Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Another dull season already on the cards for Ferrari?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
194 replies to this topic

#151 aramos

aramos
  • Member

  • 1,498 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 05:18

I really don't understand why people use Massa as some sort of Benchmark. He is perhaps the most up and down driver on the grid and someone that really needs to feel happy and supported to shine. His Ferrari years contained the full spectrum.

Sure, he was inconsistent. But Schumacher was consistently ahead of Massa and by a decent margin too, both in qualifying and races. Massa never really looked anywhere close to him on more than the occasional race weekend.

 

Raikkonen however was never consistently faster than Massa. Massa was ahead of him in qualifying in both 07 and 08 over two full seasons and in races they were at best tit for tat.

 

Id be very surprised if Massa suddenly found half a second per lap in one off season, therefore I'd have to conclude that Schumacher was simply faster than Massa... and Raikkonen.  This logic is backed up by the Alonso-Massa Alonso-Raikkonen pairings.


Edited by aramos, 28 December 2014 - 05:19.


Advertisement

#152 skyfolker

skyfolker
  • Member

  • 393 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 28 December 2014 - 07:29

Raikkonen however was never consistently faster than Massa. Massa was ahead of him in qualifying in both 07 and 08 over two full seasons

Using qualifying to prove that one driver is better than another is just flawed especially during those years when they were qualifying on different fuel loads.

and in races they were at best tit for tat.

No,Raikkonen was almost always better,he was clearly better in 2007,he was clearly better before they changed front suspension and after they reinstated it in 2008,and it's difficult to tell for 2009 because during first half of the season his car was breaking down too often,basically he only had few races without some car problem until Hungary.

#153 aramos

aramos
  • Member

  • 1,498 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 07:35

Using qualifying to prove that one driver is better than another is just flawed especially during those years when they were qualifying on different fuel loads.
No,Raikkonen was almost always better,he was clearly better in 2007,he was clearly better before they changed front suspension and after they reinstated it in 2008,and it's difficult to tell for 2009 because during first half of the season his car was breaking down too often,basically he only had few races without some car problem until Hungary.

In 2007-2008 I've got it 14-12 to Massa in races they both finished. I'm sure analysis of individual performances could swing that either way by maybe a few points but regardless how you look at it those are two very similar drivers.

 

Its much like your theory Raikkonen was 'close to' Alonso in performance this year, you'd have to be viewing those seasons through very tinted glasses to conclude that. 


Edited by aramos, 28 December 2014 - 07:40.


#154 skyfolker

skyfolker
  • Member

  • 393 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 28 December 2014 - 07:58

In 2007-2008 I've got it 14-12 to Massa in races they both finished.

Criteria of only 2 car finishes is one of the most ridiculous stuff I ever read on fora,it speaks more about ignorance of the person that uses it than anything.

I'm sure analysis of individual performances could swing that either way by maybe a few points but regardless how you look at it those are two very similar drivers.

For 2008 there is distinct discrepance between what results tell and what actually happened.
 

Its much like your theory Raikkonen was 'close to' Alonso in performance this year, you'd have to be viewing those seasons through very tinted glasses to conclude that.

I'm telling you what exactly happened and why it happened.If you disagree with something I wrote you are free to challenge it or disprove it using valid arguments,although it would be better for all if you actually watched races and payed attention to what really happened.

#155 aramos

aramos
  • Member

  • 1,498 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 08:02

Criteria of only 2 car finishes is one of the most ridiculous stuff I ever read on fora,it speaks more about ignorance of the person that uses it than anything.

 

I disagree. I think 2 car finishes are a very useful statistical tool to showing us how two drivers performed. Its quite obvious you have a vested interest in an outcome (being, Raikkonen ahead). I don't see the point in continuing a conversation with someone who uses insults to try and make a point.



#156 DutchQuicksilver

DutchQuicksilver
  • Member

  • 6,304 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 28 December 2014 - 10:42

I disagree. I think 2 car finishes are a very useful statistical tool to showing us how two drivers performed. Its quite obvious you have a vested interest in an outcome (being, Raikkonen ahead). I don't see the point in continuing a conversation with someone who uses insults to try and make a point.

Not really, as a faulty pitstop, on track collisions etc. all play a factor as well. If you want to measure it properly, only use races where both had no issues at all and both were allowed to race flat out.



#157 aramos

aramos
  • Member

  • 1,498 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 11:00

Not really, as a faulty pitstop, on track collisions etc. all play a factor as well. If you want to measure it properly, only use races where both had no issues at all and both were allowed to race flat out.


