alot of people. He does need to improve his qualifying though so hopefully he can do that now.

Look, their racecraft is not IMO dissimilar. But SV did it in quali, Mark did not, and that's what mattered at Bahrain, and could be very important 2010. Mark needs to improve his quali. He will do I'm sure, but possibly not enough to > Seb.

your right, except beligium.

mark outraced seb on the first lap, then was let down by the lollypop man. was on for seb's podium

^ agree. And that's also happened the other way round. Hungary?

How is he right on the other ones? How can it be called a pathetic excuse as Jez calls it when a driver is collected on the first lap which is very easy to do whilst minding his own business?? I'm not saying he would have beaten Seb I'm saying he was taken out of a race through no fault of his own and never had a chance to score points in these cases.

" so Rubens took the inside line, sidewalled into Heidfeld who was pushed out wider into the path of Mark Webber's Red Bull

The desperately unlucky Aussie's car was spun round and in doing so swiped the front left of Heikki Kovalainen's McLaren. All three cars in the sandwich kept going; Barrichello with a damaged front wing, Heidfeld and Webber needed to return to the pits, but it was the passer-by, Kovalainen, who was out of the race.

http://www.planetf1.com/grand-prix/australia/reports

Italy - Kubica is behind Mark and they tangle. Mark is punted off again on the 1st lap of the race where accidents happen. Arguably Kubica was behind and should have taken more care. Once again this kind of thing can happen easily in the midfield on the first lap. Hardly a glaring error and pathetic excuse especially when Mark was also in front of Kubica.

Slow on the exit, the BMW was overhauled by the Red Bull into the della Roggia chicane, but Kubica insisted on making a last minute dive up the inside of Webbo, tagged him, and sent him speering off the road

http://www.planetf1.com/grand-prix/italy/reports

In Singapore Webber crashes out with brake failure

The pair were running in fourth and sixth – split by Kovalainen's McLaren – when Webber went off at turn one after suffering issues with his front-right brake.

http://www.crash.net/f1/race+report/152805...re_success.html

Japan he made a mistake in practice however it is not a pathetic excuse to cite the facts that he had the fastest car, was fuelled up from the back of the grid yet had to make 3 pitstops for a faulty headrest and puncture. It is more than possible he could have got points when you look at past history of other fast drivers and cars starting from the back of the grid and making it into the points like Schumacher and Hamilton have done before.

Please tell me how after reading these facts you have come to the conclusion Jez is right?? At worst Mark was very unlucky. I don't see where he has made a glaring mistake in any of these incidents except in practice in Japan.

^
mate, im as big a webbo fan as anyone but melbourne was his fault because he fluffed qualy. if your going to start mid field, that stuff happens.

theres arguments both sides for monza/singapore but i won't get into that, but belgium was not his fault at all.

nah, not hungary, vettel got bogged down off the start from second on the grid, and ended up 7th after the first corner. webber upto 2nd from 3rd.
vettel then retired later on with suspension failure.

In the vs thread we tend to rank qualifying and the race seperately, qually in Melbourne obviously went to Seb, the race was a no contest. Carrying it over from the day before is rubbish (as was giving Vettel a penalty for Malaysia). He got hit by Rubens who started on the front row anyways, probably would've been better for Mark to not even make it to Q3, might've got a podium

ah ok, fair enough then. hard to seperate them when one influences the other so heavily though, no? however, i see what you mean with the vettel/malaysia thing.
ten years ago i would agree with you however.

All sounds pretty desperate to me. Here's a recap for the races which you were making excuses for:

Australia (Driver Error)
- botched qualifying which put himself in the midfield dangerzone

Italy (Driver Error)
- raced hard with Kubica, paid the price - again put himself in harms way

Belgium (Slow)
- dreadfully slow in the race... so slow in fact the team had to rush a stop to get him out in front of Heidfeld (made to look worse to the stewards due to the horrendous wheelspin out of the box putting him even closer to Heidfeld in the pitlane)
- awful driving on the outlaps (overtaken by rubens and challenged by nakajima ffs)
- could not even pass a slower Rosberg for the last 10 laps for the final point in a faster car

Singapore (Driver Error, Slow)
- penalty for cutting the corner while putting a move on Alonso
- was being outclassed and outpaced by Seb and Hamilton before the brake went anyway

Japan (Driver Error)
- driver error in FP3 leaving him with no chance in quali or the race


Its all cause and effect my friend you talk the effect but never the cause.

