Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 3 votes

Mark Webber on the favourites for 2014 and who's the best driver he'd raced against


  • Please log in to reply
187 replies to this topic

#51 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,510 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 15 December 2013 - 00:21

I think Mark is taking that into consideration.  It is expected that one's form would dip if the performance of the car is lacking or if the driver has trouble adjusting to a new configuration.  This happened to Alonso in the same period and to Lewis at Merc in 2009.  So I don't think Mark would find it an acceptable excuse for purposes of his rating these drivers.

 

Overall, a very good post, just to pick you up on something here.

 

Lewis in 2009, is not comparable to Seb of 2012 in terms of adapting. Seb was being outperformed on a few weekends by Webber at the start of 2012 (Silverstone and Monaco for example) Lewis in 2009 was not really troubled by Heikki, from what I recall (a quick scan reveals he finished behind him in China) I would say Lewis adapted better in 2009 than Seb did in 2013.

 

Now, I suspect you might have meant a typo and meant 2013 and not 2009? If so, I still think the adaption phase for Lewis was much worse (not that I am defending him, which I will get to in a moment) Lewis had a entire new team. Plus Webber had the same circumstances and at least in qualifying adapted better than Seb at the start of 2012.

 

However, Lewis at the start of 2013 struggled relative to his teammate a lot worse than Seb did in 2012 in my opinion, so I am not out to defend Lewis or anything.

 

I find it hard to excuse a driver for not adapting. Look how Prost took like a duck to water at Ferrari in 1990, how much Schumi extracted from that dog of  a Ferrari in 1996 (first year in the team, and maybe his best season in a bloody hard to drive car by all sources), or how much Senna got from the Williams in 1994 (3 poles, and in the first race he was a lap ahead of his teammate, who was firmly established already at Williams)

 

I am not holding it against Seb as such, as I am sure he will adapt later in his career to a change in situation, he is too dedicated not to. But in 2012, he did find difficult at first. 2013 he was right on it though, the results in comparison to Webber early on with the tyre problems confirm that.



Advertisement

#52 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,723 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 15 December 2013 - 01:51

Overall, a very good post, just to pick you up on something here.

 

Lewis in 2009, is not comparable to Seb of 2012 in terms of adapting. Seb was being outperformed on a few weekends by Webber at the start of 2012 (Silverstone and Monaco for example) Lewis in 2009 was not really troubled by Heikki, from what I recall (a quick scan reveals he finished behind him in China) I would say Lewis adapted better in 2009 than Seb did in 2013.

 

 

You say these events are not comparable in terms of adapting because Lewis adapted better?  I don't really understand where you are going with that.  My only point was that all drivers will show a "dip" if they are struggling trying to adapt to a new configuration or if the car lacks pace.  Lewis showed a dip in 2009 and Sebastian in 2012.

 

I don't believe your added contention - 'who was quickest to adapt?'  is a relevant criteria - I could ask 'who had the more brilliant adaption?'  But these further questions are neither here nor there - the point was that we should expect a "dip" in these circumstances and I do not believe this type of "dip" should be used to support the relative performance of the drivers.  That is why I concluded that I did not believe Mark was doing that.

 

Now, I suspect you might have meant a typo and meant 2013 and not 2009?

 

That would be one hell of a typo.  :lol:  No, I meant 2009.

 

If so, I still think the adaption phase for Lewis was much worse (not that I am defending him, which I will get to in a moment) Lewis had a entire new team. Plus Webber had the same circumstances and at least in qualifying adapted better than Seb at the start of 2012.

 

Well you are on about 'adapting better' again, which I don't believe is relevant to judging the relative performance of drivers.  Lewis, I thought did great in 2013 with a new team.  I think a lot of people around here judged him very harshly.  But when don't they judge drivers and everything associated with F1 harshly around here?

 

However, Lewis at the start of 2013 struggled relative to his teammate a lot worse than Seb did in 2012 in my opinion, so I am not out to defend Lewis or anything.

 

But this was a whole different circumstance.  Lewis went to an entirely new team - we have to cop the dude a break.  I wouldn't make that comparison at all - it is unfair on too many levels to enumerate.

 

I find it hard to excuse a driver for not adapting.

 

But that is not a driver issue, that is a fan issue.  Drivers are going to vary on the amount of time it takes to adapt based on the circumstances.  Webber being a driver is likely to see it through a driver's eyes - knowing how difficult adapting in certain circumstances can be.

 

Look how Prost took like a duck to water at Ferrari in 1990, how much Schumi extracted from that dog of  a Ferrari in 1996 (first year in the team, and maybe his best season in a bloody hard to drive car by all sources), or how much Senna got from the Williams in 1994 (3 poles, and in the first race he was a lap ahead of his teammate, who was firmly established already at Williams)

 

You can't compare these things because each situation and circumstance is different, imo.  All drivers must adapt and I don't see how we can legitimately say how long it should take in any given circumstance.

