49 replies to this topic

[skittt]

Come On the guy has already lost 2 WDC one winning only one GP and one winning probably more than the actual WDC...so what does this guy have to do to win one?

I'm under the impression that he will never win one.

So which WDC do you think he regrets losing more 2003 or 2005?

Me thinks is 2005...

[RDM]

2005.

And, as the actress would presumably have said to the bishop, "Where's yer poll?"

[jokuvaan]

I'm almost sure that it was asked from him, but I dont quite remember the answer. Most likely 2003 as it was more close.

[bira]

I vaguely recall Ron Dennis saying, when Kimi moved to McLaren, something about Kimi wanting to be the youngest World Champion - that it was his desire. So I think it hurt him more to lose 2003 because of that. That said, I'm pretty sure that losing any championship that is within reach is painful.

[SeanValen]

Originally posted by skittt
..so what does this guy have to do to win one?
.

He doesn't have to do much, he just needs more luck and some better reliability, he's got the talent, Michael and Todt know he's got the talent, it's more like it'll be a crime if he didn't win the championship, mclaren were not quite there in 2003 with performance consistently and were not quite there in 2005 in reliabilty and early qualifying problems in the season, winning a championship has alot to do with the team, kimi was ready, mclaren wasn't, mclaren got jpm's car right though lol for test drivers either when he was away.


2003, I don't see him regretting losing that, 2003 was pretty stupid with Japan, even Max Mosely said Michael would of been robbed if the championship went to kimi, based on a wettish lottery quali, it's not a way to decide a championship, the championship was won in Indy when Michael got that win, as much as I liked Kimi in 2003, the rules that year and even today is disrespectful to the race winners, the points system of 10-8 is a joke.

2005, I think Kimi will realise reliability was the major problems, why have regrets, move on, got plenty of years ahead of him, as soon as he gets in a reliabile car as well as fast, he's gonna be a force.

[kismet]

I don't think he's beating himself up over either 2003 or 2005 anywhere near as hard as some people seem to think he should. I doubt he's feeling too much regret in the sense of "if only I hadn't done this or that".

[wawawa]

Originally posted by RDM
And, as the actress would presumably have said to the bishop, "Where's yer poll?"

I think 2005 would have hurt more: he knew since Imola that he had the equipment (as far as speed went) to win. Also, if the Mclaren PR is to be believed, most the technical DNFs were unexpected in the sense that the failed parts had held up well in testing.

In contrast, in 2003 he lost the WDC lead mid-way, and although he did a superb job of staying in touch, he had several months to realize it was a losing battle. He did superbly well to end up just 2 points behind, though.

[Henrik B]

Originally posted by kismet
I don't think he's beating himself up over either 2003 or 2005 anywhere near as hard as some people seem to think he should. I doubt he's feeling too much regret in the sense of "if only I hadn't done this or that".

I'm also under the impression that the "iceman" moniker does NOT come from his on-track behaviour (as stupidly debated in the BB some time ago), it's because he's good at putting the past behind him and don't let that influence the future.

[Henri Greuter]

Originally posted by wawawa


I think 2005 would have hurt more: he knew since Imola that he had the equipment (as far as speed went) to win. Also, if the Mclaren PR is to be believed, most the technical DNFs were unexpected in the sense that the failed parts had held up well in testing.

In contrast, in 2003 he lost the WDC lead mid-way, and although he did a superb job of staying in touch, he had several months to realize it was a losing battle. He did superbly well to end up just 2 points behind, though.

Funny detail about loosing in 2003. MS had two more finishes that season than Kimi. MS's two lowest point scores were two eight places (Hungary and Japan), both goot for a single point.
Exactly the two points he lost out on against Michael....
Had Michael not scored those two 8th places it would have been even more painful for Kimi: losing the title because of equalling the champ's pint score but with less victories to his credit.

Henri

[bira]

Originally posted by Henrik Brodin


I'm also under the impression that the "iceman" moniker does NOT come from his on-track behaviour (as stupidly debated in the BB some time ago), it's because he's good at putting the past behind him and don't let that influence the future.

Right.... I'll remind you of that when he moves to Ferrari ;)

[Collective]

I think none. As he said in the PC, he did his best both times, I'm sure. He'll be WDC someday.

