Vettel's 4 vs Hamilton's 6.

[Kingshark]

If the top bods at Mercedes or Ferrari or RBR decided Ricciardo (for example) was a better bet than what they've got, then they'd have jettisoned their incumbent driver for him. Just like what happened at Ferrari to Vettel. They aren't stupid, subjective or sentimental and going to keep a driver on out of loyalty over performance. There's a reason Hamilton has kept that drive for seven years. There's a reason RBR put all their eggs in the Verstappen basket. There's a reason Leclerc has been anointed at Ferrari.

The teams feel those particular drivers give them the best chance of success, and unfortunately for Ricciardo and a few others, they see him as slightly below that level.

Nah, that’s not even remotely close to being true.

Vettel won 4 championships on the bounce while Alonso (a superior driver) was stuck in an inferior Ferrari. The fact that Alonso was better than Vettel did not encourage Red Bull to change their driver lineup.

The fact that Hamilton is driving a Mercedes right now is zero evidence on whether he is actually the best driver on the grid. As Russell showed in Sakhir, looking good in a Mercedes is not that difficult (even without practice)

This idea that the best drivers will always end up in the best teams is a complete myth, an idealistic concept that has no basis in reality.

Having the best car in Formula 1 is mostly down to dumb luck.

[dans79]

Nah, that’s not even remotely close to being true.

Vettel won 4 championships on the bounce while Alonso (a superior driver) was stuck in an inferior Ferrari. The fact that Alonso was better than Vettel did not encourage Red Bull to change their driver lineup.

99% of that is Alonso's own fault, he has been overly political and vocal when he shouldn't have been and it has severely damaged his career!

The fact that Hamilton is driving a Mercedes right now is zero evidence on whether he is actually the best driver on the grid. As Russell showed in Sakhir, looking good in a Mercedes is not that difficult (even without practice)

On what is probably the easiest circuit layout f1 has seen in over 20 years. Russell could have Jumped into the RB and been dead even with Max as well, because the outer circuit required almost no driver skill. The outer loop made the drivers skill almost irrelevant, it was all about the car and how they were set-up. 0.823 seconds covers the top 10 cars in qualifying.

This idea that the best drivers will always end up in the best teams is a complete myth, an idealistic concept that has no basis in reality.

Having the best car in Formula 1 is mostly down to dumb luck.

Keep telling yourself and everyone else that if it makes you feel better, because very few people believe that!

its proven true across multiple generations of drivers.

[El Scorchio]

If the top bods at Mercedes or Ferrari or RBR decided Ricciardo (for example) was a better bet than what they've got, then they'd have jettisoned their incumbent driver for him. Just like what happened at Ferrari to Vettel. They aren't stupid, subjective or sentimental and going to keep a driver on out of loyalty over performance. There's a reason Hamilton has kept that drive for seven years. There's a reason RBR put all their eggs in the Verstappen basket. There's a reason Leclerc has been anointed at Ferrari.

The teams feel those particular drivers give them the best chance of success, and unfortunately for Ricciardo and a few others, they see him as slightly below that level.

Nah, that’s not even remotely close to being true.

Vettel won 4 championships on the bounce while Alonso (a superior driver) was stuck in an inferior Ferrari. The fact that Alonso was better than Vettel did not encourage Red Bull to change their driver lineup.

The fact that Hamilton is driving a Mercedes right now is zero evidence on whether he is actually the best driver on the grid. As Russell showed in Sakhir, looking good in a Mercedes is not that difficult (even without practice)

This idea that the best drivers will always end up in the best teams is a complete myth, an idealistic concept that has no basis in reality.

Having the best car in Formula 1 is mostly down to dumb luck.

[PlatinumZealot]

At what point does the sport become meaningless?

It is and has always been meaningless to the fans that don't care about anything other than how many races and championships their favorite driver or team wins.

I like to see driver achievements be an accurate reflection of driver ability. Hamilton and Vettel have both had their achievements severely inflated relative to their actual talent because of car advantage. Hamilton more so than Vettel because Mercedes is more dominant than Red Bull ever was.

On the other hand you have someone like Ricciardo who is 31 and still has never driven a single WDC capable car in his entire career, injustice tbh.

I do think that over time, F1 will eventually become like Indycar, where the cars are almost equal and the drivers are the primary difference makers. This is because it's human nature to want a proper competition.

So you want to watch a single specification series then?