 

I am not holding it against Seb as such, as I am sure he will adapt later in his career to a change in situation, he is too dedicated not to. But in 2012, he did find difficult at first. 2013 he was right on it though, the results in comparison to Webber early on with the tyre problems confirm that.

 

I don't agree.  I feel that Mark and Seb both had difficulty at the start of the 2012 season because the car behaved very differently.  Mark was a whopping 6 points ahead, which is not enough to effectively support your point.  Seb was P2 in Oz, P1 in Bahrain and P1 in Europe before the alternator blow out; Mark won Monaco as his only podium and 3 P4s - otherwise, both teammates were up and down and both complained that the car lacked pace and did not suit them.  So I disagree that Mark's 6 point lead and overall performance is sufficient to conclude that he had a significantly greater adaption, though the car suited him a tad better, it was not enough to make a significant difference.

 

And I certainly would not extrapolate from the start of 2012 any conclusive evidence regarding Seb's ability to adapt.  He adapts every year, as do all the drivers - some years will be more difficult than others.  The important thing is that the driver get it done in the end. 


Edited by bourbon, 15 December 2013 - 02:07.


#53 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,510 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 15 December 2013 - 02:26

You still made a typo, you said Merc in 2009, that I would assume you would mean Mercedes.

 

I probably should not have used the word "comparable" I meant I disagreed with your comparison as I felt Lewis did adapt better in 2009 than Seb did in 2012, and I supported that argument with how they did in comparison to their teammates at the beginning of the year.

 

Adaption is something I greatly admire in drivers, it can create a great difference. I believe the true greats adapt fast, you can say every situation is different, but I would argue you need a vast skill-set to adapt well, with the changes in regulations in numerous ways, it is essential to adapt well and fast. You say its a "fan issue", well F1 is a competitive sport, you either adapt fast or you get swallowed up. You could argue that Chilton deserves more time to "adapt" as he is a rookie, there is only a certain amount of time you can give people leeway.

 

I was not saying that Seb cannot adapt quickly, just that he did not in 2012 (at least in qualifying, as Webber showed there was more pace in the car), I felt he adapted very quickly in 2013. It is a big "if" but that slow adaption phase could have cost Seb the title in 2012 "if" a few scenarios were different. Again though that is a "if".

 

I am harsh on Lewis, as I think his 2013 did him no justice, and this is from a big fan of his. The fact that his problems carried on throughout the season shows that he struggled to adapt, and in some ways "did not get the job done in the end" (he beat his teammate, but did not dominate him). Maybe when the car is designed around him more next year, he will be more capable, but when I think of the true greats who adapted under the most extreme circumstances like Senna at Brazil 1991, or Schumi in 1996, I find it hard to give leeway.

 

It all depends on our expectations and what standard we expect of course. 

 

Adaption is not like age, it does not always come down to nature, it can come down to talent and hard work, and a advanced skill-set, which I already alluded to.


Edited by sennafan24, 15 December 2013 - 02:35.


#54 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 2,047 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 15 December 2013 - 08:20

The same Lewis that beat Fernando in his first year. I guess he is going on the current era though of the Pirelli tyre because if we went back to sprint racing with tyres you could push on Lewis would be up there all day long.

 

So would webber.



#55 Hans V

Hans V
  • Member

  • 357 posts
  • Joined: August 03

Posted 15 December 2013 - 08:53

Webber is working on his reputation I see. I followed his career since F3 and I've always found him a bit overrated. Nice chap who speaks his mind, portrayed himself as the hard man from the outback, but not top drawer in my book. He's been comprehensively trashed by Vettel for three years now and he still leaves with a very good reputation. I believe this has a lot to do with the good rapport he has with the F1 press.  What would we have thought about the Red Bull cars for the last five years if Webber was paired with Buemi or Alguersiari?

 

Now he is hailed as the saviour for Porsches LMP1 comeback, but Webbers main challenge is traffic. He has not been particularly good in traffic in F1, despite the best equipment. Being surrounded by just as fast or faster Audis and Toyotas plus all the LMP2’s and the fleet of various GTs I will be surprised to see him go through two stints at La Sarthe 2014 without crashing.



#56 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,510 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 15 December 2013 - 13:20

So would webber.

I disagree.

 

Webber admits he lost speed in his winter years, he would not be that strong under those sort of regulations from 2011-2013.



#57 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 1,357 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 15 December 2013 - 14:15

The same Lewis that beat Fernando in his first year. I guess he is going on the current era though of the Pirelli tyre because if we went back to sprint racing with tyres you could push on Lewis would be up there all day long.

Then again what we have heard is tha Lewis wasn't all that great with Michelins either. He can be very fast but his adaptability isn't among the best.

#58 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,510 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 15 December 2013 - 14:35

Then again what we have heard is tha Lewis wasn't all that great with Michelins either. He can be very fast but his adaptability isn't among the best.

