603 replies to this topic

[Dicun]

Blaming Ocon for that incident is so typical Vettel.

 

Last year I made an elaborate post about Vettel's tendency to deflect his own mistakes onto others. This is another one to add to the list.

He too often delusionally refuses to accept blame and shifts it to someone who's mostly innocent. He thinks he can shift public perception, and sometimes this has worked.

 

Vettel at Aston Martin was supposed to be a fresh start, to shed the negativity off him. I just cannot believe that it took him only 1 race to go back to his usual doings. He'll never learn.

 

Disclaimer: it will be a long post, my apologies in advance.

 

Vettel's case is a curious one. On the one hand, he is a four-time WDC with the 3rd most career wins in the sport's history. He is also the youngest driver to win the title ever, as of now.

 

But on the other hand, I have always thought that he is an overachiever, and his talent/skills are not truly represented by his former success.

 

Now, I know it's the internet. No matter how I put it, how carefully I phrase it, people will jump, get offended, and ignore whatever I write as a disclaimer. Obviously, Vettel has talent and is a much better driver than most of the drivers in the history of the sport. Nobody gets a top drive without talent, and nobody wins races, let alone titles without talent. 

 

But there are arguably some differences in terms of how impressive champions or legacies are, and I don't think Vettel would be ahead of Prost in terms of race wins, or he would be behind only Schumacher, Hamilton and Fangio in terms of WDC titles purely on merit. But as I said, I know full well that people who want to take offence at my opinion will ignore what I mentioned about him being obviously talented, so we might as well just jump into the nitty-gritty.

 

Vettel always struck me as a driver who needs special circumstances to shine. The best package overall through a season, a slower/unfortunate teammate, privileged situation within the team, and not being in traffic.

 

I never felt that Vettel was your "driver's driver". He doesn't shine in a wheel to wheel battle. Unlike other multiple champions and decorated legends of the sport, such as Prost, Schumacher, Alonso Hamilton, Senna, Stewart, Clark, Lauda or Mansell, he doesn't have wins that make you think how on Earth he pulled that off, regarding the circumstances. To me, his most memorable wins would be 2013 Germany and 2015 Malaysia because, on both occasions, he managed to beat faster cars ultimately. But these are only two wins out of fifty-three.

 

Ultimately, there are three reasons why I think it is clear Vettel's successes led to people believe for a while that he was better than he really is:

 

1) Wins from low grid positions (or rather, the lack thereof)

2) His performance as defending champion in a year when he loses the title fight

3) His performance against strong teammates

 

Let's look at these points in detail. 

 

1) This one really is a striking and telling piece of statistics. Out of his fifty-three wins, Vettel never won a single race when starting from lower than 3rd - and even that happened only six times. In other words, Vettel needed to start from the first row 89% of the times he managed to win the race.

 

For comparison, let's take a look at the aforementioned all-time greats,  Prost, Schumacher, Alonso, Hamilton, Senna, Stewart, Clark, Lauda and Mansell, how they fared in this respect.

 

Prost: 51 wins with 16 wins (31,4%) starting from lower than 3rd

Schumacher: 91 wins with 7 wins (7,7%) starting from lower than 3rd

Alonso: 32 wins with 8 wins (25%) starting from lower than 3rd

Hamilton: 96 wins with 6 wins (6,3%) starting from lower than 3rd

Senna: 41 wins with 7 wins (17%) starting from lower than 3rd

Stewart: 27 wins with 8 wins (29,6%) starting from lower than 3rd

Clark: 25 wins with 4 wins (16%) starting from lower than 3rd

Lauda: 25 wins with 9 wins (36%) starting from lower than 3rd

Mansell: 31 wins with 4 wins (12,9%) starting from lower than 3rd

 

As you can see, some greats won more races when starting from lower, and some won less. But Vettel is the only driver with at least 25 wins in the sport's history who never managed to win even a single race when starting lower than 3rd. Astonishing.

 

2) Another quite telling piece of statistics is that out of the 13 drivers who won more than 1 title since 1962, Vettel is the only one who couldn't win a single race as defending champion in a year when he couldn't defend his title. In other words, even though they couldn't defend their title, all other multiple WDCs won at least one race as defending champions.

 

Let's look at these historic pieces of statistics in chronological order:

 

Hill

Title years: 1962, 1968

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 3 (2 in 1963, 1 in 1969)

 

Clark

Title years: 1963, 1965

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 4 (3 in 1964, 1 in 1966)

 

Stewart

Title years: 1969, 1971, 1973

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 5 (1 in 1970, 4 in 1972)

Note that Stewart retired at the end of the 1973 season.

 

Fittipaldi

Title years: 1972, 1974

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 5 (3 in 1973, 2 in 1975)

 

Lauda

Title years: 1975, 1977, 1984

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 8 (5 in 1976, 2 in 1978 and 1 in 1985)

 

Piquet

Title years: 1981, 1983, 1987

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 3 (1 in 1982, 2 in 1984)

Note that 1988 is the only other year since 1963 when the defending champion couldn't win a single race.

 

Prost

Title years: 1985, 1986, 1989, 1993

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 8 (3 in 1987, 5 in 1990)

Note that Prost retired at the end of the 1993 season.

 

Senna

Title years: 1988, 1990, 1991

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 9 (6 in 1989, 3 in 1992)

 

Schumacher

Title years: 1994, 1995, 2000-2004

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 4 (3 in 1996, 1 in 2005)

 

Hakkinen

Title years: 1998, 1999

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 4 (2000)

 

Alonso

Title years: 2005, 2006

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 4 (2007)

 

Hamilton

Title years: 2008, 2014, 2015, 2017-2020

Wins in the year(s) losing the title as defending champion: 12 (2 in 2009, 10 in 2016)

 

Should Hamilton end up losing the title for the ongoing 2021 season, he already won this year, so Vettel would still be the only driver in almost 60 years who couldn't win a single race in the year(s) when the said driver was a defending champion but lost the title fight. 

 

Now, I know what arguments a few people will throw in, so let me counter them in advance. 

 

a) "It's not fair, Vettel only had one year like that, while many others had multiple ones."

 

True. But firstly, more years as defending champion means more chances that one slips up and can't win a single race. Apart from that, Hakkinen and Alonso also only had one year like that. Still, it didn't prevent them from winning multiple races.

 

b) "It's not fair, the Mercs dominated 2014, the only year when Vettel lost the title as a defending champion."

 

True. However, the Mercedes domination didn't prevent Vettel's teammate, Ricciardo, to win 3 races. It's telling that whenever Mercedes dropped the ball, it was Ricciardo who was there to pick the pieces up and not his established, 4-time WDC teammate. Besides, it was the same team Vettel enjoyed his successes with before. Many champions listed above switched teams and sometimes even ended up with inferior equipment, still managed to win multiple races (Stewart in 1970, Lauda in 1978, Prost in 1990, Schumacher in 1996, Alonso in 2007). 

 

c) "It's not fair, Schumacher's sole win from 2005 was because of the infamous tyre-gate at Indianapolis."

 

True. However, Schumacher already proved in 1996 that he could do what Vettel couldn't, even though Vettel's teammate proved multiple times that the RB10 could win races. Also, even if Schumacher couldn't have won that particular US Grand Prix in 2005, the pattern is clear: 12 multiple champions since 1962, in 23 seasons as defending champions who ended up losing the title, still managing to win at least one race per season as defending champions.

 

d) "It's not fair; Piquet also had a year as defending champion when he couldn't win a race."

 

True. But refer to a). Multiple years when the title defence is unsuccessful also means multiple chances where the defending champion might not win a single race. Also, Piquet had two other seasons in 1982 and 1984 where he proved he could do what Vettel couldn't. His 1988 Lotus 100T was nothing like the RB10 in 2014 in terms of competitiveness. The RB10 was arguably the 2nd best car of 2014, which was able to score 3 wins and 12 podiums in total, whereas the Lotus 100T was 4th in the WCC with 0 wins and 3 podiums.

