Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 11 votes

Vettel as good as Senna, says Ascanelli


  • Please log in to reply
805 replies to this topic

#701 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 00:34

Firstly, for someone with 'consistent front running pace' Webber finished way off Sebastian, 6th in the WDC and over 100 points down on his team mate.

Secondly, if you are going to judge Sebastian against Schumacher and Alonso then it should only present Sebastian in a further good light. After all, for all that Webber might occasionally keep up the pace, he was never required to cede a victory to Sebastian. Rubens Barrichello has managed to keep the pace with Schumacher a few times back in Ferrari, and some might say Massa even showed up Alonso towards the end of 2012. That is not to mean that Schumacher and Alonso are not great, just that they are human and so naturally imperfect.

Thirdly, if you really want to do things Di Resta's way, Webber beat Alonso back in F3000. To just wave off Webber's talent as 'a classic journeyman' is quite disrespectful. After all, here is someone who, back when he just entered the sport, claimed unlikely poles in 2003 and 2004 for mid-running teams. Not unlike what Nico Hulkenberg has achieved so far. Yes, Webber might not be classed as a F1 legend, but he isn't someone to be easily dismissed either.


If Webber is not a journeyman who is? Driven with multiple teams, had no success until lucking into the best car since 2009, yet has still only managed a meagre number of wins, and consistently under performed in the WDC, because of lack of driving consistency and always being involved in incidents. He fits perfectly alongside the Gerhard Bergers, Coulthards, and Patrases. The fact he is generally very fast just shows how good the redbulls are, which is totally different to Massa, and Schumachers team mates who were generally nowhere, most of the time.

Firstly, I think it is very easy to overlook that a single alternator is the reason why Sebastian even dropped behind Webber on points. Otherwise, Sebastian would quite easily lead Webber from Europe right to the end.


And you are over looking Marks consistent KERS failures, team failure to get him out in qualifying in Spain, and qualifying problems in bahrain, and Valencia.

Sebastian is indeed not as good at adapting to a changing car as Alonso and Hamilton are. To jump from that comparison to 'mediocre and comfortably beaten' is quite hilarious, though. Let us compare the results of Sebastian, Webber and Alonso over the first seven races in 2012 (when Sebastian stated he wasn't comfortable with the car).

Sebastian 2 11 5 1 6 4 4
Webber 4 4 4 4 11 1 7
Alonso 5 1 9 7 2 3 5

Alarmingly, Webber is the most consistent. Sebastian and Alonso both have one victory and one 2nd place, Alonso having one more podium (a 3rd), but Sebastian having better points positions. Sebastian also has one 11th, while Alonso's lowest result is a 9th. In conclusion, all three drivers had somewhat similar results


You cant compare Alonso's consistency to the redbulls when they were driving totally different cars, especially when the Ferrari was a total piece of rubbish at that stage of the season. Your comparison does show that Vettel was less consistent than Mark Webber, and if your less consistent than a 36 year old journeyman then how can you not be mediocre? Just imagine if his team mate had been Alonso or Hamilton during that time? good god, it would have been ugly.


Secondly, although I would agree Senna is probably the better qualifier when compared to Sebastian, Alonso should not be in the equation. Webber has been a great qualifier throughout his F1 history and had never been beaten until he came up against Sebastian, while Alonso often faltered against Trulli in 2004 and occasionally lost to Fisichella as well. Only when he is the established number 1 does he ever comprehensively beat his team mate. If you want an example of a fast driver, Hamilton should be considered instead.


Hilarious. Alonso has a better career qualifying record than Vettel, despite having much stronger team mates, yet he should not be in the equation? As a 21 year old Alonso was matching renowned qualifying master in the difficult 1 lap qualifying system, at the same age as Vettel was being often out qualified by Luizzi and Bourdais. The fastest driver Webber ever beat in qualifying was an old Coulthard, the rest were rookies, so he is far less proven than the likes of Trulli, Fisichella, Hamilton and Massa, who out paced Kimi. What has number 1 status have to do with qualifying? Are you suggesting he is getting superior equipment? You have better back up such a serious charge. Fact is Vettel has only proven to be faster most of the time than an old journeyman, which is nothing special, and still got out qualified by him, 9 times last year which is the same number of times Alonso has been out qualified since 2008. A totally different class. History shows the greats are rarely out qualified. Senna, Schumacher Alonso have that in common, Vettel does not. he facts prove it, regardless of the rhetoric.

Many people have been tricked into believing Vettel is super fast because he has the fastest car so long and gets so many poles. Remove the car advantage and nobody would look twice at him qualifying in 10th positon 1 tenth ahead of Webber. Its all the in perception.



1. 'ignoring these major flaws' There has yet to be a major flaw in Sebastian's technique that has been properly supported. Statistics is one way of supporting one's argument, informed opinion by ex-drivers or team members is another. Claiming to be an 'experienced F1 observer' is worth not much at all.


There are widely publicised quotes from his team engineers, including Marko and Vettel himself, that state, he cannot adapt as well to a car as Webber, and that he needs a specific type of handling to be fast. This is well known, and Im sure you have seen the quotes, so if you dont want to accept these facts, then its clear you are not interested in an honest debate, and merely want to defend your driver at all costs. I can dig up the quotes if you want, but do I really need to? This is all proven by Mark dominating Vettel in qualifying in the first half of the season, even getting pole at Monaco when Vettel could not even make the top 10. Pathetic. When have you ever seen Alonso or Senna perform so bad?

3. 'Vettel is clearly not the type of driver interested in a real challenge or test' And you know that, how? If Sebastian is uninterested in challenges, he could easily retire right now and be happy with his abundance of cash. Every second spent in a F1 car is a challenge, a test of his physical fitness, a dare to travel as fast as possible in a prototype car. If it was that simple to become a WDC, I wonder why so many drivers have yet to accomplish it.


We dont know for sure yet, we need to wait and see, but he seems very happy to keep having a journeyman team mate resigned year after year, that he knows he can comfortable beat, and not a proper young hard charger as a new challenge.

And Alonso, Schumacher, Prost and even the great Senna have not? If the driver winning the WDC having the best car has occurred throughout the history of F1, what makes you think it will change now?


Alonso and Schumacher won titles without the best car. Senna had the best car but he had Prost as a team mate.

Schumacher claimed his 2003 title from Kimi by only 2 points. Hamilton's title was claimed by a single point. And I'll never understand how Lauda claimed victory in 1984 by half a point. As for your perceived clear superiority of the Red Bull, isn't it interesting that Ferrari claimed 2nd in the WCC? Or how Massa was right behind Webber in the WDC, despite Massa himself admitting he underperformed at the start of the season (while Webber insists he gave his best shot)? Yes the Red Bull was the better car, but it was far from a clear superiority.


The lap times prove it was much quicker for about 15 out of 20 races. In most objective peoples minds, that would classify as clear superiority. It was a different class of car, the lap times prove it, you cant argue with lap times.

I think you are making the assumption that 'faster' = 'better'. If so, McLaren should have won the WCC by a landslide. Ferrari's reliability clawed back points that Alonso (on his own) would not have been able to make up. Therefore, we rate Ferrari quite a bit higher than you do. And just in case it was not clear, 100 points+ is the difference between Sebastian and 'one of the oldest drivers on the grid'.


Reliability was a factor with Mclaren but Alonso and Vettel had the same number of race finishes. Reliability was not a factor in the end.




Advertisement

#702 Harry

Harry
  • Member

  • 182 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 27 January 2013 - 00:43

I think people should not compare drivers of one different period to another, the rules, regulation & technology make the comparisons completely redundant.