Pretty much

 

Some of that will be due to being with one team for his career, but its only a excuse to a extent.

 

If you look at Schumacher's career, he had to adapt to a variety of different regulations from 1991-2006, and he always preformed very well, even when he changed teams in relative performance he did very well in 1996.

 

Which is why I am harsh on Lewis, the greats adapt well, no matter what the circumstance. Only age or rust I think are valid excuses.



#59 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 2,775 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 15 December 2013 - 14:56

The same Lewis that beat Fernando in his first year. I guess he is going on the current era though of the Pirelli tyre because if we went back to sprint racing with tyres you could push on Lewis would be up there all day long.


Weak excuses. Great drivers adapt.

And the same Lewis lost to Button in 2011.

Advertisement

#60 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,378 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 15 December 2013 - 17:41

Pretty much

 

Some of that will be due to being with one team for his career, but its only a excuse to a extent.

 

If you look at Schumacher's career, he had to adapt to a variety of different regulations from 1991-2006, and he always preformed very well, even when he changed teams in relative performance he did very well in 1996.

 

Which is why I am harsh on Lewis, the greats adapt well, no matter what the circumstance. Only age or rust I think are valid excuses.

 

Michael is likely the most adaptable driver we have seen. From 1991 to 2012.



#61 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,510 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 15 December 2013 - 17:58

Michael is likely the most adaptable driver we have seen. From 1991 to 2012.

Probably, like I said age and rust prevented Schumi from adapting well in 2010, which is why I will give Kimi some leeway in 2012 also (he had 2-3 years on the sidelines). If you look at the sport in 1991 and compare it to 2006, it gives you a picture of how much Schumi had to keep adjusting, season in season out. The transition in 1996 was amazing if you listen to Eddie Irvine's observations.

 

Lewis, bless him struggled in 2013 throughout, top drivers adapt fast usually, Lewis did not. Its a different scenario from 2011 which was down to his mental state (he was actually the best driver on the grid for my money in the opening stages of 2011, the he really slumped and we know the rest) 

 

Alonso is a driver who has always adapted well to the best of my knowledge.


Edited by sennafan24, 15 December 2013 - 17:58.


#62 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 15 December 2013 - 18:11

Hamilton's best season is still 2007, by far. And that is slightly concerning. 

 

He was very fast out of the gate and vs a two time wdc he established his reputation but as more seasons pass and we have seen the performance of Alonso to be consistantly strong it becomes fairly obvious that 2007 was just a down year for Fernando. Perhaps Lewis was overrated based just on one stellar season. Imo Webber is correct in his assessment that Lewis currently is not in the top tier of drivers.


Edited by halifaxf1fan, 15 December 2013 - 18:15.


#63 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,723 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 15 December 2013 - 18:33

Alonso is a driver who has always adapted well to the best of my knowledge.

 

The beginning of 2010 was Alonso's troubled start.

 

And does all of this adapting apply to adapting to updates? 

 

In any case, I respect the fact that this criteria can be used, but I don't personally place much value in it, and I don't think it was one of the criteria Mark used to rate the three drivers. 

 

He was very fast out of the gate and vs a two time wdc he established his reputation but as more seasons pass and we have seen the performance of Alonso to be consistantly strong it becomes fairly obvious that 2007 was just a down year for Fernando. Perhaps Lewis was overrated based just on one stellar season. Imo Webber is correct in his assessment that Lewis currently is not in the top tier of drivers.

 

I disagree with Mark on that. Mark seems to wish to pull one of the greats down to his level and polish his reputation a bit.  Mark is a great driver, but a step below the top 4 or 5.


Edited by bourbon, 15 December 2013 - 18:41.


#64 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,510 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 15 December 2013 - 18:38

 

 

And does all of this adapting apply to adapting to updates? 

 

 

Good question

 

I would say so, yes, that is a area that someone could look into actually, that some decent finding could be found. I would have to go back and watch 2010 again to see how Alonso did, a quick scan of the results is pretty inconclusive, so maybe you are right.

 

In our little debate, it did seem that the difference in our views was that I have higher expectations of drivers than yourself and as you say I value adaption more than yourself, no right or wrong between us  :up:



#65 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 2,775 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 16 December 2013 - 03:48

Michael is likely the most adaptable driver we have seen. From 1991 to 2012.


No love for Prost?

#66 f1RacingForever

f1RacingForever
  • Member

  • 840 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 16 December 2013 - 03:56

Fernando's sundays seem better because his saturdays aren't always that good in comparison.

Honestly it's hard to know just how good vettel's saturdays really are. Seems good on the surface but i remember webber was quite competitive not too long ago. Wasn't in damn near even in Q last year? How about 2010. That said, this year has gone very well for vettel but just how much does a 37 year old webber have left in the tank. The only other drivers we can compare him to aren't even worth mentioning so you'll excuse me if i find some of his qualifying hype dubious.

