241 replies to this topic

[Taxi]

Raikkonen-Montoya:


Points:

Raikkonen-155
Montoya-85


wins:

Raikkonen-7

Montoya-3


Poles:

Raikkonen-6

Montoya-1


fastest laps:

Raikkonen-12

Montoya-1


Podium:

Raikkonen-16

Montoya-7

[HoldenRT]

Please don't make this a Kimi vs JPM topic. It's not even worth talking about. JPM isn't even in F1 anymore. I don't think this is what Andy Van De Burgt meant when he said "enjoying the debate". Unless it's just for giggles.

[yr]

Originally posted by Taxi
Raikkonen-Montoya:


Points:

Raikkonen-155
Montoya-85


wins:

Raikkonen-7

Montoya-3


Poles:

Raikkonen-6

Montoya-1


fastest laps:

Raikkonen-12

Montoya-1


Podium:

Raikkonen-16

Montoya-7

It cant get bigger difference than this between team mates, can it?

[Mauseri]

Originally posted by yr


It cant get bigger difference than this between team mates, can it?

Ferrari and Renault drivers were further apart so....

[pUs]

Originally posted by jez33
Probably best to compare the two when they both drove most of a season together.

Let's take 2005 and the MP4-20, for instance.

Kimi 112 points, Juan Pablo 60 points.

That was a massacre, if we use your statistical approach to analysis.

Worst still, Juan Pablo threw away the WCC hopes of McLaren that year with some notably poor drives (Turkey 05 being a prime example).

Nooo! I really liked that dodgy average "statistical" method for only seven races in 2006.

Apart from shoe size, body weight and some other non F1-related stuff, I can't think of any other way to prove with statistics that Juan really ran him close this year. Really creative.

[pUs]

Originally posted by VresiBerba

No.22 is who? Montoya? The NASCAR driver? Did Kimi destroy Montoya's NASCAR career? How? All of this is completely beside the point though since the top 50-list is hardly based on fictitious destroyed careers.

Then we might as well ask ourselves the question what the "NASCAR driver" Montoya is doing on that list at all, based on what he's accomplished in his new office so far... but sure, you might think his crashing and spinning at a few events at the end of this year was a big achievment, it wouldn't surprise me.

You're just being ridiciulous now. In one reply you keep blabbering about statistics for the first seven F1 races (yeah, Formula 1, not NASCAR), and in another one these 7 races are suddenly totally irrelevant and not even worth discussing.

[VresiBerba]

Originally posted by pUs
Nooo! I really liked that dodgy average "statistical" method for only seven races in 2006.

How is it dodgy? Does it in any way premier Montoya? Does it put Kimi in a bad light?

There is NOTHING which would suggest that Montoya would do WORSE for another 10 races than he already had done for 7. It's called a trend-line, that line would have put Montoya at 63 points at the end of the season. Kimi doesn't need a trend-line analysis since we already know what he accomplished over 17 races, 65 points.

So if you believe that this stastistic is worthless, then pretty please tell me why you'd think Montoya would do worse in the remaining 10 races that he already did in the 7 he completed.

[VresiBerba]

Originally posted by pUs
Then we might as well ask ourselves the question what the "NASCAR driver" Montoya is doing on that list at all, based on what he's accomplished in his new office so far...

Maybe his position on the list is based of what he did in his old office. Remember that Villeneuve is currently driving nothing at all, let alone NASCAR, didn't complete the F1-season either and was even fired from his team and on top of that was beaten by Montoya for the championship. So if Montoya does not belong on that list, why the hell does Villeneuve, and even several positions better than Montoya?

[yr]

Originally posted by VresiBerba

How is it dodgy? Does it in any way premier Montoya? Does it put Kimi in a bad light?

There is NOTHING which would suggest that Montoya would do WORSE for another 10 races than he already had done for 7. It's called a trend-line, that line would have put Montoya at 63 points at the end of the season. Kimi doesn't need a trend-line analysis since we already know what he accomplished over 17 races, 65 points.

So if you believe that this stastistic is worthless, then pretty please tell me why you'd think Montoya would do worse in the remaining 10 races that he already did in the 7 he completed.

After Montoyas last race points were Kimi 39 Monty 26. You can twist things as much as you want but it wont change the fact that he was slower and made more mistakes than Kimi thruout their time together in Mclaren, especially this year. In the light of that it is bordering ridiculous to create imaginery stats which shows only two points less for Monty by the seasons end.

[pUs]

Originally posted by VresiBerba

How is it dodgy? Does it in any way premier Montoya? Does it put Kimi in a bad light?

