Jump to content


Photo

Is Vettel worthy of the 3 WDC Title?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
453 replies to this topic

#401 Mr.Wayne

Mr.Wayne
  • Member

  • 572 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 17 October 2012 - 07:55

There is no bias in determining Massa could not have been evenly matched with Alonso and Hamilton in 2007/2008 considering his performances since 2010. The bias is totally ignoring these facts and going with what you want to believe because of your agenda, so you are basically describing yourself.

Also, there is no bias in determining that Schumacher could not have fought with Hamilton in 2007/2008 considering his performances since 2010.

Oh, and very conveniently, you chose to ignore the very nasty Korean GP part of my post. Once again, who was the fastest Ferrari driver until team orders came into effect?

And since you mention 2010, you mean, since when he was leading a Ferrari 1-2, in front of a RedBull with no mechanical failures, until "This is ridiculous" Alonso called the team and asked to do something about it?

Advertisement

#402 sammyg

sammyg
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:12

Also, there is no bias in determining that Schumacher could not have fought with Hamilton in 2007/2008 considering his performances since 2010.

Oh, and very conveniently, you chose to ignore the very nasty Korean GP part of my post. Once again, who was the fastest Ferrari driver until team orders came into effect?

And since you mention 2010, you mean, since when he was leading a Ferrari 1-2, in front of a RedBull with no mechanical failures, until "This is ridiculous" Alonso called the team and asked to do something about it?


Massa was quicker, but considering the wdc this was a non event, unlike Redbull taking webbers wing off his car and giving it to Vettel when they were seperated by 12 points mid season. There is no bias regarding the schumacher thing you mention but also no logic, its completely baseless.

#403 oligc94

oligc94
  • Member

  • 520 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:13

then please elaborate which races did for example Hamilton win without a 'dominant' car.


Hungary? Canada?

#404 Cesc

Cesc
  • Member

  • 940 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:29

I can´t see why Hamilton is in the discussion. He has not been up to the level. He has done some nice races, but there has been too many "off-track" issues for him.
Vettel is an astonishing driver, but 3 straight WDC are too much imo.

I would rather see Alonso winning this one after so many efforts during all these years and tremendous performances to overcome the real performance issues of his cars. Bu unless Vettel has a DNF and a rain race, I can´t see that coming.

#405 oligc94

oligc94
  • Member

  • 520 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 09:06

I can´t see why Hamilton is in the discussion. He has not been up to the level. He has done some nice races, but there has been too many "off-track" issues for him.
Vettel is an astonishing driver, but 3 straight WDC are too much imo.

I would rather see Alonso winning this one after so many efforts during all these years and tremendous performances to overcome the real performance issues of his cars. Bu unless Vettel has a DNF and a rain race, I can´t see that coming.


Frankly, Hamilton has been up to the level almost all season. It's his team that hasn't been. LH and FA have been the best drivers by some margin this year, but for one reason or another (team mistakes, slow car) the results have not necessarily accurately portrayed the quality of their driving.


#406 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,855 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 09:09

I can´t see why Hamilton is in the discussion. He has not been up to the level. He has done some nice races, but there has been too many "off-track" issues for him.
Vettel is an astonishing driver, but 3 straight WDC are too much imo.

Absolute rubbish. Hamilton and Alonso have driven every bit as good as Vettel all season. Off track comments mean nothing to that analysis whatsoever. The others just havene't had the team support Vettel has had and they also been more unlucky. It takes more than the driver to win the WDC and Vettel is not ahead purely because he has more talent. :rolleyes:

#407 GotYoubyTheBalls

GotYoubyTheBalls
  • Member

  • 301 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 09:50

I love the Hamilton fanatics around here.

They will argue until they are black and blue that Hamilton won 2008 title in inferior machinery, but when it comes to Vettels win in Monza with a Toro Rosso they argue that he had a dominant car.

Toro Rosso..... ffs. It was a good car no doubt but seriously the 2008 season was dominated by Mclaren and Ferrari(they were pretty equal). Toro Rosso had no business winning a gp that year. Vettel deserves huge admiration for that victory.

#408 sammyg

sammyg
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 09:54

Toro Rosso..... ffs. It was a good car no doubt but seriously the 2008 season was dominated by Mclaren and Ferrari(they were pretty equal). Toro Rosso had no business winning a gp that year. Vettel deserves huge admiration for that victory.


