Seb Vettel – why all the hatred?

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 105 total)
  • Author
  • #207869


    In Hungary, Webber had higher tyre wear due to his differential issue.

    Why would they put Vettel on the one stop strategy? Its not so that he would lose time, its because they felt he could gain positions using it.

    Yes, it was to gain him places, but given that he had a loss of engine power mid-race (which was only temporary), that strategy had to be worked to regain lost ground. Given that the more conventional strategy was to pit around lap 35-40, it was a risk that could just as easily have backfired without the pace.

    It’s easy in hindsight to blame strategy for where a driver finishes in relation to his teammate, but superior race pace or tyre conservation does influence how well a strategy works.


    @raymondu999 – I’ve made my point, and I’m not “getting a room”! :P


    As with aliens and landing on other rocks, you’re looking for the difficult explanation.

    Whatever your thoughts about Monza are a complete joke. The only reason Vettel ended up behind Webber in the first place was because his engine took a mid-race brake.

    Webber had to pit another time in Hungary because a faulty differential was eating his tires.

    Speaking of which, Vettel is known for being able to conserve his tires, and he was the only driver battling that was able to make a 1-stop work. No way on earth Webber could have made a 1-stop work.

    See how you can all get perfectly reasonable explanations without the need for some elaborate plot against Mark Webber?


    Near the end of the 2010 season it was really Vettel, not Webber, who injured his arm while mountain biking, then Christian Horner switched their arms around.

    Yeah, that’s just silly.


    @ David-A

    They settled for 8th when they could have had 4th at Hungary. It was bad strategy.

    Even Webber himself said so.

    And as for Monza 2010, yes they went with the run long strategy for Vettel to try and gain positions. It was essentially Webber they were racing so he was their goal.


    I’ve never heard Vettel being told to “maintain the gap” or having bits taken off his car to give to Webber.

    The origins of the concept of favoritism are well justified.


    The question is why is Vettel not liked by some F1 fans; so there only needs to be a perception of favouritism.
    Clearly some examples were real (twice being told to maintain the gap, taking parts from one car to another) but others may be nothing more than speculation but the damage is done.


    Let me rephrase the question:
    Why does Vettel get loads of hate, dislike and or disrespect for perceived favoritism not even close to the extent Michael Schumacher and Fernando Alonso receive it, who do not get the same slack for it?


    Horner explained that the diff issue increased Mark’s rear tyre wear. He may have slipped down from 5th due to the mechanical problem’s effect on tyre wear. Vettel was instructed not to pass Webber after catching him at the 2009 Turkish Grand Prix, maybe they didn’t use the words “maintain the gap” Thomas, but that’s the same.

    Monza 2010- as I said, Vettel’s superior pace, despite the mid-race mechanical issue made the difference.

    Overall though, Vettel is naturally going to be favoured, but it’s justified.


    It was “Mark is faster, mark is faster. Sebastian: save your car, save your car. Mark is faster” back in Turkey 2009, not to mention being the only frontrunner to be running a 3-stopper.



    I can’t speak for myself, but others feel its because Horner claims equal-treatment, while Ferrari don’t. Everyone has given Schumi tons of stick for his Barrichello days, but they are in the past now


    Why does Vettel get loads of hate, dislike and or disrespect for perceived favoritism not even close to the extent Michael Schumacher and Fernando Alonso receive it, who do not get the same slack for it?

    I hated the favourism in the Schumacher era too, not Schumacher, but his need to have a no2, just as I hate it now with Alonso. I agree that all three are very good drivers, but it makes me dislike them that they all need a designated no2. Before anyone starts saying Fischi or Trulli were given equal treatment, no they were not, ask Flavio if you want.


    people maybe dislike the fact that he had it much easier with cars than his main rivals the last years and feel like vettel would not have two title with a proper teammate like alonso.
    i for sure agree that a thrid title simply would be too much and too early for him and would not represent his performance.
    however, there is no need for hatred!


    @sunnyAK to be fair – when was the last time a title was won “with a proper teammate?” Generally the teammate has been a decent guy, but not really one you’d call a champion in the waiting. Other than 1996 and 1992, when the champion’s teammate went on to become the champion, but I still don’t really consider Villeneuve or Hill of top caliber – they had a 2s advantage and still almost managed to lose it. (They are worthy WDCs, and of WDC caliber, but I wouldn’t rate them amongst the best WDCs)

    Champions’ teammates over the last 20 years:
    2011/2010 – Webber
    2009 – Barrichello
    2008 – Kovalainen
    2007 – Massa
    2006/2005 – Fisichella
    2000-2004 – Barrichello
    1998/1999 – Coulthard
    1997 – Frentzen
    1996 – J. Villeneuve
    1995 – Herbert
    1994 – Herbert/Lehto/Verstappen
    1993 – Damon Hill
    1992 – Patrese
    1991 – Berger


    ‘This is for Sid Watkins’.

    That’s why. Vomit all over the place.

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 105 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.