Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Political skills of drivers


  • Please log in to reply
144 replies to this topic

#51 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 01 August 2013 - 08:37

Don't know if there was any actual price to be paid but Alonso's 'I am fighting Newey rather than Vettel' comments score 10 out of 10 for plain idiocy. The thing is the comment had no impact on Vettel, or Newey but was very likely indeed to alienate Alonso from his team of engineers and mechanics. After all Alonso in so many words said they are all second rate at best.

You've voiced what I wanted to say many times already in here, but always at the end side-stepped the issue.

Advertisement

#52 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 01 August 2013 - 08:42

...The final one is Vettel & probably is the most dangerous until everyone figures him out which people are doing - Vettel is the babyface who plays the field as the innocent wonderkid with no agendas - however as time passes we're beginning to see Vettel showing his political edge - especially intra-team with Webber..who I feel he pummeled into the ground politically more than performance wise. Red Bull where happy to keep the equal status in the team but after Seb won that 1st world title (where sparks flew like crazy between them) he maneuvered himself into an unspoken number 1 at RBR, and mainly through winning Helmut Marko over through his babyface supertalent game. Now he's also pushing subtle hints out in the media regarding certain things - the most recent being who he'd rather have at Red Bull. I reckon Vettel is growing adept at playing the field politically & is growing to challenge Alonso...


A great display of vivid imagination in above.

#53 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 4,027 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 01 August 2013 - 08:42

Don't know if there was any actual price to be paid but Alonso's 'I am fighting Newey rather than Vettel' comments score 10 out of 10 for plain idiocy. The thing is the comment had no impact on Vettel, or Newey but was very likely indeed to alienate Alonso from his team of engineers and mechanics. After all Alonso in so many words said they are all second rate at best.


Why repeat an inaccurate quotation?

#54 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 09:00

Why repeat an inaccurate quotation?

He's made two statements. In the Spanish interview, he left Vettel out.

#55 Hans V

Hans V
  • Member

  • 366 posts
  • Joined: August 03

Posted 01 August 2013 - 09:43

How should we define the political skills of a racing driver? I’d say, the ability to get what you want – in terms of the best possible equipment, engineers etc. and preferably preferential treatment over your teammates. Now, who is good at this? Fangio, Lauda, Piquet, Prost (although he didn’t quite see Senna coming), Senna and Schumacher was great internal politicians. Nowadays, as many has mentioned Alonoso, Vettel (with good help from mentor Marko) and Button. But this ability may come at a price. I’d believe the constant nagging and bickering wears an organization out over time. Many might prefer Kimi’s style, let the driving – and precise feedback, do the talking and thus make the team bend over backwards for him. So maybe the “non-political driver” is the best politician of them all?

Worst political drivers? Whining, unconvincing drivers like Di Resta and Ralf Schumacher.


#56 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 01 August 2013 - 10:07

If Alonso is such a great politician, how come that, despite being one of the two fastest drivers in F1, he hasn't won a title since 2006, has burnt his boats with two race-winning teams, and pissed off a third? He's turned gold into lead.

Not seen Nelson Piquet on here. Threw away an outside chance at the '82 title to cement a better go for '83 - and in doing so gained the undying loyalty of the BMW engineers whose turbo was being rubbished. Then got Honda on his side to such an extent that his team signed up the beyond-redemption Nakajima into a world championship-worthy seat. And still wangled a very decent Benetton drive after taking Lotus from winning races to DNQing.

#57 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 4,027 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 01 August 2013 - 10:07

He's made two statements. In the Spanish interview, he left Vettel out.


So Alonso uses Spanish when he is supposedly trying to destabilise Vettel?

#58 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 4,027 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 01 August 2013 - 10:12

If Alonso is such a great politician, how come that, despite being one of the two fastest drivers in F1, he hasn't won a title since 2006, has burnt his boats with two race-winning teams, and pissed off a third? He's turned gold into lead.


He lost two last race deciders in the last three years. Plenty of the great names have had the same thing happen (Schumacher, Prost etc). Also, as of now, McLaren are not a race winning team :).

Not seen Nelson Piquet on here. Threw away an outside chance at the '82 title to cement a better go for '83 - and in doing so gained the undying loyalty of the BMW engineers whose turbo was being rubbished. Then got Honda on his side to such an extent that his team signed up the beyond-redemption Nakajima into a world championship-worthy seat. And still wangled a very decent Benetton drive after taking Lotus from winning races to DNQing.


