39 replies to this topic

[ardbeg]

I think many believes Kimi's rally career was a failure, but was it? 
We compared him to Ogier who was no competition to Loeb. Then. In that car. Look at him now. Latvala can't touch him. Nobody can. 

Sorry, not a very conclusive or interesting OP, but I am sure there are some here that can give it more flesh...?

http://plus.autospor...9038.1419649042

[Marklar]

Well, Latvala is bloody inconsistent, thats why he cant touch Ogier.

(Just for clarification: I dont think that Kimis Rallye adventure was a failure)

[tyker]

I'm puzzled by this, when they were teammates Kimi was no competition for Ogier, when Ogier was teammates with Loeb he challenged for the title and won several rallies.

[EightGear]

Ogier has develloped a lot since '10/'11, and even then he WAS a match for Loeb.

 

Kimi was there to pick up the pieces left behind. Nothing spectacular, but considering his limited rallying experience he did OK.

Edited by EightGear, 21 January 2016 - 16:31.

[Timantti]

Rally and F1 (or circuit racing in general) are just slightly too different for someone to be world class at both imo. I think Kimi's biggest problem was always the co-pilot and listening to the notes whilst driving. If I remember correctly, he was surprisingly competitive on stages he knew and had memorized.

 

Also Loeb was always overrated. He is one of the best no doubt, but he also had a great car and remarkably **** competition. For god's sake Hirvonen was his number 1 rival majority of his reign! It took Ogier to show that Loeb isn't untouchable.

Edited by Timantti, 21 January 2016 - 18:19.

[Myrvold]

Was Hirvonen number 1?
What about Grönholm? Solberg?
Or that he beat everyone except Solberg in his first whole season.

There is no doubt that Citroën had a good car, but he really is a great rally driver.

[JHSingo]

I'm puzzled by this, when they were teammates Kimi was no competition for Ogier, when Ogier was teammates with Loeb he challenged for the title and won several rallies.

 

And Ogier and Loeb famously fell out, which was probably because Seb O was probably a bit too fast for Seb L's liking. I don't think it is fair or indeed correct to say Ogier was no competition for Loeb.

 

What this has to do with Raikkonen though, I have no idea. Raikkonen wasn't very good at all.

Edited by JHSingo, 21 January 2016 - 19:50.

[ardbeg]

 

What this has to do with Raikkonen though, I have no idea. Raikkonen wasn't very good at all.

Exactly that. He got beaten by Ogier and we thought it meant he wasn't very good at all. But comparing them now, knowing what a great driver Ogier was, kind of puts Kimi's performance in a different light, IMO. The difference between Kimi and Ogier was not huge.

[tyker]

2010 WRC

 

4. Ogier 167pts (2 wins, 2 2nds, 2 3rds, 2 4ths, 1 5th, 2 6ths, 1 10th)

10. Kimi 25pts (1 5th, 1 7th, 2 8ths, 1 10th)

 

I fail to see how this was close also bear in mind that Ogier had to sacrifice some of his rallies in order to assist Loeb in his title challenge, this probably cost Ogier second in series as he only finished 4 points behind.

[Seanspeed]

From what I heard, it was very much like Kubica's - fast in flashes, but ultimately crashed out way too much.  Seems like it's just too hard a category to jump into without the required experience.  It's entirely possible he'd have been a serious contender had he 5 years or so under his belt without the pressure of being in the top line category, but we'll never know. 

[BRG]

I am a bit puzzled about this.  Why compare Kimi to Ogier or Loeb?  There is no comparison.  The fact is that Kimi was beaten by far lesser lights, such as Henning Solberg, Matthew Wilson and Federico Villagra (who?).  

 

Was his effort a failure?  In purely results terms, yes.  But he was up against real rally drivers with years of proper rally experience. Even a talented F1 driver is going to struggle to overcome that sort of disadvantage, as we have seen since with Kubica.  You can't just hop in a rally car and expect to match the best drivers that the rally world has to offer, anymore than Ogier could hop in a F1 Ferrari and give Kimi a drubbing. So from that point of view, Kimi did pretty well.  But he was never going to catch up with the WRC hot shoes, he came to the game far too late in life.

