Forum Replies Created
20th April 2015, 20:39 at 8:39 pm #297259
Ok I’ll play.
Moss ahead of Fangio? I would be interested to hear the reasoning behind that. Just based on their F1 accomplishments or what they did outside F1 too? I could understand Moss being so high if you take into account stuff outside F1. But then where is Mario Andretti if that is the case. Anyway based solely on what they have accomplished in F1, my top 10 would look something like:
The top 5 is a lot easier to pick for me than those outside it. I’ve thought about this before and that top 5 hasn’t changed for a long time.
I find it hard to rank Vettel at the moment, I’m not sure where exactly where to put him.17th April 2015, 13:07 at 1:07 pm #296865
No one has more vocal fans than Raikkonen, and yet I don’t see him getting anywhere near the criticism that Lewis does. And I say this as a fan of both Hamilton and Raikkonen.
In the UK people who are successful are not treated as well as those who try hard but ultimately have less success. The public loves a underdog, and Hamilton who has been in a potential race winning car from the very first race of his career doesn’t really fit that bill, compared to someone like Jenson Button who had to toil for a long time to achieve his success. British people seem to be the ones who criticise Hamilton more than anyone else, although I will admit that in general Hamilton seems to be a person that people either really like or can’t stand from what I have read over the years in different forums. There is no grey area, people either love him or hate him, and when you have two opposing sides with such strong feelings one way or the other then the level and extent of the criticism is going to be bigger.
I don’t think it is racism, he just seems to have a personality that rubs certain people the wrong way. Personally I don’t care what he does in his private life, its his life, its his money, its his body and he can do what he wants. As far as I’m concerned the only thing I judge him on is what he does on track, maybe some people can’t make that distinction though. I say if he wants to dress like a rapper, who cares, as long as he drives well on track.
I actually don’t think its unfair to call Lewis unintelligent based on his behaviour outside the car, but people confuse what he does outside the car with what he does inside it. There are different types of intelligence and its clear that behind the wheel of a racing car he is incredibly intelligent with what he does, and he always has been. But in day to day life? In his interviews he doesn’t strike come across as particularly erudite, the thing he did at Spa with putting the data on Twitter was certainly a stupid thing to do, and it doesn’t help that people often compare him to Rosberg, who speaks six languages or whatever. But intelligence in these situations doesn’t necessarily translate to intelligence behind the wheel.
The persona out of the car gets confused with the persona inside the car. People always assumed that Rosberg must be the more intelligent driver, 1) because people like labels and putting people in boxes and 2) it fits their personality outside the car. But I think we can all see that this notion of Rosberg having superior racecraft and intelligence to Hamilton is a complete myth.
Will Buxton wrote a blog before the decider last season where he analysed both Rosberg and Hamilton, which I thought was interesting, as he suggests that Hamilton may even have deliberately cultivated this idea that he isn’t smart in order to gain a mental advantage over his rivals. Something along the lines of ‘the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.’
https://willthef1journo.wordpress.com/2014/11/19/the-contenders-lewis-hamilton/ Here is the article if anyone is interested.13th April 2015, 18:43 at 6:43 pm #296627
I also think the Webber comparison is valid with Rosberg, as like Webber he got close to a world title because his teammate suffered worse reliability. Vettel lost a lot of points in 2010 from mechanical breakdowns, and as I recall Mark was rather more fortunate in that respect that year. But I think it was the change to Pirelli tyres that really affected Webber rather than some sort of mental weakness, Vettel could deal with them so much better. Don’t forget 2010 was the last season on Bridgestones, I think I’ve seen Mark say himself in interviews that he never really got to grips with the Pirelli tyres. There was that and also the team perfecting the EBD system, which always favoured Vettel’s driving style over Mark’s.13th April 2015, 18:15 at 6:15 pm #296626
I am not surprised. What we are seeing is what I think would have happened last year if another car had been able to take the fight to Mercedes on a more regular basis, as Ferrari, at least in Vettel’s hands appear to be this season.
Rosberg knew that last season he was basically guaranteed P2 minimum at each race if his car was reliable. Its the reason the championship was reasonably close despite Lewis winning 6 more races. Nico finished second 10 times in total and 9 of those were behind Hamilton. Now with the Ferrari’s seemingly closer he can’t just rely on finishing second to Hamilton and hoping he has better reliability.