 

I recall Hamilton saying something to the effect of "Fernando is more accurate" talking about one lap pace. Pretty telling coming from someone like Hamilton. I think most would agree that Fernando regularily faces a far greater challange on most sundays then Vettel does so again it's hard to rate him. How hard is managing the gap to second in the best car? I don't get the Vettel hype to be honest



#67 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,378 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 16 December 2013 - 05:14

No love for Prost?

 

I do agree about Alain Prost, he had gone through extensive regulation changes, NA, Turbos, than Ferrari V12, etc, but it was not as dramatic as Michael went through in his career as for as track circumstaces, example being wet weather, Michael is better than Alain Prost. Then Ayrton.

 

For wet driving adaptability, Ayrton has no other equal (except for Michael on certain races, Spain 1996, Monaco 1997, Spa 1998 or European 2000).  I consider the best wet drive is Spain 1996, by any driver but on a whole Ayrton was better than Michael in the wet....

 

Donington 1993 and Spain 1996 would be on anyone top list, but given the Ferrari chassis and how far it was behind the Benetton and Williams, it gets the nod over 1993. Given he made a horrible start (he went from 4th to 7th) whereas Ayrton made the finest start ever...

 

It is obscene how fast the 1993 Williams was, 1.6 sceonds faster than Ayrton in the McLaren at Donington....


Edited by George Costanza, 16 December 2013 - 05:27.


#68 404KF2

404KF2
  • Member

  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 16 December 2013 - 05:20

Gilles Villeneuve was handy in the rain, to say the least.  I enjoyed watching him in the day.



#69 Talisker

Talisker
  • Member

  • 284 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 16 December 2013 - 06:15

I always liked how Eddie Irvine rated other drivers. Basically none of the other drivers on the grid was up to his standard, apart from the only one who raced the same car as him, therefore allowing a clear comparison. He was a super-human god who no driver on earth could even hope to come close to. Or something like that.



#70 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,510 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 16 December 2013 - 14:14

I always liked how Eddie Irvine rated other drivers. Basically none of the other drivers on the grid was up to his standard, apart from the only one who raced the same car as him, therefore allowing a clear comparison. He was a super-human god who no driver on earth could even hope to come close to. Or something like that.

He is not quite as bad as you make out.

 

But it did make me laugh when he said he thrashed Rubens during their time as teammates during the SKY interview, only for Ryder to do a voice over correcting him.



#71 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 3,700 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 17 December 2013 - 21:11

Its hard to directly compare, but for me Alonso and Lewis were pretty equal in 2012, both being the cream of the field.

 

 

Alonso had pressure all season, trying to defend a championship lead (or small deficit) down to the wire against the more competitive Red Bull. That adds a dimension to his 2012 season that was not present for Lewis. I know that the reliability issues were not Lewis's fault, but Alonso had to take risk after risk in race after race with the championship always at stake. His one small error while doing this did eventually cost the championship. Lewis was not under the same pressure.



#72 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,510 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 17 December 2013 - 21:20

Alonso had pressure all season, trying to defend a championship lead (or small deficit) down to the wire against the more competitive Red Bull. That adds a dimension to his 2012 season that was not present for Lewis. I know that the reliability issues were not Lewis's fault, but Alonso had to take risk after risk in race after race with the championship always at stake. His one small error while doing this did eventually cost the championship. Lewis was not under the same pressure.

You could say Lewis had the pressure of shopping himself round the market though, and the pressure of beating a teammate who had schooled him the year before. It is forgotten how important 2012 was for Lewis's reputation.

 

I can agree after he left McLaren and his future was secured he had little pressure (the Championship was well gone thanks to McLaren's cowboy antics), but before that he was under as much pressure as anyone.

 

Plus Lewis was under the same pressure for the first 60 % percent of the season, it was only around Singapore where his title chances really looked bleak, he was always closely in touch until then.



#73 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,322 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 17 December 2013 - 21:39

This sums up the best driver Webber raced against: http://www.jamesalle...ns-at-red-bull/

 

The only stat Webber has beaten Vettel in is DNFs. And it's only by 1 DNF. Quite contrary to the popular understanding that Webber had all the failures.

 

Great guy but Vettel had him licked.



#74 travbrad

travbrad
  • Member

  • 635 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 18 December 2013 - 07:35

I disagree, 2012 was better, and 2010 was on the same level.

 

2010 he only finished behind Button when both finished twice, both in mixed conditions, and in 2012 he was amazingly consistent. Only in Australia was he off-pace on merit, when nothing went wrong he performed to a very high level, sometimes to such a level he was the king of the field.

