Search Results

Both drivers qualified in the top 4 for that race. Its funny how they try to call the torro rosso a Minardi when in reality It was a magnificent Newey chariot.

The 1992 Benetton WAS statistically a more superior car than the 2008 Toro Rosso.

Evidence and Facts??

1992 Benetton - Finished 3rd in WCC (Drivers 3rd and 6th)
2008 Toro Rosso - Finished 6th in WCC (Drivers 8th and 17th)

Questioning Vettel's driver skill in a 'Newey Chariot' of a 2008 Toro Rosso? It wasn't exactly winning or scoring left right and centre, was it? Schumacher alone got 7 other podiums on top of that maiden win.

And let's just agree for your benefit only that the 2008 Toro Rosso was superior (mega LOL)...

Let's compare the cars capability in the hands of the little punkaSS German rookie to non other than the established experienced racer and multi Champcar Champion teammate Bourdais...

Vettel - Best result was a win at Monza. A string of points finishes, 4ths and 5ths. No more podiums.
Bourdais - Best Result in two seasons of 'Newey Chariots' was 7th. Conveniently at the same Spa circuit.

...versus the 3rd Placed WCC 1992 Benetton.

2008 Toro Rosso, clearly a superior 'newey chariot' in comparison!

Fullhouse, you sir, are an idiot!

 

I think this needs to be addressed. The Toro Rosso of 2008 was designed by Newey, and had the more powerful Ferrari engine. Sebastien Bourdais, who got sacked from Toro Rosso for being crap, managed to put his Toro Rosso on the second row that GP. So, it clearly wasn't a "slow car".

Thank you

 

I too think that it's very important it's addressed that Adrian Newey, the designer who failed to come up with a championship winning car for almost a decade, designed the Toro Rosso that a brilliant Sebastian Vettel drove to an unprecedented win in Monza that year.

 

Credit where credit is due, right

A bit of a sore loser. As much as I don't like Sebastian, he's wiped the floor with Webber who's in the same car. Take away Vettel and you don't see Webber having the last four titles. Yes, it's down to the car, but Vettel also has the extra speed to cope with it, unlike his teammate in the same car.

 

Just because Webber has been a fool for years and thankfully now leaves F1, does not lessen the greatness of the RB cars. After 2011 Webber should have been fired from Red Bull and from F1 in general, that pathetic was his performance. 

 

Difference is, Seb has taken the opportunities he had to take the titles in the last 4 years. Alonso could and should have done so in Abu Dhabi, but failed miserably. Also last year, Seb with a badly damaged car did everything exactly right to seal the championship. He won that one because of his cool and focused head. Alonso and his team in the sort-like situation in Abu Dhabi panicked badly and lost the championship themselves.

 

Seb had to fight hard for at least 2 of his WDCs (he fought hard as well for the others, just that others couldn't really follow him), while Alonso has basically been gifted all of his WDCs

 

Nonsense. Alonso was by far the best driver in 2006 and while it is true that the engine problems of Mercedes made it easier for Alonso in 2005, he still drove a perfect season, very high quality season. Far better than any season Vettel has ever managed.

Alonso deserved his titles completely, to say he was gifted his titles is borderline insane. 

Vettel on the otherhand should have won each title since 2009 (including) with ease, such was the dominance of his cars. That he had to fight for it so hard against Alonso in two of those seasons shows how great Alonso is and how much better than Vettel he is.

I'm not a particularly big fan of Alonso, but that doesn't make him wrong. Seb is an excellent driver these days, but frankly I believe that's down to Red Bull making him one. Vettel's success has been a virtuous circle as Gary Anderson put it. Every year he has less to prove and he can take things in a more and more relaxed mindset, while time is running out for the rest of the top guys.

 

If he were not a Red Bull driver, I don't believe he would have won a single championship title, let alone several. If Lewis or Fernando had been driving the RB5 derivatives, not only would I expect them to have been even more dominant, but having had a fair chance of beating Jenson to title in 2009. Vettel recently suggested that RB5 was good enough to do that.

 

Vettel's a wonderful driver, but I can't picture anyone considering him all-time great nevermind the greatest had he been anything besides a Red Bull man. Someone else would have got that recognition instead.

 

If Alonso had accepted the offer of Red Bull in 2009, he would be a 7x WDC by now, whereas Button and Vettel would be 0X WDC. Unlike Vettel, he would not have wasted the RB car in 2009, nor would have been taken to the last race in either 2010 and 2012. 

 

Exactly, but from Vettel fans. What that Red Bull chasis did in the wet before Monza:

 

2007 Nurburgring: Webber 3rd, Coulthard 5th, Speed and Liuzzi spun off

2007 Fuji: Coulthard 4th, Liuzzi 9th, Webber and Vettel crashed into each other while running 2nd and 3rd.

2007 China: Vettel 4th, Liuzzi 6th, Coulthard 8th, Webber 10th

2008 Monaco: Webber 4th, Vettel 5th, Coulthard and Bourdais retired.

 

Now consider the Ferrari engine in the Toro Rosso was way better than the Renault in the Red Bull at that time, and the fact that it was Monza, and suddenly it becomes a very far cry from the "he won in a Minardi" that Vettel's fans want us to believe.

 

Reality is the worst enemy of Vettel fans. TR was an excellent car that weekend, quite probably the best car of the weekend. That a driver like Bourdais, who was a complete failure in F1, was able to do so well with it, shows you just how great the car was.

