285 replies to this topic

[mnmracer]

Your logic is wrong.... how do you know the time difference between Ferrari and RBR ? Nobody knows, the only way to be closer to the truth is to have Vettel in the same team as Alonso or Lewis.:

Yet people have no problem 'knowing' the other way around that the RBR is definitely faster than the Ferrari...

[Barabas]

Vettel is Vettel and Michael was Michael,yes,but he does remind me of MS.So while he may not be the next Schumacher,he could very well be the start of a new era-which is something I've believed for quite a while,now,long before his debut in '07.

Awesome

You were onto him very early and his dominance on the sport is indeed very Schumi-like.
It has been a pleasure to be able to watch these two greats excel in my lifetime.

[tghik]

Yet people have no problem 'knowing' the other way around that the RBR is definitely faster than the Ferrari...

...BUT there is something we know, RBR can take the corners with the open rear spoiler, something no other team can, and we also know that in F1 there is bigger time gain with corner adherence than with higher straight line speed. So RBR is glued better to the tarmac than the rest of the field, at least before this season. This season, I don't know or didn't hear if RBR can still do it comparing to others. So this would indicate RBR are faster, yet once again nobody knows the exact delta number.

[jjcale]

SV is obviously a very good driver but he has had a car that is visibly better than the others for the past 4 seasons and a journeyman team mate. Kudos to him that the maximising his advantage but its not really possible to go further than that.

[fullhouse]

I think this opinion is not tenable. Why? If Vettel drives the best car, how much faster is it than the Ferrari and the Mercedes? Four tenths? Six tenths? A second? How much slower is Webber than Alonso and Hamilton per lap? Half a second?

If you start calculating it like that, you will see that it is impossible that Webber is as slow as you think or that the Red Bull is as dominant as you think. Just think about it. If I remember correctly, Vettel is on average 0.350 seconds faster than Webber in qualifying. That would mean that if the Red Bull is on pole and 0.350 faster than all the other cars, Webber should be 2nd in every qualifying. But that is not the case.

See what I mean?

When you see the Redbull drivers consistently out pacing Alonso or Hamilton by large margins, then its clear to any rational person the car is much quicker, because the speed of Alonso and Hamilton is well known. We don't need to be specific in terms of tenths. Vettel is not on average 0.350 faster than Webber. Its usually very close except this year when Webber is struggling.

[mnmracer]

...BUT there is something we know, RBR can take the corners with the open rear spoiler, something no other team can, and we also know that in F1 there is bigger time gain with corner adherence than with higher straight line speed. So RBR is glued better to the tarmac than the rest of the field, at least before this season. This season, I don't know or didn't hear if RBR can still do it comparing to others. So this would indicate RBR are faster, yet once again nobody knows the exact delta number.

What kind of argument is that? "the corners". What corners? And how do you know how much time that saves you? And how bad do you think Vettel and Webber are when, in a car that is according to you "glued to the tarmac", they are still half a second slower on a corner-rich track like Hungary? Surely, if the advantage was as significant as you make it out to be, they would not even be worthy of being Formula One drivers.

It is exactly this simplistic thinking that is so aggravating to read for anyone that knows two things about Formula One.

[mnmracer]

the speed of Alonso and Hamilton is well known

The speed of Alonso and Hamilton is well-known between them (at least, if you're stuck in time 6 years ago).
Neither of their speed is known against Vettel.

[PaulTodd]

You already saw him back in 2007,2008 in a toro rosso,he has nothing more to prove!

adrian newey designed car with a Ferrari pony hardly a bad car mate

[tghik]

What kind of argument is that? "the corners". What corners? And how do you know how much time that saves you? And how bad do you think Vettel and Webber are when, in a car that is according to you "glued to the tarmac", they are still half a second slower on a corner-rich track like Hungary? Surely, if the advantage was as significant as you make it out to be, they would not even be worthy of being Formula One drivers.

It is exactly this simplistic thinking that is so aggravating to read for anyone that knows two things about Formula One.