Lotus already had Nakajima on board, so perhaps that little bit of politicking should be credited to Senna.

#59 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 9,811 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 01 August 2013 - 10:38

I see why there's some credit to be given to Piquet in that sense, but he certainly wasn't perfect. He had a big chance to go to McLaren at some point (don't remember which season - I think it was shortly before they decided to hire Senna instead), and in Jo Ramirez's book it says he had a meeting with Ron Dennis and duly managed to rub him completely the off way by spending the whole time talking about money. So had he been a little more careful behind the scenes he might have landed himself in the car to beat for years and years to come, instead of a fading decadent Lotus and an occasional-race-winning-at-best Benetton.

That being said, he'd have to face Prost as a team-mate there.

Advertisement

#60 rasul

rasul
  • Member

  • 955 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 10:46

I see why there's some credit to be given to Piquet in that sense, but he certainly wasn't perfect. He had a big chance to go to McLaren at some point (don't remember which season - I think it was shortly before they decided to hire Senna instead), and in Jo Ramirez's book it says he had a meeting with Ron Dennis and duly managed to rub him completely the off way by spending the whole time talking about money. So had he been a little more careful behind the scenes he might have landed himself in the car to beat for years and years to come, instead of a fading decadent Lotus and an occasional-race-winning-at-best Benetton.

This reminds me of how Alonso could have ended up in Red Bull in 2009 instead of Vettel if he hadn't asked for too much money. He could have been 5xWDC now.

#61 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 11:07

I think Webber is one of the few straight shooters in F1 - very little politics in his make up. I feel he is quite honest about things.


Oh please. Enough with this circlejerk fantasy about the straight shooting blue colar australian lad.

Webber talks constantly and tries to influence public opinion. That is pretty close to the definition of a damn politician. And you are the definition of the victim of a demagogue politician. He says the things you want to hear so you think his is a "straight honest shooter".

And how exactly has Vettel done anything "political"?

You can accuse Vettel of being liked by the team better (and for good reason IMO) even getting more support. But that has nothing with "politics" from his part. Even the crazy Webber consipiracy theorists will tell you that Vettel is supposedly favoured due to being liked by HM better, not because he earned the favouring due to his political skills.



#62 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,690 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 01 August 2013 - 11:18

I don't know where that came from, but the general view within the team about Barrichello was downright scornful, and MS was AFAIK way more popular in Italy - and still is - than Woobens.


I guess I just imagined it.

#63 Kimbo

Kimbo
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 01 August 2013 - 11:39

Don't know if there was any actual price to be paid but Alonso's 'I am fighting Newey rather than Vettel' comments score 10 out of 10 for plain idiocy. The thing is the comment had no impact on Vettel, or Newey but was very likely indeed to alienate Alonso from his team of engineers and mechanics. After all Alonso in so many words said they are all second rate at best.


How do you know that?


#64 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 11:58

How do you know that?

It's fair to assume considering "more comments = more results".
Unless you assume it'd have a positive impact.

#65 maverick69

maverick69
  • Member

  • 4,822 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 01 August 2013 - 12:04

This is in public - in private they might all be steeped in politics up to their ears! :lol:

-Alonso is the consumate politicker - on every level. He manipulates whatever situation he can to his advantage and tries the same with people as well.
-Lewis likes to think he is a great politicker, but his attempts fail miserably (and that is a compliment).
-Raikkonen will toss a coin in the politic ring here and there, but for the most part stays out of it.
-Vettel is a formidable opponent when it comes to rebuking politics, he is a pro. But he doesn't do much of it himself. Hilarious that he is called political for being straight forward and honest in saying he prefers Kimi over Alonso for a teammate. Politics is disseminating or manipulative - that is not what was going on there.
-Button - he is a cool politicker, but only mildly so.
-Webber - he ranks just behind Alonso for politicking. He doesn't have the dastardly edge tho - he wouldn't stoop to the outrageous.
-Nico R - about the level of Kimi, just a tad.
-Perez - No idea.
-Massa - He has the backbone for it, but seems to give up before barely getting started at it. I think many things in life bring him joy and he finds it more fun to focus on those.
-Grosjean - He tries - but he has to earn the respect of the paddock before anyone will take his politicking seriously

And there are your 10 drivers in the top 5 cars. The others have little to do with politics at the moment.


