Jump to content


Photo

Fernando Alonso thread [merged]


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
14493 replies to this topic

#8551 e34

e34
  • Member

  • 718 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 06:34

If that was the case, then Ferrari are idiots. They knew what Kimi was like. He had been in F1 for 6 years at the time. Its not like he is magically going to change his entire personality just because he comes to Ferrari.
And a season where he won the drivers championship wasnt very good? Alrighty then. :drunk:
He struggled a bit with adapting to the car and the Bridgestones at first but when he got it working he won 2 more races than his rivals. I also see people in here excusing Alonso for not wiping the floor with Hamilton in 2007 - and the reason given were the tires.

Funny how that works..


What the heck do you mean, a better car? It won both championships in 07 and one in 08. Almost 2. Anything else you are trying to assume or conclude is pure fiction and speculation. I suspect you are trying to imply that Alonso would have flattened the field if only he had been in the car then. Pure fantasy and wishful thinking without any evidence to back it up with. In fact, the 07 McLaren is widely regarded as the best car that year. Pretty evenly matched on speed but edging ahead of the Ferrari due to its better reliability. And Alonso didnt set the world on fire with that car.

And if anyone starts complaining about trolling or something, my sole reason for responding to these posts are because of their obvious logical fallacies and flawed guesswork.


If you feel like talking about obvious logical fallacies and flawed guesswork, you need to look no further than

"It won both championships in 07 and one in 08. Almost 2. Anything else you are trying to assume or conclude is pure fiction and speculation." Talking about 2007, that can only be referred to Ferrari.

But two sentences later: "In fact, the 07 McLaren is widely regarded as the best car that year".

I agree that McLaren was the best car in 2007, but that must be because I must be prone to pure fiction and speculation, because if you want to base your statements in facts, Ferrari won both championships, so it must had had the best car, or the best driver, or both. To say otherwise would be "pure fantasy and wishful thinking without any evidence to back it up with".

But if we were to indulge into pure fantasy, we could say that it is indeed a funny championship that won when the drivers of the WCC team have a total combined score of 204 points, and the drivers of the other team combined score is 208 points. That could cast a shadow of a doubt over one of the championships of which followers of a certain driver are so proud. As would the fact that it took a total meltdown of a rookie driver in the last two races, because up to that point, that rookie driver, with the help of his team, was beating both the incumbent 2WDC and the fastest, most talented and uber cool driver ever, who, as facts say, was driving the best car of that season. But as you said, that would be nonsense and pure speculation. Opinions, and talking about how a team may destabilize a driver, by backing his teammate and not paying attention to the other driver's needs, have no place in a F1 internet forum. Only Facts are facts.

And fact is that after 2007, Alonso's worst year, in which he ended third in the WDC standing, one point shy of the championship, he painfully fought his way back to a top team, and so he ended last year on the brink of winning his third WDC, while the driver who was supposed to be his main rival throughout his career, squandered his opportunity at a top team, was paid silly money not to drive, and went on to exhibit his exceptional speed at WRC, where he had a great time crashing cars on the woods. And now he is showing how multi-talented he is, by driving vans at NASCAR.



Advertisement

#8552 broooz

broooz
  • Member

  • 108 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 06:50

I would try to elaborate my thoughts on Massa a bit further. In 2006 he performed relative to Schumacher on a similar level as he did with Alonso. The F248 was regarded as the best or equal best car and Massa won 2 races (comparable with 3 in 2007 when the car did not suffer in the first part of the year as did F248). Therefore, Massa's performances were consistent and he did not suddenly get better in 2007. One may argue that he was inspired and stimulated in 2008 by the fight for the WDC but the car was also good enough to support him. Then again, in 2009, he performed similarly. In 2010 he had some good races but was excused by some by tyre heating troubles that were supposed to be resolved in 2011. However, the gap got only bigger in 2011. OK, Massa may be a spent force by now but I think he is too young for it. Also, the loss of the 2008 title did not impede his 2009 performances.

Consequently, there is absolutely no evidence that Massa suffered any troubles other than having the super fast teammate.

Edited by broooz, 24 May 2011 - 06:57.


#8553 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:07

There is no way that Massa is performing like he did in 07-08.

I am convinced that an injury to the brain and being in a coma have taken away those tenths of a second that made him special. Its visible and very unfortunate. And he is not the first driver to experience this.
The only time I have seen him on fire since early 2009 was Germany last year. He had the panazz but still lacked a bit of speed. Sadly that confidence boost was taken away from him when Alonso inherited the win.

