Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 5 votes

Can we finally put to bed the myth that the best drivers end up in the best cars?


  • Please log in to reply
99 replies to this topic

#51 HeadFirst

HeadFirst
  • Member

  • 693 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 30 November 2013 - 15:37

Top teams (based on results and ability to pay their bills) .... Red Bull, Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren.

Top drivers .... Vettel, Hamilton, Alonso, Raikkonen ...... then maybe Button (based on the WDC)

 

Seems to me the top drivers are on the top teams.



Advertisement

#52 Baddoer

Baddoer
  • Member

  • 1,505 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 30 November 2013 - 15:52

A myth quite often put forward by the media when defending the 'is the world champion really THAT good' etc...

 

Hulkenberg casing point. Lucky to even still have a drive

He is not the best. 



#53 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,545 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 30 November 2013 - 15:55

Well, the very best driver doesn't get automatically the very best car because such things aren't predictable.

 

Schumacher isn't the perfect example because he didn't go to Ferrari for having the best car. And Ferrari was the second best car, except 1996, after all.

 

And talking about Red Bull and Alonso. Alonso had the oppurtunity to drive for Red Bull but he picked Renault and later Ferrari.

 

The Ferrari wasn't the 2nd best car in 1996 or 1997.  Only by 1998 it was a clear 2nd best. 1999 was the same, or at least on par with McLaren. So from 1999-2000, it was on par. 2001, 2002, 2004, he had the best car. 2003 was a close fight, but he likely had the better car then. From 2001-2004, then 2005 well we know the tires were pretty bad. 2006? roughly equal,

 

Look at Eddie's results in 1997, that was not the 2nd best car...


Edited by George Costanza, 30 November 2013 - 15:55.


#54 FullThrottleF1

FullThrottleF1
  • Member

  • 515 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 30 November 2013 - 16:17

Who else is secretly hoping that Force India 'do a brawn' and  Hulkenberg ends up winning a couple of races? or even a championship?



#55 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 4,055 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 30 November 2013 - 16:29

 

 

Look at Eddie's results in 1997, that was not the 2nd best car...

I just checked this out, and amazingly when there was pace in the Ferrari in 1997, Irvine was behind Schumi in terms of finishing position, but not by a significant amount. The most I found was a 4th for Schumi, and a 12th for Irvine. Irvine had a lot more retirements.

 

Schumi was always a league above than Irvine, no question, one was a good driver, one was a great driver. But the 1997 Ferrari was probably the 2nd best car overall, Schumi was the best driver over the 1997 season though, no doubt.



#56 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 3,433 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 30 November 2013 - 16:30

Who else is secretly hoping that Force India 'do a brawn' and  Hulkenberg ends up winning a couple of races? or even a championship?

 

I am not sure if the current midfield teams have the budget to develop a class-of-the-field car even if they get "fortunate" with loopholes. Although Brawn was cash-strapped and fell behind in 2009 car development, the initial car with which they started the season was a development result of the huge Honda budget.



#57 rasul

rasul
  • Member

  • 955 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 30 November 2013 - 16:53

First of all, I don't agree that Hulk can be put into the "best drivers" category. Not yet. Yes, he's had a great season, but he wasn't exactly driving a truck and I believe he was very flattered by his rookie teammate. Many drivers show great potential in midfield cars and fail to deliver in top cars under the title pressure, so I'm not ready to consider him a top driver yet. Hulk had a chance to win a race last year and he blew it, so I have my doubts about his ability to deliver under pressure. Maldonado, whom everyone likes to ridicule on this forum, had his chance and he didn't blow it. Vettel, whose Monza 2008 win many people like to downplay, had his chance and didn't blow it, either. So I'll reserve my judgement on Hulk until I can see him in a top seat -- and I don't think he's entitled to a top seat. No one is.

 

The fact is, there were 4 open seats in 4 top teams this season(which is almost unheard of), and yet he was overlooked by McLaren, Red Bull, Ferrari and Lotus for one reason or another. Lotus' problems are obvious, but the other three teams were free to choose whoever they wished. And yet, McLaren and Red Bull clearly didn't consider him to be good enough to choose him over their junior drivers. Ferrari did consider him as their #2 driver instead of Massa, but didn't consider him--a young driver at his peak--a better prospect for the future than a 34-year old Kimi who will retire in a few years. Even Sauber turned him down. I would expect that if they thought he really was "outperforming the car," as many like to say, they would try to keep him, regardless of their financial problems--because WCC points mean money and if the driver was really making the difference, they would try to keep him. But they didn't and they would know better than anyone if Hulk was "outperforming" the car.