 

Fernando Alonso is an idiot. His own two titles were a product of rule changes and loopholes.

 

I will never forget when he uttered the words "Formula one is not a sport anymore". I will celebrate the day when he's gone from the grid.

 

The only one whose titles are a product of rule changes is Newey Passenger Vettel. 

Well, if you want to ignore reliability problems, you'll have to blame Hamilton for not winning 2012.

Why? McLaren was not the fastest nor the best car of the year, both of those honours easily belong to Red Bull.

I would presume he considers the TR at Monza 2008 to be the best in the field, a lot of others also think that.

 

Don't put words in my mouth.

 

 

 

And Vettel does even have a win in a TR. A car that was not a winner car in any way.

 

Your point?

 

A winner in any way? It was designed by Newey! Point invalid.

Are you trying to say that the STR3 was as bad as the A18?

 

The A18 (Arrows) had 6 retirements out of 17 starts, and out of the 11 finishes, only 2 resulted in points. The only podium finish, 2nd - came from 3rd on the grid, while teammate qualified 19th, two seconds slower and didn't finish the race.

In comparison:

The STR3 (Toro Rosso) had 2 retirements out of 13 starts and out of the 11 finishes, 9 resulted in points The only podium finish,1st came from pole position, while teammate qualified 4th, 0.900 slower and finished 18th.

 

 

 

edit:

 

 

 

Interesting. 

 

This is the perfect moment to ask the following question, Do you think Alonso thinks he could have won the WDC several times (4 times for example) during these years if he were driving a Red Bull?

 

Yes. Lewis & Kimi definitely as well.

Alonso ... Never gave up despite having terrible machinery for half the season, and once he got his hands on decent machinery (3rd best car) he outscored the lot of them and won 2 races, beating a mclaren and bmw and finishing close to Kimi and widely acclaimed Kubica. The best driver of the season imo.

Hamilton...Was scrappy and made many mistakes but still dominated his team mate and won the wc in the second best car. Was lucky his main opponent was a fumbling Massa, otherwise he wouldnt have gotten close the wc though.

Kubica...Had a great 2/3's of a season but really fell away from Spa, and was outpaced by Heidfeld once the car started to become difficult. The jury is still out on him as to whether he can be complete or just fast in certain cars. Overall Solid, but overhyped in the end.

Massa...I think he made the most out of his limited abilities in the best car. He probably drove better than he was in the past but hes still not top class and was too inconsistent and made too many mistakes for a driver of his experience. I dont think he will get this close again.


Vettel...Had a great win and some good drives but i think hes been overrated as the car hes driving underrated. A Newey chassis and a ferrari engine is no joke so I dont think he worked the miracles many suggested. Even at Monza, that chassis dominted the front of the grid. Good season but jury still out.

Webber... Dominated his experienced team mate and never stopped trying. I think he will test vettel hard in 09.

Well, I care and that STR win with a newey-copy-car was lame.
 
It's not healthy if customer cars beat some of the constructor teams, possibly killing them off. It can end up like American open-wheels which is cheap and, for me, boring.

That was the exception to the rule, more often than not the customer teams will not beat the constructors. And it was fortunate because it resulted in Vettel's promotion to Red Bull and fast-tracked his career. How many other drivers have seemed to be terrific but never had a proper car to demonstrate their speed?

In all honesty, I can't find a single rational downside to how Vettel and STR won Monza 2008.

I think if anybody needs to be introduced into the career of Michael they really need to look at 3 seasons first:

 

2000: A lot of preassure, driving a Ferrari, failing to win during the last 3 previous years, especially making a very bad move in 1997. And arguably racing against a faster Mclaren, he pulled it off.

1998: Just relentless, everything seemed to go wrong, tyres, superior Mclaren with Newey, fast Hakkinen, SPA with Coulthard and dramatic Suzuka. He still managed to fight it till the end. In fact, for me it's perhaps the most remarkable campaigns since I'm watching F1. Stunning.

1995: Brilliant, it's not getting appreciated enough because somehow Hill and Coulthard managed to make a total mess of the season. Imagine if it was Vettel driving that Williams. He would be crucified, no less.

 

bonus: return races in 1999. Just epic, and unexpected by no one. I remember the articles at the time, with various experts debating wheter he would ever be able to return to his form.

 

This is something that I miss with Lewis. Perhaps, he is even a better racer than Michael, but for me he lacks those very special seasons. He had his tough one in 2007 against Fernando. But after that? 2008 was really scrappy, almost looked like no driver wanted to win it. And everything in his Mercedes years can only be compared to Michael from 2001-2004. Yep, very similar, very impressive, fully deserved. But unspectacular and boring in both instances for both drivers.

 

Lewis's 2010 was very special, and I think very comparable to say a Schumi 1997. The racecraft he demonstrated in that season (the last without DRS) was some of the best in F1 ever (it was like Alonso's in 2012 but with even more of an edge to it). He had two imprudences in Monza and Singapore that were largely borne out of desperation at his equipment disadvantage as the Ferrari and Red Bull were out-developing them, and had already started the season from a better place. Without those two mistakes it would have been a better championship win than Prost's 1986. The McLaren could barely scratch any wins in the dry. There were multiple threats in the form of peers (Alonso) or people who were at least all-time greats (Vettel) as well as a formidable teammate (prime Button).

 

It's no coincidence that at all of the points when the field was most competitive (2009, 2010, 2012) Hamilton ended up being one of the heroes of the season. 

