- 19 Aug 12, 15:25#316471
Whoever has the most points at the end of the season, and has done so fairly (within the rules, or at least not massively under-punished for breaking them, I doubt any winner has had a totally clean season or not benefited from some light or lucky punishments) is the champion.
It's how the sport works, you can't just pick and choose whose worthy of a championship based on arbitrary factors, I could say Vettel has had the strongest car by a clear margin (including his team-mate perhaps) so isn't really worthy of two world championships, you can surely make an argument against any other champion being undeserving if you wanted to. The WDC is still fundamentally team based.
By can't, I mean you can't as in it's not fair principle, your obviously free to.
----
I think I was too harsh there.
I guess what you meant was you don't like/ rate/ appreciate Massa as a top driver that much, that's fair game, even if he was champion you don't have to say he was a good one or whatever, but in terms of him actually having the right to be champion (which is what I interpreted from you saying deserving, possibly a mistake to do so) that I think is unconditionally based on the rules of F1, which is having the most points at the end of the season. I kinda forget that "champion" also has a colloquial meaning, deserving champion referring to champion ability rather than the actual title champion.
It's how the sport works, you can't just pick and choose whose worthy of a championship based on arbitrary factors, I could say Vettel has had the strongest car by a clear margin (including his team-mate perhaps) so isn't really worthy of two world championships, you can surely make an argument against any other champion being undeserving if you wanted to. The WDC is still fundamentally team based.
By can't, I mean you can't as in it's not fair principle, your obviously free to.
----
I think I was too harsh there.
I guess what you meant was you don't like/ rate/ appreciate Massa as a top driver that much, that's fair game, even if he was champion you don't have to say he was a good one or whatever, but in terms of him actually having the right to be champion (which is what I interpreted from you saying deserving, possibly a mistake to do so) that I think is unconditionally based on the rules of F1, which is having the most points at the end of the season. I kinda forget that "champion" also has a colloquial meaning, deserving champion referring to champion ability rather than the actual title champion.
