Search Results

This. Also, Vettel would never have won that race if the weekend had stayed dry. I also doubt he would have won if Hamilton had qualified himself well into Q3.

 

Absolutely, as to Hamilton. It's become a bit lost to memory that he had a couple of duff weekends in the last third of the 2008 season, and Monza was one of them.

 

F1 is and should be a cutthroat business and if a driver have 2 seasons and fail to deliver his employer, then I do not see any reason to find the driver being treated unfairly. I would actually want a lot more drivers dropped, since as someone posted above there are hundreds of drivers equally talented as the bottom half of the current grid.

 

Di Resta - We know what he can, what he can not and what he brings. Give someone else his seat. 

Sutil       - We know what he can, what he can not and what he brings. Give someone else his seat.

Massa    - We know how good he used to be, he is not anymore and there is no reason for a team to take a chance on him.

Chiton     - We know what he can, what he can not and what he brings. Give someone else his seat.   

Van der Garde - We know what he can, what he can not and what he brings. Give someone else his seat.

 

Agreed, especially the cut-throat approach. Apparently that was Newey's argument for getting rid of Buemi and Alguersuari. I wouldn't retain any of the drivers you named but would differ with you only in arguing that Massa was always overrated. My recent watch-through of the season 2008 suggests he was as error-prone then as he is now and only got into a position to win a WDC through Hamilton's mistakes (including Hamilton's ruining of Raikkonen's race at Canada).

 

Also enjoyed the (intentional?) misspelling of Chilton. The amended version is an accurate summary of his skills.

Try reading the articles on the Red Bull program in the last issue of Autosport, they're very illuminating. Takeaway from them for me were: 1). It was Newey's idea, not Marko's, to sack both STR drivers after 2011, as it was clear by then that neither would ever be promoted to RBR; 2). They look for flaws in a driver's approach, try to pound them out, and cut bait if they can't; 3). They demand total commitment from the drivers in the program; and 4). They're not looking for guys who can win at STR, they're looking for guys who can win at RBR.

 

Seems clear that Alguersuari likely fell short in the commitment department, and didn't impress much on the track either. At the time I too thought they gave up on him way early but Jamie post-sacking does seem more interested in the DJ biz than in resurrecting his F1 career. 

 

As to point 4 and the myth that the STR guys needed to win at STR to be considered for promotion, remember that Vettel's promotion to RBR was announced in 2008 during the run-up to Hockenheim, long before the race at Monza. His win at Monza was a very nice bonus but didn't change his career trajectory.

Perez Malaysia 2012

 

Circumstances were very similar to Monza 2008 (and Perez started 10th)

 

Not really. Malaysia 2012 was a chaotic race in changing conditions (= results more affected by luck), while Monza 2008 had fairly constant full wet (but not to the extent that the race had to be interrupted) weather. And, of course, Perez did not win.

Vettel was the only driver in a Newey car who scored consistently in the second driver. Bourdois, Webber and Coulthard were all significantly slower than Vettel.

Toro Rosso in the second half of 2009 was on the same level as Force India now. And I don't think anyone wouldn't be impressive if Di Resta or Sutil would win race. Or from another point of view neither Hamilton nor Alonso won a race in a similar car.

 

Perez Malaysia 2012

 

Circumstances were very similar to Monza 2008 (and Perez started 10th)

 

(pin, grenade, throw)

 

 

Main problem is Newey used to have competition (back in the '90s and '00s) & Vettel is an absolute gun in the peak of his powers - but he's not Jesus (yet).

 Another issue with vettels red bull dominance is that supporters always bring up his amazing Toro Rosso rain affected monza win as proof of him winning in inferior cars but thats not true.  vettel's first win in 2008 - the redbull B team Toro Rosso STR3 was not the inferior car vettel fans make out to be. The car was identical to the Red bull RB4 designed by Adrian Newey the only difference was the customer ferrari engine, it was an impressive win but vettel wasn't driving an inferior car either.

 

At this point. Vettel can't do anything to prove it's not just the car if people seriously claim that the Toro Rosso was not a mid/low tier car in 2008.

Agreed, that is one thing Lewis has not have since Heikii, a clear number 2 driver.

 

Alonso has it with Massa, and Vettel may not get cooperation with Webber, but Webber is so shopworn he is hardly any threat. He is the Patrese to Vettel's Schumi, all the resources and time probably go firstly to Vettel, and it works well.

 

I guarantee Lewis Hamilton would be at least a 2 time WDC if  mclaren had clear number 1 driver status 2010-2012 but the departure of his mentor Ron Dennis CBE  and inter team politics with Martin Whitmarsh destroyed any hopes of multiple championships with the team. I am relieved that he left the toxic climate at Mclaren who are currently reliving their winless mid 90's form!

 

 

 

 

Newey is not a one man team, at McLaren he could not make up for the the cowboys that ran things there, which is why they had 0 titles under Newey from 2000-2005 despite having a prime Kimi to apply his trade. Since then it took Lewis Hamilton beating the better car in Ferrari in 2008 to give McLaren their sole title, even with Newey and the right drivers,

 

 

McLarens 2007  MP4-22? LOL I think Nigel Stepney  and Mike Coughlans expert photocopying skills done more for mclaren than Adrian ever could.!

 

Adrian Newey's lack of success at mclaren 2000-2005 also  was because that was the era of many variables which he had no control over such as tyre war favoritism (bridgestone-Ferreri michelin-Renault)  and mercedes trying to out power ferreri building powerful  950bhp+ V10 grenade engines which constantly blew up mid race.

 

 red bull, Adrian and the 'chosen one' benefit from the  2009 regulation change because the regs forced engine reliability and teams put the emphasis on other aspects such as aero and other rule bending gimmicks where Adrian excels.

 

 

Another example of how a team can benefit and dominate from huge regulation change was the rebadged 2009 Honda..Brawn BGP 001

 

 

Around may/june 2008 Honda aborted ALL development of the 2008 RA108 so they could put all resources behind the radical 2009 car which was ultimately rebadged brawn with customer merc engine after Japanese execs decided pulled out of F1.

 little known fact is that Honda B team Super Aguri pioneered the radical double diffuser. After Super Aguri ceased operations may 2008 most key staff moved to Honda F1 HQ in brackley to further develop the game changing technology that destroyed the field in the first half of 09 season and handed Brawn the WCC and WDC.

 

Red Bull have mastered the 2009 regulation change and dominated but  i see history repeating itself. (Honda>Brawn>Mercedes) Mercedes lack of pace towards the end of this season suggests that they will dominate early after the radical reg 2014 change but thats a debate for another thread

I think you have a point, but I maintain that the 2008 season is more than enough evidence that Vettel can perform in a car that isn't the best, an accusation consistently lobbed his way. Let's look at the results of the Toro Rosso pairing in the second half of the 2008 season - that is, when the car appeared to take a step forward post-Silverstone.

 

Hockenheim - Vettel 8th, Bourdais 12th

Budapest - Vettel Ret, Bourdais 18th

Valencia - Vettel 6th, Bourdais 10th

Spa - Vettel 5th, Bourdais 7th

Monza - Vettel 1st, Bourdais 18th

Singapore - Vettel 5th, Bourdais 12th

Fuji - Vettel 6th, Bourdais 10th

Shangai - Vettel 9th, Bourdais 13th

Interlagos - Vettel 4th, Bourdais 14th

 

From this, I think, we can deduce that the Toro Rosso was rarely more than a midfield car in 2008, and yet Vettel ran consistently in the points, snapping at the heels of the big boys, and, on the one occasion when he was given a front-running car, won the race. What more can be asked of him? Even taking Monza out of the equation, his 2008 for me proves that he can compete in a difficult car.

