Well, of all the responses I expected to get, this … errr… wasn’t one of them. Nonetheless.
Actually, I brought it up to underline the difference between what Ferrari claim and what the truth is.
So, what is it that they claim? The point? That the claim “McLaren is the most sucessful team since 1966″ is the one rather selective or specific; Damn, if that doesn’t work, maybe we should exclude years where they didn’t have wins like 2006. Just because).
That’s exactly my point. Ferrari shout from the rafters about how they’re the most successful team in the sport, and they’ve used that claim to bully the FIA, demand special privileges, and spit from a height on other teams. The problem with that position is that
a) They’re only the most successful if you look at the figures from one specific direction.
b) They’ve spent very long periods of time not only not being successful, but being hopelessly incompetent.
c) They have a 20 or 30 year advantage over their rivals. Given that head start, their number of wins really isn’t as impressive as they would like you to believe.
Am I biased? Well, I think of bias as claiming to be impartial while clearly being the opposite.
No, that’s not what bias means.
Bias is an attribute that is applied to a presented thought or position, with the intention to deceive, manipulate, or selectively publish without declaring the person’s true intentions. I maintain that because my statement were made from an unambiguous and open position, I am not being biased. I am making a statement (“I don’t like Ferrari”), and then presenting evidence to support that. Even within my original post, I have not ignored the “look at his selective statistics” rule you are applying to argue against me, I introduced it. I was clear about why, and used those selective statistics not to bolster my own argument, but to reduce Ferrari’s “We’re the most successful” argument.
biased towards the teams he wants, McLaren and Lotus – he only wants to count the years they participated)” And I would add now, that Ferrari is ahead of McLaren, Lotus, Williams in percentage of wins per Race Entered.
I haven’t suggested anywhere in my post that I prefer any of those teams to Ferrari. I have merely named them as Ferrari’s next closest rivals in the “all time winners” stakes. You are applying a position to me that a) there’s no evidence to support, and b) can only be argued if you’re more interested in what your assumptions about me are, rather than what I have done. (bias, because you are misrepresenting the truth, while presenting your misrepresentation as fact)
Even at that, Ferrari are only *barely* ahead of their rivals.
Again with the confusion on word meanings. Or at least, a rather wide range you allow when calling something “barely”. I’ll compare to McLaren, as they are the second on the table. 216 wins to 171. Not barely, 45 race wins. ok? if McLaren wins all the races from now until the end of 2013 they will be *barely* ahead of Ferrari.
*(1) EDIT: I did the math, and found that McLaren has 3.8 wins “per year in which they participated” and Ferrari 3.54. Now that’s what I call as being “barely ahead”.
I’m not arguing with the mathematics. My point was, given their 20-30 year advantage, their success is less impressive than they make out. And McLaren, for those taking score, had just that sort of success rate at one point in their career, as did Williams, and Ferrari (when they let foreigners take over).
One of their engineers, Enzo, jumped ship and took lots of their staff, and slowly bought his way into success. Yet nowadays, Ferrari pretend none of that happened
Not sure what’s wrong with that, you say you hate it, nothing wrong with that either.
Then I’m not sure you caught the point I made. The reason I don’t like it, is that their behaviour is hypocritical. Hypocrisy is one of the most reprehensible qualities.
someone who talks and brags a lot, but doesn’t have much talent to back it up.
I don’t know Enzo Ferrari, never knew and am not the least bit interested in him. The only thing I know is that attached to his name it’s the most prestigious brand of sports cars or supercars, or luxury-fast-cars whatever you want to call that segment of the market. And the most sucessful team on the most prestigious series of motorsport, the so called “pinnacle”, F1. Again, not sure what kind of talent you expect he should have for you to approve him. But, no point in debating that either.
Names aren’t everything. While Ferrari is a name that stands for red coloured famous racing cars, it’s also a name that stands for endless amounts of tatty cheap ugly merchandising bought by people with no discernible taste. Are they successful? Yes they are. Are they as great as they say they are? No. Hence, “All mouth, no trousers”. David Haye was successful, until he met a man he couldn’t beat. But he had plenty of mouth before the fight – and no trousers in it.
If you started watching F1 in the past 10-12 years, you won’t be aware just how hapless and incompetent they were for a very long time.
