4010 replies to this topic

[gillesthegenius]

There's no question about it, Hamilton is among the top flight of Formula 1 Drivers.

Form is temporary, but class is permanent. He had a bad season last year, he had a bad start to the 2010 season, but he had issues off track as well.

I think we'll see a massive resurgence of Hamilton this year. Which will affirm what most already consider fact. That he's one of the best to jump in an F1 car. It's the main reason I was so for seeing Vettel V Hamilton at Red Bull... It would have been incredible.

Cant argue much with what you say. That man certainly has the class and, like you, I was also yearning for Lewis to come to RBR in go head to head with Seb. But now that Kimi is back I just want to see Seb and Kimi racing together.

[maverick69]

Brundle: "If nobody has a car advantage over Vettel, he'll win again, he's that good."

Hmmmmmmmm......... High praise.

Edited by maverick69, 26 February 2012 - 18:04.

[Group B]

This is the only comment in the last 2 days you have even remotely come close to saying he had the best car for the majority of last year.

Trolltastic. You won't find anywhere in this thread or any other where I've denied he had the best car for the majority of last year.

[icecream_man]

Brundle: "If nobody has a car advantage over Vettel, he'll win again, he's that good."

Hmmmmmmmm......... High praise.

Ahhh but, he did say he expects the pack to close up, and we don't know for sure how Vettel will cope with being under pressure. For most of the past couple years he's been well out in front in by far the quickest car, and able to take it relatively easy. On the one occasion where he actually came under pressure from a rapidly closing JB he fell off the track and handed JB the win. Question is, in a closer chasing pack, will that become more regular or will it prove to be a one-off ? Time will tell, but I'm not expecting Vettel to have it so easy this year as he has the last 2

Edited by icecream_man, 26 February 2012 - 18:38.

[Alarcon]

Ahhh but, he did say he expects the pack to close up, and we don't know for sure how Vettel will cope with being under pressure. For most of the past couple years he's been well out in front in by far the quickest car, and able to take it relatively easy. On the one occasion where he actually came under pressure from a rapidly closing JB he fell off the track and handed JB the win. Question is, in a closer chasing pack, will that become more regular or will it prove to be a one-off ? Time will tell, but I'm not expecting Vettel to have it so easy this year as he has the last 2

On the main occasion? Maybe you are talking about Barcelona... or about Monaco... or about Korea... wait... he won at those races !

And we also can talk about 2010... he had the best car? Maybe he would prefer a reliable car (he lost a lot of points he deserved)... Alonso had it, fast and reliable but lost the WDC because his own mistakes (Monaco, Valencia, China, Spa) same as Webber (Valencia, Australia, Bahrein, Korea, Abu Dabhi...)

Don´t forget Vettel won his first WDC with only 23 years, under pressure and in the last races with all the pressure on him (even press pressure blaming the team for let them battle free) and he did an amazing job at Korea, Brazil and Abu Dhabi. Relatively easy...

Edited by Alarcon, 26 February 2012 - 18:57.

[bourbon]

Ahhh but, he did say he expects the pack to close up, and we don't know for sure how Vettel will cope with being under pressure. For most of the past couple years he's been well out in front in by far the quickest car, and able to take it relatively easy. On the one occasion where he actually came under pressure from a rapidly closing JB he fell off the track and handed JB the win. Question is, in a closer chasing pack, will that become more regular or will it prove to be a one-off ? Time will tell, but I'm not expecting Vettel to have it so easy this year as he has the last 2

What about the one occassion in Spain with Lewis all over him for 30 laps to the end of the race, in a faster, DRS, and KERS enabled car on better tyres? Vettel held him off, remained in front and won - under extreme pressure.

What about the one occassion in Monaco with Button and Alonso alternatively all over him for the entire second half of the race with Vettel running the tyres 60 laps of the race and obviously slower? Another extreme pressure scenario that Vettel managed well.

Any driver can make an error, but you can't make sweeping generalizations based on one race. I could use either of the above to conclude that he is a master under pressure and some of the best drivers on the grid can't take him even with massive advantage in their corner.

In addition, you can't include 2010 in your "head of the pack" scenario because Vettel never lead the championship the entire season and still won in the end. He went into a massive number of races under extreme pressure, and he underwent quite a learning curve that season as a result. By the end, he showed us all exactly how well he could perform under pressure.

So while he may run wide here or there - what driver doesn't? - on the whole, I think you have made an unsupported allegation, if one considers the body of Seb's work.

You also have to consider that the rest of the pack makes unforced erros too - in qually and race - so to the extent that they are all human, including Vettel, and may do that from time to time, I wouldn't say that one factor would make a difference. Remember Lewis' spin out from the lead or Button's poor grid starts and both their errors in qually all while under pressure. But by the same token, you can point to instances where they performed well under pressure too. So I would say that it isn't a factor that is anything notable in any of the top drivers. A driver is simply going to make an error now and again under pressure - or even while not under pressure. That's racing.