:lol: How's that a compliment exactly?


#66 Kimbo

Kimbo
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 01 August 2013 - 12:08

It's fair to assume considering "more comments = more results".
Unless you assume it'd have a positive impact.


Results depend on many things, not just comments. There's no way to know whether it had an effect on Vettel, so claiming it didn't is pure conjecture. Case closed.

Edited by Kimbo, 01 August 2013 - 12:08.


#67 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 12:21

Results depend on many things, not just comments. There's no way to know whether it had an effect on Vettel, so claiming it didn't is pure conjecture. Case closed.

There's now way of knowing a lot of things. Pic and van der Garde might be the best drivers on the grid, severely limited by their cars. Yet no one is saying it is conjecture to claim they are not the best drivers. Why is that? Maybe because a lot of things point towards the oppposite?

#68 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 12:45

This reminds me of how Alonso could have ended up in Red Bull in 2009 instead of Vettel if he hadn't asked for too much money. He could have been 5xWDC now.


Or he could have alienated the RBR team, or maybe just one of the main players, such as Newey. Or perhaps he couldn't have helped develop the RBR as much as Vettel, or ???.

What RBR and Vettel have done is special, and IMO you couldn't just plug another driver into the seat and have him automatically emerge 3x WDC.

Edited by Winter98, 01 August 2013 - 12:48.


#69 rasul

rasul
  • Member

  • 955 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 12:58

Or he could have alienated the RBR team, or maybe just one of the main players, such as Newey. Or perhaps he couldn't have helped develop the RBR as much as Vettel, or ???.

What RBR and Vettel have done is special, and IMO you couldn't just plug another driver into the seat and have him automatically emerge 3x WDC.

That's definitely possible. I'm not saying that he would have automatically emerged 3xWDC; of course not. But I bet "what could have been" incredibly grates Alonso as he watches Vettel become a multiple world champion. And I bet Lewis's 2008 title grated him, too, because that title "could have been" his, as well. If I were him, I know it would grate me.

#70 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,153 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:06

Nice post. I think Prost could have hardly foreseen that Ron Dennis would fall in blind love with Senna (like he later did with Hakkinen and perhaps Hamilton). The choice McLaren had was between Senna and Piquet. I think Prost realised the huge influence Honda would have on the team's affairs and that they might be helping the other driver - both Senna and Piquet were Honda drivers already. Maybe he saw the old fox Piquet as the bigger threat in this situation and thus recommended Dennis to pick Senna. Ayrton had in my opinion underperformed in championship point terms in 1985-1987. What I mean is, Senna was very fast and the Lotus was a pretty good car especially in his hands but he wasted lots and lots of point scoring and winning opportunities those years, so Prost probably thought he was less capable than Piquet to challenge him over the lenght of a season. Which was actually not a bad guess looking at 1988 and 1989 championship points tables.


Ron and actually Frank Williams were both in love with Ayrton after that 1983 test. The seat at McLaren was pretty much Ayrton's when it opened up, and he was available. Stefan Johanssen driving for the team in 1987 was a bad choice as he was never going to be retained beyond that one season.

Senna did not under-perform during the Lotus years. If anything, he over-performed with the Lotus-Renault, and then Lotus-Honda cars. Keep in mind one of the big problems with the Lotus-Renaults was fuel consumption. Kind of hard to do better when your car runs out of fuel while you are in the lead - 1985 San Marino GP.

But regarding the topic...

I think Prost was the absolute best when it came to politics within F1 as he got the ear of Balestre. I believe as for team politics, Senna was the best as he could get the entire team working for him alone. Schumacher was also quite good at pulling the team in his direction too.

#71 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 1,143 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:06

We do not know much about their political skill, we just see attempts to play the media. A skillfull politician is usually skilled in playing the media, but it is not necessary true the other way around.

#72 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,153 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:07

If Alonso is such a great politician, how come that, despite being one of the two fastest drivers in F1, he hasn't won a title since 2006, has burnt his boats with two race-winning teams, and pissed off a third? He's turned gold into lead.

