Jump to content


Photo

Vettel and Webber scorecard 2010


  • Please log in to reply
8165 replies to this topic

#4701 hansmann

hansmann
  • Member

  • 261 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 09 August 2010 - 09:09

snip- As things get more black and white here, then we get more extreme. ...etc ....-snip


Good read, there should be more of that kind of balanced and informed postings.

Advertisement

#4702 flyer121

flyer121
  • Member

  • 4,570 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 09 August 2010 - 16:11

If MP is a fan of Webber's, so what?
I get the feeling that some of the fanboys who infect this site believe that positive comments about anyone but Vettel are terrible and likely to cause the end of civilization as we know it.
I like MP's posts.
Always readable; always interesting.
In comparison, the fanboys display ignorance and malice.
The poison some of them have been advancing re the Le Mans flips defies understanding.


Look - I don't care about neither LeMans nor his charities.. I am interested in what he does in F1 which he hasn't done much till this season quite frankly.
I guess LeMans came up because Webber fans used the excuse of him not landing in a top seat.

I also happen to believe that the car is 95% of the performance and the driver can only add the missing 5% .. I think that all the drivers are pretty much within half a sec or so and that varies from track to track + car suitability. So yeah Webber is not a bad driver obviously but if you really were being objective Seb has him beat this season and last. The only argument is that the points don't tell the same story but to me that is an aberration which hopefully will correct itself.

And if not then it will still be alright - Mark would win fair and square even thou he was slower than Seb but made fewer mistakes. Thats fair.

Edited by flyer121, 09 August 2010 - 16:14.


#4703 WhiteBlue

WhiteBlue
  • Member

  • 2,138 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 09 August 2010 - 16:23

Webber is not a bad driver obviously but if you really were being objective Seb has him beat this season and last. The only argument is that the points don't tell the same story but to me that is an aberration which hopefully will correct itself. And if not then it will still be alright - Mark would win fair and square even thou he was slower than Seb but made fewer mistakes. Thats fair.


+1


#4704 Henrytheeigth

Henrytheeigth
  • Member

  • 4,655 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 09 August 2010 - 16:25

Bah last season Webber hada crook leg, now he's owning seb with a well leg :p lol

#4705 KateLM

KateLM
  • Member

  • 2,342 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 09 August 2010 - 17:54

Look - I don't care about neither LeMans nor his charities.. I am interested in what he does in F1 which he hasn't done much till this season quite frankly.
I guess LeMans came up because Webber fans used the excuse of him not landing in a top seat.

I also happen to believe that the car is 95% of the performance and the driver can only add the missing 5% .. I think that all the drivers are pretty much within half a sec or so and that varies from track to track + car suitability. So yeah Webber is not a bad driver obviously but if you really were being objective Seb has him beat this season and last. The only argument is that the points don't tell the same story but to me that is an aberration which hopefully will correct itself.

And if not then it will still be alright - Mark would win fair and square even thou he was slower than Seb but made fewer mistakes. Thats fair.

Le Mans came up because Kovalonso kept inexplicably mentioning it as a reason why he thinks Webber is a bad driver :rolleyes:

Personally I don't buy the whole scenario that the driver with less points beats the other one. There is no such thing as a "what if" championship. And even if you look at points theoretically lost through unreliability, you must also consider that even with those points lost, Vettel could still be in front of Webber if he hadn't thrown away points in Silverstone, Hungary, Turkey and Germany. And if a driver loses these points through mistakes, he has not got his team mate beat. Besides, when looking at points theoretically lost you can only say what would have likely happened, not what would have definitely happened. For example, if Vettel had not had his failure in Australia, he still could have crashed out of the lead. Its not likely, but its not impossible. And we can never know.

I don't think that I am being unobjective because I would have said the same of Button and Hamilton after the first 5 races of this year, even though I rate Hamilton much higher. And I do say the same about Coulthard and Webber in 2007, when DC had more points and Webber had a lot of mechanical retirements.

Providing that the team don't start interfering before one driver is mathematically out of it, whoever finishes the season with more points has beaten the other one. End of.

Edited by KateLM, 09 August 2010 - 17:54.


#4706 Kovalonso

Kovalonso
  • Member

  • 540 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 09 August 2010 - 17:54

Vettel lucked...
Alonso is great...

Hamilton did not even do what Vettel had to do. Hamilton jumped straight into a top car. So far, Hamilton's record is far from perfect IMO, form lying to the Stewards and lots of other stuff, perhaps causing a huge rift at McLaren that cost the team 100 million, and a championship too I recall.

Webber's not in that class of driver, not because of his talents IMO, but because he never got the breaks to have a fast car at a young age. Its as simple as that IMO.

Not satisifed to be the #1 in WDC rankings, MP is making a revisionism in Webber's career.

