Who should win the title this year? why or why not?

[Giblet]

Vettel has shown -bad- racecraft, which is why he doens't deserve the title yet. If Seb is so good, why hasn't he been able to dominate his teammate all year like Alonso has over Massa.

At this point Alonso is the most deserving.

[donskar]

Webber and Button have been more consistent, but also consistently slower than their team-mates.

In Webber's case, that is patently untrue. He has been faster than Vettel for much of the season.

Webber was the faster Red Bull driver when qualifying was wet and Vettel had issues with his car which is very little consolation to the fact that he is generally slower. If you just look at dry qualifying you see that even with damaged cars Vettel was on average 1.5 tenth faster than Webber. If you take out Monaco and Turkey were Vettels car was definitely damaged Vettel was 2.5 tenth faster on average. However you turn it Vettel qualifies faster by any given criterion. He gets pole more often, has the higher average qualifying position and wins on aggregate time.
In Korea Webber is only 0.7 tenth behind Vettel but you have to consider that he is using a new engine which is worth 2 tenth a lap. So the true difference is more like 2.5 tenth which is pretty typical of what the two drivers usually do. Webber was having a lot of good luck while lady luck was mostly crapping over poor Seb particularly in the reliability stakes.

So for me there is only one Red Bull driver who truly deserves the title at this point in time and it is Sebastian. Perhaps if Webber demonstrates some heroic stuff in the last three races and qualifies on pole for the last two times I'm prepared to change the opinion.

The obvious response to your post (especially the portion I highlighted for clarity) is that the race does not always go to the swiftest. Or, more to the point, it is less important to start first than to finish first.

[WhiteBlue]

The obvious response to your post (especially the portion I highlighted for clarity) is that the race does not always go to the swiftest. Or, more to the point, it is less important to start first than to finish first.

That is well understood. Experience and luck also play a big role in a driver's fortunes. It would just bug me wrong if Webber would win it by a percentage game and not by superior driving. IMO he has made his own fair share of mistakes and risk taking but he enjoyed better reliability and got away with some stuff that led to DNFs for other drivers (Singapore come to mind).

If Seb is so good, why hasn't he been able to dominate his teammate all year like Alonso has over Massa. At this point Alonso is the most deserving.

I don't agree with some of this. Surely Webber and Vettel had a better car most of the season than Alonso and Massa. And Alonso is the more complete driver compared to Massa, no doubt about it. Massa can only do good if the car is 100% balanced and has superior grip. As soon as the grip varies and tyres are hard Massa typically is in problems. Nevertheless he also had won in Germany where he had to gift 7 points to Alonso that do not belong to Alonso. The points may be on Alonso's account but they do not belong there. They were bought for him by Ferrari with $100,000 and a lot of political arm wrestling. So if Alonso wins it by less than 7 points I'm not prepared to agree that he is a worthy champ. Ferrari and Alonso can throw their weight around at the FiA but they cannot do this with the fans. Alonso should better beat the other drivers by the rules if he wants to be respected as the best.

[marcush.]

to me it again looks like Vettel has the moral preverential status in RB and is running the high risk as well .He was really throwing around the car in a very spectacular ways. And i wonder why Webber could be quickest for all FP sessions and suddenly Vettel has the upper hand .
could it be they allowed him mappings not available to Webber to play it conservative for Mark?
I feel RedBull is just too selfassured banking on their car advantage and they play the wrong cards again and again...managing their championship...my view

[fausto cedros]

this weekend in my opinon has demonstrated that the man who would have deserved it is Vettel. As well, Alonso must win by more than 7 points, to be a worthy champion.But it's funny how Red Bull has to ask Vettel to help Webber in their only chance to win the contest. I wonder what will happen.

[Mysticf1]

Hmm very interesting situation Redbull find themselves in now, do they back Webber or not...Vettel is a whole 25points behind...do they really want the WDC at all costs? Its going to be hard preventing Alonso from getting the crown either way...you just can't discount his skill and experience.

