176 replies to this topic

[Kingshark]

I thought the goal of every driver was to win the WDC.

Of course it is, but Formula 1 is a sport of man and machine. It is completely natural in F1 for some drivers to have machinery advantage over others.

2012 was one of the worst examples of the best driver losing to the best car. 2003 and 1997 belong in that list too.

[ebc]

Of course it is, but Formula 1 is a sport of man and machine. It is completely natural in F1 for some drivers to have machinery advantage over others.

2012 was one of the worst examples of the best driver losing to the best car. 2003 and 1997 belong in that list too.

Come on, Vettel was superb last year and deserved the title every bit as much as Alonso, those 2 are a level above the others as is being shown again this year, and besides the Mclaren was the best car. I would agree with the other 2 seasons.

[bourbon]

Of course it is, but Formula 1 is a sport of man and machine. It is completely natural in F1 for some drivers to have machinery advantage over others.

It is also completely natural in F1 for better drivers to have better machinery.

2012 was one of the worst examples of the best driver losing to the best car. 2003 and 1997 belong in that list too.

I would disagree. In 2012, the best performing car was the Macca, but it was unreliable and the team was prone to error - the driver was quite consistent. I saw consistency for Ferrari, but the driver faded toward year's end. And Red Bull and its driver grew stronger toward year's end. It is easy to see why RBR/Vettel won in the end, under the circumstances.

[as65p]

It is also completely natural in F1 for better drivers to have better machinery.



I would disagree. In 2012, the best performing car was the Macca, but it was unreliable and the team was prone to error - the driver was quite consistent. I saw consistency for Ferrari, but the driver faded toward year's end. And Red Bull and its driver grew stronger toward year's end. It is easy to see why RBR/Vettel won in the end, under the circumstances.

Starting crap then become decent is your idea of consistency?

[Fontainebleau]

I would disagree. In 2012, the best performing car was the Macca, but it was unreliable and the team was prone to error - the driver was quite consistent. I saw consistency for Ferrari, but the driver faded toward year's end. And Red Bull and its driver grew stronger toward year's end. It is easy to see why RBR/Vettel won in the end, under the circumstances.

Excuse me, are you talking about the Ferrari that was nicknamed "Clifford" in Australia (http://joesaward.wor...the-hoon-ahead/) ? Some people seem to have forgotten about those little anecdotes, that tell a world about the car, to settle for a version in which the Ferrari was a top contender for the title.

Edited to add link

Edited by Fontainebleau, 27 June 2013 - 09:51.

[dau]

Excuse me, are you talking about the Ferrari that was nicknamed "Clifford" when it first came out during the winter tests? Some people seem to have forgotten about those little anecdotes, that tell a world about the car, to settle for a version in which the Ferrari was a top contender for the title.

I think he is talking about the Ferrari that was never more than 13 points behind the WDC leader, actually leading the championship for half of the races and by 34 points at midpoint of the season.

[mnmracer]

Excuse me, are you talking about the Ferrari that was nicknamed "Clifford" in Australia (http://joesaward.wor...the-hoon-ahead/) ? Some people seem to have forgotten about those little anecdotes, that tell a world about the car, to settle for a version in which the Ferrari was a top contender for the title.

Not much sillier than people projecting 3 dominant races by Red Bull on the entire season, or even the entire end of the season.

[as65p]

I think he is talking about the Ferrari that was never more than 13 points behind the WDC leader, actually leading the championship for half of the races and by 34 points at midpoint of the season.

Ah, now you're talking about that RB driver failing to make use of his car advantage for two thirds of the season, right?

[prty]

Starting crap then become decent is your idea of consistency?

Excuse me, are you talking about the Ferrari that was nicknamed "Clifford" in Australia (http://joesaward.wor...the-hoon-ahead/) ? Some people seem to have forgotten about those little anecdotes, that tell a world about the car, to settle for a version in which the Ferrari was a top contender for the title.

Edited to add link

It says all about how objective are the judgements of the past season by some, yeah

So fullarrow, [...]

HSJ, is that you?

[dau]

Ah, now you're talking about that RB driver failing to make use of his car advantage for two thirds of the season, right?

You mean both RB, drivers, i guess?

[as65p]

You mean both RB, drivers, i guess?

You think it's smart to bring the 2nd drivers in when talking about car performance in 2012? Okay.....

[dau]

You think it's smart to bring the 2nd drivers in when talking about car performance in 2012? Okay.....

Personally, i'd rate Webber much higher than Massa, but i guess both being second drivers makes them comparable in speed as well.

[as65p]

Personally, i'd rate Webber much higher than Massa, but i guess both being second drivers makes them comparable in speed as well.

Sure, I understand why you'd say that, personally.

[elusivef1]

How about Vettel and Schumacher now that webber has p*ssed off.

[Seanspeed]

How about Vettel and Schumacher now that webber has p*ssed off.