So 5 teams rejected him or didn't consider him at all for one reason or another. This honestly is quite baffling if he really is that good. Yes, all of them had their reasons, but if he were that good as he's hyped, I doubt he would be overlooked by all of them.

He is still quite young, though, and if he really is a top driver material, he will be in a top car, sooner or later.  

To sum it up, I think best drivers are in the best cars.  Hulk is good, but one of the best? We'll see.



#58 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 3,433 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 30 November 2013 - 19:38

 Even Sauber turned him down. I would expect that if they thought he really was "outperforming the car," as many like to say, they would try to keep him, regardless of their financial problems--because WCC points mean money and if the driver was really making the difference, they would try to keep him. But they didn't and they would know better than anyone if Hulk was "outperforming" the car.

 

I agree that Hulk isn't proven as a top driver yet, even if he leaves a strong impression, but this part isn't really right. We have been discussing it in the silly season thread that the finances paydrivers bring outweigh the advantage of possible higher WCC position a superior driver could bring. Maldonado's 30M $ could make a difference of 5-6 WCC positions, which no single great driver is capable of making it all up with his driving skills! As a result both Lotus and Sauber can't afford him and would rather have a paydriver with a big financial backing. Because a couple of potential WCC positions ain't worth it. Plus from WCC points they'd get the money at the end of the year, while for car development they need the money right now.



#59 paipa

paipa
  • Member

  • 324 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 30 November 2013 - 19:43

[...]

Regarding blown chances at a first win, you can add Perez there for 2012 Malaysia. Actually, the hype surrounding Hülkenberg now is not unlike to what Perez enjoyed a year ago, and Perez didn't lose 47-22 to a 40-year-old Barrichello. Whooping this Gutierrez guy is no bigger feat than, say, Rosberg destroying Nakajima and it's not like anyone considered Rosberg the second coming for that. I don't get the Hülkenberg mania. He was doing well with a Sauber on 2012 spec tyres, so what, Perez and Kobayashi were doing well too.


Edited by paipa, 30 November 2013 - 19:45.


Advertisement

#60 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 3,433 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 30 November 2013 - 19:45

It's not a myth. Great drivers TEND to be picked up by the better teams. They won't ALWAYS be picked up, and this effect is less pronounced as you go down the ladder as teams that aren't at the very top might not have the resources to pick drivers exclusively on merit, but over time most of the great ones tend to rise to most of the great teams. Always has been, always will be.

 

It's not a coincidence that Vettel, Alonso, Raikkonen, Hamilton, Rosberg and Button are all driving for Red Bull, Ferrari, Mercedes and McLaren.

 

I think this sums it up well. Usually great drivers end up in top cars, even if they have to wait for it to happen. Then again you can argue that Button and Rosberg weren't your top-top drivers, so it took them more time to naturally get into a top team. Of course someone like Coulthard got into a top team immediately, but this is the matter of fate and circumstance. Hulkenberg could yet get into a top team though, but as with Button and Rosberg it takes time.

 

Heidfeld of course didn't get into a top car, but a) he wasn't your top-top talent either, b) he actually DID get into quite promising teams (Williams-BMW, Sauber-BMW), just a shame for him that when he was there those teams weren't quite performing quite at the highest level. Like Alesi's fate.

 

Kubica - a) his career was too short, so he might have eventually ended up ina  top team too, b) BMW was a pretty good car in 2008. Kubica led the WDC in one point in the season.

 

Of course the definition of a top team is needed here. Like Kubica and others, you can argue that Schumacher had to wait before getting his "top drive" chance too, because Benetton in early 90s wasn't really rated as your ultimate top team. They only developed there. So Schumi got your top seat in his third full season, Alonso in his fourth full. Hulkenberg, by the way, has just had his third full season only. However, if you include those "up-and-coming" teams as top teams too, like Schumacher in 93 or Alonso in 03, both Heidfeld and Kubica have had top drives, sort of. After all, some people have been arguing that Lotus is a top team seat, which Hulk should have occupied.