It's not accurate entirely, but the law of averages mean if two drivers appear similar over two years then chances are they are similar. I watched 2007 and 2008 and there was no way anyone could
make claim to Raikkonen being better than Massa. They both had roughly similar amounts races of being the stronger Ferrari driver.

#158 Kimble

Kimble
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 12:11

It's not accurate entirely, but the law of averages mean if two drivers appear similar over two years then chances are they are similar. I watched 2007 and 2008 and there was no way anyone could
make claim to Raikkonen being better than Massa. They both had roughly similar amounts races of being the stronger Ferrari driver.


Here's me, making a claim that Kimi was better over the two seasons. He won a WDC.

#159 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 4,954 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 28 December 2014 - 12:40

Here's me, making a claim that Kimi was better over the two seasons. He won a WDC.


Had one race each year gone differently then Massa would be a WDC and Kimi not. Had McLaren not cocked up China in 07 and Ferrari not cocked up Singapore in 08. They were the two closest seasons in a long while.

Advertisement

#160 Kimble

Kimble
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 12:47

Had one race each year gone differently then Massa would be a WDC and Kimi not. Had McLaren not cocked up China in 07 and Ferrari not cocked up Singapore in 08. They were the two closest seasons in a long while.


If the woulda/coulda/shoulda talk is allowed then Kimi's season was scuppered in Canada when he surely would have won and he would have been banking points at Spa rather than knowing it was win or bust and playing a supporting role to Massa through the backend of the season.

#161 JimiKart

JimiKart
  • Member

  • 457 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 28 December 2014 - 13:58

wait, isn't this the Ferrari "dull season" thread... let me clear this up for you guys, Kimi and Massa and light years behind Alonso.

 

Ferrari has a massive void to fill with the loss of Alonso and despite today's news that Seb's "ruthlessness" will propel Ferrari back to the podium, Seb has no hope of filling the Alonso void and Ferrari is on for more than one "dull" season.

 

In fact the only drama at Ferrari is going to be Seb on the radio and the media swirl about how many more broken promises of "good car" Seb will put up with before bailing.



#162 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 28 December 2014 - 14:07

If people are saying that the driver line-up is bad, then I'd have to say that surely it can't be worse than Raikkonen-Massa back in the day? And Raikkonen-Massa line-up certainly proved that if you give them the car, they can get the job done. And they seemed to be doing fine even in the 2009 car, which was definitely below Brawn GP and Red Bull in terms of performance over a full season.



#163 Kimble

Kimble
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 14:14

Yes, a massive void of ego and driver input into engineering hires. Alonso didn't close out the WDC with Ferrari when he should have, maybe history would have been very different if he did. He's decided to leave and let's see how life at McLaren plays out. Somehow I don't think it's going to be all high fives with Ron but that's just my opinion.

Ferrari seem to have moved on from Alonso, perhaps Alonso fans should move on from Ferrari?

#164 dreamer

dreamer
  • Member

  • 1,922 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 14:38

If people are saying that the driver line-up is bad, then I'd have to say that surely it can't be worse than Raikkonen-Massa back in the day? And Raikkonen-Massa line-up certainly proved that if you give them the car, they can get the job done. And they seemed to be doing fine even in the 2009 car, which was definitely below Brawn GP and Red Bull in terms of performance over a full season.

 

You make a very good point there. It's funny to read that Raikkonen-Vettel or Raikkonen-Massa is a bad/weak line-up. Actually, Raikkonen-Massa helped the team win 2 constructors championships something that  Alonso-Massa and Alonso-Raikkonen couldn't do.



#165 ebc

ebc
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 28 December 2014 - 15:22

When Ferrari gave Kimi what he wanted he was a level above Massa, he dominated the second half of 2007 and was very strong the first half of 2008.  Ferrari then decided to go a different direction which hurt Kimi and Ferrari too, had they backed Kimi I have no doubt he would have won them the title again in 2008.  In 2009 he was not given full backing until Massa left and he was transformed, that showed those who didn't know already that Kimi needs the team around him giving him what he needs to perform at his best.  If he doesn't have that then he will not perform.  

