Search Results

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.

2011 would suggest otherwise. Likewise the end of 2010, some elements of 2009 (awesome season for lewis despite result!) and 2008 suggest Lewis has improved little since 2007.

He got his Mclaren seat because he was quick from the word go. He wasn't just quick, he was only 1-2 tenths slower than the reigning two time champ at the time! Lewis was a MEGA rookie. No other rookie will ever achieve what he has. Jacques and Lewis were special in that respect. Lewis found his form quickly and was leading the title for most of the season!

In 2008 he certainly made a few mistakes he should not have, and even on occasion looked rather... so-so. He limped over the line to take his title after his rival dominated the race.

In 2009 he got every bit of the car's performance and used it! He used the Mclarens low speed grip to amazing effect and arguably out performed drivers in better cars! Still he made errors you would not expect from a driver of his ability. Monaco is the big one for me, and of course Monza. But Monaco was a killer mistake and I have never before, or even since been so disappointed in him. It was a race where he had the chance to show the world just how mega he could be. Instead he stuffed it in the wall and we were left to wonder.

2010. Epic start and mid season. He again got the max out of the car 100% of the time. Then once again in classic Lewis style, he lost it when it mattered the most.

2011. What do you want me to say about this season? It was perhaps his worst in F1.

2012. Similar to 2010 IMO. Getting 100% out of the car 100% of the time... so far.

Let me put it this way. I do not believe it is possible for Lewis to improve in terms of pace or ability. I believe he has NOT improved his race craft, or ability to read a race or even read a season. I think he is rash with decisions and sometimes shows to be a little too eager. He needs to learn when to stop, and when he has lost.

Ultimately this is going to come down to you, proving to me that he has improved. Based on your idea, Rubens should have been the best F1 driver ever. DC should have got better rather than turn to sh*t. And Jenson should be blitzing Lewis.

What seems to hurt Lewis is that we have Vettel who seems to learn from his mistakes and be a better driver because of it. With Vettel, Lewis can not rely on his talent or pure speed because Vettel is as quick, if not quicker. When was the last time Vettel was involved in a tangle with another driver? Or even when he made a mistake in qualifying or a race? I can't remember so it would be great if you could tell me?

You can't get do a season getting 100% out of the car 100% of the time. Take 2010 example, he had to rag that car to the edge, thats why in middle of the season he made to 2 misjudgements 2 races in a row, Italy and Singapore - he had to be opportunistic as thats what get him there in the first place.
I don't think you go on improving forever in sport as you age as sportsmen/humans have their peak. For F1 I'd say its around age 31, after this you won't gain anymore from your experiance.
As for Vettel, its been too easy for him when he has such a rocketship of a car. You can't separate his abilities from that of his car. With a dominant car you can easily give the perception of absolutely thrashing the field.

One thing that has never helped Hamilton in this regard is that even for a half a season he's never been fortunate enough to take it easy and rackup wins the easy way, and that goes a long way to ones perception of a driver.
Vettel is quick but how quick? is it the car? It's 4-4 this year in quali between him and webber. And in 2010 it needed the #1 driver love and support from Dr Marko, Horner and Newey to hug him and take off parts off webbers car and put it on his. How much is that support worth? That arrangement was everything for Schumacher and Alonso. Again Hamilton hasn't had this luxury, he has had to graft it the hard way with 2 world championship teamates. Schumacher, Alonso, Vettel never had world championship teamates to beat in the same car.

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.

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.

Aww come on. Just because his cars didn't have a shot at WDC those years doesn't mean they were slow. In 2002 McLaren was new to Michelin. In 2004 they had some problems with the famous MP4/19. They still won at least one race those years. In 2006 they weren't very good, but hadn't Räikkönen crashed it in Hungary it could have been a winning car too. In 2007 and 2008 nobody seriously expected a winning car considering the competition. Still in Fuji 07 it was very close to victory only to be ruined by Vettel. And in 08 the car won in Monza...