Not seen Nelson Piquet on here. Threw away an outside chance at the '82 title to cement a better go for '83 - and in doing so gained the undying loyalty of the BMW engineers whose turbo was being rubbished. Then got Honda on his side to such an extent that his team signed up the beyond-redemption Nakajima into a world championship-worthy seat. And still wangled a very decent Benetton drive after taking Lotus from winning races to DNQing.


Honda wanted Nakajima in the 2nd seat when they started supplying Lotus.

#73 Kimbo

Kimbo
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:09

There's now way of knowing a lot of things. Pic and van der Garde might be the best drivers on the grid, severely limited by their cars. Yet no one is saying it is conjecture to claim they are not the best drivers. Why is that? Maybe because a lot of things point towards the oppposite?


You're getting off topic mate. Judging driver ability is something completely different to knowing whether a comment had an effect on a driver. Stick to the topic rather than trying to bring up another argument and hitting that down.

There's no way to know whether those comments had an effect on Vettel and Newey. Case closed.

#74 William Hunt

William Hunt
  • Member

  • 3,404 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:20

Everything you said is what Senna wanted you to think of Prost ;).


You should read Nigel Mansell's biography to see what he says about Prost. Exact the same as what Senna was saying and exactly how most people view Prost.

And Prost used Ballestre (the FIA director in the '80s) to get an advantage over Senna. For example during the Japanese GP Prost got Ballestre so far that he moved the pole position to the dirty side of the track. Senna who was on pole was furious and claimed that the pole position should be on the clean side (logically) or that the polesitter had the chance to choose the position. There are many other examples like that.

Prost also used Renault to get a Williams seat for 1993, the seat that '92 title winner Nigel Mansell was occupying and that was a dominant car: a ticket to a title. At the same time that he managed to get Mansell's seat he made sure there was a clause in his contract that Senna could not sign for Williams as his teammate.

Prost was widely regarded as the most political driver in F1.


#75 chrisj

chrisj
  • Member

  • 600 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:27

Political skill versus your teammate is something all top drivers need to have, but outside of that, do any of them really have any political skills? Their attempts at mind games are mostly comical. Drivers are basically willing to sell their souls, run over their grandmother to get in a good seat. Team owners know this, so they hold all of the political power. Drivers basically do what they're told, because they can easily be replaced. In my lifetime, Pironi seems to have the most political skills. He was a big player in the '82 superlicence strike, wielded some influence with Balestre (helped by being French), and in spite of being thrashed by Villeneuve, still had influence with Ferrari management, which is no small feat.

#76 Aloisioitaly

Aloisioitaly
  • Member

  • 272 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:29

And Prost used Ballestre (the FIA director in the '80s) to get an advantage over Senna. For example during the Japanese GP Prost got Ballestre so far that he moved the pole position to the dirty side of the track. Senna who was on pole was furious and claimed that the pole position should be on the clean side (logically) or that the polesitter had the chance to choose the position. There are many other examples like that.


This should be moved directly in "greatest F1 myths" thread




#77 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:29

That's definitely possible. I'm not saying that he would have automatically emerged 3xWDC; of course not. But I bet "what could have been" incredibly grates Alonso as he watches Vettel become a multiple world champion. And I bet Lewis's 2008 title grated him, too, because that title "could have been" his, as well. If I were him, I know it would grate me.


Sorry, I misunderstood.

I agree with the above 100%

#78 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 3,358 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:44

A driver who is truly good at politics is never suspected of being involved in politics.


This is well said. And based on that Button is a good example. In this thread people say he is nice an non-political, but he went to lion's den (Hamilton's team) and turned it around in his favour. Coincidence? No.

Schumacher also. He wasn't as openly political as Prost or Alonso, but silently doing his business, building teams around him and winning everything.

Whoever said Webber is bad in politics is probably right. Same about Barrichello. They openly complain about being a no2 driver, which may help to get some sympathy from the media. But it certainly doesn't help them in their own teams nor in their career in general. Other teams don't take them so seriously too - "aha he is a number two driver. Well not good enough to lead our top team then."

#79 V3TT3L

V3TT3L
  • Member

  • 1,681 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:51

I see why there's some credit to be given to Piquet in that sense, but he certainly wasn't perfect. He had a big chance to go to McLaren at some point (don't remember which season - I think it was shortly before they decided to hire Senna instead), and in Jo Ramirez's book it says he had a meeting with Ron Dennis and duly managed to rub him completely the off way by spending the whole time talking about money. So had he been a little more careful behind the scenes he might have landed himself in the car to beat for years and years to come, instead of a fading decadent Lotus and an occasional-race-winning-at-best Benetton.