 

We're mostly going in circles because a contingent rightly (in my mind) declares that the driving competition in Shumi's heyday was wanting. Others counter that they only appeared so because Schumi rendered them so. But, as Atreiu has already said, Schumi can take wins, poles, podiums, championships (in other words, accomplishments) off of you, but he can't take away the caliber of driving you present to the viewer. And in that regard, your Alesis, Bergers, Hills, Villeneuve's, etc. are incontrovertibly some ways below, your Alonsos, Vettels, Verstappens, Leclercs, even Ricciardo, etc. 

A few things clear after this race. Heikki and the Ferrrari drivers dont deserve there seats. Hard to put into words the incompetence of those drivers today. Kimi started in 14th and was stuck in 14 until the last laps when it dried, just unbeleivable. Ferrari managment getting their just desserts. Massa was just as bad, qualfying 1.3 seconds slower than Vettel with only 3 laps more fuel and out driven all raceJust incompetent.

Great drive from Vettel but its possible he had the best car out there because newey cars are known to be very slippery, and it seems he had a great setup, but he still made the most of it and dominated.

Great fighting drive from Alonso again. He made a great tyre call and embaressed the Ferrari drivers today, and was very quick in the final stages of the race. Highly rated Kubica in a much better car only beat him by 3 seconds today, on a terrible renault track, so he still has a long way to go to be mentioned in the same class as Alonso.

Ferrari better pray for no more rain, their drivers are just no good in the wet. I dont beleive these stories that their car is THAT bad in the wet. Ive never heard of a great car suddenly becoming terrible in the dry. Its mainly just a convenient excuse to cover up their drivers.

Superb race from Vettel, incredible performance! Future WDC, no doubt.
Pity for Bourdais, never got a chance to show what he could do. Newey again gets a victory for one of his cars - he hasn't lost his touch.

Great race from Kubica as well, again a podium, in very difficult conditions. He and Alonso were on the right strategy, as they got their stop essentially "free" because everyone else had to change to intermediates, as well.

McLaren lost a major chance to overtake Ferrari in the WCC and take a nice cushion in WDC, with yesterday's blunder. If Hamilton had started around Kova's position, he would have challenged for the win. As it was, nice damage limitation, though some hard driving at times (Webber and especially Glock). Hamilton was superb in his first stint, pity he didn't get the "free" pitstop and his pace on intermediates, after being initially impressive, suddenly dropped - Massa had much the same problem, I think. Due to tyre usage/graining, perhaps? Hamilton really animated the first third of the race though, with a fantastic march through the field that was a pleasure to watch.
Still, Hamilton had a bad weekend overall: harder dry tyres, a wet but drying circuit in the actual qual and race: he should have extended his lead instead of having it reduced to nothing. Soon, Ferrari's favorite conditions (soft tyres, dry weekend, heat) may come back and Spa and Monza were the type of weekend where Hamilton should have taken advantage. Title will be difficult, very much so.

Kovalainen really should have won, and on the podium his body language told it all. He's still not fast enough in the race.

Ferrari similarly lost a good chance to profit maximally from McLaren's mistakes: Massa made little impression and Raikkonen was couldn't keep up with Hamilton's march through the field. Their car may not be that good in those changing conditions.

Originally posted by primer


There are Minardi crews in that team but resource and car wise they are very different now. While taking nothing away from Vettel you have to accept that the car STR have been gifted is better than anything Minardi made for themselves.

My thoughts also. As much of a fairy tale it is, Minardi never had a Ferrari powered, Adrian Newey designed, british built car.

Renault this year was 4th on WC. with 88 points (and Alonso did 3 podiums before winning)

Toro Rosso was 6th with 39 points !!! (best result before Monza was a 5th of Vettel after start on the grid the 18th!)

I mean YOU CAN´T COMPARE.

Toro Rosso didn't even launch that car until the 6th race up until then Vettel was too busy crashing into people, the chassis was designed by one Adrian Newey and had a Ferrari engine in it (which as Red Bull moaned so much about was more powerful than its Renault counterpart). Looking at the results Vettel was the only driver scoring points in the second half of the season consistently, Bourdais struggled to do the same. With Alonso and Trulli both drivers were picking up points.

There is also the fact that in 2003 the engines weren't as reliable as they were in 2008, picking up more points can be attributed to that along with other drivers being out the race as a result of an accident.

While I agree with the rest of your post to a large degree, I can't believe the rubbish that is sprouted about Vettel's win in the TR (where fans keep thinking in won in a Minardi which a load of rubbish as well - a Minardi is one that Marques or Yoong or Alonso or Webber drove not a Newey designed car with Ferrari power).

- He won one race with TR (I didn't see him winning any other races)
- That race was perfect conditions for TR, Newey's chassis that year was brilliant in the wet and the Ferrari had greater horsepower than the Renault of the RB (look at them at the bottom of the speed traps)
- BOTH TRs would have outqualified BOTH RBs had Webber not pipped Bourdais late on in qualifying

Taking away nothing from Vettel did what he does best which was lead from the front and stay there but him being a great driver in the TR when the car + weather suited the track at the right time is often overlooked by fans.

It wasn't a Minardi, it was a STRF with Newey input. And Seb made the most of it by beating out the big sister car - Single handedly. The Monza win was icing on the cake - but it was that PLUS the other 25 old school points that got him promoted to the seat at Red Bull. Seb drove a fantastic season in that car, by any standards, and proved he deserved to be in a top car. Not only did RB promote him, Macca thought he was pretty terrific too and tried to get him. So it isn't just crazed fans that saw his 2008 as a great bit of racing.