#703 MarileneRiddle

MarileneRiddle
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:02

What on earth are you talking about politics? Lap times have nothing to do with politics, and they prove the Redbull was much faster than the F2012 for the vast majority of the season. Instead of making u pathetic excuses, try to form a sensible and logical argument as to why you think the cars were comparable in speed, which obviously includes explaining why Vettel and Webber were both consistently faster than Alonso. It seems clear you are not interested in facts, and just your personal interpretation of reality. The Redbull must faster all season? Ahh just politics! Hilarious

It had slightly better reliability than redbull but that was offset with Alonso being taken out in two races. Rocket ship starts from 7th position on the grid do not out weigh its lack of qualifying pace compared to Redbul, and Massa did not show championship winning speed, you just made that up, unless you can show lap times and detail what races Massa would have finished higher than Alonso did.

Politics are when the Ferrari is claimed to be a much worse overall car than the Red Bull. The Red Bull is faster in qualifying, but that is about it. If you consider fastest laps as the only relevant lap time, than that statistics are in your favour. Otherwise, overall race pace show the Ferrari to be comparable to the Lotus and the Red Bull in most circuits. There are, of course, races when the Red Bull was far better (Asian 4-race stretch) or the Ferrari was far better (wet races).

Last three races Massa had better race pace than Alonso, after summer break (from Belgium onwards) Massa was always comparable to Alonso on race pace. When Sebastian and Webber starts 3rd and 4th on the grid, a rocket-ship start from 5th or 6th can easily overcome the qualifying deficit. Especially when Webber bogs down (as he often does).

Would have been easier to say, Vettel has done well in Newey cars
But actually, you said one thing too many: he hasn't impressed in non-EBD or downforce equivalent cars.

I am glad you think Adrian wants Sebastian to do well so badly that he has designed a one-off car for BMW Sauber just for Sebastian's debut.
And if Sebastian's 2nd place in Australia in 2012 (with gutsy overtake on Rosberg included) wasn't impressive when coping with a non-EBD car, then I am not sure what your definition of impressive is.

Indeed you should not confuse that. When the car was difficult to drive, Webber had the measure on Vettel. But difficult to drive doesn't mean that Webber liked it.

Well, Webber liked it more than Sebastian did. And for all that he 'had the measure' on Sebastian, his performances up to Europe haven't been much better than Sebastian's. Indeed he mostly trailed Sebastian on points, and if not for a broken alternator, would have continued to do so for the rest of the season. I fail to see Webber's advantage.

I love how you group them into "qualifying specialists" as if by magic all the drivers that fall into that group are equally good.

In overall quality? Maybe not. But over 1 lap pace? Definitely.

Its not preference, because when the car does not suit Vettel he is consistently out paced by Webber, he can't adapt he said so himself and so did the team, are you really going to disagree with them? lol.

No, he wasn't consistently out-paced by Webber. Please check your facts. And Sebastian never said he couldn't adapt, just that he couldn't use all his previous tricks and therefore had to adapt. There is a difference between losing an advantage (his EBD-honed tricks) and having to start over, to being disadvantaged (because he is unable to adapt to the car). Sebastian's results in the first half of the 2012 (consistently in the top 5 with only 2 races with no points scored) points more to the former.

Massa was a qualifying specialist acccording to everyone before Alonso thrashed him, and everyone changed their opinion because they could not handle all the egg on their faces. Massa beat Kimi, who did Webber ever beat? David Coulthard? lol.

Massa has never been considered a qualifying specialist because he has been out-paced by Nick Heidfeld, Giancarlo Fisichella and Michael Schumacher. Massa record against Kimi is 25-19 (I did not add in the Hungarian GP in 2009 since Massa couldn't do his Q3 lap), which is far from what a 'qualifying specialist' should achieve. Therefore Alonso beating Massa in qualifying is nothing special.

Webber's record has out-qualified every team mate he has had before Sebastian: Alex Yoong, Anthony Davidson, Antonio Pizzonia, Justin Wilson, Christian Klien, Nick Heidfeld, Nico Rosberg and David Coulthard. There are some names in there that you might not recognise, but others (like Heidfeld and Rosberg) are definitely considered talents. And I am not sure why there is a need to laugh at Webber's record against DC. Is someone who kept pace with Damon Hill and Mika Hakkinen not good enough for you?

I still have yet to read a properly substantiated "Vettel is bad" argument (not "Vettel isn't as good as (insert favourite driver name)", those I can easily accept when using different yardsticks).

#704 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:42

It's telling how most of this dribble is always argued based on misrepresentation of facts or double standards.
It's really an unjustice to Alonso and Senna (in this topic), that their fans don't actually seem to know what makes them so good, that they have to resort to such low behavior to try and make their point. If I didn't know any better, if people had to lie and deceive to make someone look good, I'd almost think they are really quite lousy. I mean, if they're better, wouldn't real fans argue based on facts and equal measures?

Exhibit A, deceitful representation of facts:

Would have been easier to say, Vettel has done well in Newey cars :D

He wants us to believe that Vettel has had non-Newey cars and was not able to do well in them.
Now if he was interested in a fair and balanced assessment, he would realize that his attempted dig at Vettel (has only done well in Newey cars = can't perform in a non-Newey car) is a misrepresentation of the fact that a driver can only do well in what material he has been given. Accusing Vettel of that, is like saying "Alonso has never performed well in a Newey car."

Furthermore, his misrepresentation of the idea that Newey automatically translates into success. He only mentions Newey's successes, yet I hear nothing along the lines of "Vettel has done well in cars designed by someone who Kimi Räikkönen could not win a championship with."

Exhibit B1, factual lies:

But actually, you said one thing too many: he hasn't impressed in non-EBD or downforce equivalent cars.

Anyone actually following Formula One knows that the STR2 nor the STR 3 fall into this category.

Exhibit B2, stretching reality to the point of lies and double standards:

Indeed you should not confuse that. When the car was difficult to drive, Webber had the measure on Vettel. But difficult to drive doesn't mean that Webber liked it.

As the definition of 'having the measure on someone' is not set in stone numbers, winning 3 out of 11 instances could be considered having a measure, but few people in their right mind would argue losing 27% of encounters is having the measure on someone.

Also, as mentioned before, a prime example of a double standard, as by the measure he gives to Vettel, he should also argue that Massa had the measure on Alonso. Yet he doesn't, as he is not interested in a fair and true assessment.

Exhibit C, dismissing without counter arguments

I love how you group them into "qualifying specialists" as if by magic all the drivers that fall into that group are equally good.

As he didn't like the answer, rather then make a point why Webber would not be as good a qualifier as Trulli, he just dismisses it. This behavior usually indicates he does not know why, but is afraid to admit it.

Exhibit D, over-glorifying retired drivers

Hilarious. Alonso has a better career qualifying record than Vettel, despite having much stronger team mates

Apparently we've somehow all missed the glorious careers of those strong Italian drivers Jarno Trulli and Giancarlo Fisichella and son-of-a-WDC Nelsinho Piquet.

Exhibit E, not knowing what you're talking about:

History shows the greats are rarely out qualified. Senna, Schumacher Alonso have that in common, Vettel does not. he facts prove it, regardless of the rhetoric.

Here we see a prime example of someone who simply shapes history to his liking. Of course, technically the line between 'rarely' and 'not rarely' could just co-incidentally fall between Vettel's 70% and Schumacher/Alonso's 74.5%/74.7%, but that is highly unlikely. Also conveniently ignoring greats that have similarly or worse records, such as Stewart, Prost and Lauda.

Exhibit F, false sense of fairness:

We dont know for sure yet, we need to wait and see

The guy who is burning Vettel for everything he has not yet had a chance to do, wanting us to believe he is actualy fair and wants to wait and see.

Exhibit G, double standards:

The lap times prove it was much quicker for about 15 out of 20 races. In most objective peoples minds, that would classify as clear superiority. It was a different class of car, the lap times prove it, you cant argue with lap times.

According to this user, when Alonso had the fastest lap times in his championship years, this was no indication of the 'not best car' Alonso had. Now that we're talking about Vettel though, having the fastest lap times suddenly is an indication of 'clear superiority'. A prime example of two different measures.