 

Not that I believe we should take Monza out of the equation. Let us not forget that he simply motored away from Kovalainen's Mclaren, which started alongside him on the grid and yet finished some twelve seconds in arrears. I do not believe that the Toro Rosso was a better car than the Mclaren, at this or any other race in 2008. Furthermore, after his bad luck at the start Bourdais, himself no mug - he was a serial winner in America, after all - was able to recover only to 18th place. Had that car been the best in the field I would expect Bourdais to at least be in the top 10 in spite of starting from the back.

 

The following season, Vettel hopped into a Red Bull and secured the team's first victory at his third attempt, leading home experienced and highly-rated teammate Mark Webber.

 

So, in my opinion, Vettel has more than proved he can perform even without the best car, and as a result must take some credit for delivering four straight titles, even in the best car. Like all great teams, it is the combination of car and driver that is so hard to beat - I don't believe any of Jim Clark's teammates even looking like winning a race during his dominant 1963 season. It doesn't mean that he doesn't have the best car, of course, but it equally proves that it isn't all down to the car - Webber has never been WDC runner-up, as you would expect if the car was as good as the 2004 Ferrari or 1988 Mclaren.

Is it coincidence or not that Vettel was at Toro Rosso when they had their best ever spell and at RB when they've had their best ever spell... maybe he finds a way to fine tune his car so that he always drives the best car... clearly Newey's recent efforts have all been quick but could Vettels technical ability or hard work flatter Newey's car a little?

3 out of the first 4 places on the grid for that race being Newey designs suggests it again wasn't completely down to Vettel. Of course he had to do the rest, but to suggest that the Toro Rosso was not a front-running package for that Grand Prix is missing the entire point.

I think you have a point, but I maintain that the 2008 season is more than enough evidence that Vettel can perform in a car that isn't the best, an accusation consistently lobbed his way. Let's look at the results of the Toro Rosso pairing in the second half of the 2008 season - that is, when the car appeared to take a step forward post-Silverstone.

 

Hockenheim - Vettel 8th, Bourdais 12th

Budapest - Vettel Ret, Bourdais 18th

Valencia - Vettel 6th, Bourdais 10th

Spa - Vettel 5th, Bourdais 7th

Monza - Vettel 1st, Bourdais 18th

Singapore - Vettel 5th, Bourdais 12th

Fuji - Vettel 6th, Bourdais 10th

Shangai - Vettel 9th, Bourdais 13th

Interlagos - Vettel 4th, Bourdais 14th

 

From this, I think, we can deduce that the Toro Rosso was rarely more than a midfield car in 2008, and yet Vettel ran consistently in the points, snapping at the heels of the big boys, and, on the one occasion when he was given a front-running car, won the race. What more can be asked of him? Even taking Monza out of the equation, his 2008 for me proves that he can compete in a difficult car.

 

Not that I believe we should take Monza out of the equation. Let us not forget that he simply motored away from Kovalainen's Mclaren, which started alongside him on the grid and yet finished some twelve seconds in arrears. I do not believe that the Toro Rosso was a better car than the Mclaren, at this or any other race in 2008. Furthermore, after his bad luck at the start Bourdais, himself no mug - he was a serial winner in America, after all - was able to recover only to 18th place. Had that car been the best in the field I would expect Bourdais to at least be in the top 10 in spite of starting from the back.

 

The following season, Vettel hopped into a Red Bull and secured the team's first victory at his third attempt, leading home experienced and highly-rated teammate Mark Webber.

 

So, in my opinion, Vettel has more than proved he can perform even without the best car, and as a result must take some credit for delivering four straight titles, even in the best car. Like all great teams, it is the combination of car and driver that is so hard to beat - I don't believe any of Jim Clark's teammates even looking like winning a race during his dominant 1963 season. It doesn't mean that he doesn't have the best car, of course, but it equally proves that it isn't all down to the car - Webber has never been WDC runner-up, as you would expect if the car was as good as the 2004 Ferrari or 1988 Mclaren.