Edited by BRG, 21 January 2016 - 20:20.

[Risil]

Yeah. Reminds me a bit of Jean-Michel Bayle, the motocross legend, jumping into GP bike racing. (At a much younger age than Kimi went to rallying, admittedly.) The fact that he ran consistently in the middle of the top 10 was astonishing. But he never looked like he was going to win a Grand Prix. Which was something that much lesser names than Bayle managed in the mid nineties.

Edited by Risil, 21 January 2016 - 20:28.

[messy]

Yeah, he was fairly crap. Sorry. He had little rally experience, he was jumping straight out of an F1 car and I think so on, I think they said at the time too that on practise stages that he knew well he was often as quick as his team-mates if not faster, but stick a 14km stage in front of him and he was nowhere. He did very little in rallying aside from bringing publicity, did he? He showed no real speed and was competing in an extremely thin field where the lower points positions were full of Matthew Wilsons and Khalid Al-Qassamis.

[EightGear]

Also Loeb was always overrated. He is one of the best no doubt, but he also had a great car and remarkably **** competition. For god's sake Hirvonen was his number 1 rival majority of his reign! It took Ogier to show that Loeb isn't untouchable.

I suggest you check your facts. He immediately started beating McRae and Sainz in the same team in his first few events in the Xsara ever.

The last few years he didn't have much competition but people tend to forget he beat Makinen, Burns, Sainz, McRae, Gronholm, etc. He beat everyone.

[chunder27]

Interesting you mention JMB. I had a lot of time for Jean Michel, what he did back then was insanely brave!

 

He was actually very quick on a GP bike, got a Roberts Yamaha on pole a few times and also a Modenas which is no mean feat. But was plagued by injury on his 500 career.

 

He was quick and could have been top 3 in 250 championships but was in the same team as Biaggi so had little input into the bike as Max was very pushy and aggressive in his demands which only really he could ride. But was often as quick as Ruggia who was a GP winner, JMB could have won a race in my eyes, easily. Just unlucky.

 

Not sure many guys did win 25- races in the mid 90's, Biaggi won most of them with Harada and Waldmann next, that was Bayles nest chance as he was not as good on a 500.

 

To give up what he did, a huge earning career in moto/supercross was insane really. Imagine someone like Kvyat or  now suddenly deciding to start NASCAR or something, it is that much of a leap. It was that early in his career he switched.

 

As for Loeb and Ogier, Loeb wanted him out of Citroen, tells you all you need to know really about how much of a threat he was to Seb.  Seb is the greatest but had it easy for a very long time. Same as Ogier now. Would he have beaten McRae in his prime? Maybe but I think not, not every week as he did at Citroen. And he certainly would not ave beaten Tommi!

Edited by chunder27, 21 January 2016 - 21:47.

[Dolph]

Ogier had to sacrifice some of his rallies in order to assist Loeb in his title challenge, this probably cost Ogier second in series as he only finished 4 points behind.

 

What do you mean?
 

[taran]

Hmmm, reminds me of the following:

 

Raikkonen is fast in the Lotus. Grosjean is almost as fast as Raikkonen. Grosjean must be pretty good then.

Raikkonen is **** against Alonso. Raikkonen is **** against vettel.

Raikkonen must be pretty **** then. Grosjean was almost as slow as Raikkonen. Grosjean must be pretty **** then.

 

 

Edited by taran, 22 January 2016 - 07:55.

[JeePee]

I followed his rally adventure pretty closely, and as a Kimi fan I can say it was not that great, but the speed he showed at times was cool to see.

It was a bit like Kubica, only I believe Kimi's flashes of speed were quicker and his crashes were definitely less severe (a lot of the time just stuck in a ditch instead of a big roll). But he was never ever going to win a rally. I did like following it though, just like the Nascar thingy. And he didn't keep a seat occupied for some other great talent. He paid the car himself so no harm done there also 

Edited by JeePee, 22 January 2016 - 08:21.