Edited by bourbon, 26 February 2012 - 19:05.

[icecream_man]

Don´t forget Vettel won his first WDC with only 23 years, under pressure and in the last races (amazing job at Korea, Brazil and Abu Dhabi). Relatively easy...

Canada was the race I was referring to I believe

Look up relatively in the dictionary

JB similarly stormed to victory after victory in the first half of 2009 before Brawn were overtaken by RB in performance. He had to really fight for it in the 2nd half.

We're yet to see what would happen if the roles are reversed and RB are suddenly overtaken by, say, McLaren. It's only then that I believe we'll see just how good Vettel really is...

[tifosiMac]

There is no question about his talent, but in my view the jury is still out on whether he can sustain the level of focus required to be considered as a top tier driver.

I think thats a bit unfair. When I see people getting upset when others say Vettel is only successful because of the car, and then claim Lewis can't be considered top tier, I find that massively hypocritical. Hamilton is every bit as good as Vettel and this has been shown time and time again. The sooner we accept we have at least 4 top tier drivers in the sport, the sooner this petty discussion can move on to more relevant heights.

[Alarcon]

What about the one occassion in Spain with Lewis all over him for 30 laps to the end of the race, in a faster, DRS, and KERS enabled car on better tyres?

What about the one occassion in Monaco with Button and Alonso alternatively all over him for the entire second half of the race with Vettel running the tyres 60 laps of the race and obviously slower?

Any driver can make an error, but you can't make sweeping generalizations based on one race. I could use either of the above to conclude that he is a master under pressure and some of the best drivers on the grid can't take him even with massive advantave in their corner.

In addition, you can't include 2010 in your "head of the pack" scenario because Vettel never lead the championship the entire season and still won in the end. He went into a massive number of races under extreme pressure, and he underwent quite a learning curve that season as a result. By the end, he showed us all exactly how well he could perform under pressure. So while he may run wide here or there - what driver doesn't? - on the whole, I think you have tried to make a point that has no support if one considers the body of his work.

You also have to consider that the rest of the pack makes unforced erros too - in qually and race - so to the extent that they are all human, including Vettel, and may do that from time to time, I wouldn't say that one factor would make a difference. In some years, drivers make more than other years, but that is just racing.

19 flying laps on Q3 this season. Moment of pure "maximum pressure" in all the weekend. The only moment you can prove or not your sheer speed.

Result: 14 pole position (best record ever)

And the most important thing... No mistake. 19 flying laps and no mistake...

I never saw something similar, not even Ayrton.

Edited by Alarcon, 26 February 2012 - 19:06.

[icecream_man]

You also have to consider that the rest of the pack makes unforced erros too - in qually and race - so to the extent that they are all human, including Vettel, and may do that from time to time, I wouldn't say that one factor would make a difference. Remember Lewis' spin out from the lead or Button's poor grid starts and both their errors in qually all while under pressure. But by the same token, you can point to instances where they performed well under pressure too. So I would say that it isn't a factor that is anything notable in any of the top drivers. A driver is simply going to make an error now and again under pressure - or even while not under pressure. That's racing.

Yes I completely agree, I wasn't trying to suggest they didn't.

I'm not trying to say Vettel isn't as good as the last 2 years suggest, I'm just saying I'd like to see how he performs these days in a less dominant car before deciding

[Alarcon]

Canada was the race I was referring to I believe

Look up relatively in the dictionary ;)

JB similarly stormed to victory after victory in the first half of 2009 before Brawn were overtaken by RB in performance. He had to really fight for it in the 2nd half.

We're yet to see what would happen if the roles are reversed and RB are suddenly overtaken by, say, McLaren. It's only then that I believe we'll see just how good Vettel really is...

RB never overtook Brawn in performance. Barrichello finished 3rd... just as Webber this season (and 2010 season). Casually?

Last season where was Webber (with the same car)?

The RB was the best car... but only on Vettel hands. Casually?

Vettel proved enough (and much more than the "tops"), just watch 2008 season. While his team mate achieved 4 points with a crap car (not a McLaren or Ferrari car, of course)... he won a race and did a pole. He also was near the podium at Fuji 07 and China 07.

Edited by Alarcon, 26 February 2012 - 19:16.

[Group B]

The sooner we accept we have at least 4 top tier drivers in the sport, the sooner this petty discussion can move on to more relevant heights.

This is the patently obvious bottom line. They all have different strengths and weaknesses but the evidence clearly suggests that those four are currently a step above the rest and to scratch around trying to heavily discredit any of them reveals more about the poster than the driver. God knows I don't like Hamilton, but I'm not about to make an idiot of myself by denying his huge natural talent, and anyway I can actually appreciate and enjoy that talent on track at times - just so long as he doesn't win ;)

[Alarcon]

Yes I completely agree, I wasn't trying to suggest they didn't.