 

Yeah Hamilton was great and consistent in 2012, and showed a lot more racing intelligence than he had in the past.  He just had a lot of bad luck with pitstops, unreliability, and 2012's crash test dummies (Grosjean and Maldonado)

 

In 2013 he didn't seem quite as consistent, but it's hard to judge since the Mercedes car seemed very inconsistent from one race to another or even within the same race depending on the fuel load.  I think a lot of people still underrate Rosberg as well, so beating him was no mean feat.  There is a reason Rosberg was only rated behind WDCs (and ahead of one) in this years team principals vote.



#75 LuckyStrike1

LuckyStrike1
  • Member

  • 5,583 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 18 December 2013 - 08:40

He was very fast out of the gate and vs a two time wdc he established his reputation but as more seasons pass and we have seen the performance of Alonso to be consistantly strong it becomes fairly obvious that 2007 was just a down year for Fernando. Perhaps Lewis was overrated based just on one stellar season. Imo Webber is correct in his assessment that Lewis currently is not in the top tier of drivers.

 

 

A hell of a down year if you finish one point behind the WDC, on equal points and with equal amount of victories as your teammate.



#76 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,161 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 18 December 2013 - 10:46

The only stat Webber has beaten Vettel in is DNFs. And it's only by 1 DNF. Quite contrary to the popular understanding that Webber had all the failures.

 

You do realise that not all the technical difficulties lead to DNF's don't you? To give an indication, mnmracer didn't update his thread as promised he would do after the summer, so that means the tally must have really not supported his claims :D


Edited by prty, 18 December 2013 - 10:50.


#77 abc

abc
  • Member

  • 1,961 posts
  • Joined: July 05

Posted 18 December 2013 - 13:20

You do realise that not all the technical difficulties lead to DNF's don't you? To give an indication, mnmracer didn't update his thread as promised he would do after the summer, so that means the tally must have really not supported his claims :D

Any tally doesnt change fact, that Vettel was quicker in every weekend this season and didnt make any mistake as a bonus. Something even mighty Alonso in his soo revered (IMO overrated as hell) season 2012 couldnt achieve.

 

Question is, was Vettel's season really unbelievable or Weber sank to M.Chilton level (alternatively RB sabotaged his car throughout whole year). Answer is everybody's guess or rather wishful thinking. :p



#78 David1976

David1976
  • Member

  • 841 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 18 December 2013 - 13:28

Mark Webber, in my opinion, hasn't been "on it" in the last few years.  Whether it was his age, accidents or motivation I just don't know.

 

For me the jury is still out on Seb.  When he wins regularly in what is perceived as an equal car, and not a dominant one, I will change my opinion.  Until then, for me, he is merely a lot better than a modern day Webber.



#79 kenkip

kenkip
  • Member

  • 471 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 18 December 2013 - 13:51

Mark Webber, in my opinion, hasn't been "on it" in the last few years.  Whether it was his age, accidents or motivation I just don't know.

 

For me the jury is still out on Seb.  When he wins regularly in what is perceived as an equal car, and not a dominant one, I will change my opinion.  Until then, for me, he is merely a lot better than a modern day Webber.

But he has won races with cars that are equal or even superior to the Redbull.Think his first win,the Toro rosso was fast on race day but superior to the grid?I don't think so.

Germany this year,even Lotus were saying the Redbull was slower than them but he pulled it out of the bag.

Spain and Monaco 2011 are other examples and even though he didn't win it Spa last year was impressive how he hauled it to 2nd from 11th (he was 12th after the shunt so the excuse of Grojsean clearing the road for him doesn't count.)

 

Its clear as day Seb Vettel is every inch as good as adapting to a car as well as the other drivers.To say the 4 times WDC is only better than Webber is a bit of a diservice and smacks of bitterness.I am not saying you have to acknowledge him as the best driver,but give him some credit,the kid is on Alonso's level,and next year he may even go one better.



Advertisement

#80 Obi Offiah

Obi Offiah
  • Member

  • 8,641 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 18 December 2013 - 16:15

This sums up the best driver Webber raced against: http://www.jamesalle...ns-at-red-bull/

 

The only stat Webber has beaten Vettel in is DNFs. And it's only by 1 DNF. Quite contrary to the popular understanding that Webber had all the failures.

 

Great guy but Vettel had him licked.

But hasn't Webber experienced a great deal of reliability issues that have not caused DNFs, but have hampered his performances, such as no KERS for qualification etc?


Edited by Obi Offiah, 18 December 2013 - 16:15.


#81 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,510 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 18 December 2013 - 16:17

But hasn't Webber experienced a great deal of reliability issues that have not caused DNFs, but have hampered his performances, such as no KERS for qualification etc?

If you skim the Webber vs Vettel page, there was some excellent research done by a few posters that showed that they both had the same amount of KERS failures.

 

Seb's just occurred in places where he could manage it better, like being well in the lead, so it effected his race less. Seb made his own luck in a roundabout way.



#82 JSDSKI

JSDSKI
  • Member

  • 1,439 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 18 December 2013 - 17:42

Webber is working on his reputation I see. I followed his career since F3 and I've always found him a bit overrated. ......

