Sebastian Vettel
Discussion
kiseca said:
Siao said:
Muzzer79 said:
So you're suggesting that Hill, a racing driver at the pinnacle of the sport, should just have offered to move over?
It's a fairly simple equation - another car catches you up, you fight for position = potential to have crash. If you're both in the same team, less than 20 laps to go and with the team about to win their first ever race and have their first ever 1-2, it seems fairly prudent to just keep the status quo.
In regard to Alonso, he was instructed to pit and then vacate the pit box. He ignored that instruction and stayed there to hold Hamilton up. Seems like ignoring team orders to me.
So you're suggesting, a WDC at the pinnacle of the sport, cannot drive without crashing out his team mate? It's a fairly simple equation - another car catches you up, you fight for position = potential to have crash. If you're both in the same team, less than 20 laps to go and with the team about to win their first ever race and have their first ever 1-2, it seems fairly prudent to just keep the status quo.
In regard to Alonso, he was instructed to pit and then vacate the pit box. He ignored that instruction and stayed there to hold Hamilton up. Seems like ignoring team orders to me.
One driver, Senna, a man for whom a crash was more possible than average when he was involved in a fight for position, was asked about his record for collisions by Jackie Stewart, and very famously responded when you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver.
Personally I was on Jackie Stewart's side on that one. It was perfectly possible to race eachother and collide less often than Senna managed. But you're dealing with two extremes here. You're suggesting that two racing drivers are capable of fighting for position without risking a crash. That's patently not what happens. We see collisions reasonably frequently. However, when countered, you went to the other extreme and said they cannot avoid crashing.
The answer, and reality, is neither of the positions you've put forward. The reality is that when two drivers are fighting for position, they are taking the risk of a collision and sometimes it will, and does, happen. If they aren't taking that risk, then they go nowhere like Bottas (who still can't avoid collisions all the time). If you go to the other extreme, you have a LeClerc, a Vettel, a Verstappen (version 1...), or a Senna, who are having an relatively good day if they manage to fight their way up through the field without losing at least one piece of bodywork somewhere or other.
Damon, if he wanted to guarantee that he and Ralf swapped places without colliding only had one choice, and that was to move over and let him through. Even that isn't guaranteed to be incident free. If he chose instead to try defend, he chooses to risk a collision because these drivers aren't leaving two second gaps to eachother. They aren't leaving big safety margins.
Anyway, 23 year old horse, maybe enough beating in a Seb thread.
kiseca said:
Prost believes that was a big difference between him and Senna, and I think Jo Ramirez said the same thing but that could be my memory messing with me again.
Prost had seen lots of bad accidents up close and personal. He stopped on circuit and saw the wreckage from Villeneuve's crash. Another driver, I think Rosberg but could be wrong, told him to just not go and look. Prost also witnessed directly the aftermath of Peroni's accident - he saw the accident itself, obviously because Peroni hit him, and then he saw the state of Peroni's legs, saw him getting extracted from the car, kept in touch and saw the aftermath. He considered quitting after that. I think he saw fatalities directly prior to F1 too, but I can't remember if he did or if I'm just confusing him with Damon Hill on that one.
Senna never really seems to have encountered death on a race track, though I've seen someone say he was present at Elio's crash, so hard to say. But he certainly drove like the car was an unvulnerable suit of armour, while Prost drove like he knew he could die in the car at any moment and as much as he enjoyed racing, he'd rather carry on living than throw it all away for a win.
I've suggested the differences there were down to experience, but that's just a thought. It might have nothing to do with it. All the drivers have to put the risk to the back of their mind to some extent, but Senna seemed capable of burying it deeper than most.
On balance though I agree. Senna in the 1960s would have likely been more cautious than 1980s Senna, but I expect he'd have been less cautious than his 1960s contemporaries. I'd say the same for Gilles Villeneuve.
I believe De Andelis was the only driver on track when it happened.Prost had seen lots of bad accidents up close and personal. He stopped on circuit and saw the wreckage from Villeneuve's crash. Another driver, I think Rosberg but could be wrong, told him to just not go and look. Prost also witnessed directly the aftermath of Peroni's accident - he saw the accident itself, obviously because Peroni hit him, and then he saw the state of Peroni's legs, saw him getting extracted from the car, kept in touch and saw the aftermath. He considered quitting after that. I think he saw fatalities directly prior to F1 too, but I can't remember if he did or if I'm just confusing him with Damon Hill on that one.
Senna never really seems to have encountered death on a race track, though I've seen someone say he was present at Elio's crash, so hard to say. But he certainly drove like the car was an unvulnerable suit of armour, while Prost drove like he knew he could die in the car at any moment and as much as he enjoyed racing, he'd rather carry on living than throw it all away for a win.