MP says that Webber never had the chance to get a fast car early in his career, but I contested him saying that he had three years at Mercedes Motorsports before the Lewis experiment.
Then, had the chance to drive Alonso's Phase I Renault and turned it down.

So, IMO, MP assessment about MW career is not true.
The guy could have been WDC many times through two different teams.


#4707 jez33

jez33
  • Member

  • 1,071 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 09 August 2010 - 20:21

WDC points are the perfect way to determine which intra team driver is better because things like reliability, luck etc they even themselves out over the course of a season.

Running with this logic Mark was beaten by Heidfeld in 2005 (up until quick nick's "injury") and beaten by DC in 2007. This is a fair assessment right Webberites?

#4708 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,625 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 09 August 2010 - 20:55

WDC points are the perfect way to determine which intra team driver is better because things like reliability, luck etc they even themselves out over the course of a season.

Luck does not always even out over a season. That would imply a perfectly ideal world, and we all know that simply aint the case.

Edited by Seanspeed, 09 August 2010 - 20:57.


#4709 jez33

jez33
  • Member

  • 1,071 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 09 August 2010 - 21:03

Sorry sean I missed quoting your rant before you edited it off but in response to it anyway yes why shouldn't Mark be seen as the better driver right now? He has more points therefore by virtue and measure of what is important he is overall doing a fundamentally better job than Seb, in much the same fashion Heidfeld and DC did a better job than Mark in 2005 and 2007, respectively.

#4710 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,223 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 09 August 2010 - 23:33

Not satisifed to be the #1 in WDC rankings, MP is making a revisionism in Webber's career.

MP says that Webber never had the chance to get a fast car early in his career, but I contested him saying that he had three years at Mercedes Motorsports before the Lewis experiment.
Then, had the chance to drive Alonso's Phase I Renault and turned it down.

So, IMO, MP assessment about MW career is not true.
The guy could have been WDC many times through two different teams.


When did I say that? Please quote me.

Its crazy to think anyone would suggest Webber did not refuse the Renault option for the race seat. It was just that he thought BMWilliams was the better option. But go on - quote when I said he never had a chance to get a fast car in F1. And anyhow, when he signed for Sir Frank, it was a fast team. :rolleyes:

The McLaren situation is more difficult. I have argued that Webber was close to getting a McLaren seat. While others have said that MB would not want him. I think we'll have to wait until someone writes a book in order to know how close MW got to a McLaren seat. Frank Williams made it sound like MW was leaving his team to go to McLaren, because Sir Frank said it was understandable to take such a great opportunity. That narrowed the field to either going back to Renault (Webber tested there before he went to Minardi) or going to McLaren. Ferrari was never an option. But then Renault came out, and said they would not be taking Webber. And that came directly from Flavio. So the drive Sir Frank discussed - the 'great opportunity' - sounded very much like McLaren. But it was never confirmed. Webber had said that he was close to a good drive, and that he had a fall back position. That sounded like he was trying to go to McLaren, and that the RBR was the fall back. A few weeks later, RBR announced Webber was going to them. Webber said he had been talking to them for some time, and the delay had been about finalising details. Many McLaren fans said 'told you so', and that Webber had not been likely. We really do not know IMO whether the McLaren drive was ever on.

So who knows. But please - quote me if your going to claim I said specific things.

And also, many have claimed that there was bad blood between MB and Webber. But I've never read about that. However, Haug was running the team, and had Webber for two years in that team, and the team stopped racing either at LeMans, or shortly after, after the LeMans fiasco. I am not sure whether Webber was going to race a car on the Sunday or not (his car was written off on the Saturday). I imagine that if he had refused to race on the Sunday, that Haug might might have been very pissed off with him. The team put some extra fins on the side of the front for the Sunday, and perhaps for the Saturday, but of course they did not work. We don't know all the details of what was said on the Saturday from Webber to the team, or at least I have not read what was said. There are reports that said Webber would race on the Sunday, and others that he would not. If you want to know what happened, there are various places where you can read about it.


Incidentally, here is Webber, using a novel approach to check out the track surface from his car on the Saturday Le Mans practice:

Posted Image

http://4.bp.blogspot...nz CLR flip.jpg

Edited by Melbourne Park, 09 August 2010 - 23:51.


#4711 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 26,955 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 10 August 2010 - 01:51

Sorry sean I missed quoting your rant before you edited it off but in response to it anyway yes why shouldn't Mark be seen as the better driver right now? He has more points therefore by virtue and measure of what is important he is overall doing a fundamentally better job than Seb, in much the same fashion Heidfeld and DC did a better job than Mark in 2005 and 2007, respectively.



See I am totally the opposite, I'd have taken Mark as a driver in 05 and 07 and Seb this year.