[Oho]

I followed his rally adventure pretty closely, and as a Kimi fan I can say it was not that great, but the speed he showed at times was cool to see.

 

 

I understood Räikkönen's issues were not so much with speed as such but with pace notes. On familiar roads he was right up there but lacked the ability to either create or to drive to comprehensive pace notes. Well he was thrown or more like hurled himself straight into the deep end.

[RPM40]

To be fair, his rally career was probably no worse than his recent F1 career.

[kingofspa]

Ogier is superfast no doubt, but also a prick. He is always crying about how he is disadvantage by running first even though he has the fastest car. Loeb is a far better sportsman than him. Loeb had to face similar situations through out his career yet he never complained so frequently. Also remember, Loeb was out of rallying for 2 years and came back for Monte last year and immediately was fastest, that is until he crashed. But doing this at Monte is no mean feat.

[noikeee]

Also Loeb was always overrated. He is one of the best no doubt, but he also had a great car and remarkably **** competition. For god's sake Hirvonen was his number 1 rival majority of his reign! It took Ogier to show that Loeb isn't untouchable.

 

But Ogier's silly better than everyone else now too. I think it makes more sense to say they're both extremely good drivers, than to say they're average and every single other rally driver in the whole world is crap   (or hindered by terrible machinery/opportunity).

[Alexandros]

I understood Räikkönen's issues were not so much with speed as such but with pace notes. On familiar roads he was right up there but lacked the ability to either create or to drive to comprehensive pace notes. Well he was thrown or more like hurled himself straight into the deep end.

 

It's a whole different world driving blind under instructions. Some people are good at it, some less so. Kimi is on the second group. Closed stages etc with no notes required, the pace was there, IIRC he also won a repetitive street SS. 

[noikeee]

Winning stages means absolutely nothing, specially short stadium stages, I recall even Armindo Araújo won a stadium stage once and with a Group N car!

[Alexandros]

Winning stages means absolutely nothing, specially short stadium stages, I recall even Armindo Araújo won a stadium stage once and with a Group N car!

 

Well it definitely means something: You were faster than the other guys 

[sopa]

F1 and rallying are completely different sports.

 

To be honest, Raikkonen in WRC looked like a rich hobby driver, who could afford to buy himself a WRC car for a full season. Kubica is not far off this image either.

 

Raikkonen was better than the Al Qassimis or Ken Blocks of this world, who have also tried out WRC, and been nowhere. Of course, Kimi (like Kubica) came with a strong motorsports background and is a proper athlete, so he had at least some competence to go fast on stages. But overall still nowhere near the established experienced rally elit, which is a different ballgame altogether.

[messy]

I followed his rally adventure pretty closely, and as a Kimi fan I can say it was not that great, but the speed he showed at times was cool to see.

It was a bit like Kubica, only I believe Kimi's flashes of speed were quicker and his crashes were definitely less severe (a lot of the time just stuck in a ditch instead of a big roll). But he was never ever going to win a rally. I did like following it though, just like the Nascar thingy. And he didn't keep a seat occupied for some other great talent. He paid the car himself so no harm done there also 

 

I think Kubica has shown far, far more outright speed in a WRC car than Kimi did personally. If Kubica could keep it out of the ditch, he might actually have won Monte Carlo last year. 

[noikeee]

I agree Kubica's quicker than Kimi in a rally car; but Kimi was better at not crashing! Kimi crashed quite a bit too, but Kubica's crashing record is just insane. A lot of it may be just due to his lack of mobility/strength in his arms, sadly...

[JHSingo]

Exactly that. He got beaten by Ogier and we thought it meant he wasn't very good at all. But comparing them now, knowing what a great driver Ogier was, kind of puts Kimi's performance in a different light, IMO. The difference between Kimi and Ogier was not huge.

