Alonso voted Chinese GP Driver of the Weekend

2013 Chinese Grand Prix

Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, Shanghai, 2013Fernando Alonso was voted Driver of the Weekend for the Chinese Grand Prix while Daniel Ricciardo made his first appearance in the top three.

Kimi Raikkonen made his second appearance in the top three this year.

1. Fernando Alonso

Started: 3rd
Finished: 1st

Alonso brought his team mate’s run of superior qualifying performances to an end and lined up third on the grid. He took the lead in the early stages of the race and seldom looked under serious threat for the victory from that point on.

He just seemed to be in control the whole race. I loved the team radio when Ferrari told him not to push and he said he wasn?t, then the fastest lap for Alonso caption came on screen straight away.
@PJA

world champion. This race Alonso face it with maturity and with a good pit strategy. It worked. It wasn?t a breathtaking race until the last lap, for the lead lacked a bit of fight there. But it wasn?t Alonso’s fault, he was there, he did enough to came out in first and win the grand prix.
@Hipn0tic

He topped a practice session, nearly missed out on pole, beat his team mate all around and had an absolutely commanding race.

Watching both Ferraris mug Hamilton was priceless. Gutted for Webber and Hamilton!
@Karter22

2. Daniel Ricciardo

Started: 7th
Finished: 7th

Ricciardo beat his team mate by almost a second in qualifying and managed to convert his lofty starting position of seventh into the same result. This is the first time he has appeared in the top three in Driver of the Weekend.

Great weekend overall, he had a very good pace compared to Jean-Eric Vergne. And I didn?t expect a Toro Rosso to out-race Force India and Sauber. Good job by Ricciardo, I hope that Toro Rosso will give him a decent midfield car for the next races, he needs it if he wants to be in a Red Bull next year.
@Yobo01

He decimated Vergne in qualifying and had great race pace, most noticeably against Grosjean. Alonso was obviously a close second choice but the Ferraris have looked pretty good all weekend whereas the same cant be said about the Toro Rosso, so I think Ricciardo way outperformed the car this weekend.
@Nackavich

3. Kimi Raikkonen

Started: 2nd
Finished: 2nd

It was a case of what might have been for Raikkonen. Poor starting positions have been Lotus’s weakness in recent races but on this occasion he started on the front row but slipped back at the start. Then came the collision with Perez which left him with a damaged car, despite which he still recovered to second at the flag.

I loved his fight with Hamilton till the end in a damaged car and surely would have fought for victory if the team didn?t ruin his setting for start. Really loving the old McLaren Raikkonen.
@Rahim-rg

2013 Driver of the Weekend results

Race First Second Third
Australian Grand Prix Kimi Raikkonen (51.2%) Adrian Sutil (17.9%) Jules Bianchi (13.6%)
Malaysian Grand Prix Mark Webber (34.2%) Sebastian Vettel (17.4%) Nico Rosberg (13.6%)
Chinese Grand Prix Fernando Alonso (47.0%) Daniel Ricciardo (18.2%) Kimi Raikkonen (15.6%)

2013 Chinese Grand Prix

Browse all 2013 Chinese Grand Prix articles

Image ?? Ferrari/Ercole Colombo

Advert | Go Ad-free

63 comments on Alonso voted Chinese GP Driver of the Weekend

  1. That was the correct result I think, unlike the previous weeks…

    • Well I’d say Räikkönen was debatable for his awful start and the collision with Perez, but on balance he did really well.

      • DaveF1 (@davef1) said on 28th April 2013, 21:18

        Yeah, I’m not entirely sure why Raikkonen is there. Did he do a good job – yes. However I don’t think he was the 3rd best driver during that weekend. Personally I think Hamilton and Vettel both did better than him.

        Not sure if it’s just me but it does feel like people vote for Raikkonen in these polls simply because he’s Raikkonen.

        • @davef1 well he did have a strong qualifying and a good race result I’ll grant him that much, but he should’ve been challenging for the win really. I kind of get the impression as well that his popularly sometimes outweighs his talent, which I’d say is the complete opposite to Vettel.

          • M Dickens (@sgt-pepper) said on 28th April 2013, 22:16

            (@vettel1)

            I kind of get the impression as well that his popularly sometimes outweighs his talent

            I actually feel Kimi is regularly underrated as a driver, particularly when people mention the top three drivers as HAM/ALO/VET. To me he’s far more deserving than finger-boy. Also sometimes get the impression Webber and Jenson are also overlooked at times, perhaps slightly unfairly – they can really pull some stellar drives out at times, it takes a lot of talent, but it’s a shame they can’t the majority of races though.

          • firstLapNutcaseGrosjean (@) said on 28th April 2013, 22:19

            How do you think he get that popularity? By doing comercials for Clear/Rexona?? No. Because of his big talent.

          • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 28th April 2013, 22:43

            What really hurt Raikkonen’s reputation in my eyes, is that he was beaten by Felipe Massa when they were at Ferrari together.

            When Massa and Raikkonen were teammates from 2007-2009, Massa scored more points, won more races, had more pole positions, and finished more races on the podium than Raikkonen.

            He also beat Raikkonen 2-1 in seasons, with Felipe having the upper hand in both 2008 and 2009 (before his accident), while Kimi was only better in 2007.

            Literally, the only thing that Raikkonen has over Massa is that he won a WDC, whereas Massa lost his; and both 2007 and 2008 were decided by the narrowest of margins.

            Massa has never been a top driver, and never will be. Both Schumacher (2006) and Alonso (2010-2013) never had any problem beating Massa. Therefore, why was this so difficult to do for Raikkonen?

            He’s not in the same league as the real top drivers IMO.

          • Traverse (@) said on 28th April 2013, 23:01

            @kingshark
            +88Billion!

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 28th April 2013, 23:54

            @sgt-pepper – Jenson and Mark are good, but it’s folly to say they are overlooked then say Vettel isn’t deserving of his status, when he is so much better and more consistent than Mark, and let’s be honest, he’s far better than Jenson too.

            @kingshark – Although I class Kimi amongst (maybe slightly behind) the top three, I agree with your post.

          • Aditya F. Yahya (@adityafakhri) said on 29th April 2013, 2:53

            @kingshark – well I see that point. but we kinda followed Kimi since his Sauber/McLaren days, especially the McLaren days. which is so… (put your own word here).
            he joined Ferrari and snatch the title at first attempts. and then 2008-09 came. put conspiracy theory aside, he denied that he lost motivation but I personally think he lost his hunger he had with McLaren for the elusive title, after clinching it with Ferrari. maybe thinking “I’m a champion, one title or seven makes no difference.” then he was seeking ‘fun’ in WRC…
            maybe he realized that’s a mistake, back with Lotus and then needed about three race to clean his rusty driving, and here he is now.
            Being said all that, I still stick with Raikkonen as favourite driver :)
            Yeah, he’s got a lot of nonsense fans. every top driver has actually. Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton. Schumi, even the mighty Senna. that just common tendency.

            @vettel1, hi Sebastian’s routine advertiser :)
            talent is somewhat qualitative which is can’t be measured exactly. one doesn’t simply said ‘he’ more talented than ‘him’, because I always believe that circumstances is changing. I admire Vettel because of his mentality, more than anybody in the grid. but I can’t say he is more talented than Raikkonen, Hamilton, or Alonso.

            still, everybody is entitled with their opinion.

          • Candice said on 29th April 2013, 3:09

            @kingshark

            Didn’t you watch Schumacher ‘s interview in 2008 where he claimed that the development focus was on Massa rather than Kimi?? Funny all these thing occured after the departure of Jean Todt and the arrival of Michael Schumacher.

            Ferrari treat him as no,1 driver huh?? why they keep building a car with weak front end and understeer like eternity that suit Massa more?? Anyone in the paddock knew that Kimi hates understeer more than anything.

            His 2007 title impressed me more because he wasn’t driving a car that was built around him. In 2009, Kimi faced more reliabilities issues and strategy woes in 2009 than Massa hence the point deficit.

            He actually bettered Massa by putting that crap car in 2nd place at Monaco. He scored most point in 2nd half of the season compared to the likes of Vet, Webber, Button, Hamilton etc that drove a much better car than the development halted F60.

            What schumacher and alonso have over raikkonen was leadership. On pure driving skills Kimi is up there among the best.

          • dragoll (@dragoll) said on 29th April 2013, 3:32

            @kingshark

            I understand what you are saying, but I think comparing Kimi to when he was at Ferrari and now in Lotus is very different. Before his “vacation” from F1, he was a bit of a spoilt brat, and a bit of a party boy. That kind of attitude that James Hunt and others of that time use to have, however, times have changed and F1 has become a professional sport, and like other professional sports, whether he likes it or not, there is a certain amount of professionalism that is required.

            So, I think through “maturity”, whether its genuine, or forced upon him by the sport, has made him more focused and that is why we are seeing a more determined Kimi.

          • Ivano (@) said on 29th April 2013, 8:21

            @kingshark @adityafakhri

            I agree with your points of Kimi. However I feel Kimi fell apart at Ferrari after Todt left. Remember that Todt wanted him, and treated him like an adopted son by giving him freedom in 2007, yet managed to control his wild nightlife behind a closed door, and never publically applied pressure on Kimi. Unfortunately in 2008 Ferrari changed approuched by gunning the two drivers against each other through the media… and you know kimi. “I know what I’m doing.”

            Also in 2007, Kimi had early issues settling with the car after Australia, the conspiracies of spygate, the Monza pressure, of which if he didn’t, and had that extra Ferrari year as Massa did, the title would have been wrapped by races before.

            As well, towards the end of 2006, Schumacher struggled keeping up with Massa.

            In my view, a driver’s performance is related a lot to what’s going on in their mind and personal life issues which we’ll never know.

            And I’m no kimbot. I respect what he did in 2007, but I’m disappointed he’s not aggressively consistent like Vettel, Lewis and Alonso.

          • @sorin

            How do you think he get that popularity? By doing comercials for Clear/Rexona?? No. Because of his big talent.

            I disagree: I think he got that popularity precisely because he doesn’t do PR activities. Some find his few words and typical Finnish attitude in lacking the will to give a damn refreshing compared to the PR zombies of today!

          • firstLapNutcaseGrosjean (@) said on 29th April 2013, 22:02

            @ivano Vettel never won a race starting lower than 3′rd. Raikkonen won starting from all the positions, possible and impossible, at Mclaren, Ferrari and Lotus(started 7′th in Australia?! wow!). And you say vettel is more aggresive than Raikkonen? And that’s popular, @vettel1. Not because of his pr/not pr…etc. Heikki, is finish too. Bottas is finish too. Why they don’t have so many fans? ‘It’s pure driving!’. He managed to race with his car chopped by Perez. In normal condition, not like Vettel in Brazil on semi-wet. And the races won, started from far behind, were without Safety car, not like Vettel in Abu Dhabi, the SC being deployed twice. Plus, he din’t won there.

          • Angelia (@angelia) said on 29th April 2013, 23:58

            Kimi has been a great driver for 10 years in F1 but it seems like his 1.5 years in Ferrari will always be held against him. Which is understandable but it sometimes seems like Kimi’s time at Ferrari are held harder against him then the other top drivers. Alonso lost to Lewis as a rookie and Lewis in turn lost to Button. But people are more eager to overlook these events then they are when it comes to Kimi. I think it shows that team support is important you could be a good driver but you really need team support.
            But even when you overlook team support, Kimi was still always fast in 2008 and 2009. 2009 especially was such a bad year for Ferrari it isn’t even representative, before Massa’s accident there were so many retirements and team mistakes they had barely completed two normal races up until that time. But as time goes on the facts gets distorted.
            Just like Alonso didn’t fit into Mclaren, Kimi didn’t fit into Ferrari the whole situation was very similar. The one mistake that Kimi made was perhaps that he never complained about it publicly.

            @ivano It surprises me when people claim that Kimi isn’t consistent he has finished 20 races in the points, that is consistent. He is also fast in overtaking and getting through the field. You have to be consistent and pass others quickly to make these Lotus strategies, of doing one less pitstop, work. Take for example Vettel, he also started in 9th place in China and he wasn’t able to make the podium, because he wasn’t able to pass others that quickly, whilst Kimi managed to make the podium in Bahrain, under similar circumstances.

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 30th April 2013, 3:21

            @sorin

            Vettel never won a race starting lower than 3′rd.

            In return, he’s started on pole more than every driver in F1 history, except 2 of them. So what if he’s never won from lower than 3rd? Starting 3rd or higher is pretty good, don’t you think?

            And plus, it’s unfair to simply say something like “Vettel didn’t win in Abu Dhabi”. Finishing on the podium from the pitlane, is good enough, thank you very much.

          • @sorin comparing him to other Finnish drivers doesn’t detract from the fact he is very popular due to his “I know what I’m doing”, eating ice-cream antics. He is a good driver yes, but that can’t be the sole reason for his popularity or Vettel/Hamilton/Alonso would be more popular, and I highly doubt that is the case!

            Continuing on from @david-a ‘s point also I simply put the fact Vettel hasn’t won from lower than third down to the fact on every occasion the car is capable of winning, he has put it where it should be on the grid. When that opportunity was taken away from him in Abu Dhabi, he beat all bar two drivers. That’s hardly something to be disappointed with, is it?

        • victor (@genevene) said on 29th April 2013, 3:12

          @kingshark

          Funny, i wonder why Alonso couldn’t bettered Jarno Trulli on their stint together where Jarno had more poles and win over him. Eventually leading to Flavio kicking him out of the team with 3 races remaining.

          Jarno is then bettered by Heikki Kovolainen in Caterham.

          That’s why i don’t rank him as the best. (using your logic)

          • M Dickens (@sgt-pepper) said on 30th April 2013, 22:53

            (@angelia)

            Kimi has been a great driver for 10 years in F1 but it seems like his 1.5 years in Ferrari will always be held against him. Which is understandable but it sometimes seems like Kimi’s time at Ferrari are held harder against him then the other top drivers. Alonso lost to Lewis as a rookie and Lewis in turn lost to Button. But people are more eager to overlook these events then they are when it comes to Kimi.

            This, times 1000. People don’t doubt Hamilton’s abilities, despite his utterly dire 2011.

            (@david-a)

            And plus, it’s unfair to simply say something like “Vettel didn’t win in Abu Dhabi”. Finishing on the podium from the pitlane, is good enough, thank you very much.

            Seriously, still? He crashed twice, the fastest car, multiple retirements infront and most importantly two safety cars. Not one. Two. Whether we agree Vettel is good or not (which we never will), it would be foolish to deny Kimi’s abilities wheel to wheel. It’s my favourite thing about him, and what I look for most in a driver.

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 2nd May 2013, 5:35

            @sgt-pepper

            Seriously, still? He crashed twice, the fastest car, multiple retirements infront and most importantly two safety cars. Not one. Two. Whether we agree Vettel is good or not (which we never will), it would be foolish to deny Kimi’s abilities wheel to wheel. It’s my favourite thing about him, and what I look for most in a driver.

            1) The amount of emphasis you place on crashes and safety cars is laughable. He still passed numerous cars (and even if RBR had the “fastest car” on the race day, it was by no more than a minor margin), and finished 3rd with the fastest lap. And no, Abu Dhabi is not the only, or even best race wheel-to-wheel Vettel has had. It wasn’t even brought up by me, it was brought up by “Sorin”.
            2) You say people don’t doubt Hamilton’s abilities, despite 2011, you argue that it is Kimi Raikkonen who has his Ferrari days held against him, but then you hold some grudge against Vettel’s abilities (possibly because of two crashes in 2010?), no matter what he does?