_______________
Now I wonder, are these people really so clueless of their behavior, or do they just enjoy trolling?

#705 MarileneRiddle

MarileneRiddle
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:43

If Webber is not a journeyman who is? Driven with multiple teams, had no success until lucking into the best car since 2009, yet has still only managed a meagre number of wins, and consistently under performed in the WDC, because of lack of driving consistency and always being involved in incidents. He fits perfectly alongside the Gerhard Bergers, Coulthards, and Patrases. The fact he is generally very fast just shows how good the redbulls are, which is totally different to Massa, and Schumachers team mates who were generally nowhere, most of the time.


I am glad to see that Nico Rosberg, Felipe Massa and even Kimi Raikkonen would become eligible for the title of "just a journeyman, nothing much to see here" in a few years' time. If Alonso deserves that much praise for his short stint at Renault from 2008-2009, I fail to see how Webber's efforts at Jaguar and Williams should be forgotten.

And you are over looking Marks consistent KERS failures, team failure to get him out in qualifying in Spain, and qualifying problems in bahrain, and Valencia.

No I am not. If you want to go into to probable points, Sebastian has many complaints as well. But Webber hasn't had a single race-ending reliability problem up until USA, which by then even if I gave him back his points, he would still be behind Sebastian. As for that specific alternator failure in Valencia, it was 25 points that was taken away without him being able to even try to salvage (like he did in Bahrain 2010). That was a devastating blow to Sebastian's points haul.

You cant compare Alonso's consistency to the redbulls when they were driving totally different cars, especially when the Ferrari was a total piece of rubbish at that stage of the season. Your comparison does show that Vettel was less consistent than Mark Webber, and if your less consistent than a 36 year old journeyman then how can you not be mediocre? Just imagine if his team mate had been Alonso or Hamilton during that time? good god, it would have been ugly.

Your friend prty has stated that the Red Bull wasn't easy to drive either. And no, that Ferrari wasn't 'a total piece of rubbish' (otherwise what do you call the HRTs?) Since we don't have evidence either way, why not we agree to disagree on who would perform better in any given car? Because, frankly, I dare say Alonso would do even worse than Webber in the Red Bull (because the Red Bull requires high qualifiers). Yes, Sebastian was less consistent. And his points haul at the end of those 7 races was still higher than Webber's. I dare say that makes him not mediocre. (Even if Hamilton loses to Rosberg this season, I won't call him mediocre either.)

Alonso has a better career qualifying record than Vettel, despite having much stronger team mates, yet he should not be in the equation?

That is why it is so difficult making proper arguments against some posters. Because, having followed both drivers' careers (once an Alonso fan), Alonso is definitely not Sebastian's match in qualifying. The only time Alonso out-paced his team mates were when they were number 2 drivers. Please, please look up on his pre-2006 career.

There are widely publicised quotes from his team engineers, including Marko and Vettel himself, that state, he cannot adapt as well to a car as Webber, and that he needs a specific type of handling to be fast.

Requiring a particular handling to perform his bag of tricks and requiring a particular handling to perform well at all are two different things. Sebastian's results point to the former, not the latter.

This is all proven by Mark dominating Vettel in qualifying in the first half of the season, even getting pole at Monaco when Vettel could not even make the top 10. Pathetic. When have you ever seen Alonso or Senna perform so bad?

I've not watched Senna so I cannot say for him, but Alonso? 2007 French GP. And by the way, Sebastian did qualify in the top 10 for the Monaco GP. I am so glad you pay attention during the races.

We dont know for sure yet, we need to wait and see, but he seems very happy to keep having a journeyman team mate resigned year after year, that he knows he can comfortable beat, and not a proper young hard charger as a new challenge.

If I just read that quote by itself, I could have sworn you are talking about Alonso.

Alonso and Schumacher won titles without the best car. Senna had the best car but he had Prost as a team mate.

I feel like I am repeating myself but: There is a difference between the best car and the fastest car.

The lap times prove it was much quicker for about 15 out of 20 races. In most objective peoples minds, that would classify as clear superiority. It was a different class of car, the lap times prove it, you cant argue with lap times.

No, I cannot. And that is why I don't. Re: above point.

Reliability was a factor with Mclaren but Alonso and Vettel had the same number of race finishes. Reliability was not a factor in the end.

Er, yes it was? Reliability is not the same as racing incidents. If you want to magically remove Alonso's 2 racing incidents (Belgium and Japan), then I shall likewise remove 2 racing incidents from Sebastian (Malaysia and Brazil). Then we are on the same level. Otherwise it stands at Sebastian 2: Alonso 0.

#706 Harry

Harry
  • Member

  • 182 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 27 January 2013 - 02:13

I love how uptight and savage some of you get regarding shit like this! :lol:

#707 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,774 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 27 January 2013 - 02:16

217 drivers in the autosport top 40 from 2009 certainly didn't seem to think so, for one.
Not that I completely agree with the results of that list, your statement is incorrect.


And who were these 217 drivers?
Let's get real here, Clark and Senna are the benchmarks by which 'greatness' is determined.

#708 BenettonB192

BenettonB192
  • Member

  • 848 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 January 2013 - 02:16

Great posts MarileneRiddle. I was ready to shred azda's posts into pieces last night and link every of his sentences to the corresponding article in this list:
http://en.wikipedia....st_of_fallacies. But then i don't feel like arguing with this kind of user anymore. They are so entrenched in their dislike of Seb and everything that he has achieved that nothing will ever change their mind. Heck there are users on this forum who have analyzed to death why Schumi only was a mediocre driver at best. You can't reason with this sort of people.
So i'll let Seb do the talking on the track and lean back and enjoy while the bitter tears keep running.

Edited by BenettonB192, 27 January 2013 - 02:17.


#709 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,072 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 January 2013 - 02:25

Alonso and Schumacher won titles without the best car...


So why isn't Alonso winning without the best car now?

@mnmracer - that post had me rolling. :lol: :rotfl:

Edited by bourbon, 27 January 2013 - 02:35.


#710 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 02:36

Politics are when the Ferrari is claimed to be a much worse overall car than the Red Bull. The Red Bull is faster in qualifying, but that is about it. If you consider fastest laps as the only relevant lap time, than that statistics are in your favour. Otherwise, overall race pace show the Ferrari to be comparable to the Lotus and the Red Bull in most circuits. There are, of course, races when the Red Bull was far better (Asian 4-race stretch) or the Ferrari was far better (wet races).


The claims were based on lap times though. To say the Ferrari was comparable to Rebull on most circuits is denying reality, plain and simple, because it was blatantly obvious it was faster at most tracks. I will list them to help you.

Australia
China
Bahrain
Monaco
Canada
Europe
Silverstone
Hungary
Singapore
Japan
Korea
India
Dhabi
USA
Brazil

In the remaining races they were evenely matched at best, so the Ferrari was only faster than Redbull at Malaysia and thats being generous as it was really just Alonso making the difference. The dominance of the redbull was undeniable, which is why the vast majority of the planet rated Alonso the best driver of the season. Because they knew the car had no business competing for the title. Denying this does you no favours.


Last three races Massa had better race pace than Alonso, after summer break (from Belgium onwards) Massa was always comparable to Alonso on race pace. When Sebastian and Webber starts 3rd and 4th on the grid, a rocket-ship start from 5th or 6th can easily overcome the qualifying deficit. Especially when Webber bogs down (as he often does).


Ah but HOW MUCH faster was Massa than Alonso in those races? Enough to make a difference to the finishing position? Nope. The Ferrari was distant in all the races, even thrashed by a Force india in the last race. How many times did a Ferrari rocket start overcome the Redbulls at the start? List them all.

I am glad you think Adrian wants Sebastian to do well so badly that he has designed a one-off car for BMW Sauber just for Sebastian's debut.


