Jump to content


Photo

AUTOSPORT.com's top 10s of the decade


  • Please log in to reply
239 replies to this topic

#151 AUTOSPORT.com

AUTOSPORT.com
  • AUTOSPORT.com team

  • 16 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 01 January 2010 - 22:41

If Alonso has more votes then Hamilton how come Hamilton is ahead on the list and if Kimi has more votes then Massa Button and so on how come they are ahead. Or am i just not understanding how this works.


...

The original Top 10 was written by Dodgins. The definitive Autosport Top 10 has been compiled from canvassing all the staff writers of the website and magazine. They are two seperate top 10s.



What he said

Advertisement

#152 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 02 January 2010 - 00:19

what was the reasoning behind publishing dodgins list first and label it autosports's top 10 drivers of the last decade. ? Was he also the only one who completed the other lists for other categories.. If it was because a lot of staff are out on vacation I understand.

but that was like taking a random poster's top ten list and label it the atlasF1 racing comment forum top ten drivers.

#153 RedDawn

RedDawn
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 02 January 2010 - 01:18

Button is still too high on all the lists. He did not do anything of substance for most of the decade. I know hes one of the few wc's of the decade but that should not be an automatic pass to greatness. I would expect a little more analytical consideration from experts.

#154 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,361 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 02 January 2010 - 02:19

Button is still too high on all the lists. He did not do anything of substance for most of the decade. I know hes one of the few wc's of the decade but that should not be an automatic pass to greatness. I would expect a little more analytical consideration from experts.


09 and 04 are enough to get Jenson up there alone IMO. How many drivers not featured in most the top 10s have had better seasons than those of Jensons? None I can think of.

#155 Arion

Arion
  • Member

  • 2,415 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 02 January 2010 - 08:59

- how many races did Barrichello not win with the best car of the grid? How many times was he stomped and shamed by his teammate (including Button, for Christ's sake)?

So, basically, to make it to the list, having some sort of lasting impression is a requirement and I can think of ten other guys who were better at that than those three.


He did better against Schumacher than Massa who is higher on the list. And if Button, who's been stomped by his teammates rather too often for a WDC, is on the list, why not Rubens?



#156 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,361 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 02 January 2010 - 10:40

He did better against Schumacher than Massa who is higher on the list. And if Button, who's been stomped by his teammates rather too often for a WDC, is on the list, why not Rubens?


Team mates beaten in the 00's:

Jenson 80%:

Rubens x 3 (06, 07, 09)
Sato x 2 (04, 05)
Villeneuve x 1 (03)
Trulli x 1 (02)

Rubens 10%:

Button x 1 (08)



#157 Conny_Mary

Conny_Mary
  • Member

  • 167 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 02 January 2010 - 10:56

What a terrible list! :lol:
Too subjective! :down:
I prefer JA's choice.

#158 apoka

apoka
  • Member

  • 3,611 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 02 January 2010 - 11:03

Good post, but in 6 out of 10 years the team mate of Rubens was very tough to beat. Another way to compare them would be to look at the points they got in the 4 years at Honda/Brawn:

Rubens: 30/11/0/77 = 118 total
Jenson: 56/6/3/95 = 160 total

This is a bit closer than 80% vs. 10% in your post (and the perceived difference is probably even smaller). But it still shows that it is sensible to place Jenson above Rubens even if Rubens has more wins and total points in his career.

Off-topic: The new point system will make such comparisons much more difficult. :-/


#159 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,361 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 02 January 2010 - 11:35

Good post, but in 6 out of 10 years the team mate of Rubens was very tough to beat. Another way to compare them would be to look at the points they got in the 4 years at Honda/Brawn:

Rubens: 30/11/0/77 = 118 total
Jenson: 56/6/3/95 = 160 total

This is a bit closer than 80% vs. 10% in your post (and the perceived difference is probably even smaller). But it still shows that it is sensible to place Jenson above Rubens even if Rubens has more wins and total points in his career.

