31 replies to this topic

[mattferg]

Thinking along the same lines as the Riccardo/Raikkonen debate, what's more impressive:

a) A young driver who's been nurtured by one team - groomed to be a future champion. Along the lines of Vettel/Hamilton, and possibly Alonso at Renault. Does Jenson at Honda/Brawn count? Please post some more examples of this happening! JV/Hill at Williams maybe?
b) An established driver being "imported" into a team, and being as successful/if not more at the new team. Much like Schumacher/Raikkonen to Ferrari

I came up with this idea because I'm not sure what I'd be more impressed by - if Riccardo went to RBR and won the WDC or if Raikkonen did.

Remember this can also be thought about from a team perspective - if a team is able to nurture new talent and create new champions, this is also really impressive.

Vote!

Edited by mattferg, 27 July 2013 - 00:28.

[noikeee]

Proving yourself outside of your comfort zone where you were groomed is probably slightly more impressive. Although for me the best measure of a truly great driver is one able to beat several established proven drivers in equal circumstances of machinery (as team-mates), not necessarily in different teams.

And ultimately certain drivers care very little about all that and just want as many wins and championships as possible. Which I suppose is an entirely fair and logical goal as well.

[mattferg]

Sadly I can't think of anyone in recent times who's intentionally gone to another team to 'take on' another great in his field, or if I can they haven't been super successful (Jenson) It'd be awesome if we had the Senna-Prost challenge days back, but then again, no one really wants to see one team dominate.

[noikeee]

It doesn't tend to happen intentionally. It's often a driver outperforming expectations and suddenly mixing it up with the established lads (Hamilton vs Alonso; Mansell vs Piquet), or a top driver stuck in an underperforming/financially troubled team having to suck it up and move to a team with more chances of success despite a difficult team-mate. The moves of Button and Montoya to McLaren sort of fit into this latter situation, although there was little between the teams they were at and the one they ended up on, but were proved right in terms of car speed. Kimi to Red Bull if he does it will be kind of similar, it's not really about proving himself vs Vettel, it's about Red Bull being likely better.

Edited by noikeee, 27 July 2013 - 01:06.

[HoldenRT]

Maybe I'm just tired and am misunderstanding this question..

But I don't think this one matters at all.

The one that matters is..

"Which is more important.. winning a championship with an established team.. or building it from the ground up and going from nothing to winning championships".

ie what Lewis has tried to do with Mercedes.

Junior driver or established driver doesn't make much difference IMO.

[Sakae]

Maybe I'm just tired and am misunderstanding this question..

But I don't think this one matters at all.

The one that matters is..

"Which is more important.. winning a championship with an established team.. or building it from the ground up and going from nothing to winning championships".

ie what Lewis has tried to do with Mercedes.

Junior driver or established driver doesn't make much difference IMO.

I think you are tired.

Edited by Sakae, 27 July 2013 - 05:09.

[v@sh]

I find neither one is more impressive over the other. It all depends on the context of winning the WDC, the circumstances, the team-mate, the competition etc.

[undersquare]

Well many of us are waiting to see Sebi in another team, aren't we? Then he might be more impressive, or less.

[Sakae]

Well many of us are waiting to see Sebi in another team, aren't we? Then he might be more impressive, or less.

Hamilton built his reputation at McLaren as his first team, whilst Vettel was stuck at TR. I think Vettel is done for all practical purposes with trying to impress Hamilton's fans.

[SpaMaster]

Impressive by team can be very different to impressive by driver. So there cannot be a proper answer to this question.

A driver coming through from the bottom ranks with no structure in place to support him consistently and a driver being backed a proper system at the very young age and delivering on the promise are impressive in their own ways. Similarly an organization having a structure in place to develop young drivers is impressive from an organization's perspective as well. If they happen to have a chance of getting a driver like Raikkonen or driver X who has come up through the ranks without much established support that is impressive as well. Often these two features go against each other, so it is difficult to quantify.

[undersquare]

Hamilton built his reputation at McLaren as his first team, whilst Vettel was stuck at TR. I think Vettel is done for all practical purposes with trying to impress Hamilton's fans.

I'm sure Sebi wants to impress me with all his fastest laps

Lewis and Sebi will both be more impressive if they can win in multiple teams, it's obvious. The op isn't quite to the point IMO.

[stillOrange]

I'm sure Sebi wants to impress me with all his fastest laps

Lewis and Sebi will both be more impressive if they can win in multiple teams, it's obvious.

Well... one of them has already achieved that

[fabr68]

[prty]

If a driver maintains competitiveness regardless of team and rules, again and again, is more impressive than anything else.

[garoidb]

Well... one of them has already achieved that ;)

And the other may do it tomorrow!

[joshb]

Well many of us are waiting to see Sebi in another team, aren't we? Then he might be more impressive, or less.

Seb has been in 3 teams! He's well travelled compared to most drivers on the grid!

[prty]

Seb has been in 3 teams! He's well travelled compared to most drivers on the grid!

Yeah, one race in BMW, then a Red Bull chassis with a better engine, then Red Bull. So travelled...