 

3) 2014 is also a peculiar season where we saw how a team rookie thoroughly beat and outscored the established 4-time WDC star driver. Vettel was the defending champion, having won 4 titles on the trot. He was in the team that had built around him, he was driving a car that was designed with him in mind, and he was only 26 at that time.

 

The beating he got from Ricciardo (238-167 in points, 12-7 in qualifications, 11-3 in races, 8-4 in podiums, 3-0 in wins) was, to put it mildly, decisive and demoralising. No other established, multiple champions in the history of the sport got beaten by a team rookie, and certainly not in that fashion. 2014 was the first stark indication that Vettel massively overachieved in the previous years. 

 

This scenario (being unable to win a single race when the team rookie wins several ones; getting outscored by 42.5%; achieving only half the amount of the teammate's podiums) never happened to any other multiple champions in the history of the sport before or since either.

 

Many tried to defend Vettel with various half-cooked arguments, but the same thing happened to him when Leclerc joined Ferrari and quickly gained the upper hand. And although 2020 was a brutal beating again, this time, it wasn't as much of a shock since Vettel's stock was considerably lower by 2019. But Leclerc beating Vettel basically confirmed that 2014 was not just a one-off. It also turned out since that infamous 2014 season that Ricciardo, while unquestionably a top driver, is most probably not even on the level of the likes of Hamilton, Verstappen, Alonso–or Leclerc, for that matter, who duly beat Vettel even more thoroughly than Ricciardo did back in 2014 (14-3 in qualifying, 10-3 in races, 98-33 in points).

 

All this led to yet another scenario that was unprecedented in the history of the sport: a 33-year-old multiple champion's team want him gone. The team are not offering him a contract extension, and no front-running team want to sign him either, which leads to discussions about whether he would retire. Vettel's career was basically saved by Aston Martin as he was not on the shopping list of any of the big teams. In fact, Horner, Wolff and Brown all specifically said that they not even entertained the idea of signing Vettel. Ouch.

 

A 33-year-old multiple WDC is a pariah as far as the big teams are concerned - not that's something that would have been unthinkable with the likes of Prost or Senna or Schumacher or Hamilton or Alonso - aka the real and true greats of the sport. I stand by my opinion that Vettel is probably the weakest multiple-time champion in the history of the sport, whose CV is definitely more impressive than it would have been purely on merit.

[PlayboyRacer]

1) This one really is a striking and telling piece of statistics. Out of his fifty-three wins, Vettel never won a single race when starting from lower than 3rd - and even that happened only six times. In other words, Vettel needed to start from the first row 89% of the times he managed to win the race.

Can you elaborate a little on this. It's too simplistic. When you're in a top car, you're rarely going to qualify lowish. Even more so if you have sensational 1 lap speed and Vettel certainly did.

I'd like to know - did he ever have a race win where, by the end of the first lap (or later), he was anywhere from 4th position or lower and literally fought his way through to win, be it with bold passes and/or scintillating speed where he overcame every driver (or most) in front of him? So not drivers retiring in front of him, just Vettel simply monstering the drivers in front with a proper racers performance. A "backs to the wall" sort of race win.

I'm actually curious. I'm not saying it didn't happen, I genuinely can't remember. But yeah grid position can sometimes be misleading. You can still put in a phenomenal comeback drive despite starting in the top 3. It's overcoming adversity and pressure with brilliant racecraft and speed.

To me that epitomizes a *racer*, as opposed to a *driver*. Having a top car and winning from pole takes real talent and speed. But a heroic comeback drive is something else, particularly if some passing is done on the track. I think you'd find alot of World Champions have one or two of these sorts of heroic drives, whether because they've qualified outside podium positions (or further down) or they've been shuffled back early and they come out swinging with something special to win. Raikkonen at Suzuka 2005 is a perfect example... and that was from a long way back...

Edited by PlayboyRacer, 31 March 2021 - 04:41.

[Dicun]

Can you elaborate a little on this. It's too simplistic. When you're in a top car, you're rarely going to qualify lowish. Even more so if you have sensational 1 lap speed and Vettel certainly did.

I'd like to know - did he ever have a race win where, by the end of the first lap, he was anywhere from 4th or lower and literally fought his way through to win, be it with bold passes or scintillating speed where he overcame everyone in front of him? So nobody retiring in front of him, just Vettel simply monstering the drivers in front with a proper racers performance.

I'm curious. I'm not saying it didn't happen, I genuinely can't remember. But yeah grid position can sometimes be misleading. You can still put in a phenomenal comeback drive despite starting in the top 3. It's called overcoming adversity and pressure with brilliant racecraft and speed.

To me that epitomizes a racer. Having a top car and winning from pole takes real talent and speed. But a heroic comeback drive is something else, particularly if some passing is done on the track.

 

I know exactly what you mean when suggesting that starting positions won't always tell you the full story. For example, Senna started from pole at the 1988 Japanese Grand Prix but bogged down when the lights went off and dropped back to 14th by the first corner. Or the way Checo started from fifth but was dropped back to dead last by the end of the first lap only to recover and score an amazing win.

 

But I'm afraid, in Vettel's case, his statistics hide no racing gems like that – basically, looking at his statistics, what you see is what you get. Here is the full list of all of his 53 wins, complete with the details you were asking for (lights to flag wins are highlighted):

 

2008 Italy: all laps led apart from laps 19-22, worst position during the race: 4th for 4 laps

2009 China: all laps led apart from laps 16-19 and 40, worst position during the race: 3rd for 6 laps

2009 Britain: all laps led apart from laps 45-47, worst position during the race: 2nd for 3 laps

2009 Japan: all laps led

2009 Abu Dhabi: all laps led apart from laps 1-17, worst position during the race: 2nd for 16 laps

2010 Malaysia: all laps led apart from laps 23-24, worst position during the race: 2nd for 2 laps

2010 Europe: all laps led

2010 Japan: all laps led apart from laps 26-38, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2010 Brazil: all laps led apart from laps 25-26, worst position during the race: 2nd for 2 laps

2010 Abu Dhabi: all laps led apart from laps 25-39, worst position during the race: 2nd for 14 laps

2011 Australia: all laps led apart from laps 14-17, worst position during the race: 4th for 1 lap

2011 Malaysia: all laps led apart from laps 14 and 26, worst position during the race: 3rd for 2 laps

2011 Turkey: all laps led apart from lap 12, worst position during the race: 2nd for 1 lap

2011 Spain: led between laps 24-33, 36-47 and 50-66, worst position during the race: 6th for 1 lap

2011 Monaco: all laps led apart from laps 16-32, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2011 Europe: all laps led apart from lap 14, worst position during the race: 2nd for 1 lap

2011 Belgium: all laps led apart from laps 1-2, 6-10, 14-17 and 31, worst position during the race: 7th for 1 lap

2011 Italy: all laps led apart from laps 1-4, worst position during the race: 2nd for 4 laps

2011 Singapore: all laps led

2011 South Korea: all laps led apart from laps 35-36, worst position during the race: 2nd for 2 laps

2011 India: all laps led

2012 Bahrain: all laps led apart from laps 12 and 40, worst position during the race: 2nd for 2 laps

2012 Singapore: 2nd between laps 1-9 and 15-22, worst position during the race: 10th for 1 lap

2012 Japan: all laps led

2012 South Korea: all laps led

2012 India: all laps led

2013 Malaysia: led between laps 1-4, 19-22, 31-32 and 46-56, worst position during the race: 7th for 1 lap

2013 Bahrain: all laps led apart from laps 1-2 and 11-14, worst position during the race: 5th for 1 lap

2013 Canada: all laps led apart from laps 16-18, worst position during the race: 2nd for 3 laps

2013 Germany: led between laps 1-6, 14-40 and 50-60, worst position during the race: 7th for 1 lap

2013 Belgium: all laps led

2013 Italy: all laps led apart from laps 24-27, worst position during the race: 5th for 1 lap

2013 Singapore: all laps led

2013 South Korea: all laps led

2013 Japan: led between laps 13-14, 29-37 and 43-53, worst position during the race: 3rd for 23 laps

2013 India: led between laps 1-2, 29-31 and 33-60, worst position during the race: 17th for 1 lap

2013 Abu Dhabi: all laps led

2015 Malaysia: all laps led apart from laps 1-3, 18-23 and 38, worst position during the race: 3rd for 3 laps

2015 Hungary: all laps led apart from lap 22, worst position during the race: 2nd for 1 lap

2015 Singapore: all laps led

2017 Australia: led between laps 17-22 and 26-57, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2017 Bahrain: led between laps 14-33 and 42-57, worst position during the race: 11th for 1 lap