Off-topic: The new point system will make such comparisons much more difficult. :-/


00-05 MS scores 39% more points than RB (678-412)

06 - 09 JB scores 26% more points than RB (160-118)

In this respect Jenson is closer to Michael than he is to Rubens.

Edited by Tenmantaylor, 02 January 2010 - 11:36.


Advertisement

#160 Arion

Arion
  • Member

  • 2,415 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 02 January 2010 - 11:41

Team mates beaten in the 00's:

Jenson 80%:

Rubens x 3 (06, 07, 09)
Sato x 2 (04, 05)
Villeneuve x 1 (03)
Trulli x 1 (02)

Rubens 10%:

Button x 1 (08)


what's your point? Rubens spent most of the 00's playing lapdog to Schumacher. the quality of their respective teammates don't even compare.



#161 potmotr

potmotr
  • Member

  • 9,999 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 02 January 2010 - 11:51

Couldn't agree more :up:

Shame on you AUTOSPORT, how can you publish such ridiculous list in the first place even if it's from one person's opinion. :down:


This list is a total disgrace. I have always turned to AUTOSPORT.COM for news but this is a total disgrace. Shame on you. Button in 5th place, Kimi im 8th... I will have a hard time taking anything you you write seriously from now on. Shame on you. I know you are a english website but come on. You have now lost a reader.



Considering you've both just joined I can't imagine it is a great loss...

I mean, get some perspective. It is Dodgins' opinion.

The lists are there to promote debate.

Sheesh.

#162 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,080 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 02 January 2010 - 11:52

Imagine the can of worms it'd be if they got nostalgic and did these top 10s of the 90s, 80s...

#163 Johnrambo

Johnrambo
  • Member

  • 940 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 January 2010 - 12:54

In my opinion the clear top-3 from 2000-2009 in F1 have been Michael Schumacher, Fernando Alonso and Kimi Räikkönen.

I don't see how you can place any of the other drivers ahead of them. Of course it is a subjective opinion - but it is strongly supported by statistics as well.

In the recent couple of years imho clearly Lewis, Kimi and Fernando have been the top-3. Perhaps not surprisingly these seem to be the ones with the most fans.


Indeed. :up:

#164 Anomnader

Anomnader
  • Member

  • 8,616 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 02 January 2010 - 14:53

Look at the posts in these top 10s I'd say Kimi has the most fans thats why theres being so much upset.

#165 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,361 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 02 January 2010 - 15:10

Look at the posts in these top 10s I'd say Kimi has the most fans thats why theres being so much upset.


IMO the reason Lewis is higher on most lists is the fact he acheived everything Kimi has within 2 years as a rookie. Kimis career peaked, again IMO, between 03 and 05. Had Kimis McLaren in those days had the reliability that Lewis had at McLaren in 07 and 08 Kimi would probably be double champ now. But even when he won the title in 07 Massa was just as good and since then he just doesnt blow people away anymore. He's capable, he just doesnt seem to want to do it as much is the impression I get.

#166 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 02 January 2010 - 16:06

Look at the posts in these top 10s I'd say Kimi has the most fans thats why theres being so much upset.

So you would seriously put Hakkinen, who retired mid season 2001, ahead of Kimi? I am so ****ing tired of this "if you think like that your a fan of that" kind of idiotic troll argumentations. The world is NOT black and white with 100% contrast.

#167 fullthrottle

fullthrottle
  • Member

  • 488 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 02 January 2010 - 19:53

Considering you've both just joined I can't imagine it is a great loss...

I mean, get some perspective. It is Dodgins' opinion.

The lists are there to promote debate.

Sheesh.


I don't agree with you. This list was published as "AUTOSPORT.com's top 10 F1 Drivers", it represent AUTOSPORT's view no matter who wrote it. If AUTOSPORT's standard is so low I can't imagine how much craps had been published...



#168 Lazy Prodigy

Lazy Prodigy
  • Member

  • 2,458 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 02 January 2010 - 21:46

I was wondering if they will do superbike riders?

