planetf1.com

Hi guys. Recently, I saw this advert on my TV that congratulates Sebastian Vettel on becoming Champion again, and in the video, Christian Horner says "Against all the odds, Sebastian became Champion..." Now, I personally don't agree with this, as it became quite clear to me towards the end of 2012 that Sebastian was going to win in the end. I still think he drove very well though, just not that it was really an unlikely victory.

However, there are some drivers who I believe defied the odds to become Champion:

Sebastian Vettel, 2010: He was a fair bit behind Fernando Alonso going into the Abu Dhabi decider, and I didn't think he'd do the business. Ferrari's strategy blunder helped his cause, but that's definitely not his fault. I was quite amazed at the end result.

Kimi Raikkonen, 2007: 17 points behind Hamilton with 20 to play for? And Alonso in the mix? Sounds unbelievable to me. Yet, the Iceman came out on top and managed to become Champion against all odds. That, for me, was really special.

I've only really watched F1 since 2007, so I'm hoping some of our more experienced members will post their own thoughts on some other "Against all odds" champions. With decent motivations, of course Thanks guys

Probably just in general, the odds of being a 3 time consecutive champion are pretty slim. There are what, 2 other people who have done that, out of 32 champions.

_________________

I think what Horner was saying was just about the last race.

_________________
Supporter of:

Fernando Alonso
Pastor Maldonado
Sergio Perez
Michael Schumacher
Lewis Hamilton

I think 2007, 2010, and 2012 are the best examples. Drivers being out of it with 2 races or 1 race to go, or at some stage during the last race.

There aren't really any other examples besides that for a long time. I guess JV in 1997 coming from a point behind to win is the closest. Hakkinen in 1999 came from two points down but won the race very easily.

Perhaps Prost in 1986.

Jochen Rindt: Although he did have a substantial lead at the time of his death, threre were still 4 races of a 10 race season to be run.

_________________
Official member or the "It's Haas not HAAS" club.
(Apologies to mds for stealing his idea)

This for sure.

_________________

Horner was probably thinking of the beginning of the season, where just before the testing began the FIA banned their clever rear end solution for the exhaust. Newey had found a loophole and had devised some trick parts that did some tricks behind the rear axle. So they started on their back foot, and the first third of the season were pretty dark days for Vettel and Red Bull.

But eventually the RB8 developed into a very competitive car, and in the hands of Vettel, delivered the goods.

He was probably thinking of the alternators too, wicked bad luck that probably cost him many sleepless nights.

Piquet in 1983: 16 points behind Prost (51 to 37) on the 9-6-4-3-2-1 system with three races to go. Piquet then gets 1st, 1st, 3rd to snatch the title from Prost by two points at the last round.

Surtees in 1964: with three races to go, it was Clark and Graham Hill fighting for the championship, with Surtees only a distant third. But a win and a second place kept Surtees in with a shout in the final round. Hill had a 5-point lead going into the finale, but retired with an oil leak and Surtees claimed the second place he needed to take the championship by a point.

1970 was a 13 race season. Button is perhaps worth a mention, considering where his team was only months before the start of the 2009 season.

Piquet 83

Prost 86

Rosberg 82

Out of interest where did you get the picture for your signature?
I am sure that is a helmet I own and photo I took. You're welcome to use it anyway

_________________
http://www.racefan.co.uk

Alain in 86;
Mika post 1995 - 2x champion against all odds;
Kimi 2007;
Seb 2010/2012

I tend to focus on my favs, so I don't remember the others.

It does appear that before 2007, there were not many examples of this til about 1986.

Fangio's WDC in 1956: twice he was 'loaned/borrowed' team-mates cars during races and scored enough points to win his fourth WDC.

Brabham's WDCs in 1959 and 1960 were against the odds: Moss was so much faster and walked/led almost every race until: in 1959 he had five gearbox failures (incorrect machining by contractor, not Moss' fault), in 1960 he crashed in practice at Spa and missed three races due to injuries.

Brabham's WDC in 1966: Surtees in the Ferrari 312 was faster and imo would have walked the WDC had he not been fired by Ferrari after race 2 at Spa ,which he won in the wet.

I have nothing against Jack Brabham or any other drivers. The 1959-60 Coopers and the 1966 Brabham-Repcos were outsanding cars and deserved their WMCs. Imo Brabham faced drivers who were somewhat faster in Moss and Surtees, and but for fate, are the ones who should have won the WDCs.

Hunt's WDC in 1976: he won by only one point (or so?) , and had Lauda not missed three races after his horrific Nurburgring crash, Niki was way ahead of the Hunt/McLaren package: pre-crash 5 wins to Hunt's two.

Having said all this, the WDC is based on points, and those who score the most are the WDCs. Which is why I do not value all WDCs scored on arbitrary points systems. As explained on my blog, I use other measures to rate competitors.

_________________
http://grandprixratings.blogspot.com