F1 Championship - who DESERVES to win it?

[evenflow]

There are 6 races left, so 60 points up for grabs.
That means theoretically any of the top 12 drivers could still win the championship:

Lewis Hamilton: 70
Felipe Massa: 64
Kimi Raikkonen: 57
Robert Kubica: 55
Heikki Kovalainen: 43
Nick Heidfeld: 41
Jarno Trulli: 26
Fernando Alonso: 18
Mark Webber: 18
Timo Glock: 15
Nelson Piquet Jr: 13
Rubens Barrichello: 11

The poll option only allows 10 choices, so I'll leave Piquet & Barrichello off.

Who do you think deserves to win?

My vote goes to Kubica - he's gone about the job quietly and professionally in inferior equipment.

[flemke]

evenflow said:

There are 6 races left, so 60 points up for grabs.
That means theoretically any of the top 12 drivers could still win the championship:

Lewis Hamilton: 70
Felipe Massa: 64
Kimi Raikkonen: 57
Robert Kubica: 55
Heikki Kovalainen: 43
Nick Heidfeld: 41
Jarno Trulli: 26
Fernando Alonso: 18
Mark Webber: 18
Timo Glock: 15
Nelson Piquet Jr: 13
Rubens Barrichello: 11

The poll option only allows 10 choices, so I'll leave Piquet & Barrichello off.

Who do you think deserves to win?

My vote goes to Kubica - he's gone about the job quietly and professionally in inferior equipment.

Query - when you say "deserves to win", do you mean what driver only through his driving performances deserves to win, or what package of driver/car/team deserves to win?

[patmahe]

I think Massa is really coming of age recently, he's driving very controlled races and we're not seeing the sort of erratic behaviour we used to from him. I think any driver that can go away and analyze his own faults and failings as a driver and address them, then put in a performance like we saw in Hungary only to have it cruely snatched from him so close to the end. Then to come back and win in Valencia the way he did was incredible (pit lane errors aside).

He's becoming a very rounded character and ok 2 races doesn't deserve a championship but if he keeps driving in the last 6 races the way he has in the past 2 then I certainly wont begrudge him the championship. And more than that I think he'll have earned it.

[evenflow]

flemke said:

Query - when you say "deserves to win", do you mean what driver only through his driving performances deserves to win, or what package of driver/car/team deserves to win?

I originally meant driving performaces only. But then I saw my own reason for voting for Kubica was partly due his his inferior machinery...

So, I suppose driving talent, taking into account the benefit/disadvantage that their machinery gives them. In other words, a Kubica win is "better than" a Hamilton win.

Hope this makes sense. It does to me

[flemke]

patmahe said:

I think Massa is really coming of age recently, he's driving very controlled races and we're not seeing the sort of erratic behaviour we used to from him. I think any driver that can go away and analyze his own faults and failings as a driver and address them, then put in a performance like we saw in Hungary only to have it cruely snatched from him so close to the end. Then to come back and win in Valencia the way he did was incredible (pit lane errors aside).

He's becoming a very rounded character and ok 2 races doesn't deserve a championship but if he keeps driving in the last 6 races the way he has in the past 2 then I certainly wont begrudge him the championship. And more than that I think he'll have earned it.

I'd agree that, on the right day in the right place, Massa looks unbeatable. On the other hand, Silverstone was only 4 races ago, and there Massa looked like he was literally racing in too high a formula.

[matt3001]

Massa easily deserves to win this years world title!! Even though i'd love to see Kubica have a car underneath him to have a fighting chance!

[kevin ritson]

flemke said:

patmahe said:

I think Massa is really coming of age recently, he's driving very controlled races and we're not seeing the sort of erratic behaviour we used to from him. I think any driver that can go away and analyze his own faults and failings as a driver and address them, then put in a performance like we saw in Hungary only to have it cruely snatched from him so close to the end. Then to come back and win in Valencia the way he did was incredible (pit lane errors aside).

He's becoming a very rounded character and ok 2 races doesn't deserve a championship but if he keeps driving in the last 6 races the way he has in the past 2 then I certainly wont begrudge him the championship. And more than that I think he'll have earned it.

I'd agree that, on the right day in the right place, Massa looks unbeatable. On the other hand, Silverstone was only 4 races ago, and there Massa looked like he was literally racing in too high a formula.