Another failure for Vettel, i just can't help but wonder if its all "bad luck" or something todo with driving style or as Marcush mentioned using more aggressive mapping / setup.

[WhiteBlue]

And i wonder why Webber could be quickest for all FP sessions and suddenly Vettel has the upper hand .
could it be they allowed him mappings not available to Webber to play it conservative for Mark?

The solution is in the Korean race thread. Vettel was conserving his engine and did very little running in the FPs plus he had a puncture.

I do not believe in this mapping theory. I believe Seb just had less wing on than Mark which helped him to be 2 tenth faster in the first sector. Nevertheless by driving brilliantly in the third sector he still got a good time there. What kind of engine mapping would give Vettel more power out of an older engine than Mark Webber got out of a new one? Makes no sense IMHO.

Why would Renault tolerate abuse of an engine and then apologise for the failure if your theory was correct?

[marcush.]

I admit to walking on thin ice there...but isn´t it funny it would explain for sure why Seb has somehow more engine related issues this year and Webber is miracously slower .
you call it talent ...I call it preferential status.
Some people at RedBull have even admited to Vettel having profited more than Webber from software things....that is not exactly telling us if Webber got the same things that
Seb got...
In Turkey this was really all too obvious and we surely all remember how RedBull struggled for explanations .They even gave Webber a new contract then and there ...reason? Make him stop talking about things he would have aired maybe?
Maybe I´m seeing things here
But usage of different maps (retarded overrun)would surely explain a thing or two in terms of speed differences and reliability issues.
the bad luck thing is a myth and something that is not existing (the one proven exception to the rule is Chris Amon in F1 but that was different times).

[Terrible3]

That is just ridiculous.

1. Why give just one driver an engine map worth 1-2 1/10ths? At the end of the day you need both driver scoring maxim points for WCC, as such 0.2 seconds a lap could mean the difference from 2ed to 5th. Why in hell would you want one driver to be fundamentally slower at best?

2. Why give a driver an engine map believed to lead to engine failure? I am pretty sure you are suggesting that SV has a quicker map that is leading to these issues. Surely if you are able to so clearly draw a correlation between a quicker map causing engine damage I am sure Red Bull would discover this long before you. If they were aware of such problems why enable it in the first place?

Sorry guys these theories are laughable at best. At the end of the day one driver will be faster than the other in equal machinery. Just accept that the odds play out eventually despite looking one sided as of right now.

ie: Flip a coin 3 times and then flip it 100 times. I am sure in the first three flips its possible to get at least two heads, but that does not mean heads will come up 60%+ of the time. In 100 flips it will work out to 50%

[Miguel]

ie: Flip a coin 3 times and then flip it 100 times. I am sure in the first three flips its possible to get at least two heads, but that does not mean heads will come up 60%+ of the time. In 100 flips it will work out to 50%

Actually, even after 100 flips, the std deviation is sqrt(0.5*100)~7.

EDIT: Edited because I'm thick today. Anyway, what I mean is that in this era of ultrareliable cars, I don't think it's statistically significant if, even after two seasons, one driver accumulates two more engine failures than the other. It does suck, though. And no, I haven't counted if Vettel actually has 2 more engine failures than Webber, in case you wonder.

[marcush.]

you make a interesting point here ..coin flipping .

Webber made two significant driver errors in races this year both leading to dnfs.
Vettel did at least one in spa . So thats ok with me.Both are not heros.
But how come that both use the same equipment and all technical issues leading to dnfs or loosing positions are concentrated on one car only ?
Can that be pure luck? Neverever.They work to the same standards on both sides of the garage ...they getthe same bits ..If you almost get a hit and miss on one car and the other is totally reliable something just has to be going on.I would not go as far as saying this is on purpose or playing higher risk and to let that driver shine more...but give me a better explanation for it please.the coin will not even come close as the risk for Webber is so low that it is NOT 50/50 as with a coin ...
Try it 16 times ...not a single time on the face..the explanation is they do not play the same game or to the same set of rules...