You mean that debut where he was outqualified and out raced by the Nick Heidfeld? which impressied bmw so much they discarded him?

And if Sebastian's 2nd place in Australia in 2012 (with gutsy overtake on Rosberg included) wasn't impressive when coping with a non-EBD car, then I am not sure what your definition of impressive is.


Considering his team mate was faster, it was not very impressive. Whats impressive is winning malaysia with a car that qualified 10th, 1.5 seconds off the pace.


No, he wasn't consistently out-paced by Webber. Please check your facts. And Sebastian never said he couldn't adapt, just that he couldn't use all his previous tricks and therefore had to adapt. There is a difference between losing an advantage (his EBD-honed tricks) and having to start over, to being disadvantaged (because he is unable to adapt to the car). Sebastian's results in the first half of the 2012 (consistently in the top 5 with only 2 races with no points scored) points more to the former.


You need to read the quote again because Vettel specifically said the team changed the car to suit him. He did not say he had to adapt, you are making it up. Post the quote for all to see. Seb was indeed consistent in the first half of 2012, consistently mediocre. 1 win out of the first 13 races proved he cannot do anything without the fastest car. He cant make the difference.

Massa has never been considered a qualifying specialist because he has been out-paced by Nick Heidfeld, Giancarlo Fisichella and Michael Schumacher. Massa record against Kimi is 25-19 (I did not add in the Hungarian GP in 2009 since Massa couldn't do his Q3 lap), which is far from what a 'qualifying specialist' should achieve. Therefore Alonso beating Massa in qualifying is nothing special.


Prior to 2010 everyone was saying Massa was the most improved driver on the grid, and a qualifying specialist. Of course now history must be re written after Alonso made him look slow, much slower than Vettel can make any team mate look even if he is the oldest on the grid.

Webber's record has out-qualified every team mate he has had before Sebastian: Alex Yoong, Anthony Davidson, Antonio Pizzonia, Justin Wilson, Christian Klien, Nick Heidfeld, Nico Rosberg and David Coulthard. There are some names in there that you might not recognise, but others (like Heidfeld and Rosberg) are definitely considered talents. And I am not sure why there is a need to laugh at Webber's record against DC. Is someone who kept pace with Damon Hill and Mika Hakkinen not good enough for you?


The list of names you listed are a joke. Those drivers barely lasted a season the sport. Coulthard was near retirement by the time he became webbers team mate, and he lost every qualifying battle in his whole career.



#711 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 02:55

No I am not. If you want to go into to probable points, Sebastian has many complaints as well. But Webber hasn't had a single race-ending reliability problem up until USA, which by then even if I gave him back his points, he would still be behind Sebastian. As for that specific alternator failure in Valencia, it was 25 points that was taken away without him being able to even try to salvage (like he did in Bahrain 2010). That was a devastating blow to Sebastian's points haul.


You are the one that went into probable points when you started making excuses for Vettel trailing his journeyman team mate until Spa. All drivers have mishaps, although Vettel and Webber both had their even share. If Vettel was so good Webber should not have been anywhere near him. The guy loses at least 5 positions each race start. At least Massa is a demon starter, yet Alonso still doubled his points.

Your friend prty has stated that the Red Bull wasn't easy to drive either. And no, that Ferrari wasn't 'a total piece of rubbish' (otherwise what do you call the HRTs?) Since we don't have evidence either way, why not we agree to disagree on who would perform better in any given car? Because, frankly, I dare say Alonso would do even worse than Webber in the Red Bull (because the Red Bull requires high qualifiers). Yes, Sebastian was less consistent. And his points haul at the end of those 7 races was still higher than Webber's. I dare say that makes him not mediocre. (Even if Hamilton loses to Rosberg this season, I won't call him mediocre either.)


If you want to be taken seriously you need to be at least a little reasonable and rational. Denying the ferrari was rubbish when it was 1.5 seconds off the pace at the start of the season is not reasonable. The redbull was very strong from race 1, qualifying near the top of the grid, and you could see from the onboards it was easy to drive, while the Ferrari drivers were rally driving.

That is why it is so difficult making proper arguments against some posters. Because, having followed both drivers' careers (once an Alonso fan), Alonso is definitely not Sebastian's match in qualifying. The only time Alonso out-paced his team mates were when they were number 2 drivers. Please, please look up on his pre-2006 career.


I just presented an argument that was backed up by facts, and numbers. You ignored it and simply repeated your opinion that Alonso is definately not Vettels match in qualifying. As I said before you are not interested in facts just what you believe, no matter what. Webber outqualifed Vettel 9 times last yeat but of course Alonso would not be a match lol. In reality he would dominate him, especially in a F2012. If Vettel struggled with the redbull handling early on, just imagine him in the F2012? It would have been like Massa.

Requiring a particular handling to perform his bag of tricks and requiring a particular handling to perform well at all are two different things. Sebastian's results point to the former, not the latter.


He was no better than Webber until singapore when the car finally suited him and became a rocket. Being no matter then Mark Webber is pretty average.


Er, yes it was? Reliability is not the same as racing incidents. If you want to magically remove Alonso's 2 racing incidents (Belgium and Japan), then I shall likewise remove 2 racing incidents from Sebastian (Malaysia and Brazil). Then we are on the same level. Otherwise it stands at Sebastian 2: Alonso 0.


Vettels were self inflicted and not as costly as Alonso's which cost him two, second places.

#712 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:14

Someone saying

If you want to be taken seriously you need to be at least a little reasonable and rational.

then claiming
- it is rediculous to claim Alonso would not have Webber's number in qualifying, despite the fact Alonso couldn't have Trulli's number.
- there is a relation between visible stability and car speed (let's see how fast you go if you put max. downforce (stability) on every track).
- Vettel was no better than Webber until Singapore (FACT: Vettel outpaced Webber all but three times; see also, Alonso/Massa).
- Suzuka was not self-inflicted, yet ignoring the measurable facts that Karthikeyan had more than enough room in Malaysia.

This is comedy gold :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

#713 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:21

Anyone actually following Formula One knows that the STR2 nor the STR 3 fall into this category.


Vettel was nothing special in those cars. Good win the wet, but often out qualified by bourdais and Luizzi.

As the definition of 'having the measure on someone' is not set in stone numbers, winning 3 out of 11 instances could be considered having a measure, but few people in their right mind would argue losing 27% of encounters is having the measure on someone.

Also, as mentioned before, a prime example of a double standard, as by the measure he gives to Vettel, he should also argue that Massa had the measure on Alonso. Yet he doesn't, as he is not interested in a fair and true assessment.


My measure is outpaced. Fact is Vettel does not show any magic speed when the car does not suit him.

As he didn't like the answer, rather then make a point why Webber would not be as good a qualifier as Trulli, he just dismisses it. This behavior usually indicates he does not know why, but is afraid to admit it.


There is no evidence to suggest it, so of course its dismissed. The best driver Webber ever beat in qualifying is Coulthard, who was one of the worst qualifiers in modern history and lost every team battle he ever had. That is not a compelling case doe webber being a qualifying specialist.

Exhibit D, over-glorifying retired drivers

Apparently we've somehow all missed the glorious careers of those strong Italian drivers Jarno Trulli and Giancarlo Fisichella


Both had exceptional qualifying records and out qualifed all their team mates, which included quality drivers, and were considered qualifying specialist over their career.


Exhibit E, not knowing what you're talking about:

Here we see a prime example of someone who simply shapes history to his liking. Of course, technically the line between 'rarely' and 'not rarely' could just co-incidentally fall between Vettel's 70% and Schumacher/Alonso's 74.5%/74.7%, but that is highly unlikely. Also conveniently ignoring greats that have similarly or worse records, such as Stewart, Prost and Lauda.