 

I think that's a bit disingenuous, trying to make out Raikkonen was better than he actually was. He was struggling to beat drivers who most people will never have heard of on most occasions. He was even close to challenging for podiums. 

I don't know why, but circuit races just seem to struggle to make the transition to rallying. While I think what he's overcome is fantastic, and he's very brave to be still rallying considering what happened those years ago, Kubica hasn't done much better than Raikkonen. But there's no shame in them giving it a try, I think the skill that WRC drivers have is incredible. They are surely among the very best drivers in the world, for the variety of conditions and stages they compete on. It's just a shame there's so little competition for Ogier currently.

[Tsarwash]

Ogier is superfast no doubt, but also a prick. He is always crying about how he is disadvantage by running first even though he has the fastest car. Loeb is a far better sportsman than him. Loeb had to face similar situations through out his career yet he never complained so frequently. Also remember, Loeb was out of rallying for 2 years and came back for Monte last year and immediately was fastest, that is until he crashed. But doing this at Monte is no mean feat.

To finish first, first you must finish. 

[DrProzac]

Kimis rally career wasn't a failure, if you consider how difficult the sport is and not only how much talnet but most importantly experience is needed to compete in WRC.

 

We can compare him to Kubica, both being F1 drivers.

http://www.ewrc-resu...hp?p=6450&sct=1

http://www.ewrc-resu...hp?p=8567&sct=1

 

http://www.ewrc-resu...?p=8567&sct=222

http://www.ewrc-resu...p?p=6450&sct=23

 

In WRC both had the same number of retirements, the same best result overall (5th), but Kubica had 14 stage wins (including longer ones and even gravel) and Kimi just one. Kubica had ten more rallies.  On other hand Kimi has more points. I don't remember Kimis rallying adventure that well, but i thin Kubica is much faster, but apparently he was able to bring more points home. Maybe crashed a bit less, despite a bigger percentage of retirements (or had more luck).

 

Kubica drivers basically with one hand (numerous WRC drivers said how impressed they are with his speed) and I think he treat his rallying much more seriously than Kimi. Sadly apart from stage wins the results don't show that.

Edited by DrProzac, 22 January 2016 - 15:20.

[Fatgadget]

It is my view Kimi went rallying for something to do during his lay off and because he had ample funding to do so.

I doubt very much he was under any illusions of taking the rally world by storm,his fanboys - maybe!

[tyker]

Re: Dolph

 

It was at a time when the leader of the rally had to start each day of the rally and clear the road for the drivers behind to their disadvantage, I believe there was a couple of rallies were they positioned Ogier in front of Loeb to clear the road for him. 

 

Sorry I don't know how to use the quote feature.

Edited by tyker, 22 January 2016 - 22:28.

[LuckyStrike1]

He crashed less than Kubica - haskubicacrashedyet?

[AlexLangheck]

They have 4 wheels & a steering wheel; but that is were the similarity ends. Rallying is just so different; mainly the pace-notes which virtually all circuit racers have difficulty with. Making fast, safe, accurate pace notes is a skill - and then trusting them is another problem. It's just too different/difficult for anybody to make a success of any switch. 

 

Saying that, quite a few circuit racers do rallying for a hobby in their spare time; in fact Guy Smith won the Jack Frost stages last weekend in a Focus WRCar, Romain Dumas quite often does ERC. WRC events in his Porsche, etc

 

The days of all rounders like Vic Elford winning the ERC, then going and winning the Monte & Daytona 24 back to back are gone. Saying that, Loeb is probably the best current all round driver; WRC, race wins in WTCC, FiA GT and other categories.

[tormave]

I certainly didn't expect Kimi to compete with the WRC elite. I was astonished at his rate of development in the beginning, with all the bloody world watching. The fact that he comfortably beat the WRC gentleman drivers, most of whom have won national championships and have years of experience, was impressive in my opinion.

