132 replies to this topic

[sopa]

 2 wins and 18 podiums since the comeback and this earns one a place in the 'Least successful comebacks' thread. It's like some people are clinically unable to give Kimi any credit even when he's done something right.

 

Actually I have to agree with you here. We need to define, what success is.

 

I mean... We may discuss whether the Lotus car had a bit more potential in it than Kimi ultimately delivered, but there is no way Kimi's Lotus career wasn't a success as such. Third in WDC and lots of podiums is very much a success. Also performance-wise I'd say he was among top 5 drivers on the grid at that time too (even if not level with Alo, Vet, Ham), so that's also very good.

 

Conversely... Schumacher's comeback was not a success. Yeah, again we may discuss whether his performance wasn't that bad, but in the end he got just 1 podium, was stuck in average cars and got beaten by Rosberg in all three years. For a 7xWDC this very much is NOT a success!

[sopa]

Prost's comeback was very much a SUCCESS. A WDC is a success, isn't it? 

 

Yeah, he was past his prime, and basically quite rusty in the early part of the season. Senna was even leading WDC after six races.

 

Late in the season, however, Prost couldn't be properly bothered any more. He won none of the last 6 races.

 

Circumstances made it easy for Prost, but it can't be said his comeback didn't work out. I mean we have seen far worse comebacks than that? And regardless of all overall he still had an edge over Hill, even if only a slight one.

[byrkus]

Does Fangio's return in 1953 after missing most of 1952 (due to injury) also count as a comeback? If it does, it must be the ultimate comeback ever.

[Dan333SP]

^^ That should go in the most successful comeback thread, then ;) I think that thread fell off the front page, but it's easily found with a search

[noikeee]

Actually I have to agree with you here. We need to define, what success is.

 

I mean... We may discuss whether the Lotus car had a bit more potential in it than Kimi ultimately delivered, but there is no way Kimi's Lotus career wasn't a success as such. Third in WDC and lots of podiums is very much a success. Also performance-wise I'd say he was among top 5 drivers on the grid at that time too (even if not level with Alo, Vet, Ham), so that's also very good.

 

Conversely... Schumacher's comeback was not a success. Yeah, again we may discuss whether his performance wasn't that bad, but in the end he got just 1 podium, was stuck in average cars and got beaten by Rosberg in all three years. For a 7xWDC this very much is NOT a success!

 

 

Prost's comeback was very much a SUCCESS. A WDC is a success, isn't it? 

 

Yeah, he was past his prime, and basically quite rusty in the early part of the season. Senna was even leading WDC after six races.

 

Late in the season, however, Prost couldn't be properly bothered any more. He won none of the last 6 races.

 

Circumstances made it easy for Prost, but it can't be said his comeback didn't work out. I mean we have seen far worse comebacks than that? And regardless of all overall he still had an edge over Hill, even if only a slight one.

 

As a Kimi fan AND a Prost fan, I've got to agree with all that - with the feeling that both comebacks were slightly underwhelming as they didn't seem at their best, yet at the same time they were quite competitive enough not to belong to this thread. Prost won a championship and Kimi seemed strong at Lotus with some entertaining races and wins, even if on hindsight you could think the Lotus was capable of even better. Even now I think he's far from his best and there's plenty better drivers who could be on that Ferrari, but he's still a capable driver that still belongs in the F1 field.

[BRG]

BTW: BRG is very, very good in keeping reminding us how dismal failure the 2015 Nissan was and of course it was a close to a disaster. But each of the three Nissans that started the race did at least manage to drive more than 6 laps in the race of 2015: 6 laps was the number of laps that the two Aston AMR-Ones ran in the 2011 race combined! PR wise the Nissan is ndeed much more of a debacle than that Aston, but achievents wise, certainly the best of the Nissan cars did better then those AMR-One's, the average Lamborghini , the Pagani as well as a few other strange birds entered at Le Mans over the years. Efforts all but forgotten by the majority of fans.

 

It's a dirty job, but someone has to do it.  Especially when there were all those enthusiasts proclaiming how wonderful and revolutionary the Nissan concept was.

 

But certainly the A-M effort with the AMR-One was a total disaster.  How they could get it SO wrong beggars belief.

 

Wonder how long it would be before BRG mentioned Nissan he's their PR man you know.

 

Well, I waited a polite period, but nobody else seemed inclined to point out this major cock-up by a major manufacturer, so......

[prpr]

Mini in the WRC. The programme had the potential to be successful, if only someone would pay for it.