The last time I checked the teams with the fastest cars had the pick of the litter. The best teams arw the king-makers and Mercedes has chosen their king. Do you have a problem with their choice of driver? They don't.


RedBull chose their King who was Vettel.
Ferrari chose Alonso.
Mercedes chose Lewis.

Vettel was exposed by a challenger. He was not a real king.
Alonso abdicated the Ferrari throne.
Ferrari chose Vettel. Who was exposed yet again by a challenger to the throne.

RedBull then chose Verstappen.
Ferrari chose Leclerc.


Mercedes has stuck with Lewis and they both make a dominant combination.

Why change?

Why must Ferrari change and why must RedBull change now?

No reason.

The real problem is that Ferrari and RedBull need to make faster cars.

[Jolle]

If the top bods at Mercedes or Ferrari or RBR decided Ricciardo (for example) was a better bet than what they've got, then they'd have jettisoned their incumbent driver for him. Just like what happened at Ferrari to Vettel. They aren't stupid, subjective or sentimental and going to keep a driver on out of loyalty over performance. There's a reason Hamilton has kept that drive for seven years. There's a reason RBR put all their eggs in the Verstappen basket. There's a reason Leclerc has been anointed at Ferrari.

The teams feel those particular drivers give them the best chance of success, and unfortunately for Ricciardo and a few others, they see him as slightly below that level.

Nah, that’s not even remotely close to being true.

Vettel won 4 championships on the bounce while Alonso (a superior driver) was stuck in an inferior Ferrari. The fact that Alonso was better than Vettel did not encourage Red Bull to change their driver lineup.

The fact that Hamilton is driving a Mercedes right now is zero evidence on whether he is actually the best driver on the grid. As Russell showed in Sakhir, looking good in a Mercedes is not that difficult (even without practice)

This idea that the best drivers will always end up in the best teams is a complete myth, an idealistic concept that has no basis in reality.

Having the best car in Formula 1 is mostly down to dumb luck.

Seeing this is a technical forum, formula one is who can build and race the best car. Spec series are kinda fun, but so uninteresting on a technical level for me. From the first time I watched F1 the pushing the limit on car development is so much more rewarding then the endless discussions that driver x would beat driver y in the same car.

[Just_a_fan]

If the top bods at Mercedes or Ferrari or RBR decided Ricciardo (for example) was a better bet than what they've got, then they'd have jettisoned their incumbent driver for him. Just like what happened at Ferrari to Vettel. They aren't stupid, subjective or sentimental and going to keep a driver on out of loyalty over performance. There's a reason Hamilton has kept that drive for seven years. There's a reason RBR put all their eggs in the Verstappen basket. There's a reason Leclerc has been anointed at Ferrari.

The teams feel those particular drivers give them the best chance of success, and unfortunately for Ricciardo and a few others, they see him as slightly below that level.

Nah, that’s not even remotely close to being true.

Vettel won 4 championships on the bounce while Alonso (a superior driver) was stuck in an inferior Ferrari. The fact that Alonso was better than Vettel did not encourage Red Bull to change their driver lineup.

The fact that Hamilton is driving a Mercedes right now is zero evidence on whether he is actually the best driver on the grid. As Russell showed in Sakhir, looking good in a Mercedes is not that difficult (even without practice)

This idea that the best drivers will always end up in the best teams is a complete myth, an idealistic concept that has no basis in reality.

Having the best car in Formula 1 is mostly down to dumb luck.

Seeing this is a technical forum, formula one is who can build and race the best car. Spec series are kinda fun, but so uninteresting on a technical level for me. From the first time I watched F1 the pushing the limit on car development is so much more rewarding then the endless discussions that driver x would beat driver y in the same car.

An interesting point is that, generally, the drivers in F1 have got there by progressing through several junior formulae. Other than a notable exception, the top drivers have worked their way through and, in a number of cases, topped the tables in the junior formulae before they go to F1.

A case of "been there, done that" in most cases.

Sadly, some F1 viewers see F1 in isolation where really it's the pinnacle of a single-seat driver's career. Even "rubbish" F1 drivers are often better than almost every other racing driver. Not all, but most.

[aMessageToCharlie]

It is and has always been meaningless to the fans that don't care about anything other than how many races and championships their favorite driver or team wins.

I like to see driver achievements be an accurate reflection of driver ability. Hamilton and Vettel have both had their achievements severely inflated relative to their actual talent because of car advantage. Hamilton more so than Vettel because Mercedes is more dominant than Red Bull ever was.