I've suggested the differences there were down to experience, but that's just a thought. It might have nothing to do with it. All the drivers have to put the risk to the back of their mind to some extent, but Senna seemed capable of burying it deeper than most.
On balance though I agree. Senna in the 1960s would have likely been more cautious than 1980s Senna, but I expect he'd have been less cautious than his 1960s contemporaries. I'd say the same for Gilles Villeneuve.
Siao said:
kiseca said:
Siao said:
Muzzer79 said:
So you're suggesting that Hill, a racing driver at the pinnacle of the sport, should just have offered to move over?
It's a fairly simple equation - another car catches you up, you fight for position = potential to have crash. If you're both in the same team, less than 20 laps to go and with the team about to win their first ever race and have their first ever 1-2, it seems fairly prudent to just keep the status quo.
In regard to Alonso, he was instructed to pit and then vacate the pit box. He ignored that instruction and stayed there to hold Hamilton up. Seems like ignoring team orders to me.
So you're suggesting, a WDC at the pinnacle of the sport, cannot drive without crashing out his team mate? It's a fairly simple equation - another car catches you up, you fight for position = potential to have crash. If you're both in the same team, less than 20 laps to go and with the team about to win their first ever race and have their first ever 1-2, it seems fairly prudent to just keep the status quo.
In regard to Alonso, he was instructed to pit and then vacate the pit box. He ignored that instruction and stayed there to hold Hamilton up. Seems like ignoring team orders to me.
One driver, Senna, a man for whom a crash was more possible than average when he was involved in a fight for position, was asked about his record for collisions by Jackie Stewart, and very famously responded when you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver.
Personally I was on Jackie Stewart's side on that one. It was perfectly possible to race eachother and collide less often than Senna managed. But you're dealing with two extremes here. You're suggesting that two racing drivers are capable of fighting for position without risking a crash. That's patently not what happens. We see collisions reasonably frequently. However, when countered, you went to the other extreme and said they cannot avoid crashing.
The answer, and reality, is neither of the positions you've put forward. The reality is that when two drivers are fighting for position, they are taking the risk of a collision and sometimes it will, and does, happen. If they aren't taking that risk, then they go nowhere like Bottas (who still can't avoid collisions all the time). If you go to the other extreme, you have a LeClerc, a Vettel, a Verstappen (version 1...), or a Senna, who are having an relatively good day if they manage to fight their way up through the field without losing at least one piece of bodywork somewhere or other.
Damon, if he wanted to guarantee that he and Ralf swapped places without colliding only had one choice, and that was to move over and let him through. Even that isn't guaranteed to be incident free. If he chose instead to try defend, he chooses to risk a collision because these drivers aren't leaving two second gaps to eachother. They aren't leaving big safety margins.
Anyway, 23 year old horse, maybe enough beating in a Seb thread.
Damon Hill said:
I'm going to put something to you here, and I think you'd better listen to this.
If we race, if we two race, we could end up with nothing, so it's up to Eddie (Jordan).
If we don't race each other, we've got an opportunity to get a first and second, it's your choice.
No-one's suggesting that people can't drive without hitting each other. If we race, if we two race, we could end up with nothing, so it's up to Eddie (Jordan).
If we don't race each other, we've got an opportunity to get a first and second, it's your choice.
But anyone blessed with a lack of naivety will understand that, in the heat of the moment, you can end up in a position where neither driver will yield or there's a genuine misunderstanding about who is going for what and where.
Damon was clearly protecting his own interests. If he'd been the car behind in second, there's no way he'd have made that radio call.
But any mature driver with half a racing brain would have made the same call at that stage of the race, no matter what the pace of their team mate was.
These drivers are there to win, not to make the show better or to help other drivers.
Siao said:
I mostly agree with your post, although there are plenty of opportunities for a driver to pass safely at Spa. What I find wrong is the wording. It wasn't something like "guys can we hold positions?", it was "I'll put something out there, you better listen to me". We probably disagree, I may even be reading too much into it, but it sounded almost like a "reminder" of what can happen... The team knows what can happen, everyone does.
Anyway, 23 year old horse, maybe enough beating in a Seb thread.
I do get your point, he was trying to be persuasive and say the only options are I win or we fight, he wasn't making a suggestion for his boss to consider and then committing to honour whatever order the boss gives. Quite the opposite. He was laying down his terms and adding a degree of inflexibility.Anyway, 23 year old horse, maybe enough beating in a Seb thread.
He did something a bit similar when asked to slow down to let Prost catch him once. He didn't, and he said to team "Tell Alain I will race."
And there was definitely a reminder in what he said to Eddie, put there to try encourage Eddie to agree with him I'm sure.