Or you don't know about this or you simply prefer to ignore it as a fan. I don't know. You lose aero advantage with lower speeds so for lower speed corner your advantage diminish and that's where mechanical grip starts to gain in importance. On the other hand with super high speeds closer to sound barrier aero lose completely its "normal" characteristics and this is the reason why propellers are twisted on the ends, but this is completely another matter as it doesn't apply to F1. If you don't know these things I suggest to read what engineers say.

"It is exactly this simplistic thinking that is so aggravating to read for anyone that knows two things about Formula One." well this is interesting, I studied air planes construction, mechanics and aerodynamics. And I am an engineer. I wanted to apply for F1 job but that would require moving which I decided against. But a girl I studied with works for many years now with Ferrari. So your comments are out of hand dear. sorry

[JohnnySchwaffel]

I think Vettel can only be named "Schumi-like" as soon as he starts ramming his opponents from the track and deny any involvement in those actions.

He DOES have the Nationality, but he lacks the killer-I-bite-your-ear kind of tactics. He'll learn I guess.

[mnmracer]

Or you don't know about this or you simply prefer to ignore it as a fan. I don't know. You lose aero advantage with lower speeds so for lower speed corner your advantage diminish and that's where mechanical grip starts to gain in importance. On the other hand with super high speeds closer to sound barrier aero lose completely its "normal" characteristics and this is the reason why propellers are twisted on the ends, but this is completely another matter as it doesn't apply to F1. If you don't know these things I suggest to read what engineers say.

So you are basically saying the RB advantage is on tracks with high speed corners, exactly the tracks that usually have the straights that Red Bull are weak at. You can't have it both ways.

"It is exactly this simplistic thinking that is so aggravating to read for anyone that knows two things about Formula One." well this is interesting, I studied air planes construction, mechanics and aerodynamics. And I am an engineer. I wanted to apply for F1 job but that would require moving which I decided against. But a girl I studied with works for many years now with Ferrari. So your comments are out of hand dear. sorry

The claim that Red Bull can take "the corners with DRS open" is even in the best-case scenario vague. Unless you are trying to say all the corners, in which case it is very simply utterly false. I don't care what you claim to know, be or have (you really don't want to try that hand).

And even when we have that covered, you fail to quantify said advantage. Even if they were able to take the corners flat-out, if you can't quantify how much they win in corners and lose on straights, your argument proofs exactly nothing.

[vlado]

I think Vettel can only be named "Schumi-like" as soon as he starts ramming his opponents from the track and deny any involvement in those actions.

He DOES have the Nationality, but he lacks the killer-I-bite-your-ear kind of tactics. He'll learn I guess.

No need yet.. he makes it look so easy

[ViMaMo]

Schumacher or not, he is carving a monument in F1 history, he is certainly among the best.

[spacekid]

I think Vettel can only be named "Schumi-like" as soon as he starts ramming his opponents from the track and deny any involvement in those actions.

When did Schumacher ever deny any involvement? I must have missed those quotes.

Sad that people are still unable to view the mans career entirity and just focus on a handful of incidents. Like no one else in F1 was ever overly aggresive on track.

OT - I never defined Schumi as a driver by his title streak with Ferrari, it was the '96-2000 seasons that interested me the most. I haven't seen Seb in a comparable situation. And no, one race in a Torro Rosso where Bourdais also did very well (compared with his usual performance at TR) doesn't count.

Also I think that too many people forget that when Schumi first won in F1 he was driving a car with a manual gear box, Good Year tyres (I think? I stand corrected if incorrect) and no refuelling. then went through the refuelling era, huge changes to the cars etc. and proved himself in every configuration. Seb has had some very stable regs to work in.

I do believe Vettel is very good, and probably under rated by many, which seems ludicrous. He has done very well and converted a car with championship potential into a champtionship winning car. Not every 'good' driver can do this - Berger, Patrese, Webber, Barrichello were all very good drivers who I don't believe could do what Seb has.

I agree with the posts that say Michael is Michael, and Seb is Seb. I don't particularly like comparisons between Seb and Schumi (or Lewis and Senna for that matter) as I find them a bit lazy. They are both their own drivers and personalities with different strengths and weaknesses.