[chunder27]

Good point prpr, they could really push the WRC2 version now as it seems a decent car. Gets results in Eastern Europe and France.

 

But it seems BMW are far more interested in DTM and sports cars.

And lets be honest the mni hardly needs an image push does it, they sell by the damn bucketful!

And BRG, some companies call success many things. I don't think it matters 100% that the Nissan has been a cock up, it would have been awesome if it was, but the PR and image the design and hysteria got Nissan was probably wrth more than track success anyway.

[Volcano70]

Mercedes-1999 LM24?

I think it was a spacecraft prototype after how it turned up- on its roof most of the time

[Spillage]

I am not sure Massa's form was particularly good in the first half of 2010. It was just Alonso making mistakes in that time period.
Alonso spun in Australia in Turn 1, yet still ended the race right behind Massa and was held up.
In Malaysia was also held up before gearbox (?) problems.
In China and Spain Alonso was clearly better.
In Monaco Alonso crashed in FP3 and started from the back.
In Turkey one of the few occasions, where Massa beat Alonso fair and square, but that was for 7th and 8th positions?!?! So chances are neither was going well that day.
in Canada - Alonso on podium, Massa nowhere.

Etc. Seems to me like standard Massa form in the post-accident era, just that Alonso wasn't in his usual relentless delivering form.

This is key for me. In 2010 Massa only really looked faster than Alonso in the very first race - and that was Alonso's very first for Ferrari. I remember a Wendlinger interview in which he said his first time back in the car went well, too, but it was after that that he began to struggle. Whether that was a physical or psychological result of his injury he didn't know. I'd postulate that the two can't really be separated in any case, but I think the same applies to Massa; I certainly don't think he returned as the same driver he was before Hungary.

[Jimisgod]

I think I was one of the very few who were disappointed already on his Lotus stint. I love that he got those two victories, but let's be honest here, he kind of flattered Grosjean. I'm sure Vettel would have taken several wins with that car.

 

I'm absolutely convinced the 2012-13 Lotus cars (Lotii?) were WDC capable and certainly 2nd only to RBR over both those years combined. In the hands of Alonso or Hamilton they probably would have run RBR close, with the same engine to boot. It was quite laughable that the only person who got close over the years was Alonso in a Ferrari that was way off the pace at the start of the year.

[Kop Alonso]

What about the Brabham Formula 1 Team? 
 
They went from front running championship winning team in 1983/84 to midfield 1985 to 1987. Then left at the end of 1987.
 
Returned in 1989 to 1992.

But their season in 1989 was a huge improvement compared to 86 & 87 .

[messy]

I'm absolutely convinced the 2012-13 Lotus cars (Lotii?) were WDC capable and certainly 2nd only to RBR over both those years combined. In the hands of Alonso or Hamilton they probably would have run RBR close, with the same engine to boot. It was quite laughable that the only person who got close over the years was Alonso in a Ferrari that was way off the pace at the start of the year.

 

I do agree that there were other drivers who could probably have got a couple more wins out of those cars - Kimi often struggled in qualifying and someone like Hamilton wouldn't have done, meaning he'd probably have been in the right position to challenge for more wins. Kimi made a trademark of qualifying 6th or 7th then rising through the field and that meant he was only rarely in a position to actually win - and when he was, like Bahrain 2012, he did fluff it slightly. 

 

But we're talking about success, and Kimi scored a boatload of points and podiums over those two seasons. Similar to the Prost thing,I completely agree that wasn't a vintage year for him in 1993, but ultimately he won the World Championship so it can't be seen as unsuccessful. 

 

Paul Di Resta's return to the DTM after three years in F1 has hardly been successful so far. I know he's had the odd decent result, but watching him last season there's definitely something missing from his days as a young gun fighting for the championship. 

[noikeee]

But their season in 1989 was a huge improvement compared to 86 & 87 .

eh?

 

86 - Brabham-BMW - 9th (2 pts)

87 - Brabham-BMW - 8th (10 pts)

 

89 - Brabham-Judd - 9th (8 pts)

 

Unless you mean their 89 chassis was way better and their results were hindered by the Judd engine... Might've been true.

[AlexLangheck]

Good point prpr, they could really push the WRC2 version now as it seems a decent car. Gets results in Eastern Europe and France.

 

But it seems BMW are far more interested in DTM and sports cars.

And lets be honest the mni hardly needs an image push does it, they sell by the damn bucketful!

And BRG, some companies call success many things. I don't think it matters 100% that the Nissan has been a cock up, it would have been awesome if it was, but the PR and image the design and hysteria got Nissan was probably wrth more than track success anyway.