Good grief.

Whatever...

When you grow up, - come back and we'll have a discussion!

So just because you make a mistake in quali and start further back its automatically your fault if something happens to you out of your control then? Thats what you seem to be alluding to. What a load of rubbish. He had chances to score points before factors out of his control ended his race. You just don't get it at all do you?

By the way did you even watch Spa? Yeah Mark was so slow thats why he passed Vettel in the first stint and was running 5th ahead of Heidfeld before the unsafe pit release.

Yes.

Cause and effect.

Can I please point out this is the 2010 thread? Every single argument you guys are making was already bashed out for dozens of pages in last years thread ...

- The bad qualifying did put him down the grid, but the incident wasn't his fault, he was rammed from behind, you could do this with any incident to be honest, no driver has done a perfect lap before, let alone a whole race of them. Lets take any random incident, perhaps the Kubica/Vettel incident from the same race, now if Sebvet had've not botched the previous corner he wouldn't have been in the Kubica dangerzone, regardless of what actually happened at the next corner, for Sebvet he's out because of (Driver Error). Lets have a look at Hungary and Sebvet again, horrendous wheelspin off the line puts him in the midfield dangerzone in T1, theres another (Driver Error) so he's totally to blame there. What about Jarno Trulli failing to cross the line in Bahrain, if we trace that back we come to him not defending the inside line for the second last corner of the 2004 French GP and getting kicked out of Renault, more (Driver Error).

I'm being stupid ofcourse, but Mark didn't get a result in Australia because two drivers couldn't keep their cars under control at the start, responsibility isn't with Mark even if he could've avoided that particular situation by being better, or indeed worse, in qualifying the day before.



- Racing hard, oh dear, BOO HISS! This point from you is just hilarious because you've spent a lot of time abusing Mark for not being aggressive on the first lap. Keep it coming, good for the lulz.



- Was hardly "dreadfully slow". It wasn't epic pace in the first stint, but it wasn't terribad. In the end he and Sebvet were never in clear air at the same time to see what was going on. Didn't appear to be more than 2-3 tenths between them from what I could see.
- Rubens had a lot less fuel onboard at the time and more straightline speed, hardly surprising.
- An F1 car couldn't pass another that was up to speed, shame on him.



- Whats the definition of cutting eh?
- Uh huh, you're talking toss again, after the first lap where Mark was involved in fighting, he lost 8 tenths to Seb in the 4 laps before he had to yield to Glock and Alonso. With a lap more fuel onboard. Yet more rubbish from you, "outlcassed and outpaced". Laughable like most of your posts.



I have no particular problem with this, unlike Australia his accident in FP3 actually directly caused him to miss qually altogether. He didn't drive any better or any worse than anyone during qualifying and the race though, it'd be like marking JPM down because he didn't do very well at Imola '05...

I take it you're not a Webber fan anymore then Jez haha.

You create your own luck... In this case, Mark being poor made him vulnerable. You can call it bad luck, but it is not silly to think that he had something to do with it. Had he been racing at the front (something his car was capable of) ...

So, if the first gp and the first two wrc events are an image of how this year will go on, can we already start the Vettel vs Raikkonen 2011 thread?

Whilst i personally dont think such a harsh position is the way to judge a driver, its obvious several people here do.
All I would ask is that if you are going to blame MW for things like RB taking him out, being rear ended and having the team release him into pit traffic
Then please apply the SAME harsh position to SV.
SO extending your position to SV we would have to blame him for all his on track collisions, mechanical failures, tyre degradation and slipping off in bad weather.

