Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Button v Perez 2013 (part II)


  • Please log in to reply
249 replies to this topic

#51 SmokeScreen

SmokeScreen
  • Member

  • 185 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 22 November 2013 - 01:33

Nothing, I think. But at least the money thing is a plausible theory (that I don't believe, btw, I just have to admit it is plausible), while the other that plagues Buttons threads everywhere is Martins 'manlove' for Button...

 

interesting Mark Hughes take 

 

http://www1.skysport...me-back-to-bite



Advertisement

#52 coppilcus

coppilcus
  • Member

  • 347 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 22 November 2013 - 03:41

interesting Mark Hughes take

http://www1.skysport...me-back-to-bite

Mr BillBald could write a much more informed and documented article than mr Hughes...

Edited by coppilcus, 22 November 2013 - 03:42.


#53 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,538 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 22 November 2013 - 04:09

Qualy times are quantifiable. Raw speed isn't.

Sigh. The term raw speed is applicable to what you show during multiple tries in qualifying. 

I notice you sometimes (often?) try to complicate things a lot, and lay down your own criterias for what  should be the game of the discussion, that's fine but you're running the risk of standing on your own top spinning.



#54 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,856 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 22 November 2013 - 07:11

interesting Mark Hughes take 

 

http://www1.skysport...me-back-to-bite

Interesting article. So to summarise (bearing in mind the recent posts on this thread)..

 

1. The decision was nothing to do with money

2. Checo has matched Button in qualifying but lacked in the races

3. Both drivers have had erratic qualifying performances

4. Button hasn't been up to his usual standard this season

5. Checo is simply a good F1 driver, but not the exceptional talent McLaren was hoping for

 

It all seems plausible enough.

 

OT Mark Hughes' info about why Hamilton left is also quite illuminating i.e. he was all set to stay and was happy working with MW and the rest of the team until Ron intervened. 



#55 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,274 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 08:02

 

Interesting comment from Rob Wilson about why Jenson might suffer relatively with a bad car. From 2:40.



#56 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 08:53

It's quantifiable. As I said in my response to Buttoneer, I have kept tabs on qualifying comparisons for years, this year too, but the numbers are at home. I'm abroad on paternity leave.

 

Well you seem to have access to the internet, so you should have been able to find something like this:

 

Performance comparison Sergio Perez v Jenson Button Qualified ahead (SP) 9 (JB) 9 Average qualifying gap (SP) +0.255s
 

Not that I agree that qualifying stats = raw speed because cars are set up biased more or less towards race trim, but on that binary measurement (that you have stated you use) your point is not quantifiable. 


Edited by Rinehart, 22 November 2013 - 08:54.


#57 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 08:58

If there is a wrong decision to be made you can pretty much count on MW & McLaren's cast of characters to find it and make it.

 

Promoting a young starlet in Magnussen to a race drive seems to echo promoting Hamilton a few years ago.

 

Its not all McLarens fault for choosing Perez. Its partly Perez fault for not being better.



#58 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 09:02

Nothing, I think. But at least the money thing is a plausible theory (that I don't believe, btw, I just have to admit it is plausible), while the other that plagues Buttons threads everywhere is Martins 'manlove' for Button...

 

Even if Perez has lost all his financial backing, if he'd proven better than Button, McLaren would have been better off financially dropping Button (due to his salary).

Which ever way its cut, it looks 100% a performance decision to me. 



#59 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 09:05

Well more to the point they're looking to 2015.  2014 is going to be an interim year at McLaren, I think that's clear.  They want Button in the car because he's a very known quantity, knows the organization, the car, feedback loops and probably some peeps at Honda.  They've clearly seen enough of Perez to believe he's not going to be WDC in 2015, so given that next year is a bit of a write-off the risk of running Magnussen is less than it might otherwise be.  If it's a success then you've got Magunusen and Vettel/Alonso/Hamilton (best case) in 2015 - with a fall back of Magnussen / Button if Honda isn't promising to be a world beater.  If it fails you've got Button and Hamilton/Alonso/Vettel/next star in a car for 2015.

 

It terms of longer terms scenarios, I'm agree those options/possibilities are all on the map. However, for me they remain factors over and above the core reason as highlighted.



Advertisement

#60 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 09:10

interesting Mark Hughes take 

 

http://www1.skysport...me-back-to-bite

 

Echo's my views exactly.



#61 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,414 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 09:17

I also think McLaren know Jenson is capable of doing better than he has this season and that doesn't help Sergio either.