[BorderReiver]

I wouldn't presume to know, but from a viewer's point of view 2003 was never really more than a statistical longshot. Kimi drove very well that year, but he was always going to need massive amounts of luck.

This season Raikkonen's been driving exceptionally, has won alot of races, and has been in a position to win many more. If I were in his shoes I'd say this one was there for the taking, and was taken away by bad luck, rather than 2003, which was a half chance, and required the opposite.

[Henrik B]

Originally posted by bira


Right.... I'll remind you of that when he moves to Ferrari ;)

Hehe, THAT is a different matter. I just don't think he will reflect very much upon missed WDC opportunites when and if next opportunity arises, be it in Ferrari or McLaren, and I don't think he is prone to brooding... But not incapable of deciding that enough is enough!

[HBoss]

It must be this years loss.

In 2003 his car didn't have the sped to constantly challenge for wins and allow him to make his own luck. This year it has the speed and he drove it very well, but the missing ingredient is reliability and that must hurt even more.

[F1 Tor.]

For sure this year. 2003 was a joke for me really. I mean he drove well and was consistent but if he were to have been WDC by only winning 1 race to Michael's 6, that would have been a travesty. I think he was just happy to be in it so late in the year. This year he's driven exceptionally well and was let down by his Mac. Simple as that. I do,however, believe he'll be champ one day. He's too good. Some posters comparing him to Chris Amon or Stirling Moss is just silly imo.

[Hotwheels]

I think both - any racer will always mind being the first loser , which is what the runner up is.
Also Kimi has lost both titles thanks to Alonso - One can argue that if Brazil 03 was not stopped due to Alonso's accident ,Kimi and not Fisi would have been the winner - and the 2 points would have made the difference in the end.

[Platipus]

Raikkonen is OVERATED!

i never seen any talent in him, in 2003 he just won 1 race, shum won 6!

this year, it's his 5 years in F1 and Alonso who finish his 3 year have won more points and races than him!

this guy is a drunk mule that can't even battle with a better JPM regulary, and even if McLaren team is backing him rather than JPM!

the reliability is way of the couple car driver, and when driver don't look after car, the car blow up!

when JPM and raikkonen blown their car in same race?

unreliability is the way you drive!

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by Hotwheels
I think both - any racer will always mind being the first loser , which is what the runner up is.
Also Kimi has lost both titles thanks to Alonso - One can argue that if Brazil 03 was not stopped due to Alonso's accident ,Kimi and not Fisi would have been the winner - and the 2 points would have made the difference in the end.

Actually I think DC would have been.

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by Platipus
Raikkonen is OVERATED!

i never seen any talent in him, in 2003 he just won 1 race, shum won 6!

this year, it's his 5 years in F1 and Alonso who finish his 3 year have won more points and races than him!

Uh . . . not to prove you horribly wrong and stupid but :


Fernando Alonso GP's 66 ; Wins 7 ; Poles 8 ; Points 231
Kimi Raikkonen GP's 83, Wins 8 ; Poles 8 ; Points 263

Add the wins that Kimi should have had but for car failure through no fault of his own and the number Alonso has inherited because of that and the balance would be further tipped Kimi's way. Not that they're valid comparisons being in different cars.

[KeyserSoze27]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1


Uh . . . not to prove you horribly wrong and stupid but :


Fernando Alonso GP's 66 ; Wins 7 ; Poles 8 ; Points 231
Kimi Raikkonen GP's 83, Wins 8 ; Poles 8 ; Points 263

Add the wins that Kimi should have had but for car failure through no fault of his own and the number Alonso has inherited because of that and the balance would be further tipped Kimi's way. Not that they're valid comparisons being in different cars.

Try to compare Alonso's stats with Kimi's stats in his FIRST 66 GPs .
And then come back!!!

[Piif]

Originally posted by KeyserSoze27


Try to compare Alonso's stats with Kimi's stats in his FIRST 66 GPs .
And then come back!!!

How about opening your eyes and watching what happens in the races? And then come back!!!

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by KeyserSoze27


Try to compare Alonso's stats with Kimi's stats in his FIRST 66 GPs .
And then come back!!!

What relevance would that have . . .they both got race winning cars around the same time.

[911]

I'd have to go w/ 2005 because I believe his chances of winning the WDC were better, and he also probably had higher expectations due to the car's phenomenal pace.