Schumacher is gone. Stop it.

[as65p]

Schumacher is gone. Stop it.

Well, Ralf still owes us a comeback.

<duck>.

[elusivef1]

Schumacher is gone. Stop it.

He may come back. He did not have a drive seat available for when Hamilton joined. Besides he is good enough to give Vettel a run for his money old boy!

[Vesuvius]

He may come back. He did not have a drive seat available for when Hamilton joined. Besides he is good enough to give Vettel a run for his money old boy!

He won't come back, period.

[Kingshark]

Personally, i'd rate Webber much higher than Massa, but i guess both being second drivers makes them comparable in speed as well.

Based on what? There's absolutely nothing to support that. Massa has more wins than Webber in his career, and both drove three consecutive years in the best car.

Edited by Kingshark, 27 June 2013 - 17:50.

[Vesuvius]

Based on what? There's absolutely nothing to support that. Massa has more wins than Webber in his career, and both drove three consecutive years in the best car.

Massa had 1-2 good or equal teams against ferrari and 1-6 drivers that had the possibility to win...while Webber has had 2-5 equal teams and 3-10 drivers to fight against to get wins.

Edited by Vesuvius, 27 June 2013 - 20:15.

[Skinnyguy]

Based on what? There's absolutely nothing to support that.

I find exactly the opposite, there´s nothing to back up your view.

There are 2 ways to look at this, what a "better teammate" is:

1) Looking only to the time these guys shared teams with Vettel and Fernando.
2) Looking at their full careers.

If you choose 1), Webber´s been better post 2009 than Felipe post 2010 on average, by a healthy margin.
And if you choose 2), you might lack some info to judge this way but I´ll help you: Massa peaked really high in the 2006-2009 stint, but further than these years, no matter where you want to look, be it early 2000´s or recent past, Webber´s been better the rest of the time. Webber´s average performance over his career has been superior.

Only way to hold your view is the "who´s better at both guys´ best". Massa peaked higher (still, I´d have loved to see 2003/2006 Webber in a proper top car). But that´s irrelevant, it didn´t happen while partnering FA, and if you want to average their careers, you have to do it properly, not selecting just a season/s that fit your agenda.

Edited by Skinnyguy, 27 June 2013 - 23:20.

[Kingshark]

and if you want to average their careers, you have to do it properly, not selecting just a season/s that fit your agenda.

I was actually just looking at their best season. Massa in 2008 was most certainly better than Webber in 2010; but that "analysis" of yours is useful, I guess.

[Skinnyguy]

I was actually just looking at their best season. Massa in 2008 was most certainly better than Webber in 2010; but that "analysis" of yours is useful, I guess.

You´re spot on inside that criterium, but you´re using an irrelevant criterium for this discussion.

You´re basically saying Massa "can be" a better teammate than Webber. And I agree, he can be better. But that´s not the topic. He´s not being better than Mark recently, and he hasn´t been over their full careers either. Webber is a higher benchmark to compete against, both now and overall. All we can say about Massa is that he has the potential to be a really hard rival, but he´s not being it.

[discover23]

I wouldn't claim Webber has been performing better than Massa lately. Actually it was my impression, given the performance difference of their respective cars, that Massa had a better second half last year than Webber.
This year, their gap is not really that big..

[mattferg]

Based on what? There's absolutely nothing to support that. Massa has more wins than Webber in his career, and both drove three consecutive years in the best car.

You know 2003, 2004 and 2007 aren't consecutive right? And that Massa only drove 1 of those Ferraris? Because in 2008 the McLaren was the best car, and in 2006 it was the Renault. Plus, in 2007 the Ferrari was joint best. Kingshark you've been warned about this by mods now stop please.

Edited by mattferg, 29 June 2013 - 00:11.

[Kingshark]

Mattferg, the gap between Renault and Ferrari in 2006, if there was any, was very small, likewise the gap between McLaren and Ferrari in 2008.

But sure, since you are so convinced that Massa only drove the equal best car once in his career, it makes his stats of 11 wins look all the more impressive.

Regarding the Vettel and Alonso team, I'd say that there's a greater chance of it happening at Red Bull than in Ferrari.

Edited by Kingshark, 29 June 2013 - 00:16.

[mattferg]

Mattferg, the gap between Renault and Ferrari in 2006, if there was any, was very small, likewise the gap between McLaren and Ferrari in 2008.

But sure, since you are so convinced that Massa only drove the equal best car once in his career, it makes his stats of 11 wins look all the more impressive.

Regarding the Vettel and Alonso team, I'd say that there's a greater chance of it happening at Red Bull than in Ferrari.

Exactly, and as such for you to outright claim that Massa drove the best car three years in a row, when Alonso himself (who drove 2/3 of the main title contenders to those very cars) says the best car wins in the end anyways, is just ridiculous.