Group Admins

  • Profile picture of Keith Collantine

Group Mods

  • Profile picture of damonsmedley
  • Profile picture of Bradley Downton

F1

Public Group active 13 hours, 48 minutes ago

F1 discussion

Is Vettel’s fourth title almost guaranteed?

This topic contains 97 replies, has 32 voices, and was last updated by Avatar of Michael Michael 8 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 98 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #237726
    Avatar of Stephen
    Stephen
    Member

    I hate the way Vettel is getting such a hard time from almost everyone, it’s hardly his fault if he has the ability and car to keep winning,

    He may have the best car but he still has to drive his way to the championship,

    He will win 4 in a row, and i’m sure he will eclipse Michael in championships and stats!!

    #237727
    Avatar of
    Anonymous

    @MazdaChris
    You make a good point about Red Bull making the quickest car but with less resources.
    Does anyone know what kind of budget the top teams are running this year? I wouldnt have thought Red Bull would not be too far off of Ferrari or Mercedes??

    Like most people I am disappointed the others have dropped off as there is nothing better that a nail biting finish like 2010 & 2012.

    #237728
    Avatar of mnmracer
    mnmracer
    Participant

    Made me laugh:

    “Sebastian Vettel, the Infiniti Red Bull driver who is so far head in the F1 standings… well, his rivals need the Hubble Telescope to see him.”

    #237729
    Avatar of Boris
    Boris
    Participant

    Hi. I’m new. Yes it does look like Vettel will get a fourth title. He’s very lucky to have that car so much faster than all the others. He makes good use of it of course. But I’d love to see him racing the other aces in the same level of machinery. It’s really hard to judge his ability when he has such an advantage. I think now he will definitely have a fourth title , but I don’t think he’s twice as good as Alonso or four times as good as Hamilton, I’d put him just under them.

    #237730
    Avatar of Jon Sandor
    Jon Sandor
    Member

    I have yet to see a shred of evidence that Vettels car is “so much faster than all the others”, and I think I’d be wise not to hold my breath waiting for any to appear. At both Spa and Monza we saw Alonso start behind Webber, in the other Red Bull rocketship, and he had absolutely no trouble getting past him early in the race.

    #237731
    Avatar of Kingshark
    Kingshark
    Participant

    @jonsan
    You cannot contrast Alonso’s racing ability in the first few laps to Webber’s, because that’s a comparison between arguably the best starter in F1 to the worst starter in F1.

    Plus, comparing Alonso to Webber is really like comparing apples to oranges. Why are you comparing the better Ferrari driver to the worse Red Bull driver? It doesn’t make much sense. If you want to get an idea of the gap between Ferrari and Red Bull, either compare their #1 drivers directly, or #2 drivers directly.

    In both cases, Red Bull wins the prize as a better car, although I do agree that the gap between the F138 and RB9 wasn’t that big in Monza, there was definitely still a gap.

    #237732
    Avatar of Jon Sandor
    Jon Sandor
    Member

    You cannot contrast Alonso’s racing ability in the first few laps to Webber’s, because that’s a comparison between arguably the best starter in F1 to the worst starter in F1.

    But I’m told that the worst starters is in “that car so much faster than all the others”. Surely that should compensate for the difference in skill between Alonso and Webber? Or is it actually not so much faster after all?

    #237733
    Avatar of Michael
    Michael
    Participant

    @jon_sandor

    I have yet to see a shred of evidence that Vettels car is “so much faster than all the others”

    You know what might actually help – watching the races. I’ve found it’s extremely helpful in telling which car is faster. The rule of thumb is that the slower cars are in the back and the faster cars are in the front.

    #237734
    Avatar of Boris
    Boris
    Participant

    And also when watching the races, look out for how the cars behave on cornering. The Bull is planted. There’s so much rear downforce that Seb can rotate the car in the corner and power out of it without risk of loosing the back end. He gets a big advantage from being able to do that. When double diffusers were banned, before Newey was able to engineer back some of that rear downforce, Vettel was similarly paced to Webber…ie he’d lost his advantage. So, as long as Newey can give Vettel his superior rear downforce, and Seb is able to use it so effectively…then I guess he is on track to keep winning.

    #237735
    Avatar of mnmracer
    mnmracer
    Participant

    The rule of thumb is that the slower cars are in the back and the faster cars are in the front.

    So you agree all this “the Ferrari was a dog of a car in 2012″ was BS?