      • Atticus (@atticus-2) said on 28th April 2013, 22:39

        I think the Perez bust up was entirely Checo’s fault.

        Raikkonen was halfway up on the left side of the McLaren, Perez really should have given enough room for Kimi there. It’s not just illegal what he did, but also ‘unsportsmanship-like’ a bit – as much as one is a racer, who races other drivers really hard and to the limit, I think it is not quite a gentleman kind of move to force one off the track. Each to his own in the case of the latter, though, I’m just an old-fashioned man at heart with principles not widespread nowadays. But it was certainly illegal anyway.

        So that leaves the start as the only real hiccup of a great weekend by Raikkonen.

        • M Dickens (@sgt-pepper) said on 28th April 2013, 23:40

          (@kingshark) (@hellotraverse)
          I think Kimi fits the definition that Clarkson described Gilles Villeneuve with best – ‘maginificent on a number of occasions.’ Perhaps he doesn’t have the world’s best consistency (although he was extremely consistent in 2012, so maybe that improved with age) but to me he defines everything I look for in a driver – immense racecraft, speed and huge balls. It’s why I’ll always rate him above the likes of Vettel (who, sticking to the theme I’d compare to the likes of Jacques Villeneuve).

          For example, heading towards Eau Rouge he decides to go for it, despite the fact seconds later he’d be gifted yet another dull, easy, DRS overtake on the straight. Why?

          ‘Cause Kimi.

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 29th April 2013, 0:09

            @sgt-pepper
            And “Jacques Villeneuve” (known as a “modern day Fangio” according to Stirling Moss) passed Rosberg around the fastest corner in the sport – Blanchimont, and numerous others coming out of it the following year. Your comparison is laughable.

        • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 29th April 2013, 1:16

          @david-a
          Off topic, but is Blanchimont really the fastest corner in Formula 1? I always thought it was 130R.

          • @kingshark I’d say it was maybe the Curva Grande (although the acceleration zone into that is shorter) but at Spa I’d expect the downforce levels were much lower than at Suzuka and it’s a longer flat-out section leading up to it so I wouldn’t think so.

            @aityafakhri

            hi Sebastian’s routine advertiser :)

            That one’s new to me!

            As for your actual comment though, it is a very subjective, well, subject but I would honestly say Vettel has greater inherent natural speed than all but Hamilton which I think speaks for itself in qualifying results.

            Of course though, I have no more evidence to back that up than the number of poles and such like which isn’t exactly representative!

      • Candice said on 29th April 2013, 2:56

        Hamilton better than Kimi???

        In qualifying, Kimi obviously outperformed the car significantly to put the car in front row in front of two ferrari and 1 merc.

        In the race, it was Lotus that screwed him up with the start. And the Perez incident was his fault really, FIA recently stated they wanted to be lenient hence no penalty.

        Despite dragging the heavily under-steered car (losing wing cascades, endplates, and a hole in nose cone) he managed to match Lewis ‘s pace and ultimately took over 2nd.

        • Guccio (@concalvez00) said on 29th April 2013, 9:35

          Ofcourse Hamilton is better than Kimi. And China, everybody knows that the Lotus is better on it’s tires then the W04 so don’t pretend like it was all Kimi’s talent that made sure he became second.

          • Candice said on 29th April 2013, 9:46

            Nope, you are the 1 pretending they encounter tyre issues in China like they were in Bahrain. Nice generalization.

            Shanghai is front limited circuit. Losing that much front downforce leading to massive understeer that will wear the front tyre out faster than anyone with intact FW that support the front and rear DF balance. Lotus was good on tyre with good overall car balance, and since the balance cracked, such advantage do not applies anymore.

            If that’s not talent to recover from that deficit, i don’t know what else.

          • Manished said on 29th April 2013, 12:01

            Shanghai is front limited.

            Merc suffer excess deg on rear.