By the way, the MP4/21 is considered a Newey-design, but he wasn't with the team anymore when the season was on.

I believe most other designers would be happy about such a record in their CVs.

The Torro Rosso is also made by the hands of Newey?

Ehh... 2002, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008?

Aww come on. Just because his cars didn't have a shot at WDC those years doesn't mean they were slow. In 2002 McLaren was new to Michelin. In 2004 they had some problems with the famous MP4/19. They still won at least one race those years. In 2006 they weren't very good, but hadn't Räikkönen crashed it in Hungary it could have been a winning car too. In 2007 and 2008 nobody seriously expected a winning car considering the competition. Still in Fuji 07 it was very close to victory only to be ruined by Vettel. And in 08 the car won in Monza...

By the way, the MP4/21 is considered a Newey-design, but he wasn't with the team anymore when the season was on.

I believe most other designers would be happy about such a record in their CVs.

Aww come on. Just because his cars didn't have a shot at WDC those years doesn't mean they were slow. In 2002 McLaren was new to Michelin. In 2004 they had some problems with the famous MP4/19. They still won at least one race those years. In 2006 they weren't very good, but hadn't Räikkönen crashed it in Hungary it could have been a winning car too. In 2007 and 2008 nobody seriously expected a winning car considering the competition. Still in Fuji 07 it was very close to victory only to be ruined by Vettel. And in 08 the car won in Monza...

By the way, the MP4/21 is considered a Newey-design, but he wasn't with the team anymore when the season was on.

I believe most other designers would be happy about such a record in their CVs.

Now we are talking semantics. No F1 car is slow, as they all could run rings around any supercar you can find on the street. Regardless, compared to the top contenders of those years, overall the cars of the aforementioned years were slow by F1 standards.

MP4-19 didn't win any races, that was the MP4-19B which was a totally revised new version. MP4-19 was slow.

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.

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...

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.

And now I don't agree with your assessment of Vettel. "He has that natural "x factor" somehow I can't see much of it. I have trouble remembering Vettel's memorable races. Maybe some can remind me of those and I'm not talking about races where he starts from pole and ends first in race. He is not known for defending properly from someone overtaking him, he has trouble overtaking himself, strategy difficult to judge but can't remember anything special, development questionable. (BMW letting him go for all those reasons). The only way he stands out is his qualifying but I still want to see him with a different teammate and especially in a worse car. Newey's designed car is so strong in qualifying that it's also hard to judge. Vettel maybe the best driver, could be very well, but for now he was lucky to be in the fastest car on the grid. I just can't remember him standing out with something exceptional while he was with STR. Look at Alonso, Lewis, Kubica, they can qualify, race, overtake, not make many mistakes, develop the car, especially Alonso and Kubica look like complete packages, Hamilton only needs to put his head in cold water from time to time and he'll be there too. Just thinking about it, can't remember Hamilton praised that much for his development skills.

I saw a number of special moments with Vettel during his early career, very early on actually. I'm only sorry that such fine displays were lost on you.
But perhaps the most noteable was his 2008 pole and win at Monza in very tricky conditions in... wait a minute... an STR.

There were numerous other displays of skill and speed and of course immaturity back in 2007... "damn kids" - Webber 2007.

Not your fault though, either you have only been following F1 for 5 minutes or you have no capacity to assess talent down the back half of the grid. One or the other clearly.

Ask any intelligent F1 pundit with access to the drivers, or engineers who have worked with Vettel and they will tell you one thing, the kid is blindingly fast. That is the x-factor as far as i am concerned. You can't teach speed, you either have it or you don't and this kid has got it in spades. He has been around for 4 short seasons, perhaps in a few years time he would have delivered some races you will find memorable, others here can already see the talent, we don't need special circumstances to define his speed.

Sure, he is no Alonso, but give him time and he may get close, he has all the right foundations to be a legend of the sport.