Seb still has a looong career ahead of him, and I look forward very much to seeing how he fares against other team mates and with different regs. It would not surprise me one bit if he takes another title this year, and eventually matches or overhauls Michael's 7 titles.

I think others dislike Seb as they think Lewis or Alonso should have been winning these titles. But F1 is a team game and Seb is the winning driver in the team that has been getting the job done. He couldn't have done much more and on that basis thoroughly deserves his success imo.

[JohnnySchwaffel]

When did Schumacher ever deny any involvement? I must have missed those quotes.

Sad that people are still unable to view the mans career entirity and just focus on a handful of incidents. Like no one else in F1 was ever overly aggresive on track.

He never openly spoke about the 1994 Adelaide incident, he claimed Villeneuve needed his car to get trough the corner in 1997 Jerez (??yeah sure).

Schumacher is often regarded by critics as a driver who will do all he possibly can to assure victory – no matter who he upsets, and what he has to do. (even on-sportive behavior)

The 1998 Belgian Grand Prix, we had the famous Schumacher and Coulthard Crash. Where Schumacher claimed DC wanted to kill him. (YOLO)

Schumacher Monaco Qualifying 2006, was it a mistake? Was it deliberate, an antic, or a combination of all three? Schumi claims something else than what the rest of the world was thinking on that move..... and these are simply just a couple of the cheating ways of Michael. There are to many to name, but these few have already covered the most controversial moments of his career.

Those handful of incidents changed a whole world of racefans mind on this man, his ethics and sportmanship. He signed them all himself, never took the blame on any single one of them.
That's excluded his Mercedes career, where he was not the same Schumacher like Luca said in 2010 about him.

Vettel does not even have enough of those tricks done to be named in his presence.

[Galko877]

The 1998 Belgian Grand Prix, we had the famous Schumacher and Coulthard Crash. Where Schumacher claimed DC wanted to kill him. (YOLO)

For your information:

"I'm not doing a Fernando-beating thing," said Coulthard. "But I realised on reflection...when Michael ran into the back of me, his reaction was that I'd brake tested him or tried to kill him and all that sort of thing. The stewards looked at the data and I hadn't braked, so it was just all brushed under the carpet.

"The reality is that I lifted to let him pass me, but I lifted in heavy spray on the racing line. You should never do that. I would never do that now. In 1998, I didn't have the experience and the knowledge, and I had never had someone run into the back of me. And because someone pushes you, you react. So you act as though 'I didn't do that,'" he said.

"The minute I knew he was there, and I was told by the team that he was and was trying to allow him to pass me, I should have made a smarter decision."

Interview: Coulthard Acknowledges Blame for Spa '98: http://www.autosport...t.php/id/11031/

[spacekid]

He never openly spoke about the 1994 Adelaide incident, he claimed Villeneuve needed his car to get trough the corner in 1997 Jerez (??yeah sure).

Schumacher is often regarded by critics as a driver who will do all he possibly can to assure victory – no matter who he upsets, and what he has to do. (even on-sportive behavior)

The 1998 Belgian Grand Prix, we had the famous Schumacher and Coulthard Crash. Where Schumacher claimed DC wanted to kill him. (YOLO)

Schumacher Monaco Qualifying 2006, was it a mistake? Was it deliberate, an antic, or a combination of all three? Schumi claims something else than what the rest of the world was thinking on that move..... and these are simply just a couple of the cheating ways of Michael. There are to many to name, but these few have already covered the most controversial moments of his career.

Those handful of incidents changed a whole world of racefans mind on this man, his ethics and sportmanship. He signed them all himself, never took the blame on any single one of them.
That's excluded his Mercedes career, where he was not the same Schumacher like Luca said in 2010 about him.

Vettel does not even have enough of those tricks done to be named in his presence.

This has all been done to death a million times on here. I don't agree that these are examples of ramming someone off the circuit and denying all knowledge. In fact Michael has openly said he did what he felt he needed to do to win, and thats his nature. Take that as you will.

Schumi and DC have moved on, as have others, maybe you could too? One would hope by now a thread involving Michael could be a bit more objective and OT than another typical bashfest.

Edited by spacekid, 17 June 2013 - 14:51.