This of course, is hard to prove with numbers. But I am sure most people have noticed that Massa is changed. Both on and off the track.


This sounds like the words of someone who can't accept they were wrong about a driver. Doctors, Ferrari and family say Massa is perfectly fine and not changed, so I think they are in a better position to judge him than you are. Why do you find it so hard to believe Massa is performing at his best but his team mate is simply faster, and that the Ferrari's of those years were the fastest? It's a far more reasonable explanation than yours.

He was simply flattered by great cars, and so was Kimi. Certainly not the first time in history that's happened.

Edited by rommel, 24 May 2011 - 07:11.


#8554 broooz

broooz
  • Member

  • 108 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:11

This sounds like the words of someone who can't accept they were wrong about a driver. Doctors, Ferrari and family say Massa is perfectly fine and not changed, so I think they are in a better position to judge him than you are. Why do you find it so hard to believe Massa is performing at his best but his team mate is simply faster? It's a far more reasonable explanation than yours.

Occam's razor!

#8555 ForzaGTR

ForzaGTR
  • Member

  • 2,941 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:15

This sounds like the words of someone who can't accept they were wrong about a driver. Doctors, Ferrari and family say Massa is perfectly fine and not changed, so I think they are in a better position to judge him than you are. Why do you find it so hard to believe Massa is performing at his best but his team mate is simply faster, and that the Ferrari's of those years were the fastest? It's a far more reasonable explanation than yours.

He was simply flattered by great cars, and so was Kimi. Certainly not the first time in history that's happened.


Doctors may say Massa is physically okay, but what about the psychological effect the crash may have had on him?

Personally I think he has lost his edge. However, even with his edge I would expect Alonso to beat him every year.

#8556 bogi

bogi
  • Member

  • 3,012 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:17

Doctors may say Massa is physically okay, but what about the psychological effect the crash may have had on him?

Personally I think he has lost his edge. However, even with his edge I would expect Alonso to beat him every year.



He can't remeber anything from the accident, I don't think you can get PTSP that way. His main problem is Alonso who is much better driver.

#8557 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:20

Doctors may say Massa is physically okay, but what about the psychological effect the crash may have had on him?


Why would it have a psychological effect? , do you mean he is scared now? Considering he is always over driving, sliding, locking up, spinning out, it does not look a driver who has lost his edge and is scared, it just looks like a driver trying as hard as hell, constantly going over the limit, trying to find the speed to match his faster team mate.

#8558 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,179 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:25

He can't remeber anything from the accident, I don't think you can get PTSP that way. His main problem is Alonso who is much better driver.


Of course psychology comes into it, but not necessarily related to the accident. All drivers are affected when they get beaten and if it happens frequently enough many will start to perform below their personal optimum (like Massa last Saturday, we know Alonso isn't really a whole second faster). Some other drivers might be a lot less affected, Button for example.

So in addition to being genuinely simply a bit slower than Alonso, Massa might be underperforming an thereby exaggerating the effect. I think that's all there is to it.

#8559 Desdirodeabike

Desdirodeabike
  • Member

  • 1,890 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:39

If you feel like talking about obvious logical fallacies and flawed guesswork, you need to look no further than

"It won both championships in 07 and one in 08. Almost 2. Anything else you are trying to assume or conclude is pure fiction and speculation." Talking about 2007, that can only be referred to Ferrari.

But two sentences later: "In fact, the 07 McLaren is widely regarded as the best car that year".

I agree that McLaren was the best car in 2007, but that must be because I must be prone to pure fiction and speculation, because if you want to base your statements in facts, Ferrari won both championships, so it must had had the best car, or the best driver, or both. To say otherwise would be "pure fantasy and wishful thinking without any evidence to back it up with".

But if we were to indulge into pure fantasy, we could say that it is indeed a funny championship that won when the drivers of the WCC team have a total combined score of 204 points, and the drivers of the other team combined score is 208 points. That could cast a shadow of a doubt over one of the championships of which followers of a certain driver are so proud. As would the fact that it took a total meltdown of a rookie driver in the last two races, because up to that point, that rookie driver, with the help of his team, was beating both the incumbent 2WDC and the fastest, most talented and uber cool driver ever, who, as facts say, was driving the best car of that season. But as you said, that would be nonsense and pure speculation. Opinions, and talking about how a team may destabilize a driver, by backing his teammate and not paying attention to the other driver's needs, have no place in a F1 internet forum. Only Facts are facts.