            No matter how good your car is on tyre, when you lose excess front downforce, the balance crumble. Your rear will grip much more than your front leading to understeer and wear out your front tyre much faster.

            Great driver can adjust his driving to counter the understeer with induce oversteer. All was done on steering wheel input.

            For example in turn 1, you tend to turn the wheel earlier, when the understeer kick in, it will cancel out the consequences of turning in too early. Is easy to say, but if you missed out the accuracy on steering angle input, you will ended up losing much more time. All comes with how sensitive the driver is.

            I personally find it astonishing. Truly talented driver kimi raikkonen is.

        • chiliz00 (@chiliz00) said on 29th April 2013, 16:04

          You know this business of drivers outperforming cars IMO just cannot be true… I mean the cars cannot go any faster Han they are built to just because Kimi is driving it or Alonso last year…maybe my understanding or command of the language is somewhat lacking but I don’t see how a driver can make car go faster than it is able to…yes give them props for finding the absolute limit of the car if you must but to say the driver outperformed the car or made the car go faster than it is capable just doesn’t seem to make sense to me….I’d hope someone can help me to understand what is meant by driver outperform car

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 29th April 2013, 17:47

            @chiliz00 – It’s true that strictly speaking no-one can really “outperform” a car. People say someone outperformed a car because they finished in an unexpectedly high position. Say if an average driver gets 70% out of a car, while a top driver gets 90% out of a car (arbitrary values, just as an example), the top driver, in a worse car, can finish ahead of decent drivers who aren’t necessarily underperforming, but simply haven’t been as good as them.

  2. OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 29th April 2013, 3:09

    @kingshark Kimi has been runner up 2 times, one of them winning 7 races to Alonso’s 6 (2005) in a mclaren which was more fragile than Pirelli’s soft tyres.
    Raikkonen has 20 victories to Massa’s 11, and don’t forget that even when you recall Massa’s half year off, Raikkonen was off for 2 years. (Kimi has 180 starts to Massa’s 176, almost the same). So I wouldn’t say that because Massa beat Raikkonen in Ferrari, he’s necessarily better. By that logic, Button is better than Hamilton (I said that last year when both were compared in stats and people made me understand it). Or Rosberg better than Schum.

    • OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 29th April 2013, 3:15

      @david-a please tell my your opinion about the reasons I post here.
      I also forgot to say in the comment above that Massa 2008 is by far very different from Massa post-Turkey

      • David-A (@david-a) said on 29th April 2013, 3:44

        @Omarr-pepper – I definitely don’t think Massa is as good as Raikkonen. When you weigh up their careers, Raikkonen has a much better record than Massa, and is better in pretty much every regard. But Kingshark was getting at the way Massa, who pre-2007 had beaten his teammate just once in four years. It just doesn’t reflect well on Raikkonen.

        I guess that 08-09 were Massa’s best years and Kimi’s worst, uncomfortable with Ferrari. That leads me to believe that when both on-form, KR would beat FM, plus Raikkonen has had more good years than Massa.

      • David-A (@david-a) said on 29th April 2013, 3:48

        @omarr-pepper Also in 2005 Alonso won 7 races.

        • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 29th April 2013, 3:59

          @omarr-pepper

          By that logic, Button is better than Hamilton (I said that last year when both were compared in stats and people made me understand it). Or Rosberg better than Schum.

          The difference is that Hamilton was clearly better than Button in both 2010 and 2012 when they were teammates, Button was only better in 2011. The reason to why Jenson ended up with 15 more points at the end was purely because of luck.

          Rosberg beat a washed up 42 year old Schumacher, Massa beat Raikkonen in the prime years of his career. There’s a big difference.

          @david-a

          I definitely don’t think Massa is as good as Raikkonen. When you weigh up their careers, Raikkonen has a much better record than Massa, and is better in pretty much every regard.

          What about Felipe Massa of 2008? I wouldn’t put it past Massa of ’08 being as good as Raikkonen ever was. He won 6 races that year, could’ve been 8 but he was screwed out of Hungary and Singapore. Also, he very nearly beat Hamilton to the championship in an about equal car despite having more bad luck.