#169 carbonfibre

carbonfibre
  • Member

  • 6,295 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 02 January 2010 - 22:05

Don't think so since they don't report any WSBK news (a shame autosport, it's just as good as MotoGP nowadays). And it represents all of autosport.com writers etc views.

It suprised me that 2 people of the autosport.com team actually put Alonso over Schumacher in their list... They must have been under influence of something..;)

#170 tkulla

tkulla
  • Member

  • 3,352 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 02 January 2010 - 22:18

Don't think so since they don't report any WSBK news (a shame autosport, it's just as good as MotoGP nowadays). And it represents all of autosport.com writers etc views.

It suprised me that 2 people of the autosport.com team actually put Alonso over Schumacher in their list... They must have been under influence of something..;)



I'd like to see Autosport cover WSBK too, but I don't think the series can be called equal to MotoGP. When their new top driver is "promoted" to MotoGP right after winning the championship, it's hard to claim equality. The racing is terrific in WSBK, but the riders clearly view MotoGP as the top step.

#171 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,080 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 02 January 2010 - 22:59

WSBK is simply fantastic, it'd be terrific to have some reports here.



#172 beanoid

beanoid
  • Member

  • 5,247 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 02 January 2010 - 23:21

I'll give it a go! Hee!

World Superbike Top 10 of the Naughties
1. Troy Bayliss
2. Noriyuki Haga
3. Colin Edwards
4. James Toseland
5. Troy Corser
6. Ben Spies
7. Frankie Chili
8. Neil Hodgson
9. Ruben Xaus
10. Ben Bostrom

I pulled that out of my a**, so please feel free to take aim and fire. :D

#173 Lazy Prodigy

Lazy Prodigy
  • Member

  • 2,458 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 02 January 2010 - 23:34

I'll give it a go! Hee!

World Superbike Top 10 of the Naughties
1. Troy Bayliss
2. Noriyuki Haga
3. Colin Edwards
4. James Toseland
5. Troy Corser
6. Ben Spies
7. Frankie Chili
8. Neil Hodgson
9. Ruben Xaus
10. Ben Bostrom

I pulled that out of my a**, so please feel free to take aim and fire. :D

its hard to disagree because once you get passed 6 there has really been nobody else that dominated beside hodgson and Id move him to 7. Id put Vermeulen around 8th because he did really good durring a time of Ducati dominancein 2004 and finished 2nd in 05 before he moved to gp on a team that did their own thing.

#174 potmotr

potmotr
  • Member

  • 9,999 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 03 January 2010 - 01:00

I don't agree with you. This list was published as "AUTOSPORT.com's top 10 F1 Drivers", it represent AUTOSPORT's view no matter who wrote it. If AUTOSPORT's standard is so low I can't imagine how much craps had been published...


Come on, the list wasn't that crap, there were a few names left out that might have made it otherwise.

But the list is there to provoke debate. No need to call for the site to be shut down on grounds of crapness.

#175 DaleCooper

DaleCooper
  • Member

  • 2,512 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 03 January 2010 - 05:57

Look at the posts in these top 10s I'd say Kimi has the most fans thats why theres being so much upset.



Ever hear of the vocal minority?


Cooper

#176 santori

santori
  • Member

  • 3,993 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 03 January 2010 - 10:36

I'll give it a go! Hee!

World Superbike Top 10 of the Naughties
1. Troy Bayliss
2. Noriyuki Haga
3. Colin Edwards
4. James Toseland
5. Troy Corser
6. Ben Spies
7. Frankie Chili
8. Neil Hodgson
9. Ruben Xaus
10. Ben Bostrom

I pulled that out of my a**, so please feel free to take aim and fire. :D


That's not far off what I think. For me number 1 is between Bayliss and Edwards and I'd probably drop Toseland a bit. Xaus wouldn't make my list but I'd like to have Biaggi and Laconi. Edit: and Vermeulen.

How about Autosport lists for 250s and 125s?

Edited by santori, 03 January 2010 - 10:38.