I'm not trying to say Vettel isn't as good as the last 2 years suggest, I'm just saying I'd like to see how he performs these days in a less dominant car before deciding

2010 or 2008. You choose.

Edited by Alarcon, 26 February 2012 - 19:18.

[tifosiMac]

This is the patently obvious bottom line. They all have different strengths and weaknesses but the evidence clearly suggests that those four are currently a step above the rest and to scratch around trying to heavily discredit any of them reveals more about the poster than the driver. God knows I don't like Hamilton, but I'm not about to make an idiot of myself by denying his huge natural talent, and anyway I can actually appreciate and enjoy that talent on track at times - just so long as he doesn't win ;)

I can see I am going to have to find a driver to dislike as I genuinely think they are all nice people generally. I feel a bit out of place on forums with my present attitude.

[jamiegc]

JB similarly stormed to victory after victory in the first half of 2009 before Brawn were overtaken by RB in performance. He had to really fight for it in the 2nd half..

He had a poor second half of the season. From the 10 races after Turkey:

Vettel 55 points
Barrichello 42 points
Webber 42 points
Hamilton 40 points
Raikkonen 39 points
Button 34 points

Barrichello matching Webber proves the Brawn was capable of more than Button could get out of it...

Edited by jamiegc, 26 February 2012 - 19:24.

[icecream_man]

RB never overtook Brawn in performance. Barrichello finished 3rd... just as Webber this season (and 2010 season). Casually?

Last season where was Webber (with the same car)?

The RB was the best car... but only on Vettel hands. Casually?

I guess on that first point we'll have to agree to differ, I guess it's a matter of opinion.

With regards team mates, the same could be said of LH vs HK and no doubt many other partnerships over the years.

As I said, I'd just like to see what Vettel does this year if the pack has indeed closed up. I'll leave it at that. I actually really like the bloke (if only he'd stop that finger wagging nonsense) And if you notice I didn't say I was expecting it to go one way or the other, I'm just curious to see which !

Edited by icecream_man, 26 February 2012 - 19:28.

[jrg19]

2010 or 2008. You choose.

You don't think 2010 was a dominant car?

I still dont see why people cant admit a great car, if Lewis or Jenson wins this season in a car that gets the majority of poles/race wins i'd never make out it wasnts the best car becasue thats just stupid.

[MrPodium]

RB never overtook Brawn in performance. Barrichello finished 3rd... just as Webber this season (and 2010 season). Casually?

Last season where was Webber (with the same car)?

The RB was the best car... but only on Vettel hands. Casually?

Vettel proved enough (and much more than the "tops"), just watch 2008 season. While his team mate achieved 4 points with a crap car (not a McLaren or Ferrari car, of course)... he won a race and did a pole. He also was near the podium at Fuji 07 and China 07.

I've wrote two replies to you this evening and deleted them, as you can't seem to see past the fact that Vettel is not a driving god, who needs at least a dozen after every platitude served upon him in this thread.

Undoubtedly Vettel is a great driver, but the races you mention, together with his maiden win in 2008 were all achieved in a car which was very capable in wet weather conditions. Add to the fact that Vettel is without question RedBull's favourite son, and you can see why his results stack up so well. Then there's the modern day equilvalent of the FW14b and FW15c made available to him (Newey designs), and you may appreciate why some people believe he's not the best thing since Fangio.

If McLaren and / or Ferrari (preferably both) provide real competition this season and Vettel trashes them all, then I'll be the first in this thread to congratulate him and eat humble pie. I just somehow cannot see him (or any other driver currently on the grid) destroying the opposion like in 2011 without the best car by far at their disposal. If the McLaren is half as good as it looks so far, then I expect Vettel to take a good few wins, but nothing like witnessed last year. Either way, best of luck, I hope the battle is close and fair.

[jamiegc]

Why do these car arguments need to keep cropping up every 5 minutes?

RB built a fantastic car with the RB5 and even with the DD controversy, Vettel still could've/should've win the title and they've built on that with the RB6, RB7 and now RB8.

The DD cost RB the 09 title, reliability nearly cost them the 10 title and with car and driver almost faultless in 11 they delivered what they'd been threatening since 09.

Anyone that says RB haven't built great cars is kidding themselves, as is anyone that says Vettel is not a great driver.

These incessant arguments over who is 'best' are a waste of breath.

Edited by jamiegc, 26 February 2012 - 19:41.

[bourbon]

Yes I completely agree, I wasn't trying to suggest they didn't.

I'm not trying to say Vettel isn't as good as the last 2 years suggest, I'm just saying I'd like to see how he performs these days in a less dominant car before deciding

Well I guess I just don't understand that. We saw him in a below mid grid car for 7 races and overall, he performed well (2007); We saw him perform well in a mid grid car (2008); we saw him perform well in a car that was less dominant for 1/2 a season and then equal or better than the rest for the second 1/2 (2009); We saw him perform well in a car that should have been dominant, but was hit by so many reliability issues his ability to dominate was thwarted (2010); we saw him in a dominant car without reliability issues on the whole and he performed well (2011).