I still find the case of the MINI programme a missed opportunity. It showed so much potential in its 6 outings. BMW seemed to fund the early development, and no more; Prodrive supposedly had sponsors lined up but nothing materialised; meaning a short lived programme – and Motorsport Italia becoming the ‘works’ team.

 

BMW just don’t get the sport of rallying – and view a domestic Touring car series as a bigger priority than a world series.

[chunder27]

Indeed Alex, one of the greatest whodunnits in recent motorsport in my eyes, to spend all thise tens if millions developing the car and then abandon it before even really giving it a chance, stupid thing was, it was quick! Unlike recent WRC debutants Hyundaj and Suzuki.

[Seanspeed]

I am not sure Massa's form was particularly good in the first half of 2010. It was just Alonso making mistakes in that time period.
Alonso spun in Australia in Turn 1, yet still ended the race right behind Massa and was held up.
In Malaysia was also held up before gearbox (?) problems.
In China and Spain Alonso was clearly better.
In Monaco Alonso crashed in FP3 and started from the back.
In Turkey one of the few occasions, where Massa beat Alonso fair and square, but that was for 7th and 8th positions?!?! So chances are neither was going well that day.
in Canada - Alonso on podium, Massa nowhere.
 
Etc. Seems to me like standard Massa form in the post-accident era, just that Alonso wasn't in his usual relentless delivering form.

That spin in Australia was mostly just unfortunate, too, getting sandwiched. Hard to say that was a mistake.

[Albaforever]

And of course: Nigel Mansell in 1995...

 

Sadly, I have to agree with that.

[king_crud]

Alain Menu to the BTCC

[BRG]

And BRG, some companies call success many things. I don't think it matters 100% that the Nissan has been a cock up, it would have been awesome if it was, but the PR and image the design and hysteria got Nissan was probably wrth more than track success anyway.

Yes indeed.  When I suggested just that on another thread, saying that it may have been more a PR than engineering project, there was much outcry.  Such seems to be the mysterious draw of these 'radical' (to me, freak) designs.

 

I still find the case of the MINI programme a missed opportunity. It showed so much potential in its 6 outings. BMW seemed to fund the early development, and no more; Prodrive supposedly had sponsors lined up but nothing materialised; meaning a short lived programme – and Motorsport Italia becoming the ‘works’ team.

 

BMW just don’t get the sport of rallying – and view a domestic Touring car series as a bigger priority than a world series.

BMW had to be persuaded to allow Prodrive to prepare the original model M3 for rallying.  They apparently didn't like the idea of a muddy BMW which they felt would degrade their image.  Once the car won rallies, they sort of came around to it, but never accepted it as a core sporting activity.  The MINI project seems to suggest that mentality remains in BMW.

Edited by BRG, 18 December 2015 - 18:00.

[Seanspeed]

Kimi seemed strong at Lotus with some entertaining races and wins, even if on hindsight you could think the Lotus was capable of even better. Even now I think he's far from his best and there's plenty better drivers who could be on that Ferrari, but he's still a capable driver that still belongs in the F1 field.

*thumbs up*

[Jimisgod]

I do agree that there were other drivers who could probably have got a couple more wins out of those cars - Kimi often struggled in qualifying and someone like Hamilton wouldn't have done, meaning he'd probably have been in the right position to challenge for more wins. Kimi made a trademark of qualifying 6th or 7th then rising through the field and that meant he was only rarely in a position to actually win - and when he was, like Bahrain 2012, he did fluff it slightly. 

 

But we're talking about success, and Kimi scored a boatload of points and podiums over those two seasons. Similar to the Prost thing,I completely agree that wasn't a vintage year for him in 1993, but ultimately he won the World Championship so it can't be seen as unsuccessful. 

 

Paul Di Resta's return to the DTM after three years in F1 has hardly been successful so far. I know he's had the odd decent result, but watching him last season there's definitely something missing from his days as a young gun fighting for the championship. 

 

The point is it's typical Kimi to be just "decent" in a good car, the only exception being 2003. He's a #2 driver that is treated like a #1 by fans.

 

That car should have beaten RBR more than twice due to its miraculous tyre life. Really it was the best car over all the races in 2012 and he was flattered by it when all he offered was a safe pair of hands ala Nick Heidfeld in his BMW and Williams days.

[Jovanotti]

What a load of BS.

 

And even if it were true: why are you guys discussing this in the "least succesful comebacks"-thread?

