152 replies to this topic

[as65p]

mlsnoopy, on Mar 15 2012, 13:39, said:

Would Alonso drive for Ferrari in 2010 if it wasn't for Santader's money?

I have a better one:

Would any money in the world have been enough to buy out Raikönnens seat if he had outdriven Massa regularily in similar style as Alonso?

[flyer121]

as65p, on Mar 15 2012, 16:10, said:

I have a better one:

Would any money in the world have been enough to buy out Raikönnens seat if he had outdriven Massa regularily in similar style as Alonso?

Why not? If Sultan of Brunei felt that Alonso should go race for Ferrari - He would buy out the team and give the seat to Nando.

There is a price tag for each and every thing in this world, some of them are not on display - thats all!

Edited by flyer121, 15 March 2012 - 16:21.

[Seanspeed]

wepmob2000, on Mar 15 2012, 11:57, said:

My respect for Petrov just increased greatly - and I thought he was underrated by many 'experts' anyway. Basically he shoots from the hip and has said things that many people believe but are too scared to say

If you believe that Alonso and Petrov are both in similar situations in regards to being 'paydrivers', then being scared to express that opinion is quite a dignity-preserving instinct to have and you should be glad it exists.

[Oho]

Gilles4Ever, on Mar 15 2012, 05:40, said:

Alonso's replacement of Kimi had nothing to do with sponsorship but rather the performance he could bring to the team.

Then why didn't he.

[flyer121]

Oho, on Mar 15 2012, 16:30, said:

Then why didn't he.

Oh Man !! You crack me up ...
... at the innosence with which you asked the question.

Anyway to answer the question - because it was just the prospect of the performance.
You cant guarantee performance when you are making a deal. Can you?

Edited by flyer121, 15 March 2012 - 16:47.

[GeorgeCartwright]

rr0cket, on Mar 15 2012, 15:57, said:

Are you implying that there is a team out there, compensation aside, that would choose Vitali Petrov over Fernando Alonso as their driver?

No, not necessarily, I'm only saying that none of us are in a position to state that they know what any team would do. No matter how obvious something may seem, you can't know the necessary truth of it.

[Rafo]

F1 Pay Driver /def/: Driver who would be unable to find a drive in the paddock without the assiatance of a substantial financial aid in form of sponsorship or otherwise for the hiring team.

While you can surely say that Santander's sponsorship money pays for Alonso's current salary and was probably influential in the decision to bring him over to Ferrari, think its plain stupid to believe he wouldnt have a drive in today's paddock if it wasnt for that sponsoship. As much as I dislike the guy, he is a double WDC and one of the best drivers in today`s paddock.

Question is, Petrov (who I loved when he ruined Alonso's race) would be able to find a drive if he would have any financial aid?

Also, besides probably Hamilton, is there any new driver in nowadays paddock, comming to a rookie season in F1, without any sort of financial aid? Aren't all new drivers these days pay drivers? eventually some shine more than others and get hired to bigger teams on a paycheck, but believe almost everyone these days starts as pay drivers, to "pay" for their chance to show if they have what it takes to be a top driver in F1.

[sheogorath]

Unless you are sponsored by a team from the start, a la Hamilton or Red Bull/Toro Rosso, completely bypassing everybody else.

[jals99]

Sanman59, on Mar 15 2012, 16:52, said:

Lets get some perpective here..........

Pay drivers are those without any recognisable talent who get into F1 purely on pay as you drive type deals with no form shown in feeder series. I give you some examples:

- Rosset
- Yoong
- Lavaggi
- Deletraz
- Diniz
- Yamamoto
- Monteiro
- Baumgartner


Drivers with Talent who are therefore able to attract sponsorship support are quite different. I give you:

- Maldonado - GP2 Champion
- Petrov - GP2 Runner Up
- Senna GP2 Runner Up


These have shown that they deserve their place in F1 by these performances. There are no better qualified or more obvious candidates for seats.


END OF STORY

Rosset also was GP2(F3000) runner up, his results in lower series were much better, than of others from that group

[aray]

Oho, on Mar 15 2012, 22:00, said:

Then why didn't he.

..kimi became pathetic enough to lose to massa..considering his last one and half year performance against felipe(2008-2009 hungry),he shouldn't had managed to won a race with 2010 ferrari...alonso brought that car to the brink of championship...

likes of gilles,prost,mansall failed to win a championship with ferrari...and guess what,a certain jody schekter did it in 1979(that too in his first year with ferrari,like kimi).....and funny enough he got the boot within 2 years...ferrari knows the class..

[fieraku]

as65p, on Mar 15 2012, 11:10, said:

I have a better one:

Would any money in the world have been enough to buy out Raikönnens seat if he had outdriven Massa regularily in similar style as Alonso?

There would and it did also it was a bonus of the whole new Ferrari philosophy of going 'Latino'.
Who pays someone 40? million a year for doing nothing? Santander does to get FA onto a seat.

[bourbon]

seahawk, on Mar 15 2012, 09:49, said:

Well, are most top drivers not paydrivers?

Once they have personal sponsors who also sponsor the team the line gets blurred. Vettel is a paydriver, if you see Red Bull as his personal sponsor.

Red Bull is a RACING TEAM and pays its drivers. They have sponsors like everyone else. That Red Bull Racing has another company behind it called Red Bull does not justify your above comment. McLaren also has another company behind it called McLaren which would similarly make Lewis and Jenson pay drivers if you were to see it as their personal sponsor, but there is no reference to this being true for Vettel, Webber, Lewis or Jenson that I know of.

Your comment makes no sense in my opinion.

Quote

Alonso is a pay driver beyond any doubt and he would have no place in F1 without the money.

What are you talking about? Do you believe Alonso would not get a drive unless he had sponsorship? Just because someone wants to sponsor him does not mean he is a pay driver. If that were the case, it makes your other statement nonsense:

Quote

I only see few drivers who can not be called pay drivers.
1. Lewis
2. Jenson
3. Kimi

Because every single one of those drivers has sponsors too, either team or personal.

Quote

and that is about it.

No, based on your criteria, either everybody in the sport is a paydriver or they are not. Seeing as your criteria does not distinguish, I would have to disagree with your definition altogether. As stated, it is a driver that would not have a seat without cash (or a paydriver is one that must seek sponsors - and have that sponsor's continued contribution for his seat)

[aray]

GeorgeCartwright, on Mar 15 2012, 22:05, said:

No, not necessarily, I'm only saying that none of us are in a position to state that they know what any team would do. No matter how obvious something may seem, you can't know the necessary truth of it.

O'REALLY..!!!..
how many ounce of grey cell it requires do you think to chose alonso over petrov...?
you never know what would happen if you try to cross a busy road with both of your eyes close,but that won't mean that you are not aware of most possible outcome...

[Dolph]

Sanman59, on Mar 15 2012, 14:52, said:

Lets get some perpective here..........

Pay drivers are those without any recognisable talent who get into F1 purely on pay as you drive type deals with no form shown in feeder series. I give you some examples:

- Rosset
- Yoong
- Lavaggi
- Deletraz
- Diniz
- Yamamoto
- Monteiro
- Baumgartner


Drivers with Talent who are therefore able to attract sponsorship support are quite different. I give you:

- Maldonado - GP2 Champion
- Petrov - GP2 Runner Up
- Senna GP2 Runner Up


These have shown that they deserve their place in F1 by these performances. There are no better qualified or more obvious candidates for seats.


END OF STORY

Rosset was 2nd in F3000 1995.
Monteiro was 2nd in WSbR in 1994

[GeorgeCartwright]

aray, on Mar 15 2012, 17:11, said:

O'REALLY..!!!..
how many ounce of grey cell it requires do you think to chose alonso over petrov...?
you never know what would happen if you try to cross a busy road with both of your eyes close,but that won't mean that you are not aware of most possible outcome...

I'm not entirely sure what your question is, I haven't claimed that anyone would pick Petrov over Alonso, just that it's a really bad argument to claim you know something based on popular opinion.

[fabr68]

I was not aware that Alonso owned Santander

[aray]

GeorgeCartwright, on Mar 15 2012, 22:53, said:

I'm not entirely sure what your question is, I haven't claimed that anyone would pick Petrov over Alonso, just that it's a really bad argument to claim you know something based on popular opinion.

my point is you can,sometimes,accurately predict the outcome of a event that is yet to happen...

[aray]

in reality,it seems alonso is the only guy who can commend such trust from a sponsor...every team get sponsorships and pay the drivers after using substantial part of the money to run the team.....in case of alonso,a sponsor is giving money to a driver and separate money to run the cost...a win-win situation for a team..

