acosmichippo wrote:why does it matter? It could easily be said that the RB only got to first place to begin with because it was such a dominant car (apart from the reliability).
Read his post, in response to the post about the Brawn being more reliable, he says because Jenson is better than Vettel.
----
Thinking about it, have direct driver by driver comparisons ever actually gone anywhere, ever? Let comparing championships won, different years, different cars, different oppositions. Just seems to come down to personal preference.
Anyway, its a sham isn't it? Heck even the idea of a WDC is, the cars have never been equal between teams - no ones ever claimed they are. And I can't think of another sport where there is a greater reliance on an individuals performance within the team (the drivers) with regards to a teams performance as a whole. It's a team sport.
In cricket for example, a batsman can still clearly perform well even though their team mates are doing rubbish, what his partner is doing has little effect. The indivuduals performance is easy to note. Of course you could always say - cos his team was s*** the batsman had to play more aggressively than usual, or the pressure mounted or something.
Then there's football (soccer) again, you can look at individual stats - pass completion number of times tackled or has tackled etc. But really, its difficult for a player to turn a generally rubbish team performance round - a keeper could make loads of great saves, but one or two shots could get past them and they lose.
In f1? It's even harder for a driver to outperform a rubbish car, and often its not clear since they tend to be presented together - there isn't really a clear distinction between what is down to the car, and what is down to the driver - even when comparing team mates since they use different setups and the teammate themselves has their own ability.
- By hass25