262 replies to this topic

[sensible]

Rationale being that he has the best car by a mile, no points costing reliability problems during the race and his team mate should not have been a problem given that he lost over 60 points on reliability alone.

I can see that this is in danger of being taken as flame. Its not intended as such as I firmly believe that whoever wins is a worthy champion, including Webber, but I truly think he should have had it well sewn up by now given the above circumstances.

[Longtimefan]

Webber wont win it, Alonso will.

will Alonso be the worst even WDC hmm.. nope, Hill gets that achievement for 1996 but it will be an empty and undeserved WDC.

[velgajski1]

Thats like claiming that Alonso will be worst WDC ever if he wins by less than 7 points.

In both cases - no.

[sensible]

Thats like claiming that Alonso will be worst WDC ever if he wins by less than 7 points.

In both cases - no.

No its not - Alonso will have done it in the 3rd best car which in my book is pretty impressive even with a lottle assist.

[Henrytheeigth]

What an insensible thread this is...

[Lights]

Wasn't Button the worst WDC ever?

[velgajski1]

No its not - Alonso will have done it in the 3rd best car which in my book is pretty impressive even with a lottle assist.

I'd say that Alonso Ferrari is second best car on grid after Webber's RBR overall in season (Vettel lost 60 points to reliability, Hamilton's McLaren was overall slower and less reliable). Lets not forget that Ferrari had some races where car was great but Alonso made costly mistakes.

[trogggy]

Wasn't Button the worst WDC ever?

No, he's just the worst so far. Webber will be the worst. And next year, at about this time, there'll be a thread about the new worst one.

[velgajski1]

No, he's just the worst so far. Webber will be the worst. And next year, at about this time, there'll be a thread about the new worst one.

[sosidge]

Wasn't Button the worst WDC ever?

At least Jenson didn't take his rivals off the track during the season.

At least Jenson didn't whine about not getting love from the team.

At least Jenson could beat his team-mate in a fair battle head-to-head.

At least Jenson wasn't gifted the win by superior reliability.

[Don_Humpador]

No, he's just the worst so far. Webber will be the worst. And next year, at about this time, there'll be a thread about the new worst one.

Judging by recent opinion, the 2011 champion will be Hulkenberg.

[velgajski1]

At least Jenson didn't take his rivals off the track during the season.

At least Jenson didn't whine about not getting love from the team.

At least Jenson could beat his team-mate in a fair battle head-to-head.

At least Jenson wasn't gifted the win by superior reliability.

I think Lights was just cynical ;)

[Dunder]

I am not really into grading WDCs relative worthiness.

If Webber does win, he will have had more than his share of good fortune but whilst the RB6 is unquestionably the best car this year it is by no means as dominant as some people seem to suggest. Mark Webber is not the fastest or most talented driver on the grid but he will be nonetheless deserving if he does win it in the end.

[Don_Humpador]

At least Jenson wasn't gifted the win by superior reliability.

That's rather debatable don't you think?

[sosidge]

I am not really into grading WDCs relative worthiness.

If Webber does win, he will have had more than his share of good fortune but whilst the RB6 is unquestionably the best car this year it is by no means as dominant as some people seem to suggest. Mark Webber is not the fastest or most talented driver on the grid but he will be nonetheless deserving if he does win it in the end.

15 poles out of 18?

Led every race bar China (only because of Alonso's jump start), Canada, Spa, Germany and Singapore?

Not dominant?

Completely dominant more like.

Vettel should have sealed this championship a few races ago were it not for reliability. For Webber to be behind Alonso's Ferrari after having a completely reliable car is a reflection of his poor performance, not the car's lack of dominance.

[W154]

Wasn't Button the worst WDC ever?

Nah..... Mike Hawthorn, Jody Scheckter and any 1 of Schumachers

[sosidge]

That's rather debatable don't you think?

I don't think Rubens' mechanical problems cost him more points than the final margin to Button. Stand to be corrected though.

[goingthedistance]

10 podiums, 4 wins (maybe 5). Yep he'd be the worst winner ever...seriously!

[DILLIGAF]

He might be the worst WDC but i doubt he'll give a ****.

He will be the best "Never Expected to Win" Champion though.

Edited by DILLIGAF, 08 November 2010 - 14:06.