#177 carbonfibre

carbonfibre
  • Member

  • 6,295 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 03 January 2010 - 10:54

I'd like to see Autosport cover WSBK too, but I don't think the series can be called equal to MotoGP. When their new top driver is "promoted" to MotoGP right after winning the championship, it's hard to claim equality. The racing is terrific in WSBK, but the riders clearly view MotoGP as the top step.

Sure in the riders view but im talking about the view of the people. And nowadays i enjoy WSBK just as much as the MotoGP and maybe sometimes even more. The racing is just fantastic and the level is pretty high as well and there are a lot more different brands represented as well.

I think WSBK deserves more attention then it gets now. :)

#178 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:20

Top 10 F1 drivers:

10. Mark Webber
9. Robert Kubica
8. Kimi Raikkonen
7. Felipe Massa
6. Mika Hakkinen
5. Jenson Button
4. Sebastian Vettel
3. Fernando Alonso
2. Lewis Hamilton
1. Michael Schumacer



Abysmal list; a top-ten-list-of-2009, with Schumacher and Hakkinen thrown into it.
There should not be a place for Hakkinen, Hamilton second overall is silly, just as Vettel at fourth, and Massa should not be ahead of Raikkonen. No Montoya, but Kubica and Webber. Laughable.


Just for a quick comparison, this is the point score total of the decade:

1 SCHUMACHER Michael 799.00
2 RAIKKONEN Kimi 579.00
3 ALONSO Fernando 577.00
4 BARRICHELLO Rubens 530.00
5 BUTTON Jenson 327.00
6 MASSA Felipe 320.00
7 COULTHARD David 314.00
8 MONTOYA Juan-Pablo 307.00
9 SCHUMACHER Ralf 267.00
10 HAMILTON Lewis 256.00
11 TRULLI Jarno 235.50
12 FISICHELLA Giancarlo 226.00
13 HEIDFELD Nick 219.00
14 WEBBER Mark 169.50
15 KUBICA Robert 137.00
16 HAKKINEN Mika 126.00
17 VETTEL Sebastian 125.00
18 KOVALAINEN Heikki 105.00
19 ROSBERG Nico 75.50
20 VILLENEUVE Jacques 55.00

It puts the input of Hamilton, Webber, Kubica and Vettel into the right perspective.

#179 HaPe

HaPe
  • Member

  • 1,016 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:29

..and Massa should not be ahead of Raikkonen.


Hu? Defintely Massa has to be ahead of Raikkonen.
He proved to be the better driver in 2008 and 2009 (until his crash).
Also in 2007 he was as strong as Kimi (the margin came by technical failures).

Edited by HaPe, 03 January 2010 - 11:33.


Advertisement

#180 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:33

The decade covers 2000-2009, not only 2008 and 2009.

#181 RodrigoL

RodrigoL
  • Member

  • 1,531 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:34

Hu? Defintely Massa has to be ahead of Raikkonen.
He proved to be the better driver in 2008 and 2009 (until his crash).


What about the rest of the decade? Let's ignore performances like Brazil 03, Spa 04, Japan 05 etc. just because Massa 'was better' in some select period of time...

Maybe you prefer to watch drivers win from pole in the best car instead of real racing.. :rolleyes:

#182 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:36

Hu? Defintely Massa has to be ahead of Raikkonen.
He proved to be the better driver in 2008 and 2009 (until his crash).
Also in 2007 he was as strong as Kimi (the margin came by technical failures).

I would agree that he seemed better 2009, the half season he raced, but for 2008 it Kimi was as strong as him (the margin came by technical failures).
But as Giacomo said, there were a lot more seasons during that decade. Ask Peter Sauber what he thought about Felipe during, I think it was, 2005.

#183 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,080 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:42

[b]It puts the input of Hamilton, Webber, Kubica and Vettel into the right perspective.

Definitely not. A simple point table is no way to assess their input.
If we go by the points, it seems Barrichelo was a leading and comanding force of the decade. Raking up results all along the way. And history shows us it was the contrary. The closest he ever came to a title fight was in 2009, probably the weakest year of the entire decade. He never led the points table and never had more wins than a teammate of his. He has been solid and a good driver, raking up points and helping develop cars, but that's hardly more impressive than Kubica leading the WDC briefly in 2008, or Vettel's 4 wins of 2009, or Hamilton's imediate success against Alonso and 2008 title.

