Brazil

[JHS18 0]

Wouldn't it be boring another title for Vettel once again this season? I think the other guy winning would be more fun. What's his name again?

Nope.

I don't understand these frankly ridiculous comments I've read elsewhere how it'd be "too early" for Vettel to win three and that he'd be undeserving.

Undeserving? You don't win one title by fluke. You don't win three by fluke, either. Sure, maybe the Red Bull has been the superior car - but remind me, when in recent history has the best car not been the one to win the title?

Also, as good as Alonso has been this year, I do think that the Ferrari is now a better car than a lot of people give credit for. They are second in the WCC after all. It is certainly miles better than it was when the season started in Melbourne.

[AleHop 0]

I don't understand these frankly ridiculous comments I've read elsewhere how it'd be "too early" for Vettel to win three and that he'd be undeserving.

Undeserving? You don't win one title by fluke. You don't win three by fluke, either. Sure, maybe the Red Bull has been the superior car - but remind me, when in recent history has the best car not been the one to win the title?

Also, as good as Alonso has been this year, I do think that the Ferrari is now a better car than a lot of people give credit for. They are second in the WCC after all. It is certainly miles better than it was when the season started in Melbourne.

I never said it would be undeserving.

Of course the Ferrari is a better car now as is the Red Bull, Lotus, McLaren, etc. A winner car? In normal circumstances, nowhere. Maybe in Monza without the anti-roll bar problem. Ferrari-Alonso have done a brilliant job at the circuits, a poor job at the factory in Maranello.

Any driver winning the championship is a deserving champion. Some drivers/teams not winning the title may deserve credit for the good job during the season. That's how I see it.

[dribbler 6]

How do you know he did'nt work so hard, especially to get the car to his liking, remember the start of the year? Judging by what I read about his work ethic on F1 sites, he's probably THE most hardworking driver on and off the circuit....

I meant in the car. My perception has been that Fernando has driven every lap flat out this year.

Sad way for a WDC to be decided, don't u think. But then again, U'de be happy cause Alonso won his 2nd title like that with a Schumie engine breakdown

That engine breakdown was in Suzuka and not the final race of the season. It still went down to the wire In Brazil. I didn't think any less of Fernando for the way he won his second title. On the contrary, he thoroughy deserved it. In fact, for me it was the most convincing beating Michael ever had because arguably, the Renault and Ferrari seemed quite even that year and I still felt that Michael was very near to his best.

[BradSpeedMan 6]

I meant in the car. My perception has been that Fernando has driven every lap flat out this year.

and we can deduce that Vettel has'nt?

[freaky2 1]

Well, not when running first

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Well, not when running first

hey hey

[Jean-Pierre 0]

I predict there will be weather.

In a sense, there would be justice in an Alonso title because he drove so well. In another, it doesn't feel right that a team like Ferrari that has under-delivered (relative to their finances) in terms of development, occasional strategy errors and re-hiring Massa should be vindicated for their approach or not punished for their mistakes. If they win, I hope they remember they owe it to Alonso and not themselves.

well said

[Jean-Pierre 0]

"There would be justice in a Vettel title, too, because he drove so well, and his team was actually there for him. Either one will be the right champion."

Vettel is good when he is in front with the best car, a little bit like Michael, who won the majority of his races from the pole. Put him under pressure (like having to pass several top cars or to drive in showers) and things often start to go wrong and he starts to complain. He will be under pressure this week-end and he might prove me wrong, but my money is on FA for the WDC if it rains.

[Rainmaster 7]

So apparently rain is a certainty for Sunday as it will rain throughout the day?

Just thinking about that 4 hour time limit that was introduced this year. Considering the amount of pre-race expectation I would find it quite funny if this race was started under a SC and then red flagged.

[Massa 0]

Perhaps, Jean-Pierre, but I'm just not so sure.

I don't read much into what drivers say over the radio. To me, complaints aren't desperate cries for help out of an incompetence; it's just being competitive. Different people motivate themselves and their teams in different ways. Some people lose the plot if they stay too calm. Others make silly mistakes if they get too frustrated. One driver staying calm does not mean he is handling it better than the one getting angry. It just means he is handling it better for himself.