The comparison to Kubica is interesting. Kimi seemed to find his comfortable rhythm quicker, whereas Kubica - perhaps due to his injury - has struggled to find the fast but safe speed. I always thought Kimi jumped to WRC too quickly, but Kubica didn't seem learn a lot from a full season in WRC2.

[DrProzac]

He crashed less than Kubica - haskubicacrashedyet?

He crashed less, but his results weren't really better.

 

Some statistics. Kubica's stats include his starts in a slower RRC car in 2013 when he won the WRC2 championship and was scoring in WRC general classification.

 

Best WRC result:

Kubica: 5th

Raikkonen: 5th

 

Average number of points per WRC rally:

Kubica: 1,34  

Raikkonen: 2,68

 

Number of won WRC stages (and the average number per rally):

Kubica: 14 (0,44)

Raikkonen: 1 (0.05)

 

% of retirements in WRC:

Kubica: 28,1%

Raikkonen: 36,4%

 

 

Some will think that Raikkonen was better at controlling his pace (so he brought home some more points, despite also crashing frequently), some will say that Kubica is a lot faster in a rally car. I think both may be true.

 

It also wonder if and how much would Kimi improve. I think he his ralling was far les serious for him than for Kubica (I'm not thinking about testing, car and team preparation etc, but about attitude. For Kubica it;s a replacement for F1, and generally Kimi has a different philosophy of work)

 

Another funny statistic - Kubica's result in WRC position wise in an RRC (WRC2) car were similar to those in the WRC car. Maybe even better. One has to wonder what went wrong when he switched to the WRC championship and a faster car.

 

 

Suplement - number of international championship rally wins (WRC, WRC2, ERC, IRC):

Kubica: 6

Raikkonen: 0

(Though Raikkonen didn't really try, so it's perhaps unfair to compare But people forget that Kubica was competitive in rallying not only in local rallies bu also including championships. Not in WRC though, apart from pure pace granting some stage wins)

Edited by DrProzac, 23 January 2016 - 11:49.

[tormave]

Rally2 rules make the number of retirements stat a bit silly. The only reason Kimi has more points is he finished way more rallies than Kubica without crashing out once.

[DrProzac]

True, which unfortunately doesn't make his results any more impressive.

 

Not that they should be, given his rallying experience. But sometimes I feel that people think it's a lot easier than it is and focus on bashing Kubica for his crashing. (it was a similar with Raikkonen, but to less extent).

 

And if we compare, than Kubica's WRC results in an RRC in his first year in the championship (2013) were more consistent and close point wise with Kimi's in an WRC car in his first year (2010). That's why I find it intriguing  why he was so more crash happy in a WRC car.

[Pierce89]

Interesting you mention JMB. I had a lot of time for Jean Michel, what he did back then was insanely brave!

He was actually very quick on a GP bike, got a Roberts Yamaha on pole a few times and also a Modenas which is no mean feat. But was plagued by injury on his 500 career.

He was quick and could have been top 3 in 250 championships but was in the same team as Biaggi so had little input into the bike as Max was very pushy and aggressive in his demands which only really he could ride. But was often as quick as Ruggia who was a GP winner, JMB could have won a race in my eyes, easily. Just unlucky.

Not sure many guys did win 25- races in the mid 90's, Biaggi won most of them with Harada and Waldmann next, that was Bayles nest chance as he was not as good on a 500.

To give up what he did, a huge earning career in moto/supercross was insane really. Imagine someone like Kvyat or now suddenly deciding to start NASCAR or something, it is that much of a leap. It was that early in his career he switched.

As for Loeb and Ogier, Loeb wanted him out of Citroen, tells you all you need to know really about how much of a threat he was to Seb. Seb is the greatest but had it easy for a very long time. Same as Ogier now. Would he have beaten McRae in his prime? Maybe but I think not, not every week as he did at Citroen. And he certainly would not ave beaten Tommi!

It wasn't quite as early in his career as you imply. He had time to win a MX World Championship and fail in US MX (much higher level than WORLD championship, funnily enough), before he started road racing.

Edited by Pierce89, 23 January 2016 - 13:49.