Actually it was an RB4, with a Ferrari engine.

#409 seahawk

seahawk
  • Member

  • 3,132 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 17 October 2012 - 09:56

If Vettel wins it is the car, if Vettel loses it is the driver.
If Hamilton wins it is the driver, if Hamilton loses it is the car.

#410 GotYoubyTheBalls

GotYoubyTheBalls
  • Member

  • 301 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:01

Actually it was an RB4, with a Ferrari engine.


Sure it may have been essentially a Red Bull. But the team didnt have the engineers Red Bull had, they were the second class team.

And you can say he won with a Red Bull, and nowadays that isnt so impressive, but in 2008 winning with a Red Bull was impressive. No one expected anything of Red Bull in 2008. No one even expected anything of Red Bull in 2009.

#411 apoka

apoka
  • Member

  • 3,611 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:10

We can continue to find small failures or "missing proofs" of the top drivers or just acknowledge that Alonso, Hamilton and Vettel all have performed so well this season that each of them would be a deserving WDC.

Vettel deserved his WDCs in the past 2 years well.


#412 Nobody

Nobody
  • Member

  • 1,449 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:13

I love the Hamilton fanatics around here.

They will argue until they are black and blue that Hamilton won 2008 title in inferior machinery, but when it comes to Vettels win in Monza with a Toro Rosso they argue that he had a dominant car.

Toro Rosso..... ffs. It was a good car no doubt but seriously the 2008 season was dominated by Mclaren and Ferrari(they were pretty equal). Toro Rosso had no business winning a gp that year. Vettel deserves huge admiration for that victory.


With a (gamble) wet weather set up, Seb Bourdais (in the other TR) took the same gamble and was unlucky to not to start on the front row (he was 4th in quali).

Admire him for other things, that day he got lucky

#413 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:19

With a (gamble) wet weather set up, Seb Bourdais (in the other TR) took the same gamble and was unlucky to not to start on the front row (he was 4th in quali).

Admire him for other things, that day he got lucky

Nobody bashes Senna for a lucky set-up gamble in Monaco 1984.
Or Schumacher for Spain 1996.
Or (insert shit-load of race wins aided by the right set-up).

The cringe-worthy double standard is that for the entire history of Formula One discussions, wet races have been considered to be the true equalizer. That's where a driver can show his true talent.
But now that Vettel shows his skills in the wet (not only Monza), it is suddenly a lucky gamble.

*edit: pun not intended :lol: *

Edited by mnmracer, 17 October 2012 - 10:20.


#414 Zava

Zava
  • Member

  • 5,095 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:20

Hungary? Canada?

my point is, if Vettel's bahrein (or singapore, btw) win is considered a win in a dominant car, then all of Hamilton's wins qualify as a win in a dominant car.

#415 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:28

With a (gamble) wet weather set up, Seb Bourdais (in the other TR) took the same gamble and was unlucky to not to start on the front row (he was 4th in quali).

Admire him for other things, that day he got lucky



except that's completely wrong as evidenced by Kova in P2 ;)

The truth is Ferrari and McLaren took the stupid gamble of running their cars too late in Q2, rain got heavier, they got stuck in P1x and the rest is history

#416 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 4,254 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:35

My favorite driver (insert name other than Vettel) doesn't have as many championships (or poles or wins or winning % ect...). Therefore Vettel must just be lucky and have the best car all the time. lol, yeah, that's it. :rolleyes:

How many races/poles/championships will he have to win to be "better" than any of the other drivers he has already eclipsed? Or is the answer really that he will never be better because you just don't like him or are so enamoured of another driver that you aren't taking an honest critical look at the situation?

#417 rolf123

rolf123
  • Member

  • 2,332 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:40

I agree with the OP. Vettel has had very lucky circumstances that the other 3xWDC champs did not have. A bit like Schumi in the early 2000s.

#418 apoka

apoka
  • Member

  • 3,611 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:41

With a (gamble) wet weather set up, Seb Bourdais (in the other TR) took the same gamble and was unlucky to not to start on the front row (he was 4th in quali).

