35 replies to this topic

[lukywill]

Point your baby f1 of the year and don´t forget to take into account what car he drive and the political circumstances.

[denthierry]

No Rosberg?

[ensign14]

Strangely, on the basis that he has raced in F1 before this year, no.

[lukywill]

no, rosberg is needing a wet day pension to retire.

[Buttoneer]

In theory, Kubica was a rookie up to Hungary too.

Incidentally, who did you vote for Lukywill?

[lukywill]

Originally posted by Buttoneer


Incidentally, who did you vote for Lukywill?

None!

[F1Fanatic.co.uk]

Lewis Hamilton, but I also thought Heikki Kovalainen was very good and Vettel and Sutil had their moments. A good crop this year.

[tidytracks]

Lewis no contest.

Yes he had the best car. Yes he was better prepared than any rookie in history. Yes he had the simulator.

But at the end of the day, in his first season in F1 he nearly won the title and finished level on points with a double world champion.

Say what you will about how the season ended. Say what you will about whether or not you like him, his actions, his attitude etc

On the track, where it counted, he was absolutely outstanding.

No rookie has ever done, and quite possibly no rookie will ever again make the kind of impact that Lewis did this season.

[The Kanisteri]

Tough choise between Vettel and Kovalainen. But I vote Vettel.

[noikeee]

You forgot Winkelhock.

[The Kanisteri]

Originally posted by denthierry
No Rosberg?

Rosberg is not rookie...

[Ricardo F1]

Hamilton by a country mile.

[Zmeej]

Not to take anything from the very good crop of rookies, but there's no question that Hamilton was an unparallelled phenom this year.

Good post tidytracks

Only one thing to disagree with: IMO, Hamilton matched Villeneuve in the best rookie of all time category. For one thing, he matched JV's win count - he didn't surpass it.

For another, in some sense, LH had an easier ride, since he essentially rose into a seat he was groomed for and was facing an arriving WDC, while Jacques was a raw arrival facing a man who'd been trying and developing the car for a WDC run for four years.

In terms of on-track pressure, I'd give JV the edge, since resisting the attentions of Michael Schumacher until the last few yards of a Grand Prix rates higher than what LH was up against.

Jacques also gave us The Move in Estoril.

However, Lewis was younger, and that counts for something too, and it seems that he's better in the rain and was definitely better at Monaco than Jacques ever got.

In the end: even.

[quasi C]

There really is no contest in this.

Lewis was clearly the best rookie.

[kar]

In the context of their equipment I'd like to say Sutil or Vettel.

In reality though, painful as it is to say, it has to be Hamilton. He had arguably the season's best car. He is arguably the most prepared driver in history so he's not exactly a rookie either.

But ultimately he equaled the performance of Fernando and he's a two times wdc so it's a bit academic really?

[D A]

Hamilton.

He beat his teammate, a 2xWDC, and 1 point of the WDC itself. Probably would have won it if it wasn't for the gearbox-glitch.

[Spunout]

Who knows how well Kovalaine or Sutil could have performed with top car?

Nevertheless, to me rookie of the year can only be Lewis Hamilton

[Risil]

Originally posted by Zmeej

Only one thing to disagree with: IMO, Hamilton matched Villeneuve in the best rookie of all time category. For one thing, he matched JV's win count - he didn't surpass it.

For another, in some sense, LH had an easier ride, since he essentially rose into a seat he was groomed for and was facing an arriving WDC, while Jacques was a raw arrival facing a man who'd been trying and developing the car for a WDC run for four years.

In terms of on-track pressure, I'd give JV the edge, since resisting the attentions of Michael Schumacher until the last few yards of a Grand Prix rates higher.

However, Lewis was younger, and that counts for something too, and it seems that he's better in the rain and was definitely better at Monaco than Jacques ever got.

In the end: even.

On the other hand, it is debateable whether Jacques can be considered a true 'rookie' at all, given the Indycar series' pretensions of being a challenger to F1, instead of a subordinate (if one could even term it that these days). Similarly to how if, say, Andy Priaulx moved across to DTM and was immediately successful, the measure of his achivements would not be placed on the same level as Paul di Resta's have been.

It's also important to remember that the 1996 Williams was a slightly better car than Hamilton's Mclaren has been this season. Whilst both did score 4 wins (from a similar number of WC rounds), Hamilton's win tally matched that of his teammate, whereas Jacques's was only half. And Damon Hill, it is generally held, was no Fernando Alonso.