It sits OK with me, as part of his character as much as anything else, and as I say, I can't put my hand on my heart and say if I was fortunate enough to be in his position that I'd have been open to letting Ralf steam past unchallenged either, nor that if I had thought of it, I'd have dismissed the option to try get team orders invoked. So I can't hold Damon to a higher standard than I'd hold myself to when there is a grand prix win at stake. I can accept that it may not sit so comfortably with you and there's no right or wrong answer so I'm not trying to change your mind because it's not the kind of thing, in my opinion, where one answer has more validity than another. So yep, happy to let this horse rest too
Edited by kiseca on Thursday 10th June 14:27
kiseca said:
I do get your point, he was trying to be persuasive and say the only options are I win or we fight, he wasn't making a suggestion for his boss to consider and then committing to honour whatever order the boss gives. Quite the opposite. He was laying down his terms and adding a degree of inflexibility.
He did something a bit similar when asked to slow down to let Prost catch him once. He didn't, and he said to team "Tell Alain I will race."
And there was definitely a reminder in what he said to Eddie, put there to try encourage Eddie to agree with him I'm sure.
It sits OK with me, as part of his character as much as anything else, and as I say, I can't put my hand on my heart and say if I was fortunate enough to be in his position that I'd have been open to letting Ralf steam past unchallenged either, nor that if I had thought of it, I'd have dismissed the option to try get team orders invoked. So I can't hold Damon to a higher standard than I'd hold myself to when there is a grand prix win at stake. I can accept that it may not sit so comfortably with you and there's no right or wrong answer so I'm not trying to change your mind because it's not the kind of thing, in my opinion, where one answer has more validity than another. So yep, happy to let this horse rest too
Fully agreed!He did something a bit similar when asked to slow down to let Prost catch him once. He didn't, and he said to team "Tell Alain I will race."
And there was definitely a reminder in what he said to Eddie, put there to try encourage Eddie to agree with him I'm sure.
It sits OK with me, as part of his character as much as anything else, and as I say, I can't put my hand on my heart and say if I was fortunate enough to be in his position that I'd have been open to letting Ralf steam past unchallenged either, nor that if I had thought of it, I'd have dismissed the option to try get team orders invoked. So I can't hold Damon to a higher standard than I'd hold myself to when there is a grand prix win at stake. I can accept that it may not sit so comfortably with you and there's no right or wrong answer so I'm not trying to change your mind because it's not the kind of thing, in my opinion, where one answer has more validity than another. So yep, happy to let this horse rest too
Edited by kiseca on Thursday 10th June 14:27
Muzzer79 said:
No-one's suggesting that people can't drive without hitting each other.
But anyone blessed with a lack of naivety will understand that, in the heat of the moment, you can end up in a position where neither driver will yield or there's a genuine misunderstanding about who is going for what and where.
Damon was clearly protecting his own interests. If he'd been the car behind in second, there's no way he'd have made that radio call.
But any mature driver with half a racing brain would have made the same call at that stage of the race, no matter what the pace of their team mate was.
These drivers are there to win, not to make the show better or to help other drivers.
Glad we sorted this out. In the meantime I'll be waiting for some Schumacher, Senna and Alonso examples But anyone blessed with a lack of naivety will understand that, in the heat of the moment, you can end up in a position where neither driver will yield or there's a genuine misunderstanding about who is going for what and where.
Damon was clearly protecting his own interests. If he'd been the car behind in second, there's no way he'd have made that radio call.
But any mature driver with half a racing brain would have made the same call at that stage of the race, no matter what the pace of their team mate was.
These drivers are there to win, not to make the show better or to help other drivers.
RichB said:
Siao said:
Glad we sorted this out. In the meantime I'll be waiting for some Schumacher, Senna and Alonso examples
Or not, seeing as this thread is titled Sebastian Vettel 
thegreenhell said:
RichB said:
Siao said:
Glad we sorted this out. In the meantime I'll be waiting for some Schumacher, Senna and Alonso examples
Or not, seeing as this thread is titled Sebastian Vettel So back on topic, Vettel got the DOTD vote, all well!
That Jordan scenario needs putting into context. It was their first ever win (for all they knew, it could be their only win), it was a 1-2 and they had hired the experienced ex-champion Hill for precisely the reason of elevating the team both in terms of performance and stature.
Whether the subsequent team orders were the right sporting decision, they were unquestionably the right business decision.
Was it the following year that Frentzen kept in WC contention nearly all season? The ability to do that started here.
Whether the subsequent team orders were the right sporting decision, they were unquestionably the right business decision.
Was it the following year that Frentzen kept in WC contention nearly all season? The ability to do that started here.
We should also remember that was the race with the infamous 13 car pile up at the start, and the Schumacher/Couthard lapping incident, plus numerous other spins and crashes in torrential conditions. There were only half a dozen or so cars running by the end of the race. It wasn't a day to be tempting fate by having both your cars going for the same piece of the race track.