From the drivers you mentioned, the only one I'd put Barrichello above is Webber.

#184 HaPe

HaPe
  • Member

  • 1,016 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:45

The decade covers 2000-2009, not only 2008 and 2009.

But 2007-2009 were the years to compare these 2 (objective).
Massa has made silly mistakes and stuff in his early years, okay. But has been grown and become a mature title contender.

An we look to that comparison TODAY ... not 2005.

#185 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:53

Definitely not. A simple point table is no way to assess their input.
If we go by the points, it seems Barrichelo was a leading and comanding force of the decade. Raking up results all along the way. And history shows us it was the contrary. The closest he ever came to a title fight was in 2009, probably the weakest year of the entire decade. He never led the points table and never had more wins than a teammate of his. He has been solid and a good driver, raking up points and helping develop cars, but that's hardly more impressive than Kubica leading the WDC briefly in 2008, or Vettel's 4 wins of 2009, or Hamilton's imediate success against Alonso and 2008 title.

From the drivers you mentioned, the only one I'd put Barrichello above is Webber.

A point table is a more useful tool than the personal opinion of a journo who obviously forgot that there were F1 races before 2007.
It shows that the input of young drivers like Hamilton and Vettel was zero and non-existent early in the decade, just as Schumachers and Hakkinens input late in the decade.

And your counter example Barrichello was competitive and winning in 2000, as well as in 2009.


#186 HaPe

HaPe
  • Member

  • 1,016 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:55

but for 2008 it Kimi was as strong as him (the margin came by technical failures).


This is a joke or?! :confused: :lol:
Have you reviewed how many points Massa lost due technical (or team dependend) failures in that year?! More than 20...

Edited by HaPe, 03 January 2010 - 11:56.


#187 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:56

But 2007-2009 were the years to compare these 2 (objective).
Massa has made silly mistakes and stuff in his early years, okay. But has been grown and become a mature title contender.

This is not a Raikkonen-Massa comparison, its an assessment of their input to the last decade.

An we look to that comparison TODAY ... not 2005.

That does not allow us to neglect the 2005 results in favour of the 2009 results.

#188 Galko877

Galko877
  • Member

  • 4,215 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:57

Just for a quick comparison, this is the point score total of the decade:

1 SCHUMACHER Michael 799.00
2 RAIKKONEN Kimi 579.00
3 ALONSO Fernando 577.00
4 BARRICHELLO Rubens 530.00
5 BUTTON Jenson 327.00
6 MASSA Felipe 320.00
7 COULTHARD David 314.00
8 MONTOYA Juan-Pablo 307.00
9 SCHUMACHER Ralf 267.00
10 HAMILTON Lewis 256.00
11 TRULLI Jarno 235.50
12 FISICHELLA Giancarlo 226.00
13 HEIDFELD Nick 219.00
14 WEBBER Mark 169.50
15 KUBICA Robert 137.00
16 HAKKINEN Mika 126.00
17 VETTEL Sebastian 125.00
18 KOVALAINEN Heikki 105.00
19 ROSBERG Nico 75.50
20 VILLENEUVE Jacques 55.00

It puts the input of Hamilton, Webber, Kubica and Vettel into the right perspective.



Points/race would be however:

1. M. Schumacher
2. Hamilton
3. Alonso
4. Räikkönen
5. Montoya
6. Vettel
7. Massa
8. Häkkinen
9. Kubica
10. Coulthard


Edited by Galko877, 03 January 2010 - 11:58.


#189 HaPe

HaPe
  • Member

  • 1,016 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 03 January 2010 - 11:59

That does not allow us to neglect the 2005 results in favour of the 2009 results.

Agreed.
My point was not to move Massa up the list, but to move Raikkonen down!
2007-2009 showed and proved, that Raikkonen was a bit overrated in his McLaren years.