It's particularly dangerous in mid field cars where one good race means u end the year in front on points. I don't care what anyone says, Mark always looked faster than Nick and Vettel looks faster this year. Maybe Mark will get up but i'd still rate Seb in front of him.

#4712 Henrytheeigth

Henrytheeigth
  • Member

  • 4,655 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 10 August 2010 - 05:49

Another thing that causes me to not have the best thoughts and memories of Seb, is what happened in Fuji 2007, where he rammed Mark, and Mark was in a possible podium position at the time. So yea he shafted Mark then in my view, and well I've never really have gotten that out of my mind yet. Just stating facts, the past is past I know, but it did happen.

#4713 Redback

Redback
  • Member

  • 770 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 10 August 2010 - 06:59

See I am totally the opposite, I'd have taken Mark as a driver in 05 and 07 and Seb this year.

It's particularly dangerous in mid field cars where one good race means u end the year in front on points. I don't care what anyone says, Mark always looked faster than Nick and Vettel looks faster this year. Maybe Mark will get up but i'd still rate Seb in front of him.

I agree that Seb has more frequently looked faster in qualifying, but I think (this year) Mark has generally looked quicker in the races.

The Grands Prix in which Seb has looked the speedier of the two in race mode have been Bahrain, China, Europe and Germany. In the other eight races, Mark has shown better pace.

Analysis of lap times, (relative) gaps and race results supports this perspective.

#4714 jez33

jez33
  • Member

  • 1,071 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 10 August 2010 - 07:40

I agree that Seb has more frequently looked faster in qualifying, but I think (this year) Mark has generally looked quicker in the races.

The Grands Prix in which Seb has looked the speedier of the two in race mode have been Bahrain, China, Europe and Germany. In the other eight races, Mark has shown better pace.

Analysis of lap times, (relative) gaps and race results supports this perspective.


This analysis of "race pace" is practically worthless under the tight current regulations of limited engines and gearboxes.

How do you know Seb was not quicker in say Malaysia and was simply managing his track position after he had taken the lead from Mark? Conversely, do you really think Lewis had a chance against Mark at Silverstone because he finished 1.5s behind? All the drivers this season are managing their cars during the race, all the way up and down the grid order. The only real way to tell who was "faster" is when they are all NOT managing their cars and that is in Q3, and based on this Mark clearly loses out to Seb.

This "race pace" thing is nonsense under car-nursing regulations because you simply do not know when a driver is on the limit. By definition the faster driver is obviously the guy who finishes ahead because he has taken less time overall to complete the grand prix.

At the end of the day I still believe Mark is doing a better job overall than Sebastian so far, in the way that Heidfeld and DC did a better job overall than Mark when they paired in 05/07.


#4715 Redback

Redback
  • Member

  • 770 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 10 August 2010 - 08:39

This analysis of "race pace" is practically worthless under the tight current regulations of limited engines and gearboxes.

How do you know Seb was not quicker in say Malaysia and was simply managing his track position after he had taken the lead from Mark? Conversely, do you really think Lewis had a chance against Mark at Silverstone because he finished 1.5s behind? All the drivers this season are managing their cars during the race, all the way up and down the grid order. The only real way to tell who was "faster" is when they are all NOT managing their cars and that is in Q3, and based on this Mark clearly loses out to Seb.

This "race pace" thing is nonsense under car-nursing regulations because you simply do not know when a driver is on the limit. By definition the faster driver is obviously the guy who finishes ahead because he has taken less time overall to complete the grand prix.

At the end of the day I still believe Mark is doing a better job overall than Sebastian so far, in the way that Heidfeld and DC did a better job overall than Mark when they paired in 05/07.

I do understand that race pace varies and is frequently difficult to quantify under the existing regulations, however, there are times and circumstances in a race when direct comparisons can be made and analysis is therefore valid.

You and I both know that in Malaysia (for example) Mark was able to close the gap to Seb quite easily and even with Seb's penchant for glory laps, Mark still set the fastest race lap.

At Silverstone, analysis of the laps clearly showed that Mark basically shut down and cruised with a few laps to go.

Random data points are like words. Viewed individually in isolation they tell you very little, but observed in context, they tell a quite compelling story.

Some "literacy" however, is still required.

Edited by Redback, 10 August 2010 - 08:42.


#4716 goldenboy

goldenboy
  • Member

  • 3,492 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 10 August 2010 - 08:45

This analysis of "race pace" is practically worthless under the tight current regulations of limited engines and gearboxes.

How do you know Seb was not quicker in say Malaysia and was simply managing his track position after he had taken the lead from Mark? Conversely, do you really think Lewis had a chance against Mark at Silverstone because he finished 1.5s behind? All the drivers this season are managing their cars during the race, all the way up and down the grid order. The only real way to tell who was "faster" is when they are all NOT managing their cars and that is in Q3, and based on this Mark clearly loses out to Seb.