I found it difficult to like Seb when he was winning everything as I wasn't a fan of him back then. I remember when he won his first championship in the last race at Abu Dhabi.... I wanted Fred to win at the time because overall he's the better driver. But now, looking back, I'm quite happy to see Seb with 4 titles and Fred with 2. Even with Seb's flaws I've warmed to him over the years like I think many others have too. He has the ruthless streak that most if not all multiple champions do, but without the s
thousery that we've seen Fred do to teams.
I'm a Lewis fan and I have been since before his day one in F1, but I'll be sad when Seb retires as he's a bit of a character.
thousery that we've seen Fred do to teams.I'm a Lewis fan and I have been since before his day one in F1, but I'll be sad when Seb retires as he's a bit of a character.
groomi said:
That Jordan scenario needs putting into context. It was their first ever win (for all they knew, it could be their only win), it was a 1-2 and they had hired the experienced ex-champion Hill for precisely the reason of elevating the team both in terms of performance and stature.
Whether the subsequent team orders were the right sporting decision, they were unquestionably the right business decision.
Was it the following year that Frentzen kept in WC contention nearly all season? The ability to do that started here.
Ok, a bit more context then. Ralf had his car set up for a wet race, Damon didn't, which also explains the great difference in pace. The issue you have in this situation is a similar scenario to what happened in Abu Dhabi in 2016, the slower driver ahead with the faster car stuck behind and in danger of being attacked by the third driver. A fast approaching Alesi could have attacked Ralf. He obviously didn't (helped by the fact that the rain picked up again), but that's all in hindsight, they didn't know it back then. The obvious solution is to release the faster driver and hope that the slower one can hold off the fast approaching car behind, otherwise they can both get attacked.Whether the subsequent team orders were the right sporting decision, they were unquestionably the right business decision.
Was it the following year that Frentzen kept in WC contention nearly all season? The ability to do that started here.
Jordan himself mentioned in his book how he perceived Hill's message: "He was very calm and very measured but the implication was very clear. He was effectively saying, ‘Call Ralf off. Don’t force me to do something stupid and risk everything.’". Doesn't matter how we view it in the end of the day, Jordan himself read it like this. I still see this like a very mild (or maybe not so mild) insinuation, but each to his own. I do not blame Damon one bit, he did very well for himself.
After all everyone was happy to see Jordan win. And may I add that they had some of the most beautiful liveries in F1, which made me root for them even more!
DaveE87 said:
I found it difficult to like Seb when he was winning everything as I wasn't a fan of him back then. I remember when he won his first championship in the last race at Abu Dhabi.... I wanted Fred to win at the time because overall he's the better driver. But now, looking back, I'm quite happy to see Seb with 4 titles and Fred with 2. Even with Seb's flaws I've warmed to him over the years like I think many others have too. He has the ruthless streak that most if not all multiple champions do, but without the sthousery that we've seen Fred do to teams.
I'm a Lewis fan and I have been since before his day one in F1, but I'll be sad when Seb retires as he's a bit of a character.
I mostly agree, although I'd be happy if there was 3 titles Seb and 3 for Alonso. As much as a menace to the teams as he is, Alonso is a fantastic driver and I think a lot of people agree that just 2 titles possibly do not reflect the skills of the man who managed to stop Schumacher.thousery that we've seen Fred do to teams.I'm a Lewis fan and I have been since before his day one in F1, but I'll be sad when Seb retires as he's a bit of a character.
When Seb does a debrief, settle in for a long one 
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.vettel-...
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.vettel-...
ajprice said:
When Seb does a debrief, settle in for a long one
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.vettel-...
He must be one of the most intelligent F1 drivers at the moment. The way he was thinking about the strategy at Ferrari while racing at 120mph as well was incredible, although he must be happier now with a pit wall he can trust to do sensible things. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.vettel-...
AM will get a lot out of him even if he never gets near another world championship title.
Condi said:
ajprice said:
When Seb does a debrief, settle in for a long one
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.vettel-...
He must be one of the most intelligent F1 drivers at the moment. The way he was thinking about the strategy at Ferrari while racing at 120mph as well was incredible, although he must be happier now with a pit wall he can trust to do sensible things. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.vettel-...
AM will get a lot out of him even if he never gets near another world championship title.
I'll say the same thing now. He's had two good races. I'm happy he has, because I'm one of the many who didn't like him at Red Bull but have grown to like him since. I like seeing him have success. It's two races. He could be in for a good season, it could be a blip. I think we need to wait longer to see whether he's good value for Aston Martin.
Yes he's giving good, valuable feedback in the debriefing room but for that to be value, it has to consistently pay off on the track. That's where the value is. If he gives all that feedback in the back room but then goes out on track and has another 2020, the team won't trust him.
I think it's an upturn personally, I think we'll see more good performances from him, but it's too early to say still.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff