planetf1.com

I don't like Benson's articles. I lost all respect for him after he published that pre season report saying Alonso had the average fastest lap times. Utter crap. But this article was different. I think I'm in the minority who read it differently. I didn't see it as a Vettel/Schumacher bash and an Alonso praise fest. I saw it as something much more subtle than that. He was trying to say, just because Vettel has more titles than Alonso or whoever, it doesn't mean they're better. Alonso has been widely accepted as the benchmark for F1 drivers, and just because Vettel has won more titles, he shouldn't be perceived as better. It's not a personal thing.

That is the point of the article. Statistics shouldn't make you think better of a driver, purely because of the driver having bigger or better numbers than someone else

This is why I don't agree with ranking drivers based on statistics. Because on their own, statistics are just numbers, meaningless. What they need is context. F1 is a very circumstantial sport, the tiniest of differences in circumstances can have humongous effects. That is something statistics on their own cannot account for. They need context.

This reminds me of a thread we had here a few months ago. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2468&p=58785#p58785 One of the better threads we had on this site. They seem to be so few and far to come by, I had to save it.

_________________
Forza Fernando !

not sure if I will say "choked" - but his last 3 - 4 races cant be described as perfect as is made out to be.

Getting beat by Massa by a couple of tenths who is generally 5 tenths off him means he underperformed to the tune of 7 tenths which would have been sufficient to clich top grid slots and take the fight to Vettel.

It could either be choking (as you say) OR (as I feel) his risk averse attitude and ultra wariness of mistakes while leading a title battle. I also feel that to be considered a real all time great , this attitude is a massive liability. Collecting points work but not when you are up against an aggressive guy like Vettel and a team like RedBull.

Scanning down the article he has spoken of the championship battles of 12 differant drivers and where Vettel is mentioned includes the lines "Did those events reflect on the qualities of Alonso or Vettel as drivers in any way? Of course not. None of this is to diminish a remarkable achievement by Vettel, or to downplay the talent of a man who will clearly be a central figure in F1 for the next decade."

Yet you've somehow read it as an article focused on crushing Vettel.

Benson's assertion that the numbers don't tell the whole story and results should be put into context is perfectly correct, and he is correct that championships have turned on the smallest of margins but that the details are forgotten years down the line when simply reading down the championship table. As such the numbers alone do not tell the whole story of a given f1 season or the history of f1 as a whole.

If he'd written an article saying that since Button thrashed Vettel in the 2009 championship, Button should clearly be considered a much better driver, you would certainly argue against this since as we all know this is plainly not true and the Brawn car avantage should be taken into consideration.

You may not like what he said but he has made perfectly well reasoned points.

That is indeed the point of the article but the problem is that everyone knows Benson very well by now and his motivations. So its hard to take him at face value. Plus the way he has chosen examples is also noteworthy. Why not talk about Alonso and Button for instance ? Why get this article out just after Seb has won his 3rd and overhauiled Alonso if he was generally making a point.

As Laura rightly said, this guy is a Lewis fanboy and is butthurt to the extent of praising Lewis ' nemesis -just to put down achievements of the guy who stole Lewis' thunder !!

We'll agree to disagree I guess. I felt his only letdown was his Q3 pace. For me he seemed to give his all in Q2 and not make an improvement in the final session.

But he did the maximum in the races as far as I was concerned.

Towards the end of the season Ferrari's rate of successful development tailed off while the Red Bulls and McLarens were constantly improving. I don't think better results could have been extracted from it (Massa could have grabbed 2nd in Korea maybe).

_________________
"I am a believer, but I start each Grand Prix with 195 liters of fuel behind me," he explains. "I don't rely entirely on God, I rely on Prost."

A Lewis fanboy? I could have sworn he was an Alonso fanboy.
If he wanted to bash Vettel, he could have done it much easier. "Vettel the champion but the best?" or words to that effect. I actually think this is one of Andrew's Benson's better articles. Not that there's much competition

_________________
Forza Fernando !

I never read this guy.

_________________
Get your facts right first, then you can distort them as you please. Mark Twain.

That article is unadultrated BS because it deals with suppositions to suit the writer's line of thinking. A lot of sporting results are very close, including F1. We are prefer competition where the final result goes to the wire rather than a forgone conclusion halfway through a season. Therefore, what is the purpose of ifs and buts afterwards? Why shold we consider the supposedly lucky results of just the winner and not of those who came close second or third?