[sensible]

I'd say that Alonso Ferrari is second best car on grid after Webber's RBR overall in season (Vettel lost 60 points to reliability, Hamilton's McLaren was overall slower and less reliable). Lets not forget that Ferrari had some races where car was great but Alonso made costly mistakes.

constructor points would say otherwise. Generally they are a better guide than an opinion

[Don_Humpador]

I don't think Rubens' mechanical problems cost him more points than the final margin to Button. Stand to be corrected though.

I was thinking more along the lines of Vettel, who was runner up.

[sensible]

I am not really into grading WDCs relative worthiness.

If Webber does win, he will have had more than his share of good fortune but whilst the RB6 is unquestionably the best car this year it is by no means as dominant as some people seem to suggest. Mark Webber is not the fastest or most talented driver on the grid but he will be nonetheless deserving if he does win it in the end.

Dont disagree as I said in my original post.
I think its a valid theing to compare WDCs (or to jump the gun - potential ones

[paulrobs]

Of course Webber will be a deserving WDC. We could go back through every championship and make some kind of case for each winner not being a deserving champion. Hell, why not just rate each driver at the start of the year and award them the title there and then because they are the best and most deserving. That way we could eliminate all the bad luck and bad driving and anything else that happens over the course of a season to seemingly prevent a driver from winning.

It would be very sad that if Webber wins that it could be seen as undeserving and not making the most of a dominant car. If Vettel were to win he'd be crowned as the heir apparent to Schumacher and the best driver since whenever and someone who beat his vastly more experienced teammate in the same car etc etc.

Whoever wins the championship deserves it. I might however feel aggrieved if Alonso wins it by less than 7 points because I still view F1 as a sport. I know it's more than that but it's the way I feel.

[unoc]

going by this logic, no webber wont be... schumacher is and will always be.. think about it

number 1 when going for titles in a car that was braking the rules.... so those two don't ocunt

then in ferrair he had the best car over the entire season (yes some races weren't ferraris way, but overal it was), and barichello had more problems, and schumacher was by far the favourite. And he did it 7 times....!

Hamilton has lost points by bad luck... 18 in spain (which helped vettel), more when his engine packed it in in hungary. A bit of bad luck in singapore, monza was only a small error.

To say that Webber doesn't deserve it is to ignore Webbers career in his previous 3 teams, first two years at redbull. And the fact that despite all odds he can challenge vettel at most places. Some going his way, others vettels.

Vettel has had SOME bad luck, but most of it has been brought on or enraged. Webber has worked around problems ad worked through things.

[sosidge]

I was thinking more along the lines of Vettel, who was runner up.

Yes - this could be two seasons in a row that Vettel loses the WDC through reliability.

[Slyder]

Nah, Nelson Piquet is the worst WDC ever.

He never deserved any of his championships. He just benefited from the fact that his rivals took each other and themselves out...

[Andrew Hope]

I'm not one of those people that buy into 'deserving' champions. 'Deserving' is a bunch of **** in racing contexts, it's a word used by people when they can't make a real case as to why their favorite driver isn't the WDC. You are what your points say you are at the end of the day, that's why we run the races. Reliability problems, accidents, excuses, in other words, are part of being a racing driver and they are as much a necessary challenge to a WDC as the other drivers are.

I don't really like Webber, and I don't think he's anywhere near as good as driver as Hamilton, Alonso or Vettel (or a few other drivers on the grid, for that matter), but if he wins the WDC he'll be just as deserving as Fangio and Senna, and I'm certainly more happy for him than I am for Button, who is incredibly lucky he was even in F1 long enough to win the Championship, but he's just as 'deserving' as anyone else.

[DILLIGAF]

I am not really into grading WDCs relative worthiness.

If Webber does win, he will have had more than his share of good fortune but whilst the RB6 is unquestionably the best car this year it is by no means as dominant as some people seem to suggest. Mark Webber is not the fastest or most talented driver on the grid but he will be nonetheless deserving if he does win it in the end.

A very objective post. Pity there wasn't more like you Dunder.

[Kelateboy]

Webber wont win it, Alonso will.

will Alonso be the worst even WDC hmm.. nope, Hill gets that achievement for 1996 but it will be an empty and undeserved WDC.

Who cares if Alonso deserves the 2010 WDC title. If he wins it next week, we will annoint him as a 3-time F1 champion - that is 2 more than Hamilton, and 4 less than Schumacher.

There won't be an asterisk to his name or title.