This "race pace" thing is nonsense under car-nursing regulations because you simply do not know when a driver is on the limit. By definition the faster driver is obviously the guy who finishes ahead because he has taken less time overall to complete the grand prix.

At the end of the day I still believe Mark is doing a better job overall than Sebastian so far, in the way that Heidfeld and DC did a better job overall than Mark when they paired in 05/07.

I have to agree, I cant see that much of a point in comparing totals fastest lap times and race pace this year, or at least not as much as has been done so. Looking at it so generally will just skew it. If you look more at peak pockets of performance when it matters at a certain point of time in a race though, then yes.

#4717 flyer121

flyer121
  • Member

  • 4,570 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 10 August 2010 - 09:09

I agree that Seb has more frequently looked faster in qualifying, but I think (this year) Mark has generally looked quicker in the races.

The Grands Prix in which Seb has looked the speedier of the two in race mode have been Bahrain, China, Europe and Germany. In the other eight races, Mark has shown better pace.

Analysis of lap times, (relative) gaps and race results supports this perspective.



The reason Q is the real measure of speed is because there are no variable factors involved. All cars are on the same fuel load, same set of fresh tyres , and hopefully similar traffic conditions (almost none in Q3).

I agree race craft is a valid skill , but Race pace IMO is just a throwback to previous years race fuel qualifications .. This season there is no reason to not go flat out in Q3 and race pace as a concept cant be applied.

People talk about differing Q3 set ups to justify the speed differential - but tell me who in the right mind would sacrifice Q speed for race pace on a track like Hungary where there is virtually no chance of overtake even if "race pace" wise you are 2 secs up? You could argue that pit-stop jump may be attempted but it is only useful for jumping other rival cars not your teammate in an equal car.

Raw speed is simply raw speed and is most clearly evident in Q3 (not even in Q1 or 2).

Edited by flyer121, 10 August 2010 - 09:17.


#4718 Redback

Redback
  • Member

  • 770 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 10 August 2010 - 10:00

The reason Q is the real measure of speed is because there are no variable factors involved. All cars are on the same fuel load, same set of fresh tyres , and hopefully similar traffic conditions (almost none in Q3).

I agree race craft is a valid skill , but Race pace IMO is just a throwback to previous years race fuel qualifications .. This season there is no reason to not go flat out in Q3 and race pace as a concept cant be applied.

People talk about differing Q3 set ups to justify the speed differential - but tell me who in the right mind would sacrifice Q speed for race pace on a track like Hungary where there is virtually no chance of overtake even if "race pace" wise you are 2 secs up? You could argue that pit-stop jump may be attempted but it is only useful for jumping other rival cars not your teammate in an equal car.

Raw speed is simply raw speed and is most clearly evident in Q3 (not even in Q1 or 2).

Yes, - qualifying is a measure of raw speed, but it's just one lap. For those with attention deficit disorder, it's probably all that matters, - but a race is 300+ kms...

A good driver can continue to pump out competitive laps for 2 hours rather than just 2 minutes.

By that measure, Mark has had the better of Seb so far this year.

#4719 flyer121

flyer121
  • Member

  • 4,570 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 10 August 2010 - 10:57

Yes, - qualifying is a measure of raw speed, but it's just one lap. For those with attention deficit disorder, it's probably all that matters, - but a race is 300+ kms...

A good driver can continue to pump out competitive laps for 2 hours rather than just 2 minutes.

By that measure, Mark has had the better of Seb so far this year.



No a good driver manages his race pace just so he can maintain or better his position - And maybe pump up a blinding lap to clinch the Fastest Lap towards the end. :)

Its a little bit like the Overtaking argument

If you put yourself in a position where you will need to overtake - then of course you are going to have more overtakes over the season. But you will still lose the WDC to the guy who didnt make a single overtake. In other words - they dont mean anything at all.
Same with race pace - you only need it if you are in a bad position compared to others.

On the contrary - there is no excuse to be beaten in Q.. you are just slower. But F1 being the sort of sport where other factors may still let you be ahead for a while. But its damn hard to keep the faster guy behind over the whole season.

Edited by flyer121, 10 August 2010 - 10:59.


Advertisement

#4720 Redback

Redback
  • Member

  • 770 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 10 August 2010 - 11:05

No a good driver manages his race pace just so he can maintain or better his position - And maybe pump up a blinding lap to clinch the Fastest Lap towards the end. :)

Its a little bit like the Overtaking argument

If you put yourself in a position where you will need to overtake - then of course you are going to have more overtakes over the season. But you will still lose the WDC to the guy who didnt make a single overtake. In other words - they dont mean anything at all.
Same with race pace - you only need it if you are in a bad position compared to others.