 

Hulkenberg's current situation is definitely unlucky to an extent due to financial issues and unfavourable game on the driver markets, like junior programmes of teams of which Hulk is not part of. However, Hulkenberg's case hardly is a relevant extension to all drivers. Everyone has their own fate. Like someone said - an exception to the rule.


Edited by sopa, 30 November 2013 - 19:51.


#61 wepmob2000

wepmob2000
  • Member

  • 709 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 30 November 2013 - 22:19

In the case of Johnny Herbert his ultimate potential was greatly diminished as a result of the dreadful leg/foot injuries he sustained after his collision with Gregor Foitek at Brands Hatch in 1988.

 

It was nothing short of a minor miracle that Herbert was able to drive a F1 car competitively in subsequent years, without the Brands shunt he would have been far more effective and your dismissive comment 'wasn't that great' is in my opinion inappropriate and wrong.

 

Yes that's true, I should have qualified that comment. But he was still talked up considerably on the basis of his form at Lotus, and was subsequently disappointing when he did get good seats. Its not his fault, and the circumstances (particularly at Benetton) may have prevented him demonstrating his full potential, but the way the press talked him up.... just meant I expected more somehow......


Edited by wepmob2000, 30 November 2013 - 22:20.


#62 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Member

  • 7,470 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 30 November 2013 - 22:41

Did Herbert ever really get a top car apart from his short time at Benetton as Schumacher's teammate? Hard to impress under those circumstances.



#63 Force Ten

Force Ten
  • Member

  • 3,240 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 01 December 2013 - 00:03

Yes that's true, I should have qualified that comment. But he was still talked up considerably on the basis of his form at Lotus, and was subsequently disappointing when he did get good seats. Its not his fault, and the circumstances (particularly at Benetton) may have prevented him demonstrating his full potential, but the way the press talked him up.... just meant I expected more somehow......

 

Which EVER Schumacher teammate has done anything against him and what were the circumstances when somebody finally started to do anything against him and how were they different versus before? - Yeah I bet too, that it helps that your teammate is doing tyre tests for you on Friday and you have a spare car with wet setup every time you deem necessary.

 

Using Irvine as a benchmark of the car's real worth is frankly ridiculous as the only reason he was there to help facilitate Schumacher's strategies and doing tests for him. Yet the moment Schumacher broke his legs Irvine suddenly emerged almost every bit as worthy a title contender Michael had been just before.



#64 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,545 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 01 December 2013 - 00:04

I think this sums it up well. Usually great drivers end up in top cars, even if they have to wait for it to happen. Then again you can argue that Button and Rosberg weren't your top-top drivers, so it took them more time to naturally get into a top team. Of course someone like Coulthard got into a top team immediately, but this is the matter of fate and circumstance. Hulkenberg could yet get into a top team though, but as with Button and Rosberg it takes time.

 

Heidfeld of course didn't get into a top car, but a) he wasn't your top-top talent either, b) he actually DID get into quite promising teams (Williams-BMW, Sauber-BMW), just a shame for him that when he was there those teams weren't quite performing quite at the highest level. Like Alesi's fate.

 

Kubica - a) his career was too short, so he might have eventually ended up ina  top team too, b) BMW was a pretty good car in 2008. Kubica led the WDC in one point in the season.

 

Of course the definition of a top team is needed here. Like Kubica and others, you can argue that Schumacher had to wait before getting his "top drive" chance too, because Benetton in early 90s wasn't really rated as your ultimate top team. They only developed there. So Schumi got your top seat in his third full season, Alonso in his fourth full. Hulkenberg, by the way, has just had his third full season only. However, if you include those "up-and-coming" teams as top teams too, like Schumacher in 93 or Alonso in 03, both Heidfeld and Kubica have had top drives, sort of. After all, some people have been arguing that Lotus is a top team seat, which Hulk should have occupied.

 

Hulkenberg's current situation is definitely unlucky to an extent due to financial issues and unfavourable game on the driver markets, like junior programmes of teams of which Hulk is not part of. However, Hulkenberg's case hardly is a relevant extension to all drivers. Everyone has their own fate. Like someone said - an exception to the rule.

 

 

Jean Alesi is a good example. He was always at the wrong place at the wrong time. Yes, that was his "fate" if you will.