[st99]

I wonder why many people remember Monza 2008 as the only race Vettel was really good that year. I remember that in Germany 2008 he kept Alonso behind the whole race, in Valencia he was the fastest in Q2, he scored points in Monaco and Canada after stating 19th and 20th, in Brazil he overtook Hamilton on the last laps...

He was really good back then but somehow that year is often diminished as "he had the best car in Monza and that's why he won" and nobody remembers what he did the rest of the season.

[mtojay]

I wonder why many people remember Monza 2008 as the only race Vettel was really good that year. I remember that in Germany 2008 he kept Alonso behind the whole race, in Valencia he was the fastest in Q2, he scored points in Monaco and Canada after stating 19th and 20th, in Brazil he overtook Hamilton on the last laps...

He was really good back then but somehow that year is often diminished as "he had the best car in Monza and that's why he won" and nobody remembers what he did the rest of the season.

people tend to forget. above all if the guy we are talkin about is disliked by them.

people forget that sebastian did not just only have the win in 08. in this year he had 10 races in which he finished in the top 10 (1x 1st, 1x 4th, 3x 5th, 2x 6th, 2x 8th & 1x 9th). you have to think about the fact that until last weekend no torro rosso driver since the sebastian finished higher than p7. in fact, only in 07' liuzzi did it once (it was in china, in that race sebastian finished p4 ;-) ) so next to sebastian there are only two torro rosso drivers ever who finished p6. but he did it 7 times (p6 or higher) in only 1,5 years and 25 races.

25 races, 11x top ten, 9 DNF's, which leaves only 5 races finished not in the top 10 in the torro rosso, not that bad for a rookie i guess.

[OldSoldier2]

people tend to forget. above all if the guy we are talkin about is disliked by them.

people forget that sebastian did not just only have the win in 08. in this year he had 10 races in which he finished in the top 10 (1x 1st, 1x 4th, 3x 5th, 2x 6th, 2x 8th & 1x 9th). you have to think about the fact that until last weekend no torro rosso driver since the sebastian finished higher than p7. in fact, only in 07' liuzzi did it once (it was in china, in that race sebastian finished p4 ;-) ) so next to sebastian there are only two torro rosso drivers ever who finished p6. but he did it 7 times (p6 or higher) in only 1,5 years and 25 races.

25 races, 11x top ten, 9 DNF's, which leaves only 5 races finished not in the top 10 in the toro rosso, not that bad for a rookie i guess.

Thank you. I was trying to paste a table with those results and failed miserably.

Vettel set the bar very high for his STR successors. Too bad for them. I am really tired of reading (British press, other boards) the reasons those that dislike Vettel use, such as (still) he can't overtake, he can't drive through the field, etc.

Alonso and Hamilton went to sleep at the end of 2009 sure that they would awake in what would be known as the Alonso Era, the Hamilton Era, or the Great Alsonso vs. Hamilton Era. Unfortunately for them, it is the Vettel Era. They have to deal with it; we should hope their fans will.

[Jan.W]

He never openly spoke about the 1994 Adelaide incident, he claimed Villeneuve needed his car to get trough the corner in 1997 Jerez (??yeah sure).

Schumacher is often regarded by critics as a driver who will do all he possibly can to assure victory – no matter who he upsets, and what he has to do. (even on-sportive behavior)

The 1998 Belgian Grand Prix, we had the famous Schumacher and Coulthard Crash. Where Schumacher claimed DC wanted to kill him. (YOLO)

Schumacher Monaco Qualifying 2006, was it a mistake? Was it deliberate, an antic, or a combination of all three? Schumi claims something else than what the rest of the world was thinking on that move..... and these are simply just a couple of the cheating ways of Michael. There are to many to name, but these few have already covered the most controversial moments of his career.

Those handful of incidents changed a whole world of racefans mind on this man, his ethics and sportmanship. He signed them all himself, never took the blame on any single one of them.
That's excluded his Mercedes career, where he was not the same Schumacher like Luca said in 2010 about him.

Vettel does not even have enough of those tricks done to be named in his presence.

More than 6 years since "the Real Schumacher" is retired, and still, you spit with rage.
92-2006 years must have been very painful for you.