On the other hand you have someone like Ricciardo who is 31 and still has never driven a single WDC capable car in his entire career, injustice tbh.

I do think that over time, F1 will eventually become like Indycar, where the cars are almost equal and the drivers are the primary difference makers. This is because it's human nature to want a proper competition.

So you want to watch a single specification series then?

The last time I checked the teams with the fastest cars had the pick of the litter. The best teams arw the king-makers and Mercedes has chosen their king. Do you have a problem with their choice of driver? They don't.


RedBull chose their King who was Vettel.
Ferrari chose Alonso.
Mercedes chose Lewis.

Vettel was exposed by a challenger. He was not a real king.
Alonso abdicated the Ferrari throne.
Ferrari chose Vettel. Who was exposed yet again by a challenger to the throne.

RedBull then chose Verstappen.
Ferrari chose Leclerc.


Mercedes has stuck with Lewis and they both make a dominant combination.

Why change?

Why must Ferrari change and why must RedBull change now?

No reason.

The real problem is that Ferrari and RedBull need to make faster cars.

Why are you so opposed to the idea of F1 fans craving for some actual competion after 4 years of predetermined WDC results?

That doesnt mean they should turn their backs on F1 and watch a spec series. As it is right now and has been for years, with no serious contender in the second seat, we could just have the teams run simulations on their car's performance and hand out the trophies based on the results.

I understand that you're very happy for your "King's" success, but wouldn’t you like to see some racing for once?

Wouldnt you prefer to see the best drivers pushing each other to the maximum and proving themselves in competition over watching the one same guy cruise from win to win in dominant machinery for years on end? How is that entertaining?

Of course you're correct in saying that the other teams need to make faster cars. Since that's not happening however, the only chance we have to see a WDC title fight is for Merc to put a challenger in their second car.

So instead of trying to blow up Hamilton's achievements over the last 7 years, we should rather "lobby" for Merc to give us what we want to see and put someone serious in the second car. Hamilton could prove himself on track then and put some more merit behind his records.

Win/Win for everyone.

[NathanOlder]

I like to see driver achievements be an accurate reflection of driver ability. Hamilton and Vettel have both had their achievements severely inflated relative to their actual talent because of car advantage. Hamilton more so than Vettel because Mercedes is more dominant than Red Bull ever was.

On the other hand you have someone like Ricciardo who is 31 and still has never driven a single WDC capable car in his entire career, injustice tbh.

I do think that over time, F1 will eventually become like Indycar, where the cars are almost equal and the drivers are the primary difference makers. This is because it's human nature to want a proper competition.

The same teams seem to win mostly in IndyCar, so its not exactly a level playing field.

And as for RIcciardo not being in a WDC contending car, unfortunately there is probably half a dozen drivers near the top level, but over the last 7 years only Ferrari have made a car equal to Merc. So drivers have to miss out. Thats how F1 has always been. Nothing new .

No it has not always been like this. One team being this dominant for this long a period is something that has never been seen before in the history of this sport.

It has always been like this. Drivers miss out on WDC contention because there isn't enough top teams to offer the number of top drivers a seat. So I'll say it again, F1 has always been like this.
How often has there been more than 3 teams capable of winning a WDC in a season? Remembering that most teams like a number 1 and number 2 driver, so only 1 seat for a top driver..... answer.... not many. How many times has there been more than 3 top tier drivers on the grid in one season? a lot. So yes, F1 has always been like this.

[PlatinumZealot]

Why are you so opposed to the idea of F1 fans craving for some actual competion after 4 years of predetermined WDC results?

That doesnt mean they should turn their backs on F1 and watch a spec series. As it is right now and has been for years, with no serious contender in the second seat, we could just have the teams run simulations on their car's performance and hand out the trophies based on the results.

I understand that you're very happy for your "King's" success, but wouldn’t you like to see some racing for once?

Wouldnt you prefer to see the best drivers pushing each other to the maximum and proving themselves in competition over watching the one same guy cruise from win to win in dominant machinery for years on end? How is that entertaining?

Of course you're correct in saying that the other teams need to make faster cars. Since that's not happening however, the only chance we have to see a WDC title fight is for Merc to put a challenger in their second car.

So instead of trying to blow up Hamilton's achievements over the last 7 years, we should rather "lobby" for Merc to give us what we want to see and put someone serious in the second car. Hamilton could prove himself on track then and put some more merit behind his records.