On the contrary - there is no excuse to be beaten in Q.. you are just slower. But F1 being the sort of sport where other factors may still let you be ahead for a while. But its damn hard to keep the faster guy behind over the whole season.

If the "faster guy" is only faster for one lap (before falling asleep) then maybe you can keep him behind over the whole season...? :)

#4721 flyer121

flyer121
  • Member

  • 4,570 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 10 August 2010 - 13:31

If the "faster guy" is only faster for one lap (before falling asleep) then maybe you can keep him behind over the whole season...? :)


Cant argue with that ..

#4722 Kovalonso

Kovalonso
  • Member

  • 540 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 10 August 2010 - 17:19

Maybe this googles article can explain some behaviour of Vettel.

http://www.autobild....10_1229108.html

"Nothing in the world counts for me as much as winning the World Cup", the Heppenheim quoted by the 'World'. For this he had waived at a young age to many things.

While his friends had spent the summer are usually in the pool, he was himself in karting been away. "How much I'd been there, but I had to work hard and train. I have used to work for my goal in life," said Vettel. However, that has always been part of his job. "One is forced to live with some form of unfairness."


#4723 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 26,955 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 10 August 2010 - 18:49

Please, no more than anyone on the grid.

#4724 Ricardo F1

Ricardo F1
  • Member

  • 38,751 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 11 August 2010 - 03:48

If the "faster guy" is only faster for one lap (before falling asleep) then maybe you can keep him behind over the whole season...? :)

Which isn't the case, and your argument about Webber being faster because he has to be is a bit of bunk really isn't it. Simple fact of the matter is that Webber leads the WDC because of Vettel's poor judgment, poor luck and poor mechanical reliability combined into one Red Bull/Vettel cluster of a season. Mark hasn't been averse to suffering, but he hasn't suffered as bad as Vettel even with the mistakes he's made on his own.

Edited by Ricardo F1, 11 August 2010 - 03:49.


#4725 Flex

Flex
  • Member

  • 57 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 11 August 2010 - 04:00

Which isn't the case, and your argument about Webber being faster because he has to be is a bit of bunk really isn't it. Simple fact of the matter is that Webber leads the WDC because of Vettel's poor judgment, poor luck and poor mechanical reliability combined into one Red Bull/Vettel cluster of a season. Mark hasn't been averse to suffering, but he hasn't suffered as bad as Vettel even with the mistakes he's made on his own.


At least Vettel's failures have been mostly his. Even his engine blow up came because he ran too hard and was running out of fuel. Last race, Webber did 20 extra laps and won, but he could have gone faster - he just did what was necessary to win. Webber lost points early due to the cars instablity in aero wake. He'd only have foung that out in that particular situation. He's been bulletproof from the front, except when he did not agressively defend against his team mate. Since then, he's been a tougher driver. His harder setup is slower in qualifying, but faster in the races. That is obvious.


#4726 Ricardo F1

Ricardo F1
  • Member

  • 38,751 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 11 August 2010 - 04:03

At least Vettel's failures have been mostly his. Even his engine blow up came because he ran too hard and was running out of fuel. Last race, Webber did 20 extra laps and won, but he could have gone faster - he just did what was necessary to win. Webber lost points early due to the cars instablity in aero wake. He'd only have foung that out in that particular situation. He's been bulletproof from the front, except when he did not agressively defend against his team mate. Since then, he's been a tougher driver. His harder setup is slower in qualifying, but faster in the races. That is obvious.

No, that's made up. :wave:

And Vettel driving around with a cracked chassis for three races didn't really help his cause.


#4727 Kovalonso

Kovalonso
  • Member

  • 540 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 11 August 2010 - 04:07

At least Vettel's failures have been mostly his.

Like the..
> Engine spark plug in Bahrain
> Cracked chassis for 2 races
> Lewis tire cut in Silverstone
:rolleyes:

#4728 Supersleeper

Supersleeper
  • Member

  • 1,441 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 11 August 2010 - 04:08

And Vettel driving around with a cracked chassis for three races didn't really help his cause.

Webber being able to use 10Kg less of ballast hasn't assisted in the last season and a half....sorry 9kg - he's got the lighter chassis.


#4729 Kovalonso

Kovalonso
  • Member

  • 540 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 11 August 2010 - 04:10

Last race, Webber did 20 extra laps and won, but he could have gone faster - he just did what was necessary to win.

That's bull.
Webber only won Hungary bcs Vettel delayed Alonso in more than 3 sec. at the restart.
If Alonso was allowed to restart closer to Webber, he would come back from the pits behind the Ferrari.