And fact is that after 2007, Alonso's worst year, in which he ended third in the WDC standing, one point shy of the championship, he painfully fought his way back to a top team, and so he ended last year on the brink of winning his third WDC, while the driver who was supposed to be his main rival throughout his career, squandered his opportunity at a top team, was paid silly money not to drive, and went on to exhibit his exceptional speed at WRC, where he had a great time crashing cars on the woods. And now he is showing how multi-talented he is, by driving vans at NASCAR.

First of all, you can win championships in a lesser car :rolleyes: Besides the cars were pretty even in 07 as I said. The McLaren was more reliable though.

Secondly, I dont know what you are on about going off about a "rookie driver, with the help of his team" (which is also speculation) and ranting about Kimi? I dont quite follow you there or completely understand your point. But speaking about facts, you got a couple of them wrong. The combined score of the WCC points of the McLaren drivers were 218 that year. However, you have to subtract 15 points for Hungary when they both acted like little kids. That equals 203 points. And then subtract another 203 down to zero for possession of Ferrari data, in which Alonso was heavily involved btw. Unless you dont want to count penalties at all. In that case you opened up a whole new box of worms if we have to take that into consideration.

Another fact you got wrong is that Alonso was one point shy of the championship. Actually he needed 2 points more to win the WDC because of only 4 wins to 6. But that is nothing but details.

As for the rest of your post, I will be happy to watch you trying to somehow discredit Kimi, but my initial post was not about defending him. I only responded to some points that didnt make sense concerning Massa and Kimi - and Alonso for that matter. So have at it if you want.

Advertisement

#8560 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:43

Of course psychology comes into it, but not necessarily related to the accident. All drivers are affected when they get beaten and if it happens frequently enough many will start to perform below their personal optimum (like Massa last Saturday, we know Alonso isn't really a whole second faster). Some other drivers might be a lot less affected, Button for example.

So in addition to being genuinely simply a bit slower than Alonso, Massa might be underperforming an thereby exaggerating the effect. I think that's all there is to it.


Massa out qualified Fernando by 3 tenths in the first race of 2010, so we can assume he was psychogically very strong at that moment, yet two weeks later he was out qualified by 7 tenths, and its basically followed that trend until now, so that really disproves the psychological excuse, which is all it really is, unless you think in the space of two weeks for some reason he started to psycholically under perform for no reason.

First it was tires and now its psychological issues, it seems there is a never ending list of excuses thrown around, isntead of just accepting a simple truth. Some rare drivers are just that much faster than others. Massa was 1 second slower because of circumstances, and it will vary all the time. The car was handling bad, and Alonso did a great lap, I don't think it had anything to do with psychology.

#8561 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:44

First of all, you can win championships in a lesser car :rolleyes: Besides the cars were pretty even in 07 as I said.


What is this assumption based on?

The only way the cars could have been equal was if the drivers were roughly equal. Is that what you really think?

#8562 SCUDmissile

SCUDmissile
  • Member

  • 3,907 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 08:00

i dont know who this helps, but Ferrari imo was the faster car that year. the mclaren was just more consistent. like when Ferrari got a 1-2, like Spa,
McLaren got 3-4.

McLaren got a 1-2 in Monaco, and ferrari were 3-8.

take a look at this

Ferrari: 9 Wins, 9 Poles, and 12 Fastest laps.

McLaren: 8 wins, 8 Poles and 5 Fastest Laps.

The McLaren though had the 2 best drivers in the sport though.

and lets be honest, Mclarens performance was a little boosted by a certain document, and Ferrari may have even be allowed to use their flexi floor if they werent caught!





#8563 Desdirodeabike

Desdirodeabike
  • Member

  • 1,890 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 24 May 2011 - 08:03

Massa out qualified Fernando by 3 tenths in the first race of 2010, so we can assume he was psychogically very strong at that moment, yet two weeks later he was out qualified by 7 tenths, and its basically followed that trend until now, so that really disproves the psychological excuse, which is all it really is, unless you think in the space of two weeks for some reason he started to psycholically under perform for no reason.

We could also assume that it was due to Massa driving the Ferrari since 2006 and Alonso only in testing that year. And the Bahrain raceweekend got him up to speed. That could also be a viable explanation. But we dont know. I for one cant believe that people dont see a significant change in Massas entire demeanour and attitude from now and before his accident. And please stop trying to think its because I want to make Kimi look better cause its not. Kimi is one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless. But I just think its sad to see Massa like this. Last Sunday was just pitiful. He wasnt even that bad in his first Ferrari year in 2006 when he made quite a few mistakes.