#62 selespeed

selespeed
  • Member

  • 1,059 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 22 November 2013 - 09:26

But for each of those three podiums there was a strong tyre-related reason. He'd been early onto the slicks in Malaysia, jumping him several places, and at Montreal and Monza his tyre strategy was different to everyone else's - and turned out to be right, aided by the Sauber's very gentle tyre usage.

 

it's just a spin bs by hughes...he was early on slicks in malayia which got him to second...but he had lewis hamilton behind him for the whole race...and he was pushing fernando alonso...after lap 5 would mark hughes put money on perez finishing second??

in monza cameras were folowing alonso which was potentialy fastest car in that race...and you could see in the background checo shadowing him...i think those were great performances...



#63 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,538 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 22 November 2013 - 09:35

Well you seem to have access to the internet, so you should have been able to find something like this:

 

Performance comparison Sergio Perez v Jenson Button Qualified ahead (SP) 9 (JB) 9 Average qualifying gap (SP) +0.255s
 

Not that I agree that qualifying stats = raw speed because cars are set up biased more or less towards race trim, but on that binary measurement (that you have stated you use) your point is not quantifiable. 

Well, I am away on paternity leave, so I have limited possibilities to sneak away to discuss here. 

...but, I calculated the results again, and got Perez slower by 0.035 secs on average, only comparing sessions both participated in. That's very respectable for someone who joined the team this year, and he's indeed been getting better/faster relative to Button in the second half. 

 

We compare the "raw speed" from the prevailing circumstances.



#64 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,274 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 09:49

Well, I am away on paternity leave, so I have limited possibilities to sneak away to discuss here. 

...but, I calculated the results again, and got Perez slower by 0.035 secs on average, only comparing sessions both participated in. That's very respectable for someone who joined the team this year, and he's indeed been getting better/faster relative to Button in the second half. 

 

We compare the "raw speed" from the prevailing circumstances.

But qualy this year has been more about tyre temps than raw pace, just look at Fred/Felipe or Kimi/Romain. 

 

JB is winning the race battle 13-6 or so despite having the majority of the misfortune and qualifying on equal terms on average.

 

Seems to show that JB has the advantage in pace.



#65 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,247 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 10:12

Well, I am away on paternity leave, so I have limited possibilities to sneak away to discuss here. 

...but, I calculated the results again, and got Perez slower by 0.035 secs on average, only comparing sessions both participated in. That's very respectable for someone who joined the team this year, and he's indeed been getting better/faster relative to Button in the second half. 

 

We compare the "raw speed" from the prevailing circumstances.

If you're claiming something is quantifiable then defining what it is and posting calculations to support your claim - which you say you've done - would seem the obvious thing to do.



#66 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 2,928 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 10:21

Ok so we have got it that McLaren made a hasty decision and didn't analyze their 2013 driver signing. But can we be sure now that they have got the Magnussen signing right? Hulkenberg said McLaren didn't even consider him - did McLaren get it right or did they "forget" to analyze something?



#67 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,628 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 22 November 2013 - 10:57

I've never been a fan of 'RawSpeed' calculations.  I much prefer to use TruePaceTM as my measurement of ultimate potential.  It's accurate to a couple of thousands instead of hundredths.



#68 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,414 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 11:43

Interesting comment from Rob Wilson about why Jenson might suffer relatively with a bad car. From 2:40.

I'm just not buying it.



#69 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,274 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 11:49

I'm just not buying it.

It might explain the peaks and troughs of 2012.



#70 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,555 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 22 November 2013 - 11:49

Sigh. The term raw speed is applicable to what you show during multiple tries in qualifying. 

I notice you sometimes (often?) try to complicate things a lot, and lay down your own criterias for what  should be the game of the discussion, that's fine but you're running the risk of standing on your own top spinning.

 

I'd argue I'm not introducing complication. F1 is an extremely complicated business to begin with and I've merely tried to point out some of the ways in which that's the case and to argue that there's no foolproof way of establishing, from laptime data alone, the comparative raw speed of two drivers even if they're racing in the same teams under, as near as possible, the same conditions, because you can't isolate what the driver puts in in terms of his pure natural ability and speed, from other facets of what the driver brings to the table in terms of his setup choices, racecraft, consistency etc, nor can you isolate it from outside influences. And even if you could, in principle, isolate raw speed from other facets of driving skill and ability and from outside influences, it wouldn't be of much relevance because, as Butoneer correctly pointed out, all that matters is what results a driver is able to get  from whatever equipment, ability, talent, opportunities etc he has at his disposal.

