2013 Canadian GP - Montreal (June 9)

graniteharbor502 said:He was better during those last two races in 2012, but they had to sabotage him if Alonso was going to have any shot at the title. Essentially, after Germany, Alonso only had one more decent race, which was the one in India. The second half of the season cost him the championship. Now, I'd love for some Ferrari fan to explain to me how they were actually satisfied with Alonso during that latter part of the season.

Massa performed better in Korea, Brazil, and now—I can't recall that fourth race offhand. But regardless, in Korea and now, even if he had driven like Massa, he couldn't have done much better than his actual finish.

The only real setback was in Brazil, but I watched that race closely and Alonso was clearly pushing as hard as he could—that’s why he spun so many times—it just wasn't happening. Something strange was going on with the Ferrari development during those final few races. Clearly, the car either didn't suit him, or the updates simply failed to work.

steelmaker83 said:You’re making stuff up again. Massa was just as good, if not better, in exactly four races back in 2012. That’s nowhere near half a season. What happened—and we know it now—was clearly the result of Ferrari rushing a panicked development program. They were slapping updates on Fernando Alonso that just didn't work, all in a desperate attempt to snatch the title.

Honestly, sometimes it’s easier to explain things to a brick wall.🙄
And seriously, you aren't even reading the posts you're replying to...

You claim Webber was better than Vettel during the first half of 2010 and 2012...
Sure, he was statistically better...only because in those first ten races of both seasons—twenty total—he actually finished them without a single breakdown or getting wrecked by someone else.

Vettel, on the other hand, had four DNFs in those same twenty races, plus mechanical failures and some brain-fart pit stops in 2010 during races he actually completed. And lo and behold, he ended up with fewer points because of those retirements and failures.
But of course, it's always Vettel's fault when his alternator dies, or a spark plug fails, or the brakes go, or a wheel nut isn't tightened, or someone slams into him. Typical.🙄

In those twenty races, Webber finished ahead of Vettel 6 times, while Vettel finished ahead of him 10 times. But no, let's just say Webber was the better driver.

It’s the exact same logic as saying Massa was better than Alonso between Belgium and Japan in 2012. Sure, Massa wasn't better at the finish line once, but he grabbed more points in that stretch simply because Alonso had two DNFs.

That's like me whining about how Vettel crushed Webber in this race just because Vettel won dominantly and Webber couldn't even make the podium.
And while we're at it, I'm totally forgetting about 🙄van der Grade 😠 and how he spent the whole time riding in Webber's slipstream.

steelmaker83 said:Felipe Massa performed much better in Korea, Brazil, and now, though I can't quite recall that fourth race off the top of my head. Regardless, in Korea and now, he wasn't quite there, nor was he driving with the same edge as Massa; he might have been able to achieve more than his final result.

The only true disappointment was in Brazil, but if one watches that race closely, it becomes clear that Fernando Alonso was pushing himself to the absolute limit—which explains why he spun out those many times—but things simply wouldn't go his way. There seemed to be something peculiar happening with the Ferrari development during those final few races. It was quite apparent that the car either didn't suit him, or perhaps the updates failed to function entirely.

Have you ever paused to wonder if Kimi Räikkönen actually found the car he was driving at Ferrari to be a good fit, and whether the engineers were truly developing it to align with his specific driving style?

steelmaker83 said:And credit where credit is due; nobody is disputing that point. My argument is simply that one should wait for more comprehensive conclusions until everything has actually played out on track.

I previously labeled myself a troll, largely because I have grown weary of explaining why we cannot simply crown Kimi Räikkönen as the greatest driver of all time. It seems the crux of the matter is that anyone who dares to question Kimi Räikkönen's supposed divine driving talent is immediately branded a member of the Fernando Alonso cult (or rather, that specific Ferrari driver currently leading the team). Is it really necessary to go further? The essence of these debates always boils down to this: if you don't believe in his perfection, you're an extremist. And frankly, how can anyone see "divine skill" in a driver who constantly spins into the grass, slams into walls, and spends half the race screaming about tire degradation or demanding that everyone—especially his own teammate—get out of his way?🤣😂... do I even need to continue?

You guys are really overdoing it with this Alonso vs. Vettel nonsense. Fine, I’ll jump in and vent too. As a Ferrari fan, I think it’s honestly pathetic to downplay Vettel's achievements while simultaneously riding the high of Alonso's titles from his Renault days. There's no doubt both are among the best drivers out there right now. One is still busy writing Formula 1 history, and the other—if he doesn't snag a title at Ferrari—is going to be remembered as just another decent world champion.