There is NOTHING which would suggest that Montoya would do WORSE for another 10 races than he already had done for 7. It's called a trend-line, that line would have put Montoya at 63 points at the end of the season. Kimi doesn't need a trend-line analysis since we already know what he accomplished over 17 races, 65 points.

So if you believe that this stastistic is worthless, then pretty please tell me why you'd think Montoya would do worse in the remaining 10 races that he already did in the 7 he completed.

Dodgy, because you compare some things that NEVER happened, to something that did. It's not a worthy comparsion and you know that perfectly well. Labelling it 'statistics' just make it even more laughable.

Anyway VresigBerba, racing for me is about what the driver and the team accomplish on the track. Not "statistical" wouldacouldashoulda. I don't have to tell you "pretty please" about anything Montoya "would" have done, or how GREAT his incredible trend line was in his magical, sparkling 2006 F1 season! I'm not even interested.

Fly like the wind, Montoya. You're so good, that even things you never did are incredibly great.

[VresiBerba]

Originally posted by pUs
Dodgy, because you compare some things that NEVER happened, to something that did. It's not a worthy comparsion and you know that perfectly well. Labelling it 'statistics' just make it even more laughable.

What the hell do you mean it never happened?!? Did not Kimi race 17 races, Pedro 10 and Montoya 7? Are you telling he this never happened and it's all in my mind that 65 divided by 17 is 3.8 and 26 divided by 7 is 3.7?

The only thing laughable here is you.

[KWSN - DSM]

I asure you VresiBerba that you are more laughable.

[yr]

Originally posted by VresiBerba

What the hell do you mean it never happened?!? Did not Kimi race 17 races, Pedro 10 and Montoya 7? Are you telling he this never happened and it's all in my mind that 65 divided by 17 is 3.8 and 26 divided by 7 is 3.7?

The only thing laughable here is you.

Howcome anyone can be so clueless?

[slapstick]

I'm sure VresiBerba next comes up with statistics where he picks the three races (Silverstone, Monza and Brazil) that JPM won and where KR was suffering grid penalties (except Brazil) and concludes JPM is the better driver.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by VresiBerba

How is it dodgy? Does it in any way premier Montoya? Does it put Kimi in a bad light?

There is NOTHING which would suggest that Montoya would do WORSE for another 10 races than he already had done for 7. It's called a trend-line, that line would have put Montoya at 63 points at the end of the season. Kimi doesn't need a trend-line analysis since we already know what he accomplished over 17 races, 65 points.

So if you believe that this stastistic is worthless, then pretty please tell me why you'd think Montoya would do worse in the remaining 10 races that he already did in the 7 he completed.

Trend line

Good one! The proper "trend line" tells us Montoya was on his way down (based on say...3 last races), and of course stats genius like you forgot McLaren´s form dropped as well. Bahrain, Australia, Monaco, Canada, GB...they almost had winning pace. Or well, Kimi had anyway. No such races after the first 7.

Let´s compare the races they both participated in 2005-2006 and leave it to that.

Care to construct the stats for us?

[Spunout]

Originally posted by slapstick
I'm sure VresiBerba next comes up with statistics where he picks the three races (Silverstone, Monza and Brazil) that JPM won and where KR was suffering grid penalties (except Brazil) and concludes JPM is the better driver.

That has been done already by other posters

[VresiBerba]

Originally posted by yr
Howcome anyone can be so clueless?

So it didn't happen then? :

[Spunout]

Originally posted by VresiBerba

So it didn't happen then? :

One thing that didn´t happen was Montoya scoring 2 less points than Räikkönen in 2006.

[VresiBerba]

Originally posted by Spunout
One thing that didn´t happen was Montoya scoring 2 less points than Räikkönen in 2006.

Who said he did

[VresiBerba]

Originally posted by Spunout
No such races after the first 7.

Oh really?!? What about Germany, race #12, Kimi was on podium 13 seconds from a win. Or how about Italy, Race #15, Kimi was on podium again 8 seconds from a win.

MERRY NEW YEAR!

[slapstick]

The only relevant trend line is that JPM got kicked out of McLaren (and F1) and Kimi will be a Ferrari driver for 2007-2009.

[pUs]

Originally posted by VresiBerba

What the hell do you mean it never happened?!? Did not Kimi race 17 races, Pedro 10 and Montoya 7? Are you telling he this never happened and it's all in my mind that 65 divided by 17 is 3.8 and 26 divided by 7 is blah blah blah

Sure, I'm laughable. Personally, I look at things that took place. You prefer to discuss Juan Pablo's hypothetical performance in races he never participated in. We all know why.