What scenario is missing?

[Alarcon]

I've wrote two replies to you this evening and deleted them, as you can't seem to see past the fact that Vettel is not a driving god, who needs at least a dozen after every platitude served upon him in this thread.

Undoubtedly Vettel is a great driver, but the races you mention, together with his maiden win in 2008 were all achieved in a car which was very capable in wet weather conditions. Add to the fact that Vettel is without question RedBull's favourite son, and you can see why his results stack up so well. Then there's the modern day equilvalent of the FW14b and FW15c made available to him (Newey designs), and you may appreciate why some people believe he's not the best thing since Fangio.

If McLaren and / or Ferrari (preferably both) provide real competition this season and Vettel trashes them all, then I'll be the first in this thread to congratulate him and eat humble pie. I just somehow cannot see him (or any other driver currently on the grid) destroying the opposion like in 2011 without the best car by far at their disposal. If the McLaren is half as good as it looks so far, then I expect Vettel to take a good few wins, but nothing like witnessed last year. Either way, best of luck, I hope the battle is close and fair.

I said the RB was a great car... just on Vettel hands. And that it´s a fact because you have a second driver who class. 3rd on the Champ. not far from the 4th.

In 2008 Vettel did a pole on the rain just 1 tenth better than a McLaren. And then he won the race. Obviously if he won the race, the car was able to win. However the important thing is the driver achieve the winning (or the pole) with that car, under those conditions (including age) and pressure. Vettel did it. And the whole F1 world recog. that as one of the most amazing in F1 history. Sorry but we can´t change it.

About the "best car"... Senna won his 3 WDC with the best car. As Jim Clark also won his 2 WDC. But maybe they didn´t proved enough...

About McLaren... last season Jenson Button recog. Mclaren was very close to RB (in some races even fastest at Q3) but the difference was they made mistakes and Vettel didn´t. You can´t accept it? Sorry but ask to Jenson Button, not me.;)

Edited by Alarcon, 26 February 2012 - 20:37.

[bourbon]

Undoubtedly Vettel is a great driver, but the races you mention, together with his maiden win in 2008 were all achieved in a car which was very capable in wet weather conditions. Add to the fact that Vettel is without question RedBull's favourite son, and you can see why his results stack up so well. Then there's the modern day equilvalent of the FW14b and FW15c made available to him (Newey designs), and you may appreciate why some people believe he's not the best thing since Fangio.

The point isn't how he compares to some past driver from a different era. The point is that I feel you are poorly delimiting his achievement in the 2008 season based on the idea that all he managed to achieve was to fulfill the potential of the car. But that is a very special achievement in F1. The 2008 STRF was often good enough to get top 10 finishes and sometimes top 5 finishes and even win (at Monza). We know that. Why do we know that? Because Vettel did it. The point is that the 20 year old Vettel generally got the potential out of the car and that is the most that a driver can ever do.

You might suggest ANY driver would do the same given that 2008 STRF. But that is just simply false. Let's look at some examples: Fisi's car had the potential to win at Suzuka 2005 and Vettel's car had the potential to win at Canada 2011 for two desparate examples. And neither won. In the first case, Kimi came along and whomped Fisi and his renault outta the way on the final lap and Button did the same to Vettel in Canada. Lewis' Macca had the potential to be in the top 5 at Monaco 2011, but not the way he drove it. So yeah, having a great car with great potential is one thing. Driving it to its potential is another. More current examples? Ask Vettel's 2008 teammate - he too had some good performances, but he didn't make it sing the way Vettel did, not even close. Ask Hamilton's 2008 teammate. Heikke had the potential to win at Monza 2008, but Vettel outdrove him that day in his car that also had the potential. Ask Alonso, who had the potential for a top 5 finish at Valencia 2010, but literally gave it away to a mottle of midgridders as he sat in his car fuming over Hamilton and got no where near the potential from his car that day. That happens, that's racing. However, every driver I have mentioned has also pulled out some great performances so all you have to do is think back a little to find them.

So no, I cannot appreciate why some people keep talking about wanting to see Vettel in certain situations, when he has clearly been in them and performed well (and better with time as expected). And while you started off with that argument and ended on the 'comparisons to the greats' argument, I am purposely keeping them separate. I don't think you can accurately compare drivers from different eras, so I would agree with you that those types of conclusions about any driver on the current grid are just for fun.

If McLaren and / or Ferrari (preferably both) provide real competition this season and Vettel trashes them all, then I'll be the first in this thread to congratulate him and eat humble pie. I just somehow cannot see him (or any other driver currently on the grid) destroying the opposion like in 2011 without the best car by far at their disposal. If the McLaren is half as good as it looks so far, then I expect Vettel to take a good few wins, but nothing like witnessed last year. Either way, best of luck, I hope the battle is close and fair.