I don't see him with Alonso/Hamilton which IMO Alonso is the same so he would have no problems with Vettel coming over. Vettel doesn't also have Dr. Marko pulling strings for him like he had at TR and now RB. If he does go over to Ferrari and he beats Alonso then he would be considered a great to me. Out of the younger drivers, Hamilton/Vettel are the natural successors to Alonso which you can see why Ferrari have gone that direction.

What strings is Marko pulling for Seb at RB - and with whom? Why would that have any impact on his going to Ferrari?

It wasn't a Minardi, it was a STRF with Newey input. And Seb made the most of it by beating out the big sister car - Single handedly. The Monza win was icing on the cake - but it was that PLUS the other 25 old school points that got him promoted to the seat at Red Bull. Seb drove a fantastic season in that car, by any standards, and proved he deserved to be in a top car. Not only did RB promote him, Macca thought he was pretty terrific too and tried to get him. So it isn't just crazed fans that saw his 2008 as a great bit of racing.



What strings is Marko pulling for Seb at RB - and with whom? Why would that have any impact on his going to Ferrari?

If you read my post properly I was referring to that win and that win alone. Not the season as a whole as I never mentioned anything else about the season because clearly seb was talented, that was obvious to see and he earned his chance and has grasped it. I have nothing against that so you don't need to be so defensive in your seb love mate.

Bourdais said Marko was like poison in that garage, not to mention Jamie getting an earful from Marko in Korea which lead would have contributed to his sacking and you really think what they say and don't say behind closed doors is going to someone leaked out to the public? There is a whole load of politics behind closed doors whether it be RBR or any other teams just as there is in any organization. Seb has been protected by Marko since the start of the RBDYP, he is less likely to be the golden child if he heads to ferrari and Fernando handily beats him initially.

Sakae, from what I've read the conditions are loosely based where Ferrari are in the constructors championships at a point in time in the 2013 championship as to ensure for Vettel that he will has a decent car underneath him for 2014. Who knows the exact condition. On the other hand if RB do not say for example manage top 3 constructors for next season then Vettel has a get out clause and hence free to speak to Ferrari. However, if RB do hit those targets then I would imagine the option is exercised and Vettel would then have to see out 2014. Much the same IMO a similar scenario to Webber hitting a particular target for him to retain the RB seat for next season.

Christian Horner

 

 

The 46-year-old Englishman has transformed a modest group center team into a team capable of dominating F1 for four years, becoming a permanent part of the sport's elite

The 'Red Bull phenomenon' is and remains one of the most particular events in the entire history of Formula 1. A team sponsored by an energy drink brand that not only wins in a few years (that was also successful at Benetton, more brand certainly not motorsport) but it is permanently positioned at the top, becoming one of the reference points of world motorsport. In 2005, when Dietrich Mateschitz bought the Jaguar F1 to transform it into Red Bull Racing, few could have predicted that the boy who ran the hut, Christian Horner , a 32-year-old with good hopes who in 1997 had founded an F3000 team, would have just become 10 years later one of the most successful managers in F1 history.

 

Thinking about it, Horner's story is perfect for a team like Red Bull. Young, ambitious and intelligent, the Englishman began his motorsport career at 19 as a driver. It achieves good results in Formula Renault, Formula 3 and F3000. The turning point of his life, however, came in 1997, when he created Arden International, just 24 years old, to race in the F3000. This is the context in which he comes into contact with Helmut Marko , former pilot owner of the RSM Marko, a team that in 1999 will become Red Bull Junior Team. Horner takes little to understand that he is worth more as a manager than as a pilot and in a few years he hangs his helmet on the nail. From behind a desk he transforms Arden into one of the teams to beat, tightening relationships with Marko more and revealing an exceptionaltalent scout .

 

When the powerful Austrian brand decides to implement the big leap, the choice is quickly made: Horner becomes team principal, Marko a sort of special consultant. Purists don't like the idea and mock the new team, but Mateschitz, Marko and Horner have the long run vision. Year after year Red Bull grows. The first points arrived (fourth place with David Coulthard in the first ever race, in Australia in 2005), then the first podiums (always the Scotsman in Monaco in 2006). Then, above all, the best designer out there comes to the tune of millions: Adrian Newey . In 2006, a satellite stable, the Toro Rosso, also emerged from the ashes of Minardi. Paradoxically, in 2008 it found the victory before the 'parent company', with Sebastian Vettelin Monza. Just the young German becomes the emblem of the functionality of the Red Bull nursery. The eyes of Horner and Marko and the huge amount of money available allow Red Bull to create an Academy.

 

Horner uses the regulatory change of 2009 to bring the team closer to the top and with the Vettel-Webber duoin the car the successes begin to arrive. Since 2010, Red Bull has simply been the car to beat. The English manager, at 37, finds himself managing a very young team that plays world titles against giants such as Ferrari and McLaren and which, moreover, has two drivers who do not collaborate. Here is perhaps the main masterpiece of Horner, who despite some spectacular accident (Turkey 2010) manages to manage the relationship between Vettel and Webber keeping both in contention for the world championship. The failure to exchange positions between the two in Brazil, which could have brought the Australian to -1 from Fernando Alonso in view of the last race, is derided by everyone. But in the end, with a little luck, he's right. Sebastian Vettel, the 'designated' driver, wins the world championship in Abu Dhabi, after the cruel and ingenious 'love' pulled by the unaware Webber.