#8564 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 08:15

We could also assume that it was due to Massa driving the Ferrari since 2006 and Alonso only in testing that year. And the Bahrain raceweekend got him up to speed. That could also be a viable explanation. But we dont know. I for one cant believe that people dont see a significant change in Massas entire demeanour and attitude from now and before his accident. And please stop trying to think its because I want to make Kimi look better cause its not. Kimi is one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless. But I just think its sad to see Massa like this. Last Sunday was just pitiful. He wasnt even that bad in his first Ferrari year in 2006 when he made quite a few mistakes.



Getting consistently blown away week in week out by your team mate would not do great things to your mood and demeanour. It would probably make you depressed actually especially with your career on the line. Nothing to do with accident damage though, just a normal reaction to a bad situation. You have to remember that Massa was on a real high until 2010. He had seen off Kimi, and was rated highly, so the arrival of Alonso has totally turned his world around, and it must be hard to take. I am not surprised he is not smiling much.

#8565 broooz

broooz
  • Member

  • 108 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 08:19

If I succumb to the drive to be just a little bit nasty, I would easily conclude that most of the excuses made for Massa come from the same source and are based on the same assumptions as those made for Kimi a few years ago. I would also easily conclude that they belong to the very same agenda of trying to explain the certain differences between one past and one present Ferrari driver by circumventing logic and fabricating issues and excuses.

#8566 broooz

broooz
  • Member

  • 108 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 08:25

Getting consistently blown away week in week out by your team mate would not do great things to your mood and demeanour. It would probably make you depressed actually especially with your career on the line. Nothing to do with accident damage though, just a normal reaction to a bad situation. You have to remember that Massa was on a real high until 2010. He had seen off Kimi, and was rated highly, so the arrival of Alonso has totally turned his world around, and it must be hard to take. I am not surprised he is not smiling much.

If there ever was a compelling evidence about relative strengths of the two drivers not driving in the same team (admittedly always a hard job), then the 2007-11 era provides plenty. Both Kimi and Alonso faced the same driver in his prime, a driver with with a long tenure in the team. Kimi was beaten, Alonso is dominating. And there is no excuse, spin or twist that would ever be able to change that facts. No tyres, Santander or front suspension or whatever silly idea would ever change that.

I am positive that Alonso's Ferrari spell, regardless of the current results, already did more for his image and stature than his 2 titles with Renault.

Edited by broooz, 24 May 2011 - 08:41.


#8567 Oho

Oho
  • Member

  • 7,533 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:00

so the arrival of Alonso has totally turned his world around, and it must be hard to take. I am not surprised he is not smiling much.


Ah the spring that cracked his skull and made mince meat of part of his brain has been christened Alonso.....

#8568 Oho

Oho
  • Member

  • 7,533 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:04

Both Kimi and Alonso faced the same driver in his prime, a driver with with a long tenure in the team.



No shit, except for the prime part which may or may not be true due to rather severe head trauma.

#8569 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:04

Barna's GP 2011 start (from the grandstands):





awesome, thank you very much :up:

(also for the other two videos)

#8570 broooz

broooz
  • Member

  • 108 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:07

No shit, except for the prime part which may or may not be true due to rather severe head trauma.

A trauma that everybody involved and qualified considers fully healed and completely a non-issue.

#8571 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:09

A trauma that everybody involved and qualified considers fully healed and completely a non-issue.


Of course, a driver that was fighting for a championship 3 years ago can barely fight for 7th much less podium finishes and it's all because of the wonder of Alonso . Damn those 6 tenths :S

#8572 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,552 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:15

If I succumb to the drive to be just a little bit nasty, I would easily conclude that most of the excuses made for Massa come from the same source and are based on the same assumptions as those made for Kimi a few years ago.

Are you suggesting Massa fans believe Ferrari have changed Massa's floor mid season which is why he is driving poorly in comparison to his teammate?

#8573 Oho

Oho
  • Member

  • 7,533 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:15

A trauma that everybody involved and qualified considers fully healed and completely a non-issue.


How do you know that? I guess you really don't. He has been declared fit to race really no more no less, not free of any and all lingering after effects. People actually involved and qualified say precious little beyond assessing his fitness to race. There is this thing called doctor patient confidentiality gagging anyone from making anything but positive comments without explicit permission from Massa.

#8574 Desdirodeabike

Desdirodeabike
  • Member

  • 1,890 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:25

If there ever was a compelling evidence about relative strengths of the two drivers not driving in the same team (admittedly always a hard job), then the 2007-11 era provides plenty. Both Kimi and Alonso faced the same driver in his prime, a driver with with a long tenure in the team. Kimi was beaten, Alonso is dominating. And there is no excuse, spin or twist that would ever be able to change that facts. No tyres, Santander or front suspension or whatever silly idea would ever change that.