Kind of like 2010? Where were you in 2010? That is exactly what happened - Vettel took a few good wins. Although the RBR was the best car over all, Vettel's reliability issues evened things out completely. Now while you seem to need "pace" to even things out, what difference does it make what the evening factor is? Reliability, errors, incidents, strategy, lack of pace, who cares what the reason is? You are never, ever going to have a season where all the top cars have equal race and qually pace, equal reliability, equal team strategy calls, equal numbers of incidents, an equal number of errors, etc, across the board. You can't even get that in a spec series. But 2010 was as close as we can hope for in F1. 2010 gave us the close battle you are talking about, 5 driver/car combos going for the win with 3 races to go and 4 gunning for the win at the final race. You simply can't get any closer than that. The battle was close and fair and every one of those drivers was put in a position to have to press their cars to their potential to win. Vettel won, but it could have been anyone of them. So if you want to see that again, that is cool (but generally a difficult proposition). But if you are trying to pretend 2010 never happened or that the "reasons" fore parity matter - then I would have to disagree.

So I don't know why you say you "expect" to happen what already has happened if Vettel's car is not dominant. We already know that is what will happen. That is what has happened in racing down through the ages of time. No driver thrashes the entire field to the extent Vettel did in 2011 unless he has an overall dominant car (reliability, strategy, lack of errors, lack of incidents, and good race-qually pace included). I haven't ever seen any fan or foe of Vettel, or any other driver, suggest otherwise.

Edited by bourbon, 26 February 2012 - 21:22.

[Alarcon]

Well I guess I just don't understand that. We saw him in a below mid grid car for 7 races and overall, he performed well (2007); We saw him perform well in a mid grid car (2008); we saw him perform well in a car that was less dominant for 1/2 a season and then equal or better than the rest for the second 1/2 (2009); We saw him perform well in a car that should have been dominant, but was hit by so many reliability issues his ability to dominate was thwarted (2010); we saw him in a dominant car without reliability issues on the whole and he performed well (2011).

What scenario is missing?

He didn´t win the 2008 WDC with the TR, then rubbish...

[Alarcon]

The point isn't how he compares to some past driver from a different era. The point is that you are delimiting his achievement in 2008 season based on a flawed argument. The car was often good enough to get top 10 finishes and sometimes top 5 finishes and even win (at Monza). We know that. Why do we know that? Because Vettel did it.

You can say ANY driver would do the same. But that is just simply false. Fisi's car had the potential to win at Suzuka 2005 and Vettel's car had the potential to win at Canada 2011 for two desparate examples. And neither won. In the first case, Kimi came along and whomped Fisi and his renault outta the way on the final lap and Button did the same to Vettel in Canada. So yeah, having a great car with great potential is one thing. Driving it to its potential is another. Ask Vettel's 2008 teammate - he too had some good performances, but he didn't make it sing the way Vettel did, not even close. I would say that he should have at least gotten half of Vettel's point take (accounting for excess reliability and so forth) but he didn't. So the driver can make a difference. Ask Hamilton's 2008 teammate. He had the potential to win at Monza 2008, but Vettel outdrove him that day in his car that also had the potential. Ask Alonso, who had the potential for a top 5 finish at Valencia 2010, but literally gave it away to a mottle of midgridders as he sat in his car fuming over Hamilton and got no where near the potential from his car that day. That happens, that's racing. However, every driver I have mentioned has also pulled out some great performances so all you have to do is think back a little to find them.

So no, I cannot appreciate why some people keep talking about wanting to see Vettel in certain situations, when he has clearly been in them. And while you started off with that argument and ended on the 'comparisons to the greats' argument, I am keeping them separate. I don't think you can accurately compare drivers from different eras, so I would agree with you that those types of conclusions about any driver on the current grid are just for fun.



Kind of like 2010? Where were you in 2010? That is exactly what happened. Although the RBR was the best car over all, Vettel's reliability issues evened things out completely. Now while you seem to need "pace" to even things out, what difference does it make what the evening factor is? Reliability, errors, incidents, strategy, lack of pace, who cares what the reason is? You are never, ever going to have a season where all the top cars have equal race and qually pace, equal reliability, equal team strategy calls, equal numbers of incidents, etc, across the board. You can't even get that in a spec series. But 2010 was as close as we can hope for in F1, where all the drivers had incidents, but

2010 gave us the close battle you are talking about, 5 driver/car combos going for the win with 3 races to go. You simply can't get any closer than that. The battle was close and fair and every one of those drivers was put in a position to have to press their cars to their potential to win. Vettel won, but it could have been anyone of them. So if you want to see that again, that is cool (but generally a difficult proposition). But if you are trying to pretend 2010 never happened or that the "reasons" fore parity matter - then I would have to disagree.

