Comments on: Debate: Can Robert Kubica win the title?

By: xxxyyy

xxxyyy — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:51:38 +0000

If u look at hamilton’s reliability it’s really really poor I must say. If we take this year + 2 last races from 2007 (which started his mentall slump) it’s easy to deduct that he lost 4 races out of 10 (with magny cours) on his own stupidity and lack of concentration – my question is : if someone who was eliminated on his own wish in 40% of races can really think of becoming a champion – I think not really…it gives us almost one race in two when he does some fatal error, not being forced by car or other driver’s mistake. As I see it he got too much preasure on his head and as we can clearly see he doesn’t know how to manage it (no matter what he says, couse he think he can).
Don’t get me wrong – he’s a great driver (maybe a little bit overestimated couse being in a title chase in an illegal car is not something that impress me a lot, he and alonso should be disqualified last year as happened to their team) but what happened last year put him in position which is harmfull to him.

For me only ferrari is there this year, maybe Kubica can make it, what I hope for… i think, so far, he is the driver who makes the most out of his car. Being a leader in the middle of the season is really outstanding but we must also realise how it happened – in each race he got 4 cars faster than his car and in almost each race he outqualifies few of them and in almost every race he ends in front of few of them. It’s like David fighting Goliath, and I think he makes it perfect.

If he win this year’s championship it will be one of the greates titles in history – couse it’s not an art to win if you got the fastest car – but try winning in the slowest one….

By: Sumedh

Sumedh — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:36:34 +0000

Excellent point Keith, If Massa had not given way to Kimi, Alonso indeed would have been world champion. ( Will Mclaren have dropped him still ? We will never know )

Dan, you talk about not forgetting DNFs and bad luck sustained by a few drivers more. But all these “inconsistencies” have become far more consistent this year ! ! And, I suppose it will stay that way. Ferrari probably have the worst strategy team ( Japan last year, Monaco, Montreal) compared to BMW and Mclaren. So, inspite of the fastest car, Ferrari drivers won’t enjoy a comfortable reign at the top of the table

Probably, Ferrari will decide late on whom to support, and that fellow will battle out with Hamilton and Kubika, who will DEFINTELY be in the hunt till late.

I see Kubika in similar position to Kimi in 2003, not fastest, but consistent

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 00:47:36 +0000

Keith,
I can see your point, however I don’t think it will ever manifest in the real world due to the competitive mindset of all the drivers or rather contenders. I believe that Massa only did what he did because it was the logical thing to do from a team stand point. I don’t think this season will be as close as the last because last year we had four good drivers on only two teams, getting the most out of their cars. This season we have four good drivers two on one team and two on seperate teams. Therefore the Ferrari’s have a better chance of splitting the major points and protecting each other at the money end of the season, which will only become relevant if it happens to get as close as last year. One other flaw I see in your point is that if Ferrari continue to take turns at 1st’s and podium’s it stands to reason that a Ferrari driver will be champion. Only one driver walks away with 10 points per race. It could alsp be generalised that the odds are 2:4 that Ferrari will herald another world champ. Not bad odds really. This then equates to Lewis or Kubica having to WIN more races not just consistently come 2nd, 3rd or 4th.

One other point is in relation to Kubica and the fact that he could be considered the counter to my argument and support of your’s. Yet this would be false as the points issue is only such when points are scored. Let’s not forget the DNF’s sustained by most of the contenders. If Kimi didn’t have bad luck etc and he finished top five in the last two races we wouldn’t even be talking about this issue.

Of the contenders other than Ferraris’, Lewis is the only one that can “consistently” win races (at the moment anyway, you never know what a scrappy win could do for Kubica’s confidence)

After all this talk about points and odds etc I have had a novel idea. How about F1 scrap the Drivers Championship and have a Team/Contructor’s Championship only!!! I wonder how dominant Ferrari would be then? The way it would work would be that drivers simply drive to the finish. The points system stays the same yet at the end of the race both drivers points are added together and then added to the team’s total. I suppose you could still have a driver’s championship however it would be performance based and must come from the winning team at the end of the season. Just an idea!?!?