    And also when watching the races, look out for how the cars behave on cornering.

    I don’t want to burst your bubble, but a track is composed of more than just corners.

    #237736
    Avatar of raymondu999
    raymondu999
    Participant

    @boris

    When double diffusers were banned, before Newey was able to engineer back some of that rear downforce, Vettel was similarly paced to Webber

    When double diffusers were banned Vettel produced the most dominated year since the Schumacher era.

    In fact – Webber says that more rear downforce helps himself and hurts Vettel, as Vettel prefers the rear to be loose so that he can get the car to change direction quickly with a spike of oversteer.

    #237737
    Avatar of Boris
    Boris
    Participant

    Of course the drivers want more downforce, it’s just that Vettel can do more with it than Webber. I’d check the statistics of those races when the DD was banned before the rear downforce came back, it wasn’t a long period, and Webber was on Vettel’s pace
    @mnmracer bubble not burst. Of course there’s more than corners on a racetrack LOL. It’s just that cornering is what sorts out the men from the boys( cars as well as drivers)

    #237738
    Avatar of mnmracer
    mnmracer
    Participant

    I would suggest you do some checking yourself ;-)
    Webber performed better in only 3 out of 19 races last year (the same score as Massa:Alonso). A very small sample to draw conclusions from.

    #237739
    Avatar of Boris
    Boris
    Participant

    Yes thats true. But for most of that year Newey clawed the downforce back, it’s only at the beginning when it was lacking that the drivers were close. And also the superiority of the Bull over the other teams went as well. This was a closer fought year than 2011, and closer than this year. Vettel was lucky to get this one. Other teams screw ups helped.

    #237740
    Avatar of Nick
    Nick
    Participant

    Vettel was lucky to get this one. Other teams screw ups helped.

    2009: BrawnGP inherits great car from Honda. McLaren and Ferrari underestimated the rule changes and made a bad car. Red Bull was fast, but had poor reliability. BMW and Renault also made bad cars. Button made the best of his massive car advantage and his experience to win the title. He was lucky to get that one because McLaren and Ferrari screwed up and Red Bull took too long to find good form.

    2008: Hamilton wins in the final corner. He was lucky because of that final corner, Ferrari having team mates taking points off eachother and Raikkonen binning it in Spa.

    2007: Raikkonen was lucky to have Hamilton and Alonso taking points of eachother and having a good car, which Schumacher developed in 2006. All down to luck.

    2006: Alonso lucks into the title because of McLaren’s screw ups with narrow designs and poor reliability in engines. Also, luck because Schumacher’s engine blew in Japan. All luck, no skill.

    2005: Alonso lucks into his first title because Ferrari screwed up their 2005 cars, Mercedes destroyed McLaren’s season and he magically had a race winning car. Fisichella was sabotaged and had tons of KERS other failures, clearly sabotaged by Horner Briatore.

    2004: Schumacher is lucky to win this title. McLaren and Williams screwed up again, BAR and Renault have inexperienced drivers and lack the massive resources and design talent of Rory Byrne. If Byrne wasn’t there, Schumacher would not have lucked into titles the years before either.

    2003: Schumacher lucks into a title because McLaren and Williams screw up their title contenders and has the tyre rules changed in his favor. Lucky German.

    2002: Schumacher; luck. Rest of the field; screws up.

    2001: Schumacher runs against a unreliable McLaren and lucks into a poor Hakkinen. Basically all down to the F2001.

    2000: Schumacher is lucky to win this once, since McLaren screwed up so bad and had a great car and massive luck in races such as Germany. I for one wasn’t glad to see him win his title for Ferrari, because it was a lucky title.

    1999: Hakkinen lucks into a broken bone for Schumacher and competing against Irvine. Newey wins another title, this time with some Mercedes help.

    1998: Hakkinen must be lucky to Finnish first, because he has a Newey car and Schumacher screwed up in Japan. Newey strikes again.

    See how easy it is to ridicule any title and put it down to luck and having a good car? Nobody has even been unlucky all year long, in a bad car, for a bad team with a bad designer and won the title. It’s a combination of those factors, but to imply Vettel has won only because of luck, or his car, or other teams screwing up, is just low. I don’t like Vettel either, but this constant cynicism about his ability is sickening. If Vettel lucks into titles, what does this say about Webber? He must be one poor driver. Alonso, Raikkonen, Hamilton? Useless, they can’t even beat some lucky kid in a car that happens to be good.

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 98 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.