2017 Monaco: led between laps 34 and 78, worst position during the race: 2nd for 33 laps

2017 Hungary: all laps led apart from laps 32-42, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2017 Brazil: all laps led apart from laps 30-42, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2018 Australia: led between laps 19-58, worst position during the race: 3rd for 17 laps

2018 Bahrain: all laps led apart from laps 18-25, worst position during the race: 4th for 1 lap

2018 Canada: all laps led

2018 Britain: all laps led apart from laps 21 and 34-46, worst position during the race: 2nd for 13 laps

2018 Belgium: all laps led

2019 Singapore: led between laps 31-61, worst position during the race: 10th for 1 lap

 

Even when one would think when looking at races like the 2013 Indian Grand Prix or the 2017 Bahrain Grand Prix that huh, Vettel was 17th or 11th for a lap, there must have been some issue, so he must have fought his way back after an unforeseen difficulty, right? Well, no. Even these rare examples are only races where he was on a different strategy and pitted early. Any of these occasions where you see him dropping out of the top 10 in the above list was because of scheduled pit stops. 

 

That's his racing legacy - very comfortable when leading, no dramas, no wheel to wheel battles. A total of 14 lights to flag victories, that's some 26% of all his wins and many more where he only briefly relinquished the lead when he pitted. There are simply no legendary comebacks from the back of the pack. There is no stuff of the legends there, nothing like Prost 1982 South Africa or Schumacher 1995 Belgium or Watson 1983 Long Beach or Clark 1967 Italy. Frankly, there was never an inspiring or magical moment in Vettel's whole body of work.

 

And that's why Vettel's case is really unique. On paper, the 4th most successful driver in terms of WDCs won, and the 3rd most successful in terms of races won. And yet, his legacy is full of wins where he basically had to cruise into the distance, starting from mostly the front row. As soon as he would need to fight or overcome adversity for a win, he doesn't deliver. Now, to be fair, I wouldn't hold the 2012 Brazilian Grand Prix against him. He fell back to the pack and could "only" finish 6th even though there was a safety car phase too. But the car was badly damaged in his crash with Senna, so it probably was quite off from its full potential.

 

But the point is, Vettel's career spans over 258 races and 13 years, and yet, there's not a single heroic/inspiring/heroic comeback drive to be found in there. There's no single vitory with he achieved after starting from outside the first two rows. All other greats have some races where one can say, "look at him, how did he manage to win from there, under those circumstances - I'll never know" – but not Vettel. Very peculiar indeed.

[PlayboyRacer]

Thanks Dicun. Some hard work you've put into that. Much appreciated.

He's a unique case. I'll stick with what I said a while back. Had Vettel only won 2 WDC's instead of 4, it'd feel much more his natural level. Sitting with the likes of Hakkinen and Fittipaldi. But when you've won 4 and you're sitting with Prost (and above drivers like Senna and Lauda) it's going to raise eyebrows when you throw in weird, underperforming seasons and a monumental amount of race mistakes and spins in the last 3 years. Because statistically he does sit with the true greats and yet, because of all that, he's the odd one out. He's a curious case Vettel.

[flatoutflatbroke]

 

I know exactly what you mean when suggesting that starting positions won't always tell you the full story. For example, Senna started from pole at the 1988 Japanese Grand Prix but bogged down when the lights went off and dropped back to 14th by the first corner. Or the way Checo started from fifth but was dropped back to dead last by the end of the first lap only to recover and score an amazing win.

 

But I'm afraid, in Vettel's case, his statistics hide no racing gems like that – basically, looking at his statistics, what you see is what you get. Here is the full list of all of his 53 wins, complete with the details you were asking for (lights to flag wins are highlighted):

 

2008 Italy: all laps led apart from laps 19-22, worst position during the race: 4th for 4 laps

2009 China: all laps led apart from laps 16-19 and 40, worst position during the race: 3rd for 6 laps

2009 Britain: all laps led apart from laps 45-47, worst position during the race: 2nd for 3 laps

2009 Japan: all laps led

2009 Abu Dhabi: all laps led apart from laps 1-17, worst position during the race: 2nd for 16 laps

2010 Malaysia: all laps led apart from laps 23-24, worst position during the race: 2nd for 2 laps

2010 Europe: all laps led

2010 Japan: all laps led apart from laps 26-38, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2010 Brazil: all laps led apart from laps 25-26, worst position during the race: 2nd for 2 laps

2010 Abu Dhabi: all laps led apart from laps 25-39, worst position during the race: 2nd for 14 laps

2011 Australia: all laps led apart from laps 14-17, worst position during the race: 4th for 1 lap

2011 Malaysia: all laps led apart from laps 14 and 26, worst position during the race: 3rd for 2 laps

2011 Turkey: all laps led apart from lap 12, worst position during the race: 2nd for 1 lap

2011 Spain: led between laps 24-33, 36-47 and 50-66, worst position during the race: 6th for 1 lap

2011 Monaco: all laps led apart from laps 16-32, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2011 Europe: all laps led apart from lap 14, worst position during the race: 2nd for 1 lap

2011 Belgium: all laps led apart from laps 1-2, 6-10, 14-17 and 31, worst position during the race: 7th for 1 lap

2011 Italy: all laps led apart from laps 1-4, worst position during the race: 2nd for 4 laps

2011 Singapore: all laps led

2011 South Korea: all laps led apart from laps 35-36, worst position during the race: 2nd for 2 laps

2011 India: all laps led

2012 Bahrain: all laps led apart from laps 12 and 40, worst position during the race: 2nd for 2 laps

2012 Singapore: 2nd between laps 1-9 and 15-22, worst position during the race: 10th for 1 lap

2012 Japan: all laps led

2012 South Korea: all laps led

2012 India: all laps led

2013 Malaysia: led between laps 1-4, 19-22, 31-32 and 46-56, worst position during the race: 7th for 1 lap

2013 Bahrain: all laps led apart from laps 1-2 and 11-14, worst position during the race: 5th for 1 lap

2013 Canada: all laps led apart from laps 16-18, worst position during the race: 2nd for 3 laps

2013 Germany: led between laps 1-6, 14-40 and 50-60, worst position during the race: 7th for 1 lap

2013 Belgium: all laps led

2013 Italy: all laps led apart from laps 24-27, worst position during the race: 5th for 1 lap

2013 Singapore: all laps led

2013 South Korea: all laps led

2013 Japan: led between laps 13-14, 29-37 and 43-53, worst position during the race: 3rd for 23 laps

2013 India: led between laps 1-2, 29-31 and 33-60, worst position during the race: 17th for 1 lap

2013 Abu Dhabi: all laps led

2015 Malaysia: all laps led apart from laps 1-3, 18-23 and 38, worst position during the race: 3rd for 3 laps

2015 Hungary: all laps led apart from lap 22, worst position during the race: 2nd for 1 lap

2015 Singapore: all laps led

2017 Australia: led between laps 17-22 and 26-57, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2017 Bahrain: led between laps 14-33 and 42-57, worst position during the race: 11th for 1 lap

2017 Monaco: led between laps 34 and 78, worst position during the race: 2nd for 33 laps

2017 Hungary: all laps led apart from laps 32-42, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2017 Brazil: all laps led apart from laps 30-42, worst position during the race: 3rd for 1 lap

2018 Australia: led between laps 19-58, worst position during the race: 3rd for 17 laps

2018 Bahrain: all laps led apart from laps 18-25, worst position during the race: 4th for 1 lap

2018 Canada: all laps led

2018 Britain: all laps led apart from laps 21 and 34-46, worst position during the race: 2nd for 13 laps

2018 Belgium: all laps led

2019 Singapore: led between laps 31-61, worst position during the race: 10th for 1 lap

 

Even when one would think when looking at races like the 2013 Indian Grand Prix or the 2017 Bahrain Grand Prix that huh, Vettel was 17th or 11th for a lap, there must have been some issue, so he must have fought his way back after an unforeseen difficulty, right? Well, no. Even these rare examples are only races where he was on a different strategy and pitted early. Any of these occasions where you see him dropping out of the top 10 in the above list was because of scheduled pit stops. 