I was speaking about drivers regarded as the 'fastest'. Their qualifying records back it up. The fact that Vettel's qualifying % is still inferior to Alonso's despite only having luizzi, and Webber, as team mates rather than, trulli, fisichella, massa, , hamilton, simply backs up what I have been saying. The notion that Vettel is a superior qualifier or anything special is totally baseless.


Exhibit G, double standards:

According to this user, when Alonso had the fastest lap times in his championship years, this was no indication of the 'not best car' Alonso had. Now that we're talking about Vettel though, having the fastest lap times suddenly is an indication of 'clear superiority'. A prime example of two different measures.


His rivals had faster lap times far more often in those years which is why he did not have the fastest or best car. How many times did Alonso have fastest lap times than Vettel this year? More or less? No double standards so matter how much you try to misrepresent and distort other peoples comments.

#714 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:29

Someone saying

then claiming
- it is rediculous to claim Alonso would not have Webber's number in qualifying, despite the fact Alonso couldn't have Trulli's number.
- there is a relation between visible stability and car speed (let's see how fast you go if you put max. downforce (stability) on every track).
- Vettel was no better than Webber until Singapore (FACT: Vettel outpaced Webber all but three times; see also, Alonso/Massa).
- Suzuka was not self-inflicted, yet ignoring the measurable facts that Karthikeyan had more than enough room in Malaysia.

This is comedy gold :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:



What has Trulli got to do with Mark Webber? Alonso was 21 years old back then and matched him.

Then why are the redbull drivers always looking like they are on a sunday drive with almost no oversteer, and why were the Ferrari drivers rally driving for half the season? Grip = speed, and Grip = stability so of course there is a relation. Now things are getting even more comical , with you denying the redbulls were very fast and easy to drive, despite their qualifying averages and onboards suggesting otherwise.

If Vettel outpaced Webber so often why was he behind him on points until Spa?

#715 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:39

double post

Edited by Winter98, 27 January 2013 - 03:40.


#716 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:39

How many times did Alonso have fastest lap times than Vettel this year?


There is more to a car's merits than fastest lap times. For instance, LH had a very fast car, but it wasn't very reliable, so he wasn't in the hunt for the championship.

Hope that helps.

#717 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:45

There is more to a car's merits than fastest lap times. For instance, LH had a very fast car, but it wasn't very reliable, so he wasn't in the hunt for the championship.

Hope that helps.



We are not discussing Hamilton's car though. We are discussing the Redbull which had equal numbers of finishes as Alonso. Even if we say Suzuka was 100% Alonso's fault, we still have Spa, and Monza which maybe cost him a win, so overall, there was nothing between them on reliability.

#718 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:57

We are not discussing Hamilton's car though. We are discussing the Redbull which had equal numbers of finishes as Alonso. Even if we say Suzuka was 100% Alonso's fault, we still have Spa, and Monza which maybe cost him a win, so overall, there was nothing between them on reliability.


I don't think accidents can be classified under reliability.

#719 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:02

And the deceit continues. I should publish a paper on this.

Exhibit lost count 1: lies and misrepresentations

Vettel was nothing special in those cars. Good win the wet, but often out qualified by bourdais and Luizzi.

A classic example of piggybacking a lie on a context-less claim.
Faulting a 19-year old driver who gets into the car with most of the season gone, for being out-qualified three times in the first 4 races, and then going on to tell the outright lie that he was often outqualified by Bourdais (14:4 for Vettel), or that he was nothing special in those cars (which is why team bosses voted him 5th best driver of '08).

Funny thing is, the subject seems to have 'forgotten' that in his well-prepared rookie year, even Alonso was outqualified twice by this-is-the-kind-of-guy-we-invented-the-107%-rule-for Tarso Marques.

Exhibit lost count 2: keep lying, even if you've been shown up

My measure is outpaced.

Rather than at least be truthful to the facts, which are that Webber outpaced Vettel in just 3 races, the subject continues to repeat his own deceitful message.

Exhibit lost count 3: what has he been smoking

There is no evidence to suggest it, so of course its dismissed. The best driver Webber ever beat in qualifying is Coulthard, who was one of the worst qualifiers in modern history and lost every team battle he ever had. That is not a compelling case doe webber being a qualifying specialist.
Both had exceptional qualifying records and out qualifed all their team mates, which included quality drivers, and were considered qualifying specialist over their career.

The subject now wants us to believe that Webber's career-long label of qualifying specialist is nothing compared to outqualifying Pedro Lamy, Ralf Schumacher, Alexander Wurz, Takuma Sato, Ralph Firman, Olivier Panis, Heinz-Harald Frentzen and Ricardo Zonta. :smoking:

Exhibit lost count 4: sure I know the facts, do you?

His rivals had faster lap times far more often in those years which is why he did not have the fastest or best car. How many times did Alonso have fastest lap times than Vettel this year? More or less? No double standards so matter how much you try to misrepresent and distort other peoples comments.

More often? Care to back that up with some facts, or do you 'just know'?

Exhibit lost count 5: me no speaka English

What has Trulli got to do with Mark Webber?

Two acknowledged qualifying specialists as team-mates.

Exhibit lost count 6: what's one more lie

Alonso was 21 years old back then and matched him.

Alonso was 23/24 when he matched Trulli.
Age 22, Vettel had outqualified Webber as often in one season, as Alonso had in two seasons with Trulli.

Exhibit lost count 7: I don't understand racing

Then why are the redbull drivers always looking like they are on a sunday drive with almost no oversteer, and why were the Ferrari drivers rally driving for half the season? Grip = speed, and Grip = stability so of course there is a relation. Now things are getting even more comical , with you denying the redbulls were very fast and easy to drive, despite their qualifying averages and onboards suggesting otherwise.

The subject doesn't seem to understand that time won in corners due to grip, is time lost on straights and vice versa. Simply saying "it had more grip, thus it was faster", shows a complete lack of understanding the basics of racing.
He then goes on to further demonstrate his lack of understanding of racing, by claiming qualifying pace is an indication of how much points can be gathered on Sunday. He might want to have a talk with Jarno 'Trulli-train' Trulli.

Exhibit lost count 8: I don't understand mathematics

If Vettel outpaced Webber so often why was he behind him on points until Spa?

In elementary school, I was taught how to count side-by-side. If 7-year old mnmracer wanted to count how often someone was faster than the other, he would count 1 for Vettel in Australia, 1 for Webber in China, 1 for Vettel in Bahrain, 1 for Webber in Monaco. Simple addition that then tells you the simple fact "in the first 11 races, there were 8 races where Vettel was faster".

Advertisement

#720 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:03

I don't think accidents can be classified under reliability.



If the driver is faultless then they can because have the exact same result, and not even you would suggest Alonso was at fault at Spa. Even that is not fair really though because a car breaking down is the fault of the team and the driver is part of the team, and the whole package, while Ferrari and Alonso were totally faultless.

#721 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:07

Exhibit 'does this guy ever stop'

a car breaking down is the fault of the team and the driver is part of the team, and the whole package, while Ferrari and Alonso were totally faultless.

When the Red Bull breaks down, it is partly the fault of Vettel.
When the Ferrari is not fast enough, it is none of Alonso's fault.

#722 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:13

If the driver is faultless then they can because have the exact same result, and not even you would suggest Alonso was at fault at Spa.


Regardless of the result or fault, accidents do not count as reliability issues.

Anyways, back on topic. So, how do you think Vettel compares to Senna?

I rate Senna higher, at least at this point in Vettel's career, but considering Ascanelli apparently wrote this a couple of years ago, you have to give the guy kudos for having an eye for talent.

Edited by Winter98, 27 January 2013 - 04:21.


#723 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:33

Anyways, back on topic. So, how do you think Vettel compares to Senna?

I rate Senna higher, at least at this point in Vettel's career, but considering Ascanelli apparently wrote this a couple of years ago, you have to give the guy kudos for having an eye for talent.