Alonso and Kubica, spot on they are the benchmark for me also, Lewis is great to watch a real talent (just in the wrong team ;) )
But don't underestimate Vettel. Unlike 2009 a top 3 driver did win the title in 2010. He wasn't the best in 2010, but he was deserving.

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

I don't understand.

I know this is not a support thread, but i don't see the point of coming to the thread named "Alonso" to say "the block was better" or to talk about Vettel's achievements.

Wake up! There´s a german guy (only 24 years old) he´s going to join the same achievements than Alonso with almost 100 races less... we can talk about class above

Alonso was betrayed by Mclaren and I consider him a much better driver than Lewis (that not means that I not consider Lewis an amazing driver too).

In case you didn't notice Vettel was 1 year and a half in a not so nice team and then jumped right to a Newey's car that have been title contender for 3 years.
Meanwhile Alonso came to F1 in the worst team of the grid to later go to a middfield brand for years (till that brand could make a title contender car).

So I don't understand how could someone do comparisons about what two drivers achieved in X races taking into account those two drivers were not given the same tools equally or similarly during that number of races and that they both didn't have to cope with the same degree of competitiveness. Vettel has had a title contender car more often than not, and in two out of three years where he had it his car was so diminant that he had only real competition from his own team mate.

Therefore, an unfair data to take in order to talk about the class of these two drivers.

Also the Toro Rosso at Monza was the fastest car... and at China 07 or Monaco 08... Vettel always drove the best car. Even the Webber car is a different chassis car...

Erm... Actually if you even bothered to follow 2008 season, indeed the Toro Rosso was the fastest car at Italy and under the conditions that took place that day. Vettel got the pole position and Bourdais got 4rd at qualifying. Not that Vettel was given the victory, he was nice and is a talented driver, but again, denying a fact and reality to hail a driver is completely oblivious.

Also, the Toro Rosso from back then wasn't the Toro Rosso we know today despite that some Vettel's fans want to believe it was. In reality It was a car that allowed Vettel to finish in the top 10 exactly ten times and five times in the top 5. If a driver is able to finish in X position is because the car can run as fast to get that X position.

Of course Vettel is a very good driver, made the difference back then, and blah blah, but again you are bringing some quite unfair sarcasms there.

If you want to believe Vettel is a class above it's ok, but if you need to be unfair to hail him...



It's like if I said Alonso's car at Hungary in 2003 wasn't fast... He made the difference as Vettel did in a Toro Rosso but saying his car wasn't fast would be pretty dumb just like in Vettel's case regarding certain races such as Italy.

Also, I never heard anyone here saying Webber runs a car with a different chassis than Vettel, so besides unfair you are being a demagogue. Enjoy your cave.

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.

Strange how a driver with such an obvious claim to a top F1 team has spent 3 seasons driving cars that have little or no chance of winning in F1.

 

It is vital that to succeed in F1, assuming a certain level of talent, that drivers must be well connected and onside very early on in their careers. If you have to scratch around in mediocre or average machines for several years then you are in peril of your skills and motivation being squandered and becoming sidelined. The difference in the F1 careers of Vettel and Hulkenberg is startling, the former has gone from strength to strength, from memory starting off with a single BMW entry in 2007 followed by several drives with Torro Rosso, then 2008 with TR and the Monza win then straight to RBR with 4 wins and runner up in the WDC followed by 3 and now probably 4 WDCs in a row. Much of this, in my opinion, made possible by Newey designed cars.

 

In my opinion Nico Hulkenberg is at least as capable as Vettel but despite his many pre-F1 successes he has had to rely upon Williams, Force India and now Sauber. Is he less marketable than others, or is he unlucky that there are already three German drivers in regular F1 seats, why for instance, as others have commented, did McLaren choose the inconsistent and overly aggressive Perez instead of Nico?

 

Let's hope Hulkenberg gets the Lotus ride or something comparable/better soon.

Strange how a driver with such an obvious claim to a top F1 team has spent 3 seasons driving cars that have little or no chance of winning in F1.

