I suspect that the majority of those posters in this thread taking the ultra literal "WDC is the only thing which matters" line, are self-styled Sebastian Vettel fans. I further suspect that those views are shaped largely by support/loyalty/misguided subjectivity when it comes to Herr Vettel. Furthermore, if I'm correct with my suspicions, the timing of this thread is hardly surprising given that Ricciardo has so far been widely regarded to have outperformed Vettel as a teammate.
Well that is a bit disingenuous considering the poster before you accused non-Vettel fans of championing the opposing point of view. 
Personally, I don't understand how anyone can be a fan of F1 and deliberately and selectively ignore the simple fact that F1 is a team sport. All WDCs are at the mercy of their machinery both in terms of its performance and its reliability. Straightaway that gives context for each and every WDC's career and achievement(s). Yet that is only one example of context in an F1 career. The ability levels of teammates is, of course, another.
Well that is the point of this thread; to discuss whether teammate battles are as important as winning a WDC cup.
Given that F1 is a team sport, the PP/race wins/WDC stats of a driver merely tells us how successful they were. It does not tell us about their entire careers. Afterall, why is 3xWDC Ayrton Senna often said to the greatest F1 driver of all time, when there is a 7xWDC, a 5xWDC and two 4xWDCs? Whilst "greatest driver of all time" is an impossible debate to prove, the sheer fact that none of these debates (or articles in print) rank the drivers neatly along the lines of numbers of WDCs won, tells us that there is more to F1 than just amounts of WDC titles.
Most agree Ayrton was amazing - but many do not agree that he was the greatest of all time. It is just that there is little point in arguing it because his body of work was tremendous and beyond that, it was incomplete and so one can only speculate on the further greatness he would have achieved (we know he would have, but how much?).
Or you can compare it other ways. Why isn't a 1xWDC such as Hill, rated as highly as another 1xWDC Mansell?
Depends who you ask.
Why has F1 history forgotten, to a certain extent, a 3xWDC such as Piquet?
Not in Brazil, China, Japan or Abu Dhabi. The British Media and perspective is not matched by global sentiment.
Why does a 4xWDC such as Vettel struggle to get the widespread respect of a 2xWDC such as Alonso and to a lesser extent, a 1xWDC in Hamilton? I suggest it all comes back to context, such as F1 being a team sport, machinery, teammates and sometimes just plain old luck.
They alternatively say they have all the respect in the world for him and then change their mind in the midst of bitter, jealous rants.
Coming back to my own thoughts, the depth behind F1 results (i.e given that it is a team sport) is one of the most appealing aspects of F1. There is so, so, so much more to F1 than just results and stats. Of course stats and success are a huge measure of any driver's career but the beauty of F1 is that stats and success never tell the whole story. I simply do not understand how anyone can have such a shallow approach of "WDCs are the only measure" and enjoy watching F1. I wonder if such people even begin to understand what they're watching.
Every sport is much more than just stats and success. But what is memorable, what is historical, what is used as a comparison through time, are the major successes. Vettel won 4 WDCs and "JOINED" an elite and very, very small group of drivers that had done it. Now when and if another driver does that, they will make history and the commentators will go on and on about they are joining the exclusive group of 4xWDCs which includes a mere 4 individuals. If this happens tomorrow or in 50 years, it will be the same.
And that is why WDCs are the most important. They are the standard by which all are judged through time - the only standard.
That does not mean that the other legends that left a mark in the sport without titles (Sterling, Gilles) won't be remembered - they are, and in specials their stories are told. And even the "worst" drivers make it into specials on that topic. But when it comes to achievements in the sport over time, the only measure is the number of WDCs won.
Before anyone sighs after reading that - think about it - very carefully. It isn't just "winning a WDC" - it means preparing a fantastic car on the majority of weekends by the crew, it means the constructor arranging deals behind the scenes to keep them viable in the sport - it means the driver training like mad and staying consistently mistake free as possible (sometimes making personal sacrifices on track - like certain records, etc - to attain the bigger goal) - and it means all of the details, hard work and tremendous effort that goes into becoming a champion. It also means the champion beat his teammate (oh but the teammate wasn't a WDC - so what - that does not mean that the Champion's work was easier or the team, crew, administration and staff's work was less difficult).
So don't be so quick to dismiss the WDC. It has more significance behind it than any other measure.
Afterall, if stats and success were the the only measure, Senna would never have gone beyond Toleman and Alonso would have been stuck at Minardi. In the case of the latter, Alonso was according to the the final WDC standings of 2001, the "worst" of the full-time drivers of the 2001 season. Afterall, Alonso didn't score a single WDC point in 2001, much less get anywhere remotely close to a race win.
But the sheer fact that he was headhunted by Briatore after 2001 straightaway tells us that performance judged in context i.e the car they drive and performance against a teammate, is a very real measure in F1. And it doesn't suddenly stop just because a driver becomes a WDC. I would suggest that's something for the ultra-literalist "WDC is everything" crowd to consider but as already stated, I suspect that those views are largely being shaped by driver preference. Or all-out bias.
You are making declarations that no one has made. Who says WDCs are the ONLY measure? Nobody is saying that. They are merely the most important measure and compared to teammate battles - 1000000's of times more because you cannot choose your teammate, so it is wholly unfair to hold that fact against a driver. ALL drivers have the opportunity to be great (as you pointed out) - and if they are, they will get a top drive and likely challenge for the WDC. It is the fairest measure and that is why it is the standard measure.
In conclusion, beating a top class teammate is great, but winning a WDC is the objective. This is not bias. Sure I am a Vettel fan, but I am a Kimi fan and a Daniil fan too. Seb has 4, Kimi has 1 and Daniil has none. Yet I believe they are all similarly super talented - just differing in experience.
Edited by bourbon, 01 May 2014 - 20:37.