Be as harsh as you want but at least be consistent.

You have provided a repeated account of events of 2009. Where is however in-depth analysis of individual events?

Australia - I do not know credibility of your source, as there were a lot of trashy articles written, and to quote one just doesn't turns the page and improves quality of it; in another thread some Polish fan quoted to me another article as "evidence" that Vettel was at fault. Well, FIA in their infinite wisdom ruled that, and I am not disputing it.

I have looked at that incident several times from all angles available to me, and after having watched F1 of good part of my life (long time, trust me on that), I am not so sure it was all black and white as some like to describe it. Horner and some of my friends, quite independently by the way merely expressed the same thoughts after the race. FIA over the years made a lot of mistakes, and their judgments, while binding, always leave me with uneasy feelings. Point is, some more data would be needed to take this further, so why dwell on it, and bring it up against this driver repeatedly? That's the factor what gets me.

And the other topics, well, I don't think I am going to convince you to think more objectively, because I am not sure that you are capable of it. I do not know what you know about Monaco incident to make such definite statement how Vettel should have driven car based on conditions of his tires. I surely cannot say much about it, because again I am lacking necessary data, and therefore merely wondering how you can; but you finger point Vettel anyway, don't you?

Take spun at Maly race. Utter rubbish coming from you to imply, that this incident should be put down as some monumental driver's error. If you would know more about this sport, then you would just shrug shoulders, and leave it at that. Reason why I can say that so confidently is because there was another race in wet, which this driver won in a lesser car, thus I would not mark him as less competent in rain than Webber.

Tarmac surface quality in such conditions is in imbalance, and vehicle can get out of control regardless who sits in it. I have seen Prost going off track in Brazil, and surely he was a driver who knew his business quite well. No one in his right mind would doubt his competence, even as we all knew, that he didn't like racing in the rain, nevermind monsoons.

If you think Vettel needs trashing, be my guest, but unless you have something more substantive to add, I am not interested rehashing yesterday's news.

The key difference is very few use incidents as an excuse when it comes to Seb.

Sure they both made mistakes, sure they both suffered "bad luck"... but still Seb came out on top more often than not, which says everything we need to know.

Yes I am a Mark Webber fan and it irks me watching him not being able to achieve what I know he must be capable of against the youngster.

I do think that SV is partly to blame for not winning the title last year (from your list I would only remove the mechanical failures). He DID too many mistakes. So on my side I feel pretty consistent. I was just commenting on Mark, and did not feel the need to bring SV just for the sake of appearing consistent.

Very well put, I sit between Jez and the hard core Webber fanatics but you can't just brush off Seb's mistakes either.

So how does Webber's far greater experience fit into the comparison picture (or Vettels lesser if you like)?

I'm neither a Vettel fan or Webber fan, but as an overview i was more impressed by Vettel than Webber in 2009, and obviously same again in Bahrain. You can analyse every race as much as you want but it seems to me as a rule that more often than not Vettel was quicker, but there's still 18 races to go, things sometimes change.

What I want to see is MW doing Q tests almost exclusively in FP1 and 2
Out...one lap then in....wash and repeat.
Honestly with the format this year Q is all that matters.
He can handle the races and as we have seen if you can get track position you can hold out people who have 1-2s a lap on you without much trouble.

Until he sorts that out we will get the people saying SV was faster (the race times dont support that only Q3s) and he will not get the results the car is capable of.


Some comments were made earlier on the grove tyres vs slicks.
Mark did not make that comment its was talked about by the press as they searched for an answer.
The only comment I remember from MW on Q that covered something specific about the car was his discomfort with the new breaks (different to the ones he had used untill 09)
He has not mentioned that since the 2nd race last year.
Where he said he found it difficult to get a feel for them and that was making his corner approaches "hairy"

This is all old news.

If he muffs the OZ Q3 It will be a bad sign for 2010

So what do the race times support?