[wepmob2000]

Seanspeed, on Mar 15 2012, 16:23, said:

If you believe that Alonso and Petrov are both in similar situations in regards to being 'paydrivers', then being scared to express that opinion is quite a dignity-preserving instinct to have and you should be glad it exists.

Ehm, no, actually not. Technically Petrov's right, Alonso's a great driver - of that there's no doubt - but anyone who says the money he brings from Santander has no bearing on his desirability as a driver is living in cloud-cuckoo land. Alonso's contract with Ferrari is a business deal, plain and simple....

[GeorgeCartwright]

aray, on Mar 15 2012, 17:30, said:

my point is you can,sometimes,accurately predict the outcome of a event that is yet to happen...

But does that mean you knew it was going to happen beforehand?

I admit, the argument I'm making is largely academic but consider it from a drivers perspective, like Petrov, what reason should he have to believe Alonso is a better choice than him? In his mind, it's likely that the only difference between him and Alonso is the opportunities they've had and the time they've had to make use of them. If there's one thing an F1 driver is likely to need it's self-confidence and the utter belief that he can win given the chance.

[itsademo]

baddog, on Mar 15 2012, 08:42, said:

Pay driver STILL means, to 99% of Alonso fans, a driver who would not have an F1 drive without a fat bundle of cash. trying to redefine it is silly.

corrected for you.

FYI
Only a fool would think Alonso would not have had a seat in a good car without santander however...
The fact remains Santander said take Alonso and you get our cash only a fool thinks that is not paying.
However many get hung up on thinking the term pay driver has to be derogatory.
To some yes it is, to others it is mealy a statement of fact not a comment on ability.
The fact remains Santander paid massive amounts of cash to ensure Alonso got a seat in the ferrari a year early
or do people want to ignore that fact too?

[Bunchies]

wepmob2000, on Mar 15 2012, 08:57, said:

My respect for Petrov just increased greatly - and I thought he was underrated by many 'experts' anyway. Basically he shoots from the hip and has said things that many people believe but are too scared to say

Because what he believes has a bearing on how much driving skill he has?

[wepmob2000]

Bunchies, on Mar 15 2012, 17:43, said:

Because what he believes has a bearing on how much driving skill he has?

Driving skill isn't the only measure of how much respect most people have for a driver, otherwise a certain M.Schumacher would receive wholly undeserved levels of respect. Straight talking is something I like to see in todays overly-sanitised corporate F1........

[Burai]

rhukkas, on Mar 15 2012, 14:33, said:

unfortunately motorsport has become excessively expensive that now only the very wealthy can get the opportunity to test and drive often enough to build a competence level that makes them a more than attractive prospect for any team.

Hasn't this always been the case though? Motor racing has never been a poor man's game. There have been some guys who've gotten to the top through sheer bloody-mindedness but they are the exception rather than the rule and they've still needed some level of funding from somewhere. Nigel Mansell's unshakeable self-belief in his own ability leading him to mortgage his house to carry on after his sponsorship had dried up springs to mind.

[fabr68]

The difference between Alonso and Petrov is that if Santander withdraws from Ferrari, Alonso will still drive for them until 2016. If Petrov sponsors withdraw from Carteham, Petrov who?

[rr0cket]

GeorgeCartwright, on Mar 15 2012, 12:35, said:

No, not necessarily, I'm only saying that none of us are in a position to state that they know what any team would do. No matter how obvious something may seem, you can't know the necessary truth of it.

I agree that nothing is absolute. But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

Alonso is not a pay driver, I don't see how he is. He receives a salary from Ferrari. Ferrari, apparently, need help to pay for a driver of Alonso's caliber. They in turn find an investor who sees the incentive in helping pay for a high salary driver. It's black and white.

[GeorgeCartwright]

rr0cket, on Mar 15 2012, 18:32, said:

I agree that nothing is absolute. But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

Yeah, that's not unreasonable, see my later post for what I think is more to the point.

[wepmob2000]

fabr68, on Mar 15 2012, 18:32, said:

The difference between Alonso and Petrov is that if Santander withdraws from Ferrari, Alonso will still drive for them until 2016. If Petrov sponsors withdraw from Carteham, Petrov who?

And you know this because you were present at both drivers contract negotiations and are privy to all the clauses in each contract?

[jals99]

fabr68, on Mar 15 2012, 22:32, said:

The difference between Alonso and Petrov is that if Santander withdraws from Ferrari, Alonso will still drive for them until 2016. If Petrov sponsors withdraw from Carteham, Petrov who?