[Kelateboy]

I'm not one of those people that buy into 'deserving' champions. 'Deserving' is a bunch of **** in racing contexts, it's a word used by people when they can't make a real case as to why their favorite driver isn't the WDC. You are what your points say you are at the end of the day, that's why we run the races. Reliability problems, accidents, excuses, in other words, are part of being a racing driver and they are as much a necessary challenge to a WDC as the other drivers are.

I don't really like Webber, and I don't think he's anywhere near as good as driver as Hamilton, Alonso or Vettel (or a few other drivers on the grid, for that matter), but if he wins the WDC he'll be just as deserving as Fangio and Senna, and I'm certainly more happy for him than I am for Button, who is incredibly lucky he was even in F1 long enough to win the Championship, but he's just as 'deserving' as anyone else.

+1

[Tsarwash]

Keke Rosberg was the most undeserving champion in modern times. The two favourites for the title both failed to finish the season, and to a larger extent, the championship was decided by who had the least amount of retirements. It seems certain that both Peroni and Villeneuve would have beaten him had they not had horrifying crashes. Prost had seven or eight retirements. Arnoux who won more races than Rosberg, had ten retirements. In fact Arnoux only finished a race outside the top three once.

[Dunder]

15 poles out of 18?

Led every race bar China (only because of Alonso's jump start), Canada, Spa, Germany and Singapore?

Not dominant?

Completely dominant more like.

Vettel should have sealed this championship a few races ago were it not for reliability. For Webber to be behind Alonso's Ferrari after having a completely reliable car is a reflection of his poor performance, not the car's lack of dominance.

How many of those poles were by more than 2-3 tenths than the fastest Ferrari or McLaren?
If we compare the RB6, for example, to the Williams' driven by Mansell, Hill or Villenueve, how does it stack up?

As I said the RB6 is the best car, indeed it is a dominant car but when compared to WDC winning cars from 15-20 years ago it is hardly outstanding (speaking relatively).

Edited by Dunder, 08 November 2010 - 14:21.

[unoc]

I'm not one of those people that buy into 'deserving' champions. 'Deserving' is a bunch of **** in racing contexts, it's a word used by people when they can't make a real case as to why their favorite driver isn't the WDC. You are what your points say you are at the end of the day, that's why we run the races. Reliability problems, accidents, excuses, in other words, are part of being a racing driver and they are as much a necessary challenge to a WDC as the other drivers are.

I don't really like Webber, and I don't think he's anywhere near as good as driver as Hamilton, Alonso or Vettel (or a few other drivers on the grid, for that matter), but if he wins the WDC he'll be just as deserving as Fangio and Senna, and I'm certainly more happy for him than I am for Button, who is incredibly lucky he was even in F1 long enough to win the Championship, but he's just as 'deserving' as anyone else.

Agree except for the bit about vettel being better than Webber. Right now, I don't think so. Hamtilon and Alonso are overall better drivers. WEbber in spain/monaco form this year could challenge, but overall speed. Alonso the fastest driver on field currently, followed by Hamilton. Vettel, while fast, isn't a better drive currently because of his overall package. He can't drive around problems and can't overtake to save his life. That's what makes them so equal.. Vettel is a tenth quicker on average. But a tenth is teh difference btween pole and 2nd. Webber though can overtake and is much better at working situations to his advantage. Vettel is still a point and squirt kind of driver. He's a bloody fast driver, but I don't think he could have done webbers stratergies in his races anymore than webber could pull off vettels.

[Tenmantaylor]

If Webber is the worst WDC ever it'll mainly be because his team mate and the others gave him the worst challenge.

[Dunder]

Yes - this could be two seasons in a row that Vettel loses the WDC through reliability.

You cannot just separate the speed of the RB6 and its reliability.
Any analysis of Newey cars of the past shows us that.

He has been unlucky is this respect compared to Webber but designing the car and its components to make reliability less marginal would come at a cost of less speed.

[Tsarwash]

Webber has publically questioned his team, been resoundly beaten by his teammate, (not always, but more often), and been very lucky with reliability and collisions this season. I'm not saying that Mark is undeserving of his position, but he has been pretty lucky this year compared to Lewis, Alonso and Vettel. It appears that all three of them are faster than him over a season.

[DanardiF1]

Webber wont win it, Alonso will.

will Alonso be the worst even WDC hmm.. nope, Hill gets that achievement for 1996 but it will be an empty and undeserved WDC.