I think it's a combo of both, but mainly the car. It'll be interesting to see what Vettel can do in an inferior car. Monza 2008 comes to mind, but that was just one off. 

 

MS many times took terrible Ferraris to podiums and wins. Alonso is doing that too, last season, and this season as well. 

 

Will Vettel be able to do it?

Why are you sure that Vettel haven't had inferior car when he has had podiums and wins with Red Bull? Might not have been inferior car yesterday, but still. My point is that you can't compare drivers driving in different teams. Some times you can't even compare team mates when they don't have same machinery or same resources working for them. I mean even if two drivers have exactly same car it doesn't necessarily mean that they have equal chance for success. That is if car is made to suit one driver.

3 out of the first 4 places on the grid for that race being Newey designs suggests it again wasn't completely down to Vettel. Of course he had to do the rest, but to suggest that the Toro Rosso was not a front-running package for that Grand Prix is missing the entire point.

Except: newey cars weren't exactly setting the pace that year. Monza would be their only win.

Having a Newey car in 2008 meant having a midfield car

Monza was exceptional because the wheater leveling the playing field, Lewis and co screwing up and Vettel seizing the smallest of opportunities, this had little to do with the car designer

I think it's a combo of both, but mainly the car. It'll be interesting to see what Vettel can do in an inferior car. Monza 2008 comes to mind, but that was just one off. 

 

MS many times took terrible Ferraris to podiums and wins. Alonso is doing that too, last season, and this season as well. 

 

Will Vettel be able to do it?

 

3 out of the first 4 places on the grid for that race being Newey designs suggests it again wasn't completely down to Vettel. Of course he had to do the rest, but to suggest that the Toro Rosso was not a front-running package for that Grand Prix is missing the entire point.

DId you miss the start of the 2009 season ?

This is one of main pet peeves against Hamilton's fanbase. The claim that he proved himself in a bad car by getting a few points finishes followed by 5 consecutive races out of the points is a bit weak, isn't it? Because then how is what Vettel did at Toro Rosso, even back in his rookie year 2007 not enough?

 

The main problem with Vettel in his early F1 days was that he often found himself involved in incidents, but when he stayed out of trouble he was delivering constantly, even before Monza 2008, many ppl already saw him as possible future champion, nowadays many guys make it sound like Vettel's dominance came out of nowhere, it really didn't. He had obvious talent from day one.

I think it's a combo of both, but mainly the car. It'll be interesting to see what Vettel can do in an inferior car. Monza 2008 comes to mind, but that was just one off. 

 

MS many times took terrible Ferraris to podiums and wins. Alonso is doing that too, last season, and this season as well. 

 

Will Vettel be able to do it?

So much pro-Vettel spin...

 

Monza 2008 was unusual circumstances (rain affected qualy) and the STR3 wasn't a bad car i.e Newey, powerful Ferrari engine. But Vettel didn't even score another podium in 2008 so it really was a one-off circumstance.

 

But still a good win from a then likeable kid. But as I said, I can't stand the constant spin about anything-Vettel. "Wunderkid?"

 

 

Monza 2008 was a special circumstance? Of course it was special because the WunderKid won the race with a dry-weather set-up in a monsoon condition. FYI, I prefer the term "WunderKid" to "Finger Boy" - just a personal preference, I guess.

 

STR3 was a special car? Then STR4 with such huge regulation changes in 2009 should have been a much better car than STR3, is it not? It was still designed by Newey, the year was 2009 where Newey was supposed to wave his magic wand, equipped with the more powerful Ferrari engine, and yet they had 0 podium and 8 measly points to show for STR4. 

 

The kid is special, but he is not the best thing since sliced bread - not yet.

Then another plus point for the Wunderkid since he won in the year (2008) before Newey was supposed to show his magic (2009 and beyond).... 

 

So much pro-Vettel spin...

 

Monza 2008 was unusual circumstances (rain affected qualy) and the STR3 wasn't a bad car i.e Newey, powerful Ferrari engine. But Vettel didn't even score another podium in 2008 so it really was a one-off circumstance.

