How Good is Sebastian Vettel?

Status
Not open for further replies.
And?

Mika Hakkinen only won in Newey designed cars... (or at least Newey inspired cars)... I don't see the level of venom poured out over Hakkinen as over Vettel..... Personally, I can't see the difference- other than that Vettel is more successful!

I fore one see Hakkinen's achievements overrated because simply Schumacher said he was the only driver he respected.

You'd be surprised the real fans will point to a few things ...he won his first two races by being gifted by his teammate... the Melbourne one was the points margin he lead into the final race

1999 he nearly threw it away and could not take Mclaren ( or Ron) not ordering DC to move over at Spa and the next race he cried in the bushes after throwing a lead away at Monza
 
Vettel has only won races designed by NEwey cars which was the same criticism labelled at Damon Hill until Hill proved he could sort out teams in non Newey cars .

If Vettel wins this title he would be his best and toughest yet because he's never had to defend a lead into the last race which is more difficult

A hallmark of the greats from the very good drivers are that they win races when they should not ...so when did Vettel win a race when he was not expected to?

That is not a trick question
 
Defending a 13 point lead in the last race is more difficult then making up a 13 point deficit?

Yes because it is better to chase than be chase as they say because Alonso has nothing to lose but Vettel does in going for broke...just look at Hamilton going all out hard in 2007 as evidence
 
Juan Manuel Fangio ditched slower cars mid-season.
Jim Clark only ever won in Colin Chapman cars.
Ayrton Senna won 6 race in a pretty decent Lotus before he earned the right to win 35 races in some of the most dominant cars in history.

I have yet to find someone take the fastest car-argument to tell me why they are undeserving.
 
Interesting to hear what 'the man' himself has to say of it:
“Obviously, what Sebastian’s been fantastic at in the past is: putting it on pole, making enough of a gap … and staying there,” Newey said. “That way, the straight-line speed weakness cannot be exploited.”

Newey has helped Nigel Mansell, Alain Prost, Damon Hill, Jacques Villeneuve, Mika Hakkinen and Vettel to world championships, but says he doesn’t like to compare the many greats with whom he’s worked. “But the thing you can say about Sebastian is:
"He’s a clever guy, he thinks about it a lot, learns from his mistakes, will often be there late in the evening, looking through the data, working with the engineers, looking at the onboard [video footage] of himself and comparing it to the other drivers,” Newey told Sky. “So he tries to use every bit of information that’s available to him. And I think that is something that I have seen in some of the other great drivers I’ve been privileged to work with – that’s a common theme.”
 
Juan Manuel Fangio ditched slower cars mid-season.
Jim Clark only ever won in Colin Chapman cars.
Ayrton Senna won 6 race in a pretty decent Lotus before he earned the right to win 35 races in some of the most dominant cars in history.

I have yet to find someone take the fastest car-argument to tell me why they are undeserving.

Senna's 1991, 1992, 1993 Mclarens were no way the fastest cars.. those three seasons he spent fighting superior Williams until it all became too much for him that he had to join
 
Il_leone
Was Senna not acknowleged before 1991 then? Or was he given due praise before he showed his skills in a slower car?

Galahad
Yes, although he switched cars several times between season when it became clear there was a better.
That's not a criticism to Fangio, but it shows that claiming you can't credit Vettel because he's only had fast cars is untrue if you apply the same standard.

Il_leone
Do you know how often Hamilton won from lower than the front 2 rows?
Or, speaking of one-offs, Senna?
 
mnmracer - As regards Vettel, I completely agree. On Fangio, though, for 54 he had signed for Mercedes for the start of the season, and only used a Maserati in the first two races because his Merc wasn't ready in time. So not really a case of ditching a slower car mid-season.

Sooner or later Newey will make another dud, as he has always done from time to time, and we'll see how Sebastian copes with that; unless he's gone to Ferrari, in which case the same situation might well apply too.
 
I simply don't understand this argument of "only winning from the front".

If a car is capable of winning a GP then more often than not it will be on the first few rows.
The only time this doesn't happen is if the driver in question is dreadful at qualifying, there is some sort of screw up, or a mechanical failure.

What is this obsession with expecting drivers to qualify in 20th and win races?

If a car is only good enough to qualify at the back of a grid with a driver of the calibre of Vettel, Alonso or Hamilton, why the hell do people think it would be good enough to win a GP?
 
Il_leone
Was Senna not acknowleged before 1991 then? Or was he given due praise before he showed his skills in a slower car?
============================================
Senna's Mclaren was no way the dominant car in 1991, 1992. or 1993 he was fighting superior Williams all the way and his skills in a Lotus were unbelievable
 
Il_leone
Do you know how often Hamilton won from lower than the front 2 rows?
Or, speaking of one-offs, Senna?[/quote]
----------------------------------------------------------

Hamilton has won from 4th place twice

But we've seen this season Seb shows sign of frustration when he is not out clear in the front and has to fight his way through and lose his cool

In China he complained about the poor straightline speed of his car...well did not he go with the set up
 
I simply don't understand this argument of "only winning from the front".

If a car is capable of winning a GP then more often than not it will be on the first few rows.
The only time this doesn't happen is if the driver in question is dreadful at qualifying, there is some sort of screw up, or a mechanical failure.

What is this obsession with expecting drivers to qualify in 20th and win races?

If a car is only good enough to qualify at the back of a grid with a driver of the calibre of Vettel, Alonso or Hamilton, why the hell do people think it would be good enough to win a GP?
---------------------------------------------------

A quote from Schumacher " Damon Hill is only hot when he is leading from the front but not so hot when he has to follow someone" - the same applies to Vettel

I am not expecting Seb to qualify 20th to do his charge but it would blow the myth he can only win from the front and overtake a few cars to win a race

he has not shown he can win in all conditions
 
No-one made 21 positions from their grid position from 1983 to when Vettel did in Abu.
that was down to couple of safety cars and the fact he changed his set up completely
--------------------------------------

Not as great as John Watson 1983 US GP 22nd to 1st !
 
Il_leone
You may have missed my questions, so I'll repeat them for you ;)
  • Was Ayrton Senna not acknowleged for his skills before he impressed in 1991 on?
  • Do you know how often Lewis Hamilton won from lower than the front 2 rows?
  • Do you know how often Ayrton Senna won from lower than the front 2 rows?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom