72 replies to this topic

[kosmos]

Fernando Alonso AUTOSPORT's Rating: A+
Lewis Hamilton AUTOSPORT's Rating: A
Sebastian Vettel AUTOSPORT's Rating: A

Mark Webber AUTOSPORT's Rating: B+
Romain Grosjean AUTOSPORT's Rating: B+
Michael Schumacher AUTOSPORT's Rating: B
Nico Rosberg AUTOSPORT's Rating: B
Kimi Raikkonen AUTOSPORT's Rating: B-
Pastor Maldonado AUTOSPORT's Rating: B-
Sergio Perez AUTOSPORT's Rating: B-
Paul di Resta AUTOSPORT's Rating: B-
Nico Hulkenberg AUTOSPORT's Rating: B-
Kamui Kobayashi AUTOSPORT's Rating: C+
Heikki Kovalainen AUTOSPORT's Rating: C+
Jenson Button AUTOSPORT's Rating: C+
Daniel Ricciardo AUTOSPORT's Rating: C
Bruno Senna AUTOSPORT's Rating: C
Vitaly Petrov AUTOSPORT's Rating: C
Pedro de la Rosa AUTOSPORT's Rating: C
Narain Karthikeyan AUTOSPORT's Rating: C
Timo Glock AUTOSPORT's Rating: C
Charles Pic AUTOSPORT's Rating: C
Jean-Eric Vergne AUTOSPORT's Rating: C-
Felipe Massa AUTOSPORT's Rating: C-

To read the full article with explanations of the scores, go here.

Edited by kosmos, 05 July 2012 - 04:04.

[jcbc3]

Those are coarse grades and I don't have too many problems with them.But..

First one that struck me as weird, is Rosberg and Schumi getting the same score. I'll agree that Schumi has eventually raised his game approaching Rosberg, but if you take the whole half season into consideration Rosberg has absolutely murdered the old guy. IMO.

Next one is Kovalainen who I really don't rate highly, only getting a C+ for his efforts in the Caterham. I think that giving him and Button the same grade when Button has massively underperformed isn't quite right.

And lastly I think the lump of drivers with a C seems too big and undifferentiated. De La Rosa and Narain on the same score? Not really my impression of their respective performances.

my USD 0.02

[walkindude]

Schumi and Rosberg have been driving at the same level.I don't think anyone has murdered the other.The only murdering done was by the team on schumachers car.

[Raelene]

jcbc3 - luckily the USD0.02 isn't worth that much ;);)

not sure how Rosberg has murdered MSC

Edited by Raelene, 05 July 2012 - 07:36.

[jcbc3]

Rosberg:
1 win
1 pole
2 podium places
4.9 average gridposition
75 points

Schumacher:
0 wins
(1) pole
1 podium
8.2 average gridposition
17 points

Murdered, slaughtered.......

Edited by jcbc3, 05 July 2012 - 07:55.

[ivand911]

I think that only Alonso deserve A.

[ivand911]

Rosberg:
1 win
1 pole
2 podium places
4.9 average gridposition
75 points

Schumacher:
0 wins
(1) pole
1 podium
8.2 average gridposition
17 points

Murdered, slaughtered.......

Where is DNF part? 5:0. One of them finish 8 times and other 3 times? And one time he finish he started last(DRS) and other time he finish he was hit by RG.

Edited by ivand911, 05 July 2012 - 08:00.

[jcbc3]

I think that only Alonso deserve A.

So you would downgrade him?

I think they got that part of the grades right. Alonso slightly ahead of Lewis and Vettel

[jcbc3]

Where is DNF part? 5:0.

Barcelona e.g.?

[hello86]

IMO Kimi deserves a B. Either that or Schumi gets a B- and Grosjean a B.

[ivand911]

So you would downgrade him?

I think they got that part of the grades right. Alonso slightly ahead of Lewis and Vettel

I mean the only A, Lewis and Vettel B. This pluses and minuses? For me real difference is letters.

Barcelona? This makes your review right? Still 4:0. Even in Barcelona he could beat Nico. And we are not sure he could finish there. You know car problem?

Edited by ivand911, 05 July 2012 - 08:12.

[Don_Humpador]

I don't see what the FI drivers have done to earn those B's.

Oh, right. One of them is British and the other is some darling.

[GSiebert]

Unless the Marussia, HRT and Caterham drivers are responsible for building their crap cars, why would they deserve C ? Those ratings are bullshit, how do they know the mid grid drivers didn't get the most of the package at their disposal ?

Edited by GSiebert, 05 July 2012 - 08:28.

[TFLB]

Unless the Marussia, HRT and Caterham drivers are responsible for building their crap cars, why would they deserve C ? Those ratings are bullshit, how do they know the mid grid drivers didn't get the most of the package at their disposal ?

Because nobody ever bothers to take any notice of them.

[GSiebert]

I thought that was journalists' job to do that.

[TFLB]

I thought that was journalists' job to do that.

I know, it should be. But you can see it in Autosport's driver ratings for individual races as well - everything seems to be based on car performance.

[launcher]

Terribly unfair rating of Massa. If Alonso is doing such an amazing job, then Massa is being unfairly judged. He has not been the worst performer on the grid.

Edited by launcher, 05 July 2012 - 08:38.

[Kvothe]

A bit facetious but I don't see what Alonso has done to warrant him being placed higher then Lewis:

He crashed out in Aus qualifying, when he could have made it into Q3, and did so by putting a wheel on the grass.

Went wide in China losing several positions,

Failed to win in Spain despite getting ahead at the start and being in the faster car as the last stint showed.

Lost a potential win in Monaco by pitting too early,

made a mistake in Canada qualifying at the hairpin losing second place and opted for the wrong strategy

Underperformed in Valencia qualifying, and while his victory was superb it relied a lot upon his main competitors running into problems (Lewis' pit stop (like Malaysia) Vettel's retirement, and Grosjean's retirement (who would have put pressure on Alonso at the end, considering the problems Alonso had with his car))

Some are also pointing to the car, when quite clearly its one of the best cars now (look at Massa), and while before it certainly wasn't one of the best there's a strong argument that it wasn't as bad as it appeared especially when you factor in Alonso's performances, or the car's quali and race position at Barcelona. You can't outperform a car, and when the only other benchmark is someone who spins it on his own at turn 1 in Canada well......

Also for those wondering why I listed strategy mistakes as errors well:

http://www.fernandoalonso.com/en/

In a race, how many times to do you speak with your engineer?

In normal conditions, he speaks to me two times a lap, and I speak to him every two or three laps. The thing is that normal conditions don’t last long. We try to agree on race decisions, and that means that we have to speak a lot.



aj_rebollo

What percentage approximately of the decisions made in the race correspond to the engineer and how much to the driver? Thanks champion.

50/50. They’ve got all the data, the mathematics and have a plan in mind. Every three or four laps they fine-tune things depending on the driver’s sensations and the behaviour of the car, which can respond differently to the calculations… And they make decisions depending on this.

Edited by Kvothe, 05 July 2012 - 08:46.

[velgajski1]

Agree with those ratings in general except Schumacher Rosberg. Rosberg was much better than Schumacher.

[launcher]

A bit facetious but I don't see what Alonso has done to warrant him being placed higher then Lewis:

Probably because he's scored my points and wins with an inferior car.

[PoliFanAthic]

Surprisingly decent ratings. Don't know if Hamilton deserves an A rating, but they do look alright - except for some of those C ratings and how they are rated against each other.

[Raelene]

Rosberg:
1 win
1 pole
2 podium places
4.9 average gridposition
75 points

Schumacher:
0 wins
(1) pole
1 podium
8.2 average gridposition
17 points

Murdered, slaughtered.......

come on - unless you haven't watched any of the races, you would know that the points do not give the full story. He has driven very well this year - his car/team has been the failing point (and himself in 1 race ;))

[Kvothe]

Probably because he's scored my points and wins with an inferior car.

I see you don't want to address my points
Alonso may have had an inferior car in the early part of the season, but Lewis has had an inferior team imo for the whole season, apart from Canada not a race has gone by where they haven't cost him points and even in Canada there was a problem for the right rear at a critical time, for example both of Alonso's victories have come about after a mistake in the McLaren pits allowed him to get ahead of Lewis.

I would put Lewis and Alonso ahead of everyone else due to general performance, and Sebastian Vettel slightly behind, due in part to his inconsistency in qualifying, especially when Mark proved the car was good enough for the front row, his penalty for speeding under yellows and his collision with Karthikeyan.

[UPRC]

My lord, is there some rule that states that Autosport has to use unflattering pictures for about 50% of the grid? Some of those pictures definitely don't look like they should be there, especially Heikki's.

[aray]

A bit facetious but I don't see what Alonso has done to warrant him being placed higher then Lewis:

He crashed out in Aus qualifying, when he could have made it into Q3, and did so by putting a wheel on the grass.

he didn't lost anything despite the mistake..5th the best possible...A+ for finishing that car into that position(points are given on sunday in case you forgot)

unlike someone who lost his position 1 at the first corner and the race...

Went wide in China losing several positions,

maldo didn't give him the room...

Failed to win in Spain despite getting ahead at the start and being in the faster car as the last stint showed.

if anything last stint showed,then it is that william had the edge and both lotus underperformed during first half of the race..A+ for keeping 2nd place..

Lost a potential win in Monaco by pitting too early

won't argue with such dumb statement....A+ for covering hamilton

made a mistake in Canada qualifying at the hairpin losing second place and opted for the wrong strategy

yes,he made the mistake...yet he showed better judgement with letting other passed and damage limitation unlike someone in valencia who lost his podium to his ego....A+ for composed driving under pressure..

Underperformed in Valencia qualifying, and while his victory was superb it relied a lot upon his main competitors running into problems (Lewis' pit stop (like Malaysia) Vettel's retirement, and Grosjean's retirement (who would have put pressure on Alonso at the end, considering the problems Alonso had with his car))

you have to be there to utilize other's misfortune....brilliant drive through the middle of the grid..ballsy overtaking..true grit..A++

you missed malaysia,where there was again a A++ drive...lewis couldn't go fast even with open field...and he is called rain-master...

Some are also pointing to the car, when quite clearly its one of the best cars now (look at Massa), and while before it certainly wasn't one of the best there's a strong argument that it wasn't as bad as it appeared especially when you factor in Alonso's performances, or the car's quali and race position at Barcelona. You can't outperform a car, and when the only other benchmark is someone who spins it on his own at turn 1 in Canada well......

everybody know what kind of car ferrari started the season with...

i consider not only button,but lewis too under-performing that macca..in the race particularly....no way such a car which won the opening race with royal ways can lose it's edge..

Edited by aray, 05 July 2012 - 09:13.

[launcher]

I see you don't want to address my points

My post addressed them all in 1 sentence. I doubt even Lewis thinks the Ferrari has been better or as good as his car this season. Race pace has been similar, but Mclaren still have been better overall if you include qualifying. Even if you take into account pitstops and team work then at best I would say they have been equal. Ferrari slightly better team, Mclaren slightly better car.

[Kvothe]

he didn't lost anything despite the mistake..5th the best possible...A+ for finishing that car into that position(points are given on sunday in case you forgot)

unlike someone who lost his position 1 at the first corner and the race...

Lewis lost a position at the the start due to a clutch problem after the team told him to change settings despite feeling comfortable with his first getaway.

maldo didn't give him the room...

Maldonado gave him plenty of room, he chose to try and defend by going out on the marbles and paid the price which ultimately cost him several positions when he couldn't get past Maldonado at the end.

if anything last stint showed,then it is that william had the edge and both lotus underperformed during first half of the race..A+ for keeping 2nd place..

Don't quite know who you worked that out, Alonso lost grip in his tyres trying to overtake Pastor who he was all over the back of, and the Lotus strategy of pitting Kimi far too late meant Alonso was never in any real danger and Kimi was unlikely to pass had he gotten close.

won't argue with such dumb statement....A+ for covering hamilton

Yes but instead of merely beating a slower McLaren and getting a podium, he could have won the race,

yes,he made the mistake...yet he showed better judgement with letting other passed and damage limitation unlike someone in valencia who lost his podium to his ego....A+ for composed driving under pressure..

you have to be there to utilize other's misfortune....brilliant drive through the middle of the grid..ballsy overtaking..true grit..A++

you missed malaysia,where there was again a A++ drive...lewis couldn't go fast even with open field...and he is called rain-master...
[/b]

I'm glad you could acknowledge he made a mistake

No he lost his podium because a car chose to come off track and drive into the side of him, whether out of stupidity or rage, and anyway if he had seceded the place he wouldn't have had the podium either way

Malaysia was a good drive, and in the final stint Lewis was lapping at the same pace as Alonso so it would have been interesting to see if Alonso would have been able to overtake Lewis on track instead of through a McLaren pit stop error, but more important the race pace came down to who got heat in their tyres and was not based on driver or car performance.

everybody know what kind of car ferrari started the season with...

i consider not only button,but lewis too under-performing that macca..in the race particularly....no way such a car which won the opening race with royal ways can lose it's edge..

Also for those wondering why I listed strategy mistakes as errors well:

http://www.fernandoalonso.com/en/

The problem is no one knows, Massa isn't a reliable benchmark, and the field is so close its hard to apply the normal definition of a bad car, what we can say is that you don't have a chance of getting in to Q3 and a fifth place finish in Aus if your car is **** without their being multiple retirements up front.

The point I was trying to make is that their performance has been roughly equal, Alonso hasn't been that great in Qualifying but Lewis has been ultra consistent, Alonso has had some great races, with a suspect car for some parts of the season whereas Lewis has been the victim of a farcical amount of team errors. I don't think Lewis has underperformed and where he put that car in Valencia I thought would have been enough to prove that.

[Konsta]

Terribly unfair rating of Massa. If Alonso is doing such an amazing job, then Massa is being unfairly judged. He has not been the worst performer on the grid.

I totally disagree. Felipe has been just absolutely piss-poor. Yes, the car was not easy in the beginning of the season but how he managed to score so low or rather not at all is just odd. Slow and void of signs of racecraft - D would be generous.

[Konsta]

come on - unless you haven't watched any of the races, you would know that the points do not give the full story. He has driven very well this year - his car/team has been the failing point (and himself in 1 race ;))

Very well but if we agree that B+ reflects Michael's level then what has Nico done to warrant a worse rating?

[iotar]

Very short memory when it comes to Vettel and Button.
Vettel:
- Australia - out-qualified by his team-mate running without KERS, benefited from DNF from Schumacher, even more from timing of a safety car.
- Malaysia - out-qualified by team-mate, crashed with Kartikheyan
- China - didn't qualify for Q3, gained position after Grosjean's five seconds longer than usual pitstop, two stoppers being held behind helped too, average pace
- Monaco - another slow qualifying, 10th, very lucky with forced start on softs strategy, benefited from threat of rain when all the top drivers had to delay their stop and run bunched together afterwards
- Barcelona: again slower than Webber in qualifying, brain fart under yellow flags and average race

That's five out of eight races and all this in a very good car. Which is not enough, only when the car was clearly fastest or utterly dominant Vettel started driving well. Quite a pattern. Canada, which was only two races ago, is a good example. Fastest car in qualifying - Vettel on pole, when the car is comparable to Ferrari and McLaren, Vettel dropped from the lead to third.

Button: it's quite clear that's not entirely his fault, he looked v. good in the first three races, something happened afterwards and reliability in Canada didn't help.

Eight out of twenty is half?

[Kvothe]

My post addressed them all in 1 sentence. I doubt even Lewis thinks the Ferrari has been better or as good as his car this season. Race pace has been similar, but Mclaren still have been better overall if you include qualifying. Even if you take into account pitstops and team work then at best I would say they have been equal. Ferrari slightly better team, Mclaren slightly better car.

I wouldn't say it did, the Ferrari qualified third and finished second in Barcelona a track known as the benchmark for performance, it has since then been competing for every race win in Monaco, Canada, Valencia, and even Massa seems to be doing much better with it. Alonso hasn't had an inferior car for as long as Lewis has had an incompetent team,:

you've only got to look at the fuel error in spain which cost Lewis 23 positions,
the pit stop errors in Malaysia and Valencia which allowed the race winner to jump him,
the pit stop errors in Bahrain that kept losing him position (to Alonso),
the gearbox fault which cost him a front row start in China,
the change of clutch settings that lost him position to Button in oz and ultimate cost him the race
ect,

and in spite of all of that he was still leading the championship a race ago.

I think on this basis Lewis and Alonso could be considered to have gotten the most out of their respective car/teams performance. if you disagree fine but your reductionist one sentence answers are simply not good enough.

Edited by Kvothe, 05 July 2012 - 09:44.

[velgajski1]

Very short memory when it comes to Vettel and Button.
Vettel:
- Australia - out-qualified by his team-mate running without KERS, benefited from DNF from Schumacher, even more from timing of a safety car.
- Malaysia - out-qualified by team-mate, crashed with Kartikheyan
- China - didn't qualify for Q3, gained position after Grosjean's five seconds longer than usual pitstop, two stoppers being held behind helped too, average pace
- Monaco - another slow qualifying, 10th, very lucky with forced start on softs strategy, benefited from threat of rain when all the top drivers had to delay their stop and run bunched together afterwards
- Barcelona: again slower than Webber in qualifying, brain fart under yellow flags and average race

That's five out of eight races and all this in a very good car. Which is not enough, only when the car was clearly fastest or utterly dominant Vettel started driving well. Quite a pattern. Canada, which was only two races ago, is a good example. Fastest car in qualifying - Vettel on pole, when the car is comparable to Ferrari and McLaren, Vettel dropped from the lead to third.

Button: it's quite clear that's not entirely his fault, he looked v. good in the first three races, something happened afterwards and reliability in Canada didn't help.

Eight out of twenty is half?

Not sure that Button's problem is not his own problem. We saw it happen in 2009. too, altough to a lesser extent, and also in McLaren 2010. in some races. Thing is, with field being so close this season, what would back in the days be 3-4 places than car should objectively be placed is now 8-10 place lower.

[robefc]

I wouldn't say it did, the Ferrari qualified third and finished second in Barcelona a track known as the benchmark for performance, it has since then been competing for every race win in Monaco, Canada, Valencia, and even Massa seems to be doing much better with it. Alonso hasn't had an inferior car for as long as Lewis has had an incompetent team,:

you've only got to look at the fuel error in spain which cost Lewis 23 positions,
the pit stop errors in Malaysia and Valencia which allowed the race winner to jump him,
the pit stop errors in Bahrain that kept losing him position (to Alonso),
the gearbox fault which cost him a front row start in China,
the change of clutch settings that lost him position to Button in oz and ultimate cost him the race
ect,

and in spite of all of that he was still leading the championship a race ago.

I think on this basis Lewis and Alonso could be considered to have gotten the most out of their respective car/teams performance. if you disagree fine but your reductionist one sentence answers are simply not good enough.

I don't mind Fred getting a grade higher than lewis, they've both pretty much maximised their cars (as far as one can tell), fred had to fight with a poorer car (although more so in quali than race trim), lewis had to fight against team incompetence in almost every race. However, he was out performend in oz by jenson and could have played the long game in valencia.

[Kvothe]

I don't mind Fred getting a grade higher than lewis, they've both pretty much maximised their cars (as far as one can tell), fred had to fight with a poorer car (although more so in quali than race trim), lewis had to fight against team incompetence in almost every race. However, he was out performend in oz by jenson and could have played the long game in valencia.

Both can be disputed, however my point wasn't that Lewis has been flawless but that Alonso hasn't been, and on that basis I would rank them equal, especially when you factor in team/car performances.

[fatd]

Yeah I agree that Lewis should be on par with Alonso. He has been driving impressively this season, only for the team to find something to screw up each races. Alonso, while driving an inferior car, has a very solid team behind him every race. If not for McLaren's incompetence Lewis would be getting better results this year. From driver point of view they've shown equal performance IMO.

[flyer121]

Terribly unfair rating of Massa. If Alonso is doing such an amazing job, then Massa is being unfairly judged. He has not been the worst performer on the grid.

Exactly , if you think that Alonso is transcending the car (judging by the only A+) then probably Massa is not doing that bad.

Or if Massa is really driving like a granny and missing the potential of the car by a mile, then maybe Alonos is nt really outdriving the car.

While its theoritically possible to have Nando outdriving and MAssa missing it by large margins, its highly unlikely ...

[slmk]

Probably because he's scored my points and wins with an inferior car.

That's why you should read his entire post. I don't believe the Ferrari has been that bad. Up to Bahrain, yes, but we've had 4 GPs out of 8 where the car was a race win contender. And it actually was a race win contender in Malaysia (he actually won). So 5 out of 8 races it was a race winner (potentially).

[flyer121]

Very short memory when it comes to Vettel and Button.
Vettel:
- Australia - out-qualified by his team-mate running without KERS, benefited from DNF from Schumacher, even more from timing of a safety car.
- Malaysia - out-qualified by team-mate, crashed with Kartikheyan
- China - didn't qualify for Q3, gained position after Grosjean's five seconds longer than usual pitstop, two stoppers being held behind helped too, average pace
- Monaco - another slow qualifying, 10th, very lucky with forced start on softs strategy, benefited from threat of rain when all the top drivers had to delay their stop and run bunched together afterwards
- Barcelona: again slower than Webber in qualifying, brain fart under yellow flags and average race

That's five out of eight races and all this in a very good car. Which is not enough, only when the car was clearly fastest or utterly dominant Vettel started driving well. Quite a pattern. Canada, which was only two races ago, is a good example. Fastest car in qualifying - Vettel on pole, when the car is comparable to Ferrari and McLaren, Vettel dropped from the lead to third.

Button: it's quite clear that's not entirely his fault, he looked v. good in the first three races, something happened afterwards and reliability in Canada didn't help.

Eight out of twenty is half?

But it was Vettel's fault that the car wasnt to his liking? Correct !

Fact is - the difference is clear, while Seb had troubles starting the season - he still kept in touch of the leaders by hook or crook despite cucumbers and now the engine blow up. And now that he is looking handy - he is the odds on favorite for th etitle even after being 30 odd points away !!

Button on the other hand has even to get to the bopttom of the issue and has almost certainly lost any title chance in presumably the best Macca since 2008!

[Watkins74]

These lists are designed to get people fired up and I see it worked.

I find the order pretty accurate but I would drop everyone down a level. ex. Alonso A, Hamilton A-, Vettel A-, Webber B.

[undersquare]

Reading the text it's quite obvious that whatever the intro says Noble is rating the car+driver combos, for just one example...

"...Caterham's hopes of a step forward to establish itself in the midfield did not materialise. But he kept his chin up as the team worked on new parts, and sure enough a breakthrough in Valencia points to more encouraging times in the second half of the season"

He doesn't really account for car potential, mechanicals, team snafus or any of the noise that would actually separate driver performance from the points table. All a bit pointless really.

[Tsarwash]

Terribly unfair rating of Massa. If Alonso is doing such an amazing job, then Massa is being unfairly judged. He has not been the worst performer on the grid.

It really isn't. Quite a few races Massa has finished ten places behind Alonso.

[schubacca]

he didn't lost anything despite the mistake..5th the best possible...A+ for finishing that car into that position(points are given on sunday in case you forgot)

unlike someone who lost his position 1 at the first corner and the race...



maldo didn't give him the room...


if anything last stint showed,then it is that william had the edge and both lotus underperformed during first half of the race..A+ for keeping 2nd place..


won't argue with such dumb statement....A+ for covering hamilton





yes,he made the mistake...yet he showed better judgement with letting other passed and damage limitation unlike someone in valencia who lost his podium to his ego....A+ for composed driving under pressure..

you have to be there to utilize other's misfortune....brilliant drive through the middle of the grid..ballsy overtaking..true grit..A++

you missed malaysia,where there was again a A++ drive...lewis couldn't go fast even with open field...and he is called rain-master...



everybody know what kind of car ferrari started the season with...

i consider not only button,but lewis too under-performing that macca..in the race particularly....no way such a car which won the opening race with royal ways can lose it's edge..

Why dont you just give FA A++++++++++++++++++++++++++?


Hehehehe, that said....

FA is the best driver on the grid at the moment.

Edited by schubacca, 05 July 2012 - 13:36.

[aray]

Lewis lost a position at the the start due to a clutch problem after the team told him to change settings despite feeling comfortable with his first getaway.




Maldonado gave him plenty of room, he chose to try and defend by going out on the marbles and paid the price which ultimately cost him several positions when he couldn't get past Maldonado at the end.



Don't quite know who you worked that out, Alonso lost grip in his tyres trying to overtake Pastor who he was all over the back of, and the Lotus strategy of pitting Kimi far too late meant Alonso was never in any real danger and Kimi was unlikely to pass had he gotten close.



Yes but instead of merely beating a slower McLaren and getting a podium, he could have won the race,




I'm glad you could acknowledge he made a mistake

No he lost his podium because a car chose to come off track and drive into the side of him, whether out of stupidity or rage, and anyway if he had seceded the place he wouldn't have had the podium either way

Malaysia was a good drive, and in the final stint Lewis was lapping at the same pace as Alonso so it would have been interesting to see if Alonso would have been able to overtake Lewis on track instead of through a McLaren pit stop error, but more important the race pace came down to who got heat in their tyres and was not based on driver or car performance.



The problem is no one knows, Massa isn't a reliable benchmark, and the field is so close its hard to apply the normal definition of a bad car, what we can say is that you don't have a chance of getting in to Q3 and a fifth place finish in Aus if your car is **** without their being multiple retirements up front.

The point I was trying to make is that their performance has been roughly equal, Alonso hasn't been that great in Qualifying but Lewis has been ultra consistent, Alonso has had some great races, with a suspect car for some parts of the season whereas Lewis has been the victim of a farcical amount of team errors. I don't think Lewis has underperformed and where he put that car in Valencia I thought would have been enough to prove that.

a good part of your reply here are conjectures....mine were all facts and i stand by it...



i am ok with lewis given A+ too..he has had most misfortunes this season,yet he managed to get so many points.. .but instead of pointing why he should be given same rate as alonso,you chose to argue why alonso shouldn't be given such accolade....


problem with you is you are adamant to prove when alonso perform well it is due to the car(we are undervaluing ferrari),but lewis perform despite the car.....such mindset can't be argued against..

Edited by aray, 05 July 2012 - 13:52.

[Atreiu]

I dont get how Kimi gets a B- for adapting himself nearly instantly from retirement, despite missed test sessions, and being able to pick up podiums and strong points results basically every time out. At the same time time Schumacher and Rosberg have both had wild, unpredictable and inconstent GPs even ammong their own standards.

[Kvothe]

a good part of your reply here are conjectures....mine were all facts and i stand by it...



i am ok with lewis given A+ too..he has had most misfortunes this season,yet he managed to get so many points.. .but instead of pointing why he should be given same rate as alonso,you chose to argue why alonso shouldn't be given such accolade....


problem with you is you are adamant to prove when alonso perform well it is due to the car(we are undervaluing ferrari),but lewis perform despite the car.....such mindset can't be argued against..

Mine are conjectures, but comments such as yours when you said Lewis had underperformed are fact....ok

Haha whatever, I clearly pointed out that while Alonso was limited by the car, Lewis was limited by the team, so they've both performed irrespective of the limitations put in front of them and you've clearly missed the point of my posts, instead choosing to focus on the fact that I didn't think the Ferrari was the s**tbox it was made out to be.

Anyway I'm done.

[aray]

Mine are conjectures, but comments such as yours when you said Lewis had underperformed are fact....ok

Haha whatever, I clearly pointed out that while Alonso was limited by the car, Lewis was limited by the team, so they've both performed irrespective of the limitations put in front of them and you've clearly missed the point of my posts, instead choosing to focus on the fact that I didn't think the Ferrari was the s**tbox it was made out to be.

Anyway I'm done.

in case you are mistaken i didn't meant it for lewis...it was all about alonso..


but what i said about lewis was based on your logic...if finishing races in high position despite bad qualifying meant car was fast but driver underperformed,then why not doing great qualifying but comparative slow race pace should be consider driver's limitation too...?

i already told that lewis deserve as much as alonso,but you chose to dig at alonso as your main intention....

[hello86]

I dont get how Kimi gets a B- for adapting himself nearly instantly from retirement, despite missed test sessions, and being able to pick up podiums and strong points results basically every time out. At the same time time Schumacher and Rosberg have both had wild, unpredictable and inconstent GPs even ammong their own standards.

+1

And Button gets a C+ (just one mark worse)

[revlec]

Interesting thread, i hope it will not disappear after the next races..
I think Kovalainen grade is low..

[Kvothe]

in case you are mistaken i didn't meant it for lewis...it was all about alonso..

These are fact?

he didn't lost anything despite the mistake..5th the best possible...

So even if he had started further up it would have had no impact on his finishing position?

maldo didn't give him the room...

Err Maldonaldo had the inside and gave him plenty of room, Alonso tried to hang it around the outside and like Perez put it on the marbles losing him positions

if anything last stint showed,then it is that william had the edge and both lotus underperformed during first half of the race..A+ for keeping 2nd place..

Fact really?

Your replies were nothing but conjecture, but at least I wasn't labelling under the illusion that mine were facts written in stone.

but what i said about lewis was based on your logic...if finishing races in high position despite bad qualifying meant car was fast but driver underperformed,then why not doing great qualifying but comparative slow race pace should be consider driver's limitation too...?

i already told that lewis deserve as much as alonso,but you chose to dig at alonso as your main intention....

No your first post was this:

i consider not only button,but lewis too under-performing that macca..in the race particularly....no way such a car which won the opening race with royal ways can lose it's edge..

but now your point of view has conveniently changed.

Also my main intention wasn't to have a dig at Alonso it was to establish why I didn't think Alonso was above Lewis, if you can't see what everyone else managed to, well then I can't help you.

[flyer121]

I dont get how Kimi gets a B- for adapting himself nearly instantly from retirement, despite missed test sessions, and being able to pick up podiums and strong points results basically every time out. At the same time time Schumacher and Rosberg have both had wild, unpredictable and inconstent GPs even ammong their own standards.

I know what you are saying .... compared to Schumi he has done remarkably well on his return.
But its a case of relativity here ... People simply had more expectations from Kimi than Schumi ... and to be honest I would have liked a bit more too.

Its a good return but I was expecting a bit more than just chances of a win and certainly not envisaged that Kimi will be only 2 tenths faster than RoGro...
We may still see Kimi beat his teammate and get multiple wins !!