Webber had opened fuel flap in Bahrein not Kubica. Leaves only 3 examples for you. Heidfeld retired sometimes as well (after leading in Spain) and collided in Suzuka with Button after being third.

AAAANYWAY Heidfeld beat Kubica with 61 points to 39, quite a gap imo.

Team mates stealing points is exactly why WDCs are lost. Had any of the teams in 2007 2008 or 2009 made an effort to make sure a single driver had the best chance of finishing ahead of his team mate from the start of the season, the WDC might have been theirs. Instead McLaren didn't have that option in brazil last year because there was a special spanish representative making sure everyone was treated normally. Ferrari allowed their drivers to take points from each other throughout the season and RBR have left it too late to focus on a single driver. All MS WDCs were won because of #1 #2 structure. Same with Alonso. Now having a #1 #2 structure doesn't guarantee a WDC, but not having it is the easiest way to lose one.


As for what consititutes a dominant car. You just have to look at 1-2 finishes. Brawn have had multiple 1-2 finishes this year.

Shred of proof? I talked about you basing your hypotheses on thin air, whereas Raikkonen is widely rumoured to have the McLaren seat available to him if he wants it. There's quite a gulf between what you're doing - dreaming up 'what if' scenarios without a shred of evidence to back them up - and discussing rumours from credible sources. But fair enough, I'll leave you to your mental masturbation.

Oh? So if we take 2008 as example...

Massa spinning of in Australia was because of Raikkonen?
Massa spinning of in Malysia was because of Raikkonen?
Massa's hopeless race in England was because of Raikkonen?
Massa's fuelless pitstop in Canada was because of Raikkonen?
Massa's retirement in Hungary was because of Raikkonen?
Massa's worthless pitstop in Singapore was because of Raikkonen?
Massa's penalty in Japan was because of Raikkonen?
Hamilton's pitlane incident was because of Kovalainen?
Hamilton's penalty in France was because of Kovalainen?
Hamilton's penalty in Belgium was because of Kovalainen?
Hamilton's penalty in Japan was because of Kovalainen?

And that's just 2008! I hope you see what I mean. Raikkonen didn't make Massa lose the title, it was Massa/Ferrari himself. Hamilton was just lucky Massa made more mistakes them him.

And do you actually remember what happened to Webber because of that? What are you trying to prove? That car with open fuel flap is faster that the one with properly closed fuel flap?

Heidfeld retired in Spain when he was behind Kubica.

Add stupid penalty in Japanese GP, retirement because of gearbox in Australia, crash in Canada caused by stupid stewards, 20 seconds pit stop in Monza and so on.

The gap is big but its only part of the truth. The point that started discussion is simple: in 2007 Kubica beat Heidfeld in GPs where he had no technical problems, and thats just it.

read his post again, he made it perfectly clear it's about making it easier. Drivers will make mistakes and they will lose points. It's not about what cost titles. It's about which is the easiest way to win WDC.

as proved by many in this thread, it's pure bs that you lose a WDC because your teammates are taking off points of each other. on the other hand it's evident that you need to have to high scoring drivers to get the WCC - especially when your competitors do have two top scoring drivers.

i don't think hamilton senior has anything to say in McLaren's choice for their 2nd driver. he might complain, but so what? if he (or his son) don't like to have a top guy along lewis, he's free to leave. there are many drivers out there who'd sell their grandmother to get into that McLaren cockpit, i suppose.

Webber crashed into Nick in the first corner, when Nick was 7th, he dropped back of the pack on lap one, completed the race with damaged car.
Kubica had lightest car, he was 68 second behind the leader, as you can see he was almost lapped but SC came out, he fought for 2nd not for win, he was in that position because of SC and other drivers had to use softer tyres, which were crap. Although his all luck, he crashed into Vettel, it was not enough for him he also crashed into the wall two corners later.


Robert engine was broken on lap two, he was already behind everyone.


Really? Glock crashed into Nick on lap 13, Nick dropped 19th from 12th. On lap 51 Sutil crashed into barrier and his wheel hit Nick’s car and cause damage. Nick dropped 12th from 7th because of that. He was still 11 seconds in front of last place Kubica.


In Q Nick 17th, Robert 18th. Kubica’s engine was broken on lap 29, Nick was 12th Robert was 15th, Nick was 23 seconds ahead of Kubica.


Nick had no grip on front left tyre in his first stint, he lost to much places in first laps, but in Q Robert was faster.


Result not reflects the facts. Nick was the faster of the pair. In Q he was behind Kubica because of error on his flying lap. In race Nick had superb start and gained 5 places but he had damaged front wing in first stint.


Really? In Q and race Nick was the faster one. Robert was ahead because of Nick had two incidents with Trulli on lap one.


Oh! Come on. In Q Nick was 0.4 seconds faster than Kubica. If his engine wasn’t broken in Q he could start the race at least top 5, not from 15th. And when Kubica had accident with Webber he was 1.1 seconds ahead of Heidfeld (1.1 second = far ahead )


In Q Nick and Kubica didn’t have a fast lap with softer tyres. Nick’s fuel weight was not correct. In race, actually Nick had no chance he had to start from the pitlane, and Alguersuari train was so slow.