 

That's his racing legacy - very comfortable when leading, no dramas, no wheel to wheel battles. A total of 14 lights to flag victories, that's some 26% of all his wins and many more where he only briefly relinquished the lead when he pitted. There are simply no legendary comebacks from the back of the pack. There is no stuff of the legends there, nothing like Prost 1982 South Africa or Schumacher 1995 Belgium or Watson 1983 Long Beach or Clark 1967 Italy. Frankly, there was never an inspiring or magical moment in Vettel's whole body of work.

 

And that's why Vettel's case is really unique. On paper, the 4th most successful driver in terms of WDCs won, and the 3rd most successful in terms of races won. And yet, his legacy is full of wins where he basically had to cruise into the distance, starting from mostly the front row. As soon as he would need to fight or overcome adversity for a win, he doesn't deliver. Now, to be fair, I wouldn't hold the 2012 Brazilian Grand Prix against him. He fell back to the pack and could "only" finish 6th even though there was a safety car phase too. But the car was badly damaged in his crash with Senna, so it probably was quite off from its full potential.

 

But the point is, Vettel's career spans over 258 races and 13 years, and yet, there's not a single heroic/inspiring/heroic comeback drive to be found in there. There's no single vitory with he achieved after starting from outside the first two rows. All other greats have some races where one can say, "look at him, how did he manage to win from there, under those circumstances - I'll never know" – but not Vettel. Very peculiar indeed.

 

 

Great piece of work there, well researched!

[DeKnyff]

 

I know exactly what you mean when suggesting that starting positions won't always tell you the full story. For example, Senna started from pole at the 1988 Japanese Grand Prix but bogged down when the lights went off and dropped back to 14th by the first corner. Or the way Checo started from fifth but was dropped back to dead last by the end of the first lap only to recover and score an amazing win.

 

...

 

But the point is, Vettel's career spans over 258 races and 13 years, and yet, there's not a single heroic/inspiring/heroic comeback drive to be found in there. There's no single vitory with he achieved after starting from outside the first two rows. All other greats have some races where one can say, "look at him, how did he manage to win from there, under those circumstances - I'll never know" – but not Vettel. Very peculiar indeed.

 

Excellent piece of work, thank you very much.

[ensign14]

And that's why Vettel's case is really unique. On paper, the 4th most successful driver in terms of WDCs won, and the 3rd most successful in terms of races won. And yet, his legacy is full of wins where he basically had to cruise into the distance, starting from mostly the front row. As soon as he would need to fight or overcome adversity for a win, he doesn't deliver.

 

 

Actually it's not quite unique.  As a very perceptive commenter pointed out in 2011...

 

Vettel is Ascari. Put him out in front and it's metronomic. Stick him in midfield and he finds it much more difficult. Ascari felt the pressure when he wasn't winning. Vettel seems to be of a similar stamp.

 

 

Take a look at Ascari's grid positions and wins.  It's of course not directly comparable, given the ease of overtaking, the more bunched-up grids (in some races, 7th would see you on the second row - and a second row considerably closer to pole than today), and the consequent lack of many bothering to get pole for the sake of a statistic (I think Reims was a valuable pole because of the 100 bottles of bubbly that came with it).

 

But Ascari had 9 wins from pole, 3 from 2nd, and 1 from 3rd. 

And the first race he lost in his big run of 9 consecutive was Reims - where he was in a slipstreaming battle.  And was beaten by team-mate Hawthorn in it.  Then in a similar event at Monza he got involved in a crash with the lapped Marimon while the canny Fangio finagled his way through.

[Anuity]

 

That's his racing legacy - very comfortable when leading, no dramas, no wheel to wheel battles. A total of 14 lights to flag victories, that's some 26% of all his wins and many more where he only briefly relinquished the lead when he pitted. There are simply no legendary comebacks from the back of the pack. There is no stuff of the legends there, nothing like Prost 1982 South Africa or Schumacher 1995 Belgium or Watson 1983 Long Beach or Clark 1967 Italy. Frankly, there was never an inspiring or magical moment in Vettel's whole body of work.

 

And that's why Vettel's case is really unique. On paper, the 4th most successful driver in terms of WDCs won, and the 3rd most successful in terms of races won. And yet, his legacy is full of wins where he basically had to cruise into the distance, starting from mostly the front row. As soon as he would need to fight or overcome adversity for a win, he doesn't deliver. Now, to be fair, I wouldn't hold the 2012 Brazilian Grand Prix against him. He fell back to the pack and could "only" finish 6th even though there was a safety car phase too. But the car was badly damaged in his crash with Senna, so it probably was quite off from its full potential.

 

 

 

 

 

It's not that unique actually.

Hakkinen won 20% of his races leading from start to finish and a handful where Coulthard led only for a couple of laps.

You can also see that almost all of his wins came in the same fashion as Vettel's. Same applies for Villeneuve's wins.

 

Obviously when you qualify upfront consistently, you will consistently find yourself in the best spot to have a clean race. If anything it's a quality, I don't understand why this should be highlighted as a weakness necessarily.

Perhaps Fernando, while a better driver overall, has never been the quickest in qualifying and then had to compensate this weakness by battling it through the field, for instance.

 

I think there were magical moments in Vettel's career. 

Starting with his first win in Monza. Yes he led, but it was a very special debut win. Winning 9 races is a big highlight. And once again demonstrates how consistent he could be. Yes it was a dominant car, but nobody else has ever come close to that record. Hamilton was arguably driving even more dominant cars in 2014,2015,2016, 2019 and never came close to that. Neither did Schumacher in 2002/2004.

 

 

Just looking at stats does not always tell the whole story.

Kimi and Rubens won from the back of the grid. They were great victories, really flashy. Vettel does not have wins like this.

But those were unique circumstances and everything has to come together for it to happen. While an absolutely epic win in Suzuka 2005, it really should have been a walk in the park in normal circumstances, as there was no competition in terms of speed to that Mclaren/Kimi, apart from Alonso.

 

 

Races like Spa 1995, etc. are special  precisely because they are unique. Surely extortionary drivers like Schumacher had them. But even for them it was not a regular thing. You can't expect every driver to have races like that. And that is the reason why those are remembered.

Edited by Anuity, 31 March 2021 - 07:52.

[BRK]

Er, sorry to be pissing on the parade a bit here, but I recall his charge through the field in 2012 Brazil to win the title against Alonso. 

[Jovanotti]

Yeah I also think the comparison is not fair. Vettel during the RB years was a consistently amazing qualifier and one if not the best in controlling a race from the front. This quality really stood out imo.There are also drives like Brazil 2012 under enourmous pressure or Abu Dhabi 2013 from the back of the grid.

Edited by Jovanotti, 31 March 2021 - 07:52.

[PlayboyRacer]

It's not that unique actually.
Hakkinen won 20% of his races leading from start to finish and a handful where Coulthard led only for a couple of laps.
You can also see that almost all of his wins came in the same fashion as Vettel's. Same applies for Villeneuve's wins.