Win/Win for everyone.

Been watching F1 for long enough to say with a level of confidence that boring periods are inevitable and all viewers can do is wait for the next season and hope for better.

I did not think 2020 was boring though. There was not any hair raising fight for the championship, but when since that was ever common?

Championship fights. In the last 11 years.

2018
2017
2016
2014
2012
2010

That is four out of seven in the mercedes era and two out four in the RedBull era. And 6 out of 11 overall.
That ia over 50% of seasons that are championship fights.

Not enough?

The previous ten years before that were worse. Lol.

[Zynerji]

Why are you so opposed to the idea of F1 fans craving for some actual competion after 4 years of predetermined WDC results?

That doesnt mean they should turn their backs on F1 and watch a spec series. As it is right now and has been for years, with no serious contender in the second seat, we could just have the teams run simulations on their car's performance and hand out the trophies based on the results.

I understand that you're very happy for your "King's" success, but wouldn’t you like to see some racing for once?

Wouldnt you prefer to see the best drivers pushing each other to the maximum and proving themselves in competition over watching the one same guy cruise from win to win in dominant machinery for years on end? How is that entertaining?

Of course you're correct in saying that the other teams need to make faster cars. Since that's not happening however, the only chance we have to see a WDC title fight is for Merc to put a challenger in their second car.

So instead of trying to blow up Hamilton's achievements over the last 7 years, we should rather "lobby" for Merc to give us what we want to see and put someone serious in the second car. Hamilton could prove himself on track then and put some more merit behind his records.

Win/Win for everyone.

Been watching F1 for long enough to say with a level of confidence that boring periods are inevitable and all viewers can do is wait for the next season and hope for better.

I did not think 2020 was boring though. There was not any hair raising fight for the championship, but when since that was ever common?

Championship fights. In the last 11 years.

2018
2017
2016
2014
2012
2010

That is four out of seven in the mercedes era and two out four in the RedBull era. And 6 out of 11 overall.
That ia over 50% of seasons that are championship fights.

Not enough?

The previous ten years before that were worse. Lol.

So, it's broken, and needs to be fixed.

Just saying it's "normal" does not make it reasonable or OK. That's just admitting to insanity

[ringo]

I can tell the new fans to f1 based on how they write about history. Those who say Hamilton need to prove himself clearly havent been watching F1 in any detail since 2007.
His Mclaren days his raw talent was more vissible. The mercedes car and hybrid rules have changed his driving style to do what makes the car cover 305km the quickest.

I dont think we need to see Hamilton team up with any great hope young gun. I dont think he has any equal at this stage.
What needs to happen is redbull make a superior car or ferrari to the mercedes and Hamilton try to chase them down. I think that's more entertaining than seeing him beat a team mate because of taltent and experienc winning WDC.
The results are what they are because of the car and driver combo. The competition just needs to make better cars than mercedes.
I think both ferrair and redbull can do it.
If Mclaren can that would be even more interesting.

[Kingshark]

The same teams seem to win mostly in IndyCar, so its not exactly a level playing field.

And as for RIcciardo not being in a WDC contending car, unfortunately there is probably half a dozen drivers near the top level, but over the last 7 years only Ferrari have made a car equal to Merc. So drivers have to miss out. Thats how F1 has always been. Nothing new .

No it has not always been like this. One team being this dominant for this long a period is something that has never been seen before in the history of this sport.

It has always been like this. Drivers miss out on WDC contention because there isn't enough top teams to offer the number of top drivers a seat. So I'll say it again, F1 has always been like this.
How often has there been more than 3 teams capable of winning a WDC in a season? Remembering that most teams like a number 1 and number 2 driver, so only 1 seat for a top driver..... answer.... not many. How many times has there been more than 3 top tier drivers on the grid in one season? a lot. So yes, F1 has always been like this.

Here’s a list of drivers that had a car capable of winning the championship from 2014-2020:

- Hamilton
- Rosberg
- Bottas
- Vettel
- Raikkonen

That’s 5 drivers in 7 years.

Now compare that to 2005-2011 (also a 7 year period):

- Hamilton
- Alonso
- Schumacher
- Massa
- Raikkonen
- Button
- Barrichello
- Vettel
- Webber
- Fisichella

That’s 10 drivers in 5 years.

Only five drivers having a shot at a WDC capable car in 7 years is completely unheard of in F1 history. You can look at any other 7 year period and the competition will be far greater. That is precisely why I call 2014-2020 the zero competition era.