Taken as a whole season, Alonso if anything had more luck than Vettel, including all 3 of his wins. Likewise in 2010 he benefitted from Vettel's retirement in Korea. It all balances out in the end and so what matters really is the actual final result and not what might have been.

Andrew Benson is no different from many bargain basement writers who use a respectable media outlet as cover to spew out their garbage. Read Tom Cary's ridiculous F1 post-race articles in the Daily Telegraph and you'll know what I mean.

_________________
Vettel / Raikkonen / Button

I can go along with a lot of what you wrote there, klauss. What I'm not clear on, is whether Alonso went too defensive this year during the final races or not. The fact is that Massa was the quicker of the two drivers in the races. Which surprised me greatly; it was becoming clearer by the race, that the Red Bull/Vettel combination was onto a scorching season ending. We all remember forum members pointing out that Massa could have been used far more offensively than he was, especially since Ferrari got the ban on team orders favouring one driver over another lifted. Puzzling.

As for the article by Benson, I can see what he means by comparing Alonso and Vettel, but he is being disingenuous by not pointing out that Alonso threw a lot of good points away himself at Suzuka - putting a double squeeze on Räikkönen, a driver he should know to be anything but accident prone (which shows Alonso didn't have his thinking helmet on at that moment).

Also, what is wrong with calling Vettel the yardstick? It doesn't mean he is the best, just the standard. Few would argue that Alonso is at the very least on the same level as Vettel.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota

Benson isn't pro-Hamilton at all. Some of his tweets after Spa were so biased towards Jenson Button and against Hamilton it was embarassing

_________________
#10

Well said Fiki

No. Benson is a Hamilton fan. No doubt about that.

_________________
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota

I have had similar thoughts on occasion. In Abu Dhabi 2010, absence of DRS notwithstanding, I got the impression that Alonso should have been able to overtake Petrov - not that it would have made much difference with Kubica and Rosberg finishing further ahead. In 2012, it could be that Massa's apparent better speed might actually be Alonso lacking that extra nerve to push the final button (pun not intended). Immaterial in interlagos of course where Button was not anywhere near being caught by the Spaniard.

_________________
Vettel / Raikkonen / Button

no, his point is NOT valid. Why does he only mention Alonso's few misfortunes, but skip all of Vettel's. You can't say "if Alonso had not been hit at Spa he wins the title" and skip the fact that Vettel's car broke down on him while leading in Spain or the title is down a race earlier. or in '10 when Vettel's car broke while leading 3 times, but he only mentions Alonso at Abu Dhabi. THerefore his article is ridiculous... just like how he carried on for days about yellow flags at Brazil

He's a "whichever British driver is doing best in this race is the one I'll support" fan. Very rarely does he have a non-biast opinion.

_________________

I actually liked the article right up to the point where I read this :
"And that's the point. Statistics don't mean everything. In fact, in the big picture, they mean very little. They're just numbers. They can't be ignored, but the real truth lies elsewhere".
It's one thing to say statistics don't mean everything. I am a supporter of Felipe Massa and I am intimately familiar with this concept. OTOH, to use the arguments he presents in his article to say that statistics mean very little is to be disingenuous. The only reason he picks on Schumacher and Vettel is because they have recorded big numbers in their favor. Why are we not talking about the relative merits of Karthikeyan and PDLR?

Agree with your post. Alonso did not have a great start to 2010. I remember some mistakes he made like the jumped start. He also did not have a great ending. Fast forward to 2012 where he did not have a great second half of the year despite the podiums. I still am puzzled that Massa was the quicker driver towards the end. There is no logical explanation for that. And finally, yes, he did make a mistake against Kimi that no one talks (much) about. So, is he the yardstick? I don't know. Vettel made mistakes himself but finally squeezed out ahead in two WDC through sheer will power and tenacity. Alonso is praised for being relentless but I would argue that Vettel has that quality in a higher degree if these past three seasons are a true reflection of each man's character. I think we are lucky to see three talented guys who would give any of the "greats" a run for their money duking it out.

All he was doing was pointing out how easily it could have gone another way. End of.

Gold.

Ifs and buts are pointless. Vettel headed the leaderboard come seasons end, Alonso didn't deserve to win because his car simply wasn't at the level of the RBR or McLaren, you don't generally win a WDC just by being consistent, and if you do, you get shit for it.

_________________
[[[[Mark Webber for the win in 2013 and beyond]]]
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[http://www.octanic.com]]]]]]]]]]]]

I love it when people say "end of" and think they have won the argument...


You'll have to try harder. Try and read what was said actually. Everyone knows that this was his point. Most agree on that. The way he gives his view though is sh*te.

I don't think it's that bad an article. Sure, he says a couple of silly things - but that's what the whole topic is. Formula One fans regularly discuss "what if" and he's doing nothing different here. Sure, he's pro-Alonso, but he's not saying "Vettel sucks. Alonso is much better", he highlighted one driver's issues throughout the year. Yes, in theory he should have highlighted every driver's issues, or at least Vettel's, but it's not the end of the world. You, the informed fan (most of you, anyway), know the true score. One man saying a few things that make you feel the whole story hasn't been told isn't going to be on your mind for the rest of your life. You'll probably have forgotten all about this article in a week.

He's not a great journalist because of the reasons I've expressed, but he isn't a boogey man sitting in the BBC office writing letters to the Legion of Doom.

Is it outrageous to suggest Alonso is the yardstick for Formula One drivers? That's down to opinion. Some will say Vettel, some will say Hamilton and some (Benson included) will say Alonso. It's an opinion piece and nothing else.

I've read much worse in my time.

_________________

I also have one of these.

Even though I see people's point that Andrew Benson is Pro Alonso and in this latest article he is again, he still makes a valid point. The Article is based around Bernie Ecclestone saying Vettel is the yardstick for the other drivers now but Benson simply goes on to say even though he is a great driver and statistics do matter like (x3 wdc) it does not tell the whole story.
Can anyone on here say that Vettel is now the yardstick for the other drivers or is he an extremely talented driver who has made the most of the opportunity presented to him.
This is an imperfect sport and the best won't always win, or team and drivers always get what they deserve (Good or bad).

Andrew Benson is biased towards Alonso but it doesn't take away from the fact he has a point.

True. He makes some good points, and does reference history a lot. Alonso/Vettel are mentioned more that most, probably, because it just so happens that this contest is a current story that is happening recently?

I think what happens is that the OP and first few posters (why might a guy named Hakkattack might have issues with Ferrari, Alonso, or a pundit whom likes them...) set the tone heavily against the article because their fav driver didn't have his ass kissed (or vice versa), and the rest of the people just comment based on assumption without having read the article.

The main point he makes is that performances and observable skill are better than numbers. Just because i think that Andrew Benson is a d*ck head does not mean he has to be wrong every time...

_________________
Forza Ferrari

I can't find a correlation between the article and the thread title? Nothing new in the article IMO, every success needs a lot of things to come together?

That's what's been the strength by Vettel and Red Bull to maximize the rules, strategy and the teamwork and with a little help from some accidents and others misfortune.

I'm gonna file this under, not an issue.

So you think that FA attitude in the first laps of most races when he makes huge moves on his opponents are risk adverse? He attempted to pass Petrov twice in that last race for sure and left the track in those attempts. Why do you think we all talked about the Trulli train back then when he was much slower then others yet nobody could pass him? We get it, you don't like the man which is the only reason you talk out your elbows the way you do.

Cruise control?

Singapore - 5th - 3rd
Japan - 7th - DNF
Korea - 4th - 3rd
India - 5th - 2nd
Abu Dhabi - 7th - 2nd
USA - 8th - 3rd
Brazil - 9th - 2nd

OK, the last pair of results were assisted by Massa, but Alonso pushed like hell in the last races of the season. Ferrari's problem, as it has been all season, was a chronic lack of single lap pace that simply left Alonso with too much to do on Sundays. Qualifying was incredibly important this season - 16 of the 20 races were won from the front row. In dry conditions, Alonso qualified in the top 3 twice - in Spain and Canada.

Alonso scored 154 points in the first 10 races, and 124 in the last 10 (where he had his two DNFs).

Hardly not a great 2nd half of the season.

It's just a load of crap.

Ignore everything bad that happened to Schumacher. Fantasize about bad things that didn't happen to him but very nearly did.

SCHUMACHER LOSER TITLE AT LAST RACES? WHO CARE? SCHUMACHER BREAK LEG? GOOD!

SCHUMACHER WIN TITLE AT LAST RACES? WHY? WHY HE NOT LOSE? HE COULD VERY LOSE? BUT NOT?

SCHUMACHER WHY HE NOT LOSER? NOT FAIR?! WHY PROST NOT WIN INSTEAD?

Exactly, Alonso could quite easily have won NONE if certain engines had not failed.

OH NO...