#4730 Redback

Redback
  • Member

  • 770 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 11 August 2010 - 04:11

Which isn't the case, and your argument about Webber being faster because he has to be is a bit of bunk really isn't it. Simple fact of the matter is that Webber leads the WDC because of Vettel's poor judgment, poor luck and poor mechanical reliability combined into one Red Bull/Vettel cluster of a season. Mark hasn't been averse to suffering, but he hasn't suffered as bad as Vettel even with the mistakes he's made on his own.

Not sure if English is your first language, but your comprehension of what I said appears lacking.

#4731 Supersleeper

Supersleeper
  • Member

  • 1,441 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 11 August 2010 - 06:16

Webber exited after his pitstop 6.1 seconds ahead of Alonso - if Alonso was 3 seconds closer to Webber at the restart, Webber still would have exited the pits after his pitstop 3.1 seconds ahead of Alonso.

Webber was faster than Alonso on 54 of the 70 laps of the race.

Of the 16 laps Alonso was faster - 6 of them Webber was less than a second from Alonso and couldn't go faster, 3 of them were due to traffic and the last 5 due to Webber turning his engine down. Alonso had essentially 2 faster laps than Webber - 1 was the lap where Webber came in, and the other the first part of Webber leaving the pits.
Had Webber and Alonso pitted on the same lap, Webber would have done all 70 laps faster than Alonso.

Suggesting Alonso deserved to win a race given those circumstances is being a little optimistic.

...to say the least.


#4732 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,223 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 11 August 2010 - 06:59

Webber exited after his pitstop 6.1 seconds ahead of Alonso - if Alonso was 3 seconds closer to Webber at the restart, Webber still would have exited the pits after his pitstop 3.1 seconds ahead of Alonso.

Webber was faster than Alonso on 54 of the 70 laps of the race.

Of the 16 laps Alonso was faster - 6 of them Webber was less than a second from Alonso and couldn't go faster, 3 of them were due to traffic and the last 5 due to Webber turning his engine down. Alonso had essentially 2 faster laps than Webber - 1 was the lap where Webber came in, and the other the first part of Webber leaving the pits.
Had Webber and Alonso pitted on the same lap, Webber would have done all 70 laps faster than Alonso.

Suggesting Alonso deserved to win a race given those circumstances is being a little optimistic.

...to say the least.


Kovalonso mentioned the wrong factor. Which was the Alonso drove slower than perhaps he could have, due to defending against Webber.

Fact is though that whatever happened, Webber did easily enough, except during the traffic, which likewise hurt the cars following when they hit it. We just don't know how much more speed he had left in the car. Perhaps if the traffic had of been closer, he would have driven faster. Which I think is the point Kova made earlier - that Webber's faster race laps do not really mean much when his team mate has been in front of him. Overall that is correct IMO. To really know that is going on though, one has to know the traffic conditions, the tyre issues, and what opportunities are out there, and also the fuel issues too.

Nonetheless if one looks at what Webber's been doing, if its true that his car setups are harder, while that makes it more difficult to get in a good qualifying time, it does give him a better race package as the cars change weight. Unless it rains of course, because sotter suspension set ups work better in the wet. And interestingly, its been in such conditions that Webber has qualified better - when he's softened up his setups. If the other teams are closer to RBR, then IMO Webber will be more competitive. But if the big speed gap continues on, then Seb has the advantage because neither driver can pass each other on the track after the first lap, if no mistakes or malfunctions occur.



#4733 goingthedistance

goingthedistance
  • Member

  • 2,531 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 11 August 2010 - 07:04

No, that's made up. :wave:

And Vettel driving around with a cracked chassis for three races didn't really help his cause.


Actually Horner is quoted as believing the crack was sustained in Monaco, and only affected Vettel's performance there.

It's also notable that Legard in his blog commented that Webber's chassis had also sustained various cracks, but did not believe it worth making a fuss about.

I firmly believe the chassis replacement was a psychological thing for Seb.

#4734 apoka

apoka
  • Member

  • 3,610 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 11 August 2010 - 07:07

If the other teams are closer to RBR, then IMO Webber will be more competitive.

If the other teams are close, then losing one or two tenths in Q3 compared to Vettel could cost him more than one position on the grid. Optimising for a better race package is not always better when several teams are competitive.

#4735 Supersleeper

Supersleeper
  • Member

  • 1,441 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 11 August 2010 - 07:19

To really know that is going on though, one has to know the traffic conditions, the tyre issues, and what opportunities are out there, and also the fuel issues too.

The only real thing I got out of Webbers performance was that for 25 laps after the restart he was about a second per lap faster than Alonso - on option tyres that had already done 18 laps on a maximum fuel load. Suggesting that someone doesn't deserve to win a race after than type of performance is just announcing to the world that you're a total fuckwit.

Not referring to you at all MP.

#4736 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,223 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 11 August 2010 - 07:36

Webber exited after his pitstop 6.1 seconds ahead of Alonso - if Alonso was 3 seconds closer to Webber at the restart, Webber still would have exited the pits after his pitstop 3.1 seconds ahead of Alonso.