#65 wepmob2000

wepmob2000
  • Member

  • 709 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 01 December 2013 - 02:54

Jean Alesi is a good example. He was always at the wrong place at the wrong time. Yes, that was his "fate" if you will.

 

Jean Alesi had the opportunity to go to Williams, and would have been driving the FW-14B in 1992 instead of the Ferrari F-92 he instead found himself driving. I'm not sure if ultimately he was a "top" driver, but in terms of car control certainly one of the most talented.



#66 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 01 December 2013 - 02:55

A myth quite often put forward by the media when defending the 'is the world champion really THAT good' etc...

 

Hulkenberg casing point. Lucky to even still have a drive

I thought Hulkenberg was having a hard time getting a drive because of his size?

 

Otherwise I would say that the best drivers nearly always end up in the best rides, although I'm sure there are a lot of different factors which are considered when teams are asssessing who is the best driver.



#67 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,672 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 01 December 2013 - 15:08

There isn't a rule.  There's a tendency, the reasons for which are blindingly obvious.

That some people  don't seem to 'get' that is a little depressing.



#68 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 10,435 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 01 December 2013 - 19:17

Regarding blown chances at a first win, you can add Perez there for 2012 Malaysia. Actually, the hype surrounding Hülkenberg now is not unlike to what Perez enjoyed a year ago, and Perez didn't lose 47-22 to a 40-year-old Barrichello. Whooping this Gutierrez guy is no bigger feat than, say, Rosberg destroying Nakajima and it's not like anyone considered Rosberg the second coming for that. I don't get the Hülkenberg mania. He was doing well with a Sauber on 2012 spec tyres, so what, Perez and Kobayashi were doing well too.

 

I agree with your point about relative team-mates. Your comparison between Perez and Hulkenberg is perhaps a little weaker as you refer to results only. I also believe Perez blew it in Malaysia with the faster car, but we didn't see him actually race Alonso.

 

If you compare the way in which Perez and Hulkenberg achieved their results in '12 and '13 respectively, Hulkenberg is a clear winner. Perez at McLaren has badly exposed his racecraft, proving what we saw in Japan '12 was no fluke. Hulkenberg has instead demonstrated his racecraft by cleanly racing/keeping behind the likes of Alonso and Hamilton. This suggests his Brazil '12 error was more likely a fluke.



#69 Astro

Astro
  • Member

  • 364 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 02 December 2013 - 00:12

A myth quite often put forward by the media when defending the 'is the world champion really THAT good' etc...

 

Hulkenberg casing point. Lucky to even still have a drive

 

I don't see it as a myth. The best three drivers (Vettel, Alonso, Hamilton) are, or have been, in the best three teams. Top teams only seem interested in having one star. For the second driver, they usually look for someone who can help bringing WCC points (consistency) and developing the car (experience).

 

The only top team without a star driver is McLaren. I suppose they don't find anything particularly special among the current F1 drivers, so they have decided in favor of someone out of F1 who may bring the talent they seek to win championships and, if he delivers, the marketing benefits of having a young star.



#70 rhukkas

rhukkas
  • Member

  • 2,454 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 02 December 2013 - 00:16

I don't see it as a myth. The best three drivers (Vettel, Alonso, Hamilton) are, or have been, in the best three teams. Top teams only seem interested in having one star. For the second driver, they usually look for someone who can help bringing WCC points (consistency) and developing the car (experience).

 

The only top team without a star driver is McLaren. I suppose they don't find anything particularly special among the current F1 drivers, so they have decided in favor of someone out of F1 who may bring the talent they seek to win championships and, if he delivers, the marketing benefits of having a young star.

 

... and had Newey messed up with the RB5, would Vettel just be another Hulkenberg....

 

My point is, commentators often fall back on the old addage " the best drivers ususally end up int he best cars". of course, motorsport is expensive and it's 99% of the time the most wealthiest guys who can afford the good teams. but within F1, we've seen a guy who couldn't match a rookie jump up into arguably the second best car. 



#71 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,672 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 02 December 2013 - 00:23

... and had Newey messed up with the RB5, would Vettel just be another Hulkenberg....

 

My point is, commentators often fall back on the old addage " the best drivers ususally end up int he best cars". of course, motorsport is expensive and it's 99% of the time the most wealthiest guys who can afford the good teams. but within F1, we've seen a guy who couldn't match a rookie jump up into arguably the second best car. 

