262 replies to this topic

[1Devil1]

- Tires

- The Sauber of that year was faster than the 2011 red bull.

- Benefited from weather.

- Increased Gravity for all the other cars except for him.

- Perez were given 10 laps advantage start over the other cars.

 

Because yes Strategy hasn't helped Hulkenberg in the past and it only helps Sergio, and since strategy is not part of racing Sergio is worse than me driving a bag of chips, thats the only argument, its such a shame to see some people's only argument based on something everyone can read without seeing beyond that, very poor criteria.

 

I did not know that Perez got a podium in 2011, do you know more? 2012 was all about freak results in the beginning. Sauber benefited from it, because they had a car that suited that Pirellis nicely. Alonso even said: Schumacher would have one three races in that Sauber, and we are talking about that washed upped version 2.0. In fact that Sauber in combination with that tires was far better than any car Hulk ever drove, but we know your criteria, so go on   

[emmanuelrubi]

I did not know that Perez got a podium in 2011, do you know more? 2012 was all about freak results in the beginning. Sauber benefited from it, because they had a car that suited that Pirellis nicely. Alonso even said: Schumacher would have one three races in that Sauber, and we are talking about that washed upped version 2.0. In fact that Sauber in combination with that tires was far better than any car Hulk ever drove, but we know your criteria, so go on   

 

I was referring to the dominance of the 2011 Red bull, do you know more? But agree it was a pretty good damn car, but Perez get the most out of it i mean Koba get one podium but Perez 3, and even in the same car no one can explain why hulk being faster was beaten in Bahrain by Perez to get the podium.

Edited by emmanuelrubi, 11 December 2014 - 15:06.

[Dunc]

I agree that this thread is becoming dull so I'm going to make one final post on it then bugger off.  Hulk, as I've said before, is a good driver but he hasn't achieved all that much in his career compared to those of similar experience.  He's had 76 race starts so let's look at his achievements against those with around the same amount of experience:

 

Daniel Ricciardo - 69 race starts - eight podiums - three wins - 268 points - no poles.

Pastor Maldonado - 76 race starts - one podium - one win - 49 points - one pole.

Romain Grosjean - 64 race starts - nine podiums - no wins - 236 points - no poles.

Sergio Perez - 74 race starts - four podiums - no wins - no wins - 188 points - no poles.

Kamui Kobayashi - 76 race starts - one podium - no wins - 125 points - no poles.

Nico Hulkenburg - 76 race starts - no podiums - no wins - 188 points - one pole.

 

When you look at it this way he comes across as decidedly average.  Ricciardo has admittedly had an advantage over him and achieved his results entirely in this season's Red Bull but the others have not and they have all managed to get their less-than-the-best machinery on the podium at least once.  If you look at Perez in particular, over his entire career he has scored the same amount of points as Hulkenburg but has managed to take four podiums.  Hulkenburg would probably have managed a podium in Brazil 2012 had fate been different but asides from that I can't think of any other time when he has looked a dead cert for one only to be let down. 

 

So, to go back to the original question, no because Hulkenburg is not a driver who has done anything outstanding in mediocre machinery.  He is solid and a good points scorer but McLaren need a bit more than that.

[sopa]

These kind of analysis are always flawed, because they have all been driving different cars. Lotus 2012-13 was a very good car, like Sauber in 2012, or Red Bull in 2014 - no Hulkenberg car has been close to these.

 

It is like saying in 1997 that Mika Hakkinen is very average, because he hasn't won a race in almost 100 Grands Prix. And at that time he had worse statistics than his contemporaries Coulthard, Villeneuve or Frentzen, let alone Hill. Fast forward a few years, Hakkinen is a double champion and universally hailed as the strongest rival Schumacher had ever had (bar Senna).

 

E: I don't understand, why do anti-Hulkenberg brigade always come up with extremely random and unobjective "statistics" to portray that he is struggling to match even the likes of Grosjean, Maldonado or Perez. Let's take a look at driving skills, what is going on, let's take a look at context. And let's remember things, instead of being ignorant and saying "oh he has never impressed me, I don't remember anything of him; oh he never has done any overtaking moves". Oh, ignorance...

 

As I said, Hakkinen in 1997 was very average and never going to exceed Frentzen, Villeneuve, Coulthard, because due to "random statistical analysis all the proof was there." Oh well. Obviously, and then Button was a bad driver in 2008 as well - just a single race win, compared to Barrichello, Coulthard, Fisichella, et al all who had multiple wins. Fast forward a few years and Button is almost universally rated above them, because he finally got the car to get those statistics.

 

I have been following forum discussions for many years already. And all those things that people say about Hulkenberg sound very familiar to me. Those things were said about Rosberg in 2012 (no race win till that time), about Button and Webber in 2008, about Hakkinen in 1997 (ok no forums back then but you get the point), about Mansell in 1984. And so on, and so on. But people never learn, they keep making the same mistakes and keep "analysing" with flawed methodologies, and end up with false conclusions. Had Hulkenberg's career panned out slightly differently, and he had the fortune to race in Williams this year, he would have multiple podiums in his tally and would be hailed as a strong future contender just like Bottas now.

 

I don't think there are many people, who think Hulkenberg is a match to Hamilton/Alonso, so to be honest I am struggling to understand, what are the critics trying to prove actually?! He is not an all-time-legend or a great in making. He is just a very good driver, who in the right car can get the job done and results like many others have done given the opportunity. F1 has shown that results are very car dependent. Vettel is not as good as Hamilton and Alonso combined in terms of titles. Had Hulkenberg had the fortune to drive some great cars, his results could be up there with Button (2009) and Rosberg (2014), who both drove some great cars. Or like Barrichello/Coulthard racked up a fair amount of wins in top cars during many years.