Admire him for other things, that day he got lucky

TR was not on a wet weather setup in Monza 2008:

http://www.motorspor...t_08091437.html

"weil wir nicht auf viel Abtrieb gesetzt hatten, da wir dachten, dass es trocken sein könnte"

translation: "[..] we didn't go for high downforce, since we thought it could by dry [...]"

Bourdais got P4, but was quite a bit slower than Vettel.


#419 SpartanChas

SpartanChas
  • Member

  • 792 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:45

Anyone else feel that Vettel walking the rest of the season would be a massive anticlimax? After all the, for better or worse, unpredictability and excitement of the season until now. I'd at least like Alonso to have a very reasonable chance of winning in Brazil.

Advertisement

#420 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:50

I agree with the OP. Vettel has had very lucky circumstances that the other 3xWDC champs did not have. A bit like Schumi in the early 2000s.

You just can't seem to name them...

#421 choyothe

choyothe
  • Member

  • 2,312 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:53

Some posters have very strange perceptions of what is a dominant car. Sure Seb won from pole at Bahrain or Lewis at Hungary but I would never call those cars dominant, maybe not even the best. Lotus was probably faster in both races, difference is you can pass at Bahrain.

#422 choyothe

choyothe
  • Member

  • 2,312 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:54

Anyone else feel that Vettel walking the rest of the season would be a massive anticlimax? After all the, for better or worse, unpredictability and excitement of the season until now. I'd at least like Alonso to have a very reasonable chance of winning in Brazil.


I'm sure there will be a mechanical failure from the front for Vettel with Alonso inheriting another win with everyone thinking it's only justice.

#423 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:58

My favorite driver (insert name other than Vettel) doesn't have as many championships (or poles or wins or winning % ect...). Therefore Vettel must just be lucky and have the best car all the time. lol, yeah, that's it. :rolleyes:

How many races/poles/championships will he have to win to be "better" than any of the other drivers he has already eclipsed?

Exactly :up:

This whole thread really has the smell of sour grapes about it.
Be it Alonso or Vettel this year one of them will be as worthy a 3xWDC as they come.

#424 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,855 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:58

The cringe-worthy double standard is that for the entire history of Formula One discussions, wet races have been considered to be the true equalizer. That's where a driver can show his true talent.
But now that Vettel shows his skills in the wet (not only Monza), it is suddenly a lucky gamble.

Thats true to an extent but like Vettel, Hamilton and Alonso have also had wet weather preformances of equal standard. Why don't they dominate every single time its wet if the talent takes over? Monza '08 wasn't the only wet race of that year so why didn't Vettel dominate more than once? Why didn't Hamilton dominate that race instead of Vettel considering he won 3 other wet races that year (Silverstone, Monaco, and Spa)? Why didn't Vettel win those races instead? It all boils down to luck for any one of them. If the setup is crap, they won't win. If they have the best setup for the race they have a better chance.

You appear to have caught the cringe worthy double standard too :wave:

#425 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:08

Thats true to an extent but like Vettel, Hamilton and Alonso have also had wet weather preformances of equal standard. Why don't they dominate every single time its wet if the talent takes over? Monza '08 wasn't the only wet race of that year so why didn't Vettel dominate more than once? Why didn't Hamilton dominate that race instead of Vettel considering he won 3 other wet races that year (Silverstone, Monaco, and Spa)? Why didn't Vettel win those races instead? It all boils down to luck for any one of them. If the setup is crap, they won't win. If they have the best setup for the race they have a better chance.

You appear to have caught the cringe worthy double standard too :wave:

Good job jumping to conclusions :clap: :clap: :clap:
Unfortunately, and you can stop gloating now, I have at no point said that I believe Vettel did great while others lucked into wet wins.
Nothing remotely. Mind-blowing how you can pull that out of thin air.

Edited by mnmracer, 17 October 2012 - 11:09.


#426 Jovanotti

Jovanotti
  • Member

  • 2,998 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:10

Jackie Stewart: Sebastian Vettel not yet a great

"I have the highest respect for Sebastian, but he could not have achieved what he has without the [Red Bull design chief] Adrian Newey factor."


Edited by Jovanotti, 17 October 2012 - 11:11.


#427 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,855 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:21

Be it Alonso or Vettel this year one of them will be as worthy a 3xWDC as they come.