Maybe I've misread this - but are you talking about a 2 x wdc there?



#72 clown

clown
  • Member

  • 168 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 02 December 2013 - 00:52

A myth quite often put forward by the media when defending the 'is the world champion really THAT good' etc...

 

Hulkenberg casing point. Lucky to even still have a drive

 

So basically what you're is trying to say is "Maldonado to Lotus proves Vettel is shit" :rolleyes:
 

The fact that you have to rely on such ridiculous arguments to "prove" Vettel isn't good enough, shows that he is.


Edited by clown, 02 December 2013 - 00:53.


#73 Farhannn15

Farhannn15
  • Member

  • 746 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 02 December 2013 - 00:52

Maybe I've misread this - but are you talking about a 2 x wdc there?

Think the fella's talking about Maldonado 



#74 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,672 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 02 December 2013 - 00:58

Think the fella's talking about Maldonado 

He's posted elsewhere and ignored this, so I wouldn't be so sure.



#75 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 4,055 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 02 December 2013 - 01:31

So basically what you're is trying to say is "Maldonado to Lotus proves Vettel is shit" :rolleyes:
 

The fact that you have to rely on such ridiculous arguments to "prove" Vettel isn't good enough, shows that he is.

To be fair to the guy he said not "that good" and not outright shit.

 

Its a still not comparable to Pastor/Lotus. Seb earned his drive with that performance at Monza 2008, and consistency in the latter stages of 2008 (tidily beating his teammate and showing calculated/mature driving for a driver of his F1 experience.

 

Pastor got his Lotus drive due to money, the odd strong performance in 2012 and luck pretty much. 

 

Even then they are not comparable, as its yet to be seen if the Lotus will be a top car next year, Pastor could be buying into fools gold. Given there was speculation he wanted to go to Force India for 2014, it seems that himself (and others) do not think Lotus will do much in 2014.

 

Its already fact that RB was a top team in 2009 when Seb joined.



#76 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,672 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 02 December 2013 - 01:38


Its already fact that RB was a top team in 2009 when Seb joined.

They'd just finished 7th, 6th, 7th in the wcc for the 3 previous seasons when Seb joined. 



#77 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 4,055 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 02 December 2013 - 01:42

They'd just finished 7th, 6th, 7th in the wcc for the 3 previous seasons when Seb joined. 

I meant they became a top team in 2009, Seb joined when they were really expected to do something. 

 

It was no secret that RB stop developing early in 2008, the Toro Rosso drivers (and I am sure others) were competing for a viable opportunity. Seb got the call due to his performances, so a potential top driver ended up in a top drive.



#78 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,672 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 02 December 2013 - 01:49

Come on - RBR were not a top team when Seb (and MW) signed.  They obviously had great potential, but the top teams were Ferrari / Mclaren, with RBR nowhere.  Their record at that time (7,7,6,7 in the last 4 wcc's) was about equivalent to Force India / Sauber's now.



#79 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 4,055 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 02 December 2013 - 02:09

Come on - RBR were not a top team when Seb (and MW) signed.  They obviously had great potential, but the top teams were Ferrari / Mclaren, with RBR nowhere.  Their record at that time (7,7,6,7 in the last 4 wcc's) was about equivalent to Force India / Sauber's now.

Please read what I wrote.

 

I said they were not in 2008, 2009 was where there focus was. It was expected given their budget and resources that Seb was joining a top team for 2009, partially due to them getting a chance to catch up with new regulations.

 

There was not certainty, but it looked very promising, and Seb earned that drive. 



Advertisement

#80 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,672 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 02 December 2013 - 07:28


 

Please read what I wrote.

 

I said they were not in 2008, 2009 was where there focus was. It was expected given their budget and resources that Seb was joining a top team for 2009, partially due to them getting a chance to catch up with new regulations.

 

There was not certainty, but it looked very promising, and Seb earned that drive.

You said:

"Its already fact that RB was a top team in 2009 when Seb joined."

 

That is not fact.  It's not even 'fact' or FACT!!!


Edited by trogggy, 02 December 2013 - 07:29.


#81 krea

krea
  • Member

  • 714 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 02 December 2013 - 07:54

Well, yes. Red Bull became a top team with Vettel as best driver of the team together in 2009.

You can read old threads and articles by experts. No one expected that Red Bull would be this good so soon. Newey was a famous car designer but he won nothing for 10 years until Vettel.
There is no reason to rewrite history.

#82 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 3,433 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 02 December 2013 - 08:18

Well, yes. Red Bull became a top team with Vettel as best driver of the team together in 2009.

You can read old threads and articles by experts. No one expected that Red Bull would be this good so soon. Newey was a famous car designer but he won nothing for 10 years until Vettel.
There is no reason to rewrite history.

 

Yep. It sounds like someone saying right now Force India would be a top team next year, because there are regulations changes, they "look good" for nailing these and they have finished also 6th and 7th in WCC in recent years. Though Force India doesn't have anyone of Newey's caliber, back in 2008 we had 6 car manufacturers around, whose chances were rated higher.



#83 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 1,707 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 02 December 2013 - 08:18

You said:

"Its already fact that RB was a top team in 2009 when Seb joined."

 

That is not fact.  It's not even 'fact' or FACT!!!

When it comes to Vettel's cars the history has been rewritten so many times I can't keep up. The better he does the better his cars become... Even the 2008 Toro Rosso has become a WDC contender.

 

The fact is that top drivers make a good car seem like a top car and a top car a total dominator. Just look at the past two seasons and remove Fernando, Kimi and Sebastian from the equation and replace them with copies of Massa, Grosjean and Webber. 



#84 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 9,535 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 02 December 2013 - 09:14

A myth quite often put forward by the media when defending the 'is the world champion really THAT good' etc...

 

Hulkenberg casing point. Lucky to even still have a drive

 

Err... calling time a bit early aren't we? Hulkenberg has many years left to go, he could end up spending the better part of a decade in a top car at some point. 



#85 kenkip

kenkip
  • Member

  • 475 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 02 December 2013 - 11:16

Not read through,but I can think of two things.Either

  1. There are not enough top teams
  2. The best drivers are already in the top teams

I believe getting a top drive is much more than just talent (sad but true)how you carry yourself,self confidence and connections made in the paddock are immensely important.Using Lewis Hamilton as an example,there is the story where he walked up to Ron Dennis and categorically told him he wants a mclaren drive.I believe those little things also influence decisions by team principles on the quality of drivers they are getting.

If red-bull or maclaren thought that Nico Hulkenburg was an outstanding talent like Alonso and Hamilton,they would have snapped him up without batting an eyelid,but they didn't.That indicates maybe he isn't a top top driver we think he is.



#86 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 4,055 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 02 December 2013 - 14:10

Well, yes. Red Bull became a top team with Vettel as best driver of the team together in 2009.

You can read old threads and articles by experts. No one expected that Red Bull would be this good so soon. Newey was a famous car designer but he won nothing for 10 years until Vettel.
There is no reason to rewrite history.

 

The expectation was there, RB had big plans as they shut down development of their 2008 car, Newey said himself lately that the new regulations were their big chance to catch up with the pack. They had there shit together and were ambitious, a bit like how people expect Mercedes do well in 2014. A lot of insiders suspected McLaren and Ferrari had left it too late to develop, with the 2008 Championship running long.

 

People knew Honda/Brawn could be strong as they like RB spent a long while developing in 2008 to prepare for 2009.

 

Edit: Sorry Krea, read below, my mistake

 

 

You said:

"Its already fact that RB was a top team in 2009 when Seb joined."

 

That is not fact.  It's not even 'fact' or FACT!!!

I already corrected myself, I said I meant that they became a top team in 2009, please keep up.

 

The wheels were in motion when Seb joined, for reasons I stated above. 2009 was the year RB had there eye on for ages, even stopping their 2008 development to concentrate on it.

 

There was great expectation there for RB, and Seb did his job well in 2008 to be given opportunity to experience these potential expectations. 


Edited by sennafan24, 02 December 2013 - 14:43.


#87 trogggy

trogggy
  • Member

  • 7,672 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 02 December 2013 - 14:30

I already corrected myself, I said I meant that they became a top team in 2009, please keep up.

 

 

I need to keep up? :lol:

 

Okay then.

'I meant they became a top team in 2009, Seb joined when they were really expected to do something.'

 

I don't remember Red Bull being expected to challenge for the top spots in 2009 when Seb joined them.  Should be easy enough for you to post a few news stories from '08 talking of them in those terms though.  Assuming they exist.

 

As far as I remember Red Bull (and Brawn) being at the front was a fairly big surprise to most people.



#88 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 4,055 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 02 December 2013 - 14:42

I need to keep up? :lol:

 

Okay then.

'I meant they became a top team in 2009, Seb joined when they were really expected to do something.'

 

I don't remember Red Bull being expected to challenge for the top spots in 2009 when Seb joined them.  Should be easy enough for you to post a few news stories from '08 talking of them in those terms though.  Assuming they exist.

 

As far as I remember Red Bull (and Brawn) being at the front was a fairly big surprise to most people.

It was a basic grammar error on my part, I will admit

 

http://www.formula1....008/7/8098.html

 

Seb when joining RB "“As a driver your target is always to be with the most competitive team possible and, over the past couple of years, Red Bull Racing has proved it has great potential, so this is a good move for me.

 

Seb already being in the RB loop would have known about the lack of development for 2008, and the concentrated effort for 2009.

 

Okay I will concede I was surprised to read this

 

http://www.f1fanatic...rrari-the-rest/

 

"Red Bull had a fire when they tried out a KERS, and have pointed out that they project is of little value to them, not being a car manufactuter. Given their lesser degree of resources relative to the like of BMW and Toyota, they may struggle early in 2009. What they intend to do with Toro Rosso isn’t clear"

 

I suspect I might have been looking at it in hindsight, it makes sense when looking back that Red Bull/Vettel did very well. I swear I read at the time they were expected to do well, but I could be wrong. Apologies.

 

The article does say that Honda/Brawn had a chance to upset the applecart though.


Edited by sennafan24, 02 December 2013 - 14:43.


#89 Wanderer

Wanderer
  • Member

  • 292 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 02 December 2013 - 15:40

They weren't expected to be front runners in 2009 nor were they regarded as top team before that season. Many people thought BMW would be the better option for Vettel back then, some even went so far to say he should stay at STR.



#90 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 4,055 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 02 December 2013 - 15:47

They weren't expected to be front runners in 2009 nor were they regarded as top team before that season. Many people thought BMW would be the better option for Vettel back then, some even went so far to say he should stay at STR.

I never said they were regarded as a top team before that season (I made a grammar error), I was wrong that they were expected to do well, I think hindsight blinded me a bit.

 

BMW actually did what RB did and stop developing in 2008 to concentrate on their 2009 car, it backfired as we know. 



#91 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 3,433 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 02 December 2013 - 16:40

It takes some digging to look up old threads, but from what I remember before the new cars were unveiled the main title contenders were considered to be McLaren (Hamilton), Ferrari (both Massa and Raikkonen), BMW (especially Kubica) and possibly Renault (Alonso). Now that all those four teams had opted for KERS, which distracted their season notably, is another matter. But the point is those teams were pre-season favourites.

 

Red Bull was viewed as sort of "second tier" dark horses together with Toyota and Honda (before pullout), maybe Williams too in some eyes. Teams, "who could pull out a surprise if they manage to hit ground running with new regs." However, this doesn't make them favourites. It pretty much sounds like making Force India or McLaren the 2014 favourites based on Mercedes' engine superiority rumours.


Edited by sopa, 02 December 2013 - 16:42.


#92 kenkip

kenkip
  • Member

  • 475 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 03 December 2013 - 05:40

I never said they were regarded as a top team before that season (I made a grammar error), I was wrong that they were expected to do well, I think hindsight blinded me a bit.

 

BMW actually did what RB did and stop developing in 2008 to concentrate on their 2009 car, it backfired as we know. 

What exactly happened in 2009 to BMW sennafan24?I wasnt paying attention then realy to F1.



#93 boldhakka

boldhakka
  • Member

  • 2,802 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 03 December 2013 - 06:32

These exceptions prove the rule.

#94 PassWind

PassWind
  • Member

  • 5,031 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 03 December 2013 - 11:13

Hulkenberg's lack of a top drive illustrates the influence of engineering in  Formula One which is the great thing about F1, if they introduced driver weight parity it would not be an issue and everyone can have cake.