[BoschKurve]

Silly topic even for when it was made.

There is no "next" Schumacher, Clark, Senna, Stewart, Fangio, Rindt, and so on.

The best you can hope for is that they show the driving characteristics that made each of those men legends.

Each has to forge their own destiny in whatever way they see fit. Regardless of the statistical numbers Vettel will accumulate over the course of his career, it'd be hard to view him as the next Schumacher. Simply because There was no one quite like Michael before he came along, and there will certainly never be anyone like him ever. Aside from them being both German, there aren't in my opinion many qualities they share otherwise. The biggest difference is that Schumacher took a huge gamble in going to Ferrari for 1996, and when one considers what he did with that F310 that totally botched the side impact rules...well...

[Sakae]

Silly topic even for when it was made.

There is no "next" Schumacher, Clark, Senna, Stewart, Fangio, Rindt, and so on.

The best you can hope for is that they show the driving characteristics that made each of those men legends.

Each has to forge their own destiny in whatever way they see fit. Regardless of the statistical numbers Vettel will accumulate over the course of his career, it'd be hard to view him as the next Schumacher. Simply because There was no one quite like Michael before he came along, and there will certainly never be anyone like him ever. Aside from them being both German, there aren't in my opinion many qualities they share otherwise. The biggest difference is that Schumacher took a huge gamble in going to Ferrari for 1996, and when one considers what he did with that F310 that totally botched the side impact rules...well...

Absolutely right. Just take just how much has changed in regulations, and we have lost all benchmarks we used to compare Senna, Prost, and Michael. It was time when qualification meant something next to just having positional advantage on the grid. Today, frankly, I am not sure what it is we are looking at, yet Vettel is a product of this era, just as Michael was a product of his. It is nice way to kill the time when people are comparing drivers, but I doubt that it has any other value. Seb is his own man, and he will stay that way.

[BoschKurve]

Absolutely right. Just take just how much has changed in regulations, and we have lost all benchmarks we used to compare Senna, Prost, and Michael. It was time when qualification meant something next to just having positional advantage on the grid. Today, frankly, I am not sure what it is we are looking at, yet Vettel is a product of this era, just as Michael was a product of his. It is nice way to kill the time when people are comparing drivers, but I doubt that it has any other value. Seb is his own man, and he will stay that way.

I think you sum it up quite well. Today's formula doesn't really offer much in the way of a true benchmark the way things were even 10 years ago. Until the formula stops being the antithesis of what F1 was, it's going to be really difficult to evaluate guys now and into the future. I don't have any sense for what Vettel's true speed is. He's fast certainly, but so are all drivers who drive in Formula 1...some just happen to be faster than others. That seems to be the most difficult concept for people to grasp about F1...there are no slow drivers. Even the drivers people think to be slow, are much faster than anyone seems to realize. It's more of a case of where they fit in on the list.

The way I figure, is if you changed career start dates for say Alonso (to keep it to someone currently driving) to about 5 years ago, what's to say that there wouldn't be questions about what his speed is? We know he is fast because we saw what he did in the V10 era when drivers weren't driving as conservatively as they are now.

Either way Vettel is who he is. I don't know how he will be viewed historically, or even how this particular era is going to be viewed when looked at from a safe distance far in the future.

[tghik]

So you are basically saying the RB advantage is on tracks with high speed corners, exactly the tracks that usually have the straights that Red Bull are weak at. You can't have it both ways.


The claim that Red Bull can take "the corners with DRS open" is even in the best-case scenario vague. Unless you are trying to say all the corners, in which case it is very simply utterly false. I don't care what you claim to know, be or have (you really don't want to try that hand).

And even when we have that covered, you fail to quantify said advantage. Even if they were able to take the corners flat-out, if you can't quantify how much they win in corners and lose on straights, your argument proofs exactly nothing.