The fact remains that Vettel dominated Sébastien Bourdais, who is a marvelous driver (a winner in Champ Car, stock cars, V8 Supercars, and sports cars of many varieties...I can't think of any modern day driver who has proven to be so versatile) and won a race in a Toro Rosso that was a better car than any Toro Rossos have been, but still not a winner. He's won seven races not from pole (26.92% of his wins), which admittedly pales in comparison to Alonso's 16 (53.33% of his). Nevertheless, can we really fault Vettel for winning so many poles, and winning races in what we think is the best car (how much better, we've never really known)?

I think it's a shame that Vettel is not being praised as a legend of our time. I was his biggest detractor from day one (there are many forum posts from me in 2007 calling him useless), but it's just not possible for someone who is not very, very special to win so many races and two, maybe three, titles. Yes, a mediocre driver can win races in a good car. A mediocre driver can put together a good season in a good car. But the flaws will be obvious. Those flaws are not there with Vettel, and the F1 field as a whole is so much closer than it ever has been, so any deficiency becomes so pronounced that Vettel could not possibly win if he were not very, very good. The Red Bull is the best car, sure, but not by enough to carry anyone to the title. Even if he were number one, Webber would not win two, potentially three, championships. Neither would Massa or Kobayashi or Karthikeyan.

I, too, think Alonso is a very, very good driver. At the same time, has Alonso ever lost a title in the best car? Arguably in 2007. Has Vettel? Not yet. Has Alonso ever won a title not in the best car? No, not yet. Has Vettel? No, not yet. So I don't really see how we can use "best car" to differentiate the two. I could only make the case, but not assert as fact, that Räikkönen won in 2007 without the best car (the Ferrari and McLaren were very even that year, though, so it is not a great one), and that Hamilton won in 2008 without the best car (in a very weird season where it was hard to gauge the performance of either car as all four of the team's drivers had great inconsistencies, but perhaps you could say the Ferrari was the best car and was utilized least efficiently in backing Massa, hence it did not win).

Even then, I cannot think of a recent World Champion who won in a car that wasn't very close to the best if not the best. So are all the World Champions no longer legitimate? I'd think not. A car cannot drive itself, and a driver cannot defy what is physically possible to do in a car. I find it fair to say the guy who scored the most points was the year's best driver, and give recognition to others who did well. We have so few measures of what the best car is and who the best driver is, and without a better one, I won't reject Vettel's 26 race wins and two-bordering-on-three titles as not being great demonstrations of driver and car united, as any other Grand Prix win or championship must have been.

I do hope for rain and a good race, but even more, I hope for respect for what Red Bull and Vettel have done because it's well-deserved.

[Massa 0]

For George:

The weather update only goes to 1 PM Sunday, so an hour before race time. It will have been raining essentially all day up until then, so I assume the track will be wet at the start if it is not still raining.

[Rainmaster 7]

Thank you Eric, you truly are a rainmaster.

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Perhaps, Jean-Pierre, but I'm just not so sure.

I don't read much into what drivers say over the radio. To me, complaints aren't desperate cries for help out of an incompetence; it's just being competitive. Different people motivate themselves and their teams in different ways. Some people lose the plot if they stay too calm. Others make silly mistakes if they get too frustrated. One driver staying calm does not mean he is handling it better than the one getting angry. It just means he is handling it better for himself.

The fact remains that Vettel dominated Sébastien Bourdais, who is a marvelous driver (a winner in Champ Car, stock cars, V8 Supercars, and sports cars of many varieties...I can't think of any modern day driver who has proven to be so versatile) and won a race in a Toro Rosso that was a better car than any Toro Rossos have been, but still not a winner. He's won seven races not from pole (26.92% of his wins), which admittedly pales in comparison to Alonso's 16 (53.33% of his). Nevertheless, can we really fault Vettel for winning so many poles, and winning races in what we think is the best car (how much better, we've never really known)?