 

But still a good win from a then likeable kid. But as I said, I can't stand the constant spin about anything-Vettel. "Wunderkid?"

Red Bull and Adrian Newey dominance does harm the sport.

 

People forget that EVERY single one of Vettel's wins including his Monza 2008 win driving for Toro Rosso was in a car designed by Adrian Newey. I am not denying that he is a good driver but not  Alonso, Hamilton and raikkonen good.

 

 

What other drivers think of Vettel's so called 'raw' talent... 

 

Alonso  

 

...but now we are fighting against Newey and, at the moment we cannot match him.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hamilton 

 

 

For me, in my eyes, he(Alonso) really is a three or four times world champion. Seeing Sebastian dominate the last few races doesn't come as a surprise because the Red Bull has been dominant for the past few years. They seem to have a great capacity to improve the car. Adrian is just a genius. I can't even imagine what he's doing. He is a one-off. I've seen their speed - there was no way I could compete with that. Even if I drive at 200 per cent and crash, I can't match it.

  

 

 

yes you could say why isn't webber dominating too? Why assume both cars are created equal....... http://joesaward.wor...-as-he-sees-it/     like mark said "he(vettel) is the chosen one"

"I'd rather be the guy getting booed than the one standing on the second step right now." ~ Mario Andretti, Monza 2013 post-race ceremonies

 

Pretty much says everything that needs to be said, I think.

 

In pre-race Mario said: 'Sebastian Vettel is a rare breed that only comes along one in a long while and can extract the maximum from whatever you give him to work with" 

 

He is right of course.  Vettel has people saying that the 2008 STRF was a WDC car.  A WDC car!!  lol.  That is AWESOME!  Newey himself agrees Seb is special, but I guess he'd be considered a blinkered old man who doesn't know his foot from a front wing...

I agree. Even if everything was ideal at every track from the first race, if he didn't crash in Malaysia and instead finished on the podium, didn't open DRS again in Bahrain and finished 5th in Monaco, and that was possible, he would now have something between 176 and 182 points, at best 15 points behind Vettel. RB9 is too strong, and Vettel is also driving incredibly well. Alonso will probably finish second anyway at the end of the season, so he will provide the best possible result with this car.

 

 

Some of these posts are hilarious.

Do have to laugh at comments like "he hasn't produced a Monza 2008 type performance yet." What do you expect the guy to do? Back then, Vettel had an Adrian Newey chassis AND a better engine than even Red Bull themselves had. Ricciardo has neither of those luxuries. I think the fact that he has qualified in the top ten for four consecutive races in a far inferior car shows you that he is quick.

And the inexperienced argument is funny too. Applying that logic, Vettel, Hamilton and Raikkonen and possibly even Alonso wouldn't have gotten their big break.

Pardon my french. What I meant to say was that during YDT and both drivers' efforts during the season have proven great deal speed but not the level of consistency and maturity. Overall not enough raw skill for RBR seat IMHO. At least not yet. In terms of points Vergne has actually more points from 2011 and 2012. If you look what Vettel did on his journey at STR (points + pole&win @ Monza 2008) neither driver is there. Kimi's first season with Sauber was huge as well.

I agree the consistency is not quite there yet, but that is also partly masked by the poor strategy STR give both drivers (e.g. DR would have finished 4th/5th at Silverstone if they pitted him at the same time as Rosberg/Webber etc not to mention poor pitstops). Overall not enough raw skill? Right...if you look at the times at YDT you can see that DR was only 3 tenths behind Vettel's best lap on new hards while Vettel did his on new mediums (fuel loads aside). If cannot see that DR has been putting the TR where is doesn't belong i.e. top 10 then do you expect poles or top 3's from them in a car that is midfield. There are IMO at least 10 cars quicker than the TRs this season.