Edited by sopa, 11 December 2014 - 21:49.

[Dunc]

Mika was never seen as average.  In 1994-96 McLaren were behind Williams, Benetton, Ferrari and had Jordan nipping at their heels yet he still pulled out some solid drives and scored 12 podiums, nobody seriously doubted he's be a contender in a competitive car.  Button's skill was never really in doubt, what people questioned was his decision to stick with Honda and get paid a lot of cash rather than try to get another drive. 

 

I'm not anti-Hulk I just don't understand why so many people seem to think he should be the automatic pick for every big seat going when he really hasn't done anything remarkable with what he has had to work with.

[sopa]

Mika was never seen as average.  In 1994-96 McLaren were behind Williams, Benetton, Ferrari and had Jordan nipping at their heels yet he still pulled out some solid drives and scored 12 podiums, nobody seriously doubted he's be a contender in a competitive car.  Button's skill was never really in doubt, what people questioned was his decision to stick with Honda and get paid a lot of cash rather than try to get another drive. 

 

I'm not anti-Hulk I just don't understand why so many people seem to think he should be the automatic pick for every big seat going when he really hasn't done anything remarkable with what he has had to work with.

 

You should take a look at the old threads. There was plenty of doubt about Button. There is always doubt about drivers, who do not get results. It is in human nature. I consider the Hulkenberg arguments to fall into the same trap.

[discover23]

@sopa, you may have a point, but Hulk is not the only driver who finds himself is this situation. There are dozens of drivers who can fit that profile and who can shine given the opportunity to drive for a top team with a dominant car - and I am including the dozens who have have entered and left f1 without ever being recognized ....

 

These guys can get there only by impressing and doing something exceptional that separates them from the rest (podiums is a good measure), or by luck.

[warp]

Had Hulkenberg had the fortune to drive some great cars, his results could be up there with Button (2009) and Rosberg (2014), who both drove some great cars. Or like Barrichello/Coulthard racked up a fair amount of wins in top cars during many years.

 

The question remains as then why is Hulkenberg not picked up by a big team every time the opportunity shows up?

 

Is it really just fortune? Or do the teams don't see potential where we do? Or teams don't see his qualities as qualities that they need?

 

Not hating the dude, but at this point I am puzzled as of why he hasn't been picked up for a big break if he is really the real deal.

[trogggy]

The question remains as then why is Hulkenberg not picked up by a big team every time the opportunity shows up?

 

Is it really just fortune? Or do the teams don't see potential where we do? Or teams don't see his qualities as qualities that they need?

 

Not hating the dude, but at this point I am puzzled as of why he hasn't been picked up for a big break if he is really the real deal.

One reason - he's not a jockey.

Tall heavy drivers (normal-sized people in other words) are disadvantaged in recent years - less so next season, but Hulk is bigger than most F1 midgets drivers.

 

Edit: Found a link, James Allen waxing on the subject:

http://www.jamesalle...areer-progress/

Edited by trogggy, 11 December 2014 - 22:25.

[warp]

One reason - he's not a jockey.

Tall heavy drivers (normal-sized people in other words) are disadvantaged in recent years - less so next season, but Hulk is bigger than most F1 midgets drivers.

 

Edit: Found a link, James Allen waxing on the subject:

http://www.jamesalle...areer-progress/

 

He's pretty much screwed then. Weight limit will raise 10kg for 2015. Hulk is said to be around 74kg so roughly ~10.5% of the weight of the car/driver vs ~10.7% this year.

 

Unless he brings a lot of talent, he will remain overlooked as long as his competition is around 5-10kg lighter. That is fuel, ballast and such you can use to tune the car.

Sad if that is the reason.

[Rurouni]

He's pretty much screwed then. Weight limit will raise 10kg for 2015. Hulk is said to be around 74kg so roughly ~10.5% of the weight of the car/driver vs ~10.7% this year.

Unless he brings a lot of talent, he will remain overlooked as long as his competition is around 5-10kg lighter. That is fuel, ballast and such you can use to tune the car.
Sad if that is the reason.

It's pretty much what Button had to contend with. He was/is being paired with smaller drivers. One of the reasoning behind my choice for Hulk in 2013 McLaren was because Button and Hulk have similar size, thus they can create a car that is more tuned to their size.
Anyway, a team like McLaren should choose the best available drivers. For 2013, the best one available was Hulk and not Perez. For next year, they've got Alonso and Button, which I believe they are the best available drivers.

[Dunc]

It's pretty much what Button had to contend with. He was/is being paired with smaller drivers. One of the reasoning behind my choice for Hulk in 2013 McLaren was because Button and Hulk have similar size, thus they can create a car that is more tuned to their size.
Anyway, a team like McLaren should choose the best available drivers. For 2013, the best one available was Hulk and not Perez. For next year, they've got Alonso and Button, which I believe they are the best available drivers.

I disagree that Hulk was the best choice in 2013, Perez looked to have (and in my opinion still does) have much more potential than Hulk. However, you are right that Alonso and Button are the best choice for 2015.

[Dunc]

It's pretty much what Button had to contend with. He was/is being paired with smaller drivers. One of the reasoning behind my choice for Hulk in 2013 McLaren was because Button and Hulk have similar size, thus they can create a car that is more tuned to their size.
Anyway, a team like McLaren should choose the best available drivers. For 2013, the best one available was Hulk and not Perez. For next year, they've got Alonso and Button, which I believe they are the best available drivers.

I disagree that Hulk was the best choice in 2013, Perez looked to have (and in my opinion still does) have much more potential than Hulk. However, you are right that Alonso and Button are the best choice for 2015.