#95 wepmob2000

wepmob2000
  • Member

  • 709 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 03 December 2013 - 11:15

It takes some digging to look up old threads, but from what I remember before the new cars were unveiled the main title contenders were considered to be McLaren (Hamilton), Ferrari (both Massa and Raikkonen), BMW (especially Kubica) and possibly Renault (Alonso). Now that all those four teams had opted for KERS, which distracted their season notably, is another matter. But the point is those teams were pre-season favourites.

 

Red Bull was viewed as sort of "second tier" dark horses together with Toyota and Honda (before pullout), maybe Williams too in some eyes. Teams, "who could pull out a surprise if they manage to hit ground running with new regs." However, this doesn't make them favourites. It pretty much sounds like making Force India or McLaren the 2014 favourites based on Mercedes' engine superiority rumours.

 

Got it in a nutshell there..... the only reasons Red Bull registered with me were - 1) They had a very nice livery  2) I'd seen an excellent demo by the current Red Bull car, been in their garage, etc..... Apart from that I viewed them as another big budget 'meh' team in the traditions of BAR, Toyota, Jaguar, Honda, etc. Brawn didn't even register, except as a desperate measure to allow people to keep their jobs....



#96 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 4,055 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 03 December 2013 - 14:33

What exactly happened in 2009 to BMW sennafan24?I wasnt paying attention then realy to F1.

Well.

 

In 2008 they stopped developing their current car at certain points to concentrate on their 2009 effort, in retrospect it was counter productive, as their 2009 car flopped badly, as the likes of Brawn and RB surged.

 

The real kicker was that if BMW continued supporting the 2008 BMW they may have stood a better chance of winning the WDC as Kubica was in the running until very late in the year (even though BMW had long neglected that years car). It was a calculated gamble that backfired, for once a team should have thought short-term and not long-term. It was this error that contributed to BMW pulling out of F1 with the money they loss through the poor 2009 results. Jake Humphrey talks about in his book that he interviewed the head of BMW during the 2009 season and asked the straight question of "do you regret your choice" the head of BMW simply walked off, Humphrey felt that BMW knew right away they made a serious mistake.

 

People generally point these events to cite that Kubica was WDC material, and it is hard to argue against it given his performances in 2008 (Canada is the one people most remember) 


Edited by sennafan24, 03 December 2013 - 14:34.


#97 KavB

KavB
  • Member

  • 1,149 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 03 December 2013 - 15:02

They weren't expected to be front runners in 2009 nor were they regarded as top team before that season. Many people thought BMW would be the better option for Vettel back then, some even went so far to say he should stay at STR.

A lot of people thought he should stay at STR. People were claiming that Red Bull were suffering from the Renault engines and that STR were performing better because of their Ferrari engines. I remember Seb being asked if it was a big mistake going to Red Bull and if he wished to stay at Toro Rosso after he won in Monza.

 

Red Bull were definitely not expected to perform strongly in 2009 by the majority of people. Maybe the team had some indication they were onto a winner because Gehard Berger boldly predicted that Red Bull would finish in the top 3 in 2009. But back at the end of 2008, the general consensus was that BMW, McLaren and Ferrari would be fighting for the championship. And if I recall correctly during pre season testing, before Brawn had run their cars, it was expected that BMW, Toyota and Ferrari were going to fight for the championship.



#98 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 4,055 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 03 December 2013 - 15:06

 

Red Bull were definitely not expected to perform strongly in 2009 by the majority of people. Maybe the team had some indication they were onto a winner because Gehard Berger boldly predicted that Red Bull would finish in the top 3 in 2009. 

I think that is what I remembered, and I therefore assumed it was a more general opinion. But all in all Troggy above was right, and I was wrong.



#99 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Member

  • 7,470 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 December 2013 - 15:10

I remember my 2009 predictions were something like Toyota, BMW, Red Bull, Brawn after pre-season testing. I had a bet going with my friends. None of us got anything like the actual order although one of us correctly guessed Brawn would be top.



Advertisement

#100 Maico18

Maico18
  • New Member

  • 6 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 03 December 2013 - 15:16

Hülkenberg is a excellent driver, a potential world champion. His history shows that in the lower categories. The big problem is that many of these current teams need money, with the exception of the automakers. The only team outside that question that best financially is a McLaren, and not so well from what I heard. He is an excellent pilot, but it can happen to him what happened with Nick Heidfeld, who was another good pilot who defeated names like Raikkonen, Massa and Kubica, but never had the projection for a great team.