Throughout much of 09 it was 50/50 if you are being fair about it.
Keeping in-mind that the driver in front is not alway pushing 100%
And the driver behind does not always have clear track.

This and Marks superior performance in trafic are the only reasons he was ahead of SV at any time in 09
With his Q performance relative to Mark SV should have ended the season 30 or more points ahead.
MW performed better in the races
(the ones that dont fall into the Jez you make your own luck and break your own disks and didnt bribe the lolypop man enough category)

The point of this is not to suggest MW beat SV in any way at all.
Its to counter arguments that he does not have the "pace" or the "speed" as many hear are saying.

He has made mistakes in Q constantly since the beginning of 09 and now in 2010
But he has RACED very well (better in my eyes than SV) and often been faster during the races.

P.S. I dont count his faster lap time this year because SV didnt have to push when he was in front and after that his times were compromised so we have no idea what SV could have done.

What are you on about? I don't think Vettel needs trashing and I actually like him but I don't like all this unfounded Webber bashing and criticism of him especially for things out of his control. I have explained the points you are rehashing and don't see the need to go over them again. Your clutching at straws with these incidents. The facts are that Vettel did not suffer mechanical failure, collisions caused by other drivers or pitstop problems during these incidents unlike Webber. He was solely responsible for control of the car at each incident but lost control. In other words driver error was responsible for those DNF's

More irrational excuses and explanation in an attempt to portray Mark Webber, is somehow on par with Vettel. I'm not even a Vettel fan, but this notion is plainly absurd. Let me ask the Webber defenders this. What does Q3 tell you about Webber and Vettel?

Its just my own personal opinion, Webbers got another great car and he's one of the better drivers in F1, he's got every chance to show what he's capable of this year but he does need to do better in qualifying which in the past as been his strongest asset

Were not debating Q3 I agree he needs to lift his game in this area, but quali is not the be all and end all in regards to driver talent. I like Seb and have praised him on numerous occasions as well.

There are alot of factors to consider when trying to assess a drivers talent, not just where a driver finishes in the WDC. Both Mark and Seb have their strengths and weaknesses. Neither is perfect.

I still stand by my belief that Mark was a better racer last year than Vettel and his WDC run was severely hampered by things often out of his control. People seem to forget that midway through the season Mark led Seb in WDC. They were pretty even before the run of 5 races where Mark was not able to score points due to those factors outside his control. I also feel that Seb made more mistakes than Mark in 2009 even if he did beat Mark in WDC. In other words things are not always black and white and I think Mark is being unfairly criticised by some people in here for things that were out of his control. Roll on Melbourne and lets see how things go.

...but Q3 2010 is not the same as Q3 2009. And we've only actually seen one 2010 version. Surely it's too early to get all excitable German or enthusiastic Australian over this pairing?

More talk that means less and less. On the Racing Bulls forum last year I presented a run down of the season where I counted up points I felt that both drivers had lost points through no fault of their own (So mech DNFs or rammed from behind though I left Italy out, pit errors, blocked in qually). They came out virtually the same on points, and you didn't have an acceptable rebuttle to it. You break things down to small details when they suit you, but when someone points out things you don't agree with you point to the scoreboard so you don't have to back down. If you're not willing to go into detail of things then why be in this thread?

The entire point of the 'vs' is to seperate the mistakes from the "bad luck" for both drivers and value those to see beyond the scoreboard.

Oh, if you want to play your game, for 2009, Mark came out on top more often than not.

This is actually the basis on why Webber was rated so highly in the first place, the only criticism he ever use to receive was for race pace, this often explained away by Webber artificially placing the car were it didnt deserve to be in the first place with the eneviabilty that he was bound to go backwards in the race with superior cars being behind him.


The only problem is Vettel is still learning, i dont think he will make as many mistakes this year, and it was his mistakes that by and large kept it close points wise.

Well I can't read the future too well these days ;) (I predicted 8th for Mark in Bahrain qually, and 6th for the race, I'm losing my touch!).