No, to be really fair, Vettel only has TWO cars jumping out of his way if you wish to consider STRF do that for him - and they don't block for him either. Mark Webber jumps for nobody, if you have film of him jumping, please share. If he lets Seb by, and he has 2 times in their time together, then you can be damn sure it is on his terms.

Alonso on the other hand, has Massa both jumping out of his way, not challenging AND blocking other drivers for him. So don't try to make this as if Vettel had some unique advantage over the competition this season. Furthermore, the STRF's let EVERYONE through, the longest they held hold up a front runner - ANYBODY in 2012 - was all of 2 turns. And the hold up was at best, midgrid - whereas Massa will block and race Alonso's competitors at the front.

So enough of that unfounded argument. Please.



Well we all have our little dislikes. Frankly, I found jacking up the teammates gearbox to slither Alonso to the front much more unsporting. But you know, everyone has an opinion on those things. The remarkable thing is Ferrari having the nerve to mention Michael at all after what they pulled in Austin - and that was just Austin. There was also "you are getting too close to Alonso" and Massa's other butting out gestures - none of which could be attributed to Mark. His only assist came in Interlagos, when he guided Seb by Narian and let him take the lead. But when you counter that with the squeeze at the start, the 3 way squeeze with Koba, Alonso getting by Mark a little to easily, etc., well, it doesn't really come out as Mark being overly helpful.



Fair enough. Everyone has their team of choice - or teams. For me, Red Bull lifted the sport to new heights. I am not a fan of teams, but I have to say that when I was walking along the pitlane and the only garage blaring house was inevitably Red Bull, I couldn't keep the smile off my face. I mean you gotta love those dudes - they are like fresh faced kids in a sea of forehead-lined adults.

_________________

A mechanical failure is part of the car's package: in the same way you claim Vettel lost x points because of an engine fail, you could claim that Alonso lost y points because of a wind tunnel fail, or because the car was not fast enough (hence a car fail). An accident is a different situation: you may judge if it is the driver's fault, in which case you should not "correct" the points, or if it was sheer bad luck, in which case I understand people allowing for that particular "what if". I think that Spa obviously falls into that second category (and for the record, since it does not seem to be part of this discussion, I don't agree with those who are eager to squarely blame Alonso for what happened in Suzuka).

As for Abu Dhabi 2010, those claiming that Alonso could not pass a slower car should remember that Hamilton could not pass the same car either. Are you going to conclude that Hamilton was too conservative in his approach to racing too?

Andrew Benson's name is an insult to the word 'journalist' - a cat can write better stuff by walking across the keyboard.

2006? If Schumacher's engine hadn't failed in Suzuka Alonso still would have won the title by a point.

_________________
"I am a believer, but I start each Grand Prix with 195 liters of fuel behind me," he explains. "I don't rely entirely on God, I rely on Prost."

No , sorry we cant but I like the way you argue .

There is no guarantee that Alonso woould have won in similar cars if the Wind tunnel had worked . Its speculatable but not a given.

There is however 99% chance that vettel would have won in Valencia given the pace he was lapping. Only a mech DNF could have denied him the win and it duly did.

Besides a DNF from a win loses you 25 points while a slower car but able to finish on podium only loses you about 10 points on average.

Sorry but he is offering his view, if you dont like it - dont read it.

Fact is he does come up with truths which is whats really annoying you. Alonso has not had a race winning car all season but he has been very consistent and Ferrari with reliability and great starts. Even I am no Alonso lover but you have to admire him and I certainly would have him in my team. If I ever saw 3 cars in a team it would straight away be Alonso, Lewis and Button. 3 different styles yet 3 great drivers all capable of winning outside of a car which is dominant - as shown in the last 3 years.

It wasn't just Schumacher's engine failure in Suzuka - next race in Brazil, Schumacher suffered from a fuel pump issue in Q3, after posting the fastest time (by a mile) in Q2. He would have certainly started that race from pole, and not had Alonso's team-mate slash his tyre which sent him to the back of the field.

If's and then's can work in so many ways...

Fair point, but Hamilton did not have the WDC on the line for him.

The problem is that his opinion is flawed. If he takes into account Spa without mentioning Valencia where Alonso got the win gifted and Vettel losing 25 points through mech DNF - his opinion will be rightly judged worthless.

The only truth he has brought about in this article is " Anything can happen in F1 - and it usually does" which is a universally known truth. No need for an article about it unless you have an agenda OR are just filling your task sheet of one article per week.