[Terrible3]

ie: Flip a coin 3 times and then flip it 100 times. I am sure in the first three flips its possible to get at least two heads, but that does not mean heads will come up 60%+ of the time. In 100 flips it will work out to 50%

Actually, even after 100 flips, the std deviation is sqrt(0.5*100)~7.

EDIT: Edited because I'm thick today. Anyway, what I mean is that in this era of ultrareliable cars, I don't think it's statistically significant if, even after two seasons, one driver accumulates two more engine failures than the other. It does suck, though. And no, I haven't counted if Vettel actually has 2 more engine failures than Webber, in case you wonder.

Exactly, thats why I am baffled when people make broad conclusions based on such a small data sample.

[Terrible3]

you make a interesting point here ..coin flipping .

Webber made two significant driver errors in races this year both leading to dnfs.
Vettel did at least one in spa . So thats ok with me.Both are not heros.
But how come that both use the same equipment and all technical issues leading to dnfs or loosing positions are concentrated on one car only ?
Can that be pure luck? Neverever.They work to the same standards on both sides of the garage ...they getthe same bits ..If you almost get a hit and miss on one car and the other is totally reliable something just has to be going on.I would not go as far as saying this is on purpose or playing higher risk and to let that driver shine more...but give me a better explanation for it please.the coin will not even come close as the risk for Webber is so low that it is NOT 50/50 as with a coin ...
Try it 16 times ...not a single time on the face..the explanation is they do not play the same game or to the same set of rules...

Our SAE car for example went four test days of heavy driving with multiple drivers. Over the four days not a single part broke, nor did a single adjustment need to be made. The following weekend be brought the car to an event. Each of the 4 drivers got two laps. None of the drivers were able to complete a single lap. Each time something different broke and the car had to be repaired for the next driver. It seems odd that the same car could take four complete test days of heavy pounding then suddenly in one day we had four separate failures with four different drivers on their warm up lap! Sometimes the odds just don't work out in your favor....

[marcush.]

terrible 3 ...you got me laughing.

please give a brief summary of the service you did after each test day on your FSAE car and you will possibly have to conclude that your car had simply reached the end of its service interval after those initial tests only to fall apart on the next meeting.
I would expect from a top notch F1 team that they would be able to not think things will just keep going ...

Please come back to reality here and start analysing as an engineer and show me any
evidence of luck or coin throwing being involved in engineering calculations.
No playing chances there just correct or incorrect calculations .
There is no element of luck in engineering ,you are doing risk management .If you are close to some physical limits (engine mileage for example),the risk is rising
and if the engine bites the dust 5 miles before its calculated life then you could speak of bad luck if this was on the last lap and denied you the championship.If the engine was in the second race only and should have done anopther race with ease..you might ask yourself if you are sure if you life your engines correct or if you do something to it wich is not really helping the endurance...as simply squeezing the throttle will not kill it you will have to look elsewhere to find the rootcause for it ...failure mode and effect analyis anyone?

[marcush.]

please forgive my harsh words there but everyone in racing should be well aware of the fact that you create your own luck and i´m well aware that not all possible faults can be
erased before they can do harm ...we are just not bright enough for this.
I once had a development project at an OEM the development was almost finished ,the car would go in production in 3months.My part was deemed not critical as it was in series production for the predecessor already ,so 5 years in service....tell you what in one week in december all (!) Test cars stopped with the same issue in the same week with thousands of cars in the field not reporting this problem ever.
Bad luck or a systematic fault? I could have brushed this off as my teamleader wanted to
but now al those parts have a different bearing as an improvement that was possible without any further modifications..Still the thing is far from perfect .so if somewhere in this world this very defect showed I would say :told you so...and everyone else would shrug and say .how is that possible...these things are totally reliable according our knowledge....