I think it's a shame that Vettel is not being praised as a legend of our time. I was his biggest detractor from day one (there are many forum posts from me in 2007 calling him useless), but it's just not possible for someone who is not very, very special to win so many races and two, maybe three, titles. Yes, a mediocre driver can win races in a good car. A mediocre driver can put together a good season in a good car. But the flaws will be obvious. Those flaws are not there with Vettel, and the F1 field as a whole is so much closer than it ever has been, so any deficiency becomes so pronounced that Vettel could not possibly win if he were not very, very good. The Red Bull is the best car, sure, but not by enough to carry anyone to the title. Even if he were number one, Webber would not win two, potentially three, championships. Neither would Massa or Kobayashi or Karthikeyan.

I, too, think Alonso is a very, very good driver. At the same time, has Alonso ever lost a title in the best car? Arguably in 2007. Has Vettel? Not yet. Has Alonso ever won a title not in the best car? No, not yet. Has Vettel? No, not yet. So I don't really see how we can use "best car" to differentiate the two. I could only make the case, but not assert as fact, that Räikkönen won in 2007 without the best car (the Ferrari and McLaren were very even that year, though, so it is not a great one), and that Hamilton won in 2008 without the best car (in a very weird season where it was hard to gauge the performance of either car as all four of the team's drivers had great inconsistencies, but perhaps you could say the Ferrari was the best car and was utilized least efficiently in backing Massa, hence it did not win).

Even then, I cannot think of a recent World Champion who won in a car that wasn't very close to the best if not the best. So are all the World Champions no longer legitimate? I'd think not. A car cannot drive itself, and a driver cannot defy what is physically possible to do in a car. I find it fair to say the guy who scored the most points was the year's best driver, and give recognition to others who did well. We have so few measures of what the best car is and who the best driver is, and without a better one, I won't reject Vettel's 26 race wins and two-bordering-on-three titles as not being great demonstrations of driver and car united, as any other Grand Prix win or championship must have been.

I do hope for rain and a good race, but even more, I hope for respect for what Red Bull and Vettel have done because it's well-deserved.

Beautiful post!

Lovely lovely stuff!

[Ikyrotz 0]

Perhaps, Jean-Pierre, but I'm just not so sure.

I don't read much into what drivers say over the radio. To me, complaints aren't desperate cries for help out of an incompetence; it's just being competitive. Different people motivate themselves and their teams in different ways. Some people lose the plot if they stay too calm. Others make silly mistakes if they get too frustrated. One driver staying calm does not mean he is handling it better than the one getting angry. It just means he is handling it better for himself.

The fact remains that Vettel dominated Sébastien Bourdais, who is a marvelous driver (a winner in Champ Car, stock cars, V8 Supercars, and sports cars of many varieties...I can't think of any modern day driver who has proven to be so versatile) and won a race in a Toro Rosso that was a better car than any Toro Rossos have been, but still not a winner. He's won seven races not from pole (26.92% of his wins), which admittedly pales in comparison to Alonso's 16 (53.33% of his). Nevertheless, can we really fault Vettel for winning so many poles, and winning races in what we think is the best car (how much better, we've never really known)?

I think it's a shame that Vettel is not being praised as a legend of our time. I was his biggest detractor from day one (there are many forum posts from me in 2007 calling him useless), but it's just not possible for someone who is not very, very special to win so many races and two, maybe three, titles. Yes, a mediocre driver can win races in a good car. A mediocre driver can put together a good season in a good car. But the flaws will be obvious. Those flaws are not there with Vettel, and the F1 field as a whole is so much closer than it ever has been, so any deficiency becomes so pronounced that Vettel could not possibly win if he were not very, very good. The Red Bull is the best car, sure, but not by enough to carry anyone to the title. Even if he were number one, Webber would not win two, potentially three, championships. Neither would Massa or Kobayashi or Karthikeyan.

I, too, think Alonso is a very, very good driver. At the same time, has Alonso ever lost a title in the best car? Arguably in 2007. Has Vettel? Not yet. Has Alonso ever won a title not in the best car? No, not yet. Has Vettel? No, not yet. So I don't really see how we can use "best car" to differentiate the two. I could only make the case, but not assert as fact, that Räikkönen won in 2007 without the best car (the Ferrari and McLaren were very even that year, though, so it is not a great one), and that Hamilton won in 2008 without the best car (in a very weird season where it was hard to gauge the performance of either car as all four of the team's drivers had great inconsistencies, but perhaps you could say the Ferrari was the best car and was utilized least efficiently in backing Massa, hence it did not win).