Comparing Vettel's STR to today's STR is a joke. Vettel had the best rain chassis that year - one built by Newey and the most powerful engine at Monza. Heck Bourdais would have qualified third if Webber hadn't pipped him at the end. Not to mention the competition is much stronger now. Neither driver is there because the car isn't there yet DR has shown that he can put the car where is doesn't belong.

As to points where Vergne was ahead of Ricciardo, you just look at the points rather than the story. Korea, DR was way ahead of Vergne before brake problems and would have had more points. Monza DR's car failed on the last lap when he was in the points again. Vergne is very good in mixed conditions, the only weakness right now I see of DRs but other than that DR has him covered everywhere else.

Some of these polls, whether it be forum polls or the FB poll that RB created is always going to be in favor of Kimi as he has been an established driver and would have far more fans anyway.

Both drivers qualified in the top 4 for that race. Its funny how they try to call the torro rosso a Minardi when in reality It was a magnificent Newey chariot.

The 1992 Benetton WAS statistically a more superior car than the 2008 Toro Rosso.

Evidence and Facts??

1992 Benetton - Finished 3rd in WCC (Drivers 3rd and 6th)
2008 Toro Rosso - Finished 6th in WCC (Drivers 8th and 17th)

Questioning Vettel's driver skill in a 'Newey Chariot' of a 2008 Toro Rosso? It wasn't exactly winning or scoring left right and centre, was it? Schumacher alone got 7 other podiums on top of that maiden win.

And let's just agree for your benefit only that the 2008 Toro Rosso was superior (mega LOL)...

Let's compare the cars capability in the hands of the little punkaSS German rookie to non other than the established experienced racer and multi Champcar Champion teammate Bourdais...

Vettel - Best result was a win at Monza. A string of points finishes, 4ths and 5ths. No more podiums.
Bourdais - Best Result in two seasons of 'Newey Chariots' was 7th. Conveniently at the same Spa circuit.

...versus the 3rd Placed WCC 1992 Benetton.

2008 Toro Rosso, clearly a superior 'newey chariot' in comparison!

Fullhouse, you sir, are an idiot!

Eh, I think Ricciardo could make something of it. He seems to be on the edge of a great result every so often, only to be struck by a strategy failure.

Vettel benefited in the final year that they could share designs between constructors, his win in 2008 was very much aided by the Newey inspired elements that came down from the parent team to the 2008 car. Remember that Bourdais also good showings in that car, and qualified 4th in Monza.

Once that design link was gone Toro Rosso hasn't really been in a position to do much more than be lower midfield, which is a hard place to impress from. Attrition is well down on years passed, so podiums are nigh on impossible for a team of that caliber. Dan has already matched the best Jamie A. could do, a 7th.

As for the other drivers:

- Liuzzi was like a Zonta or Piquet Jr., he won at the GP2 level but was too crash prone and mentally weak to last long in F1. His poor showing against Sutil wasted that good opportunity in what was a half decent car.

- Speed never had much hope at all. Also had an attitude issue.

- Bourdais was beaten heavily by Vettel. On his own, I rate him higher than Luizzi, but Buemi was obviously a better choice and had more points before Bourdais was dumped.

- Buemi has moved into a testing role so he must have some value. I think he would make a fine #2 driver.

- Jamie A. was the only real failure of the system. I think he had the edge over Buemi in 2011, yet he was dumped unceremoniously. Sadly we saw the much more capable Kobayashi and Glock leave the series a year later due to budget constraints, so maybe he was just an indicator of what was to come. Jamie was obviously more capable than say Gutierrez.

I think that overall, the RBR young driver program kind of gave too much time to inadequate drivers like Liuzzi in the early years and then developed unreasonable expectations by the time it came around to Jamie A. If anything, I think they would have had the best Webber replacement in Alguersuari had they kept him on for 2012.

RBR does not need a clash of the titans between Vettel and Raikkonen, McLaren in 2007 showed what a problem that can cause.

He ripped Alonso a new one in his rookie season, and half a dozen drivers on the grid could have done what Vettel has done in those Newey Rocketships.