Jesus mate. Didi you watch first lap? Kubica was behind because his freaking engine didnt work.

He outqualified Heidfeld fair and square.



Mate he was far ahead when he was told to pit, which was the consequence of the accident. Are you drank?




What are you smoking mate?



He was behind because of his superior speed. Amazing logic.



You need to focus more before reading.

Oh, and this is silly season thread, if you want to spread bollocks like that start Nick vs Robert thread or go to BMW thread.

So making a mistake in qualifying doesn't count? You're an idiot.

Some real mixed signals coming out of Toyota. One minute Glock is being told to look for another drive next year as they cannot guarantee participation in F1 then they publicly state they want Kubica and then say they are pursuing Kimi.

Mario Theissen: "Unfortunately an open fuel filler cover disturbed the aerodynamics of Robert's car"

source: f1.gpupdate.net


and something else. Do you know Mehdi Ahmadi? It says something to you? He was Kubica engineer. "Google it" and read the story about this.

It guarantees them publicity.

Start a new thread or STFU.

This is the thread concerning the 2010 driver market.

Then post about 2010 driver market.

Just saw a mention in another post about Jenson. He is apparently still talking to Brawn about next year, allegedly money is a stumbling block..

so what if he is talking to McLaren about the second seat ? hence the delays ?

What about rosberg, he and lewis are good friends and he is on top form at the moment, could he be talking to McLaren (and Brawn as rumoured a while ago).

Kimi ? who knows. If he did get a severance deal he may not be looking for top money, its pretty obvious he is talking to McLaren, but who else ? Toyota ? Williams ? Brawn ?

Glock will also be looking around, Williams for him maybe ?

Yes, I'm also quite worried by Toyota. I fail to see the point in communicating to both drivers that they may be out of the team in 2010, while at the same time there is no evidence that the drivers are the reason for not winning races. A driver lineup Kubica/Räikkönen would certainly be interesting (and quite expensive for Toyota), but imho Glock/Trulli also deserve good cars.

He just has to accept a lesser salary. The nonexistent speculation about him possibly going to McLaren is – pardon me for saying – nonsense. Button will remain at Brawn (it would be foolish not to) and will be paired with the German (enough) Rosberg. Kimi will return to McLaren. According to Turun Sanomat the negotiations between McLaren and Raikkonen are in their final stage. Have no idea where Glock is going if Toyota won't keep him.

There is just one (good) reason I can think of why Toyota allegedly told Glock and Trulli that their contracts wont be extended for 2010 - they want to save some money by lowering their salary. I've said it a few times before but imo they CANNOT consider Nakajima seriously... ok, he's Japanese, but he's nowhere near Rosberg, Williams(!) even want to get rid of him despite getting free(!) engines if he remains on board. If Toyota is desperate to have a driver with a Japanese passport in their car, what about Sato?! He can't be that expensive either.

Mallya is driven by patriotism aswell, but - unlike Toyota it seems - he's more reasonable on that. He said multiple times that there wont be an Indian driver in his car just for the sake of being Indian. As long as there is no Indian driver who's good enough for Formula 1, Force India takes the best they can.

Nakajima is not so bad, he is a good racer.

If they have a proper "A" driver - Kubica, and a secondary "B" driver - Nakajima ---> Kubica wants a 1 year deal. Nakajima will have to take a 1 year deal or be out of F1. That way if team don't build a quicker car, they still have option of withdrawing Toyota F1 team after next season. Also they can build the cars to Kubica understeer (?) style and Nakajima being no. 2 will just have to drive it as it is.

Anyway with the two places open, they can try for Raikkonen at least, to say they made an offer and did some negotiations in attempts to get two top drivers. Trulli is more "true blue" Toyota than Glock though IMO, and might return in the second place.

Look at Sutil and Liuzzi... right on the pace in the FI, yet they would hardly be properly considered for McLaren (Sutil would be considered as a Kovalainen replacement with the same number two pace perhaps....) and Ferrari. So it's not all the drivers, just as it's not all the car.

Why is it so foolish. McLaren could make the same offer as Kimi, 12m euro for Button, and get the #1 on their car. Would Button consider McLaren? Is Button better than Raikkonen or worse?

Kimi is better than Button, that is easy one.
Lewis would cry one way or another, having strong team mate or little weaker one but with number 1 on the car

I don't think Button would consider McLaren, especilly if their only interest in him is to get the number one. He likes the people at Brawn and Brawn like him. He stuck with them through Honda's back-out when other drivers wouldhave immediately looked elsewhere. He's one of the most loyal drivers on the grid, and I don't think he' go abandoning the team at a moment's notice like that.

The assumption there is that any other team would have wanted him at that point.

As far as I remember his 'value' at the end of 2007 was at an all time low.

Brawn came extremely good and it suited his smooth (but dull) style and he is suddenly in a position that he never expected to be.