Even then, I cannot think of a recent World Champion who won in a car that wasn't very close to the best if not the best. So are all the World Champions no longer legitimate? I'd think not. A car cannot drive itself, and a driver cannot defy what is physically possible to do in a car. I find it fair to say the guy who scored the most points was the year's best driver, and give recognition to others who did well. We have so few measures of what the best car is and who the best driver is, and without a better one, I won't reject Vettel's 26 race wins and two-bordering-on-three titles as not being great demonstrations of driver and car united, as any other Grand Prix win or championship must have been.

I do hope for rain and a good race, but even more, I hope for respect for what Red Bull and Vettel have done because it's well-deserved.

Couldn't agree more, a great post! Have to point out though that in 2005, I think McLaren was the fastest car. If only it had been reliable as well, Kimi had won the title (so maybe it wasn't the best car). Alonso won it, not with the fastest car, but always being there to take the points and making the most of the situation.

[LabradoRacer 2]

Will this be one of those rare weekends where 3 of the 4 guys at Macca & RBR finish ahead of Alonso? Doesn't seem so. Seems either Lewis or Vettel will DNF.

Surprised, though not so much, to see Felipe faster than Alonso.

Merc continues to flatter. No chance of points.

[JHS18 0]

Couldn't agree more, a great post! Have to point out though that in 2005, I think McLaren was the fastest car. If only it had been reliable as well, Kimi had won the title (so maybe it wasn't the best car). Alonso won it, not with the fastest car, but always being there to take the points and making the most of the situation.

I think there's a fundamental difference between "fastest" and "best" - for the car to be the best it has to be reliable enough. So on the basis Alonso's car was more reliable than Kimi's in 2005, to my mind, yes, he did have the best car.

[AleHop 0]

It seems rain might not turn up in Brazil. In any case the race can be a good colophon to a great season in decrescendo.

[HandyNZL 1]

...excuse me, but, for all those thinking wet = Alonso win, when has Vettel ever been bad in the wet?

[Peeweev 0]

yep china i think it was when he ran into the back of webber.

on a different note just heard Kimi asking "where is my engine?"

Reply should be "either in bits or sitting in the garage. which do u want?"

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Eish, engine blow-up for Kimi... Not good

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Might be all irrelevant with the rain coming soon

[JHS18 0]

yep china i think it was when he ran into the back of webber.

Japan, Fuji '07.

Always thought that Hamilton was playing games behind that SC, and that clip proves it.

Oh well, this thread is for this weekend, not 2007.

[Massa 0]

There is no driver on this grid with a flawless record in the wet. They've all done something silly or laid an egg. Take that out and look at maximum performance in the wet, and you end up with the same guys who are the best in the dry, too, any of whom could win on any given day. So, Craig's correct, rain does not mean Alonso gets the title. Might rain be his best chance of it? Maybe, but keep in mind that Vettel is someone you almost never find in the lower points-paying spots where he'd have to be, no matter what the conditions.

In his entire career, Vettel has finished:

P10 zero times

P9 once (never at Red Bull)

P8 four times (only once at Red Bull)

P7 once

P6 four times (twice at Red Bull)

P5 five times (twice at Red Bull)

If he does any better than that, he wins the title. Is rain putting him back there? Only variable conditions where Red Bull gets the setup wrong and botches the strategy...you really think the best team in the league's going to do that? These guys deliver. The day I finally admitted Vettel was good just so happened to be a wet race in Brazil, you know.

I guess my point is that even if Alonso is better than Vettel in the wet, it's still out of his hands as long as Vettel is good enough. I think Vettel's more than good enough, personally, in any conditions.

Alonso's best chance is a Vettel retirement in dry or in wet, and whether it is more probable in which conditions, I don't know. Alonso would be a very deserving champion, of course, in the season as a whole, but in this particular race, it just won't come down to "Alonso was the better driver today." It will be, "how did Vettel end up back there?!"

I still want rain, for an unpredictable race, independent of championship implications.

[Rainmaster 7]

^^Nailed it.

[LabradoRacer 2]

Grosjean now punts even in quali! Still, wonder if it was really his fault.