I thought it was interesting you included Damon Hill in your initial example as someone who bounced back to win the title. He did but it took him a year to regroup in order to do it. He was very poor in 1995. In fact its the reason Williams decided to replace him with Frentzen for 1997, because they thought he was past it based on his performances in 95. If Damon had driven in 95 like he did in either 94 or 96 he probably would have been a lot closer to Schumacher at the end of the season.5th April 2015, 18:50 at 6:50 pm #295960
Plato had a four second lead in Race 2, and he was absolutely cruising. It would have been inexplicable for him to make a mistake, and it looked like a puncture at the time because he turned in and the car just went wide and understeered off the track like there was no grip. His pace was really impressive before that, he was the quickest driver on track with 57kg of ballast on board, seems ominous for the rest of the season.5th April 2015, 18:46 at 6:46 pm #295959
@Atticus Race 2 was interesting because Priaulx and Shedden were fighting for 2nd place with about five laps left, Priaulx overtook him but then Shedden got him back immediately. But then Plato went off and all of a sudden they were fighting for the lead instead! Turkington was very close behind as well, but he didn’t really get involved in the fight properly. Shedden had it under control going into the last lap, but then he got blocked a bit by traffic going through Graham Hill Bend and Surtees and he left a small gap into Clearways that Priaulx went for. They were saying in commentary that the BMW had been the slowest car through the speed trap all weekend, which cost Priaulx here as Shedden managed to outdrag him to the line. It was certainly a very enjoyable race to watch.5th April 2015, 18:40 at 6:40 pm #295957
I watched races 1 and 2, but had to go out before race 3 so I don’t know if they elaborated but was there a reason Plato went off? I find it hard to believe that he would make such a seemingly rookie mistake when he had such a big lead and should have been in cruise control. Tim Harvey mentioned the possibility of a puncture, and there was debris on the track around Paddock and Druids. Can anyone confirm?
I think Plato is clear favourite for the title after today’s performance of the VW, even after his bad luck today in Race 2 meant he lost a lot of points. Turkington does not have his experience driving FWD cars, but he should run him close. The Honda will improve and Shedden is a great driver, but will it be consistently quick everywhere, which is what you need to win titles? Looking forward to the rest of the season.27th March 2015, 13:38 at 1:38 pm #295291
I expect the Honda to improve a lot once they get it sorted, so no I wouldn’t. Having manufacturer backing is a real plus in this modern era of F1.
Alonso is 33 and Button 35, they both still have some good driving left in them. Neither of them were under the impression that they would be competing for victories from the beginning. OK they might have thought it would be more competitive initially but both of them know its a more long term thing.
If Alonso were to leave though his only viable option at present would be retirement or some sort of sabbatical. That was kind of the point of joining Mclaren wasn’t it, Ferrari was no longer viable, he doesn’t fit Red Bull’s policy of promoting from within (and Renault have their own problems) and Mercedes are very happy with Hamilton and Rosberg. None of the other teams, with all due respect have a shot at winning the championship. I don’t think he will do what he did in 2008 and 2009 again and join a less competitive team just to stay in the sport.
If Kimi decides to call it quits at the end of this year though, stranger things have happened before in this sport than Alonso rejoining Ferrari… Although unlikely, its not beyond the realms of possibility if he does end up becoming tired of Mclaren.16th March 2015, 16:42 at 4:42 pm #294575
Alex Lifeson doing a Hip Hop album lol. That would be interesting to see.16th March 2015, 11:19 at 11:19 am #294546
If Claire Williams thought Susie Wolff was 1) ready and 2) good enough, why did she then say no she won’t be driving in Malaysia the first time she is asked the question? People complain about pay drivers in F1, but even someone like Max Chilton, who people maligned as being a pay driver has a greater claim to an F1 seat than Susie Wolff. Just look at her career results.
Nick actually already gave you some information about this. Williams’s situation is not unique, and other teams have a similar strategy. You seem to think its still like the mid 90’s when test drivers and reserve drivers still drove the cars on a regular basis and could step in easily when something happened to their main drivers. Its the nature of the beast nowadays and its not just Williams who do it.
With the testing restrictions nowadays being a test/third driver is not all that attractive a proposition for a driver, unless they can get it in their contract that there is a chance of a race seat in the near future like Nico Hulkenberg did when he drove for Force India.
If you were a driver of the calibre you mention, perhaps someone like Bruno Senna, Kamui Kobayashi or Heikki Kovalainen, then driving in other motorsport series is a much more attractive proposition than standing around like a spare part at every F1 race weekend, which is what happens on the vast majority of occasions if you are a third driver. What happened with Bottas is pretty rare don’t forget.
The only people who want to accept this type of job are young drivers who aren’t established yet (think Alex Lynn) who think its a good idea to get some exposure with a F1 team, drivers with lots of money who pay their way in or drivers like Vergne who is hoping that Raikkonen will leave Ferrari at the end of this season, and that he might be in the frame if Kimi does go.
That’s probably why Magnussen chose to stay with Mclaren too, he’s hoping he might step in if Button leaves in the near future. If Kimi stays though, Vergne will probably leave, its more attractive to race in other series like LeMans etc than to be a third driver in F1.16th March 2015, 10:27 at 10:27 am #294543
You might want to take your own advice and educate yourself before ‘commenting erratically.’ As I said before your posts are full of holes. I still can’t get over the fact you thought the incident between Nasr and Susie Wolff happened this weekend.
Also nice try at rewriting history, but your original argument was why did they not replace Bottas in Melbourne. You took this as a sign of Williams being too conservative, which is complete nonsense. Nice how you have changed the goalposts, now you’ve been proven wrong.