There is no comparison. I see none of Senna in Vettel at all and find the comparison laughable. To compare these drivers you need to understand what made Senna so special. It was basically his speed and ability to adapt to and be fast in any car and conditions. We all know, Vettel's weakness is adapting to a car, even if its a pretty damn good one, and I think his speed is overrated as I detailed before, the gap between him and his journeyman team mate is usually quite small, apart from 2011. So there is no justification for comparison other than just counting world titles, and ignoring everything else. If Vettel and Webber had been driving a midfield car, all these years, nobody would be talking about his speed. People get carried away because he gets so many poles, but getting pole does not mean you did a more impressive lap than someone who qualified 10th. Not to rational educated fan at least. The fanboys of course go nuts and scream senna!! senna!!

Edited by prda, 27 January 2013 - 04:34.


#724 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:49

There is no comparison. I see none of Senna in Vettel at all and find the comparison laughable.


I thought Vettel's drives at Brazil and Abu Dhabi were awesome, especially considering the championship was on the line. And of course Spa was just masterful.

Vettel is constantly improving, and has a very real chance to be considered amongst the best of all time. One thing for sure, it's going to be fun watching him for the next decade.

Edited by Winter98, 27 January 2013 - 04:53.


#725 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:55

Winter, while I applaud you for your faith in humanity, there's no point in attempting to have a discussion with someone who has a complete disregard for facts and applies a different double standard every other sentence. He's not even trying to be a sensible conversation partner. Don't waste your time on trolls.

#726 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:04

I thought Vettel's drives at Brazil and Abu Dhabi were awesome, especially considering the championship was on the line. And of course Spa was just masterful.

Vettel is constantly improving, and has a very real chance to be considered amongst the best of all time. One thing for sure, it's going to be fun watching him for the next decade.



I am never really impressed with charges from the back with the fastest car, unless its for the win, or close to it. A simple podium is nothing special, its been done may times. If he stays with newey for another 10 years he will will many more championships because when Newey gets on a rolls hes unstoppable, as he did in the 90s when he designed the best car for the majority of that decade and many different drivers won the title, but never had the luxury of staying in his team for an extended period of time like Vettel.

I don't think Vettel is crap. He is overall quite strong, but seems to have glarying weaknesses which put him below the very top tier. I think Alonso or Hamilon would beat him handily in equal cars, especially in a difficult car. His fans have gotten carried away. He needs to prove himself a lot more. Hopefully one day Alonso will have an RB8, and Vettel a F2012, and we will see how close Vettel will get to winning the wdc.

Edited by prda, 27 January 2013 - 07:13.


#727 MarileneRiddle

MarileneRiddle
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:50

Great posts MarileneRiddle. I was ready to shred azda's posts into pieces last night and link every of his sentences to the corresponding article in this list:
http://en.wikipedia....st_of_fallacies. But then i don't feel like arguing with this kind of user anymore. They are so entrenched in their dislike of Seb and everything that he has achieved that nothing will ever change their mind. Heck there are users on this forum who have analyzed to death why Schumi only was a mediocre driver at best. You can't reason with this sort of people.
So i'll let Seb do the talking on the track and lean back and enjoy while the bitter tears keep running.

Thanks! But I am also very much in awe of mnmracer's posts. Concise, logical and to the point. :up:

By the way, I apologise to all who got dragged along in these debates with a certain fallacious poster. I just pulled myself up and remembered, "don't feed the troll." So I am not going to continue restating points that go-in-one-ear-and-out-the-other. ;)

Anyways, back on topic. So, how do you think Vettel compares to Senna?

I think I have posted previously that my opinion would be they are quite similar in the behind-the-scenes stuff: set-up, technical feedback, etc. As for on-track racing, Senna looks better if only because he pulls off daring moves more consistently. Sebastian seems more a Mansell (qualify high and off into the sunset) or Prost (careful about car conservation before taking calculated risks). However, seeing overtakes like the one on Rosberg in Australia 2012, on Button in Abu Dhabi 2012 and on Alonso Italy 2011, gives me great hope Sebastian may grow to become a wonderful balance of all three characteristics. From the way Sebastian has only improved every year he is in F1, I think we can yet expect greater things to come.

I thought Vettel's drives at Brazil and Abu Dhabi were awesome, especially considering the championship was on the line. And of course Spa was just masterful.

I loved Abu Dhabi most of the 3 mainly because of the adversity he had to overcome not of his own doing (team's fault he was under-fueled). That said, Spa was wonderful as well especially since it was on my birthday weekend. And any race which ends with both Sebastian and Kimi on the podium is a great race (so yes, I loved Bahrain too).

#728 choyothe

choyothe
  • Member

  • 2,312 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:05

@ mnmracer, :up: . Rare to see an opposing viewpoint get embarrassed so thoroughly.

Good to see people are still believing that Vettel wasn't at fault. :rotfl:


I wouldn't say Vettel was completely without fault for the incident, he could've been more cautious in lapping Karthikeyan and left more space, OTOH he was hunting Hamilton for 3rd so it should be understandable that he didn't want to lose any time. Karthikeyan of course was much more at fault, hence the penalty.

Edit: Without fault, not at fault.

Edited by choyothe, 27 January 2013 - 09:34.


#729 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:14

Monaco '92 was one of those drives that could only have occurred within that time period. There's no chance of such a drive happening again due to the rules on defending we have now. If anyone tried to defend the way Senna did near the end today --aside from the likely penalties they would incur-- there would be a colossal hissy fit thrown on this message board. It'd result in some 10 to 20 pages of arguments that devolve into bitterness, thus resulting in the topic being locked.

Sorry for bumping this relatively old post, but I just feel that I have to bust the old myth and get the truth across here.

Defensive driving back in the 80's and early 90's, if such thing existed, was a joke compared to what it is today.

No, Senna was not a monster defender, not even close. What he did at Monaco was nothing but driving as hard and fast as possible on the racing line, with the occasional "mirror check", hitting a few apexes quite early, along with giving Mansell a nudge going into Tabac.

Any decent current driver could've done that.

Mansell and Senna battling for the lead at Monza.


That was the 1991 Italian Grand Prix. With a car which had virtually equal top speed, Senna allows Mansell to breeze past for the lead. That's mediocre defensive. Without the graphics or the commentary, I'd have guessed that pass being for 14th place rather than for the lead.

Today, had Vettel and Alonso been brawling it out for the lead, and Alonso let Vettel cruze past him like that, without any attempt of a basic block. People would be questioning if Alonso even wanted the position.

How come Senna didn't even know the basics of defensive driving, which is cover the inside line? Had he done that on the run down to Ascari, every lap, perhaps he might have kept the lead for good and won that race.

Here's Senna passing Prost in the same race.

Laughable. It's as if Prost was getting blue flags and being lapped. That hardly looked like two tough rivals going at it.

And I'm sure you'll be quick to point out all the times Senna has rammed someone off the track or pushed and stretched the rules as much as possible, but same could be said about these moves, which went unpunished.








Hell, I'd go as far as saying that Daniel Ricciardo's defensive driving against Mikhail Aleshin in F3.5R 2010 at Catalunya Round 2 was more impressive than any defensive driving I've ever seen in the 80's or early 90's. Drivers are simply becoming better and better, simple as that.

Edited by Kingshark, 27 January 2013 - 08:23.


#730 MarileneRiddle

MarileneRiddle
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:22

No, Senna was not a monster defender, not even close. What he did at Monaco was nothing but driving as hard and fast as possible on the racing line, with the occasional "mirror check", along with giving Mansell a nudge going into Tabac.

Any decent current driver could've done that.

Not really, but that is besides the point. I agree that Senna's 'monster defender' title is fairly exaggerated (at least from what I have seen from online videos). However, if you apply today's rules, I dare say Hamilton may have to share his platinum steward's card with his idol. :lol:

Edited by MarileneRiddle, 27 January 2013 - 08:22.