I was writing my reply then I read yours... much better than mine. I can only add:

P.D. Vettel won the most equal WDC ever in F1 history, with 4 drivers with possibilities on the last race. That´s another thing we can´t change !!!

Edited by Alarcon, 26 February 2012 - 20:41.

[skyfolker]

Ahhh but, he did say he expects the pack to close up, and we don't know for sure how Vettel will cope with being under pressure. For most of the past couple years he's been well out in front in by far the quickest car, and able to take it relatively easy. On the one occasion where he actually came under pressure from a rapidly closing JB he fell off the track and handed JB the win. Question is, in a closer chasing pack, will that become more regular or will it prove to be a one-off ? Time will tell, but I'm not expecting Vettel to have it so easy this year as he has the last 2

For that "pressure" thing you should check some of his 2008 races(closing stages of Canadian GP,German GP),besides last year's Barcelona and Monaco.

[icecream_man]

For that "pressure" thing you should check some of his 2008 races(closing stages of Canadian GP,German GP),besides last year's Barcelona and Monaco.

Will do, as I said, Canada this year may well pan out to be a one-off

[gillesthegenius]

I can only add:

+1

Now I better get out of here before nbhb takes me to the courts.;)

[gillesthegenius]

For that "pressure" thing you should check some of his 2008 races(closing stages of Canadian GP,German GP),besides last year's Barcelona and Monaco.

Its amazing how easily people dismiss his 2008 season.

[gillesthegenius]

Will do, as I said, Canada this year may well pan out to be a one-off

Just check this clip out and put it into perspective by recalling the races that skyfolker mentioned; and you will realise that it was only a one off.

[Aieljose]

Well I guess I just don't understand that. We saw him in a below mid grid car for 7 races and overall, he performed well (2007); We saw him perform well in a mid grid car (2008); we saw him perform well in a car that was less dominant for 1/2 a season and then equal or better than the rest for the second 1/2 (2009); We saw him perform well in a car that should have been dominant, but was hit by so many reliability issues his ability to dominate was thwarted (2010); we saw him in a dominant car without reliability issues on the whole and he performed well (2011).

What scenario is missing?

How about seeing how he performs against a better teammate? Namely Hamilton or Alonso. Would love to see that. That is really the only question mark left imo.

[W03]

I haven't disputed that RB has been the best car overall during the last 2.5 years, what I'm disputing is the implication that it's been the best car by a huge margin at every one of those races; a claim which the evidence clearly disproves. Simply slagging off Webber as your 'evidence' is an extremely poor; I could just as cheaply say that the 08 Mac was massively faster than the competition in 08 and Lewis only looked good because HK was dreadful. I've not claimed that SV is a superman, a great, has done wonders, or is even the best driver on the grid; all I've done is refuted the relentless, repeated claims by the same two faces that he's massively overrated and only wins because he has a rocketship.

It wasnt the best car at every single race, but the vast majority, which is inline with the majority opinion. You on the other hand claimed it was only the best car at 50% of the races which is a very unique opinion.

[W03]

Nobody's claiming what MB says is absolute fact, but knows faaarrrrr more than you and your sidekick ever will, .

The same Brundle who claimed Hakkinen was a faster driver than Schumacher. Most of these pundits don't know half as much as they think they do. Brundle knows more about driving but since 1997 hes just been an observer like the rest of us, so is no better position to judge drivers. He is just hopping on the Vettel band wagon. To be expected, but pretty laughable really to say that, when the best driver Vettel ever beat was Webber, who infact almost beat him in 2011.

[W03]

19 flying laps on Q3 this season. Moment of pure "maximum pressure" in all the weekend. The only moment you can prove or not your sheer speed.

Result: 14 pole position (best record ever)

And the most important thing... No mistake. 19 flying laps and no mistake...

I never saw something similar, not even Ayrton.

A number of drivers did the exact same thing, the only difference was that they didnt have the fastest car, so their laps did not grap the same amount of attention.

[DarthWillie]

5552249[/url]']
Its amazing how easily people dismiss his 2008 season.

They don't dismiss it, they ignore it because they would lose their 'he needs a season in a non dominant car' line. There is nothing left to criticize so they are clutching at straws. Now Vettel has to prove himself against a top teammate, even though following their rules, their is no top driver in F1 at the moment.

5552279[/url]']
The same Brundle who claimed Hakkinen was a faster driver than Schumacher. Most of these pundits don't know half as much as they think they do. Brundle knows more about driving but since 1997 hes just been an observer like the rest of us, so is no better position to judge drivers. He is just hopping on the Vettel band wagon. To be expected, but pretty laughable really to say that, when the best driver Vettel ever beat was Webber, who infact almost beat him in 2011.