We know you love bringing others into this Vettel conversation so let's do it. You mention Hakkinen and Villeneuve. That's great.

IMO Hakkinens two greatest performances are Luxembourg 1998 and Spa 2000. They don't need explanation. If you're not sure why, have a look.

Villeneuves imo are Portugal 1996 and Jerez 1997 (which was a race win until he gifted it) Again they don't need explanation.

Those four race winning performances between the two included outrageous overtakes, "come from behind" elements, searing pace and had loads of pressure and adversity. All included championship implications as they were involved in direct WDC duels.

Can you point out to me two race winning performances from Vettel that measure up to those four between Hakkinen and Villeneuve?

Edited by PlayboyRacer, 31 March 2021 - 08:01.

[BRK]

I have another problem with this line of reasoning: How many other champions on the grid have won with 'scintillating drives, overcoming adversity' from the back of the grid? Please share stats, perhaps that might be a valid comparison.

 

Here's a counter-interpretation: Seb has been among the greatest in terms of leading from LTF, and was a superb qualifier with the right car undernearth him. A bit funny to see this being twisted to work against his legacy. 

[Hellow]

 

But the point is, Vettel's career spans over 258 races and 13 years, and yet, there's not a single heroic/inspiring/heroic comeback drive to be found in there. There's no single vitory with he achieved after starting from outside the first two rows. All other greats have some races where one can say, "look at him, how did he manage to win from there, under those circumstances - I'll never know" – but not Vettel. Very peculiar indeed.

 

Cool but very situational stats. Vettel has made some great returns from complete disasters and even won one championship because of it.




 

[Anuity]

We know you love bringing others into this Vettel conversation so let's do it. You mention Hakkinen and Villeneuve. That's great.

IMO Hakkinens two greatest performances are Luxembourg 1998 and Spa 2000. They don't need explanation. If you're not sure why, have a look.

Villeneuves imo are Portugal 1996 and Jerez 1997 (which was a race win until he gifted it) Again they don't need explanation.

Those four performances between the two included outrageous overtakes, "come from behind" elements, searing pace and had loads of pressure and adversity. All included championship implications as they were involved in direct WDC duels.

Can you point out to me two race winning performances from Vettel that measure up to those four between Hakkinen and Villeneuve?

 

 

I was responding to the list of stats. 

Which I find tried to present the picture only in one way. And I pointed out that it's not that unique. 

Has Villeneuve or Hakkinen ever had to win from the back of grid?

I just looked F1 stats and it does not seem to be the case. They were mainly hanging around 1-3, with few exceptions.

 

To answer your question: Brazil 2012 is every bit as good Jerez 1997.

Edited by Anuity, 31 March 2021 - 08:03.

[PlayboyRacer]

I was responding to the list of stats.
Which I find tried to present the picture only in one way. And I pointed out that it's not that unique.
Has Villeneuve or Hakkinen ever had to win from the back of grid?
To answer your question: Brazil 2012 is every bit as good Jerez 1997.

Firstly I wasn't talking about "back of the grid" wins. Merely outrageous wins where they have come from well behind, as low as 3rd (MH luxembourg) or 4th (JV Portugal)... and performed some outrageous passes and/or an epic performance in very crucial races. What is an equivalent race winning performance for Vettel, that matches the four I mentioned for Mika (lux '98, Spa 00) and Jacques (Por '96, Jerez '97)?

Secondly, Brazil 2012 isn't in the same ballpark as Jerez 1997. I mean come on.

Edited by PlayboyRacer, 31 March 2021 - 08:45.

[Claudius]

Yes but it's still strange he doesn't have a single memorable race (except his first victory maybe). Even non-champions have some memorable races but not Vettel. 

At least I can't think of any. 

[Claudius]

I was talking about exceptional races above, not always victories.

 

Damon Hill has Suzuka 94 and Hungaroring 97 to his CV

JPM with those string of poles in 02, many incredible overtakes, Brazil 01

Rubens - Germany 00

Button - Canada 11

 

Just to name a few.

 

 

Vettel was always solid, never extraordinary. A bit like Rosberg.

[ensign14]

I would put money on Vettel not being able to come through the back at Brazil 2012 had there been no DRS.  That has been a big advantage to those who hesitated in overtaking.  And it basically killed Kobayashi's F1 career cos he didn't need it.

[New Britain]

It's not that unique actually.

Hakkinen won 20% of his races leading from start to finish and a handful where Coulthard led only for a couple of laps.

You can also see that almost all of his wins came in the same fashion as Vettel's. Same applies for Villeneuve's wins.

 

Obviously when you qualify upfront consistently, you will consistently find yourself in the best spot to have a clean race. If anything it's a quality, I don't understand why this should be highlighted as a weakness necessarily.

Perhaps Fernando, while a better driver overall, has never been the quickest in qualifying and then had to compensate this weakness by battling it through the field, for instance.

 

I think there were magical moments in Vettel's career. 

Starting with his first win in Monza. Yes he led, but it was a very special debut win. Winning 9 races is a big highlight. And once again demonstrates how consistent he could be. Yes it was a dominant car, but nobody else has ever come close to that record. Hamilton was arguably driving even more dominant cars in 2014,2015,2016, 2019 and never came close to that. Neither did Schumacher in 2002/2004.

 

 

Just looking at stats does not always tell the whole story.

Kimi and Rubens won from the back of the grid. They were great victories, really flashy. Vettel does not have wins like this.

But those were unique circumstances and everything has to come together for it to happen. While an absolutely epic win in Suzuka 2005, it really should have been a walk in the park in normal circumstances, as there was no competition in terms of speed to that Mclaren/Kimi, apart from Alonso.

 

 

Races like Spa 1995, etc. are special  precisely because they are unique. Surely extortionary drivers like Schumacher had them. But even for them it was not a regular thing. You can't expect every driver to have races like that. And that is the reason why those are remembered.

Percentage of F1 race wins after starting from pole position:

 

Senna - 70%

N. Rosberg - 65%

Fangio - 62%

Clark - 60%

Hamilton - 60%

Vettel - 58%

Mansell - 55%

Hakkinen - 50%

Schumacher - 44%

Alonso - 44%

Lauda - 36%

Prost - 35%

Button - 33%

D. Hill - 32%

Stewart - 30%

Raikkonen - 29%

Piquet - 22%

 

I don't know whether that proves anything (except perhaps that Nelson Piquet is under-rated).

I would say that, since he cracked at the 2011 Canadian GP, it has often seemed that Vettel's driving deteriorates when he is under pressure.

[ARTGP]

The way I see it, Vettel was a viciously fast driver, with race craft that is definitely not as elite as someone like Ham, Alo. He was able to win 4 titles and credit to him for doing so. Webber didn't.

 

He has since declined dramatically. This is just not the same guy who won 4 titles at Red Bull or pranced on the podium like an egyptian. Finger boy. That guy is gone and may never return.

Edited by ARTGP, 31 March 2021 - 08:53.

[Anuity]

Drivers winning when starting 3rd or lower:

 

1. Raikkonen - 7 wins (33%)

2. Button - 5 wins (30%)

3. Alonso - 5 wins (15%)

4. Hamilton - 4 wins

5. Schumacher - 4 wins (obviously without USA 2005)

6. Hakkinen - 2 wins (10%)

7. Vettel  - 0 wins

8. Villeneuve - 0 wins (actually never won starting lower than 2nd)

9. Rosberg - 0 wins

10. Hill - 0 wins

 

The most interesting from this for me is that Kimi is enigmatic not only as personality but also when he chose to win races. 

[PlayboyRacer]

The way I see it, Vettel was a viciously fast driver, with race craft that is definitely not as elite as someone like Ham, Alo.

That's the exact point that Dicun highlighted so brilliantly earlier though and really it's beyond dispute. Forget about having race craft and ability the equal of Lewis and Fernando, it's clear that part of Sebs game is well short of most World Champions. He doesn't have a race winning performance where he looks literally knocked out yet rises and delivers something heroic to win.