 

The rest is history. After the golden four-year period 2010-2013, Red Bull tries to adapt to the new regulations by starting from the young: Daniel Ricciardo spodesta Vettel, who emigrates to Ferrari. Then comes Max Verstappen , also a future designated champion, around which Horner and Marko build the team and for which they venture a move that is currently paying off: abandoning Renault engines in order to have a dedicated manufacturer, Honda. In conclusion, the numbers remain. Since Horner and Red Bull are in F1 the team has been the second most successful , behind only Mercedes. Not bad for the youngest ex-team principal in history and for an energy drink brand.

 

https://www.formulap...rko-474185.html

 

Translated from italian

The consolation thread is hardly more than a collection of excuses for the Webber fans and an opportunity to invent more conspiracy theories for those with more lively imagination. But the game can be played from both sides. I was prepared to give Mark Webber credit as a WDC if he had pulled it off in the the last round. He didn't and so this story was never written. Instead we wade through an ocean of self illusion which I'm not prepared to support. After a brief lip service to the man who beat their hero convincingly in the same equipment the Webber supporters fill pages after pages with their grief and crying. It needs a bit of counter balancing.

Could you clarify what you mean by "support"? He said himself he had equal equipment and he obviously had the support of his side of the garage. What more does he want? A cookie perhaps? He did a very good job this season, but he went about it the totally the wrong from the mental angle, especially near the end.

This Mark Webber against Red Bull charade was annoying like hell. Don't drive for the team if you don't like what you get.

It was never in Red Bull's interest to sabotage Webber and I'm sure there was never any intent to do that. They wanted the WCC after all. But Webber was right when he said his form in 2010 was an inconvenience to the team. And he certainly didn't get the support you'd normally see a team give a driver substantially in front of his team-mate with two races to go. No not team orders. I mean things like the last run in quali in Brazil or Abu Dhabi. Things like Horner coming out prior to Brazil and announcing the team will be built around Vettel in 2011 - I mean, what was the point of that? Way to make Webber feel on the outs. Dreadful timing. And then post-Korea having Gerhard Berger (close friend of DM) in an interview from Red Bull's Hangar 7 saying some spectacularly nasty things without anything to back it up. So much of the tension between SV and MW felt unnecessary and was a product of poor management IMO. It worked out for them in the end, but I'm not convinced they needed to make it so hard for themselves, or make Webber feel so isolated.

Webber was the one who was having his one man war against Red Bull while they were constantly saying that he got equal equipment and opportunity. It was very annoying for Vettel fans to have his reputation constantly smeared by the Webber PR machine. Gerhard is a great supporter of Sebastian's talent and gave him the car for his first victory in Monza 2008. Webber and DC were having by far more resources and were getting all the technical support from Adrian Newey months earlier than Toro Rosso. They could not match Vettel who beat them to glory by his talent and pace. Gerhard only told it as it was. Webber did not brake and knowingly allowed his car to become a hazard to the runners behind him. It is called "causing an avoidable collision" by the code.

Webber had the equipment and opportunity to become world champion... Whether Horner baked Webber cakes and Marko gave him backrubs is completely and utterly irrelevant. They gave him the car to go out to fight for a WDC. And they allowed him to do it. If they didn't want Webber in the WDC running, trust me they had 1 million ways to stop him without you or me ever being none the wiser. And consolation isn't synonymous with blaming everybody else. Consolation is comfort after disappointment. I fail to see why blaming everybody else is comfort.

well said

"It was a big day and we had the chance to do something incredibly unique, but in the end it didn't turn out for us."
Hard to feel sorry for Webber when he goes and says that. "Didn't turn out for us". Talk about sepparating yourself from the team...winning the WDC/WCC isn't enough? Oh wait, I guess he wanted personal glory...At least cranky pants didn't moan about being a "#2 driver". What a choke end to the season, just exemplifies how some drivers will never have a WDC mentality...

+1 Webber had it in his own hands to put a #1 on his car. He didn't and so he will have #2 next year.

I felt a bit of a disappointment that Dietrich Mateschitz did not go on the podium. He did great this season and all the years before. Unfortunately he is a very shy man when it comes to public appearances. He never goes on television if he can avoid it and he probably decided to send Helmut Marko instead. It was a fitting replacement as Marko had represented him for many seasons in F1. I'm sure most people around the world understood the gesture by the team towards their Austrian ownership.

Ok, now to the consolation bit. Mark Webber came back well from his injuries in 2008 which must have influenced his form in 2009. He drove a couple of good races and was often close to the pace which allowed him to pick up when one of the other contenders dropped the ball. He showed his experience in the qualifying under changing conditions such as Malaysia where he pulled out a 1.4 s lead and Spa. He also fully utilized his experience in Silverstone where he drove with a cool head and a hard hand. He generally used his great luck and the machinery he got to maximize his points. He deserved to be in the title race down to the wire and the place he got.

You honestly believe the TR was the absolute best car in 2008? Dream on sunshine.

As we have seen with the Red Bull cars (and Newey cars in general) they tend to be very good in the wet- they occupied pole and the second row of the grid at Monza that year. Vettel most definitley showed up the big sister team that day and displayed maturity beyond his years, but it's worth noting that Bourdais laptimes were comparable with his teammate during that race. A possible one-two lost due to a technical glitch on the grid.