As I wrote before nobody can quantify exactly the advantage, unless you take the models in the wind tunnels of all cars of all teams and measure. I find it frustrating talking to no tech people, but annoying with fanboys. Even worse to fanboys when they close their eyes and to launch forward for the kill. Just read what you wrote ... and think twice. I know you never worked with a wind tunnel or had aero courses and it's not your fault. I for example can't talk about music or playing piano lol. It's not like on or off. F1 is not digital, it is analog, maybe you know electronics so you will understand better. There is no voltage threshold for a digital 3.3 "HI" or a lower state "0". The drag is ratio of speed to second power, so obviously it is not even linear, it's curved. lift generated is not linear either. At lower speeds it gets smaller in no linear way. Simply put RBR have better curve than competition, which is not surprising as Newey is aerodynamicist, and the hell good at that. So it's not like in digital you take ALL corners with DRS or none. Complete nonsense what you wrote. And it's like RBR have advantage at higher speeds tracks, it's not about that at all... I just lost the pleasure of explaining more. All I can say, just read read and read ... learn...

On the side note I love F1, but at the same time I hate it. It's not a straight forward answer as to say which driver is better. Why I hate F1, because there is too much technical stuff and the driver is around 30% and tech is 70%. I don't want to argue about the exact percentage as this not important. What is important is that I want to cherish the drivers for their ability, like all humans. I prefer when you can follow a sportsman when you know everything is in his power, 100 %, like for example running. unless of course you take out steroids but that's another thing. Drivers are dependent on so many things in F1, and unfortunately fanboys tend to forget everything and force the idea that it is only the driver. Aero, brakes, engine, tyres even the driver's track engineer ... and everything is analog, not even linear ... think about that !

We would have a much easier time and clearer picture if all drivers were driving the same car. I think FIA should force the drivers to change teams every year. Just imagine Vettel vs Lewis one year the next against Alonso then Kubica then Raikonen and so on ... wouldn't that be fantastic ? I for one when I play soccer when after playing the first minutes I see too much quality unevenness, I force to equilibrate the teams so the game is on fire. Playing against easy opponent is not fun, and I require my heroes not to take the easy path either, I want competition, and if he is really good he will stay on top in general, and if he loses so be it, but at least I will have my answer and at the same time so much emotion ride. Maybe some of you understand my point of view.

[lbennie]

The truth being he had best car of all time. And still have one of the best cars in history of this sport.
You cannot disagree.

This is F1, no body wins a WDC without the best car, or close to it.

[BoschKurve]

This is F1, no body wins a WDC without the best car, or close to it.

That's how it has always been, and always will be in F1.

Senna himself knew this when he was working towards Formula 1.

In lesser formulas, you can in fact get away with not having the de facto best car possible when things are pretty much the same across the board. However to win...or rather to win world championships in F1, the machinery matters quite a bit. You can be the most talented driver on the planet, but if you are driving a Marussia-Cosworth, you're not going to be winning anything.

[Disgrace]

I wonder why many people remember Monza 2008 as the only race Vettel was really good that year. I remember that in Germany 2008 he kept Alonso behind the whole race, in Valencia he was the fastest in Q2, he scored points in Monaco and Canada after stating 19th and 20th, in Brazil he overtook Hamilton on the last laps...

He was really good back then but somehow that year is often diminished as "he had the best car in Monza and that's why he won" and nobody remembers what he did the rest of the season.

Absolutely right. He has been among the top performing drivers since 2008, i.e. his first full season in F1. The way he bounced back from his Japan '07 blunder in China was the biggest indicator he was a future champion.

If he retired at the end of the season, he's already got his place in history. He is 25. He will probably be around many years after Alonso retires. There is a great chance he could become the new statistical GOAT.

Edited by Disgrace, 18 June 2013 - 01:26.

[mnmracer]

So it's not like in digital you take ALL corners with DRS or none. Complete nonsense what you wrote.

You are the one claiming RB is taking the corners with DRS open. You can make all the presumptious posts you want, but you make a claim that you now admit is complete nonsense. Own up to that.

Edited by mnmracer, 18 June 2013 - 09:37.

[Tenmantaylor]

The truth being he had best car of all time. And still have one of the best cars in history of this sport.
You cannot disagree.

Total BS! It has been the best of it's era but nowhere near as dominant as the early- mid 2000's Ferraris, the Williams of the early 90s, the Mclarens of the late 80s or late 90s.