 

In 2007 he was excellent from France on, 9 Grand Prix finishes and he won 5 of those with 2 second place finishes and 2 thirds and took nearly 30 points from Hamilton over that stretch.  That is how you win a championship, and some idiots on this board would have you believe he lucked into it.  The McLaren and Ferrari were very evenly matched that season, Alonso himself said the McLaren had the fastest car so that shows how good Kimi was in his prime.  Now though he is a shadow of his former self which is a real pity as he could take on Alonso head on and beat him when he was at his peak but unfortunately that didn't last long.  He reminds me of footballer Ronaldinho who for 3 or 4 years was untouchable but then faded much like Kimi and his reputation has been tarnished because of it.  

 

Alonso is a great driver but not as special as some on this board would have you believe, Ferrari have gotten worse over his 5 years there and he has a lot to do with that.  Ferrari need someone who will push the team forward and Fernando did not do that, he was always putting the team down and criticizing them.  From afar he doesn't seem to be a great motivator and I think Ferrari need that and Vettel seems to be the best driver in F1 at the moment at leading his team.  I think Ferrari will be better off without Alonso and McLaren stronger with him, he never should have left them in 2007, I always thought that would be the best place for him but he is 33 now so it will be interesting to see how long he can stay at his current level.



#166 kosmos

kosmos
  • Member

  • 11,867 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 28 December 2014 - 16:10

When Ferrari gave Kimi what he wanted he was a level above Massa, he dominated the second half of 2007

 

 

Massa was ordered to support Kimi after Monza, Kimi dominated Massa is baloney, even he had to let Kimi pass in Brazil.



#167 Kimble

Kimble
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 16:23

Massa was ordered to support Kimi after Monza, Kimi dominated Massa is baloney, even he had to let Kimi pass in Brazil.


He didn't let him past. Kimi executed his normal strategy which was to qualify heavier, run longer and put in the fast laps to make the overtake at the end of the stint. Raikonnen was a machine at the end of that season, much like he was at Lotus. This is the guy that Allison said didn't break traction on the rear tyres once during an entire Grand Prix. That is off-the-scale quality.

#168 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 8,362 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 28 December 2014 - 16:27

Alonso is a great driver but not as special as some on this board would have you believe, Ferrari have gotten worse over his 5 years there and he has a lot to do with that.  Ferrari need someone who will push the team forward and Fernando did not do that, he was always putting the team down and criticizing them.  

That is a slight myth

 

Alonso put the hours in at the factory if reports are to be believed. I think that is a perfect example of "leading by example". Saying Ferrari got worse, is also quite inaccurate. I would say their 2012 and 2013 cars were better than their 2011 car. 

 

When Ferrari gave Kimi what he wanted he was a level above Massa, he dominated the second half of 2007 and was very strong the first half of 2008.  

This is a fair theory.

 

It could explain why Massa was closer to Kimi, than he was to Schumi. By 2003, I felt Schumi and Kimi were evenly matched as drivers (based on my own subjective and loose observations).

 

However, I do agree with the people saying that Schumi would have won the titles in 2007 and 2008.  As demonstrated in 2006, Schumi had a significant pace advantage over Massa, (Massa only beat Schumi clean a few times in 2006). Unless the team experienced a swift transformation, Massa would not have gotten close to Schumi. Even if the team's dynamic changed, there is nothing to say that Schumi would not have been quicker than Massa without team standing. 

 

Schumi vs Kimi is an interesting debate. In retrospect, it would appear that Schumi would have had the edge. I think it might have gone down to who won the political war, and how the team was structured. But like Massa, it very well could be that Schumi would have simply been generally faster than Kimi.

 

There is a lot of "ifs" and "buts" with the Ferrari drivers of 2006-2008. 



#169 Thanos89

Thanos89
  • Member

  • 50 posts
  • Joined: August 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 16:37

- Now though he is a shadow of his former self which is a real pity as he could take on Alonso head on and beat him when he was at his peak but unfortunately that didn't last long.-

 

-Alonso is a great driver but not as special as some on this board would have you believe, Ferrari have gotten worse over his 5 years there and he has a lot to do with that.  Ferrari need someone who will push the team forward and Fernando did not do that, he was always putting the team down and criticizing them.-
 

He might have been closer and beat him a few times but over the season ALonso whould still be ahead. 
 

Seriously what the hell? Did Alonso designed the car? When did he put the team down and criticised them? Every single time he said we win as a team and we lose as team. Apart from some rare occasions when Ferrari REALLY messed up things he said something like we shouldnt be having things like that cause we are Ferrari. 
Kimi fans, Kimi  is a great driver and not as special as ALL of you think he is. You cant blame Alonso for Kimi's poor showing. It's laughable. 
As for Ferrari now, in my opinion the Schumacher years raised the bar and the expectations clearly very high but if you take them away its not looking that good, is it?   :well: 
 


Edited by Thanos89, 28 December 2014 - 16:38.


#170 Kimble

Kimble
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 16:45

This is what I was saying earlier. It's like Massa is being used as some sort of 'control' in the Whole drivers performance assessment of the last ten years. As team mate to Schumi he was in his formative years, they were signs of real pace but not the full race winning package. Partnered with Kimi, who doesn't display No 1 behaviour, and with Schumi advising, he flourished. Two years in to the partnership his confidence was sky high and he was showing that he could win races from pole in a convincing fashion and nearly bagged a championship but for some misfortune (and cheating).

The rest of the Ferrari years were a disaster for him and it's not hard to see why. Now look at him at Williams, he's in a happy place again where a team loves him and bang, he's quick again. The doubters had already written him off but he has shut them up.

#171 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 8,362 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 28 December 2014 - 16:52

 nearly bagged a championship but for some misfortune (and cheating).

Steady on

 

I would not say the FIA cheated by taking away Lewis's victory at SPA   ;)



#172 Thanos89

Thanos89
  • Member

  • 50 posts
  • Joined: August 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 17:00

If you think about it, Kimi at McLaren and later at Lotus was/is the driver we all want to see no matter if you are a fan or not. He deserved at least one title with McLaren ( if only the mercedes engine was more reliable) and if Lotus had a bigger budget he might have a better shot at another title. Then you have Massa who proved this year that he still is quick and can fight at the front with the resurgent Williams. 
Put them in the Ferrari, apart from that odd competitve year both struggled the rest of the time. 
Unless you are german, the Ferrari is not the place to be for any driver  :lol:
Vettel will do fine  :cool:


Edited by Thanos89, 28 December 2014 - 17:01.


#173 Cyanide

Cyanide
  • Member

  • 5,299 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 28 December 2014 - 17:18

wait, isn't this the Ferrari "dull season" thread... let me clear this up for you guys, Kimi and Massa and light years behind Alonso.

 

Ferrari has a massive void to fill with the loss of Alonso and despite today's news that Seb's "ruthlessness" will propel Ferrari back to the podium, Seb has no hope of filling the Alonso void and Ferrari is on for more than one "dull" season.

 

In fact the only drama at Ferrari is going to be Seb on the radio and the media swirl about how many more broken promises of "good car" Seb will put up with before bailing.

 

I've rarely seen such a hateful user as yourself against Vettel. You are absolutely hilarious.  

 

The only void that has to be filled at Ferrari is the Brawn/Todt line-up. When will you guys understand the drivers aren't the problem? Not even with Alonso's stellar drives over the last 5 years, they couldn't secure a title. They, however, have always been a few good steps behind car development than the likes of Red Bull and now Mercedes. This goes beyond the childish arguments of "but but my driver is better, no, my driver is better". The problem at Ferrari is deeper than that and if you or anybody claims what Sebastian can or can't do at Ferrari, you either have a crystal ball or you're just gambling. My guess is the latter. 



#174 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 28 December 2014 - 17:24

It's like Massa is being used as some sort of 'control' in the Whole drivers performance assessment of the last ten years.

 

Let's think about random quali session examples. Like...

 

A random situation in 2014:

3. Bottas +0.8

4. Massa +1.0

 

Or, say, 2012:

6. Alonso +0.9

9. Massa +1.2

 

Or, say, 2008:

1. Massa

3. Raikkonen +0.3

 

Not much difference. Team-mate gap varies within 0.5 seconds in these random examples. But what varies massively is the car performance. Massa qualifies 9th in a midfield car alongside a great driver, he is "washed up". He takes pole in a great car with a team-mate, who struggles to heat up tyres over a single lap - he is the 'messiah'.

 

Williams was clearly good this year. I do not see a massively "resurgent" Massa, who was still outqualified by Bottas more often than not. I see a car, which was clearly second fastest on many occasions and many drivers would have put it into second row. And then proceeded to get a podium if team-mate hit trouble.

 

The main thing I have been pondering about is my own personal Massa ranking of 2006-2009. I used to rate him as a top 5 driver in late 2000s, where he clearly would not be right now. I am having serious doubts whether he was that good, or he was just seriously flattered by the car, which again seems to have happened in the Williams. In either case, it does not speak well for Raikkonen's 2007-2009 period either. Leaving Hamilton and Alonso aside, and thinking about good solid good midfield drivers of 2007-2009, like Rosberg or Button, there is no reason to think they were worse than the Ferrari line-up at the time, just that their car was worse. Well, except Button's in 2009 obviously...



#175 Kimble

Kimble
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 17:34

Exactly, these sort of stupid analysis seem to forget about what is the most important thing in an athletes performance and that is their state of mind. This state of mind is very much influenced by the management of the team, response to their feedback, how comfortable they feel in the car etc

The same bad management that allows a £50m Fernando Torres to become a 1 goal in 20 games player is also present in F1.

#176 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 28 December 2014 - 17:36

 Now look at him at Williams, he's in a happy place again where a team loves him and bang, he's quick again. The doubters had already written him off but he has shut them up.

 

Barrichello was washed up in 2007 and many thought he should retire. Give him a Brawn-Mercedes of 2009, and he is suddenly "resurgent" and a remote championship contender. By the way, Button was also written off in 2008.

 

That's just normal business, which heavily depends on cars. Drivers remain the same in most cases.

 

Give a car, which is 0.5 seconds faster than the rest of the field and up to/at least 15 drivers on the F1 grid can put it on pole position provided their team-mate cocks up the lap. So yeah, they all look quick and fantastic drivers. Give them a rubbish car, and the same driver qualifies 19th. This time his team-mate doesn't cock up the lap and ends up 15th. The 19th placed former "pole position hero" is now a rubbish past-it driver.



#177 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 8,362 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 28 December 2014 - 17:41

 

The only void that has to be filled at Ferrari is the Brawn/Todt line-up. 

I was going to mention this  :up:



#178 Tombstone

Tombstone
  • Member

  • 1,392 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 17:47

Exactly, these sort of stupid analysis seem to forget about what is the most important thing in an athletes performance and that is their state of mind. This state of mind is very much influenced by the management of the team, response to their feedback, how comfortable they feel in the car etc

The same bad management that allows a £50m Fernando Torres to become a 1 goal in 20 games player is also present in F1.

 

Shh, I'm just enjoying the black and red ants fighting it out, each using statistics to 'prove' their point.


Edited by Tombstone, 28 December 2014 - 17:48.


#179 Kimble

Kimble
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 17:51

Barrichello was washed up in 2007 and many thought he should retire. Give him a Brawn-Mercedes of 2009, and he is suddenly "resurgent" and a remote championship contender. By the way, Button was also written off in 2008.
 
That's just normal business, which heavily depends on cars. Drivers remain the same in most cases.
 
Give a car, which is 0.5 seconds faster than the rest of the field and up to/at least 15 drivers on the F1 grid can put it on pole position provided their team-mate cocks up the lap. So yeah, they all look quick and fantastic drivers. Give them a rubbish car, and the same driver qualifies 19th. This time his team-mate doesn't cock up the lap and ends up 15th. The 19th placed former "pole position hero" is now a rubbish past-it driver.


Exactly. The car has a huge impact and there are far too many muppets just repeating the complete nonsense that some journos put out there to fill pages. Some drivers undoubtedly need more emotional support than others, especially if they aren't the de facto number one where support is a given and nobody dare question talent, motivation or commitment.

Advertisement

#180 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 28 December 2014 - 18:01

The sports psychology discussion is interesting and it is especially notable that whenever Massa comes up, it is directly related to him. "Goes well, when he is loved by the team," is often claimed. Then again everybody likes to be loved. Alonso and Hamilton also like to be in the center of attention. But in Massa's case it is specifically brought up as a notable performance differentiator between different periods.

 

I am unsure, how to take it or which kind of proof can we get from there. That Massa's best year was 2008 (and maybe 2009), because he was loved by the team as a #1 driver, which helped him to perform so well? Or there are some other very practical criterias? Like the car was really good, team-mate wasn't performing well at all (which means it is easier to beat him regardless of personal performance level), car charateristics suited Massa? Complicated topic with lots of variables.

 

Massa's "problem" is that he has been a team-mate to M.Schumacher, Raikkonen and Alonso. Three famous drivers with big fanbases. And if you have this, Massa will be torn apart in discussions to "prove a point" that Massa doing this or that proves something about driver C.



#181 JimiKart

JimiKart
  • Member

  • 457 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 28 December 2014 - 18:01

I've rarely seen such a hateful user as yourself against Vettel. You are absolutely hilarious.  