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:43:28 +0000

Dan – I don’t agree. If either Hamilton or Alonso had been made to support the other driver last year then their team mate would almost certainly have won the title.

Clearly, if a team lets both their drivers fight for the championship it stands to reason that each can diminish the points tally of the other. And given that we had the top three drivers separated by one point last year, that can easily be enough to swing the championship.

Indeed, if Massa had not deferred to Raikkonen in the final round Alonso would have been champion.

By: Dorian

Dorian — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:12:50 +0000

You’re right on the money there Dan (re:your first paragraph). Mathematically one driver’s points do not directly diminish another driver’s points save the fact that there’s only 10, 8, 6, 5…. etc points to gain per driver per race.

I’m thinking that the point the others are saying is that the other competitive teams pretty much know which horse they’re backing whereas Ferrari do not know which prancing horse will be the main contender. Apologies for the puns

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:02:11 +0000

Well I can see where someone might think that Ferrari are taking points from each other but it makes no sense. People herein are saying that Massa and Kimi are taking points from each other and the other two contenders don’t have a team mate to compete with. This makes no sense because mathematically this means that somehow all teams get a certain amount of points to divide between each driver. If Ferrari continue to have 1-2 finishes or even alternate between 1-3 finishes at least one Ferrari driver will be a Schu-in (bad joke, I know)

As for Kubica, I think he should be happy with where he is at at this point and this talk of him winning the championship this season is really a moot point as it’s only come to light due to a win, which in terms of racing (by definition), was not deserved. To say he has been the more consistent driver is also a load because he was just lucky Hamilton chose to mount Kimi not him.

If Hamilton continues to show his inexperience in the next half of the season then Massa will win his first Championship. Reason being, it seems to be Kimi that cops the treatment when Lewis makes an error. I’m already over the boy wonder, as you may have noticed. As much as I hate him (only because he hasn’t steered a Ferrari) I wish Alonso was with a more competitive team this season. At least I would be happy in the knowledge that a better sportsman and driver was taking it to Ferrari.

By: Sush

Sush — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 08:50:37 +0000

the limit, i’m pretty sure they’ve taken the sandtrap out of that race now.

By: the limit

the limit — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:43:53 +0000

Yes he can. Like everybody else has said, Kubica needs to maintain his consistency which is, as others have mentioned, not unlike Hamilton’s start last season.
My big concern for him, is when he does make a mistake. Hamilton’s title challenge was unhinged by mistakes at Brazil and China which ultimately cost him a championship that at one point appeared almost certain to be his.
In the last two grands prix, Kubica has pounced on the errors of his rivals, Raikkonen in Monaco and now Hamilton in Montreal. It is vital that this trend is not reversed if Kubica is to become champion.
Looking at it another way, Kubica and BMW Sauber are the underdogs in this battle, especially if it goes down to the wire. Raikkonen is the defending champion, driving for the sports most successfull team, oodles of pressure involved. Hamilton has, to some extent, simular levels of pressure coming off the back of last season, and as he is now the team leader at McLaren.
What of Kubica? Up until a few years ago, Sauber were an eternal midfield team that would have been pleased with fifth place finishes, never mind race wins.
With BMW’s financial clout and some of the sharpest men in F1 onboard, they are now flying, really flying!!
Kubica can really do it. He just has to avoid the sandtrap coming into the pits at Shanghai, thats all.

By: sajonaraman

sajonaraman — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:17:57 +0000

The “flavour of the month” is still an optional status for Kubica in F1 series Sush, he’s young remember. Although, looking back at his racing record before F1 you’ll soon discover that he has an excellent foundation to take the glory on his back. I’m not saying his main contenders this season were short of experience when they first sat behind the F1 car’s wheel, but what we see right now is clearly showing that if given a comparable machine Robert has something more than pace: a complete, mentally composed personality, something at least one of his oponents is aparently short of and I think we all know who’s image has just crossed my mind. I exclude Raikkonen from this equation. He is a reigning champ and his goal is to defend the title. It’s definately a different kind of a pressure than the chasing pack is experiencing. Let’s wait and see. This can still be an epic season.

