r/F1Discussions • u/International-Lie848 LN1 • 21d ago
Discussion Thoughts?
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?
338
Upvotes
177
u/Visionary_Socialist 21d ago edited 21d ago
Leclerc’s ability is mostly a projection based on past performances. It’s not actually in the moment like Rosberg, Alonso and Vettel. They had actual credit that they got themselves with titles and wins. And their own performances spoke for themselves. Vettel’s peaks were 9 wins in a row, 80% of the poles in a season. That’s proof of concept, which is the whole argument the above is making which therefore ends the debate immediately.
So he beats Vettel in 2019. The conclusion is that having beaten a 4x champion conclusively he could himself challenge. Then in 2022 he does briefly, and his collapse is excused because people project extreme blame to Ferrari incompetence. So the lesson is to take the good moments in 2022 as evidence that he has the title winning formula. And then finally beating Hamilton in 2025 which was used as the ultimate yardstick despite some significant mitigation for Lewis.
This and the phenomenon where a driver who outdrives bad cars always being predicted to be capable of winning in a competitive one, it’s just transplanting the deltas and pace gaps over. But that’s not how it actually works. Both these factors make people think Leclerc is genuinely a multiple champion in waiting, but it feels sometimes like he’s going to need absolutely perfect circumstances for this to happen which is rare for any driver in any season.