I declare that Vettel is the quickest driver because he still extracted more from the RB6 compared to his teammate and remember during the summer the German driver raced with a damaged chassis which allowed Webber to be quicker and win. Also he is achieving numbers only reached by the greats of this sport. How good he is will take time to assess but out of all the top drivers he is still the least experienced.

For me the inkling we had just how good he was, was at Monza in 2008. The greatest qualifying performance for me since Schumacher was Q3 at Suzuka 2009. Phenomenal. I share Bernie's idea of the current f1 dream team: Alonso and Vettel. of course it would be an impossible sitation for any team

relax, man. i didn`t react at your previous posts, but now it`s too much.
tell me, please, how you rank bourdais performance in the other torro rosso, with more fuel on board, that day. i remind you the guy was 4th on the grid.
don`t you think that this might have had something in common with some adrien newey`s participation in upgrading 2008 torro rosso cars, that were, by the way, very quick in wet conditions even without it?

now, after 2010 rbr title saga, i`m sure that it was also pr project to back in the second half of 2008 torro rosso instead of rb main team with 2, let`s say, "retired" drivers in order to promote the young gun, "baby schumi", to elevate the selling numbers of some energy drink.
who is better advertising platform vettel or maybe webber?
the answer is easy.

and this talk about broken chasis is just pathetic, vettel admited he had had problems with throttle operating until some changes were made in engine electronics.
that`s right, he was fractionaly faster, mainly in qualifying, but he also enjoyed last run advantage most of the time, you must admit. and we all know qualifying is all today,.
so i would recommend you to wait a while with comparing him to senna.

The honor will go to Vettel after this season. Back-to-back WDC, younger than Alonso and more wins/poles than Alonso (at similar ages). There's no way it isn't Vettel.

Well, Vettel is a super driver, no doubt, but I still miss from him some super drive in difficult conditions (in fact, Monza 2008 was almost hi best win). All his victories came after getting the pole and driving the best of all cars. 12 out of his 16 victories are from pole (14 of 26 in Alonso's case). Only time will tell, Vettel is to me a fantastic driver lucky to be in the right place (as Button was lucky in 2009 of having a Brawn). I think we all know that luck is part of this sport. And in that sense, I think Alonso never had that luck, because he never had a dominant car (in 2005 the McLaren was faster almost everywhere, and in 2006 the Ferrari-Bridgestone was quite faster for 2/3 of the year). So having that in scope, I think Alonso is the man of the current era because he could be there is extremely variant conditions (different teams, different rules, different tires...).

Vettel records are to me some statistical anecdote, equaly as Schumacher is topping all tables in stats but Senna is still remembered as the best one.

PD: I would say that currently, recent championships are remembered as the "Red Bull - Newey" dominance most than Vettel's dominance...

Looking at this as objectively as I can Vettel simply hasn't adjusted to the current regs. He is a top driver, no doubt, but then again so are most of the grid.

In my opinion he isn't a great yet though. Had he won championships with two teams, through different regs, or regularly competed at the sharp end in machinery that didn't deserve it, I'd change my mind.

Make no mistake the Red Bull in 2014 is a great car. Riciardo is proving that. And he's beating Vettel without much difficulty it appears.

I hypothesise that perhaps Vettel cannot compete against the current grid without the exhaust trickery that Newey produced.

And don't throw Monza 2008 at me...

Looking at this as objectively as I can Vettel simply hasn't adjusted to the current regs. He is a top driver, no doubt, but then again so are most of the grid.

In my opinion he isn't a great yet though. Had he won championships with two teams, through different regs, or regularly competed at the sharp end in machinery that didn't deserve it, I'd change my mind.

Make no mistake the Red Bull in 2014 is a great car. Riciardo is proving that. And he's beating Vettel without much difficulty it appears.

I hypothesise that perhaps Vettel cannot compete against the current grid without the exhaust trickery that Newey produced.

And don't throw Monza 2008 at me...

 

 

The only thing I'll throw at you is that it is way too early to judge. So far their best result has come from Vettel.

i hv no idea why hamilton is labeled as fastest driver when he has been driving a winning car all the time?? With such error prone, and inconsistency, i rather opt for Alonso + Kimi or kimi+vettel !!

raikkonen is literally the only "good driver" to not win a title with Newey.

On the other hand Hamilton has been getting screwed over by his RE and TP for the last few years. Plus he is a lot more consistently fast than raikonen.

unsettled by massa?? rather kimi was having a tough year in 2008 when a few of his wins results in unfortunate event!! Canada, France, Belgium~~~

Canada - some wooden eye crash into him from the pitlane

France - exhaust pipe failure

SPa- raining on last lap, wrong tyre, no grip = crash

There were A LOT more races where raikkonen was complete garbage - Australia, Turkey, Monza, Singapore (that was hilariously bad), Hockenheim, Monaco, etc.

This is certainly an impressive list of F1 machines and an even more impressive list of victories. Having said this, I'd argue his record is even more impressive if you consider the 2007-2009 Toro Rosso cars to be Adrian Newey designs. If you include the STR2, STR3 and STR4, then Vettel's win at Monza in 2008 in the STR3 (I believe based on the same design as the RB4) not only adds yet another victory to this tally but also means that only three Newey designs from 1991 onwards have failed to win a grand prix (MP4/21, RB3/STR2 and RB11). Also, I think McLaren won 7 races in 2000 (4 for Mika Hakkinen and 3 for David Coulthard).