 

I would be perfectly happy, however, to let you bring in whatever laptime data you think is relevant to this thread without quibbling, if you were not so bold in your claims that it demonstrates, in quantifiable terms, the relative raw speed of Button and Perez. If you're now saying that all you mean by that is that it shows you who is quicker on average over multiple tries in qualifying then of course I readily accept that, if that's what you're measuring, then that's what the data tells us. But I don't accept that if Button is a shade slower on average over multiple tries in qualifying, then he is inherently slower than Perez, for the reasons I've mentioned.



#71 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,414 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 12:05

It might explain the peaks and troughs of 2012.

It might but.. it's just impossible to quantify. They make it sound like he spends more time in corners 'using' the car, and that if his car isn't working like he wants he suffers more than others because of this. The issue I have with this is that it's all relative. Sometimes the way people or 'pundits' portray driver's driving styles is as if one steers with his hands and the other with his feet. While especially lately with the way the Pirelli tires are working, I just don't believe there's much difference in how drivers go through corners. 

 

The key is still the car and how it's set up. The latter being what went wrong in 2012.



#72 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,538 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 22 November 2013 - 12:51

I've never been a fan of 'RawSpeed' calculations.  I much prefer to use TruePaceTM as my measurement of ultimate potential.  It's accurate to a couple of thousands instead of hundredths.

 

Smart. 

I'd argue I'm not introducing complication. (......)

I've always made my claim basing it on qualifying. What we have is what we have, and under those circumstances...... 

Very surprised to see Buttoneer liking your post btw. Blew me away.



#73 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,628 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 22 November 2013 - 12:57

Again with the discussion about me.  Seriously?  Redreni's post hits the mark completely while your arguments are specious and without foundation, fact, evidence or clear logical premise.  I couldn't even begin to work out what point you're trying to make, as I very clearly pointed out on the previous page.  I did not feel the need to respond directly to your follow up because it made the same mistakes of logic as the first and because Redreni did that for me.



#74 race addicted

race addicted
  • Member

  • 19,538 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 22 November 2013 - 12:59

:up:



#75 coppilcus

coppilcus
  • Member

  • 347 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 22 November 2013 - 14:25

Do your homework!

#76 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 14:38

I've never been a fan of 'RawSpeed' calculations.  I much prefer to use TruePaceTM as my measurement of ultimate potential.  It's accurate to a couple of thousands instead of hundredths.

 

Yes, and much better than "Natural Talent" which is measured using a crystal ball. Or a finger in the air if you don't have a crystal ball handy.



#77 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,409 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 22 November 2013 - 14:39

Yes, and much better than "Natural Talent" which is measured using a crystal ball. Or a finger in the air if you don't have a crystal ball handy.

Or observation.



#78 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 14:42

I'd argue I'm not introducing complication. 

 

You are not. 

But ignoring the fact that qualifying and racing require different performance criteria from a car and therefore compromises (due to parc ferme)  and not factoring this into examining raw pace in qualifying - I'd argue would be oversimplification. 



#79 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 14:44

Or observation.

 

100% accurately?



Advertisement

#80 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,409 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 22 November 2013 - 14:45

 

 

JB is winning the race battle 13-6 

That is 19 races, only 18 races completed as of today, think you have given JB a extra point, or maybe Sergio?



#81 Slackbladder

Slackbladder
  • Member

  • 1,168 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 November 2013 - 14:46

I also think McLaren know Jenson is capable of doing better than he has this season and that doesn't help Sergio either.

 

Jenson is a race winner, but needed a race winning car as well. Has he ever looked like a WDC contender though? (Obviously with Brawn yes, but that period of dominance was only half a season).

 

Ultimately how much of Jensons reputation is boosted by that one season? He's a good driver, no doubt, but solid more than brilliant.



#82 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 3,409 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 22 November 2013 - 14:47

100% accurately?

Probably not, but sometimes its really obvious.

 

You cannot measure to a science, but it can be obvious when a driver has a lot of natural skills, instead of skills they have worked for.

 

Keeping to the thread, I think Jenson despite recent form, has been decent overall this year, not as good as 2011, but still better than 2012 in terms of relative performance.


Edited by sennafan24, 22 November 2013 - 14:48.


#83 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,274 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 14:57

But qualy this year has been more about tyre temps than raw pace, just look at Fred/Felipe or Kimi/Romain. 

 

JB is winning the race battle 13-6 or so despite having the majority of the misfortune and qualifying on equal terms on average.

 

Seems to show that JB has the advantage in pace.

 

 

That is 19 races, only 18 races completed as of today, think you have given JB a extra point, or maybe Sergio?

You're right that's why I put "or so" because I was too lazy to look it up :)



#84 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,414 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:01

Jenson is a race winner, but needed a race winning car as well. Has he ever looked like a WDC contender though? (Obviously with Brawn yes, but that period of dominance was only half a season).