Piquet had a long standing rivalry with Ron Dennis, since their British F3 days.
Nelson raced the BP F3 w/ his own Team [Piquet Racing] and defeated MP4 in 1978.
MP4 won the following two years with Chico 'Banana' Serra and Stefan Johansson.

NP wrote latter in his bio that going to McLaren was never meant to be due to the emotional scars from that battle.


Advertisement

#80 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:51

Honda wanted Nakajima in the 2nd seat when they started supplying Lotus.

They also wanted him in the 2nd Williams seat...

#81 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 13:52

This is well said. And based on that Button is a good example. In this thread people say he is nice an non-political, but he went to lion's den (Hamilton's team) and turned it around in his favour. Coincidence? No.

Schumacher also. He wasn't as openly political as Prost or Alonso, but silently doing his business, building teams around him and winning everything.


I don't consider either of these to be political per se.

JB just seems like a really nice guy (OK, JB is my favourite driver, so maybe not... :p ), and MS put in the time and effort to earn the team's respect.

#82 Kimbo

Kimbo
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 01 August 2013 - 14:01

This is well said. And based on that Button is a good example. In this thread people say he is nice an non-political, but he went to lion's den (Hamilton's team) and turned it around in his favour. Coincidence? No.

Schumacher also. He wasn't as openly political as Prost or Alonso, but silently doing his business, building teams around him and winning everything.

Whoever said Webber is bad in politics is probably right. Same about Barrichello. They openly complain about being a no2 driver, which may help to get some sympathy from the media. But it certainly doesn't help them in their own teams nor in their career in general. Other teams don't take them so seriously too - "aha he is a number two driver. Well not good enough to lead our top team then."


Schumacher was notorious for things like playing mind games in the media and being friendly to backmarker drivers.


#83 motorhead

motorhead
  • Member

  • 934 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 01 August 2013 - 14:01

A driver who is truly good at politics is never suspected of being involved in politics.


This!

#84 Grundle

Grundle
  • Member

  • 721 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 August 2013 - 14:08

Was this thread created so we could declare something Alonso is the best at? We can say he's the most complete because his political skills are top notch, even though he just got outmanoeuvred by Horner.

#85 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,153 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 14:26

They also wanted him in the 2nd Williams seat...


For which season...?

#86 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 01 August 2013 - 15:10

For which season...?

1988, alongside Piquet. It was because Williams wouldn't dump Mansell that Honda dumped Williams. Piquet went with Honda, or vice versa.

#87 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,153 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 15:33

1988, alongside Piquet. It was because Williams wouldn't dump Mansell that Honda dumped Williams. Piquet went with Honda, or vice versa.


As I recall it, the loss of the Honda deal was down to what went on in the 1986 season, when Williams threw away the driver's title by not having Nelson as the number 1 driver. Honda was livid over that.

#88 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 01 August 2013 - 15:38

Some of it was also down to Frank Williams being in a wheelchair, the Honda bods found that very awkward. But Honda had a contract to supply Williams for 1988 and broke it so they could supply McLaren. The pretext was that Williams wouldn't take on Nakajima.

#89 Watkins74

Watkins74
  • Member

  • 5,814 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 August 2013 - 15:47

This should be moved directly in "greatest F1 myths" thread

:up:

#90 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,153 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 16:00

Some of it was also down to Frank Williams being in a wheelchair, the Honda bods found that very awkward. But Honda had a contract to supply Williams for 1988 and broke it so they could supply McLaren. The pretext was that Williams wouldn't take on Nakajima.


Oh yes, but regardless of whether or not Frank has that accident, he would have had trouble laying the law down on who was to be the number one driver.

Either way, Nakajima was next to Senna in '87 because Honda wanted him there, and Lotus/Peter Warr couldn't really be overly picky at that point.

#91 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 01 August 2013 - 16:10

You should read Nigel Mansell's biography to see what he says about Prost. Exact the same as what Senna was saying and exactly how most people view Prost.

And Prost used Ballestre (the FIA director in the '80s) to get an advantage over Senna. For example during the Japanese GP Prost got Ballestre so far that he moved the pole position to the dirty side of the track. Senna who was on pole was furious and claimed that the pole position should be on the clean side (logically) or that the polesitter had the chance to choose the position. There are many other examples like that.