I find it interesting that he seemed to experience something of a lean spell in the mid-to-late 2000s, in the seven seasons from 2002 to 2008 his cars scored just five wins in this period if you exclude the MP4/20 (the 2005 McLaren won twice as many races as his other designs from those seasons put together). I do wonder whether McLaren benefitted from the single tyre rule in 2005, even more so than the other Michelin teams such as Renault, as they did much better that season than they did in either 2004 or 2006, with the exact opposite being true for Bridgestone-shod Ferrari. It's ironic that the only other Newey car from 2002 to 2008 to win multiple GPs was the MP4/17D in 2003, which was only used that season due to the issues with the MP4/18, yet Kimi Raikkonen was able to finish just two points short of Michael Schumacher in it.

2005 McLaren for sure benefitted from single tyre rule/Michelins. Back then Michelin did bring different kind of tyres for the teams to the tests and teams could choose the best suited tyres for them to use (said by Kimi, last year).
At Monaco 2005 Mclaren was able to use softer tyres than Renault, due to them being gentle to the tyres and we all know Kimi being one of the most gentle driver to the tyres as well.

Bizarre to think that his first race win in F1 was 1991, an astounding 30 years ago, his longevity far surpasses any tech director in the sports history and his car is still fighting for a title this year. Imagine if a designer from 1950 was leading the title fight in 1980! it's  mind numbing. It also answers the 90's favourite debate of Newey Vs Shuey rather decisively.

 

Almost more amazing is that in 30 years of racing his cars have only gone 4 seasons without a race win and 2 of those were spent building Red Bull up from the back of the grid.

 

 

This is certainly an impressive list of F1 machines and an even more impressive list of victories. Having said this, I'd argue his record is even more impressive if you consider the 2007-2009 Toro Rosso cars to be Adrian Newey designs. If you include the STR2, STR3 and STR4, then Vettel's win at Monza in 2008 in the STR3 (I believe based on the same design as the RB4) not only adds yet another victory to this tally but also means that only three Newey designs from 1991 onwards have failed to win a grand prix (MP4/21, RB3/STR2 and RB11). Also, I think McLaren won 7 races in 2000 (4 for Mika Hakkinen and 3 for David Coulthard).

 

I find it interesting that he seemed to experience something of a lean spell in the mid-to-late 2000s, in the seven seasons from 2002 to 2008 his cars scored just five wins in this period if you exclude the MP4/20 (the 2005 McLaren won twice as many races as his other designs from those seasons put together). I do wonder whether McLaren benefitted from the single tyre rule in 2005, even more so than the other Michelin teams such as Renault, as they did much better that season than they did in either 2004 or 2006, with the exact opposite being true for Bridgestone-shod Ferrari. It's ironic that the only other Newey car from 2002 to 2008 to win multiple GPs was the MP4/17D in 2003, which was only used that season due to the issues with the MP4/18, yet Kimi Raikkonen was able to finish just two points short of Michael Schumacher in it.

Hamilton - Lewis obviously has plenty of brilliant seasons under his belt, and his clean 2015 deserves a mention too, but I feel his 2017 with a difficult Mercedes is criminally underrated. Lewis went wheel to wheel with his main rival Vettel three or four times, and came out the winner each one of them. Masterful at avoiding incidents, I feel he wasn't as complete a driver in 2012 or 2010. 

Bottas - For me his 2014 pips 2016 and 2017. His mid-season cool-headedness and podium streak was something to behold. 

Vettel - 2011 and 2015 deserve a honourable mention, but Seb's 2013 was absolutely relentless. Say whatever you like about Newey-mobiles and blah blah, but people forget Webber was absolutely nowhere near Seb that year. 

Raikkonen - 2005 slightly pips out 2003 and 2007 because of his team-mate; especially in quali-trim, Kimi was the scary monster I was expecting JPM to be. Who can forget those quali laps at Monaco and Monza?

Ricciardo - it's often overlooked how good his 2016 was, but 2014 he was a revelation. Whenever Mercedes dropped the ball, Danny Ric was there to collect it. Not to mention his exciting overtaking form. 

Verstappen - 2017 was ridden with unluck, yet it didn't impact Max's form and he truly got rewarded end-season, remembering especially the great drive at Sepang. 

Hulkenberg - the German's got a tendency to put together brilliant half-seasons and be a bit inconsistent on the other half; end of 2012 and 2013, start of 2014, end of 2016, versus the less impressive other halves... But I would rate Nico's 2017 the best overall: entering the year, I think Renault was complete shambles (as demonstrated by Palmer's struggles) and it looked like it was the Hulk himself that was carrying the team from the bottom of the midfield back to the top of it. 

Sainz - been relatively consistent over his career really, but for me 2016 would stand out of the bunch

Grosjean - Romain has always been an up and down driver depending on his brakes - sometimes producing amazing drives into top places with cars that don't belong, sometimes looking like a complete idiot. 2015 was probably the season with the biggest ratio for the former instead of the latter, with the Spa podium as a particular highlight. 

Magnussen - similarly to his team-mate, Kevin is a bit of an up-and-down driver, sometimes truly struggling with a Jolyon Palmer. But his 2018 has been more of the former. 

Ocon - he's beating Perez with more of a regularity than last year. So, 2018.

Perez - hard to choose between the surprisingly mature, high-peaking 2012, and the clean and consistent 2016 that saw his team-mate Hulk leave Force India with his stock well lower than it had been - but I would lean for the latter if pressed. 