Webber was faster than Alonso on 54 of the 70 laps of the race.

Of the 16 laps Alonso was faster - 6 of them Webber was less than a second from Alonso and couldn't go faster, 3 of them were due to traffic and the last 5 due to Webber turning his engine down. Alonso had essentially 2 faster laps than Webber - 1 was the lap where Webber came in, and the other the first part of Webber leaving the pits.
Had Webber and Alonso pitted on the same lap, Webber would have done all 70 laps faster than Alonso.

Suggesting Alonso deserved to win a race given those circumstances is being a little optimistic.

...to say the least.


Not if your an Alonso fan! :lol:

#4737 Supersleeper

Supersleeper
  • Member

  • 1,441 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 11 August 2010 - 07:48

Not if your an Alonso fan! :lol:

...apparently not.  ;)


#4738 NeilR

NeilR
  • Member

  • 477 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 11 August 2010 - 08:47

I'm talking about the human side of the Mercdes le Mans project.

The CLR-LMs is not a self-creationary Transformer.

It had a long and well documented Project Management.

MP said that Webber told the Mercedes engineers about the front end misbehaviour.
Then prove it.

So the project managers knew about it ?
Advised by Webber ?
It takes courage to kill a project if it is proven to have a fundamental error, but it is the right thing to do.
It takes courage to stop a manufacturer to run a car that puts life in danger.

Why does Webber remained silent after his second flip, right before the race ?

When Webber suffered the accident, he said he was OK.
Then, in the midle of testing he "realized" also a broken collarbone.
MP said that MW had medical care still in Australia on the collarbone.
At that time Webber fans defended the lie.
But MP knew it ?

Somebody is not playing fair in this forum, people saying/hidding lies then or now.

All I read is deflect by changing the focus on subjects.


Oh for goodness sake go and read and research and then you will no longer continue to make yourself look the fool.

Edited by NeilR, 11 August 2010 - 08:48.


#4739 flyer121

flyer121
  • Member

  • 4,570 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 11 August 2010 - 10:17

The only real thing I got out of Webbers performance was that for 25 laps after the restart he was about a second per lap faster than Alonso - on option tyres that had already done 18 laps on a maximum fuel load. Suggesting that someone doesn't deserve to win a race after than type of performance is just announcing to the world that you're a total fuckwit.

Not referring to you at all MP.


The real reason Webber won was the penalty Vettel received and that's why it was "undeserved".

Doesn't matter if he could run those softs till the second last lap and still be faster than Alonso by a second. His best chance was P2 and that too way behind Vettel.
Hungary is not that hard on tyres and these tyres are just too darn strong.

Fact is Vettel was faster , but he screwed up and Webber got lucky.

Again he won NOT because of his spectacular drive but because the forces of the universe conspired to make him win. Hope thats clear.
Webber himself has agreed that it was a "gift".

Advertisement

#4740 shunt

shunt
  • Member

  • 160 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 11 August 2010 - 10:55

The real reason Webber won was the penalty Vettel received and that's why it was "undeserved".
Fact is Vettel was faster , but he screwed up and Webber got lucky.


Yup, Seb screwed up. Mark didn't.

So tell me why Marks win was undeserved again??????




#4741 kanec

kanec
  • Member

  • 2,083 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 11 August 2010 - 10:59

The real reason Webber won was the penalty Vettel received and that's why it was "undeserved".

Doesn't matter if he could run those softs till the second last lap and still be faster than Alonso by a second. His best chance was P2 and that too way behind Vettel.
Hungary is not that hard on tyres and these tyres are just too darn strong.

Fact is Vettel was faster , but he screwed up and Webber got lucky.

Again he won NOT because of his spectacular drive but because the forces of the universe conspired to make him win. Hope thats clear.
Webber himself has agreed that it was a "gift".


Situations arise during a race. Some are based on luck or circumstance. Taking the opportunity and delivering what's needed, when it's needed counts.

Webbers middle stint wasn't a 'gift'. The situation arising was a turn of luck - one that he feels he was probably due. But he took the situation and made it work.

To say it was undeserved just really seems to be sour grapes to me.

#4742 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,606 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 11 August 2010 - 11:03

Yup, Seb screwed up. Mark didn't.

So tell me why Marks win was undeserved again??????


Because Seb fell asleep behind the safety car and Mark grabbed his opportunity with both hands. Obviously...

#4743 flyer121

flyer121
  • Member

  • 4,570 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 11 August 2010 - 11:23

Yup, Seb screwed up. Mark didn't.

So tell me why Marks win was undeserved again??????



Because , anyway you cut it , he wouldn't have won solely relying on his speed. He had to rely on extraneous factors to win.