          IMO Massa is underrated and Raikkonen is a bit overrated. Usually, the popular opinion on these two drivers is that Kimi is a once-in-a-lifetime talent, whereas Felipe is a slightly above average driver.

          However, I believe that there’s very little to choose between an in-prime Raikkonen and in-prime Massa.

          • victor (@genevene) said on 29th April 2013, 4:13

            who said Hamilton is clearly better than Button in 2010????

            Button ‘s first year in mclaren driving a lewis oriented designed car.

            In 2012, Button had his fair share of bad lucks too. And do not forget, Button was struggling badly. Lewis on his prime could barely beat him in points tally.

            Dont tell me Lewis had more retirements, same could be said to Button.

          • Lari (@lari) said on 29th April 2013, 6:07

            @kingshark You tend to forget one important difference with Raikkonen being Massa’s teammate vs Alonso/Schumacher, the contract. Raikkonen didn’t have #1 driver status by default (from contract) as in oppose to Alonso and Schumacher. Neither of them didn’t even have to think about losing to Massa and hence this *might* have something to do with Massa’s motivation to do well. With Raikkonen, Massa had equal rights and equipment and was allowed to beat him if that was the case. So these comparisons aren’t on level because just because of that alone.

          • Ivano (@) said on 29th April 2013, 13:06

            @kingshark
            Massa had the better car in 2008. He and Kimi should have been beaten Hamilton.

            @lari
            Massa has always had the same car as Schumacher and Alonso.

          • Angelia (@angelia) said on 30th April 2013, 0:21

            @kingshark

            What about Felipe Massa of 2008? I wouldn’t put it past Massa of ’08 being as good as Raikkonen ever was. He won 6 races that year, could’ve been 8 but he was screwed out of Hungary and Singapore. Also, he very nearly beat Hamilton to the championship in an about equal car despite having more bad luck.

            IMO Massa is underrated and Raikkonen is a bit overrated. Usually, the popular opinion on these two drivers is that Kimi is a once-in-a-lifetime talent, whereas Felipe is a slightly above average driver.

            However, I believe that there’s very little to choose between an in-prime Raikkonen and in-prime Massa.

            Massa was also gifted two race wins in 2008, in France and in Spa. Kimi was always faster in the races in 2008. Until halfway through the season he was still leading the championship, but despite this Ferrari still didn’t support him for the championship.

            I guess according to you Ferrari must be really slow right now, and Lotus must be the fastest car since Kimi is somehow ahead of Massa in the WDC.

          • Yaya Ishaq (@ferrari_412t) said on 30th April 2013, 0:31

            Spot on.

        • OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 29th April 2013, 5:44

          oops

          • OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 29th April 2013, 5:50

            Also in 2005 Alonso won 7 races.
            oops

          • Lari (@lari) said on 29th April 2013, 20:34

            @ivano yeah….no. The car was built around their (Schu/Alo) driving styles, they are/were that clear #1 drivers in Ferrari. They always got the upgrades first. That doesn’t even need to be discussed, everyone knows it. Trying to convince otherwise is just lying to yourself.

          • Ivano (@) said on 29th April 2013, 21:54

            @lari

            How doesn everyone know? Do they work for Ferrari? Ferrari’s official statement is the same car, and actually as it’s been happening since last year, Massa has been testing new bits before Alonso. No, not lying to myself, just going by Ferrari’s official statement, and tame the arrogance deciding what needs to be discussed.

          • Lari (@lari) said on 30th April 2013, 15:13

            @ivano Are you really that naive that you believe that everything that is said (or not said) is so? Tell me this is not true. Team orders were not allowed for most of the years (Schu&Alo era) we’re talking about. Remember, I’m not only talking about Alonso here, not sure if you have been around when Schumacher was at Ferrari or just like to talk only about Alonso and not Schumacher. Why would they say something officially or publicly that is not allowed? And yes, suprise, humans do things that are not allowed and don’t say it out loud to the public to create more fuss. That doesn’t mean it’s right or good thing, but that’s the way it is.