 

... funny, Newey rates him equal or above Seb in aero feedback and analysis.  That's what Porsche wants from him, aside from the straightforward comparison to the best of the current F1 cars. 

 

However, Newey did say that Vettel outperformed Webber by a large margin in use and adaptation of the tire changes over the past few years.   



#83 JSDSKI

JSDSKI
  • Member

  • 1,439 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 18 December 2013 - 18:00

Honestly it's hard to know just how good vettel's saturdays really are. Seems good on the surface but i remember webber was quite competitive not too long ago. Wasn't in damn near even in Q last year? How about 2010. That said, this year has gone very well for vettel but just how much does a 37 year old webber have left in the tank. The only other drivers we can compare him to aren't even worth mentioning so you'll excuse me if i find some of his qualifying hype dubious.

 

I recall Hamilton saying something to the effect of "Fernando is more accurate" talking about one lap pace. Pretty telling coming from someone like Hamilton. I think most would agree that Fernando regularily faces a far greater challange on most sundays then Vettel does so again it's hard to rate him. How hard is managing the gap to second in the best car? I don't get the Vettel hype to be honest

 

True. 

 

The easiest current comparison is the relative results between Massa and Alonso.  And the recent interview with Pat Symonds, who stated bluntly that a serious engineering analysis rated Alonso alone  worth upwards half a second a lap in an F1 car.  This was a from performance study Symonds ran for his team on the relative worth of buying the most expensive drivers versus investing a like amount into R&D engineering - in other words the question was "did it make more sense to spend money on the development or the driver."   I'd never heard or read this before.  And given the timing of the study and who did it and why, I wonder if this isn't the context of the famous "six tenths" ?

 

The argument that Massa is not the same after his accident.... well, I for one think he found his pace late in 2012 and kept it in 2013.  He drove like he always drove in the past.  Fast on most days.. very fast from the front row with a car setup to his style.  Not so competitive in mixed circumstances (to paraphrase Button, he is hilarious in the wet).  He just couldn't match Alonso.  Massa is on the rung below... 

 

Another interesting comparison will come from Williams of all places.  How will Massa do against Bottas - a highly rated young driver tipped for the future? 



#84 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 18 December 2013 - 18:44

Should have asked Webber who he thinks is better in the rain. Some insight to be had there.


I think Button can answer that question

#85 motorhead

motorhead
  • Member

  • 921 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 18 December 2013 - 19:54

Fernando was a handfull for Webber allright, that was when Vettel had some +40secs marigin to Webber...just saying



#86 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 3,700 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 18 December 2013 - 20:05

True. 

 

The easiest current comparison is the relative results between Massa and Alonso.  And the recent interview with Pat Symonds, who stated bluntly that a serious engineering analysis rated Alonso alone  worth upwards half a second a lap in an F1 car.  This was a from performance study Symonds ran for his team on the relative worth of buying the most expensive drivers versus investing a like amount into R&D engineering - in other words the question was "did it make more sense to spend money on the development or the driver."   I'd never heard or read this before.  And given the timing of the study and who did it and why, I wonder if this isn't the context of the famous "six tenths" ?

 

The argument that Massa is not the same after his accident.... well, I for one think he found his pace late in 2012 and kept it in 2013.  He drove like he always drove in the past.  Fast on most days.. very fast from the front row with a car setup to his style.  Not so competitive in mixed circumstances (to paraphrase Button, he is hilarious in the wet).  He just couldn't match Alonso.  Massa is on the rung below... 

 

Another interesting comparison will come from Williams of all places.  How will Massa do against Bottas - a highly rated young driver tipped for the future? 

 

That is interesting. Remember those races where Giancarlo Fisichella would get hurry-up messages, telling him how fast his team-mate was going!  Very tedious.

 

Massa was quite quick in early 2010 too, relative to Alonso at any rate. His form just fluctuates too much (again, relative to Alonso I suppose). Did Pat have anything to do with signing Massa for Williams, I wonder.


Edited by garoidb, 18 December 2013 - 20:05.


#87 JSDSKI

JSDSKI
  • Member

  • 1,439 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 18 December 2013 - 21:42

That is interesting. Remember those races where Giancarlo Fisichella would get hurry-up messages, telling him how fast his team-mate was going!  Very tedious.

 

Massa was quite quick in early 2010 too, relative to Alonso at any rate. His form just fluctuates too much (again, relative to Alonso I suppose). Did Pat have anything to do with signing Massa for Williams, I wonder.

 

I'm certain all the teams, race engineers, and TD's have very good insight (and data) into all the drivers. 

 

Symonds is an excellent TD with WDC and WCC results.  He probably saw who was out there and what he had as a budget.  He's picked up a known quantity in Massa who was within a whisker of a WDC.  Massa's coming from a team that was near the top of the field and he was measured against arguably one of the top three drivers.  So he's got an experienced driver who can provide a solid baseline that he can use when dealing with Botta.  And Williams got Smedley.  So, he'll have an engineer who knows Massa inside and out.  Massa's probably not all that expensive.  And he's hungry with something to prove.