Look, I'll admit it—I find Vettel annoying, and let's face it, Red Bull has been an absolute beast lately. But obsessing over a single spin or a bit of tire degradation against the backdrop of a perfectly executed, controlled race is just mental.

Both had their shots at the championship in recent years, and they had them this year too. One takes advantage of his opportunities; the other doesn't. One is a three-time world champion, the other isn't. One won the Canadian Grand Prix, the other took second. One is leading the standings, the other isn't.

Vettel is currently the better driver than Alonso, and he’ll stay that way until Alonso—not you, my dear fans of the fallen prancing horse—proves otherwise.

All we can do is keep our fingers crossed and enjoy watching both of them work their magic.

swifttiger75 said:I truly believe you all have gone far too extreme with this constant bickering regarding Alonso versus Vettel. If I may be so bold as to offer my own humble opinion? As a devoted Ferrari fan, I find it quite disheartening to see people attempt to diminish Vettel's accomplishments while simultaneously clinging to the glory of Alonso's titles from his days at Renault. There is no denying that we are looking at two of the finest drivers in the sport today; one who is destined to continue etching his name into the history books of Formula 1, and another who, should he fail to secure a championship with Ferrari, might ultimately be remembered as merely an adequate world champion.

Now, while I will admit that I find Vettel somewhat unappealing personally, and that the Red Bull Racing car has been quite the dominant force over recent years, is it not a bit absurd to scrutinize a single moment—be it a momentary spin or a tire brushing against the barrier—while completely ignoring a masterfully executed and controlled race?

Both men have had their opportunities to claim championships in recent seasons, just as they have here. One capitalizes on them, whereas the other does not. One stands as a three-time world champion, while the other does not; one has secured a victory at the Canadian Grand Prix, while the other finished second; one leads the standings, while the other does not.

At this present moment, Vettel remains the superior driver compared to Alonso, and he shall remain so until Alonso himself—rather than you, my dear fans of the prancing horse—proves otherwise.

Is it not better if we simply keep our fingers crossed and take pleasure in the sheer brilliance displayed by both of them?

Well done! It truly warms my heart to see that there are still objective Ferrari fans present within this forum.

graniteharbor502 said:Respect. It's actually refreshing to see an objective Ferrari fan on this forum for once.

There’s always going to be some blind fanatic somewhere. 😬

swifttiger75 said:Right now, Vettel is a better driver than Alonso. That’s just the reality, unless you Ferrari fans—with your obsession over those fallen horses—actually manage to prove otherwise.

What kind of scale are we using to measure this nonsense?

graniteharbor502 said:Kudos. It’s actually refreshing to see an objective Ferrari fan on this forum for once.

So, I guess you're just the baseline for objectivity now.
And by that logic, anyone who agrees with you is automatically objective too.
You really didn't need to go there.

Roger Wright94 said:So, you're essentially claiming that your own perspective is the baseline for objectivity.
And by that logic, I suppose everyone who happens to agree with you is also being perfectly objective?
This was really hardly necessary to point out.

No, my starting point is actually the actual, tangible results achieved on the track. While I certainly don't claim to be an objective judge when it comes to choosing my personal favorite or my most beloved driver—for who could truly be impartial in matters of the heart?—I can certainly strive for objectivity, as much as any human being possibly can, when interpreting the data and the final standings.
To be quite frank, you haven't exactly proven yourself to be a particularly serious interlocutor thus far. However, I shall extend to you the opportunity to attempt to change my mind.

Roger Wright94 said:By what metric on earth is this being measured?

One should look at the results, shouldn't one? Do you happen to possess a more sophisticated instrument for measurement, or are we simply destined to rely upon the whims of luck and pure satisfaction—those incredibly objective criteria, if you will—that come from watching Fernando Alonso drive?

graniteharbor502 said:Results. Do you actually have some better metric to use here, or are we just gonna lean on "luck" and "vibes"—which are totally objective criteria, obviously—based on how much Alonso's driving makes you feel good?

Let’s throw a curveball here—is Bill Russell (11 rings) better than Michael Jordan (6 rings)?

Like I said before, stats don't tell the whole story of what makes someone great.
Right now, Vettel's got the edge on paper, but whether he's actually the superior driver is something you can't really quantify, so claiming it as fact is a stretch. Sure, Vettel absolutely nailed it at the Canadian Grand Prix—props to him for that—but his performance also showed that his head still isn't quite screwed on straight.

shadowstag10 said:Let's stir the pot just a little bit here—is Bill Russell actually superior to Jordan?

