Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
JimClarkFan wrote:That is pretty much my thinking on the issue as well. I think in a good car, he is very very fast. However I think he is much less adaptable in his driving than an Alonso or Lewis both of whom have shown they can qualify and race a crap car in a placement much higher than it otherwise should be.
I don't think it's as simple as that. Being able to handle one kind of handling issue does not mean you can handle every handling issue. If a driver can be competitive in a car with chronic oversteer, it doesn't mean he can be competitive in a car with chronic understeer.
Hypothetically if you put Alonso, Ham and Vettel in a theoretically perfectly balanced car I believe they will be very evenly matched.
Balanced TO THEIR LIKING, of course - I don't think they have the same preference - but yes, I agree with you in principle.
To paraphrase Jane Austen - "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that people discussing divers must be in want of a good topic".
To paraphrase Einstein "Two things are infinite: the universe and discussions about who is the fastest driver in F1, but about the universe I still have some doubts"
...
So back to the OP, Vettel is ahead by a nose with 4 races to go. A resurgent Red Bull have won 3 races in a row, will that continue to the end of the season or was that due to the luck of their car suiting recent circuits?
Will Alonso's amazing consistency count when we get to the end of the season? He showed in 2010 that he's got the fight to take Vettel to the line.
McLaren have the most wins this season and the fastest car in the right circumstances, will they return to the front to disrupt the race to the WDC?
If Alonso cannot qualify next to, or higher than Vettel on the grid for the remaining races, he's going to need a DNF by Vettel to have a chance. The RB8 is better suited for 3 of the next 4 tracks than the F2012 is IMO.
I think most of this talk about which driver is really the best, and all the excuses for the results we are actually seeing is futile. The fact is that nobody really knows which one of two drivers are the best until they have raced each other in the same team, and then it could still be unclear after several years. When Fisichella joined Renault in 2005 most people expected him to perform on Alonsos level, but it turned out that he was not even close. Before Kimi Raikkonen moved to Ferrari, most people held him to be miles ahead of Massa. There are still som people who would claim that he was and still is, but they are now a minority. Also when Button moved to McLaren, most people expected him to be out-performed by Hamilton. Hamilton has proven that he is usually faster, but he has also showed that he is less consistent and makes more mistakes. It is pretty much the same as with Senna and Prost when they raced for McLaren in 1988 and 1989. Senna was faster, but Prost was more consistent and they ended up taking one championship each as team mates.
I am sure that many people have an opinion about how Hamilton will perform compared to Rosberg for Mercedes, but I realized a long time ago that it is better to wait and see before making claims of a driver's performance.
I think in the long-term, the drivers want to driver for the best teams and the best teams want to sign the best drivers. This is how success is achieved. There is no reason why Red Bull and Adrian Newey would waste their efforts by having bad drivers in their team. They obviously accept to have Vettel driving for them and they are about to secure their 3rd championship in a row. Vettel has beaten both Alonso and Hamilton in every championship since 2009, so if someone thinks that he is not as good as them, I don't understand how these people can have any interest in formula 1 at all. Why would anyone watch a comepetition where the best competitors are beaten regularly by weaker opponents?
I am not saying that Vettel is the best driver, and I have no doubt that he has enjoyed having the best car for most of the time since 2010 or even 2009. But he is leading the championship and he has won the championship the last two seasons as well. There is nothing that proves that he isn't one of the best. Unlike both Hamilton and Alonso (and Button, Kimi and Schumacher) he has always beaten his team mate over a full season. When a driver gets beaten by his team mate it is hard to call him the best. One can of course try to find explainations and/or excuses. For example I would say that although Schumacher was beaten by his team mate after he turned 40 (or 41 for that matter), it doesn't mean he wasn't the best 5 years earlier. And although Alonso was beaten by Hamilton 5 years ago, it doesn't mean the situation hasn't changed. But in the end we don't really know, so I don't see the point of trying to pretend that one knows.
Back on topic: I don't think it makes a big difference whether the remaining tracks suit Red Bull or Ferrari. I think the results are more likely to be determined by the cars rather than the tracks. Red Bull has been far better than Ferrari for a long time now, and there is nothing that indicates that this is about to change. Vettel has won the last 3 races, but he has delivered strong results in every race since Silverstone, with the exception of his DNF at Monza. Something has to change dramtically to enable Alonso to beat Vettel now.
Beautiful post stradivarius. Nothing to add but a +1 from me.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
Dear all - Please read Stradivarius's excellent post on why it is futile to compare drivers. Then try to stick to the topic.
p.s. Several recent posts are a carbon copy of the reason why we started a "fanboy ying yang" thread. Just read the opening pages of that thread. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7520 So I've reunited the posts from here with their brethren over there.
That's the scary thing - it can happen to anyone. And as has been stated before - random chance doesn't have memory. It can happen to Vettel, but it can happen to Alonso too (again)
raymondu999 wrote:That's the scary thing - it can happen to anyone. And as has been stated before - random chance doesn't have memory. It can happen to Vettel, but it can happen to Alonso too (again)
well vettel has had a DNF twice already through no fault of his own , unlike alonso who caused one of his two
but the newey/vettel combination is good enough to suffer another DNF and still win the WDC
to the optimist a glass is half full ; to the pessimist a glass is half empty ; to the F1 engineer the glass is twice as big as it needs to be
dren wrote:Alonso needes a Vettel DNF, penalty or crash to beat him. It happened to Alonso twice, it can happen to anybody.
it already happened to Vettel more than 2 times (and some unfair penalty at Monza, just coz he blocked the almighty at his track) and also at Valencia were they deployed SC just to cut his lead, so i think it has evened out now
lebesset wrote:but the newey/vettel combination is good enough to suffer another DNF and still win the WDC
I don't think Vettle will be able to win the WDC if he DNFs once in the remaining races. Alonso will be in the mix in the closing races.
If Vettel has 1 DNF and wins the remaining 3 races his point will be 290
and if Alonso wins the race were Vettel Dnfs and he comes 2nd in the rest of the races his points will be 288
So Vettel can afford a DNF and win the WDC
lebesset wrote:but the newey/vettel combination is good enough to suffer another DNF and still win the WDC
I would emphasize more the Red Bull combination will give Vettel a greater chance to secure the WDC. Newey, the development team, the pit crews, Webber (if he can challenge for podiums). At this point, the greater emphasis will be for every aspect of the team to be perfect, more so than earlier in the season.