Recent events are just a decline. It started slowly but clearly is accelerating now.

[PlayboyRacer]

Drivers winning when starting 3rd or lower:

1. Raikkonen - 7 wins (33%)
2. Button - 5 wins (30%)
3. Alonso - 5 wins (15%)
4. Hamilton - 4 wins
5. Schumacher - 4 wins (obviously without USA 2005)
6. Hakkinen - 2 wins (10%)
7. Vettel - 0 wins
8. Villeneuve - 0 wins (actually never won starting lower than 2nd)
9. Rosberg - 0 wins
10. Hill - 0 wins

The most interesting from this for me is that Kimi is enigmatic not only as personality but also when he chose to win races.

But as I pointed out to Dicun (and he researched so brilliantly) it isn't just about "starting position". You're ignoring what has actually been spoken about. An epic "comeback" win doesn't mean you have to start from 12th... and I've given you examples when you singled out two other champions. It seems you're just ignoring what's not convenient for your opinion.

[Anuity]

But as I pointed out to Dicun (and he researched so brilliantly) it isn't just about "starting position". You're ignoring what has actually been spoken about. An epic "comeback" win doesn't mean you have to start from 12th... and I've given you examples when you singled out two other champions. It seems you're just ignoring what's not convenient for your opinion.

 

So which drivers had "epic comebacks" or "epic drives" from the back of the grid to win the race?

 

Hamilton had. Schumacher had. Alonso had. Button had. Kimi had.

 

 

Rosberg did not, Villeneuve did not (one epic overtake, while being in the best car by far does not make it an epic win or driver, sorry). Vettel did not, Hakkinen (perhaps his win in USA 2001. I don't remember anything particular difficult about  Luxembourg 98, watching the race live it was always painful realisation that Michael was never going to win it).

 

It's clear and fair to say that Vettel is not in the same category as Hamilton, Schumacher and Alonso.

He slots somewhere between them and the other champions I mentioned.

 

One thing I can agree is that his 4 wdc is what drives a lot of people mad. If he had 1 or 2 most would be more calm. And 2 is probably a fair amount of what he should have had.

Edited by Anuity, 31 March 2021 - 09:11.

[Jovanotti]

Drivers winning when starting 3rd or lower:

1. Raikkonen - 7 wins (33%)
2. Button - 5 wins (30%)
3. Alonso - 5 wins (15%)
4. Hamilton - 4 wins
5. Schumacher - 4 wins (obviously without USA 2005)
6. Hakkinen - 2 wins (10%)
7. Vettel - 0 wins
8. Villeneuve - 0 wins (actually never won starting lower than 2nd)
9. Rosberg - 0 wins
10. Hill - 0 wins

The most interesting from this for me is that Kimi is enigmatic not only as personality but also when he chose to win races.

Not surprising. Those at the top were/are amazing wheel to wheel racers, while those at the bottom (especially Vettel and Rosberg) aren't anywhere close in that department.

[farsailor]

Drivers winning when starting 3rd or lower:

1. Raikkonen - 7 wins (33%)
2. Button - 5 wins (30%)
3. Alonso - 5 wins (15%)
4. Hamilton - 4 wins
5. Schumacher - 4 wins (obviously without USA 2005)
6. Hakkinen - 2 wins (10%)
7. Vettel - 0 wins
8. Villeneuve - 0 wins (actually never won starting lower than 2nd)
9. Rosberg - 0 wins
10. Hill - 0 wins

The most interesting from this for me is that Kimi is enigmatic not only as personality but also when he chose to win races.

A bit missleading to include JV on that list as he only spent two years in a good car, and it is hardly a bad thing qualifying good.

[ARTGP]

Drivers winning when starting 3rd or lower:

 

1. Raikkonen - 7 wins (33%)

2. Button - 5 wins (30%)

3. Alonso - 5 wins (15%)

4. Hamilton - 4 wins

5. Schumacher - 4 wins (obviously without USA 2005)

6. Hakkinen - 2 wins (10%)

7. Vettel  - 0 wins

8. Villeneuve - 0 wins (actually never won starting lower than 2nd)

9. Rosberg - 0 wins

10. Hill - 0 wins

 

The most interesting from this for me is that Kimi is enigmatic not only as personality but also when he chose to win races. 

 

 

. Kimi definetely has some good race craft. But I feel his results in this stat are propped up because Newey's Mclarens were notoriously fast but fragile...Meaning he would get grid drops routinely.

Edited by ARTGP, 31 March 2021 - 09:36.

[Anuity]

 it is hardly a bad thing qualifying good.

 

That is one of the points that I have already made. It's not a fault of a driver that he qualifies so good that he can then take control of the race and win it.

 

Regarding  Vettel's wheel to wheel racing I also feel it is exaggerated in a negative way.

I am not making the case for him driving flawlessly and he has made an extraordinary amount of mistakes during the last 2-3 seasons.

 

But he clearly also knew how to make very brave and clean moves as well:

 

Edited by Anuity, 31 March 2021 - 09:39.

[ARTGP]

 

But he clearly also knew how to make very brave and clean moves as well:

 

 

Correct, but you have to look at in the context of the other drivers to determine how well he's driving. If he has a higher ratio of errors to winners (a "calamity" ratio), then he's not doing as good a job as someone with a lower calamity ratio.

Edited by ARTGP, 31 March 2021 - 09:42.

[PlayboyRacer]

Not surprising. Those at the top were/are amazing wheel to wheel racers, while those at the bottom (especially Vettel and Rosberg) aren't anywhere close in that department.

It's actually misleading. If you include Montoya he's only got 2, yet was one of the best of his generation at wheel to wheel combat and sticking passes. Likewise Hakkinen and Villeneuve were superior in that department to Button, who's far higher. This particular subject wasn't raised because Vettel only wins from the front row or whatever, it was raised because he's lacking a sensational race winning performance where he came from well behind and won in spectacular fashion.

[Dicun]

Actually it's not quite unique.  As a very perceptive commenter pointed out in 2011...

 

 

Take a look at Ascari's grid positions and wins.  It's of course not directly comparable, given the ease of overtaking, the more bunched-up grids (in some races, 7th would see you on the second row - and a second row considerably closer to pole than today), and the consequent lack of many bothering to get pole for the sake of a statistic (I think Reims was a valuable pole because of the 100 bottles of bubbly that came with it).

 

But Ascari had 9 wins from pole, 3 from 2nd, and 1 from 3rd. 

And the first race he lost in his big run of 9 consecutive was Reims - where he was in a slipstreaming battle.  And was beaten by team-mate Hawthorn in it.  Then in a similar event at Monza he got involved in a crash with the lapped Marimon while the canny Fangio finagled his way through.

 

I agree that it's not really comparable due to various reasons. But aside from that, the issue with Vettel here is that, as PlayboyRacer duly pointed it out, he is supposed to be up there with the absolute legends of this sport, a tier above the likes of Hakkinen, Ascari or Fittipaldi (and this is coming from a lifelong fan of Mika). 

 

It's not that unique actually.

Hakkinen won 20% of his races leading from start to finish and a handful where Coulthard led only for a couple of laps.

You can also see that almost all of his wins came in the same fashion as Vettel's. Same applies for Villeneuve's wins.

 

Obviously when you qualify upfront consistently, you will consistently find yourself in the best spot to have a clean race. If anything it's a quality, I don't understand why this should be highlighted as a weakness necessarily.

Perhaps Fernando, while a better driver overall, has never been the quickest in qualifying and then had to compensate this weakness by battling it through the field, for instance.

 

I think there were magical moments in Vettel's career. 

Starting with his first win in Monza. Yes he led, but it was a very special debut win. Winning 9 races is a big highlight. And once again demonstrates how consistent he could be. Yes it was a dominant car, but nobody else has ever come close to that record. Hamilton was arguably driving even more dominant cars in 2014,2015,2016, 2019 and never came close to that. Neither did Schumacher in 2002/2004.