For me it's Rosberg 82... but Damon was my childhood hero.

You don't win 22 races in a Schumacher era without being pretty good, fantastic Williams car or not.

Edited by DanardiF1, 08 November 2010 - 14:29.

[sosidge]

How many of those poles were by more than 2-3 tenths than the fastest Ferrari or McLaren?
If we compare the RB6, for example, to the Williams' driven by Mansell, Hill or Villenueve, how does it stack up.

As I said the RB6 is the best car, indeed it is a dominant car but when compared to WDC winning cars from 15-20 years ago it is hardly outstanding (speaking relatively).

A second a lap does not happen in F1 any more. We are closer to having the whole of Q3 covered by a second than for any other car to be that dominant. 2 or three tenths is dominant enough.

What Red Bull did at Hungary in particular was exceptional, and they have always had the pace to win the races they have been on pole for. Their only poor track this year has been Monza, the only real power track left on the calendar. They were damn close to pole at Canada (especially considering Hamilton prompted another rule clarification that day ), Germany and Singapore also.

Were it not for reliability they would have won three more races this season. Were it not for blunders, they would have won another two. 14 of the 18.

[sensible]

If Webber is the worst WDC ever it'll mainly be because his team mate and the others gave him the worst challenge.

How do you work that out? he had a better car than all the "others" and his teammate suffered from reliability issues. Give vettel just one of his 3 major reliability issues back and he'd be ahead of Webber. Give Webber his reliability back and... Note this is based on positions that, had he continued on, he'd have won, not the usual woulda coulda kind of crap that involves unlikely passes and bizarre scenarios.

[sensible]

I'm not one of those people that buy into 'deserving' champions. 'Deserving' is a bunch of **** in racing contexts, it's a word used by people when they can't make a real case as to why their favorite driver isn't the WDC. You are what your points say you are at the end of the day, that's why we run the races. Reliability problems, accidents, excuses, in other words, are part of being a racing driver and they are as much a necessary challenge to a WDC as the other drivers are.

I don't really like Webber, and I don't think he's anywhere near as good as driver as Hamilton, Alonso or Vettel (or a few other drivers on the grid, for that matter), but if he wins the WDC he'll be just as deserving as Fangio and Senna, and I'm certainly more happy for him than I am for Button, who is incredibly lucky he was even in F1 long enough to win the Championship, but he's just as 'deserving' as anyone else.

Yeah I absolutely agree. Every one who wins is "deserves it" whatever that means. however gien they have won it, I think its perfectly valid to compare them. SOme champions are better than others. Some win in difficult conditions againsta better car which makes the win memorable. Some win in the best car without much competition which is neither good nor bad, and some make a real meal of doing it in the best car.
I think most fair minded peopkle would agree that webber is pretty much in the latter category given events this year, so I think its a valid question to ask. TBH I'm not sure whether or not he definitely is the worst ever, but I think the red bull's dominence is of the level of 92 or 2004 and so one of the RB drivers should have won it. While the fastes car isnt always the overall best car (cf 2005), in webbers case he had teh fastest and most reliable car of the top contenders. With that combination you should win easily. On that basis he's definitely in contention for the homour in my opinion.

[sensible]

Of course Webber will be a deserving WDC. We could go back through every championship and make some kind of case for each winner not being a deserving champion. Hell, why not just rate each driver at the start of the year and award them the title there and then because they are the best and most deserving. That way we could eliminate all the bad luck and bad driving and anything else that happens over the course of a season to seemingly prevent a driver from winning.

It would be very sad that if Webber wins that it could be seen as undeserving and not making the most of a dominant car. If Vettel were to win he'd be crowned as the heir apparent to Schumacher and the best driver since whenever and someone who beat his vastly more experienced teammate in the same car etc etc.

Whoever wins the championship deserves it. I might however feel aggrieved if Alonso wins it by less than 7 points because I still view F1 as a sport. I know it's more than that but it's the way I feel.

Again, no-one's saying that he's not deserving, the question is "is he the worst of those lovely deserving people who have won the wdc?" (if he were to win it)

[sensible]

You cannot just separate the speed of the RB6 and its reliability.
Any analysis of Newey cars of the past shows us that.

you can on webber's car.

[flyer121]

What an insensible thread this is...