 

All those things are positive for a process and systems driven manager like Symonds who has a long term outlook on building a team.

 

I really hope Williams can move up the field.  And with a bit more cash for R&D - they wil.  



#88 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 18 December 2013 - 21:52

That is interesting. Remember those races where Giancarlo Fisichella would get hurry-up messages, telling him how fast his team-mate was going! Very tedious.


Multi21?

Massa is still in F1 while Webber is not.

#89 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 3,700 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 18 December 2013 - 22:01

Multi21?

Massa is still in F1 while Webber is not.

 

The Fisichella transmissions that I remember were not team-order related, so not related to Multi21 or "Fernando is faster than you" or anything like that  :D . It was more like they thought Fisi should be going faster .... and had proof! I thought it was funny at the time. 

 

It is worth noting that Massa is still in F1, and that his stock has not been completely decimated by being beaten by Alonso. I know there are commercial considerations, but it reflects well on Alonso too. Webber could most likely still be in F1 if he wanted too, which says something about the esteem Vettel is held in.



#90 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 18 December 2013 - 22:10

A hell of a down year if you finish one point behind the WDC, on equal points and with equal amount of victories as your teammate.

 

He was off to a slow start and let the rookie get the jump on him.  He was better at the end of the season but it was too little to late especially when he spun in the rain in Japan and put the car in the wall.  It must have been a very frustrated and bitter Alonso racing at McLaren.

 

An 'on his game Alonso' in 2007 would probably have squashed Hamilton like a bug.  Just look at how much trouble Hamilton has had vs lesser drivers (than Alonso) such as Button and Rosberg for example.



#91 dave34m

dave34m
  • Member

  • 478 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 18 December 2013 - 22:23

The beginning of 2010 was Alonso's troubled start.

 

And does all of this adapting apply to adapting to updates? 

 

In any case, I respect the fact that this criteria can be used, but I don't personally place much value in it, and I don't think it was one of the criteria Mark used to rate the three drivers. 

 

 

I disagree with Mark on that. Mark seems to wish to pull one of the greats down to his level and polish his reputation a bit.  Mark is a great driver, but a step below the top 4 or 5.

 

Classic over use of "great" there. Webber has had a very good race or two and showed a lot of promise in 2010 but in no way should he be considered a great driver, imo
 



#92 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,723 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 December 2013 - 05:15

Classic over use of "great" there. Webber has had a very good race or two and showed a lot of promise in 2010 but in no way should he be considered a great driver, imo
 

 

It term is relative isn't it.  The point he is just a step below the top drivers, imo.



#93 f1RacingForever

f1RacingForever
  • Member

  • 840 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 19 December 2013 - 05:28

True. 

 

The easiest current comparison is the relative results between Massa and Alonso.  And the recent interview with Pat Symonds, who stated bluntly that a serious engineering analysis rated Alonso alone  worth upwards half a second a lap in an F1 car.  This was a from performance study Symonds ran for his team on the relative worth of buying the most expensive drivers versus investing a like amount into R&D engineering - in other words the question was "did it make more sense to spend money on the development or the driver."   I'd never heard or read this before.  And given the timing of the study and who did it and why, I wonder if this isn't the context of the famous "six tenths" ?

 

The argument that Massa is not the same after his accident.... well, I for one think he found his pace late in 2012 and kept it in 2013.  He drove like he always drove in the past.  Fast on most days.. very fast from the front row with a car setup to his style.  Not so competitive in mixed circumstances (to paraphrase Button, he is hilarious in the wet).  He just couldn't match Alonso.  Massa is on the rung below... 

 

Another interesting comparison will come from Williams of all places.  How will Massa do against Bottas - a highly rated young driver tipped for the future? 

That interesting that Alonso was found to be worth "upwards of half a second per lap" I'm assuming this is taking into account one lap pace, pace over a race distance (which i think is never talked about and severely underrated) maybe how much development potential a driver brings to a team?  I like Alonso but i doubt he is really that good. Seems a large number. It would mean over a race distance, he would finish roughly 20-30 sec's clear of the next best driver all things being equal?? I seriously doubt that.

 

Fernando's strength is his consistency, decision making as well as his speed. I don't know how you would put a number on that but i do think he is the best all round driver, especially on sundays.

 

I agree with you about massa. I'm not sure how 2014 will go for him but i'm not expecting much. I wouldn't be surprised if bottas beats him. Hopefully for the sake of pride, he can have a half decent season.



#94 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 2,047 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 19 December 2013 - 05:39

Classic over use of "great" there. Webber has had a very good race or two and showed a lot of promise in 2010 but in no way should he be considered a great driver, imo
 

 

Was the bookies favourite going into the last race of 2010.