 

 

Just looking at stats does not always tell the whole story.

Kimi and Rubens won from the back of the grid. They were great victories, really flashy. Vettel does not have wins like this.

But those were unique circumstances and everything has to come together for it to happen. While an absolutely epic win in Suzuka 2005, it really should have been a walk in the park in normal circumstances, as there was no competition in terms of speed to that Mclaren/Kimi, apart from Alonso.

 

 

Races like Spa 1995, etc. are special  precisely because they are unique. Surely extortionary drivers like Schumacher had them. But even for them it was not a regular thing. You can't expect every driver to have races like that. And that is the reason why those are remembered.

 

As PlayboyRacer and I have pointed out, Vettel, based on his successes, should be compared to the absolute top tier of all-time greats. Hakkinen or Villeneuve are not in that tier. It's even more concerning that Vettel was not able to do something "lesser" champions were.

 

With regards to Monza 2008: I also believe that race is massively overestimated. Yes, it was a good win from a then-21-year-old Vettel in tricky conditions. However, let's not forget that the STR3 was a Newey-designed chassis which were always brilliant in the wet. Also, they had a Ferrari engine strapped to the back of the car, and Christian Horner himself said that that package was better than they had at Red Bull. I would argue that under those circumstances (heavy rain at Monza), the STR3 was the car to have that day. Just look at how Bourdais, who usually qualified around 15-16th, was able to qualify 4th. Of course, every first win is special, but posterity made that debut win of Vettel look like he achieved it while driving an FW42.

 

You mention unique race wins that extraordinary drivers had. That's exactly my point - Vettel, based on his statistics, should be an extraordinary driver with his 4 titles and 53 wins. And yet, there are no unique or memorable victories from him. Surely, in 258 races and over 13 years, there must have been at least one race where he was presented with the opportunity. Drivers of old like Clark or Stewart performed such memorable drives during much shorter careers.

 

Winning 9 races in a row, to me, is an achievement that has written "dominant car and reliability" written all over it. Just look at how many of those were "undisturbed" lights to flag victories. It is a nice looking statistic, for sure, but I believe the issue with it (and that applies to basically everything Vettel has ever achieved) that one doesn't have the feeling that only the likes of Prost, Schumacher, Hamilton, Clark, Senna, Stewart, Fangio would be able to pull them off. Would you argue that Leclerc or Bottas or Ricciardo or Verstappen wouldn't have been able to achieve those 9 wins in a row with that dominant RB9? I think there are several drivers just in the current field who could have done the sam,e given the opportunity and the equipment. And we are just talking about Vettel's contemporaries here. 

 

But in any case, Vettel's career is a discrepancy that becomes even more baffling if we argue that Vettel indeed is an absolute legend of the sport, in the same tier as the ones I mentioned above. If he is, how come he has fallen to these depths at this age? How come those team rookies (yes, more than one!) beat an absolute legend all-time great? How come an all-time great needs to leave a top team at the age of 33, and at the same time, no other top team want to do anything with him? Prost was in demand even at the age of 38. Schumacher was in demand at 41. Alonso is in demand at 39. Hamilton is 36, and there's no team on the grid who wouldn't be over the moon to sign him. Vettel was 26-27 when he was thrashed by Ricciardo. Then, at the age of 32-33, he was thrashed by Leclerc and let go by his team. 

 

With these facts in mind, there are only two possibilities:

1) Vettel is and never was an all-time great; his results are inflated due to various factors he benefitted from

2) Vettel, unlike the likes of Schumacher or Prost or Hamilton or Senna, has lost it by his late twenties - and that means he is not an all-time great

 

It's not looking good either way.

Edited by Dicun, 31 March 2021 - 13:22.

[Dicun]

Percentage of F1 race wins after starting from pole position:

 

Senna - 70%

N. Rosberg - 65%

Fangio - 62%

Clark - 60%

Hamilton - 60%

Vettel - 58%

Mansell - 55%

Hakkinen - 50%

Schumacher - 44%

Alonso - 44%

Lauda - 36%

Prost - 35%

Button - 33%

D. Hill - 32%

Stewart - 30%

Raikkonen - 29%

Piquet - 22%

 

I don't know whether that proves anything (except perhaps that Nelson Piquet is under-rated).

I would say that, since he cracked at the 2011 Canadian GP, it has often seemed that Vettel's driving deteriorates when he is under pressure.

 

That is a certainty, yes. I distinctly remember how during a broadcast back in 1984 (it seems to me that it was during Brands Hatch, but don't quote me on that), James Hunt talked about how the best, most complete package on the grid was Piquet.

[PlayboyRacer]

Piquet in his prime was a beast. Criminally underrated.

[absinthedude]

I would agree that Vettel does need special circumstances to shine to the extent that he can waltz to a title....the blown diffusor was clearly a huge assistance to him. But even without that he's been able to take wins and fight for titles. The current level of performance that we're seeing from Seb isn't just because the car isn't quite suited to him. And while I do agree he's performing at a poor level, I don't buy that he's suddenly lost all his talent. He was still capable of winning in 2019, less than 24 months ago.

[ensign14]

That win though was pretty telling - he only won it because Ferrari sabotaged his team-mate to hand it to him.

[PlayboyRacer]

There was Canada 2019. He dominated that weekend... until he dropped it. Absinthedude is right, Vettel still had plenty of speed back then. Particularly in race trim. It's gone downhill fast since last year.

[ARTGP]

There was Canada 2019. He dominated that weekend... until he dropped it. Absinthedude is right, Vettel still had plenty of speed back then. Particularly in race trim. It's gone downhill fast since last year.

 

I wouldn't call that dominant. Hamilton was in his gearbox the whole day and clearly was being held up. If Vettel had pace in hand, he would have been able to pull the 5 seconds gap required to avoid losing the position post-race. Leclerc really not much further behind on that day.

Edited by ARTGP, 31 March 2021 - 10:29.

[PlayboyRacer]

I wouldn't call that dominant. Hamilton was in his gearbox the whole day and clearly was being held up. If Vettel had pace in hand, he would have been able to pull the 5 seconds gap required to avoid losing the position post-race. Leclerc really not much further behind on that day.

He stuck it on pole too. Ok perhaps dominant is excessive but any weekend you're on for a pole/win double, you're in strong form.

[RedRabbit]

I would put money on Vettel not being able to come through the back at Brazil 2012 had there been no DRS.  That has been a big advantage to those who hesitated in overtaking.  And it basically killed Kobayashi's F1 career cos he didn't need it.

 

That Brazil race I remember Vettel being helped enormously by both Torro Rosso's immediately moving aside for him and even Michael Schumacher nearly stopped his car on the side of the track to let Vettel pass. There were a couple other drivers too that didn't defend too much against him "so as to not interfere in the championship".

[uzsjgb]

With these facts in mind, there are only two possibilities:

1) Vettel is and never was an all-time great; his results are inflated due to various factors he benefitted from

2) Vettel, unlike the likes of Schumacher or Prost or Hamilton or Senna, has lost it by his late twenties - and that means he is not an all-time great

 

 

1) From this follows that Hamilton is not an all-time great, since his results are inflated due to various factors he benefitted from, mainly the dominance of Mercedes.

2) From the follows that Schumacher is not an all-time great. Schumacher showed his real talent during his comeback and that did not amount to much. 

 

As an addendum I must add that Hamilton still has the chance to also qualify for category two, so we should reserve any judgment on whether Hamilton is a good driver or not until that time. Right now we simply don't know.

 

In general the main point seems to be that there are very few good Formula One drivers at all. Those who shine brightly for a few years are not good, because they lack career longevity. Those with career longevity are not good, because they decline towards the end of their careers. 

[Jovanotti]

Winning 9 races in a row, to me, is an achievement that has written "dominant car and reliability" written all over it.