 

The only void that has to be filled at Ferrari is the Brawn/Todt line-up. When will you guys understand the drivers aren't the problem? Not even with Alonso's stellar drives over the last 5 years, they couldn't secure a title. They, however, have always been a few good steps behind car development than the likes of Red Bull and now Mercedes. This goes beyond the childish arguments of "but but my driver is better, no, my driver is better". The problem at Ferrari is deeper than that and if you or anybody claims what Sebastian can or can't do at Ferrari, you either have a crystal ball or you're just gambling. My guess is the latter. 

 

Well I'm no fan of the golden finger but leaving that aside, we're saying the same thing.

 

Ferrari are hopeless even when they have a driver who can adapt to a schitt car they lose. They've been producing 2nd and 3rd rate cars for years now and with all the turmoil there is no reason to suggest that it will change any time soon.

 

I'm just pointing out that Seb will not stand for empty promises of a good car any longer than Fred did, in fact I'd bet he'd never go into a 6th season after five years without a dominant car...



#182 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 28 December 2014 - 18:09

It could explain why Massa was closer to Kimi, than he was to Schumi. By 2003, I felt Schumi and Kimi were evenly matched as drivers (based on my own subjective and loose observations).

 

Looking back at 2003, this might be the impression indeed. But to be honest, I do not know, what to do with these past impressions any more. I think it is better to leave it there. Each F1 season adds new variables into how to rate drivers, and further clouds the picture on how to take past seasons, especially when they were such a long time ago.

 

In 1999 Frentzen looked like the best driver on the grid. But was he? Was it an illusion or a false impression, because things just perfectly fell to him and not so to others? Why wasn't he the best in other seasons? Or at least a top 3 driver?


Edited by sopa, 28 December 2014 - 18:12.


#183 sennafan24

sennafan24
  • Member

  • 8,362 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 28 December 2014 - 18:19

Looking back at 2003, this might be the impression indeed. But to be honest, I do not know, what to do with these past impressions any more. I think it is better to leave it there. Each F1 season adds new variables into how to rate drivers, and further clouds the picture on how to take past seasons, especially when they were such a long time ago.

 

In 1999 Frentzen looked like the best driver on the grid. But was he? Was it an illusion or a false impression, because things just perfectly fell to him and not so to others? 

Agreed.

 

Which is why in a previous post I conceded that I am pretty unsure if my past perception still has any value. Too many conflicting considerations have emerged since then. A fixed opinion is difficult to have, especially during this debate. 

 

Another thing that should be remembered, is that whilst Kimi and Massa are perceived to be a relatively weak pairing now, they were not in 2008. It is up in the air how Seb and Kimi will be perceived in 2-3 years time. 

 

Most of what is being discussed in this thread is very subjective and open-ended. It is fun though   ;)



#184 DrF

DrF
  • Member

  • 2,581 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 28 December 2014 - 20:04

Had one race each year gone differently then Massa would be a WDC and Kimi not. Had McLaren not cocked up China in 07 and Ferrari not cocked up Singapore in 08. They were the two closest seasons in a long while.

and Kimi getting rammed by Hamilton in Canada?

#185 FullWets

FullWets
  • Member

  • 193 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 20:09

I wouldn't be concerned about Vettel or Raikkonen, Ferrari's problem is not their drivers. Give those 2 guys the car they want and they will win races and titles, so it is up to Ferrari to sort out their technical department.

Vettel will win titles there, I have no doubt about that. He is still only 27, as good as anyone in the sport and smarter to from what I can gather. He will suit Ferrari better than Alonso ever did and will be alot more successful in my opinion.

Raikkonen too is a world class driver, but much more sensitive to the setup and handling. When he does get it how he likes then he can beat anyone.

Not trying to be too rhetoric, but if you give the F1 drivers the car they want they will win. All of them. I think what you are meaning is that they need a car they can drive optimally, given their slightly limited adaptability. There I can only see a drawback compared to having Alonso in the team, who does not need a 100% perfect car to drive fast. Now Ferrari is not limited only by their capacity to make a quick car, but also have to make sure the driveability is very good, which is very difficult given the current regulations. Vettel needs a very firm rear end, which demands a very well devised air flow all along the car reaching the floor and has been a significant deficit of Ferrari in last years, given their simulation tools were / (are?) so extremely poor compared to RBR. Kimi needs to switch-on the front tires (which were very hard in 2014) to get the front end of the car working to his liking (I don't buy for a second that pullrod = understeering and think Kimi's main problem were the tires). We are told the relative hardness of the tires will be kept for 2015, but I guess we will see changes after pre-season testing. All in all and given the reduced downforce of new cars, it remains challenging to making the tires work, specially if you cannot cope with understeering.

