Is Vettel’s fourth title almost guaranteed?
- This topic has 97 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
@freelittlebirds
Even if your assessment was correct (if), even your own description is not how one describes “completely dominat[ing] the opposition”.That depends on your perspective. Winning 6 championships in a row with 2 more in the backburner usually qualifies as absolute and complete domination.
That being said, I’m not a RB fan and hope to see the Reds (the real reds not just in name )and Silvers (both teams) fighting back.
That depends on your perspective. Winning 6 championships in a row with 2 more in the backburner usually qualifies as absolute and complete domination.
McLaren’s 1988, Mansell’s 1992, Prost’s 1993, Schumacher’s 2002 and 2004, Vettel’s 2011 were dominant seasons in recent times. Nobody else seemed to be able to win the championship. To say 2010, where Vettel only led the WDC after the final race, or 2012, where Alonso seemed to be safe after Monza were dominant, is doing those seasons short. It would be like saying 1998 was a dominant season for McLaren, while the championship went down to the final race and Schumacher was right behind. Statistics don’t tell the full story in F1.
At this point, what would you say his chances are of winning the 4th straight consecutive WDC?
When no other driver can win it.
Five races into the season, Michael Schumacher was probably feeling very confident about winning the 1999 World Championship. But then he lost the lead to Mika Hakkinen in Canada, and while he could have taken it back, he crashed out at Silverstone and broke his leg, forcing him out for the next six races.
The moral of the story is that it doesn’t matter how good you are – nothing is guaranteed.
“At this point, what would you say his chances are of winning the 4th straight consecutive WDC? “
50-50. It’s between him and Alonso (unfortunately in my view) and there is an equal likelihood of each one winning.
Something to remember – the WDC standings after Spa 2010 were as follows:
LH – 182 points: MW – 179 points: SV – 151 points: JB – 147 points: FA – 141 points.
With six races to go FA was not only down by 41 points, he also had four drivers ahead of him. But five GP”s later things looked like this:
FA – 246 points: MW – 238 points: SV – 231 points: LH – 222 points: JB – 199 points.
Nothing’s a given yet and I’m more than certain that Alonso and Raikkonen will be given their all no matter how far ahead Vettel gets because anything can happen. As Jon Sandor said above, 2010 is a very good example. Alonso was considered to be out of it with 6 races to go then all of a sudden, 5 races later he was leading the championship.
F1 is an unpredictable sport so while Vettel is certainly looking the favourite to win, he could get a string of car failures or have a drop in form etc.
That being said, when Alonso and Raikkonen have a bad race it usually involves them finishing 8th, lower or having a DNF. A bad race for Vettel usually means 4th place :P
“I still refuse to believe that Milton Keynes has better engineers than Maranello. :p”
I actually agree with you there, but then I don’t have a problem with what this implies – which is that Milton Keynes has better drivers than Maranello. :)
I still refuse to believe that Milton Keynes has better engineers than Maranello. :p
That seems a bit non-sensical when you’ve admitted quite a few times that after 3 years Ferrari still can’t get their most important tool – their windtunnel – working.
I actually agree with you there, but then I don’t have a problem with what this implies – which is that Milton Keynes has better drivers than Maranello. :)
Nope, the drivers might just be in favor of Maranello. Milton Keynes definitely has better facilities though, a superior windtunnel and simulator. ;-)
That seems a bit non-sensical when you’ve admitted quite a few times that after 3 years Ferrari still can’t get their most important tool – their windtunnel – working.
That’s what happens if that one team has relied on testing for car development in the last 20 years. :-/
Only because Ferrari have their personal testing track while Red Bull and McLaren do not. If Ferrari were allowed unlimited testing on Fiorano, the F138 would be on a different planet right now.
I think it’s far from a foregone conclusion Vettel will run away with it: he’s been super consistent so far this season and has maximised every opportunity he’s had when the car’s not been fastest but Alonso did exactly the same last year, and look how that turned out.
Red Bull may have mined every vein of gold in the RB5-lineage so we may not continue to see them out-gunning everyone in the development arms race as they have done in previous seasons. However, I do not see them falling back spectacularly, so if Vettel continues to qualify out of the clutches of trouble which Alonso has previously failed to do then there seems no reason for him to have his lead decimated.
I’m still favouring him for the championship, but it’s very much wide open!
its as simple as that: rebull have the most downforce but they dont use the tyres as well as say ferrari and lotus, but they are improving and even if vettel loses points to alonso in the next couple of races (unlikely IMO) he will fight back in the latter part of the season at the tracks where redbull have always been mighty at and he will Win this years championship. i hate to break it to you people, but he will simply do just that.
@jonsan Man… 2010 was epic!
At the moment, a below par weekend for Red Bull is, say, a 2nd place and a 8th place. Whereas with Ferrari, that is classed as a successful weekend (as they described it after Canada). And that, at the moment, is the difference. Whilst someone like Fernando or Kimi wins, Vettel is quietly there, usually on the podium, or certainly no lower than 5th. I can’t see anyone else winning it this season at the moment, simply because we’ve got Asia at the end, which Vettel owns.
unfortunatly I cant see vettel and his cohert in crime (aka marko) getting beat, ferrari and mclaren have messed up again big time i,m sorry to say
At the moment, a below par weekend for Red Bull is, say, a 2nd place and a 8th place. Whereas with Ferrari, that is classed as a successful weekend (as they described it after Canada). And that, at the moment, is the difference.
I’m not too sure if Red Bull would consider 2nd and 8th as a failure, or at least it is dependent on which driver finishes where. If Vettel is 2nd and Webber 8th, it is a solid weekend for Red Bull, but if Webber is 2nd and Vettel 8th, the weekend would be considered a failure.
‘below par’, not a failure.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.