If anyone other than those two win it, they would deserve it too. Drivers have been advantaged by others misfortune this season whoever you look at.

#428 GotYoubyTheBalls

GotYoubyTheBalls
  • Member

  • 301 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:22

Jackie Stewart: Sebastian Vettel not yet a great


And Stewart wouldnt have won much without Derek Gardner. Drivers rely on designers to give them the right machinery, its the same for every championship winner, except for Brabham who with Tauranac made his own cars great.

Everyone acts nowadays like having a Newey designed car is all you need to win a WDC. Newey hadnt won a title since 1998 until Vettel came along. And whats more Webber has never finished 2nd in the championship so clearly Vettel had to perform like a champion to win those titles.

Silly comments by Stewart. Vettel is already a great of the sport and quite frankly while maybe not on Alonso's level yet he has clearly surpassed Hamilton.

#429 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,855 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:26

Silly comments by Stewart. Vettel is already a great of the sport and quite frankly while maybe not on Alonso's level yet he has clearly surpassed Hamilton.

That is clearly a matter of opinion.

#430 choyothe

choyothe
  • Member

  • 2,312 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:26

Sounds to me like you are now trying to back track out of that one lol. :wave:


I don't understand how anyone could come up with that conclusion tbh. I think it was obvious mnmracer said everyone did great to win those wet races. He/she can correct me if I was wrong.

#431 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:27

I have to admit that I am lost over this topic, and why Vettel would not be worthy of WDC, if he has enough points? What's the punch line?

#432 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:27

Jackie Stewart: Sebastian Vettel not yet a great

To be honest, I wouldnt take any of Stewart's opinions seriously at all(or Lauda's for that matter).

They were both great drivers in their era, but clearly they are no better than some of the fans on this forums when it comes to opinions. I'd be tempted to put Moss in this very same category. Personally, I value the opinion of someone like Damon Hill or Alain Prost far more than these guys, as they always seem to have a sense of balance.

A dominant car is one that actually has qualifying and race pace that no one else can touch.

-> Think Brawn 2009 in the the first half
-> Think Ferrari in 2002 and 2004
-> Or the Williams of 1993 and 1996
-> Or the Mclaren in 1988

and so on. A car that the opposition had no chance of beating on a normal Sunday at the racetrack.

For people out here to say that Vettel has enjoyed machinery even close to that level, they must be kidding themselves. 2011 is probably the only year when he had a car that was clearly better than the opposition. In 2010, he may have had the fastest car, but it was also the most unreliable among the front runners (like the 2005 Mclaren). In 2012, Mclaren, Ferrari and Red Bull all can claim the title of the best car in different parts of the season. At a lot of races this year Vettel has just put his head down and brought home the car in a nondescript 4th or a 5th place and brought in the points.

When Alonso or Hamilton do the same thing, its termed as "the best that car can do".

Everyone who has won a Formula 1 championship in the past 60 years have won it in the best machinery, or machinery that was capable of challenging the best machinery. To put a question mark over Vettel's championships means you also consider the rest of the champions in this sport as lucky since he has won and impressed atleast as much as the other drivers who have won 3 world titles.

#433 oligc94

oligc94
  • Member

  • 520 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:27

my point is, if Vettel's bahrein (or singapore, btw) win is considered a win in a dominant car, then all of Hamilton's wins qualify as a win in a dominant car.


I agree that neither of those wins were necessarily achieved in a dominant car, but the RB8 was certainly one of the fastest (if not the fastest) car at both of those tracks.

Edited by oligc94, 17 October 2012 - 11:28.


#434 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,855 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:29

I don't understand how anyone could come up with that conclusion tbh. I think it was obvious mnmracer said everyone did great to win those wet races. He/she can correct me if I was wrong.

I agree with that aspect, its the opinion that that particular victory stands out above the others because it was won by Vettel in a Toro Rosso. Thats the point that so freely pushed here and its total tripe.

#435 sammyg

sammyg
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:38

A dominant car is one that actually has qualifying and race pace that no one else can touch.

-> Think Brawn 2009 in the the first half
-> Think Ferrari in 2002 and 2004
-> Or the Williams of 1993 and 1996
-> Or the Mclaren in 1988


The fact that you did not include the 2011 redbull in this list, clearly shows your objectively in this matter.