By: Arun S

Arun S — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 21:18:36 +0000

Exactly..

By: Sush

Sush — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 21:02:44 +0000

oh right sorry!, you meant as a “flavour of the month” type in the media?.

By: Arun S

Arun S — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 18:46:53 +0000

Hey Sush, good that you’ve always considered Kubica to be a brilliant driver, I did too. I was referring to the world knowing/getting a new great driver in form of Kubica, not to insightful f1 fans like you who know the drivers well. I was referring to general public for whom the race winners are always great drivers and vice versa.

By: Sush

Sush — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 18:18:21 +0000

Arun, new great driver in Kubica?, you what dude?, Kubica has always been brilliant (last year was bad i know), but put him in the a field with rivals with the same machine…. and he would win

I’m glad he’s at BMW

also of note, last year Kubica spun (at fuji i believe) and hit Hamilton in the wet, Hamilton was livid saying it was a stupid move that could have taken him out of the race. Hamilton takes Kimi out of the race and he states “just one of those things” …. at 35mph… IN THE DRY!

William Wilgus, I do believe in the “coming second isn’t winning silver its losing gold” comment you make…. but under that kinda scoring someone like Shoemaker and Brains (Ross) would actually take out an opponent to ensure they wouldn’t get that one extra gold needed.

By: William Wilgus

William Wilgus — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:43:25 +0000

sajonaraman et. al.

Sorry, but OED’s definition does not alter the fact that the points system is inherently unfair. Under it, a driver who won NO races COULD wind up being named `champion’. Consistency? Sure, consistently winning is admirable, but consistently being last isn’t. If consistency were the only factor in determining the champion, then a driver that finished last in every race would have a claim to the title.

Finally, `beaten’ is just another word for `won’.

By: Slawek

Slawek — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 01:52:19 +0000

I don’t know about Europe but it sureley does rain a lot in Canada this year. If we see a few wet races till the end of this season i think Robert , Nick and BMW (constructor points) have big chances to win races. In my opinion Robert and Nick prooved on several ocasions they are both excellent wet track drivers. Would that be enough to keep the championship in his hands till the end? Very hard to tell. There is a lot of things that would have to go right for Robert and his car . Lets enjoy watching without predictions

By: Wesley

Wesley — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 21:47:33 +0000

Totally agree Alianora

Kubica keeps his attention focused and his car on the track.Kimi,Massa,Hamilton and Alonso are all very good,very fast drivers but,all of them have made stupid mistakes.Robert seems more professional than his more experienced rivals sometimes.

Slow and steady wins the race.(or fast and steady in F1,s case)

By: jose

jose — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 20:45:31 +0000

Sure he can win it. He just needs to beleive it. The bmw team as well. Do they already have that winning mentality? we will see in the next races. It is time for a change of plans.

By: Nik

Nik — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 20:43:31 +0000

oh and further, the reason is simply because of the points system, which is why 10,8,6 is so much better than 10,6,4 because it rewards consistency.

By: Nik

Nik — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 20:42:30 +0000

He only needs to be consistent to have a good chance at it. His luck is that the Ferrari and McLaren drivers are a motley crue who keep bumping into each other and making mistakes. Thats why if Kubica is consistent, he can be on the podium every race this year (since it is unlikely you will ever see the 4 better cars qualify and then finish a race ahead of him). His car isn’t the fastest, but it doesn’t need to be.

Its only a 4 point difference between the top step and the lowest step on a podium. Coming in third twice is a lot better than winning one race and then flying off the track in the next on.. thats why the drivers board is what it is right now (you can see that Massa, Kimmi and Lewis each have 2 wins, 2 podiums and then the rest bad finishes).

So yes, he can do it, unless one of Massa, Raikkonen or Hamilton somehow get their act together and manage to stay consistent.

By: sajonaraman

sajonaraman — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:29:10 +0000

William Wilgus:
I’ve checked the definition of a champion in the Cambridge Dictionary and look what I’ve found:

someone or something, especially a person or animal, that has beaten all other competitors in a competition;

I believe you’re able to figure out the meaning of these words yourself. Cheers.