            Now returning to your obvious focus, Alonso, and his sponsor Santander bank. They bought Raikkonen out of Ferrari for 2010. They didn’t publicly state that they do that but that’s what they did. Major F1 columnists (including this site) still “knew” that’s the way it was. See, it doesn’t need to be publicly announced for us to understand what is really going on.

    • victor (@genevene) said on 29th April 2013, 3:15

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIucDSQU5WA

      schumacher said the car development deviate from Kimi.

      What a nice way to treat their No.1 driver. Opps

    • victor (@genevene) said on 29th April 2013, 3:20

      Kimi also had terrible luck in 2008.

      Lewis took him out in the pitlane 2008 Canada when Kimi was going for the win.

      In Magny, his exhaust pipe failure cost him an easy win.

      In silverstone, the team gamble with strategy didnt fall in place when Kimi was left out on track despite the downpour. Prior to that he was setting fastest lap after fastest lap to cacth Lewis.

      In Spa, awesome race by Kimi to get the lead. However, the last lap was hampered by rain. Anyone watched 2008 knew that F2008 had issues all year long on wet pace.

      You add up all these lost wins and points, and Kimi would’ve became WDC in 2008 by fair margin.

      Thats by driving a car that wasn’t developed around him.

      • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 29th April 2013, 8:32

        You add up all these lost wins and points, and Kimi would’ve became WDC in 2008 by fair margin.

        Wrong.

        Check out this thread:
        http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12062

        Kimi Räikkönen lost a net 25 points due to mechanical failures and other misfortune.
        Felipe Massa lost a net 21 (or 23) points due to mechanical failures and other misfortune.

        The difference wasn’t big at all.

        Massa simply decimated Raikkonen in 2008.

        • Lari (@lari) said on 29th April 2013, 12:09

          @kingshark You tend to forget one important difference with Raikkonen being Massa’s teammate vs Alonso/Schumacher, the contract. Raikkonen didn’t have #1 driver status by default (from contract) as in oppose to Alonso and Schumacher. Neither of them didn’t even have to think about losing to Massa and hence this *might* have something to do with Massa’s motivation to do well. With Raikkonen, Massa had equal rights and equipment and was allowed to beat him if that was the case. So these comparisons aren’t on level because just because of that alone.

  3. Rambler said on 29th April 2013, 4:45

    just proves the Ferrari is the superior car. Hardly driver of the weekend

    • Todfod (@todfod) said on 29th April 2013, 8:50

      maybe we should call it car of the weekend then.. since only the best car wins every race weekend

    • BOnjour said on 29th April 2013, 9:54

      Ferrari had the car to win all four races.

      Shame about Alonso not getting ahead of Massa in melbourne start.

      Fw detached in Malaysia.

      DRS failure in Bahrain.

      The drivers and the team need to start maximizing their package and do justice with it.

    • Slava (@slava) said on 29th April 2013, 13:13

      I feel I could argue with you. Just look at Massa’s result. He lost 40 seconds to Alonso.
      That mean either Massa is a bad racer again or the red car is not so good. Or Ferrari team-leader said to Massa to back off just “To make sure you’re clear number 2″.

    • I disagree: the Ferrari on balance was probably the fastest car, but to put his win down to that is nonesensical. We only need to look at Massa to see where the argument that he had a super-dominant car crumbles, as it does with Vettel in Bahrain by looking at Webber.

      • Candice said on 1st May 2013, 15:43

        Massa encountered rear punctures twice.

        And he qualified on prime tyres to start the race with different strategies.

        hardly nowhere to be found.

  4. karter22 (@karter22) said on 29th April 2013, 12:16

    Wow!!! My first ever quote in F1FANATIC!! Thanks @keithcollantine !! This certainly made my day!

  5. I think Ricciardo fully deserved the votes he got. He put in a great performance for the whole weekend, not just for the race.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.