I am positive that Alonso's Ferrari spell, regardless of the current results, already did more for his image and stature than his 2 titles with Renault.

Trying to waft away some of the things that clearly played and plays a big part - also according to the Ferrari team themselves - is indeed silly.

Yes I can: frustrated Kimi fans spend a lot of time trying to muck Alonso and to persuade us that driving redneck pick-ups on short ovals is the ultimate racing on Earth.
I think that polite Alonso fans (me included) shall not disturb Kimi threads (despite there being 3 same ones) and I think that Alonso thread is no pplace for frustrated Kimi fans.

Good grief man. Get a grip. As an Alonso fan, you must be the most touchy on earth. I would like to know who has been trying to persuade you of such a thing and what that has to do at all with this? :lol: As I pointed out, I am meerly making statements to a couple of points which I felt didnt make sense. But I guess playing the Kimi card for Alonso fans has become an easy way out for some of them. Any hint of criticism and it must be a Kimi fan trolling..

#8575 nbhb

nbhb
  • Member

  • 903 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:56

We could also assume that it was due to Massa driving the Ferrari since 2006 and Alonso only in testing that year. And the Bahrain raceweekend got him up to speed. That could also be a viable explanation. But we dont know. I for one cant believe that people dont see a significant change in Massas entire demeanour and attitude from now and before his accident. And please stop trying to think its because I want to make Kimi look better cause its not. Kimi is one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless. But I just think its sad to see Massa like this. Last Sunday was just pitiful. He wasnt even that bad in his first Ferrari year in 2006 when he made quite a few mistakes.

Some people have a logical thinking, some have not. Some base their conclusions from facts, starting from facts and some assume that something is right and build their case from that assumption.

Let's starting with what conclusion can we have based on facts:
Before Massa's accident. Massa and Fisichela were teammates. Fisichela was simply faster than Massa.
Alonso and Fisichela were teammates. Alonso was easily faster than Fisichella.
Massa and Kimi were teammates. Massa equal with Kimi.
Conclusion of before Massa's accident. Alonso easily faster than Massa. Massa equal with Kimi.

After Massa's accident. Alonso easily faster than Massa.
Conclusion of after Massa's accident: Massa has not been affected by any accident. and Alonso is easily faster than Kimi.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now let's assume that "Kimi is one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless" as you said.

Before Massa's accident.
Kimi is one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless.
Massa and Fisichela were teammates. Fisichela was simply faster than Massa.
Alonso and Fisichela were teammates. Alonso was easily faster than Fisichella.
Massa and Kimi were teammates 2.5 years. Massa equal with Kimi.
Conclusion of before Massa's accident. Massa has improved over the years and Kimi was screwed big time by Ferrari who were in love with Massa. Ferrari builded only cars than suit Massa's style.
After Massa's accident. Alonso easily faster than Massa.
Conclusion of after Massa's accident. Ferrari is now in love with Alonso because he brought Santander money. Ferrari build only cars than suited Alonso's style. Also I for one cant believe that people dont see a significant change in Massas entire demeanour and attitude from now and before his accident!!!!. Kimi is still one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless!!!!And of course Kimi is equal or better than Alonso and Alonso no way it's gonna do better at Ferrari than Kimi would have did.

Hope I cleared up for you.

Edited by nbhb, 24 May 2011 - 10:00.


#8576 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,201 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:00

Some people have a logical thinking, some have not. Some base their conclusions from facts, starting from facts and some assume that something is right and build their case from that assumption.

Let's starting with what conclusion can we have based on facts:
Before Massa's accident. Massa and Fisichela were teammates. Fisichela was simply faster than Massa.
Alonso and Fisichela were teammates. Alonso was easily faster than Fisichella.
Massa and Kimi were teammates. Massa equal with Kimi.
Conclusion of before Massa's accident. Alonso easily faster than Massa. Massa equal with Kimi.

After Massa's accident. Alonso easily faster than Massa.
Conclusion of after Massa's accident: Massa has not been affected by any accident. and Alonso is easily faster than Kimi.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now let's assume that "Kimi is one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless" as you said.

Before Massa's accident.
Kimi is one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless.
Massa and Fisichela were teammates. Fisichela was simply faster than Massa.
Alonso and Fisichela were teammates. Alonso was easily faster than Fisichella.
Massa and Kimi were teammates 2.5 years. Massa equal with Kimi.
Conclusion of before Massa's accident. Massa has improved over the years and Kimi was screwed big time by Ferrari who were in love with Massa. Ferrari builded only cars than suited Massa's style.
After Massa's accident. Alonso easily faster than Massa.
Conclusion of after Massa's accident. Ferrari is now in love with Alonso because he brought Santander money. Ferrari build only cars than suited Alonso's style.
I For one cant believe that people dont see a significant change in Massas entire demeanour and attitude from now and before his accident!!!!. Kimi is still one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless!!!!And of course Kimi is equal or better than Alonso and Alonso no way it's gonna do better at Ferrari than Kimi would have did.

Hope I cleared up for you.

Little detail, but didn’t you forget in your speculation Kimi being waaaaaaay faster than Fisichella in the same car?



#8577 nbhb

nbhb
  • Member

  • 903 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:05

Little detail, but didn’t you forget in your speculation Kimi being waaaaaaay faster than Fisichella in the same car?

Which it means that Ferrari were like 3 sec slower than Force India? Let's be honest: Fisichela couldn't adapt to that Ferrari. Like Badoer too.

Edited by nbhb, 24 May 2011 - 10:05.


#8578 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,201 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:10

Which it means that Ferrari were like 3 sec slower than Force India? Let's be honest: Fisichela couldn't adapt to that Ferrari. Like Badoer too.


Let me get this right. So you can use Fisichella as a benchmark not looking to anything else if the result coming from that comparison is the one you want. If the comparison doesn't come out as you want it to be, then other reasons can be taken into consideration so you can take Fisichella out of the equation. Right?



#8579 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:12

Let me get this right. So you can use Fisichella as a benchmark not looking to anything else if the result coming from that comparison is the one you want. If the comparison doesn't come out as you want it to be, then other reasons can be taken into consideration so you can take Fisichella out of the equation. Right?


Fisichella joined the team mid season with no testing, and a few months from retirement. Do you really think he is a valid benchmark?

Advertisement

#8580 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,201 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:19

Fisichella joined the team mid season with no testing, and a few months from retirement. Do you really think he is a valid benchmark?

And do you think that Fisichella can be used as a valid benchmark for a young driver that had not driven F1 races the previous season?

What I'm trying to point out is that comparing driver A to B, B to C and C to D to get a comparison of driver A to D doesn't work.

There was even somebody in this forum who could prove using that kind of reasoning that Trulli is the best F1 driver. Oh man! where's that post?

#8581 nbhb

nbhb
  • Member

  • 903 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:21

Let me get this right. So you can use Fisichella as a benchmark not looking to anything else if the result coming from that comparison is the one you want. If the comparison doesn't come out as you want it to be, then other reasons can be taken into consideration so you can take Fisichella out of the equation. Right?

I used Fisichella as a benchmark when he was teammate with someone form testing to the end of the year, similar conditions. Not in the last 4 races of the season when he needed to adapt to a car handful to drive. Do you believe Ferrari was 3 sec slower than Force India?

#8582 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,201 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:24

I used Fisichella as a benchmark when he was teammate with someone form testing to the end of the year, similar conditions. Not in the last 4 races of the season when he needed to adapt to a car handful to drive. Do you believe Ferrari was 3 sec slower than Force India?

Just take a look to the post above this last one of yours.

#8583 nbhb

nbhb
  • Member

  • 903 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:26

And do you think that Fisichella can be used as a valid benchmark for a young driver that had not driven F1 races the previous season?

What I'm trying to point out is that comparing driver A to B, B to C and C to D to get a comparison of driver A to D doesn't work.

There was even somebody in this forum who could prove using that kind of reasoning that Trulli is the best F1 driver. Oh man! where's that post?


Ohh please I'm eager to see it. I hope is not based on the fact that he beat Alonso on 2004 because it will be easy for me to prove it wrong. We laso have 2003.

Edited by nbhb, 24 May 2011 - 10:26.


#8584 nbhb

nbhb
  • Member

  • 903 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:29

Just take a look to the post above this last one of yours.

I'm asking you again. Do you believe Force India was 3 sec faster than Ferrari?

#8585 kurski

kurski
  • Member

  • 263 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:30

Let's be honest: Fisichela couldn't adapt to that Ferrari. Like Badoer too.


Fisichella drove Spa 2009 real amateurish when you drove a pile and came in second. Make sense of this in that the evaluation of drivers. Ferrari may not be easy to learn, but Fisichella met realistic expectations, which reached Q2, and nearly drove the points. This result was what I expected at that time. Luca Badoer decision to drive a Ferrari, it was a bad decision and it did not consider Marc Gene who thought that he would be Raikkonen's team mate.

#8586 Outsider

Outsider
  • Member

  • 495 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:32

I used Fisichella as a benchmark when he was teammate with someone form testing to the end of the year, similar conditions. Not in the last 4 races of the season when he needed to adapt to a car handful to drive. Do you believe Ferrari was 3 sec slower than Force India?

not only Fisichella needed to adapt to that car, he needed to adapt to KERS aswell. 4 races is too short ammount of time if you consider that Kimi had it like for whole season + wintertests


#8587 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:35

And do you think that Fisichella can be used as a valid benchmark for a young driver that had not driven F1 races the previous season?

What I'm trying to point out is that comparing driver A to B, B to C and C to D to get a comparison of driver A to D doesn't work.

There was even somebody in this forum who could prove using that kind of reasoning that Trulli is the best F1 driver. Oh man! where's that post?



How doesn't it work when it has been proven correct?

#8588 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,201 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:39

Ohh please I'm eager to see it. I hope is not based on the fact that he beat Alonso on 2004 because it will be easy for me to prove it wrong. We laso have 2003.

I don’t even remember in which thread it was, it could even be this one, my memory is usually quite fish-like.

The point of the guy (I do remember that) was not to prove that Trulli is the best out there, but to prove that that comparison system doesn’t work.

Of course you can find reasons to explain why Trulli got more points than Alonso. Other people will tell you that your reasons are not valid and they will have arguments as reasonable as yours. You say that you cannot compare Kimi and Fisichella in 2009 because Fisichella was not used to the car, but you do compare Fisichella and Massa in 2004 even if Fisichella had been racing in 2003 and Massa not.

You see what I mean? What I’m trying to say is that the “comparing driver A to B, B to C and C to D to get a comparison of driver A to D method” is not scientifically valid; it would never go through a peer-view review and get a green light.


#8589 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,201 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:40

How doesn't it work when it has been proven correct?

Sorry?

#8590 keeppushingurep1

keeppushingurep1
  • Member

  • 185 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:41

same people that last season was saying that alonso needed team orders to get past massa in monza, now they are saying that massa is badly injuread and scared

Same people that was saying massa was going to beat aloonso, after barhain quali

#8591 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:42

Sorry?


As nbhb detailed. Fisichella was faster than Massa, Alonso was faster than Fisichella which should have meant Alonso would be easily faster than Massa, which is actually true, so why would you be disputing the method that proved to be correct?

#8592 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:49

I don’t even remember in which thread it was, it could even be this one, my memory is usually quite fish-like.

The point of the guy (I do remember that) was not to prove that Trulli is the best out there, but to prove that that comparison system doesn’t work.

Of course you can find reasons to explain why Trulli got more points than Alonso. Other people will tell you that your reasons are not valid and they will have arguments as reasonable as yours. You say that you cannot compare Kimi and Fisichella in 2009 because Fisichella was not used to the car, but you do compare Fisichella and Massa in 2004 even if Fisichella had been racing in 2003 and Massa not.

You see what I mean? What I’m trying to say is that the “comparing driver A to B, B to C and C to D to get a comparison of driver A to D method” is not scientifically valid; it would never go through a peer-view review and get a green light.



Points is a poor measure. In 2007 Coulthard got more points than Webber but was in reality blown away. If you use the wrong measure you will obviously get the wrong conclusions.

The Fisichella situation you bring up is not comparable. Massa was a test driver for Ferrari in 2003, so that is not comparable to the mt everest Fisichella faced in 2009.

#8593 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,201 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:50

As nbhb detailed. Fisichella was faster than Massa, Alonso was faster than Fisichella which should have meant Alonso would be easily faster than Massa, which is actually true, so why would you be disputing the method that proved to be correct?

So then we all agree Hamilton is the fastest one since he was faster than Alonso during his rookie year?

Before somebody jumps to my jugular: I'm not saying Hamilton is faster than Alonso, I'm not saying Kimi is faster than Alonso, I'm not saying Alonso is faster than Hamilton and I'm not saying Alonso is faster than Kimi. And I'm not denying Alonso is driving faster than Massa at the moment.

#8594 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:55

So then we all agree Hamilton is the fastest one since he was faster than Alonso during his rookie year?

Before somebody jumps to my jugular: I'm not saying Hamilton is faster than Alonso, I'm not saying Kimi is faster than Alonso, I'm not saying Alonso is faster than Hamilton and I'm not saying Alonso is faster than Kimi. And I'm not denying Alonso is driving faster than Massa at the moment.