Alonso - I'm not as convinced about 2012 as everybody else seems to be (for me it had something to do with Massa being in the wrong place mentally as well); for me Fred's 2006 was even more impressive; going into a true one on one battle with the beast still relatively fresh-faced, and coming out as the winner. But you still have to honourably mention his giant-punching 2008 and 2009 with terrible cars, 2013 and 2014, 2016...

Vandoorne - I mean, 2017 was not that bad. About what you'd have expected from a rookie entering a McLaren team, with Alonso having had a bit of time to build it around himself.

Gasly and Hartley - well duhh... They are both driving better in 2018 than last year, no? 

Ericsson - has looked like he gets a little bit better every year, up until around Baku this year that is. So I'm going with 2017 and potentially ending Wehrlein's prospective F1 career by looking essentially not significantly weaker than him. 

Stroll - had streaks of form in 2017 where he looked like he truly belongs, especially at the end of the European tour. However, when he couldn't find the pace then he truly could not find the pace - hence, it's hard to assess whether him not performing this year is entirely due to the car, or due to him and Sirotkin being unable to hook it up without the experience of Felipe...

Just a couple of things i'd like to touch on:

 

(1) "I feel he wasn't as complete a driver in 2012 or 2010"

 

Irrespective of how "complete" or "incomplete" one considers Hamilton in 2012,  his on track performance was near flawless. Perhaps "twittergate" was the only real blot against him that year.  Otherwise, with a car  that was often breaking down, combined with a pitwall in total chaos, he maintained a high level.

 

(2) "I feel his 2017 with a difficult Mercedes is criminally underrated".

 

 

Agreed.

 

While W08 was often fastest over 1 lap, higher top speed, the SF70H  was often  more "stable" in race trim. I'm gonna say it, but there is even a large body of professional opinion that think Ferrari had the better car in 2017.

 

 Hamilton, again, was largely error free & consistent ( he had a couple of subpar weekends, like Russia, but to be fair,so did everyone else).

 

Hamilton - Lewis obviously has plenty of brilliant seasons under his belt, and his clean 2015 deserves a mention too, but I feel his 2017 with a difficult Mercedes is criminally underrated. Lewis went wheel to wheel with his main rival Vettel three or four times, and came out the winner each one of them. Masterful at avoiding incidents, I feel he wasn't as complete a driver in 2012 or 2010. 

Bottas - For me his 2014 pips 2016 and 2017. His mid-season cool-headedness and podium streak was something to behold. 

Vettel - 2011 and 2015 deserve a honourable mention, but Seb's 2013 was absolutely relentless. Say whatever you like about Newey-mobiles and blah blah, but people forget Webber was absolutely nowhere near Seb that year. 

Raikkonen - 2005 slightly pips out 2003 and 2007 because of his team-mate; especially in quali-trim, Kimi was the scary monster I was expecting JPM to be. Who can forget those quali laps at Monaco and Monza?

Ricciardo - it's often overlooked how good his 2016 was, but 2014 he was a revelation. Whenever Mercedes dropped the ball, Danny Ric was there to collect it. Not to mention his exciting overtaking form. 

Verstappen - 2017 was ridden with unluck, yet it didn't impact Max's form and he truly got rewarded end-season, remembering especially the great drive at Sepang. 

Hulkenberg - the German's got a tendency to put together brilliant half-seasons and be a bit inconsistent on the other half; end of 2012 and 2013, start of 2014, end of 2016, versus the less impressive other halves... But I would rate Nico's 2017 the best overall: entering the year, I think Renault was complete shambles (as demonstrated by Palmer's struggles) and it looked like it was the Hulk himself that was carrying the team from the bottom of the midfield back to the top of it. 

Sainz - been relatively consistent over his career really, but for me 2016 would stand out of the bunch

Grosjean - Romain has always been an up and down driver depending on his brakes - sometimes producing amazing drives into top places with cars that don't belong, sometimes looking like a complete idiot. 2015 was probably the season with the biggest ratio for the former instead of the latter, with the Spa podium as a particular highlight. 

Magnussen - similarly to his team-mate, Kevin is a bit of an up-and-down driver, sometimes truly struggling with a Jolyon Palmer. But his 2018 has been more of the former. 

Ocon - he's beating Perez with more of a regularity than last year. So, 2018.

Perez - hard to choose between the surprisingly mature, high-peaking 2012, and the clean and consistent 2016 that saw his team-mate Hulk leave Force India with his stock well lower than it had been - but I would lean for the latter if pressed. 

Alonso - I'm not as convinced about 2012 as everybody else seems to be (for me it had something to do with Massa being in the wrong place mentally as well); for me Fred's 2006 was even more impressive; going into a true one on one battle with the beast still relatively fresh-faced, and coming out as the winner. But you still have to honourably mention his giant-punching 2008 and 2009 with terrible cars, 2013 and 2014, 2016...

Vandoorne - I mean, 2017 was not that bad. About what you'd have expected from a rookie entering a McLaren team, with Alonso having had a bit of time to build it around himself.

Gasly and Hartley - well duhh... They are both driving better in 2018 than last year, no?   

Ericsson - has looked like he gets a little bit better every year, up until around Baku this year that is. So I'm going with 2017 and potentially ending Wehrlein's prospective F1 career by looking essentially not significantly weaker than him. 

Stroll - had streaks of form in 2017 where he looked like he truly belongs, especially at the end of the European tour. However, when he couldn't find the pace then he truly could not find the pace - hence, it's hard to assess whether him not performing this year is entirely due to the car, or due to him and Sirotkin being unable to hook it up without the experience of Felipe...