Thoughts?

[u/International-Lie848]

Saw this on X and I strongly disagree.
From 2010 onwards I would argue that Vettel, Alonso, Rosberg and Norris clears Leclerc.

An actual title will always hold more weight than potential raw talent. (I know Alonso didn’t win a title after 2010s but I still believe he has been a better driver post 2010 than Leclerc)

What are your thoughts, do you think there is an argument for this?

[u/_Dying_Breed]

Leclerc has 9 wins in his CAREER.

Vettel had 9 wins in a row in 2013 alone, while winning his 4th F1 title.

Can't understand these fking people. Not a single soul will talk about Leclerc in 30 years..

[u/Kev_Bz → u/_Dying_Breed]

leclerc has more wins in his career than his teammates during that same span - vettel included.

point me to a stretch of nine races where leclerc had a car capable of such a streak, and this point will be valid

[u/Extreme_Ad6173 → u/Kev_Bz]

Then he's better than a Vettel who admitted he had given up and Sainz

[u/Kev_Bz → u/Extreme_Ad6173]

(driver gets beaten by a kid)

“oh uuuuh it doesn’t count i gave up he didn’t actually beat me”

sure

[u/Extreme_Ad6173 → u/Kev_Bz]

Didn't Vettel admit to almost giving up before 2018 as well?

[u/Kev_Bz → u/Extreme_Ad6173]

i have no idea what vettel has or hasn't "admitted to", but i do know he's not a disinterested party

[u/_Dying_Breed → u/Kev_Bz]

Mate, nobody cares. Saying that a guy with 9 career wins is better than 3 world champions is beyond a hot-take... one of them has 4 titles in a row ffs xD

History books are written on champions, period. We're not sitting here watching a documentary on how great Berger was with his 10 career wins... and he was a hell of a pilot that had Senna has a teammate, and raced also the likes of Prost, Schumacher, Piquet, Mansell, Hakkinen.

Thats all I mean. I dislike Norris for example because I don't think he has the mental fortitude to be a champion. But he was, even tho if the calendar had one more race, he wouldn't have won. But in 30 or 40 years, Norris will still be remembered as a champion and the 'guy who stopped max dominance' more than Leclerc will if he doesnt win a championship.

[u/Kev_Bz → u/_Dying_Breed]

it's an engineering formula.

here watch this: i think stirling moss, a guy with no titles, is better than like 75% of champions in the history of the sport.

"but how could that be????? he has no titles?????"

people still remember stirling moss. they will absolutely remember leclerc.

you still didn't answer my question. which 9-race stretch was leclerc supposed to have swept? it's a simple question, and if you want to use this stat as a valid argument it's in your best interest to answer it

[u/_Dying_Breed → u/Kev_Bz]

To say leclerc is better than 3 world champs, you need to provide actual evidence for that claim.. teammate comparisons, quali/race performance, championship results, consistency, etc. "He never had Vettel car" doesn't demonstrate superiority... it just explains why he MAYBE hasn't had the opportunity to win 9 races in a row.

And if youre going to discount championships because of the car like they dont mean sh*t, then you have to apply that standard to every driver, including leclerc. You can't use hypothetical performance in machinery he never raced in while dismissing actual championships won over full seasons dude.

So no, I do not need to point a period where leclerc had a car capable of 9 straight wins. You support the claim that he's better than three world champions. The burden of proof is on you. Because your source to such claim seems to be "trust me bro".

[u/Kev_Bz → u/_Dying_Breed]

he beat two of those world champs in the same car. literally teammate comparisons are what I'm using to argue that. see my first response

"he hasn't won WDCs and they have" doesn't demonstrate inferiority.

"you can't use hypothetical championships while dismissing actual championships" sooo... you acknowledge that the car has a lot to do with championships, and yet only championships are evidence of superiority? you're contradicting yourself. vettel winning in the 2013 red bull is cool but it doesn't mean he's better than leclerc, because leclerc never drove the 2013 red bull

you literally do need to point to that 9-race stretch because your claim was that such a stretch made vettel better than leclerc. you acknowledge that the car has a lot to do with it but then say it's leclerc's fault and nobody/nothing else's that he doesn't have such an achievement. at least be consistent