 

Ultimately how much of Jensons reputation is boosted by that one season? He's a good driver, no doubt, but solid more than brilliant.

No. I'm not talking about what it looked like for us, or about 2009.

 

I'm talking about what McLaren knows about him during 2010-2012. And that this year Jenson's performance has been lacking in comparison to it.



#85 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 1,017 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:01

Jenson is a race winner, but needed a race winning car as well. Has he ever looked like a WDC contender though? (Obviously with Brawn yes, but that period of dominance was only half a season).

 

Ultimately how much of Jensons reputation is boosted by that one season? He's a good driver, no doubt, but solid more than brilliant.

 

Standard non-expert opinion on JB, Next please. People like you think his career started in 2007.

 

Jenson isnt top draw like Alonso/Vettel, but hes far more than a simply 'solid'.



#86 Slackbladder

Slackbladder
  • Member

  • 1,168 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:09

Standard non-expert opinion on JB, Next please. People like you think his career started in 2007.

 

Jenson isnt top draw like Alonso/Vettel, but hes far more than a simply 'solid'.

 

I'm not really here to get into a slanging epeen match over who's an expert or a 'non-expert' thanks.

 

Jenson's a good driver, but he got lucky in 2009. He'll win GPs if the cars right for him. But he's not so far in front of Perez, and too often goes missing in a race if things aren't right.

 

Whitmarsh would and will swop him in a heartbeat for Alonso in 2015 if he can..



#87 petef1

petef1
  • Member

  • 56 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:09

Jenson is a race winner, but needed a race winning car as well. Has he ever looked like a WDC contender though? (Obviously with Brawn yes, but that period of dominance was only half a season).

 

Ultimately how much of Jensons reputation is boosted by that one season? He's a good driver, no doubt, but solid more than brilliant.

 

If it wasn't for the Ferrari being on another planet, I think Jenson showed all his wares on 2004 and finished easily best of the rest. And whilst his team mate Sato can hardly be stated as a true world class teammate, he smashed him that season 85 points to 34.

 

2006 again was another belter for Jenson; and at winning his maiden GP in 2006 in Hungary, he went on to outscore the field for the remaining races, whicih again shows when JB has a car to his liking, he's very hard to touch.



#88 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,414 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:28

Jenson is a race winner, but needed a race winning car as well.

 

(Obviously with Brawn yes, but that period of dominance was only half a season).

 

He's a good driver, no doubt, but solid more than brilliant.

 

Jenson's a good driver, but he got lucky in 2009.

 

He'll win GPs if the cars right for him. But he's not so far in front of Perez,

 

Your intentions are clear by now. Your point however...



#89 Dalton007

Dalton007
  • Member

  • 2,936 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:43

I'm not really here to get into a slanging epeen match over who's an expert or a 'non-expert' thanks.

 

Jenson's a good driver, but he got lucky in 2009. He'll win GPs if the cars right for him. But he's not so far in front of Perez, and too often goes missing in a race if things aren't right.

 

Whitmarsh would and will swop him in a heartbeat for Alonso in 2015 if he can..

 

If I had a choice of Alonso or Button, I'd choose Alonso. 

 

He didn't get lucky in 2009, he drove brilliantly in those first six races. What the hell is luck, anyway? 



#90 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:46

Probably not, but sometimes its really obvious.

 

 

So it seems to everyone, through their own eyes, but we do not all see the same do we.

Happy to continue this chat elsewhere.



#91 Fox1

Fox1
  • Member

  • 632 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:47

when JB has a car to his liking, he's very hard to touch.

I keep hearing this repeated by Jenson's most ardent supporters, but this is not a trait unique to Jenson.  We've seen what Pastor Maldonado (a "pay driver") can do with a "car to his liking" in Barcelona 2012. He put in a measured and very strong drive, and given similar circumstances; there are many other drivers on the grid (including Jenson) that could produce such a remarkable drive.

 

If the Mark Hughes article is given credence; it basically surmises that Jenson is NOT a good performance benchmark and McLaren know it....(if they didn't know that before). Unfortunately anyone that says that on here is in for a hard time.



#92 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:50

Jenson is a race winner, but needed a race winning car as well. Has he ever looked like a WDC contender though? (Obviously with Brawn yes, but that period of dominance was only half a season).

 

Ultimately how much of Jensons reputation is boosted by that one season? He's a good driver, no doubt, but solid more than brilliant.

Opinions like yours convince me that 2009 was actually harmful for his reputation. 



#93 Slackbladder

Slackbladder
  • Member

  • 1,168 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:52

If I had a choice of Alonso or Button, I'd choose Alonso. 