..and even Kimi produced bad results in his early years. He lost again Heidfeld and DC.
The only difference to Massa is, that Massa made mistakes that looked more silly.

Edited by HaPe, 03 January 2010 - 11:59.


#190 RodrigoL

RodrigoL
  • Member

  • 1,531 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:01

Points/race would be however:


How would Hamilton's stats look like if they spent a few seasons dragging a Sauber/Minardi/unreliable McLaren around...

Hint: a lot worse. ;)

EDIT: I just remembered Sebastian DID do that, so it's impressive to see he's popping up in the top 10 already :up:

Edited by RodrigoL, 03 January 2010 - 12:04.


#191 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:11

This is a joke or?! :confused: :lol:
Have you reviewed how many points Massa lost due technical (or team dependend) failures in that year?! More than 20...

No, I just bounced your silly claims back at you. How many points did Kimi lose be being hit from behind at red lights 2008?
I know, now you will say "it was not a technical failiure", but it was, several very technical parts failed to function afterwards.

#192 HaPe

HaPe
  • Member

  • 1,016 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:15

No, I just bounced your silly claims back at you. How many points did Kimi lose be being hit from behind at red lights 2008?

I didnt deny that Kimi lost points 2008. What I said was that Massa lost more (and thus have fallen behind in the end of the season).
Actually, in an (subjective) review of all races 2008, trying to make these lost points (for both!) "undone", Massa would have been WDC instead.

In short:
2007 was Kimi vs. Massa : eye-to-eye
2008 as well as first half 2009 : Massa was the deciding bit better.

Edited by HaPe, 03 January 2010 - 12:18.


#193 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:15

Agreed.
My point was not to move Massa up the list, but to move Raikkonen down!
2007-2009 showed and proved, that Raikkonen was a bit overrated in his McLaren years.

..and even Kimi produced bad results in his early years. He lost again Heidfeld and DC.
The only difference to Massa is, that Massa made mistakes that looked more silly.

He did not lose against Heidfeld. He "won" the McLaren ride that Nick was destined for, how do you like that? There was no doubt that he was the better driver when he teamed up with DC either. In fact, the first part of 2009 is the only time in his career that he has been distinctively outperformed by a team mate.

#194 HaPe

HaPe
  • Member

  • 1,016 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:20

Nothign of that invalidates what I said.

#195 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:21

He did not lose against Heidfeld. He "won" the McLaren ride that Nick was destined for, how do you like that? There was no doubt that he was the better driver when he teamed up with DC either. In fact, the first part of 2009 is the only time in his career that he has been distinctively outperformed by a team mate.

Apart from 2008.

#196 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:36

I didnt deny that Kimi lost points 2008. What I asid was that Massa lost more (and thus have fallen behind in the end of the season).

You said that, and it is not necessarily true. You can not measure things like that so easily. In fact, Massa had only one retirement 2007, Kimi had two, Electrical problem in Spain and Hydraulic in the European GP.
Massa had a suspension problem at Monza.

2008 Kimi had five retirements, was hit by Lewis in Canada and had an engine failiure in Australia and at the European GP (not a happy place for him, remember the tire blow 2003?) and he crashed at Spa and Hungary.
Massa had three retirements, an engine failure and Hungary in Australia and crashed in Malaysia.

So in 2007 and 2008 Kimi had two more tech failiures and one crash more than Massa. How come Massa lost more points than Kimi on tech?


#197 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:38

Apart from 2008.

Massa did not outperform Kimi 2008. They was very evenly matched. Hamilton hitting him in Canada and Kimi himself hitting the barriers at Spa brought Massa ahead.

#198 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:44

Massa did not outperform Kimi 2008. They was very evenly matched. Hamilton hitting him in Canada and Kimi himself hitting the barriers at Spa brought Massa ahead.

I see. :lol:

#199 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:45

I see. :lol:

Good. Although I doubt you do.

Advertisement

#200 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:50

Good. Although I doubt you do.

I see that you are deluding yourself, and that you are trying to delude others as well. Argueing with revisionism is a waste of time.