[Disgrace]

Kimi's on-going comeback seems on-topic to me.

[Jovanotti]

Kimi's on-going comeback seems on-topic to me.

If you insist it's one of the least successful in the history of the sport, yes, because that's what we should be discussing here. What we ARE discussing though is whether some other drivers would have done better and/or whether Räikkönen has always been shite anyways. Classic case for the shoulda, woulda,... thread imo. Sopa's post #101 says it all for me really.

Edited by Jovanotti, 19 December 2015 - 11:18.

[Radion]

The point is it's typical Kimi to be just "decent" in a good car, the only exception being 2003. He's a #2 driver that is treated like a #1 by fans.

 

That car should have beaten RBR more than twice due to its miraculous tyre life. Really it was the best car over all the races in 2012 and he was flattered by it when all he offered was a safe pair of hands ala Nick Heidfeld in his BMW and Williams days.

Yeah, the miraculous tyre life that only one driver seemed to be able to take advantage of. So was it the car or the driver? 

And really, the best car over all the races in 2012? What made you come to that conclusion?

 

Kimi's Lotus runs were pretty impressive in my opinion. I too think he could/should have won more races. Then again, he won races he shouldn't have had.

 

His Ferrari comeback has been miserable though. Although I don't think there are that many drivers who would look that much better than Rai against Alonso/Vettel.

[chunder27]

Yet another another thread we are told to not make threadss abotu one thing.

 

This one is just as bad.

[Kop Alonso]

eh?

86 - Brabham-BMW - 9th (2 pts)
87 - Brabham-BMW - 8th (10 pts)

89 - Brabham-Judd - 9th (8 pts)

Unless you mean their 89 chassis was way better and their results were hindered by the Judd engine... Might've been true.

That's pretty much what I meant , the BT 58 was a handy car they were running 2-3 at Monaco for much of the race

[PlatenGlass]

Yeah, the miraculous tyre life that only one driver seemed to be able to take advantage of. So was it the car or the driver?

Kimi was more effective than Grosjean overall when they were at Lotus together but the tyre life was evident with both cars. That wasn't something that separated the drivers.

[Button4life]

Surprised nobody has said Schumacher 2010-2012

[Jimisgod]

Yeah, the miraculous tyre life that only one driver seemed to be able to take advantage of. So was it the car or the driver? 

And really, the best car over all the races in 2012? What made you come to that conclusion?

 

Kimi's Lotus runs were pretty impressive in my opinion. I too think he could/should have won more races. Then again, he won races he shouldn't have had.

 

His Ferrari comeback has been miserable though. Although I don't think there are that many drivers who would look that much better than Rai against Alonso/Vettel.

 

Tyre life was the defining trait of a good car in 2012. That car had some miraculous tyre life, just like the Sauber in Perez' hands.

 

Grosjean was also on a comeback and there were several instances where they finished nose to tail or Grosjean finished ahead on strategies only possible due to tyre life. If Romain hadn't been so intent on crashing that season, he would have done it even more often.

 

Kimi's comeback may not have been the least successful, but it's by far the most overrated (except for a brief period in mid-2012 when people were acting like Schumacher was faster than Rosberg).

[Henri Greuter]

Another one of long past, probably too long ago for many out here:  Bugatti in 1956.....

 

Henri

Edited by Henri Greuter, 20 December 2015 - 09:54.

[Radion]

Tyre life was the defining trait of a good car in 2012. That car had some miraculous tyre life, just like the Sauber in Perez' hands.

 

Grosjean was also on a comeback and there were several instances where they finished nose to tail or Grosjean finished ahead on strategies only possible due to tyre life. If Romain hadn't been so intent on crashing that season, he would have done it even more often.

 

Kimi's comeback may not have been the least successful, but it's by far the most overrated (except for a brief period in mid-2012 when people were acting like Schumacher was faster than Rosberg).

Now that you mention it, Canada comes to mind where Grosjean indeed took advantage of the car's trait. 

 

However I still believe the car was not the over all best. The team was low on budget compared to the other top teams. I remember Lotus being the very last of the top teams to introduce EBD. It took them a while to get on top of it too. 

As the season progressed, the car's over all performance faded a little compared to the other top teams. If you look at the amount of podiums Rai was able to get in the first half of the season (5) to his (2) from belgium onwards, there's a trend that underlines my assesment that the car's performance faded towards the end. 

 

Personally, I think the 13 Lotus was the stronger car.

Edited by Radion, 20 December 2015 - 10:47.