 

So yes, it is up to Ferrari to raise their game, both technically and regarding the organization of the team, just like it was the past 5 years. If they can do it, they have of course very fast drivers that know how to do their job



#186 FullWets

FullWets
  • Member

  • 193 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 20:54

Don't agree.

I wouldn't rate Bottas and Hulkenberg the equal of the Ferrari pair. Not close. People are quick to throw out remarks without thinking them through.

Bottas did not separate himself significantly from Massa in a team with which he had greater experience. And Massa is well past his use-by date. Similarly Hulkenburg gets a lot of props, but it seemed to me that Perez more often than not had his measure.

I grant you Vettel had a bad year. But he had been (and its too early to reckon this year was not an aberration which he will redress) a rare talent and prodigy. He hasn't forgotten how to drive and I believe that there's a pretty good chance that he will rediscover his mojo. Bottas has a chance to be good, but nothing in his two seasons suggests to me that he will match Vettel's accomplishments. I'm comparing the early years of both drivers. Hulkenburg has shown enough for one to safely surmise that he will never be in Vettel's league.

Vettel has been a bit Schumacheresque in the manner in which he has lead the development at two different teams. It may be that, like Schumacher, Vettel has hit the proverbial wall and he may never recapture his edge. On the other hand it may be that he just needed a different challenge to reignite his enthusiasm. 2015 will tell a lot.

Agree that people tend to judge very fast whether a driver is a genius or a complete fiasco. A couple of years and team mates are needed in my opinion, we being outside of the teams get very little information about actual driver performance other that the final race results.

 

Regarding the bold part... drivers do not lead development of F1 cars. They don't have a clue, how to design a F1 car, they are basically the crazy guys that spent their youth driving cars to the limit, not making a top career as engineer. Teams have 500+ extremely good and expensive guys (a certain Adrian Newey among them) to care for the development. Do you expect engineers getting on the car to show the drivers how the driving is done? Giving feedback is one thing, leading is another.

 

I don't have an opinion about the development of the Toro Rosso, but regarding RBR and in words of Newey, the feedback for the aerodynamics of the car came mainly from Webber. That doesn't fit very well with your theory



#187 FullWets

FullWets
  • Member

  • 193 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 21:41

 
Vettel was indeed slower than Ricciardo,while Raikkonen was on Alonso's pace or very close to in every race in which was no major setback,or before it happened.

 

Average gap ALO - RAI in 2014: 33 seconds :drunk:



#188 FullWets

FullWets
  • Member

  • 193 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 22:22

Ferrari do not want a driver who can put a 10th place car in 5th place, they want a driver who can put a 1st place car in 1st.  It is up to them do give Vettel that car.  

 

I think too many people here put too much stock in what a driver can do in a poor car, surely the real test is what they can do when they have a great car and Vettel has proved he can deliver and then some.  He took 2 titles at the final round once from pole to win and the other from last to 5th in the rain, he doesn't get enough credit for that, Alonso on the other hand has lost 3 titles at the final round.   Vettel always got stronger as the pressure got greater toward the end of the season, Alonso hasn't shown that quality yet either. Alonso may do better with a poor car than Vettel but who cares about that?  Ferrari have got a sure thing in Vettel providing they give him the car, if they do that I would put my money on Vettel beating any other driver to the title.

 

Alonso will probably end his career on 2 titles unless Honda come up with something really special, he can drive a car like very few have ever done but it is his own fault he has 2 titles instead of 5 or 6.  Part of being a great driver is making the most of your opportunities and Vettel has done a much better job at that than Alonso has.  

Let's see if I understand your logic:

 

- If you can drive a poor car well you will drive a good car badly

- Alonso has not shown that he is capable of winning a WDC

- His main problem is that he is prone to making failures under pressure

- Alonso is guilty of not winning with poor cars, whereas Vettel on the other hand has shown his superiority winning titles with the best car

 

Wow! It surely cannot easily get better than that



#189 FullWets

FullWets
  • Member

  • 193 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 22:39

Most other drivers couldn't win the championship like Vettel, probably only 5 or 6 drivers could win titles in that situation and only Hamilton and Alonso could have won 4. And winning those 4 is what makes Vettel a great.  Winning titles is not easy at all, even with an advantage in speed as Hamilton demonstrated in 2012.   Vettel has won races without the fastest car numerous times in his career that he doesn't get credit for from some quarters.