BTW - Mark had Seb beat in Monaco and Spain fair and square without being slower but please dont argue Hungary result was anything other than pure luck.



#4744 shunt

shunt
  • Member

  • 160 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 11 August 2010 - 11:45

Because , anyway you cut it , he wouldn't have won solely relying on his speed. He had to rely on extraneous factors to win.


As is the nature of motorsport....


#4745 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,915 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 11 August 2010 - 11:46

Because , anyway you cut it , he wouldn't have won solely relying on his speed. He had to rely on extraneous factors to win.

BTW - Mark had Seb beat in Monaco and Spain fair and square without being slower but please dont argue Hungary result was anything other than pure luck.

It was something else.

A flawless execution of a brilliant strategy.
Combined with Seb giving his brains a rest just at the wrong moment.

#4746 kanec

kanec
  • Member

  • 2,083 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 11 August 2010 - 11:47

Because , anyway you cut it , he wouldn't have won solely relying on his speed. He had to rely on extraneous factors to win.

BTW - Mark had Seb beat in Monaco and Spain fair and square without being slower but please dont argue Hungary result was anything other than pure luck.


Sure. There's a large element of fortune for Webber with how the race went down but it doesn't make it an underserved win.


#4747 Supersleeper

Supersleeper
  • Member

  • 1,441 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 11 August 2010 - 11:55

It was something else.

A flawless execution of a brilliant strategy.
Combined with Seb giving his brains a rest just at the wrong moment.

Thats about it. Great drive, ballsy call, just reward.

#4748 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,223 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 11 August 2010 - 12:02

Because , anyway you cut it , he wouldn't have won solely relying on his speed. He had to rely on extraneous factors to win.

BTW - Mark had Seb beat in Monaco and Spain fair and square without being slower but please dont argue Hungary result was anything other than pure luck.


I agree.

Although - and I am not directing this post at your flyer - realistically, Webber's staying out was pretty brave. Staying out after the SC, gave Webber an opportunity of giving the team a 1-2. If he'd been able to drive at a greater pace than Seb did, for many laps, there was an outside chance that he'd come out from this tyre change in front of Alonso. So, the dude stayed out. And he was far enough behind Seb, not to loose any position due to pitstop queuing. He could of tied up third by doing the normal thing. Most people thought he was crazy - such as I think at the time, Alfisti. And Alfisti was statistically quite right. And the Vettel fans thought - ooh, Webber's really stuffed it now. Good on Red Bull, they've left Webber out to dry!!

So there was Webber, always at risk of another SC coming out, and if it had come out again, it could have put Webber back into 4th or 5th place or 6th place or even worse. But Webber took the risk, to drive for 16 or more laps, without an SC coming out. And there had been one as early as on lap 13.

That was very gutsy, and it was not even for a win, it was for the team, to tie up a one -two, sure to close the coming points gap, but a one-two is what gives vital publicity and cudos to the whole team. And then Vettel got lazy, and did not pay attention. And the team never got its vital one - two either. And over the last three laps, Vettel did not even try to get a one-two. Instead, he went for personal cudos, and got the fastest lap.

And now we hear, that Webber did not do anything special. Even Alonso was immensely impressed by his Webber's drive. And at the podium Press Conference, Webber said the win was a gift. Whihc means, Vettel should have won the race. If you'd looked at Webber looking at Vettel, he felt looked sorry for Vettel. And meanwhile at the conference, Vettel just felt sorry for himself.

And yes - there are people here, who don't realise a top drive and a gutsy move for the team when they see it.

Edited by Melbourne Park, 11 August 2010 - 12:17.


#4749 GhostR

GhostR
  • Member

  • 2,703 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 11 August 2010 - 12:02

Because , anyway you cut it , he wouldn't have won solely relying on his speed. He had to rely on extraneous factors to win.

BTW - Mark had Seb beat in Monaco and Spain fair and square without being slower but please dont argue Hungary result was anything other than pure luck.

So, for clarity, who do you think did deserve to win the race? Certainly wasn't Vettel, and no one else would have won it on pace without RBR mistakes.

Look: winning a race is about executing over the full race distance. Mark did that at Hungary, Vettel didn't.

You can go through as many if's and but's as you want, it doesn't change the fact that Mark won because he a) made fewer errors and b) had the pace to make a risky strategy work. Fully deserved win.

Edited by GhostR, 11 August 2010 - 12:05.


#4750 flyer121

flyer121
  • Member

  • 4,570 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 11 August 2010 - 12:17

MP, Kanec et al
Agree with all of you to an extent ... Mark did what he had to do and quite bravely and brilliantly.
But I would ve liked it if he beat Seb on pace which he has done in the past. While not totally "undeserved" I find his other wins over Seb more deserving.

Mark would himself agree with that.