DanielPT wrote:I with you on that one. Luck does exist. But it is a bit hard to have luck in a whole season of 18 races. You have to be fast, reliable and win a few races for good measure.
This is probably what won Vettel the title in 2010, despite having his car fail on him 6 times, at least twice while in the lead in the closing stages, both times with Alonso taking direct advantage of that.
DanielPT wrote:In the end Massa 3 retirements against one of Hamilton cost him the title, but that is what racing is all about, no?
This is what life is about, not just racing. Things aren't always going to be fair.
DanielPT wrote:And I wouldn't say Webber dropped off the map. He still finished third in a bad season for him which is considerably better than Heikki who was 7th.
Hm. I was going to cite team orders as a reason for him finishing third and not fourth, but then I'd get lambasted for forgetting about China 2008 (where, admittedly, there were no team orders but Kimi DID voluntarily move over for Felipe).
DanielPT wrote:I think, though, that Hamilton is much faster than Hill.
I'd be surprised if there was a person who didn't think that.
By all means, while I don't believe Hammy deserved 2008, I still put him on an entirely different level compared to, say, Kubica, Vettel, Alonso and especially Raikkonen that year. It's pretty much impossible to say that there was anyone on the grid who was as strong as those two were. If anything, there is some consolation in the fact that Lewis didn't deserve to lose the championship by one point (or less
) two years in a row.
Sticking his neck on the line, one post at a time. Oh, and Singapore is still better than Monaco.