All that said, Jacques Villeneuve's unique achivements and exploits, as well as his on-track performances, place him at the forefront of the 'Mosley era' - sadly the only thing Jacques managed which held a long line of precedents was the wastage of the latter years of his career with an ill-conceived, ill-equipped personal team project.

[Dudley]

2 for Nakajima.

None for Sutil.

Right.

[Henrik B]

Originally posted by Spunout
Who knows how well Kovalaine or Sutil could have performed with top car?

In the beginning of the season Kovalainen was outperformed, by a big margin, by a driver whom Alonso dominated for two years. Meanwhile, Lewis had Alonsos number. Yes intra-team comparisons over several years suck, but it does say something.

A vote on any other than Lewis isn't an honest vote.

[1george]

Hamilton, by far

[santori]

Hamilton, by a little from Kovalainen. Vettel and Sutil are very good but less finished than Lewis and Heikki (as you'd expect).

[longhornx]

Hamilton, no doubt.
Vettel is great, too.

[FNG]

I can't stand Hamilton, but really... There shouldn't even need to be a pole. Hamilton by far.

[pingu666]

1)whinklehock

2)lewis

[David M. Kane]

I voted for Lewis, but I think overall it was a very good crop, particularly HK and SV.

[Paul Prost]

Originally posted by Henrik Brodin


In the beginning of the season Kovalainen was outperformed, by a big margin, by a driver whom Alonso dominated for two years. Meanwhile, Lewis had Alonsos number. Yes intra-team comparisons over several years suck, but it does say something.

Very true. However, Lewis was driving a car which actually went around corners. Heikki wasn't.

If you actually knew how awful the launch R27 was in terms of front-wing behaviour... you'd think that it was amazing he actually got the car on the road.

But for a suspension failure in Brazil, Heikki would have been the first rookie ever to finish an entire season*.

By the end of the season, the performance margin between him and Fisi was of a similar magnitude to that between Alonso and Fisi.

So.. honestly..I can vote Heikki

*Although someone suggested that Tiago Montero achieved this at Midland?!?

[race]

I don't understand the results or even the need for the poll. People are probably letting the spy saga and other controversy affect their votes. I think Hamilton is too arrogant and completely fakes the whole nice guy image. There's a little devil buried behind that smiling face and I think he'll pull off more than a few Schumacheresque dirty stunts in the future.

However, I can't grasp how anyone can say he wasn't the rookie of the year. I think he was maybe even the best rookie of all times.

BTW, I'm Finnish and support Kovalainen who was also mighty impressive, especially in the latter half of the year. Still no contest for the rookie award.

------------------
And then Hamilton surprised me with his newest quotes and I want to take all the nasty words back Now that's a sporting attitude, maybe LH could teach Ron some of that.

[noikeee]

Kovalainen, Sutil and Vettel all proved to be very good and will be a force in the coming years*, Winkelhock and Nakajima had their moments even with only one race to prove themselves, but Hamilton, even considering the great car he had, was clearly in a league of his own. A very strong candidate to most impressive rookie season ever.

*Sutil might become part of a force already next year, actually.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Zmeej
Only one thing to disagree with: IMO, Hamilton matched Villeneuve in the best rookie of all time category. For one thing, he matched JV's win count - he didn't surpass it.

Zmeej

The 1996 Williams was the class of the field all year, apart from occasional sprints from Schumacher. This year's McLaren faced an identical and often stronger Ferrari throughout the year. From a performance point of view a McLaren had on average a 1/4 shot of winning a race. The Williams had usually 1/2 and 1/3 at worst.

For another, in some sense, LH had an easier ride, since he essentially rose into a seat he was groomed for and was facing an arriving WDC, while Jacques was a raw arrival facing a man who'd been trying and developing the car for a WDC run for four years.

Jacques's was barely a raw arrival when he took pole at the Melbourne GP in 1996. The reigning CART champion did probably more F1 testing than any other rookie in history. At the GP circuits of Monza, Imola, Silverstone and Estoril he drove thousands of kilometers for the Williams team.

In terms of on-track pressure, I'd give JV the edge, since resisting the attentions of Michael Schumacher until the last few yards of a Grand Prix rates higher than what LH was up against.

Villeneuve never gave any ground, that is true but don't forget either that Hamilton proved to be extremely tenecious in wheel to wheel situations and in fact was essentially mistake free and not overtaken on track until the 15th race of the season.

Jacques also gave us The Move in Estoril.