Indeed and he doesn't analyse his faults, does he? I mean look at Malaysia - he tried to blame his spin on the car, I was reminded of that when he tried to dismiss Sunday's pitlane incident. Perhaps it's Rob Smedley that's doing the analysis for him.

[Rocky Balboa]

Surely this poll isn't going to be biased towards Hamilton/Mclaren

[flemke]

evenflow said:

flemke said:

Query - when you say "deserves to win", do you mean what driver only through his driving performances deserves to win, or what package of driver/car/team deserves to win?

I originally meant driving performaces only. But then I saw my own reason for voting for Kubica was partly due his his inferior machinery...

So, I suppose driving talent, taking into account the benefit/disadvantage that their machinery gives them. In other words, a Kubica win is "better than" a Hamilton win.

Hope this makes sense. It does to me

It makes a lot of sense. The reason that I asked the question, and the thing, is that you've got to know a lot more than pretty much all of us here on PH do in order to make the mental adjustment for car disparity.
Even if we try to compare the two drivers within a single team, and use that as the basis for "Who's got the biggest gap over someone in an identical car?", we cannot allow for one or the other driver's getting the better pit strategy, or having a car better suited to his driving preferences than to those of his teammate.

If we go by last year, I'd say that KR didn't deserve to win, because his performances were too erratic. At the same time, he's a fabulously talented driver who'd come close twice already, so most all of us, including me, felt that he deserved a WDC at some point for all the great racing that he's done over his career. But if you looked only at what he did last year on its own, I'm not sure that that specific collection of performances was the best.
I thought that Alonso was the most consistent last year, and depending on how you want to look at it, he would have won if either:
- the Mosley Gang had not fuccked him out of five grid spots in Hungary, or
- his car had not aquaplaned at Fuji, which could have happened to anyone at any time.
Having said that Alonso "deserved" to be last year's champion, I have no idea if actually Mark Webber got more out of what was available to him than Alonso did, or maybe Kubica got even more out last year (how to evaluate coming out of a 100g crash and racing a fortnight later?).

If we're trying to evaluate the whole package, however, at least we don't have the near-impossible task of knowing how much of the performance was driver, and how much was car or team. We only have to know how much was FIA.

Cheers.

[matt3001]

flemke said:

evenflow said:

flemke said:

Query - when you say "deserves to win", do you mean what driver only through his driving performances deserves to win, or what package of driver/car/team deserves to win?

I originally meant driving performaces only. But then I saw my own reason for voting for Kubica was partly due his his inferior machinery...

So, I suppose driving talent, taking into account the benefit/disadvantage that their machinery gives them. In other words, a Kubica win is "better than" a Hamilton win.

Hope this makes sense. It does to me

It makes a lot of sense. The reason that I asked the question, and the thing, is that you've got to know a lot more than pretty much all of us here on PH do in order to make the mental adjustment for car disparity.
Even if we try to compare the two drivers within a single team, and use that as the basis for "Who's got the biggest gap over someone in an identical car?", we cannot allow for one or the other driver's getting the better pit strategy, or having a car better suited to his driving preferences than to those of his teammate.

If we go by last year, I'd say that KR didn't deserve to win, because his performances were too erratic. At the same time, he's a fabulously talented driver who'd come close twice already, so most all of us, including me, felt that he deserved a WDC at some point for all the great racing that he's done over his career. But if you looked only at what he did last year on its own, I'm not sure that that specific collection of performances was the best.
I thought that Alonso was the most consistent last year, and depending on how you want to look at it, he would have won if either:
- the Mosley Gang had not fuccked him out of five grid spots in Hungary, or
- his car had not aquaplaned at Fuji, which could have happened to anyone at any time.
Having said that Alonso "deserved" to be last year's champion, I have no idea if actually Mark Webber got more out of what was available to him than Alonso did, or maybe Kubica got even more out last year (how to evaluate coming out of a 100g crash and racing a fortnight later?).

If we're trying to evaluate the whole package, however, at least we don't have the near-impossible task of knowing how much of the performance was driver, and how much was car or team. We only have to know how much was FIA.

Cheers.

Agreed Alonso was easily last year the most 'deservant' winner of the championship, and is still the best/most complete driver in F1 this year, but I think you can only chat about the guys that are actually in with a shout and out of LH/FM/KR then Felipe IMO deserves it!