If he will beat Kovalainen, Petrov will still drive in Caterham, and he will beat if he'll be given equal treatment, i blieve

[Fontainebleau]

itsademo, on Mar 15 2012, 18:38, said:

corrected for you.

FYI
Only a fool would think Alonso would not have had a seat in a good car without santander however...
The fact remains Santander said take Alonso and you get our cash only a fool thinks that is not paying.
However many get hung up on thinking the term pay driver has to be derogatory.
To some yes it is, to others it is mealy a statement of fact not a comment on ability.
The fact remains Santander paid massive amounts of cash to ensure Alonso got a seat in the ferrari a year early
or do people want to ignore that fact too?

Or maybe Santander accepted a business proposition by Ferrari, which included amongst many other things a certain driver line-up that the Scuderia had chosen. Santander liked the deal and decided to pay what you define as "massive amounts of cash", and Ferrari used that cash to ensure that Alonso got the seat he had already been given for 2011 one year earlier.

Why would Ferrari want to get rid of Raikkonen? I have no idea and probably this thread is not the best place to discuss it - that's more of a question for the Raikkonen thread, I have read quite a number of posts in it defending how Raikkonen was marginalised by Ferrari from 2008 (which would explain why he was beaten by Massa in those years) and if those are correct then I wonder why people defend that it was Santander that took the decision...

[Menace]

jals99, on Mar 15 2012, 12:35, said:

If he will beat Kovalainen, Petrov will still drive in Caterham, and he will beat if he'll be given equal treatment, i blieve

Is that the excuse, already made up before the season even begins?

How silly of us, of course if Petrov loses to Heikki it has nothing to do with Heikki's driving vs Petrov, it's undoubtedly a conspiracy! I mean, they would clearly fire Trulli just to bring Petrov in to handicap him vs Heikki.

[tommyhjortasen]

I think Ptrov is a very brave man, to call a spade a spade and stand for it, takes a man.

Except one thing I agree with him. Italian girls, nothing wrong with them.

[Boxerevo]

Lol,i knew lewis had haters,but 114 votes for alonso pay-driver is amusing.

"World Champion+Sponsors= Only Logical & Reasonable outcome!"
How can this be losing ??

Edited by Boxerevo, 15 March 2012 - 21:24.

[Fontainebleau]

Boxerevo, on Mar 15 2012, 22:23, said:

Lol,i knew lewis had haters,but 114 votes for alonso pay-driver is amusing.

"World Champion+Sponsors= Only Logical & Reasonable outcome!"
How can this be losing ??

Good question...

[Tifosi4ever]

jals99, on Mar 15 2012, 19:35, said:

If he will beat Kovalainen, Petrov will still drive in Caterham, and he will beat if he'll be given equal treatment, i blieve

Petrov beating a team mate is rare. He was beaten by Kubica and Heidfeld, then pretty much matched by Senna who was thrown in the middle of the season, with Senna being the fastest in quali.

Even his own team have said that Jarno would be the driver they would employ, if financial considerations weren't involved. To put it simply, Caterham have openly stated that they would rather not employ Petrov, but his cash makes it possible.

[Eff One 2002]

CrucialXtreme, on Mar 14 2012, 22:33, said:

No there is a difference. Ferrari did not sign Alonso because he had financial backing. They signed him because he is a winner. A great driver with great potential

Precisley, and there lies the distinction.

[Bunchies]

wepmob2000, on Mar 15 2012, 10:48, said:

Driving skill isn't the only measure of how much respect most people have for a driver, otherwise a certain M.Schumacher would receive wholly undeserved levels of respect. Straight talking is something I like to see in todays overly-sanitised corporate F1........

True, though you mention that he's been "underrated," which led me to believe that you were talking about his driving performance (which I didn't really agree with). However, if you meant people's outlook on Petrov's person, then I understand now.

[wepmob2000]

Bunchies, on Mar 16 2012, 04:56, said:

True, though you mention that he's been "underrated," which led me to believe that you were talking about his driving performance (which I didn't really agree with). However, if you meant people's outlook on Petrov's person, then I understand now.

I do think he's somewhat underrated as a driver too, there were certainly some very good performances in his first year, especiially considering his unconventional route to F1. At least I feel there's more to come from him than you'd expect from some of the more obvious 'pay-drivers' - I've been watching long enough to remember Phillippe Adams......