 

He didn't get lucky in 2009, he drove brilliantly in those first six races. What the hell is luck, anyway? 

 

Well the 'luck' would be having the 'double diffuser' advantage for half the season. Clearly by 'design' of course, but providing an sizeable advantage over the field.

 

But this is old ground.. lets move on.



#94 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,930 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 16:00

The funny thing is I haven't heard one person call Vettel a "solid" driver or his fortune "lucky" despite enjoying a clear car advantage for 4 years. 

Apparently if you enjoy it for 75 races rather than 5, it becomes legendary.  :cool:



#95 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,247 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 16:06

I keep hearing this repeated by Jenson's most ardent supporters, but this is not a trait unique to Jenson.  We've seen what Pastor Maldonado (a "pay driver") can do with a "car to his liking" in Barcelona 2012. He put in a measured and very strong drive, and given similar circumstances; there are many other drivers on the grid (including Jenson) that could produce such a remarkable drive.

 

 

 

If the Mark Hughes article is given credence; it basically surmises that Jenson is NOT a good performance benchmark and McLaren know it....(if they didn't know that before). Unfortunately anyone that says that on here is in for a hard time.

You're in for a hard time here if you just keep posting generalisations and dross, without taking the trouble to go into any specifics at all.

It's clear - at least to me - that Mclaren are looking for a better driver than JB.  That's what they hoped Perez was - it's what they hope Magnussen will be, it's what they believe Alonso already is.  Drivers better than JB, though, are not exactly thick on the ground.  If they can find / hire a better one then they will - that doesn't make Button rubbish.  Why is that such a difficult thing to understand?



#96 coppilcus

coppilcus
  • Member

  • 347 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 22 November 2013 - 16:06

The funny thing is I haven't heard one person call Vettel a "solid" driver or his fortune "lucky" despite enjoying a clear car advantage for 4 years. 
Apparently if you enjoy it for 75 races rather than 5, it becomes legendary.  :cool:


You should navigate a bit more through the forum and not just the button's threads...

#97 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 2,928 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 22 November 2013 - 16:10

Yes, and much better than "Natural Talent" which is measured using a crystal ball. Or a finger in the air if you don't have a crystal ball handy.

 

In the end all comes down to "gut feeling" calculations. Doesn't matter if we are talking about TruePace, RawPace (whatever these mean, btw!) or anything else, people choose their method based on their feeling they guess (!) is the most suitable. :)



#98 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,161 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 16:35

Well the 'luck' would be having the 'double diffuser' advantage for half the season. Clearly by 'design' of course, but providing an sizeable advantage over the field.

 

But this is old ground.. lets move on.

Yes but but so did Toyota and Williams at the beginning and the rest soon followed suit, however they had no KERs like Renault,McLaren and Ferrari. The also had an engine which did not fit and the rear suspension which was hitting the end-stops. There was no development and the car as they were making people redundant. The car at the end of the year was essentially the same as at the beginning of the year.

If you count that as "lucky" then you have to apply that to those teams throughout the ages that had Mass and J-Dampers,Specialty materials,Movable floors, "illegal" rear-wings, best engines, tailor made tyres and those rich enough to be able to have virtually infinite testing. (and those are just some which were made public).

 

The job of the driver is to get the job done, which is exactly what he did.


Edited by WitnessX, 22 November 2013 - 16:49.


#99 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,161 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 22 November 2013 - 16:47

If I had a choice of Alonso or Button, I'd choose Alonso. 

 

He didn't get lucky in 2009, he drove brilliantly in those first six races. What the hell is luck, anyway? 

Perhaps it would be wiser to wait until we see the capabilities of the drivers in the "new era"  before choosing anybody.


Edited by WitnessX, 22 November 2013 - 16:48.


Advertisement

#100 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,555 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 22 November 2013 - 16:58

You're in for a hard time here if you just keep posting generalisations and dross, without taking the trouble to go into any specifics at all.

It's clear - at least to me - that Mclaren are looking for a better driver than JB.  That's what they hoped Perez was - it's what they hope Magnussen will be, it's what they believe Alonso already is.  Drivers better than JB, though, are not exactly thick on the ground.  If they can find / hire a better one then they will - that doesn't make Button rubbish.  Why is that such a difficult thing to understand?

 

That's true although Mclaren obviously think Button is at least a reasonable benchmark against which to judge unproven talents like Perez and Magnussen otherwise it wouldn't be worth keeping him on at enormous expense when they could have let him go at the end of this season at no cost. If Button were some sort of average plodder, there would be no point paying him to drive when you could equally well find an average plodder with the backing of a major sponsor who would bring money to the team in exchange for the seat.