[heebeegeetee]

I haven't voted 'cos I'm equal between Massa and hamilton. I don't mind admitting to being a fan of Hamilton's 'cos I'm a fan of any great racing driver, as in a driver who really wants to *race*, but i am extremely impressed by Massa's application and determination..

I think Hamilton is the better driver, by far if i'm honest, but I don't think you can take anything away from Massa's sheer effort to win this championship. I've come to admire him very much indeed.

[mikey_p]

I am torn between Massa and Hamilton.

Hamilton is quite clearly an extremely talented driver. Anyone just has to refer to Silverstone '08 now to prove it. I also thought he showed a lot of maturity and dealt with all the bullst from last year very well, in his rookie year, and still put in some blinding drives. He also doesn't just get easy wins (e.g. Massa with his thankfully fading reputation of only winning from pole). I can't remember the track, but I thought last year when he had kimi up his gear box for an hour and half only to hold him off and take the win was bloody impressive.

Massa on the other hand is trying so hard, and just seems to have the worst luck in the world, which generally seems to result due to the team and the car (apart from Silverstone which I think was due to an inability to set the car up). He is very fast and knows his racing lines, and up until Hungrey I would have said he isn't very aggressive at overtakes, but going round the outside of Hamilton on the first corner is certainly aggressive and daring in my book. He is also a really nice bloke.

However as my mate who I watch F1 with is a Massa supporter, and having just thought about the 2 drivers merits and downfalls I think I am going to have to say Hamilton.

Dons flame proof jacket.

[tomTVR]

Massa deserves it so far. He has been the fastest driver all season. Mechanical breakdown in Melbourne and Hungary have cost him 15 points which would see him well clear at the top. That includes hes cockups in Malaysia and Silverstone he is so much faster than everyone else.

[MonkeyHanger]

The only driver that deserves to win it is the Driver who sits at the top of the points table after the final GP.

[OzzyR1]

^

Exactly what I was going to post.

[anonymous-user]

Ralph Schumacher?










OK.. maybe not

[evenflow]

flemke said:

If we go by last year, I'd say that KR didn't deserve to win, because his performances were too erratic. At the same time, he's a fabulously talented driver who'd come close twice already, so most all of us, including me, felt that he deserved a WDC at some point for all the great racing that he's done over his career. But if you looked only at what he did last year on its own, I'm not sure that that specific collection of performances was the best.

I think you've summed up my feelings towards KR very eloquently. Put all his best performances over a couple of seasons together and he's a champion. Look at last season and he shouldn't have been.

Incidentally, do we know why he's so off colour this year?

[flemke]

tomTVR said:

Massa deserves it so far. He has been the fastest driver all season. Mechanical breakdown in Melbourne and Hungary have cost him 15 points which would see him well clear at the top. That includes hes cockups in Malaysia and Silverstone he is so much faster than everyone else.

It's not obvious that someone who has had one fastest lap out of twelve races this year is "so much faster than everyone else".

Also, you imply that one should add to Massa's total the points he lost owing to mechanical failure, but you appear not to discount the points he won at places such as Bahrain and Spain thanks to the mechanical advantage that his and his teammate's cars had over all the others'.

Masss deserved to win in Hungary but did not do so; at the same time, he did not deserve to win in France but did so.

Then we have his most recent win in Valencia, which he would not have achieved if the FIA had enforced their own rules. One does not want a championship to be decided off the circuit, although that is what happened last year, and already this year the FIA have influenced the results of several races, so one cannot ignore outside factors when extrapolating what drivers "deserve" based on their points totals.

Massa is a great driver, as are many of the other drivers on the grid. It is far from clear, however, that he is "so much faster than everyone else".

[flemke]

MonkeyHanger said:

The only driver that deserves to win it is the Driver who sits at the top of the points table after the final GP.

Would you say that that logic applies to individual races: that the person who happened to win was, by definition, the only person who deserved to win?

[matt3001]

flemke said:

MonkeyHanger said:

The only driver that deserves to win it is the Driver who sits at the top of the points table after the final GP.

Would you say that that logic applies to individual races: that the person who happened to win was, by definition, the only person who deserved to win?

Haha, cause I know for one that if look at Piquet's 2nd place. Piquet is truly awful and didn't deserve that 2nd so you can't always look at the results!