 

Are you saying you can be great unless you're a WDC?  :stoned:

 

Best of the nearly men for mine - would beat button in the same car.



#95 kenkip

kenkip
  • Member

  • 471 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 19 December 2013 - 06:54

True. 

 

The easiest current comparison is the relative results between Massa and Alonso.  And the recent interview with Pat Symonds, who stated bluntly that a serious engineering analysis rated Alonso alone  worth upwards half a second a lap in an F1 car.  This was a from performance study Symonds ran for his team on the relative worth of buying the most expensive drivers versus investing a like amount into R&D engineering - in other words the question was "did it make more sense to spend money on the development or the driver."   I'd never heard or read this before.  And given the timing of the study and who did it and why, I wonder if this isn't the context of the famous "six tenths" ?

 

The argument that Massa is not the same after his accident.... well, I for one think he found his pace late in 2012 and kept it in 2013.  He drove like he always drove in the past.  Fast on most days.. very fast from the front row with a car setup to his style.  Not so competitive in mixed circumstances (to paraphrase Button, he is hilarious in the wet).  He just couldn't match Alonso.  Massa is on the rung below... 

 

Another interesting comparison will come from Williams of all places.  How will Massa do against Bottas - a highly rated young driver tipped for the future? 

Interesting stuff,do you have a link to the interview?



#96 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 3,700 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:39

That interesting that Alonso was found to be worth "upwards of half a second per lap" I'm assuming this is taking into account one lap pace, pace over a race distance (which i think is never talked about and severely underrated) maybe how much development potential a driver brings to a team?  I like Alonso but i doubt he is really that good. Seems a large number. It would mean over a race distance, he would finish roughly 20-30 sec's clear of the next best driver all things being equal?? I seriously doubt that.

 

Fernando's strength is his consistency, decision making as well as his speed. I don't know how you would put a number on that but i do think he is the best all round driver, especially on sundays.

 

I agree with you about massa. I'm not sure how 2014 will go for him but i'm not expecting much. I wouldn't be surprised if bottas beats him. Hopefully for the sake of pride, he can have a half decent season.

 

So you doubt Pat Symond's analysis because ... "seems like a large number". Why do you think he is not capable of doing this kind of analysis with the data he would have had?



#97 seahawk

seahawk
  • Member

  • 3,132 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:56

Mark Webber, in my opinion, hasn't been "on it" in the last few years.  Whether it was his age, accidents or motivation I just don't know.

 

For me the jury is still out on Seb.  When he wins regularly in what is perceived as an equal car, and not a dominant one, I will change my opinion.  Until then, for me, he is merely a lot better than a modern day Webber.

 

But in Webber´s hands the RBR was no dominating car.



#98 Module

Module
  • Member

  • 673 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 19 December 2013 - 07:58

So you doubt Pat Symond's analysis because ... "seems like a large number". Why do you think he is not capable of doing this kind of analysis with the data he would have had?

 

I think that in Symonds case the source is highly questionable when it comes to analyzing Alonso. Remember this is the guy who thought Piquet in the wall was the way to get Alonso a victory so him talking Alonso up...well it's easier to exaggerate then to risk a mans life



#99 Neophiliac

Neophiliac
  • Member

  • 279 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 19 December 2013 - 08:31

 

He also says "on Sundays Fernando over two hours is a handful. There is no question about that". 
 
In Alonso case he is perfectly able to be a clinical driver Sunday after Sunday (Spa this year is a clear example of what I am talking about, like a surgeon all the race, I was quite impressed) I don´t have enough information about Vettel (he usually starts from pole, his own merit but I don´t have enough information), I don´t know if he is as relentless as Alonso is in that sense. If they were teammates, driving a not dominant car, starting from P4 (Vettel) and P6 (Alonso), Who would be more relentless? I need to know more about Vettel in that sense. 

 

I think it's a bit ridiculous to say that we don't have enough information about Vettel's relentlessness and race craft. You could say that after his first title maybe, but surely not now. Yes, he starts from pole very often. Like Senna, eh? But if you look at races where he ended up in a difficult grid position for one reason or another, his performances tend to be likewise absolutely phenomenal. He's a complete package at this point. 



Advertisement

#100 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,161 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 19 December 2013 - 08:39

Well snap my suspenders, the coveted f1RacingForever Crown is more valuable than winning races!


They've got this little do-hickey measuring-stick called championship points. You see, at the end of each year, they add them all up and the driver with the most points is awarded the Formula 1 WDC. Because Sebastian's statistics speak for themselves -- there is no need for hype (your disrespect is always noted).

Oh, in case you forgot: Sebastian Vettel has four (4) consecutive WDCs.


Ah of course, since it's called Wdc that means that the driver is the one and only variable that is related in getting wdc points. The sum of wdc points are used for wcc but don't tell anyone.
Or better yet: see the wcc points? That's how much better the Rbr was. They are called wcc points for a reason.