If they all drove the same cars, Hamilton would soon be banned from the sport...;)

I've heard of one eyed fans... you must have no eyes.

Forgot to mention that Button beat Hamilton in 2011, not just tied on points. So does that make Button the best?

1. Alonso.

Of all his teammates, none ever came close except Hamilton. Almost won in 2010 and 2012 with cars that were probably 3rd fastest, and definitely behind the RBRs. Been a bit sill this year, actually. Malaysia ha should have felt the wing falling off. Still, best driver of the post-Schumacher era.

2. Raikkonen.

The post 2012 model Kimi seems to be the smoothest driver out there. He was naturally faster than Alonso before 2006, but has kind of turned into Mr. Consistency and is good with the tyres. Just how he was able to take 3rd after a comeback when Schumacher was floundering... very skilled. Still, he lost to Massa in 2008.

3. Vettel.

Yes he had Newey rockets and is an annoying person, but he just keeps on winning somehow. Monza 2008, his comeback in Brazil 2012. Still, unchallenged by a truly competitive teammate.

4. Hamilton.

Equaled Alonso in 2007, but has been fast but fairly inconsistent since. Only just won in 2008 against Massa, had too many brain fades in 2010 and 2011 and has only just made himself into a driver as consistent as Alonso in 2012. Lost to Button in 2011.

5. Rosberg.

Three years in Mercedes and he beat the legend Schumacher by a wide margin every single year. Seems to be almost matching Hamilton at Mercedes.

Well, obviously it suggests that the driver is a less important element in case of Vettel. I don't have an issue with the statement as such, but the mutual Hamilton/Alonso praise is a bit annoying (and of course they can hardly be objective on that matter). What's worse from a forum perspective, however, is the quality of some threads since Vettel is winning.

I don't think he's saying the driver is less important in Vettel's case. That's crazy, and of all people Alonso should know better. I think Alonso is saying that once again Newey has given Vettel a dominant car in the last few races because previously he was challenging them and beating them. To me it seems the problem is that Alonso and Hamilton rate each highly in which case this becomes a fan insecurity problem and not so much what the drivers have said.

Vettel had a few stunning drives each year, so it's not exactly an anomaly.To compare Vettel and Perez at that state, you have to ignore what Vettel did in the past 4 years.

This is correct but subsequent to 2008 Vettel has been in championship contending/winning cars. If he didn't have stunning drives in each year then it would be worrying. Anyway, what I was implying is that Vettel's drive in Monza 2008 can be likened to Perez' drive in Malaysia 2012 in that it was an anomaly. I don't think either performance proves anything and bringing it up is pointless.

Vettel was in front because of Webber's usually bad starts or strategy mistakes(Malaysia, Spain), otherwise in the first 6 races Webber was faster, apart from Bahrain of course.
I understend that it's frustrating for you to see so much people, including Hamilton and Alonso trying to diminish Vettel's achivements, but you have to blame only Vettel, for his quite poor show when the car was not dominant and so planted as it's today.
On the other hand, it's poor show for some Alonso fanboys with this constant trolling about Newey and car. No driver won a WDC, by himself. It's a team sport.

Otherwise, can't understand Vettel's fans saying Seb was poor today, because all drivers made mistakes in Q3. It seems this track is certainly not easy to drive.

It should be much more frustrating for other fans to see how a young driver is kicking the Lewis and Alonso asses since 2010. And even much more for Lewis and Alonso. That´s why I doesn´t care about what they say.

Learn this, mate:

"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (J.Swift)
After 2008 win at Monza, Seb was a diamond, praised by all of the people in F1, the rookie of the year, the future... in the moment this "future" become "present"... Alonso and Lewis lost their "status" and records and inmediatly were frustrated. Its a common thing in sports and we have seen many times, there will be always one driver/sportman better than you. Always. And it will happen to Seb someday.

Wait 2 or 3 seasons without Vettel defeats and we will see a lot of people (including drivers) prasing him again.;)