base this on points lost rather than how many times each have retired or suffered.
I found the problem with that becoming that it makes things look worse to one driver or another, based on their performance.
A great example is the race in Monza: both Vettel and Webber had the exact same gearbox problems, yet if we’d quantify the effect on positions, it would seem Webber’s problems were worse: he lost out on a chance for 2nd place, while Vettel held 1st place.
Does that mean that Webber’s issues were worse? No, they were exactly the same. But because Webber was not performing to the maximum of the car, he did not have the buffer to deal with it.
I’m just going to update this at the end of the year.
Curiously, if Webber retires in every race left this year due to mechanical issues, only then will he have as many mechanical retirements as Vettel.
A graphic has been going around of all Webber’s woes this year (including self-inflicted ones..), and it made me think, this is one of the things that sets apart a good driver from a great champion.
Yes, you’ve made your point – Vettel could have been riding a real bull instead of the red bull and still won the WDC…
How can you possibly have missed the point of this thread by such a wide margin after being such a large part of the discussion?
Just some things I noticed:
2011 australia – Red bull didn’t run KERS at all on any car for Q and race. Hence can not be considered an issue.
2011 china – Vettel has no radio to the pits in 2nd half of the race, dropping him from 1st to 2nd after wrong strategy was used.
India 2012 – vettel also had kers issues late in race, but lost no positions because of it
Italy 2013 – vettel also had brake problems late in the race
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.