Susie Wolff is not good enough for F1. End of story. Why do you think Claire Williams torched her chances as soon as she was asked? She knows it as much as anyone else.
It has nothing to do with being female. F1 is supposed to be for the best drivers and she has never won a race in any car racing series she has ever competed in, stretching back over 10 years. She hasn’t even got a podium since 2004, that’s over a decade ago! We don’t need her to get a chance in a race situation to know she isn’t up to scratch. If a woman is to get an opportunity, particularly in a very good car then she must be good enough, otherwise it will hurt the chances of female drivers being chosen in the future.
Max Verstappen at 17 years old has already achieved more in his young career than Susie Wolff. He was incredible in karts, and won 10 races in F3 last year, his first season racing cars. His potential is exceptional and very exciting. Can’t say the same for Susie Wolff.
You think Williams might give Vergne a race seat for Malaysia? What happens when Bottas is fit again, and Vergne goes back to Ferrari? He could tell Ferrari some valuable information about the handling of the car, about their set up, about the way they do things etc. Its crazy to think Williams would put themselves in that position, when they will be fighting against Ferrari in the constructors championship. I don’t think this Van der Garde situation isn’t going to resolve itself any time soon either, maybe, maybe not but I would be very surprised if Williams gave him a shot.16th March 2015, 0:09 at 12:09 am #294527
What, its banter to keep making the same argument, even when you’ve been conclusively proven wrong. Funny definition of banter. Your posts are full of so many holes and flaws in your logic.
The incident between Nasr and Susie Wolff happened nearly a month ago, and yet you think it happened this weekend…?
I also don’t know why you’re fixating on Susie Wolff. Both her and Lynn are test drivers, which is not the same as a reserve driver. Williams do not have a designated reserve driver this season. They will have to cross that bridge if they come to it, maybe bring in someone like Pascal Wehrlein if Bottas doesn’t make it. And anyway Susie Wolff is not good enough for F1, everyone knows her being given time in the car is a publicity stunt more than anything else. Just look at her results in DTM, she was absolutely nowhere. I’m not even sure the FIA would grant her a superlicence.
You then mention Jean-Eric Vergne but don’t seem to realise that Ferrari signed him as a test driver way back in December, so he is very unlikely to drive for Williams. Van der Garde? Have you been paying attention this weekend? He has his own problems to sort out with Sauber.15th March 2015, 18:19 at 6:19 pm #294509
You are ignoring the fact that the rules did not permit Williams to put in another driver instead of Bottas, no matter how much they may have wanted to do so it is against the regulations. Its got nothing to do with a defeatist mentality.5th March 2015, 14:17 at 2:17 pm #293587
Dan this talk of Kimi’s motivation is a load of rubbish and always has been. Kimi is sensitive to the characteristics of the car and always has been so when they don’t suit him his performance drops off. That is what happened in 2008. He was a bit unlucky in 2008 with incidents and the such like, but Massa simply got more out of the car that season. People always throw this talk of lack of motivation at him because of his demeanour, but it always has been and always will be a complete non-starter.
The Ferrari in the early part of 2009 was a horrible car and even towards the end of the season when it improved it was still very difficult to drive quickly. Ferrari brought in Fisichella who had been driving really well in the Force India when Massa got injured and he was a long way off the pace of Kimi. Raikkonen was a bit off the pace at the start of the season relative to Massa, but in the second half of the season when the car improved a bit his performance level was outstanding. Only Lewis Hamilton scored more points in the second half of 2009 than Raikkonen. If his motivation level were ever going to drop, it would have been precisely at that point then because speculation was rife in the paddock all season, and even from the year before that Ferrari were looking to bring Alonso into the team to replace him. But his performances were really good in the second half of 2009. Criticise Kimi because he requires a particular type of characteristic from a car by all means, but this talk of lack of motivation is a load of nonsense.5th March 2015, 13:48 at 1:48 pm #293586
Both Raikkonen and Ferrari have an option that they can take up for 2016, so if 2015 goes well Kimi will more than likely be on the grid for 2016. He obviously still likes driving the cars. If this year goes badly then I think it may well be goodbye though. Kimi and his partner have just recently had a baby boy so if things show no signs of improving then Kimi is at a stage in his life and career where he will walk away without any regrets.
Allison worked with him at Lotus, he knows what Kimi likes in a car and early signs are positive that this year’s Ferrari is more suited to his driving style. As a Kimi fan I’m feeling fairly positive about this season, even if he doesn’t beat Seb over the course of the season I just want to see him competitive again, as last season wasn’t representative of his ability as a racing driver at all.
I think that it is a bit unfair to say that Kimi’s input didn’t help on the 2014 car, that car was inherently flawed in many ways, not least of which it didn’t have a good front end which Raikkonen absolutely requires to achieve his best performance. The design work on that Ferrari chassis would have been done before Kimi joined, and given the limitations on changes to the chassis during the season Raikkonen spent all of last season trying to make the best of a bad situation with respect to the car’s handling.