The surprise is that so many people are surprised. The widespread assumption was that the title race was an all-Mancunian affair. And, indeed, after eight games, the city's representatives were neck and neck, separated only - and again - by goal difference.
Except that both trailed Chelsea. Roberto Di Matteo's side's flying start has been camouflaged by controversy, comparatively overlooked because of history and, perhaps, placed into context because of their stumbles on the European stage. But there is the question of when and where they make the jump from outsiders to favourites in the contest for the Premier League. The answer could be supplied today.
Beat Manchester United and Chelsea go seven points ahead of Sir Alex Ferguson's team, prompting the Scot to say: "We don't want a gap to open." Thus far, Chelsea have only dropped two points, at Queens Park Rangers.
They have won away from home at two of the probable end-of-season top five, Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur, which lends them the stamp of potential champions, and have the division's best defensive record. Yet the toxic John Terry has monopolised the limelight; the free-flowing football and winning habit have received rather fewer mentions.
If August victories brought few predictions of glory, it may have been because, aided by friendly early-season fixture lists, they invariably start well.
Luiz Felipe Scolari took 20 points from his first eight games in 2008; even Andre Villas-Boas took 10 points from his first four games last season.
Yet under Di Matteo, form has been sustained. Including Newcastle United, Chelsea have beaten three of the five teams to finish above them last year.
But that, too, is a reason they have been underestimated. They finished 25 points behind the two Manchester clubs last season. It is normally too big a gap to bridge but this was no normal year: partly because of the Chelsea civil war, as Villas-Boas' reign ended messily, and partly because their prowess in the Champions League began to hamper their league form.
It is rare that Champions League winners start as such underdogs; rarer still when they are the biggest spenders as well. Roman Abramovich's expensive rebranding exercise was conducted in the summer, Oscar and Eden Hazard joining to switch the emphasis from force to flair.
Perhaps, besides the inevitable issue if both can sustain their form over gruelling seasons, the reason fewer have got carried away concerned an exit, rather than an arrival.
An issue during his eight-year time as their talisman was whether Chelsea could win without Didier Drogba. Now the single biggest contributor to their Champions League triumph is gone, it has to be rephrased: can they win with Fernando Torres as their main striker?
Because, despite the pyrotechnics set off by the stylish trio of Hazard, Oscar and Juan Mata behind him, the Spaniard's form has been mixed. Di Matteo, ever loyal, declared: "I have no concerns about Fernando." But, especially as Daniel Sturridge is the only alternative available, Torres is a reason why some continue to doubt Chelsea's credentials.
The others have not occurred in Premier League games. Which, it can be asked, is the true Chelsea? The conquerors of Newcastle, Arsenal and Tottenham or the side who, in the Community Shield, the Super Cup and the Champions League, have met Manchester City, Atletico Madrid, Juventus and Shakhtar Donetsk, losing three of those four games and conceding 11 goals?
"As a team, we still have to improve on defensive responsibility and balance," Di Matteo conceded. "But our belief if that with the players we have, it our best chance to win games playing like this. It is the ability of the players that allows you to do this." But the pragmatic view is that champions are not determined by the frills and flourishes of flair players as much as a side's spine and solidity. A team with a guarantee of goals at one end and the organisation and resolve to prevent them at the other often prevails, as Chelsea proved when Drogba and Terry were at their respective peaks.
But that was the Chelsea of old, the Jose Mourinho blueprint that lasted long after the Portuguese's exit. This is the new Chelsea, trying to triumph a different way. And that, perhaps, is why recognition is eluding Di Matteo's men. They are not the Chelsea we know to be winners.
Follow us