 

 Actually, he has never won starting behind 3rd :drunk:



#190 aramos

aramos
  • Member

  • 1,498 posts
  • Joined: December 14

Posted 28 December 2014 - 23:31

I Iove how when Raikkonen beat Massa that's because Raikkonen was "better", but when Massa beat Raikkonen (which he did in points over their time together mind you) it's because Raikkonen was "struggling".

 

Its just double standards of how you frame their performance. Massa was ahead in every statistic during their time together, points, 2 car finishes, qualified ahead. There is no reasonable argument that those two are not two very closely matched drivers.


Edited by aramos, 29 December 2014 - 00:06.


#191 skyfolker

skyfolker
  • Member

  • 393 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 29 December 2014 - 07:39

Average gap ALO - RAI in 2014: 33 seconds :drunk:

It seems your reading skill or understanding what's written is challenged.



#192 mzvztag

mzvztag
  • Member

  • 816 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 29 December 2014 - 08:38

Generally speaking, Kimi's image has indeed been profiting by great marketing executed mostly by a large group of partisan fans who blew his qualities way out of proportion and reached never before achieved heights in excuse making, truth twisting and fact denial.

That being said, he is not a bad driver and with a dominant car he can fight for the title, although winning it may be out of the reach if additional factors (as in 2007) do not come his way.

Vettel turned out to be more of an unknown quantity after the 2014 season than he was so before.

But both drivers are certainly good enough not to be to blame if the results are bad. Ferrari must work on the proper car but they don't have the people to do it. And if they got (get) them by now, it may take a few years to build the winning team from the shambles they are in now, and they are in heavy troubles now indeed.

But this is F1, they may luck into a competitive car for 2015, especially if the competitors mess up. It would require a minor miracle, though.

#193 Jovanotti

Jovanotti
  • Member

  • 8,255 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 29 December 2014 - 08:44

Ferrari management (McLaren and Lotus, too) have been tricked in signing Räikkönen and paying him a shedload of money, twice, by a "large group of partisan fans"? Okay.

Gotta love the revisionism around here.

#194 Eff1NZ

Eff1NZ
  • Member

  • 171 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 29 December 2014 - 08:44

Agree that people tend to judge very fast whether a driver is a genius or a complete fiasco. A couple of years and team mates are needed in my opinion, we being outside of the teams get very little information about actual driver performance other that the final race results.
 
Regarding the bold part... drivers do not lead development of F1 cars. They don't have a clue, how to design a F1 car, they are basically the crazy guys that spent their youth driving cars to the limit, not making a top career as engineer. Teams have 500+ extremely good and expensive guys (a certain Adrian Newey among them) to care for the development. Do you expect engineers getting on the car to show the drivers how the driving is done? Giving feedback is one thing, leading is another.
 
I don't have an opinion about the development of the Toro Rosso, but regarding RBR and in words of Newey, the feedback for the aerodynamics of the car came mainly from Webber. That doesn't fit very well with your theory


I don't pretend to know about the intricacies of car development. I can only speak to my impressions and I may be wrong, especially in referring to a drivers contribution as "leading". However, by leading development, I mean to refer to the symbiotic relationship between the driver and designer which results in the production of a winning car. If that makes sense.

It is my impression that, particularly in the modern era of F1, the driver has to be able be very precise, consistent and at the limit in order to facilitate an optimal design. Schumacher was very good in this way and the feedback derived from his testing (whether verbally communicated or measured through other means) went a long way towards building a championship caliber car. I believe that Vettel is very good in this way also. I understand what you say about Webber, but it wasn't until Vettel showed up that the RB transformed into a race winner. Vettel did the same for the TR. Having done it before, I think that there is a good chance that he will be able to make a similar contribution at Ferrari. I'm sure that Ferrari is putting some stock in this.

#195 SophieB

SophieB
  • RC Forum Host

  • 24,465 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 29 December 2014 - 08:49

Looks like this has descended into a free for all argument about the form of past Ferrari drivers, current Ferrari drivers and future Ferrari drivers. For those of you who tried to respond to the topic, a shame this thread has been closed. However, it got precisely one report, just now, and while appreciated, it was to complain about the nature of the way the driver fight was being conducted rather than to let us know there were driver fights going on at all.

 

Please report threads. There is no saving this mess.