Everyone who has won a Formula 1 championship in the past 60 years have won it in the best machinery, or machinery that was capable of challenging the best machinery. To put a question mark over Vettel's championships means you also consider the rest of the champions in this sport as lucky since he has won and impressed atleast as much as the other drivers who have won 3 world titles.


Machinery that is capable of challenging the best machinery? What the hell does that even mean lol. There is best car, and not the best car, its pretty simple, no need to invent new categories. A number of champions won it without the best car so its unfair to lump them with a driver who has had rocket ships for his titles.

#436 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:40

A number of champions won it without the best car


No they didn't. You are plainly making stuff up.

#437 sammyg

sammyg
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:49

No they didn't. You are plainly making stuff up.


Prost, Schumacher (first 3 titles), Alonso, Hamilton. At most you could stretch reality and say the cars were equal but not the best.

#438 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:50

Machinery that is capable of challenging the best machinery? What the hell does that even mean lol. There is best car, and not the best car, its pretty simple, no need to invent new categories. A number of champions won it without the best car so its unfair to lump them with a driver who has had rocket ships for his titles.

Say we have a McLaren that is 0.1s faster than a Ferrari, with the McLaren driven by the talented Narain Karthikeyan, and the Ferrari driven by (post '09) Felipe Massa.
According to you, winning the championship with 2 points difference in an 'inferior' car would make Massa a great champion?

In your book, you seem to believe that you can mention both the Williams FW12 and the 2006 Ferrari 248 in one breath. Because they were faster, so they were superior.
Never mind that the FW12 was 2 seconds faster than the next in line, while the F248 may have been 1 tenths faster on average at best.

#439 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,855 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:50

Schumacher (first 3 titles)

The 1994 Benetton wasn't the best car?

Advertisement

#440 sammyg

sammyg
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:54

The 1994 Benetton wasn't the best car?


Unlikely. Williams became very strong after the regulation changes, and of course Hill was not in Schumachers class, and you must consider Michaels team mates were struggling to make the top 10 in that alleged best car.

#441 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:55

Prost, Schumacher (first 3 titles), Alonso, Hamilton. At most you could stretch reality and say the cars were equal but not the best.


I don't know what the point of debating you is when you ignore reality.

Vettel won all his titles with a vastly inferior car. I have as much proof for that as you have for your ridiculous claims.

#442 Jovanotti

Jovanotti
  • Member

  • 2,998 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:58

Vettel won all his titles with a vastly inferior car. I have as much proof for that as you have for your ridiculous claims.

Would you elaborate a bit on that, please? :)

#443 sammyg

sammyg
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:58

Say we have a McLaren that is 0.1s faster than a Ferrari, with the McLaren driven by the talented Narain Karthikeyan, and the Ferrari driven by (post '09) Felipe Massa.
According to you, winning the championship with 2 points difference in an 'inferior' car would make Massa a great champion?


No i'm not saying that. There are obviously a few factors to consider. The car quality is one, and driver quality.

#444 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:59

@Jovanotti: Oh you think I am wrong? You mean I can't make up my own reality?




PS: I think you missed the point I was trying to make

Edited by EvanRainer, 17 October 2012 - 12:00.


#445 sammyg

sammyg
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:01

Oh you think I am wrong? You mean I can't make up my own reality?




PS: I think you missed the point I was trying to make



Not all opinions are equal i'm afraid. You could not make a rational argument for what you suggested but I could.

#446 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:02

In which one of your 33 posts have you said anything rational?

#447 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:04

You lost all claim to rationality when you claimed that Schumacher and Hamilton won titles with inferior equipment.

#448 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,853 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:06

This thread:

:down:

#449 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:11

Every other day someone comes and makes some ridiculous claim and then we fill page after page trying to prove the moon isn't made out of cheese.

#450 Jovanotti

Jovanotti
  • Member

  • 2,998 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:12

@Jovanotti: Oh you think I am wrong? You mean I can't make up my own reality?




PS: I think you missed the point I was trying to make

I know you were being sarcastic, but I didn't understand what was so wrong about the point sammyg was making..nevermind, I don't really want to get involved in this discussion