[KeyserSoze27]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1

What relevance would that have . . .they both got race winning cars around the same time.

Ever thought using percentages (example total races divided by total wins) !!!

[F1 Tor.]

Originally posted by Platipus
Raikkonen is OVERATED!

i never seen any talent in him, in 2003 he just won 1 race, shum won 6!

this year, it's his 5 years in F1 and Alonso who finish his 3 year have won more points and races than him!

this guy is a drunk mule that can't even battle with a better JPM regulary, and even if McLaren team is backing him rather than JPM!

the reliability is way of the couple car driver, and when driver don't look after car, the car blow up!

when JPM and raikkonen blown their car in same race?

unreliability is the way you drive!

Meanwhile, down on the farm......

[oceansoul]

In my honest opinion, the underrated Fisichella did a bit better job than Montoya this year, and did a very slightly worse job, than the "exceptional" Raikkonen.

[Tubbs]

Originally posted by oceansoul
In my honest opinion, the underrated Fisichella did a bit better job than Montoya this year, and did a very slightly worse job, than the "exceptional" Raikkonen.

[oceansoul]

Originally posted by Tubbs

Nothing hilarious in this. Why did Kimi lose this championship with 20 points margin when he has 1 sec faster car than Renault? If I count very well, he had 2 mechanical outs.

[HBoss]

I've made some additions to my ignore list!

[oceansoul]

This ignoring-the-people-who-crticise-my-superhero mentality is so lame, isn't it? I should ignore the 3/4 of this board, because nonsense bashing on Fisichella. But no way. I like arguing, and interested in others opinion, altough sometimes it makes me sad.

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by KeyserSoze27




Ever thought using percentages (example total races divided by total wins) !!!

If you do that with race capable winning cars, it'll be pretty much even - tilted Kimi's way if you discount Alonso's inherited victories from Kimi's blown cars.

[Zmeej]

This ignoring-the-people-who-crticise-my-superhero mentality is so lame, isn't it?

You can call it lame. I call it mental hygiene.

Then again, why put folks on an Ignore List if one can be entertained by stuff like:

Originally posted by Platipus
Raikkonen is OVERATED!
i never seen any talent in him,

HBoss, you're just a purist in "a world gone increasingly democratic."*




*FFCoppola

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by oceansoul


Nothing hilarious in this. Why did Kimi lose this championship with 20 points margin when he has 1 sec faster car than Renault? If I count very well, he had 2 mechanical outs.

Well the Renault was a better car for the first three races, so let's discount those ; then add the three ten slot penalties he had for mechanical errors which cost him 11 points, add the one mechanical outs (Germany was his mistake) and you'll find 21 points - and that's before removing points from Alonso's total that he inherited because of Kimi's mechanical gremlins.

All in all, mechanical failure aside Kimi would have been champion this year.

[JForce]

I think 2003, if only because he could have beaten MS in a car that was slightly slower. That would be "nicer" I think than beating Alonso in a superior car.

But either way it wouldn't be nice, but it's not like he's running out of chances, he's very talented and it's really only a matter of time.


p.s I am glad he didn't win 2003 if only because I don't think in F1 the points system should allow someone with 1 win to beat someone with 6. Just my opinion, and nothing to do with Kimi or MS.

[WACKO]

I think 2005 was more realistic and maybe deserved than 2003, where he after all only got one victory. In 2003 he did everything within his reach and fully exploited opportunities and came close through consistency. This season Alonso won the title with that consistency, whilst Kimi had the faster car for most of the year. That will hurt more on the long term.

[Spunout]

Nothing hilarious in this. Why did Kimi lose this championship with 20 points margin when he has 1 sec faster car than Renault? If I count very well, he had 2 mechanical outs.

1 sec faster?

Let´s assume Kimi and Fernando are equally fast.

First 3 races: slower than Renault over the entire race. Imola: apart from first two excellent laps by Kimi, Alonso was at least as fast, maybe even decreasing the gap? Canada: Renault 1-2 lead before the mistake began to happen. Nurburgring: Alonso almost as fast as Kimi. In may other races like France, Great Britain, etc Alonso´s pace was almost as good as Kimi´s.

Please watch the races next time before posting, ok?