No debating that. One of the classic overtaking moves in modern F1. Especially impressive as Villeneuve had setup the car before the race so it was able to exactly that.

[F575 GTC]

Well it's bound to be Lewis, but he was blessed with the aid of the best car on the grid...still has to be driven though i guess.

All things considered i voted for Sutil. Considering the car was an utter dog for the entire season - B-Spec or otherwise! - he did extremely well with it, especially earning the point in Japan. Actually, other than the little mistake in China (Nurburgring as well, but the first corner was more fjord than road so i won't put that in) - Sutil drove well in all the wet sessions all year. Certainly best of the non-priviliged rookies anyway!

[Tenmantaylor]

Lewis was the best driver along with Raikkonen, let alone rookie. Vettel had two amazing races and made the biggest boo boo of the year.

[macoran]

Originally posted by Tenmantaylor
Lewis was the best driver along with Raikkonen, let alone rookie. Vettel had two amazing races and made the biggest boo boo of the year.

boo boo wasn't too bad compared to Lew's poo poo in the kitty litter

[Zmeej]

karlth

Jacques's was barely a raw arrival when he took pole at the Melbourne GP in 1996. The reigning CART champion did probably more F1 testing than any other rookie in history. At the GP circuits of Monza, Imola, Silverstone and Estoril he drove thousands of kilometers for the Williams team.

This much I remember, but Hamilton didn't? Strikes me as odd that he would not have.

That said, Williams were probably sure about putting JV in the second seat before McLaren was in making their decision about whether to go with PDLR or Hamilton this year, so you could be right.

Hamilton proved to be extremely tenecious in wheel to wheel situations and in fact was essentially mistake free and not overtaken on track until the 15th race of the season.

I'm not saying he wasn't tenacious, he just wasn't under as much pressure on the track as Jacques was from the very first race, when he led, and in other races when he resisted on a dry course.

In the rain, JV was somewhat of an easy target. Can't remember how Lewis fared, but I'm inclined to suppose he did better.

However, from what I remember, Jacques did better off starts.;)

Especially impressive as Villeneuve had setup the car before the race so it was able to exactly that.

Risil

On the other hand, it is debateable whether Jacques can be considered a true 'rookie' at all, given the Indycar series' pretensions of being a challenger to F1, instead of a subordinate

Don't think it's debateable. Indycar/CART might have had such pretensions, but I don't think there was ever any serious doubt about which was the senior series, certainly not after the 1980s.

It's also important to remember that the 1996 Williams was a slightly better car than Hamilton's Mclaren has been this season. Whilst both did score 4 wins (from a similar number of WC rounds), Hamilton's win tally matched that of his teammate, whereas Jacques's was only half. And Damon Hill, it is generally held, was no Fernando Alonso.

Actually, IMO karlth's post provides the answer to yours:

The 1996 Williams was the class of the field all year, apart from occasional sprints from Schumacher. This year's McLaren faced an identical and often stronger Ferrari throughout the year. From a performance point of view a McLaren had on average a 1/4 shot of winning a race. The Williams had usually 1/2 and 1/3 at worst.

Hill might not have been Alonso, but he was a veteran who had been instrumental in turning the machine he was driving into the world-beater that it was, so it's an inarguable fact that he held a large advantage over Villeneuve.

Hamilton was arguably more familiar than Alonso with the Mac, and as we know, Fernando complained vigorously that no special treatment was afforded him that might reflect the added racing experience and status as a WDC might have afforded him.

While Sir Frank was notorious for his disregard of previous achievements, and Damon began to complain that he wasn't sufficiently appreciated halfway through the 1996 season, this had more to do with the fact that Mister Williams wasn't gonna give him big bucks or maybe even a seat the FOLLOWING year, and the team was fully behind Hill's effort.

Back to you karlth

Re the likelihood of a Williams win in 1996, it's true, but this wasn't an automatic advantage to Villeneuve, since the Benetton wasn't that weak and Alesi pushed Villeneuve onto the third spot on the podium (and thus, away from striking distance at the top) a couple of times.

Furthermore, don't think you can argue that the McLaren's wasn't an overpowering car this year.

On another note: Hamilton has a better mechanical sympathy than Villeneuve did, since Jacques always tended to wring the neck of his cars, and Lewis had only one DNF, while JV had several.

[CatharticF1]

Originally posted by lukywill
Point your baby f1 of the year and don´t forget to take into account what car he drive and the political circumstances.

At last! Here's one Hamilton can win ...

[GhostR]

Hamilton -> Vettel -> Sutil -> Kova