[Kingshark]

If the top bods at Mercedes or Ferrari or RBR decided Ricciardo (for example) was a better bet than what they've got, then they'd have jettisoned their incumbent driver for him. Just like what happened at Ferrari to Vettel. They aren't stupid, subjective or sentimental and going to keep a driver on out of loyalty over performance. There's a reason Hamilton has kept that drive for seven years. There's a reason RBR put all their eggs in the Verstappen basket. There's a reason Leclerc has been anointed at Ferrari.

The teams feel those particular drivers give them the best chance of success, and unfortunately for Ricciardo and a few others, they see him as slightly below that level.

Nah, that’s not even remotely close to being true.

Vettel won 4 championships on the bounce while Alonso (a superior driver) was stuck in an inferior Ferrari. The fact that Alonso was better than Vettel did not encourage Red Bull to change their driver lineup.

The fact that Hamilton is driving a Mercedes right now is zero evidence on whether he is actually the best driver on the grid. As Russell showed in Sakhir, looking good in a Mercedes is not that difficult (even without practice)

This idea that the best drivers will always end up in the best teams is a complete myth, an idealistic concept that has no basis in reality.

Having the best car in Formula 1 is mostly down to dumb luck.

Seeing this is a technical forum, formula one is who can build and race the best car. Spec series are kinda fun, but so uninteresting on a technical level for me. From the first time I watched F1 the pushing the limit on car development is so much more rewarding then the endless discussions that driver x would beat driver y in the same car.

Honest question: if all the F1 drivers were replaced by AI robots who had equal ability, so that the cars were the only thing that mattered, would you still watch F1?

I’m actually curious about your answer

[raymondu999]

I can tell the new fans to f1 based on how they write about history. Those who say Hamilton need to prove himself clearly havent been watching F1 in any detail since 2007.

Hamilton is worthy of championship/s. That much I dont think anyone doubts. “His” level is not in question, I believe. But the question then is — is he the best driver every year that he has won the title? Or has he been undeserving of a title every year that he HASN’T won the title?

At the end of the day F1 is not about a pure driving competition—the cars are too wide apart for that. Hamilton in a Williams or a Haas would still not outscore Grosjean or Russell in a Merc.

Doesn’t make any stretch of dominance less boring though lol

[ringo]

Here’s a list of drivers that had a car capable of winning the championship from 2014-2020:

- Hamilton
- Rosberg
- Bottas
- Vettel
- Raikkonen

That’s 5 drivers in 7 years.

Now compare that to 2005-2011 (also a 7 year period):

- Hamilton
- Alonso
- Schumacher
- Massa
- Raikkonen
- Button
- Barrichello
- Vettel
- Webber
- Fisichella

That’s 10 drivers in 5 years.

Only five drivers having a shot at a WDC capable car in 7 years is completely unheard of in F1 history. You can look at any other 7 year period and the competition will be far greater. That is precisely why I call 2014-2020 the zero competition era.

Reason this is so is the rules have been changing and were less restrictive.
2005 to 06. Renault dominance. narrow angle v10 of renault and other technology make it best launching car. Michellin tyres, mass dampers etc.
shot at title: alonso , shumacher. unrealistic because of #2 for fisichella and barichello. same f1 story.

2007 to 08. rule change. v8 engines and crazier aero. mclaren and ferrari. dominance. chances for alonso, raikonen, massa. Hamilton was a rookie. He shouldnt have had a chance. same F1 story.


2009. rule change. less aero. no refueling. wide simple wings. KERS. order is shaked up.
Brawn dominates. Chances: button, barichello. Redbull come good near the end to give vettel and webber a chance. Button wins 7 in a row. Same F1 story.

2010 double diffusers go crazy. redbull pick up where they left off. Dominance for Vettel and Webber. Hamilton, Button and Ferrari drivers pick off a few good performances but dont really have a chance at wdc. Same F1.

2011... same thing as 2010. But with pirrelli lotto tyres.

So in summary these times were not more competitive than now. They had the dice thrown with rule changes and the season took a little longer to settle down. 2020 was very competitive. The midfield is stronger than it has ever been.
What has happened is that Mercedes increased the gap to p2 and p3 to a very calculated and predicted level of repeatability. Hamilton's consistency exagerates the dominance. But overall F1 hasnt gotten any worse.

Shumacher dominant days to me were still more predictable. He literally smiled and waved his way to wins.