 

It is vital that to succeed in F1, assuming a certain level of talent, that drivers must be well connected and onside very early on in their careers. If you have to scratch around in mediocre or average machines for several years then you are in peril of your skills and motivation being squandered and becoming sidelined. The difference in the F1 careers of Vettel and Hulkenberg is startling, the former has gone from strength to strength, from memory starting off with a single BMW entry in 2007 followed by several drives with Torro Rosso, then 2008 with TR and the Monza win then straight to RBR with 4 wins and runner up in the WDC followed by 3 and now probably 4 WDCs in a row. Much of this, in my opinion, made possible by Newey designed cars.

 

In my opinion Nico Hulkenberg is at least as capable as Vettel but despite his many pre-F1 successes he has had to rely upon Williams, Force India and now Sauber. Is he less marketable than others, or is he unlucky that there are already three German drivers in regular F1 seats, why for instance, as others have commented, did McLaren choose the inconsistent and overly aggressive Perez instead of Nico?

 

Let's hope Hulkenberg gets the Lotus ride or something comparable/better soon.

 

Yes,  the differences in their careers are quite surprising given that both are the same age and raced together in karting in Germany. Vettel was "lucky" to get the Red Bull backing and then the BMW backing after impressing them in the Formula BMW, that meant two teams pushing for him to get a drive in F1 while Hulk was still in F3-A1GP and had to wait a lot more to get to F1. Maybe, if he hadn't rejected the Red Bull junior team, he coud be now in RBR instead of Ricciardo.

 

Also, he's unlucky because there are a lot of Germans in F1 so it's difficult to find sponsors.

 

Hopefully Lotus will give him a drive for next yeat and he will finally be able to show how good he is.

Strange how a driver with such an obvious claim to a top F1 team has spent 3 seasons driving cars that have little or no chance of winning in F1.

 

It is vital that to succeed in F1, assuming a certain level of talent, that drivers must be well connected and onside very early on in their careers. If you have to scratch around in mediocre or average machines for several years then you are in peril of your skills and motivation being squandered and becoming sidelined. The difference in the F1 careers of Vettel and Hulkenberg is startling, the former has gone from strength to strength, from memory starting off with a single BMW entry in 2007 followed by several drives with Torro Rosso, then 2008 with TR and the Monza win then straight to RBR with 4 wins and runner up in the WDC followed by 3 and now probably 4 WDCs in a row. Much of this, in my opinion, made possible by Newey designed cars.

 

In my opinion Nico Hulkenberg is at least as capable as Vettel but despite his many pre-F1 successes he has had to rely upon Williams, Force India and now Sauber. Is he less marketable than others, or is he unlucky that there are already three German drivers in regular F1 seats, why for instance, as others have commented, did McLaren choose the inconsistent and overly aggressive Perez instead of Nico?

 

Let's hope Hulkenberg gets the Lotus ride or something comparable/better soon.

 

It's quite simple: Vettel got a spot in the Red Bull Junior Squad and Hülkenberg didn't. Same as with Hamilton. He was picked up by McLaren, a Di Resta for example had to take the route via DTM and is now trapped in a Midfield Team.

I agree. Even if everything was ideal at every track from the first race, if he didn't crash in Malaysia and instead finished on the podium, didn't open DRS again in Bahrain and finished 5th in Monaco, and that was possible, he would now have something between 176 and 182 points, at best 15 points behind Vettel. RB9 is too strong, and Vettel is also driving incredibly well. Alonso will probably finish second anyway at the end of the season, so he will provide the best possible result with this car.

 

 

Well, obviously it suggests that the driver is a less important element in case of Vettel. I don't have an issue with the statement as such, but the mutual Hamilton/Alonso praise is a bit annoying (and of course they can hardly be objective on that matter). What's worse from a forum perspective, however, is the quality of some threads since Vettel is winning.