Just hope everyone got the joke

Edit : If only drivers knew that even after winning the WDC , they are still not done.
they still have to compete in the "most deserved, barely deserved and the undeserved" Internet Forum Stakes ..

Would be interesting to know who according to OP the most deserving this year ..

Edited by flyer121, 08 November 2010 - 14:43.

[SK99]

Agree except for the bit about vettel being better than Webber. Right now, I don't think so. Hamtilon and Alonso are overall better drivers. WEbber in spain/monaco form this year could challenge, but overall speed. Alonso the fastest driver on field currently, followed by Hamilton. Vettel, while fast, isn't a better drive currently because of his overall package. He can't drive around problems and can't overtake to save his life. That's what makes them so equal.. Vettel is a tenth quicker on average. But a tenth is teh difference btween pole and 2nd. Webber though can overtake and is much better at working situations to his advantage. Vettel is still a point and squirt kind of driver. He's a bloody fast driver, but I don't think he could have done webbers stratergies in his races anymore than webber could pull off vettels.

Did you not see the race in Spain where he finished the race with hardly any braking - or the race in Bahrain where despite his engine being down on power he still managed to go faster than he had previously?

And what about adapting to this year's tyres and being on Webber's pace whilst Webber has found those tyres perfectly suited to him - which I'm not taking anything away from Webber for as he had to adapt to the car last year when he was crocked!

Vettel and Webber are far better pure driving talents than many give them credit for.

However overtaking has to be improved no doubt, but the ability is there IMO as I have seen in the lower formulae that he is more than capable of racing people and beating them, so it would seem the current issues he has are more a matter of application of his abilities than not any at all, and I would bet that in the future he will be much better.

Edited by SK99, 08 November 2010 - 14:42.

[Andy35]

Wasn't Button the worst WDC ever?

Definitey Schumacher on current form

Andy

[DILLIGAF]

He is correct though, no matter what. Webber has publically questioned his team, been resoundly beaten by his teammate, (not always, but more often), and been very lucky with reliability and collisions this season. I'm not saying that Mark is undeserving of his position, but he has been pretty lucky this year compared to Lewis, Alonso and Vettel. It appears that all three of them are faster than him over a season.

Just pointing out that there's no need to say it over & over & over. It gets boring.

As for your assessment, i agree with most of it regarding Webber.

Beaten by Vettel? Yes
Beaten resoundingly by Vettel? No (You don't win 4 GPs if being beaten resoundingly)
Publicly questioned his team management? Yes
Vettel faster? Yes, in qualifying.

Not sure about your claim Lewis & Fred are faster over the season though. I do agree they are better drivers but not faster.

[kar]

I dunno Andy, Schumacher has been there, or thereabouts (if not outright faster) than his teammate for the past 4-5 races now.

There's a world champion on the grid for who that hasn't been true all season. Much less right now.

[flyer121]

15 poles out of 18?

Led every race bar China (only because of Alonso's jump start), Canada, Spa, Germany and Singapore?

Not dominant?

Completely dominant more like.

Vettel should have sealed this championship a few races ago were it not for reliability. For Webber to be behind Alonso's Ferrari after having a completely reliable car is a reflection of his poor performance, not the car's lack of dominance.

I dont think the number of pole positions should translate directly to mean RB6 is the best car ever.
Webber's previous ( excellent ) Q record means that the drivers are no slouches over a single lap and may have more to do with pole positions than initially thought.

Keep in consideration that RBR is so much poorer in traffic and in closely following and generally poor in wet setups (with a record number of wet or part wet races).
Reliability for Vettel also points ( partially) to the car not being superlative in every department.

Looking at all this - I cant say RB6 was way ahead of others although it was the better car most circuits if not the absolute BEST...

Edited by flyer121, 08 November 2010 - 14:51.

[DILLIGAF]

I dont think the number of pole positions should translate directly to mean RB6 is the best car ever.
Webber's previous ( excellent ) Q record means that the drivers are no slouches over a single lap and may have more to do with pole positions than initially thought.

Keep in consideration that RBR is so much poorer in traffic and in closely following and generally poor in wet setups (with a record number of wet or part wet races).
Reliability for Vettel also points ( partially) to the car not being superlative in every department.

Looking at all this - I cant say RB6 was way ahead of others although it was the better car most circuits if not the absolute BEST...

+1

[sensible]

Definitey Schumacher on current form

Andy

I dont think even Schumacher can win it now this year, so...