As has been previously observed, raw statistics rarely capture the full spectrum of true greatness.
At this particular moment, Sebastian Vettel holds the more impressive record, yet whether he truly possesses greater talent is something that defies easy measurement, making any definitive claim somewhat precarious. During his time at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, Vettel managed the race with remarkable composure, and one must certainly offer him credit for that, though his recent actions suggest he may still be struggling to maintain his mental focus.

That is a fair point. If we follow that logic, how then could one possibly assert that Fernando Alonso is a better driver than, say, Jean-Eric Vergne?

This is purely my own two cents, obviously—I’m sure the actual experts in the room figured Fernando Alonso was a much better bet for that Ferrari seat than Jean-Eric Vergne anyway

shadowstag10 said:It’s primarily a subjective take, though I suspect those with more expertise than myself would have handed Fernando Alonso the seat at Ferrari over Jean-Eric Vergne.

Is that not exactly how things unfolded when those same experts decided Sebastian Vettel deserved his spot at Red Bull, even going so far as to sign him through the end of 2015? And isn't it highly probable that those very same individuals will eventually offer Vettel a contract—if they haven't already—to drive for Ferrari? If we follow that logic, what exactly are we meant to hold onto, if not actual results? As for Fernando Alonso, thank God, he has been driving incredibly competitive cars since 2005 (though I shall make an exception for 2008 and 2009). We all understand how the math works there. Vettel has had a competitive car for a slightly shorter duration, so we can just as easily see what his statistics actually represent.

And how can you be so sure Red Bull didn't offer them a deal first, or that they weren't actually capable of landing some massive superstar? For all we know, Vettel might have just been their second or third choice—and then, by some stroke of luck, everything just clicked and they hit this "perfect symbiosis" with the car that everyone seems to swear by now?

it's all just NBA nonsense

shadowstag10 said:But how can you possibly be certain that Red Bull didn't offer a contract to someone else first, or perhaps they weren't even in a position to land a much more prominent name? Is it not possible that Sebastian Vettel was merely their second or third choice, and then, by some stroke of luck, they hit upon this perfect symbiosis with the car that everyone seems to accept as fact now?

it all falls within the realm of the NBA

Precisely. That is exactly my point. This is why I find myself constantly returning to the cold, hard reality of the results. Who achieved what, and when? One has to wonder, are there perhaps other criteria at play that we aren't considering?

graniteharbor502 said:Results. Do you have a better metric, or are we just going to rely on the "luck" and "satisfaction" (extremely objective criteria, clearly) that Alonso's driving gives you?

Luck and satisfaction are feelings, not metrics. In Formula 1, at least, there’s absolutely nothing I can do to control the events that serve as the input for my feelings.

Half a million people will tell you that results—as in, the standings—aren't the sole, absolute measure of a driver's talent. But hey, if that's how you want to play it, I'm done.

Michael Schumacher won three titles in '96 and '97 back when Ferrari had a car that was significantly inferior to Williams. Back then, I was incredibly happy and satisfied, convinced Ferrari was on the right track and that Schumacher was a better driver than Hill or Villeneuve. Fast forward to 2006, when they lost the title to Fernando Alonso, and I felt exactly the same way.
I wasn't even slightly bummed about losing the title compared to how much it sucked seeing Schumacher retire.

Alright, look, you're being objective here—you're totally right. Russell is definitely better than Jordan, my bad.

Roger Wright94 said:Tens of thousands of people are telling you that results—as in the standings—aren't the one and only metric for driver quality. Fine. If you can't get that, I'm done.

Michael Schumacher took three titles and five wins back in '96 and '97 when the Ferrari was way behind Williams. Back then, I was thrilled, convinced Ferrari was on the right track and that Schumacher was a better driver than Hill or Villeneuve. Fast forward to 2006, when they lost the title to Fernando Alonso, and I felt the exact same way.
Losing the championship didn't bother me nearly as much as watching Schumacher walk away.

Alright, so what makes you "objective" when you claim Alonso is better than Vettel? What about someone saying Vettel is better than Alonso—are they just wrong???
And is your gut feeling basically the holy scripture while everyone else is just mistaken?

As far as I'm concerned, Vettel has been the better driver since 2008. So if I'm being "ultra-unobjective," at least we're clear on that.😁
But hey, my supposed bias actually has some decent stats to back it up season after season...
On the flip side, those hardcore Alonso fans don't really have anything besides feelings and tall tales.