And that's fine, it's quite telling really. I've got nothing to add, my angry friend. Happy 2007! I really hope we gonna se some GREAT trend lines during JPM's NASCAR season!

[pUs]

Originally posted by slapstick
The only relevant trend line is that JPM got kicked out of McLaren (and F1) and Kimi will be a Ferrari driver for 2007-2009.

On the edge foruming, excellent

[HoldenRT]

Originally posted by slapstick
The only relevant trend line is that JPM got kicked out of McLaren (and F1) and Kimi will be a Ferrari driver for 2007-2009.

But I'm sure we'll hear about JPM's (projected) points total for 2007 based off .9 (or whatever percentage) of Kimi's total points. :

[yr]

Originally posted by VresiBerba

So it didn't happen then? :

Indeed it didnt.

At least not in the Formula one season that I watched, Montoya never competed the whole season.
Did he completed it in your world?

The gap between Kimi and Monty was 13 points after seven races, now that is a Fact. Why you believe that gap would be only two points (your own calculation was KR 65 JPM 63) by seasons end is beyond me, in the matter of fact, it´s so stupid that it isnt even funny. Didnt you watch first seven races at all? Kimi was almost always faster and made no mistakes whereas JPM was slower and made several stupid and even race-ending errors. I dont even understand why I bother to post on this matter, Kimi is highest paid driver of the world next year, driving in a team that is legend and where every driver would love to drive, Montoya got fired in the middle of the season... wheres a locig in that ? Montoya dropped to Nascar, for crying out loud, and you say there was nothing between these two?

[Sakae]

How do you know Montoya got fired? I am last man on this Earth to say anything good about him, but circumstances of JPM' departure from F1 was somewhat mystery, and while articles were written on this subject, I am not (a) sure we should believe them, (b) I do not recall anything about anyone firing anybody, hence my question.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by HoldenRT
But I'm sure we'll hear about JPM's (projected) points total for 2007 based off .9 (or whatever percentage) of Kimi's total points. :

Consider this: according to Vresi´s in-depth research Montoya would have scored 5 points more than Kimi in last 10 races, meaning his "trend line" was on the way up. Therefore there is no reason to believe that trend would have changed in 2007.

It´s crazy: McLaren fired/suspended somebody who was approximately as good as Räikkönen in 2006, and would have been better than Räikkönen in 2007! It´s so obvious for everybody who understands something about statistics.

Unfortunately this forum is full of Kimi fanboys, who cannot accept objective and logical analysis like this.

[yr]

Originally posted by MiPe
How do you know Montoya got fired? I am last man on this Earth to say anything good about him, but circumstances of JPM' departure from F1 was somewhat mystery, and while articles were written on this subject, I am not (a) sure we should believe them, (b) I do not recall anything about anyone firing anybody, hence my question.

What was Montoyas salary in Mclaren, 10-15 mil $? If he was not fired why Mclaren first prevented him to drive Nascar, it was on news everywhere that Ron threatend JPM that he will not be paid if he drives any race-car before years end. Half seasons salary is about 5-7.5 mil$, do you think Mclaren was willing to pay that if it was Montoya who decided suddenly in the midlle of the season to stop doing his job? Only reason I can think for JPM getting payed after he was gone, is that he was fired, so Mclaren had no other option than pay for a job that JPM didnt do in order to avoid courtroom.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by yr


What was Montoyas salary in Mclaren, 10-15 mil $? If he was not fired why Mclaren first prevented him to drive Nascar, it was on news everywhere that Ron threatend JPM that he will not be paid if he drives any race-car before years end. Half seasons salary is about 5-7.5 mil$, do you think Mclaren was willing to pay that if it was Montoya who decided suddenly in the midlle of the season to stop doing his job? Only reason I can think for JPM getting payed after he was gone, is that he was fired, so Mclaren had no other option than pay for a job that JPM didnt do in order to avoid courtroom.

I suppose the correct term is suspended. Montoya defitenitely didn´t decide to quit driving for McLaren after USGP. Actually, I remember JPM himself saying he was surprised about the decision to sack him. But getting out of McLaren contract was mutual agreement, most likely Montoya giving up his salary for the rest of the year.

[yr]

Originally posted by Spunout


I suppose the correct term is suspended. Montoya defitenitely didn´t decide to quit driving for McLaren after USGP. Actually, I remember JPM himself saying he was surprised about the decision to sack him. But getting out of McLaren contract was mutual agreement, most likely Montoya giving up his salary for the rest of the year.

Yeah, but thats why my point still stands, if Ron was paying him after he was replaced, it must have been teams decision to put him out, not his own decision. That was what MiPe was asking.