That depends on whether he really was faster or whether you are just trying to make a false point.

#8595 yr

yr
  • Member

  • 5,900 posts
  • Joined: December 98

Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:57

As nbhb detailed. Fisichella was faster than Massa, Alonso was faster than Fisichella which should have meant Alonso would be easily faster than Massa, which is actually true, so why would you be disputing the method that proved to be correct?


Also, as a team mate Kovalainen was easily faster than Fisi, is faster than Trulli (even by bigger margin than Alonso ever was) but was slower than Hamilton. Based on that Hamilton is easily faster/better than Alonso, which is actually true as he was already matching/beating Fernando in his rookie year and has of course get better after gaining some experience.

That is, if you believe you can always count team mate cross comparasion gives us the whole truth.

#8596 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,201 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 11:00

Points is a poor measure. In 2007 Coulthard got more points than Webber but was in reality blown away. If you use the wrong measure you will obviously get the wrong conclusions.

The Fisichella situation you bring up is not comparable. Massa was a test driver for Ferrari in 2003, so that is not comparable to the mt everest Fisichella faced in 2009.

Of course points is a poor measure, it always is. Because it doesn't take into consideration many other things and circunstances: mechanical problems, bad luck with safety cars, bad pit-stops, Hamilton driving into your rear, Nakajima taking you out in Barcelona (yes, sh*t also happens to Alonso).

And I'm not saying that Fisichella-Räikkonen comparison is valid. You can see that the little practice Fisichella had with the F60 made it very difficult for him to get grip of that terrible car, even if he had been actively racing the whole year, but you consider that you can compare a young driver that has not raced the previous year with somebody at his peak and that had raced the previous year? Sorry, but that's double standards (no intention to be rude, I don't find other words).


#8597 zeph

zeph
  • Member

  • 765 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 24 May 2011 - 11:02

That is, if you believe you can always count team mate cross comparasion gives us the whole truth.


Obviously not. Such comparisons are about as accurate as end-of-the-world predictions.

#8598 rommel

rommel
  • Member

  • 294 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 11:02

Also, as a team mate Kovalainen was easily faster than Fisi, is faster than Trulli (even by bigger margin than Alonso ever was) but was slower than Hamilton. Based on that Hamilton is easily faster/better than Alonso, which is actually true as he was already matching/beating Fernando in his rookie year and has of course get better after gaining some experience.

That is, if you believe you can always count team mate cross comparasion gives us the whole truth.


True, you cannot always count on every one. For example Trulli is near retirement and totally unmotivated driving a car seconds off the pace, so that is one comparision that I would not use. Kovalainen was not easily faster than Fisichella by the way.

Edited by rommel, 24 May 2011 - 11:03.


#8599 nbhb

nbhb
  • Member

  • 903 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 11:03

I don’t even remember in which thread it was, it could even be this one, my memory is usually quite fish-like.

It will not help your case.

The point of the guy (I do remember that) was not to prove that Trulli is the best out there, but to prove that that comparison system doesn’t work.

Of course you can find reasons to explain why Trulli got more points than Alonso. Other people will tell you that your reasons are not valid and they will have arguments as reasonable as yours. You say that you cannot compare Kimi and Fisichella in 2009 because Fisichella was not used to the car, but you do compare Fisichella and Massa in 2004 even if Fisichella had been racing in 2003 and Massa not.


Massa was not a rookie in 2004. And in my post I didn't compare drivers base by points, I compared by their performance through those seasons. Point can be misleading as sometimes one can have more bad luck or car failures than his teammate.
Later edit: Finally we agree with something.

You see what I mean? What I’m trying to say is that the “comparing driver A to B, B to C and C to D to get a comparison of driver A to D method” is not scientifically valid; it would never go through a peer-view review and get a green light.


Is not a scientifically valid but is much better than assuming that Kimi is still one of the worlds fastest drivers regardless!!!!

Edited by nbhb, 24 May 2011 - 11:20.


Advertisement

#8600 nbhb

nbhb
  • Member

  • 903 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 24 May 2011 - 11:07

So then we all agree Hamilton is the fastest one since he was faster than Alonso during his rookie year?
Before somebody jumps to my jugular: I'm not saying Hamilton is faster than Alonso, I'm not saying Kimi is faster than Alonso, I'm not saying Alonso is faster than Hamilton and I'm not saying Alonso is faster than Kimi. And I'm not denying Alonso is driving faster than Massa at the moment.

He was? I thought they where evenly matched in Qualifying and race pace also. Sometimes 1 slightly faster than another, sometimes equals.