You must have seen a different 2011 than I did, because you believe Webber almost beat Vettel you level of knowledge is quite laughable.
I also love how every expert in you opinion is just an observer who knows nothing and is just a fanboy. And how you bring this as a fact, as if you are not just an observer with the disadvantage of having no F1 experience and no direct contact with F1 through your job

5552281[/url]']
A number of drivers did the exact same thing, the only difference was that they didnt have the fastest car, so their laps did not grap the same amount of attention.

Can you name these drivers?

[apoka]

Lets forget he said the new rules should negate some of Redbulls advantage...Oh what was that martin?....Oh so he concluded they did have an advantage which Seb used to win and in the same breath say in equal cars he thinks Seb would win it, lol...Please explain how winning in a car you think is superior can make you conclude that he will win in a car that isn't???. He has only proved to beat the rest afterall, with a superior car even according to Martin?
It's far more sensible to say, lets wait and see how he performs when he is in a car where he has to muscle and tussle for victories rather than flying into the distance in 2 laps, but that's just boring journalism isn't it

- overall best car in the past 2,5 years ≠ best car at each race (in 2008, the first half of 2009 and a some races in 2010/2011 he did not have the best car)
- you already said that the RB wasn't always miles faster than the others in your opinion - winning in such a car is also an achievement
- as long as Vettel wins, some people will keep on saying that it is because he has the best car; as soon as he does not win it will be obvious to them that it "always was the car" ==> no need to wait for that

Don't get me wrong. I understood the "let's wait and see" attitude pretty well back in 2008 and 2009 when he already was very successful already. But now after 2011, lots of stunning performances and two championships won under different circumstances, it's time to admit that he is, at the very least, not a level below other current F1 drivers. After all, a lot of our excitement in the sport is because we know that the likes of Alonso, Hamilton, Button, Vettel are excellent drivers. Each of them has to fight hard to beat the others an it would be insane to exclude Vettel from that list. (Ask yourself whether you think that there is a driver who would easily beat Vettel in equal cars.)

The "wait and see" attitude now only applies (in my opinion) to his status amongst the overall greatest drivers in F1, since he just races for 4 years.

[W03]

They don't dismiss it, they ignore it because they would lose their 'he needs a season in a non dominant car' line. There is nothing left to criticize so they are clutching at straws. Now Vettel has to prove himself against a top teammate, even though following their rules, their is no top driver in F1 at the moment.

Not ignoring it, but his win at monza in 2008 was a single race. Frentzen won a couple of races in a midfield jordan in 1999 but he was not a great driver. Vettel needs to fight for a title in an inferior car, to prove he is special.

You must have seen a different 2011 than I did, because you believe Webber almost beat Vettel you level of knowledge is quite laughable.
I also love how every expert in you opinion is just an observer who knows nothing and is just a fanboy. And how you bring this as a fact, as if you are not just an observer with the disadvantage of having no F1 experience and no direct contact with F1 through your job

Sorry I meant 2010 obviously. My point was that Brundle does not know more than me when it comes to judging drivers. That is already proven, because Brundle thinks Hakkinen was faster than Schumacher.

Can you name these drivers?

Hamilton and Alonso often did amazing final last qualifying laps, no mistakes, even more pressure than Vettel because they were not in the fastest car.

[Jaybools]

Well I guess I just don't understand that. We saw him in a below mid grid car for 7 races and overall, he performed well (2007); We saw him perform well in a mid grid car (2008); we saw him perform well in a car that was less dominant for 1/2 a season and then equal or better than the rest for the second 1/2 (2009); We saw him perform well in a car that should have been dominant, but was hit by so many reliability issues his ability to dominate was thwarted (2010); we saw him in a dominant car without reliability issues on the whole and he performed well (2011).

What scenario is missing?

He's grown since then. 2008 is definitely not mid-grid, his outstanding performances in those were definitely in top tier equivalent car (look at the useless Bourdais for god sake - Berger said he could barely react to braking in time and yet was fourth on the grid @ Monza!) so don't try and dispute this because you will be wrong. His rookie half season was in a shitty toro rosso with many crashes and a few good performances.

Since he appears to have developed so strongly (I say appears because relative to Webber he has outsped immensely compared to 2010 where they were VERY close on pace - but whether '11 was due to Webber falling back or Vettel picking up remains to be seen. Probably a bit of both), it would be very interesting to see him in a Force India/Lotus type car where only lower points are really possible.

[BennyJohnson]

Sorry I meant 2010 obviously. My point was that Brundle does not know more than me when it comes to judging drivers. That is already proven, because Brundle thinks Hakkinen was faster than Schumacher.

This chaps, is why W03 should be on your ignore list.

[W03]

This chaps, is why W03 should be on your ignore list.

So you also believe Mika was faster than Schumacher?

[BennyJohnson]

So you also believe Mika was faster than Schumacher?

Schumacher said Mika Hakkinen was the only driver he was ever scared of.

Furthermore, Brundle was teammate to both Schumacher and Hakkinen over the course of his career.