I have no idea if 2010's Brawn will enjoy the same advantages that this years model did, but if it drops back to 'merely average', then nothing in Button's past would lead me to believe that his future lies anywhere other than midfield.

The gamble would be on the Mclaren being better than the Brawn in 2010. Given the rate of development at McLaren this year and given their history it would be a fair bet. Given the choice of seats (Mc or Br) I would certainly consider the Silver cars first......

Button may very well have the numbero uno on his car next year but that does not mean that he's one of the best drivers in F1. To assume that McLaren would be after his services is plain silly imho and I'm quite sure that most F1 fans agree on that.

So what happens if Brawn - or whoever Button drives for - give him another exceptional car next season and he can fight or the title again? Will you change your stance on how he stacks up? Its not like we're playing by the old Moscow Rules - once is an accident, twice is conincidence, three times is enemy action - here ..

Errrm. Wrong.
Williams. Buttongate.

That was diferent. In 2005, it was BAR that protested his defection to Williams, and the Contract Review Board agreed with them. In 2006, Button was not confident that Williams could provide him with the car they said he would, and you know what? He was right - Williams' 2006 car was good for little more than scrap.

I think enough years have passed to drop the Williams move fiasco. I say this as one of the people who liked to bash JB for that.

So now...

Brawn
Button or Hamilton
Rosberg

Red Bull
Vettel
Webber

Ferrari
Massa
Alonso

McLaren
Hamilton or Button
Raikkonen???

Toyota
Kubica or Glock or Raikkonen
Trulli or Nakajima or Kobayashi

Williams
Barrichello???
Hulkenberg

Renault
Kubica???
Grosjean

Force India
Sutil
Liuzzi

Toro Rosso
Buemi
Alguesuari

USF1
Wurz???
???

Manor
???
???

Campos
De La Rosa
???

Sauber
Heidfeld
???

Yupp.
So much for his "loyalty" (to Williams).
If loyalty to Honda (BAR) is the issue, nobody tops JV.

Where are these rumours that Buton is going to McLaren coming from, anyway?

If the "Hamilton to Brawn" case is to be believed, I believe that Button will be the one that leaves Brawn. After all, Button's contract with Brawn is not all solid, and negotiations are still in place. If anything falls apart, Button will most certainly go to McLaren, since Rosberg is pretty much all a done deal at Brawn.

Since Santander is interested in expanding in the UK, it makes better sense for them a Hamilton x Button trade off rather than Rosberg (which won't happen).

Didn't Button acept to receive $3Million per year for 2009/10 in exchange of his Honda contract ?
And that Jenson wants an extra prize [not in the contract] if he becomes WDC ?
Brawn is refusing to pay him and give a raise for 2010, so Jenson's seat is not guaranteed.

Webber's lucky he signed his deal early on the way his form is dropping...

German TV commentators just said that Austrian journalists (RBR owner is Austrian) talk about Kimi to Red Bull.

/edit: which, by the way, would qualify as a "shock to the driver market" as some rumour statet some days ago ;)

[quote name='r4mses' date='Oct 3 2009, 06:22' post='3901261']
German TV commentators just said that Austrian journalists (RBR owner is Austrian) talk about Kimi to Red Bull.
[/quote

LOL!! No team with existing contracted drivers for 2010 are looking at Kimi... Kimi WILL be back to Mclaren, i can confirm the talks started back at the Valencia weekend..

Kimi to RBR would certainly be an upgrade over Webber the crasher.

Pls dont tell me you actually are so gullible you fall for some baseless rumour. That type of stry would be laughed at in even troll froums

There are no such rumours.

The fact that people are talking about it suggests otherwise.

It's being talked about it because someone dreamed up such a scenario here. In reality there are no such rumours circulating the paddock. Button is not expected to go to McLaren. It's nothing but silly forum chitchat.

I know that. I'm just trying to prove a point ... namely, that it's a stupid rumour, but people don't listen.

What's that speculation of Hamilton into Brawn? Isn't he confirmed in McLaren into 2012?.

Yes he is:
said a McLaren spokesman.

What about http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorspor...ty-in-2010.html

will KUB go somewhere else than renault/toyota that officially wants him? Oo

He doesn't have a lot of choice: Renault and Toyota are the only teams with guaranteed openings that stand any chance of producing a halfway-competitive car. He could try and get in with Brawn, Williams or McLaren, but they seem fixated on Rosberg, Barrichello and Raikkonen respectively, and every other team is either new, full or Toro Rosso.

Yes, contracts and F1. Rock solid!

You wrote about Toro Rosso, that reminds me one thing, isn't since 2010 a ban to have that same construction in more than one team?
I heard it some thime ago, and don't know if it's rejected?
If it is so, will toro rosso have to construct a new car? That doesn't sound good for them.
If this idea was rejected, is there no chance, that STR will be pretty competetive like RB nowadays, because the aero doesn't change so much?

Toro Rosso have apparently expaned their Faenza base and have the ability to build their own chassis.

Prior to the Red Bull buy-out, Minardi of course already built their own cars. So it's not as if Toro Rosso have to build everything from scratch, but upgrades of the facilities may bring them quite a bit.