Prost also used Renault to get a Williams seat for 1993, the seat that '92 title winner Nigel Mansell was occupying and that was a dominant car: a ticket to a title. At the same time that he managed to get Mansell's seat he made sure there was a clause in his contract that Senna could not sign for Williams as his teammate.

Prost was widely regarded as the most political driver in F1.

One day I do expect to read something similar how Vettel, flying over, got his political handle over Webber.

Edited by Sakae, 01 August 2013 - 16:11.


#92 RaikkonenZn

RaikkonenZn
  • Member

  • 151 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 16:37

A great display of vivid imagination in above.


Thanks, but really about 80% of this thread is conjecture based on what we THINK is going on in the background, and really the only valid stuff is the conclusions based on the things drivers\team principals have said directly to the press - or what Journos have documented about the background going ons in F1. Both people making claims that drivers use politics and drivers don't are just taking a guess really.

#93 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 1,932 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 01 August 2013 - 20:37

Enzo Ferrari, Max Mosley and Bernie Ecclestone were all racing drivers early on in their careers - and I'd back their political skills against any F1 driver of the last 60 years!

#94 d246

d246
  • Member

  • 571 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 01 August 2013 - 22:25

Enzo Ferrari, Max Mosley and Bernie Ecclestone were all racing drivers early on in their careers - and I'd back their political skills against any F1 driver of the last 60 years!



Funny.....I was about to name those three.

Might have chucked in JYS too.

#95 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,934 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 01 August 2013 - 22:27

You should read Nigel Mansell's biography to see what he says about Prost.


And yet they were quite pally until Prost joined Mansell's team and comprehensively whupped his ass. Can't have been superior talent. Must have been intra team politicking, preferential treatment etc. Dear old Nige :lol:

For example during the Japanese GP Prost got Ballestre so far that he moved the pole position to the dirty side of the track.


Senna wanted it moved, the request was refused. That's not quite the same thing!

Edited by E.B., 01 August 2013 - 22:29.


#96 f1motogp

f1motogp
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 02 August 2013 - 02:42




Alonso is the nr1 in using politics almost daily and everywhere but he isn't the most successful because it backfires on himself a lot.

Button is the most successful one, he dosn't use it as much as Alonso but he has much more success with his politics and he even invites journos to dinner.

Webber is also one of the most political drivers and is only second to Button.

Vettel didn't care a lot for the politics before but lately he has started to use it to his advantage.

Hamilton likes to play politics but he isn't that good though he is mostly worry and obsessed with his image in the media and likes to be seen as the best driver and likes to be compared to Senna.





#97 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 7,248 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 02 August 2013 - 03:09

:lol: How's that a compliment exactly?


Because I don't think Hamilton is naturally wired to be political (as his failing at it shows). I'm not into politics - I find it manipulative and generally unsportsmanlike. So, for me, it is brilliant that Hamilton is no good at it.

#98 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,342 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 02 August 2013 - 05:58

I don't see him as political at all. Just a nice, easy going guy. And that naturally gets you a lot of support from the team.


See that's howI see Webber as well.

#99 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,901 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 02 August 2013 - 06:37

Because I don't think Hamilton is naturally wired to be political (as his failing at it shows). I'm not into politics - I find it manipulative and generally unsportsmanlike. So, for me, it is brilliant that Hamilton is no good at it.

I agree, but I don't think it's through lack of effort on his part. All drivers have to be 'political' to a certain extent to get themselves the best environment (team support/car/...) that they can to show what they can do. No driver is non-political, however much we want to believe in the pureness of their spirits.

Advertisement

#100 SophieB

SophieB
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,424 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 02 August 2013 - 06:48

I agree, but I don't think it's through lack of effort on his part. All drivers have to be 'political' to a certain extent to get themselves the best environment (team support/car/...) that they can to show what they can do. No driver is non-political, however much we want to believe in the pureness of their spirits.


What are you (and borbon, I guess) counting as the efforts on his part?

In general, I think the word 'political' carries too much in the way of loaded emotional value judgments in the discussion to make grading the drivers on this one very easy. Or rather when we like a person, they have great inter-personal skills. When we are neutral on them, they are political. When we dislike them, they are manipulative.