I don't think he's saying the driver is less important in Vettel's case. That's crazy, and of all people Alonso should know better. I think Alonso is saying that once again Newey has given Vettel a dominant car in the last few races because previously he was challenging them and beating them. To me it seems the problem is that Alonso and Hamilton rate each highly in which case this becomes a fan insecurity problem and not so much what the drivers have said.

Vettel had a few stunning drives each year, so it's not exactly an anomaly.To compare Vettel and Perez at that state, you have to ignore what Vettel did in the past 4 years.

This is correct but subsequent to 2008 Vettel has been in championship contending/winning cars. If he didn't have stunning drives in each year then it would be worrying. Anyway, what I was implying is that Vettel's drive in Monza 2008 can be likened to Perez' drive in Malaysia 2012 in that it was an anomaly. I don't think either performance proves anything and bringing it up is pointless.

What's all this about Monza 2008? As if it is going to convince people that Vettel can win in relatively poor material. I have news for you... Even the sun shines on a dogs ass every now and then.

I can pick out quite a few drivers who have won wet races or put in magnificent performances when they really shouldn't have been close but the point I think Alonso, especially, is making is that prior to Newey's package revamp when things between the cars were close is that he was beating Vettel regularly and now that is distant memory.

What's all this about Monza 2008? As if it is going to convince people that Vettel can win in relatively poor material. I have news for you... Even the sun shines on a dogs ass every now and then.

I can pick out quite a few drivers who have won wet races or put in magnificent performances when they really shouldn't have been close but the point I think Alonso, especially, is making is that prior to Newey's package revamp when things between the cars were close is that he was beating Vettel regularly and now that is distant memory.

Of course it does, what some have to realise though is that it doesn't emanate from the bottoms of either Fernando, or Lewis.

What's all this about Monza 2008? As if it is going to convince people that Vettel can win in relatively poor material. I have news for you... Even the sun shines on a dogs ass every now and then.

I can pick out quite a few drivers who have won wet races or put in magnificent performances when they really shouldn't have been close but the point I think Alonso, especially, is making is that prior to Newey's package revamp when things between the cars were close is that he was beating Vettel regularly and now that is distant memory.

Because Ferrari hasn't been upgraded all season...
Double standards again T_T

It is not about downplaying his achievements... Alonso said that he is fighting Vettel and Newey. How exactly is that disrespectful of his achievements?

Also, is Perez the next best thing because he had a stunning drive in Malaysia? As I've said, these anomalies happen. Excuse me for not kicking up a fuss about it...

I reckon Perez is the next best big thing. Similarly, it was easy to see that Vettel was. Not only because of Monza 2008, but because of how he drove throughout the entire year in the STRF. Forget about Monza - there are not enough excuses for all of the other stellar races he put in that landed the STRF above the RB car at season's finish - and ALL of the points except 4 were earned by Seb.

The bottom line is that Vettel is very talented. He has a great car. So in this case, driver + car is a brilliant combo at times.

Whether Alonso and Hamilton are jealous is largely immaterial, imo. There are occassions for all drivers, including Vettel, to be jealous of this or that - as in any profession. Right now, the important thing is for all of them to focus on what they are doing.

I reckon Perez is the next best big thing. Similarly, it was easy to see that Vettel was. Not only because of Monza 2008, but because of how he drove throughout the entire year in the STRF. Forget about Monza - there are not enough excuses for all of the other stellar races he put in that landed the STRF above the RB car at season's finish - and ALL of the points except 4 were earned by Seb.

The bottom line is that Vettel is very talented. He has a great car. So in this case, driver + car is a brilliant combo at times.

Whether Alonso and Hamilton are jealous is largely immaterial, imo. There are occassions for all drivers, including Vettel, to be jealous of this or that - as in any profession. Right now, the important thing is for all of them to focus on what they are doing.

I can agree with the bolded part and I don't think Alonso is having a dig at Vettel. All he is saying is that now that Newey has weaved his magic both drivers are suddenly right up there when previously it wasn't the case.

I don't share your opinion of Perez and I will leave it at that.