And yet the supposed GOAT didn't manage to come even close to beating this streak after 7 seasons in the most dominant, fast and reliable cars of all time.

Edited by Jovanotti, 31 March 2021 - 11:41.

[Jovanotti]

It's actually misleading. If you include Montoya he's only got 2, yet was one of the best of his generation at wheel to wheel combat and sticking passes. Likewise Hakkinen and Villeneuve were superior in that department to Button, who's far higher. This particular subject wasn't raised because Vettel only wins from the front row or whatever, it was raised because he's lacking a sensational race winning performance where he came from well behind and won in spectacular fashion.

Yeah agreed regarding Montoya, he was an epic racer, but he neither had the cars nor the number of races to score as many victories from outside the top 3 as the others there.

Edited by Jovanotti, 31 March 2021 - 10:57.

[Lights]

Percentage of F1 race wins after starting from pole position:

 

Senna - 70%

N. Rosberg - 65%

Fangio - 62%

Clark - 60%

Hamilton - 60%

Vettel - 58%

Mansell - 55%

Hakkinen - 50%

Schumacher - 44%

Alonso - 44%

Lauda - 36%

Prost - 35%

Button - 33%

D. Hill - 32%

Stewart - 30%

Raikkonen - 29%

Piquet - 22%

 

I don't know whether that proves anything (except perhaps that Nelson Piquet is under-rated).

I would say that, since he cracked at the 2011 Canadian GP, it has often seemed that Vettel's driving deteriorates when he is under pressure.

 

I think a more telling stat is race wins after leading after lap 1. With that stat Vettel's 58% jumps to 75%. I don't know about the other champions, but I doubt most of them follow that pattern to that extent.

And this jump is partially because Vettel is a great starter, and that's to his quality. It's also partially because for example Webber is a notoriously bad starter. 

 

Either way, the 75%, that's 40 out of 53 races, he was leading the race at the end of the first lap. This more accurately shows the style in which Vettel won the large majority of his races.

 

In only 3 of his 53 wins (6%), he was running outside of the top 2 at the end of the first lap. In 1 of those (Japan 2013) he won fair and square through strategy and overtaking.

The other 2 (Melbourne 2018 and Singapore 2019) he was being outperformed by both Hamilton and his own teammate and only won through rather fortunate circumstances. 

 

Like some have pointed out, this isn't just a bad thing. It speaks volumes that he was able to have many poles and converted them into wins through good starts and controlling races.

However, it's perhaps no coincidence that he has a struggled a lot in the midfield, has been especially involved in many spins and incidents. Naturally, this happened much less frequently when he was leading in his Red Bull. 

 

People mention drive through the fields like Brazil 2012, Abu Dhabi 2012, and Germany 2019, but even those have asterisks attached to them.

Then there's the fact that he has struggled against particular teammates, Ricciardo and Leclerc, the extent to which he was losing those battles is something not seen with other multiple world champions.

These factors together do seem to support the theory that other qualities are lacking in Vettel that make a driver elite, despite the amount of titles.

[thefinalapex]

That win though was pretty telling - he only won it because Ferrari sabotaged his team-mate to hand it to him.

It was unlucky for leclerc as they underestimated the undercut, sabotage? C’mone now..

[uzsjgb]

 

Then there's the fact that he has struggled against particular teammates, Ricciardo and Leclerc, the extent to which he was losing those battles is something not seen with other multiple world champions.

 

Hamilton lost to Button and to Rosberg. Alonso lost to Hamilton, Button and Marques. But I assume the random variable "extent to which he was losing" is chosen so that it includes Vettel, but not Hamilton or Alonso.

[PayasYouRace]

Drivers winning when starting 3rd or lower:

1. Raikkonen - 7 wins (33%)
2. Button - 5 wins (30%)
3. Alonso - 5 wins (15%)
4. Hamilton - 4 wins
5. Schumacher - 4 wins (obviously without USA 2005)
6. Hakkinen - 2 wins (10%)
7. Vettel - 0 wins
8. Villeneuve - 0 wins (actually never won starting lower than 2nd)
9. Rosberg - 0 wins
10. Hill - 0 wins

The most interesting from this for me is that Kimi is enigmatic not only as personality but also when he chose to win races.

Should be two for Hill. San Marino 1995 (4th) and Belgium 1998 (3rd).

Two for Rosberg. Australia 2014 (3rd) and Austria 2014 (3rd)

Villeneuve won Hungary 1996 from 3rd.

Not sure where you got your stats from.

[Anuity]

Should be two for Hill. San Marino 1995 (4th) and Belgium 1998 (3rd).

Two for Rosberg. Australia 2014 (3rd) and Austria 2014 (3rd)

Villeneuve won Hungary 1996 from 3rd.

Not sure where you got your stats from.

Yes I made a mistake. I meant starting lower than 3rd.
Hill I missed. It’s from f1stats.

Edited by Anuity, 31 March 2021 - 11:58.

[uzsjgb]

Drivers winning when starting 3rd or lower:

 

1. Raikkonen - 7 wins (33%)

2. Button - 5 wins (30%)

3. Alonso - 5 wins (15%)

4. Hamilton - 4 wins

5. Schumacher - 4 wins (obviously without USA 2005)

6. Hakkinen - 2 wins (10%)

7. Vettel  - 0 wins

8. Villeneuve - 0 wins (actually never won starting lower than 2nd)

9. Rosberg - 0 wins

10. Hill - 0 wins

 

The most interesting from this for me is that Kimi is enigmatic not only as personality but also when he chose to win races. 

 

Without looking at the exact details, I would assume those at the top botched qualifying more often when in a winning car. That would be the most logical (and easiest) way to top this statistic. Having 0 wins in this statistic may actually be a positive.

[Claudius]

Without looking at the exact details, I would assume those at the top botched qualifying more often when in a winning car. That would be the most logical (and easiest) way to top this statistic. Having 0 wins in this statistic may actually be a positive.

 

Hmm nice try but no. Botched qualifying could be due to technical malfunction as well. 

Great drivers rise to the occasion and get great results anyway. 

[Dicun]

1) From this follows that Hamilton is not an all-time great, since his results are inflated due to various factors he benefitted from, mainly the dominance of Mercedes.

2) From the follows that Schumacher is not an all-time great. Schumacher showed his real talent during his comeback and that did not amount to much. 

 

As an addendum I must add that Hamilton still has the chance to also qualify for category two, so we should reserve any judgment on whether Hamilton is a good driver or not until that time. Right now we simply don't know.

 

In general the main point seems to be that there are very few good Formula One drivers at all. Those who shine brightly for a few years are not good, because they lack career longevity. Those with career longevity are not good, because they decline towards the end of their careers. 

 

1) No, because Hamilton, unlike Vettel, was able to prove that 

a) he can win a title even when not driving the best (fastest and/or most reliable) machinery, which was certainly the case in 2008

b) he can win races in subpar machinery or by fighting his way back from the back of the field

 

2) That is just plainly and utterly silly. Schumacher was 41 when he returned in 2010, and he had a neck injury that never completely healed. It was absolutely clear from day one that Schumacher was a shell of his former self. But then again, it took a neck injury, 3 years outside the sport and being 41 years old - and still, he wasn't beaten by Rosberg, a future WDC, as badly as a 33-year-old and healthy Vettel was beaten by Leclerc last year.

 

The main point is still that all evidence shows that Vettel has never been nearly as good as his impressive results led many to believe in the first place.

 

And yet the supposed GOAT didn't manage to come even close to beating this streak after 7 seasons in the most dominant, fast and reliable cars of all time.

 

See above. Just as a side note, I'm not a Hamilton fan (and that's putting it mildly), and I don't consider him to be the GOAT - but he is absolutely and without a doubt a legend, belonging to the top tier of the greats of the sport and is way above Vettel in every respect - be it racecraft, tyre management, wheel-to-wheel battles, qualifying pace, wet weather skills. You name it, and Hamilton is better at it than Vettel.