[mattferg]

Maybe I'm just tired and am misunderstanding this question..

But I don't think this one matters at all.

The one that matters is..

"Which is more important.. winning a championship with an established team.. or building it from the ground up and going from nothing to winning championships".

ie what Lewis has tried to do with Mercedes.

Junior driver or established driver doesn't make much difference IMO.

But Lewis hasn't done that with Mercedes... Schumacher did then left.

[mattferg]

Yeah, one race in BMW, then a Red Bull chassis with a better engine, then Red Bull. So travelled...

Yawn, you argue the Ferrari engine in 2008 was so much better than the Renault... but it's still a 'better' engine now and I didn't see it helping TR last year against Williams...

And Lewis is any better? He's always used the same engine whereas Vettel has used 3.

Edited by mattferg, 27 July 2013 - 23:05.

[Schumacher7]

But Lewis hasn't done that with Mercedes... Schumacher did then left.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...run.

[caso]

I didn't vote because it makes no difference to me where the driver comes from. If he is a product of their young-drivers-program then congratulations to the team. An established driver would've propably cost a lot more.

[apoka]

It's hard to decide between the options in the OP - I think they are more or less equal. What impresses me most is if drivers consistently perform well over several years. (Different teams and team mates is a bonus, but not strictly necessary as F1 itself and every single driver is also changing each year.)

[speng]

But Lewis hasn't done that with Mercedes... Schumacher did then left.

oh dear. The nonsense that some surfaces is baffling

[Massa_f1]

But Lewis hasn't done that with Mercedes... Schumacher did then left.

Not saying Schumacher alone is responsible, Rosberg is as well they were the men that built the team up. If anyone starts comparing Lewis at Mercedes to Schumacher in a 96 Ferrari that's when I will just burst out laughing

[prty]

Yawn, you argue the Ferrari engine in 2008 was so much better than the Renault... but it's still a 'better' engine now and I didn't see it helping TR last year against Williams...

And Lewis is any better? He's always used the same engine whereas Vettel has used 3.

First the Ferrari and Renault engines are not the same in 2008 and now.
Second, there are different rules now, which are very advantageous for the Renault one. They were allowed to tweak it for reliability reasons, being no longer in power disadvantage, as they were in 2008. Plus it is still the one which has less consumption, and the most efficient one for exhaust blowing. I don't really need to explain why that is good under current regulations.

Lewis just won with a different team, while Vettel was colliding with Button and finished 3th with the best car. Webber finished right behind him after starting 10th. That answers your question.

[Zoetrope]

Not saying Schumacher alone is responsible, Rosberg is as well they were the men that built the team up. If anyone starts comparing Lewis at Mercedes to Schumacher in a 96 Ferrari that's when I will just burst out laughing

I am too young to remember those times, so please can someone explain the difference? Ferrari was 3rd in 94 and 3rd in 95, clearly out of WCC contention just as Mercedes in 10, 11, 12. Lewis brings lots of money, resources, marketing, good aura and hope to the team. He might be just a part of Mercedes renewal rather than a reason, but it wouldn't be possible if he rejected their offer.

[George Costanza]

Not saying Schumacher alone is responsible, Rosberg is as well they were the men that built the team up. If anyone starts comparing Lewis at Mercedes to Schumacher in a 96 Ferrari that's when I will just burst out laughing

Indeed..

In 1996, Ferrari did not even have a design office in Italy, nor a team.

It was all on John Bernard in England.

In 1997, Ross and Rory set up a office an Italy.

And, the 2013 Mercedes is much quicker than the 1996 Ferrari.... Just look at Eddie Irvine's results...

[George Costanza]

I am too young to remember those times, so please can someone explain the difference? Ferrari was 3rd in 94 and 3rd in 95, clearly out of WCC contention just as Mercedes in 10, 11, 12. Lewis brings lots of money, resources, marketing, good aura and hope to the team. He might be just a part of Mercedes renewal rather than a reason, but it wouldn't be possible if he rejected their offer.

2012 was quite opposite effect for MGP, they were fast for the 1st half and Schumacher's car couldn't finish a race, then they fell wayside in the 2nd half.

[George Costanza]

But Lewis hasn't done that with Mercedes... Schumacher did then left.

If Michael wasn't there, MGP wouldn't have been the team they are today. Ask Ross Brawn.

[micktosin]

If Michael wasn't there, MGP wouldn't have been the team they are today. Ask Ross Brawn.

You mean not as backward in terms of tyre management feedback?

Edit.. Get me coat

Edited by micktosin, 28 July 2013 - 18:44.

[frp]

Not saying Schumacher alone is responsible, Rosberg is as well they were the men that built the team up. If anyone starts comparing Lewis at Mercedes to Schumacher in a 96 Ferrari that's when I will just burst out laughing

Well, yeah, the Ferrari team Schumacher joined had won twice as many races in the previous two years as the Mercedes team Hamilton joined.

[frp]

But Lewis hasn't done that with Mercedes... Schumacher did then left.

You're right there. Schumi built it up from the rag-bag no-hoper bunch of clueless losers that won eight Grands Prix and the Constructors' Championship in 2009.