#731 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:27

Winter, while I applaud you for your faith in humanity, there's no point in attempting to have a discussion with someone who has a complete disregard for facts and applies a different double standard every other sentence. He's not even trying to be a sensible conversation partner. Don't waste your time on trolls.


Pot calling the kettle black. I have used facts to back up every argument. You just throw baseless 'double standards' accusations around when you get exposed, and comparing Alonso's 2006 season to vettels 2012 proves that. You would get laughed at in the paddock and my most people if you brought that up, but of course its double standards to dare to rate someone better than vettel. How dare they.

#732 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:30

I agree that Senna's 'monster defender' title is fairly exaggerated (at least from what I have seen from online videos).

Exaggerated to such a point that Mansell overtook him like a highway pass for victory at Monza. No attempt to block, no attempt to cover the inside line. Nothing. Humorous to read people writing about how Senna was impossible to pass.

Senna's defense against Mansell back in 1992 looked very similar to Raikkonen's defensive driving against Schumacher at Monaco this season, where the Merc looked to be legit quicker than the Lotus.

Kimi is generally accepted to be one of the most cautious drivers of 2012. That is why he has been the only driver to have finished every race.

Therefore, if a very careful driver, by today's standards, can hold off a much quicker car, despite shot tyres at Monaco, it shows that Senna's defense against Mansell was nowhere near as extreme as it was made out to be.

I'd guess that if Senna was driving today, he'd be quite a bit easier to pass than Vettel.

Edited by Kingshark, 27 January 2013 - 08:32.


#733 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:33

I think I have posted previously that my opinion would be they are quite similar in the behind-the-scenes stuff: set-up, technical feedback, etc. As for on-track racing, Senna looks better if only because he pulls off daring moves more consistently.


What about his far higher level of consistency, and dominance of his team mates in qualifying? How about focusing on specific factors instead of silly general things like 'daring' which are totally unquantifiable. Apart from 2011, the average qualifying gap between Vettel and Webber is probably 1 tenth. Do you think Senna would have only been 1 tenth quicker than Mark Webber in qualifying and beaten so often?

#734 MarileneRiddle

MarileneRiddle
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:37

Senna's defense against Mansell back in 1992 looked very similar to Raikkonen's defensive driving against Schumacher at Monaco this season, where the Merc looked to be legit quicker than the Lotus.

Kimi is generally looked upon as one of the most cautious drivers of 2012. Therefore, if a very careful driver can hold off a much quicker car, despite shot tyres at Monaco, it shows that Senna's defense against Mansell was nowhere near as extreme as it was made out to be.

I'd guess that if Senna was driving today, he'd be quite a bit easier to pass than Vettel.

Have to say that when the bolded part happens, especially in the current F1, there is really nothing much the defending driver can do except hope for the best in the DRS sections. I suspect if it occurred anywhere else other than Monaco, even careful Kimi would have been passed.

Sebastian has always been quite a smart defender (like Spain and Monaco 2011, and Bahrain 2012), rather than using outright blocking moves everywhere. There has been the occasional over step though (Italy 2012). In my opinion, that makes it a plus for Sebastian as opposed to Senna, though it may be considered a matter of style.

Edited by MarileneRiddle, 27 January 2013 - 08:39.


#735 AnR

AnR
  • Member

  • 116 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:37

I am never really impressed with charges from the back with the fastest car, unless its for the win, or close to it. A simple podium is nothing special, its been done may times. If he stays with newey for another 10 years he will will many more championships because when Newey gets on a rolls hes unstoppable, as he did in the 90s when he designed the best car for the majority of that decade and many different drivers won the title, but never had the luxury of staying in his team for an extended period of time like Vettel.

I don't think Vettel is crap. He is overall quite strong, but seems to have glarying weaknesses which put him below the very top tier. I think Alonso or Hamilon would beat him handily in equal cars, especially in a difficult car. His fans have gotten carried away. He needs to prove himself a lot more. Hopefully one day Alonso will have an RB8, and Vettel a F2012, and we will see how close Vettel will get to winning the wdc.


Sometimes it's hard to understand to what length some here are going to try to talk some driver down. If you then pick the one who has dominated the sport for the last three years it get's even funnier.

Vettel is impressive in all ways right now, and it comes from Three years of success, and he is consistent, fast, can overtake, win from behind.




#736 prda

prda
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:41

Sometimes it's hard to understand to what length some here are going to try to talk some driver down. If you then pick the one who has dominated the sport for the last three years it get's even funnier.

Vettel is impressive in all ways right now, and it comes from Three years of success, and he is consistent, fast, can overtake, win from behind.



I feel the same about the lengths some go to talk a driver up. Sorry if Im not impressed about him winning the title in the last race by 3 points against a much slower rival car. You know that Jaques Villeneuve got severely bashed for the very same thing in 1997? Yet when Vettel does the same thing TWICE he is lauded as an all time great. Now THAT is a double standard.

#737 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 27 January 2013 - 09:08

Winter, while I applaud you for your faith in humanity, there's no point in attempting to have a discussion with someone who has a complete disregard for facts and applies a different double standard every other sentence. He's not even trying to be a sensible conversation partner. Don't waste your time on trolls.


This. :up:

To sum it up, Ascanelli said a gutsy thing as early as 2010 and now in a short time Seb won as as many titles as Ayrton. He said very early that he was touched again by perfection and that young driver has been practically perfect at winning WDCs, doing his job and keeping the focus on himself.

This is the relevant part not what a troll trolls.

Edited by H2H, 27 January 2013 - 09:08.


#738 MarileneRiddle

MarileneRiddle
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 09:22

This. :up:

To sum it up, Ascanelli said a gutsy thing as early as 2010 and now in a short time Seb won as as many titles as Ayrton. He said very early that he was touched again by perfection and that young driver has been practically perfect at winning WDCs, doing his job and keeping the focus on himself.

This is the relevant part not what a troll trolls.

It was back in 2008 actually, but that just means Ascanelli deserves even more kudos for his talent-spotting skills. :clap: Staying on topic, has Ascanelli ever offered opinions on any other drivers (even ones he never personally worked with)? Seems like his words definitely deserve a second listen.

#739 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:02

It was back in 2008 actually, but that just means Ascanelli deserves even more kudos for his talent-spotting skills. :clap: Staying on topic, has Ascanelli ever offered opinions on any other drivers (even ones he never personally worked with)? Seems like his words definitely deserve a second listen.


Thanks for pointing it out. I did some googling but found nothing like this quote before 2010. In any case here is what Ascanelli said after the Q3 in Monza, 2008.

Q. And Sebastian Vettel's contribution to this result?

GA: Excellent, fantastic.

Q. Are you surprised by him today?

GA: No, I think I was surprised in Valencia on Saturday. It was the first time that I thought he was really special. The pole in Q2 in Valencia was special, and I think he realised that in P2 we were at the back of the grid, we had an incredible amount of fuel in the car and he did a fantastic lap, and I asked him if he had realised what he had done. He said yes, so I asked him to do it again. And he did. That is the point.



After the Monza race he stated.

Ascanelli said Vettel has matured a lot since last season, and he is adamant the young German is a future champion.

"He has done something amazing. He has matured," he added. "He is obviously learning a lot. He has more Euros than all of us! I think I have been happy and lucky in my old age to see another champion growing. I have never seen a champion growing and it is nice to see one.

"I may say I feel I have contributed a little bit. He is very polished, very shiny and he is not as rough as he was one year ago.

"I think he has got to learn some lessons yet, the most important one is not to be self-confident. I am sure he keeps his feet on the ground, he keeps his head clear and he will do a fantastic job."



2010, after the first WDC, Ascanelli was quoted in Autosport:

Ascanelli, who worked with Senna during the late Brazilian's glory years at McLaren in the early 1990s, said that he knew Vettel was a special talent from the moment he began working with him.