Regarding those two mechanical outs (forgetting HUGE amount of lesser mechanical gremlins that lost considerable amount of points), Alonso scored 20-0 thanks to them. How difficult it is to make up such gap with current points system has been explained by several people here, so I´d suggest you to check out the previous posts. Now, back to the topic...



I´d say 2005. Both years he was excellent that´s for sure, but 2003 opportunity kinda dropped to his hands when Schumi made some BIG mistakes (Brazil, Malaysia). From there it was clear his only chance was a) luck b) more blunders by Schumi and JPM. 2005 he had the pace but mechanical gremlins ruined everything. That must be more frustrating, even if the gap was bigger compared to 2003.

[holiday]

Originally posted by skittt
I'm under the impression that he will never win one.

Nope. Remember Alain Prost had already been two times runner up before he clinched the title for the first time. Then he went on to win more championships and races than any other driver of his generation, so there are still enough opportunities for Kimi.

[Zmeej]

Word

[bern@rd]

Originally posted by Platipus
Raikkonen is OVERATED!

i never seen any talent in him, in 2003 he just won 1 race, shum won 6!

this year, it's his 5 years in F1 and Alonso who finish his 3 year have won more points and races than him!

this guy is a drunk mule that can't even battle with a better JPM regulary, and even if McLaren team is backing him rather than JPM!

the reliability is way of the couple car driver, and when driver don't look after car, the car blow up!

when JPM and raikkonen blown their car in same race?

unreliability is the way you drive!

Alonso won the WDC and still you find the need to put other drivers down in a fanboy manner. That's sad.

[VresiBerba]

Originally posted by KeyserSoze27




Ever thought using percentages (example total races divided by total wins) !!!

Did you ever thought about percentages AT ALL?!? You know Shumi I trust, a driver who has better total races divided by total wins this millennia than the whole frakking grid combined! Do you really believe Shumi is better than Kimi, Monty, Alonso, Trulli, Ralf, well, ALL OF THEM TOGETHER?

No, didn't think so. That's percentages fer ya

[TT6]

2003

[John B]

2005 for sure. He was much more competitive and dominating than in 2003, with a single win vs. Schumacher's. As for winning future titles, assuming MS and Ferrari don't resume another 5 year period dominance, the door will be open for drivers like KR to win titles

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by John B
2005 for sure.

I think you should have followed the link above.

[jokuvaan]

Kimi thinks only about points, not how they came.

I remember him saying: "the one with most points is the best driver always"

[Enkei]

Originally posted by jokuvaan
Kimi thinks only about points, not how they came.

I remember him saying: "the one with most points is the best driver always"

He might have said that but with Kimi's comments, I personally feel it's always a bit difficult to understand what he means. The reason for that is that he can't quite expres himself in English because it's not his native language.

[Sakae]

Originally posted by Enkei


He might have said that but with Kimi's comments, I personally feel it's always a bit difficult to understand what he means. The reason for that is that he can't quite expres himself in English because it's not his native language.

Welcome to my world, especially after MS had touch and go with JV in Spain, and then when he tried to explain it all to hostile press (in foreign language, which had required a barrister, not a diletant in aspect of diplomacy).

[kismet]

Kimi's a bit difficult to decipher in Finnish as well. You need to hear his tone (yes, he DOES have one) and/or see his body language to know if he's serious or just sarcastically amused and marvelling at the banality of the question he was just asked.

[Menace]

Not surprised Kimi thinks 2003 was more painfull. After all, he was fighting against MS and finished only two points behind him.

[John B]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
I think you should have followed the link above.

For Kimi's 10 reasons to subscribe to AA?

I guess I was thinking from a fan's perspective - I'd be a lot more frustrated with my driver losing under 2005 circumstances than 2003. I was an Al Unser Jr. fan in the early 1990s when he lost a CART title at the last race with a similar situation - an overmatched but reliable Galmer vs faster Rahal/Andretti cars, and thinking it was a worthy accomplishment just to be in contention at that point. It's also a fair point that 2003 was his first close loss, which can be especially painful. I wonder if Prost was almost resigned to the feeling by the 1984 half-point miss....

[Ricardo F1]

I can see that. I felt aggrieved at McLaren this year for sure, they'd better bloody win the WCC. 2003 I thought was just awesome from team and driver to take it that far.