Do you rate Mark Webber? If so, go look how few times he's finished 2nd when Vettel has won, how few times he's been 2nd when Vettel has had pole and how few times he's finished runner up to Vettel during his three WDC's (never!). Dominant cars acheive 1-2s all day long and destroy the field. None of RBs title winning cars have consistently done this.

Vettel made the difference at Red Bull and deserves every plaudit he gets.

[pUs]

Total BS! It has been the best of it's era but nowhere near as dominant as the early- mid 2000's Ferraris, the Williams of the early 90s, the Mclarens of the late 80s or late 90s.

Do you rate Mark Webber? If so, go look how few times he's finished 2nd when Vettel has won, how few times he's been 2nd when Vettel has had pole and how few times he's finished runner up to Vettel during his three WDC's (never!). Dominant cars acheive 1-2s all day long and destroy the field. None of RBs title winning cars have consistently done this.

Vettel made the difference at Red Bull and deserves every plaudit he gets.

Agreed, anybody who actually saw (and still remember) the 1992 Williams or the 2002 Ferrari in action should think otherwise..

[Sakae]

Total BS! It has been the best of it's era but nowhere near as dominant as the early- mid 2000's Ferraris, the Williams of the early 90s, the Mclarens of the late 80s or late 90s.

Do you rate Mark Webber? If so, go look how few times he's finished 2nd when Vettel has won, how few times he's been 2nd when Vettel has had pole and how few times he's finished runner up to Vettel during his three WDC's (never!). Dominant cars acheive 1-2s all day long and destroy the field. None of RBs title winning cars have consistently done this.

Vettel made the difference at Red Bull and deserves every plaudit he gets.

This is what I have been arguing for a while, because in hindsight, without Vettel having a lesser driver in his seat instead, Newey's design perhaps might not shine as much, and mantra would change. Driver and people behind him work together well, despite occasional hiccups, but at the end neither can exist and survive in spotlight without each other for too long.

[grunge]

Nobody in their right minds can claim that the dominance of the Ferrari 2002 car can in any way be compared to what RB's been doing for the past few seasons..In Ferrari's most dominant years,it was in a completely different league when compared to the rest..There was Ferrari,...and then there were the other teams.

I dont need a detailed analysis to figure out that Vettel is one of,if not the best driver on the grid..I simply need to look at who his team mate is and then look at what hes been doing in the same car..Webber is no slouch..never has been..he may not have the race craft to challenge the very best,but he has always been a one lap demon... and i dont have any reason to believe he's lost any of that..The mere fact that Vettel has outclassed him over a no of seasons now,in Quali and Race..is enough evidence.If we can use the same barometer to judge Hamilton,i-e as good as Alonso based on the 07 season,why not for Vettel then?..and whats more,hes done it every year since hes been at RB,not just one season.

The only thing that comments like ''its Us against Newey'' or ''he misses every apex,still gets pole'' do,is make the commenter look like a sourpuss.

[black magic]

spacekid nailed it.

it was schumachers performance in his first qualification, in 96, in 95 stuck in 5th gear etc etc that made his rep. not 2001 - 2004

its why people like me would like to see what he does driving a mercedes say or equivalent and I have not forgotten either 2012 start when mark was beating him until the rbr got sorted out. michael was never bettered by a teammate - as irvine said - when the car was really good others could get close and the worse the car the further away they got. it was said that michaels ability to drive around problems at tiems created it s own problems in testing

cant deny that vettel is also in that higher group.

[Zippel]

Sadly this obvious F1 Genius, is no longer a member of this site.

Most geniuses of mankind were considered halfbaked nutjobs when they embarked on their endeavours, only to be recognised after they are proven right. Dooly Tilly is truly part of this mould.

[mnmracer]

I have not forgotten either 2012 start when mark was beating him until the rbr got sorted out. michael was never bettered by a teammate

After the 1996 Argentine Grand Prix, Irvine had 6 points to Schumacher's 4. Was Irvine beating him, or, like Webber in 2012, are the results skewed because the few races Irvine/Webber were better happened in the beginning of the year? Webber was better than Vettel in 3, maybe 4, races last year. DNFs skewing championship standings is not "Webber beating him".