"I am a very lucky man, because at the start of my career and now at the end I have been touched by perfection," said the Italian. "I said two years ago that Sebastian Vettel would be world champion and here we are.

"You never know how many championships he can win. To quote Ron Dennis, winning a championship is relatively easy - but being consistently at the top of your ability is bloody hard," he added.

"That's the difficult part, but I think Sebastian has got the will to do it. He's going to be a big competitor for a long time."



The exact quote is from 2010, but obviously he refers to 2008, when a man like Berger stated Seb would be a multiple WDC.

So Girogio felt Seb was special after Valencia 2008, saw a champion growing at Monza 2008 and was touched [that season] once again 'by perfection' after having worked with Ayrton (and Michael) thanks to that young German which he said would become world champion.

Edited by H2H, 27 January 2013 - 10:23.


Advertisement

#740 MarileneRiddle

MarileneRiddle
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:14

Thanks for pointing it out. I did some googling but found nothing like this quote before 2010.

Mod Mandzipop posted "It was in a paper copy of F1 Magazine in 2008 I believe." a few pages ago. I was just repeating the message.  ;)

And thanks for your great quotes! It is interesting how invested in Sebastian's growth Ascanelli became by 2010. Indeed it should be quite a delight to have worked both with Senna and Sebastian within his career.

#741 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:35

Mod Mandzipop posted "It was in a paper copy of F1 Magazine in 2008 I believe." a few pages ago. I was just repeating the message. ;)

And thanks for your great quotes! It is interesting how invested in Sebastian's growth Ascanelli became by 2010. Indeed it should be quite a delight to have worked both with Senna and Sebastian within his career.


No problem. Maybe our Mandzipop is mistaken. Giorgio did indeed talk about Seb being 'special' and a 'champion' growing, but I saw nothing about 'touched by perfection'.

In any case Giorgio proved to be spot-on.

#742 LiJu914

LiJu914
  • Member

  • 1,776 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 27 January 2013 - 11:51

Sorry for bumping this relatively old post, but I just feel that I have to bust the old myth and get the truth across here.

Defensive driving back in the 80's and early 90's, if such thing existed, was a joke compared to what it is today.



....
And I'm sure you'll be quick to point out all the times Senna has rammed someone off the track or pushed and stretched the rules as much as possible, but same could be said about these moves, which went unpunished.


1st You were answering a huge Senna fan, so i doubt, he will portray him as unfair.

2nd And just because you found some examples of Senna not showing much resistance, doesn´t mean it´s the only way he was defending back then.

Does Estoril 88 ring a bell?
Or look at THIS....
Senna also cut to the inside many times, despite his opponent being almost next to him. (Like Brazil 85, Brands hatch 85, in Kyalami 93 or in Silverstone the same year or the well known collision with Mansell in Estoril 89 etc.).

That doesn´t mean, he was always unfair - but he definitely defended hard plenty of times and in a way, that was rarely seen before. And it´s also true that in these days such maneuvers were never punished. Did you watch Schumacher´s blocking in Spa 1995? That would be impossible today.

Edited by LiJu914, 27 January 2013 - 11:56.


#743 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,127 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:27

Sorry for bumping this relatively old post, but I just feel that I have to bust the old myth and get the truth across here.

Defensive driving back in the 80's and early 90's, if such thing existed, was a joke compared to what it is today.

...


If you goal was to cramp as much BS into a single post as possible, congrats, that post is a brilliant effort start to finish. With the bolded above as the highlight, probably the single most idiotic thing I read in quite a while. :up:

#744 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,774 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:57

Drivers are simply becoming better and better, simple as that.


Better and better at what?

#745 BenettonB192

BenettonB192
  • Member

  • 848 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 January 2013 - 13:34

Pot calling the kettle black. I have used facts to back up every argument. You just throw baseless 'double standards' accusations around when you get exposed, and comparing Alonso's 2006 season to vettels 2012 proves that. You would get laughed at in the paddock and my most people if you brought that up, but of course its double standards to dare to rate someone better than vettel. How dare they.


It's amazing how you manage to densly put fallacies in each and every of your posts. Even the ones where you defend yourself from accusations of use of fallacies.

#746 AnR

AnR
  • Member

  • 116 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 27 January 2013 - 13:39

I feel the same about the lengths some go to talk a driver up. Sorry if Im not impressed about him winning the title in the last race by 3 points against a much slower rival car. You know that Jaques Villeneuve got severely bashed for the very same thing in 1997? Yet when Vettel does the same thing TWICE he is lauded as an all time great. Now THAT is a double standard.


Wow, you must have had some really tough last 3 years if you follow F1. You also beleive that the Ferrari that Kimi had was faster than the car off the year in 2007, the McLaren which Alonso himself said was the fastest?

#747 PoleMan

PoleMan
  • Member

  • 1,529 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 27 January 2013 - 14:28

What about his far higher level of consistency, and dominance of his team mates in qualifying? How about focusing on specific factors instead of silly general things like 'daring' which are totally unquantifiable. Apart from 2011, the average qualifying gap between Vettel and Webber is probably 1 tenth. Do you think Senna would have only been 1 tenth quicker than Mark Webber in qualifying and beaten so often?

prda,

I have to salute your patience! :up:

You've made reasoned and well-thought out arguments to the same usual suspects who have to drag Alonso into EVERY THREAD. I must say that your valiant efforts will not succeed because you cannot have a rational discussion with the Vettel Taliban! :lol:

And in case any are confused, I think Vettel is an excellent driver, whose place in the F1 history books is cemented, but, no, I don't believe his current driving ability is on par with Senna...but he's young, so that may change.

Edited by PoleMan, 27 January 2013 - 14:30.


#748 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 6,892 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 27 January 2013 - 14:33

It was back in 2008 actually, but that just means Ascanelli deserves even more kudos for his talent-spotting skills. :clap: Staying on topic, has Ascanelli ever offered opinions on any other drivers (even ones he never personally worked with)? Seems like his words definitely deserve a second listen.


The interesting point here is that Ascanelli not only worked with Senna (in the beginning of his career) and Vettel (in the end) but with Schumacher in the middle of his career (Benetton) - at no point however Giorgio felt obliged to mention Schumacher in the same breath as Senna or Vettel....

#749 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,116 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 27 January 2013 - 14:50

Defensive driving back in the 80's and early 90's, if such thing existed, was a joke compared to what it is today.


ARRGH!! My eyes!! the goggles do nothing!! :lol:

#750 MarileneRiddle

MarileneRiddle
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 27 January 2013 - 15:16

You've made reasoned and well-thought out arguments to the same usual suspects who have to drag Alonso into EVERY THREAD. I must say that your valiant efforts will not succeed because you cannot have a rational discussion with the Vettel Taliban! :lol:

I am rather sorry that you feel this way. However, if you went back just 3 pages in the thread, you'll realize that Alonso comparisons were first brought up to put down Sebastian's accomplishments. We just defended Sebastian with our arguments. I do think most of us will feel just fine comparing two great like Sebastian and Senna without bringing Alonso in to cloud the issue. And I don't recommend using a word like 'Taliban' if you do not understand what it means. It is disrespectful both to us Sebastian fans and to the Muslim group you refer to.

The interesting point here is that Ascanelli not only worked with Senna (in the beginning of his career) and Vettel (in the end) but with Schumacher in the middle of his career (Benetton) - at no point however Giorgio felt obliged to mention Schumacher in the same breath as Senna or Vettel....

Great point. My guess would be that both Sebastian and Senna had that extra charisma to motivate team members that make them stand out more. After all, from all reports, Schumacher has always been very good at the technical side of things. And on-track Schumacher was quite good as well. But I could see the stern guise of Schumacher in his first career perhaps intimidating some engineers or mechanics, as compared to Sebastian and Senna who are both known to get along very well with their team members. However, I admit it is only guesswork since Ascanelli hasn't elaborated much on the matter.