[Spunout]

Originally posted by yr


Yeah, but thats why my point still stands, if Ron was paying him after he was replaced, it must have been teams decision to put him out, not his own decision. That was what MiPe was asking.

I agree.

[Man of the race]

Originally posted by VresiBerba

How is it dodgy? Does it in any way premier Montoya? Does it put Kimi in a bad light?

There is NOTHING which would suggest that Montoya would do WORSE for another 10 races than he already had done for 7. It's called a trend-line, that line would have put Montoya at 63 points at the end of the season. Kimi doesn't need a trend-line analysis since we already know what he accomplished over 17 races, 65 points.

So if you believe that this stastistic is worthless, then pretty please tell me why you'd think Montoya would do worse in the remaining 10 races that he already did in the 7 he completed.

The season 2006 was not the best for Kimi, and still he would have won JPM according to you. He don't need to do worse and it does not matter if the difference were 2 points or more, since he would have lost anyway, which you just proved.

[Sakae]

Originally posted by yr


Yeah, but thats why my point still stands, if Ron was paying him after he was replaced, it must have been teams decision to put him out, not his own decision. That was what MiPe was asking.

I don't think JPM was sacked. He could have been end of the year, who knows, but not in mid season. Suspended for a race, perhaps, but reinstated later; something that hotshot couldn't swallow. Otherwise you would have to explain why McLaren management was claiming to be surprised to hear from him over the phone, that he is quiting. What had followed was just bunch of high-school type of "in spite" actions, because whole situation got out of hand and beyond point of no return.

[slapstick]

Originally posted by MiPe
Otherwise you would have to explain why McLaren management was claiming to be surprised to hear from him over the phone, that he is quiting.

Montoya was not "quiting".

"Montoya said that he called Ron Dennis before announcing his decision to go to NASCAR in a press conference. Apparently he did do this, but only 15 minutes before the event. This explains why Ron was so boot-faced about the whole thing, and it does seem McLaren were treated rather carelessly by Montoya. But their relationship had deteriorated badly enough by this point."

http://www.itv-f1.co...itz&PO_ID=38160

[Peri_Piket]

Originally posted by slapstick


Montoya was not "quiting".

IMO, this pic sums all Montoya did...

The 4th photo of this page.
http://www.motorspor...ce&Y=2006&O=72#

Montoya is fast, I guess no one can contest it.
Juan is also a great Indycar champion, but his mental fortitude is not enough for F1. :

[Dudley]

Reason Montoya is a better driver than Kimi.

Kimi's point score 2006 : 65

Montoya's point score 206 : 875

Therefore Kimi is 12x worse than JPM.

[Limits]

I guess no one want to step back and let this insane Montoya discussion die?

[Sakae]

Another 75 days and you will have your wish materialized.

[Ross Stonefeld]

This will be going on for far longer than that.

[Dudley]

Originally posted by Limits
I guess no one want to step back and let this insane Montoya discussion die?

Hey at least my post contained solid irrefutable proof ;)

[KWSN - DSM]

QUOTE]Originally posted by VresiBerba

How is it dodgy? Does it in any way premier Montoya? Does it put Kimi in a bad light?

There is NOTHING which would suggest that Montoya would do WORSE for another 10 races than he already had done for 7. It's called a trend-line, that line would have put Montoya at 63 points at the end of the season. Kimi doesn't need a trend-line analysis since we already know what he accomplished over 17 races, 65 points.

So if you believe that this stastistic is worthless, then pretty please tell me why you'd think Montoya would do worse in the remaining 10 races that he already did in the 7 he completed. [/QUOTE]

Let's bring this up again.

Since you want to argue Montoya based on the trnedline, then you need to apply the same trendline on Räikkönnen, only this way can we "scientifically" compare the two drivers.

The races they were competing against each other, and then the trendline we would expect them to manage in the remaining races where they did not compete against each other.

There was a total of 10 races they were both in, not only 7 as you state.

Montyoa in actual races against Räikkönen 26 points = 2,6 per race run
Räikkönen in actual races against Räikkoönen 39 points`= 3,9 per race run

Montoya in trendline races against Räikkönen 8 * 2,6 = 21 points
Räikkönen in trendline races against Montoya 8 * 3,9 = 31 points

Season total for Montoya would have been 26 + 21 = 47 points
Season total for Räikkönen would have been 39 + 31 = 70 points

So based on your own “science” Montoya only managed 67% of the points that Räikkönen did.

[pUs]

Originally posted by KWSN - DSM
So based on your own “science” Montoya only managed 67% of the points that Räikkönen did.