I’ve started watching on the time of Alesi/Berger pairing. They did seem to have a car that would break out a lot. Don’t see the importance of that, though. What I remember, is that those red cars simbolized the sport in my head. It was mentioned here before, when non-fans talk about it, they talk about the Ferraris that go round and round. Again, no point in debating. You haven’t (of course ;)) though, mentioned the other periods in which other teams were as sucessful as the Schumacher age as I asked you to. To be fair, I wasn’t really expecting you did..
Cars that can’t finish a race aren’t something you can “see the importance of”? To finish first, first you must finish? It’s a sign of engineering incompetence if your cars can’t go the distance. That’s why it’s very significant, and Schumacher benefited from the opposite culture when he had the longest period in the sport with no mechanical retirements, at a time when Kimi’s engines were failing left right and centre.
Again, I’ve assumed in my original post that Ferrari’s misdemeanours are so well documented that they don’t need repeating – hopefully the rest of the thread has fleshed that out for you.
You’ve assumed wrong. And it didn’t. All I saw is mentioning this, that. Nothing that shows me that Ferrari has a trend on cheating that distinguished their culture from all the others. I believe that’s a misperception from “your side”. Why? Prejudice? Hatred? I really don’t care.
Distinguished from all the others?
Name another team that was given a technical veto on the sport’s rules.
Name another team that gets a “special bonus” on top of its prize money just for existing.
Explain why, at exactly the same time, two teams were caught in possession of another team’s data, but only one team was punished.
It’s clearly not a misperception from “my side”. The facts are clear and undeniable. Ferrari has perpetrated, and got away with, cheating behaviour the like of which no other team save Renault have come close to. And as I pointed out before, Disliking Ferrari for being cheats doesn’t preclude someone for also thinking that Renault are cheats.
About the “special influence with the FIA for decades”, sorry, you gonna have to do better than a post in a blog, even if it’s F1Fanatic, to convince me. Some official source, or credible one (no, not kicking the blog, just that a blog is a blog is a blog. Just need more.) I’m rather curious, let me leave that clear, please, make an effort and find that for me.
Quote from Martin Brundle?
http://www.brundlequotes.com/page4.htm (Race: Germany)
Article on Speed, quoting Adrian Newey?
If “Ferrari International Assistance” is a phrase you’re not familiar with, then I’m not sure how long a debate can go on.
And if it is true, it would even amaze me more. It’s the FIA responsability to be impartial, if a team earns himself special influence, it’s bad for the sport, but it’s the FIA that shouldn’t be rewarding special things to competitors in their competitions. it’s their responsability to keep things clean and the FIA that should be blamed if they don’t manage to do it, not Ferrari. A team shouldn’t be blamed for doing what’s in the best interest for them.
A team should absolutely be blamed for it. The fact that the blame is shared doesn’t absolve one party at all.
Oh I’ve no suggestion that other teams haven’t cheated as well.
I would say that it seems that you did, by stating Cheating as one the main 3 reasons (the others being Smugness and “All Mouth, no trousers”) as to why “you don’t like Ferrari”. Either this, or you don’t like any team. Maybe you don’t even like the sport.. Hmmm, come on, confess, what are you even doing here?
Be clear about what I said while you’re posting abusive comments about me, please. I said “No team represents institutionalised cheating like Ferrari”. That quite clearly means, and I carefully enumerated in the following paragraph the reasons why, Ferrari’s known exploits of cheating went well beyond what any other team have done.
Nigel Stepney (a Ferrari employee) contacted Coughlan and offered him the documents and asked for a job, having been passed over for promotion. Stepney stole from Ferrari.
Oh wait, you are indeed trying to defend one team for cheating. Except it is McLaren. Sorry, no comparation possible. They were convicted for that, I don’t remember that ever happening for Ferrari or any other. The biggest fine in the sports history. And hipochrasy until the end “The Denying” from the Ron Dennis. I don’t know about Renault, I know they didn’t had the same fate.
If you’re going to ask for evidence about what I’ve posted, and then fail to read the evidence, then you are not engaging in a discussion, you’re engaging in a series of pointless personal attacks that only serve to make you look ill informed. At no point did I try and defend McLaren for cheating – I merely took the time to attempt to expand your knowledge on that particular case.
And now in general, because it appears so many people here have such a distrust on the FIA: if you can’t trust the governing body, why do you even follow the sport? Why supporting a “rival” team from that body? Don’t you think that if it was really like that, they would never have the slightest chance? What? You also believe in the Reptilian people?
Again, you choose to misrepresent the idea that dislike of one party’s actions (the FIA) then forces someone to assume the position of abandoning the sport. That’s nonsense.