[Sanman59]

Has anybody else noticed that Santander has started sponsoring Bruno Senna?

Ferrari next then! The Senna name is irresistable in Santander's biggest market (Brazil). If Massa goes then they will need to maintain their connection to that market.

[engel]

Sanman59, on Apr 2 2012, 12:58, said:

Has anybody else noticed that Santander has started sponsoring Bruno Senna?

Ferrari next then! The Senna name is irresistable in Santander's biggest market (Brazil). If Massa goes then they will need to maintain their connection to that market.

That has probably more to do with Santander decreasing their investment in Massa (it was rumored he was getting around $5m/year directly from them to figurehead their campaigns in Brazil)

[RealRacing]

Sanman59, on Apr 2 2012, 06:58, said:

Has anybody else noticed that Santander has started sponsoring Bruno Senna?

Ferrari next then! The Senna name is irresistable in Santander's biggest market (Brazil). If Massa goes then they will need to maintain their connection to that market.

Hopefully Senna goes to Ferrari and Perez to Williams. Would hate to see Perez´s career destroyed if he goes to Ferrari.

On the subject, yeah, Petrov must have no love lost with Alonso who gesticulated his opinion at him after the last race of 2010...

If we think about it, the real Santander pay driver is Kimi. They actually PAID him to leave Ferrari to make room for FA. His rally car should have had Ferrari and Santander stickers

[cheapracer]

kosmos, on Mar 14 2012, 21:34, said:

Petrov is a loser and the only reason he is on this sport, is because the money,

Yup, he only has millions, drives a F1 car and has females hanging all over him - phhhttttt, rather your life any day

[Octavian]

Would Ferrari want Alonso if the Santander money wasn't on the table? The answer is yes.
Would Caterham want Petrov if the SIBUR money wasn't on the table? The answer is no.

That's the difference between a pay driver and a non pay driver. End of debate, close this silly petty thread.

[MikeTekRacing]

would have ferrari fired kimi to get alonso without santander money?
guess not so....it's not as simple as it looks

[prty]

MikeTekRacing, on Apr 2 2012, 23:45, said:

would have ferrari fired kimi to get alonso without santander money?
guess not so....it's not as simple as it looks

If they didn't want to fire Kimi to get Alonso they wouldn't have done so even with the Santander money.
Indeed, it's not as simple.

[mcguin]

MikeTekRacing, on Apr 3 2012, 00:45, said:

would have ferrari fired kimi to get alonso without santander money?
guess not so....it's not as simple as it looks

Says who?

About the thread per se, what main sponsor did Alonso bring to renault in 2003, F1 wasn't even broadcasted properly in spain, nobody watched F1, pffss...

[One]

Pay driver means that he is not good enough without fuding coming from himself.

Alonso will drive no matter how, so as Kimi, so as Schumi, so as Vettel,... it does not mater if he has connection who could give money to the teams or not.
Petrov is on the edge, but just make his license to pay driver if he continues to stae things like this!

[Gareth]

MikeTekRacing, on Apr 2 2012, 23:45, said:

would have ferrari fired kimi to get alonso without santander money?
guess not so....it's not as simple as it looks

If Kimi was out of contract and Alonso didn't have Santander money, who would Ferrari have signed?

IMO the answer is pretty obvious - Alonso. Which means he absolutely cannot be described as a pay driver because of the situation when he signed with Ferrari.

A pay driver to me involves a team compromising on the talent in the car in exchange for sponsorship cash. Given Ferrari's view (right or wrong, I make no comment) was clearly that Alonso was the better option than Kimi, I can't see how Alonso can possibly be classified as a pay driver.

[as65p]

Gareth, on Apr 3 2012, 11:34, said:

If Kimi was out of contract and Alonso didn't have Santander money, who would Ferrari have signed?

IMO the answer is pretty obvious - Alonso. Which means he absolutely cannot be described as a pay driver because of the situation when he signed with Ferrari.

A pay driver to me involves a team compromising on the talent in the car in exchange for sponsorship cash. Given Ferrari's view (right or wrong, I make no comment) was clearly that Alonso was the better option than Kimi, I can't see how Alonso can possibly be classified as a pay driver.

In that it pays for Ferrari to have him drive one of their cars.

BTW, long time no see . I almost feared you had grown up (and out of foruming).

[Jon83]

Both are good enough to be on the grid regardless of how much money they bring.