As I said before, that fact that you can even consider yourself as knowledgable as someone who has not only driven recently in Formula 1, but has commentated on every race, and grid walks every race, and talks to every driver, and understands every element of formula 1 makes everything you've ever said on this forum completely irrelevant.

EDIT: And just for the record, I do think Hakkinen was faster than Schumacher. He out qualified Ayrton Senna, who many consider to be the fastest driver in Formula 1, ever.

Edited by BennyJohnson, 27 February 2012 - 07:56.

[flyer121]

So you also believe Mika was faster than Schumacher?

By a big margin.

[W03]

Schumacher said Mika Hakkinen was the only driver he was ever scared of.

Furthermore, Brundle was teammate to both Schumacher and Hakkinen over the course of his career.

The numbers speak for themselves, but I doubt you have bothered to look at them.

As I said before, that fact that you can even consider yourself as knowledgable as someone who has not only driven recently in Formula 1, but has commentated on every race, and grid walks every race, and talks to every driver, and understands every element of formula 1 makes everything you've ever said on this forum completely irrelevant.

None of that gives any advantage in judging drivers over someone who studies it well as a fan. What on earth do grid walks have to do with judging drivers?

EDIT: And just for the record, I do think Hakkinen was faster than Schumacher. He out qualified Ayrton Senna, who many consider to be the fastest driver in Formula 1, ever.

So did Gerhard Berger. Do you even know who that is?

[BennyJohnson]

The numbers speak for themselves, but I doubt you have bothered to look at them.

None of that gives any advantage in judging drivers over someone who studies it well as a fan. What on earth do grid walks have to do with judging drivers?

So did Gerhard Berger. Do you even know who that is?

By your standard the numbers mean nothing, because they were never team mates.

You're saying that you, as a fan, looking in from the outside, have the same basis to judge a driver from his teammate... Your parents must be related.

Sounds like a Macdonald's meal in Austria.

[Zava]

Hamilton and Alonso often did amazing final last qualifying laps, no mistakes, even more pressure than Vettel because they were not in the fastest car.

you're talking about the Hamilton who failed to deliver in Q3s big time, could've had pole in malaysia, hungary, abu dhabi (just to name a few, Alarcon knows the full list ) if it wasn't for his mistakes and Vettel's perfect Q3 laps.
also about Alonso, in the closing stage of the year, he was sometimes outqualified by Massa, in spa by 1 second. based on that big gap, he couldn't have been perfect, could he?
(getting outqualified by a bee's dick happens, so I'm not on about the races he was 1 tenth slower than Massa)

Edited by Zava, 27 February 2012 - 08:26.

[W03]

you're talking about the Hamilton who failed to deliver in Q3s big time, could've had pole in malaysia, hungary, abu dhabi (just to name a few, Alarcon knows the full list ) if it wasn't for his mistakes and Vettel's perfect Q3 laps.
also about Alonso, in the closing stage of the year, he was sometimes outqualified by Massa, in spa by 1 second. based on that big gap, he couldn't have been perfect, could he?
(getting outqualified by a bee's dick happens, so I'm not on about the races he was 1 tenth slower than Massa)

Hamilton was pretty sloppy but still did some amazing laps, but Alonso has been fantastic in qualifying. He had traffic at spa by the way. Point is many drivers do great final laps with no mistakes under great pressure, but they go unnoticed because its not for pole. People underestimate how flattering a great car can be. Massa is a prime example. The vast majority really thought he was one of the very fastest drivers in the world, because they underestimated how good his Ferrari's used to be.

[Group B]

This chaps, is why W03 should be on your ignore list.

Indeed, that line says really sums up the trollmeister's total disconnection from reality.

[Group B]

So you also believe Mika was faster than Schumacher?

Lots of people thought that MH could be a match, or a fraction quicker, than MS over a single hot lap. As I recall Brundle did not say MH was better however, he said he'd back MH over one lap but MS over a race. But of course Brundle's close up first hand knowledge pales compared to you on your sofa.

[W03]

Indeed, that line says really sums up the trollmeister's total disconnection from reality.

Once again personal attacks, which I thought were against forum rules.

[W03]

Lots of people thought that MH could be a match, or a fraction quicker, than MS over a single hot lap. As I recall Brundle did not say MH was better however, he said he'd back MH over one lap but MS over a race. But of course Brundle's close up first hand knowledge pales compared to you on your sofa.

No it pales in comparison to lap timing data, which proved that even despite being a rookie, Michael was 0.250 faster on average than Mika was against Brundle. Its ok, you keep ignoring reality and listening to your mate Brundle. The same expert that thought it was a brilliant Idea to pit Alonso, right after Webber at Abu Dubia 2010.

Edited by W03, 27 February 2012 - 09:12.

[gillesthegenius]

So you also believe Mika was faster than Schumacher?

I think majority of the f1 fraternity does so.