2010-11 Silly Season

[phil1993]

Narain Karthikeyan has $8m backing from sponsors to drive for Force India in 2011 - Autosprint

[iceman1]

Narain Karthikeyan has $8m backing from sponsors to drive for Force India in 2011 - Autosprint

Chandhok deserves that seat. Narain is old

[sdutt]

Narain Karthikeyan has $8m backing from sponsors to drive for Force India in 2011 - Autosprint

Chandhok deserves that seat. Narain is old

anyway, i doubt it will happen. Vijay Mallya has always been reluctant about Narain

[Mar]

Just found this.
http://www.motorsport-total.com/f1/news ... 02131.html

It has been published a few minutes ago.
It’s a long article and includes interviews with Marko and Horner.
It’s this little paragraph what surprised me:

Webber (34) wird seine Karriere wohl spätestens Ende 2011 an den Nagel hängen, während Vettel (23) laut Horner "hoffentlich" noch weitere zehn bis 15 Jahre Formel 1 vor sich hat. "Deshalb gilt unsere ganze Aufmerksamkeit Sebastian", erklärt der Brite.

I’ll try a home made translation (I’m a miserable translator ):

Webber (34) will put an end to his career at the end of 2011 at the latest, while Vettel (23) has according to Horner “hopefully” still 10 to 15 years more in F1. “Because of it all our attention is for Sebastian”, explains the Briton.

At the latest?

[iceman1]

Webber will retire if he wins the title this year

[phil1993]

No way, he's gonna want the #1 on his car if he wins the title.

[sdutt]

i too feel Webber might quit if he wins the title this year. The main reason being because Red Bull will still tend to go support Vettel IMO, and vettel is quick

[shämito]

Why quit? I'm sure that Webber will continue next year, but I'm not sure if this happens with Red Bull..

With Lotus maybe?

[François]

Why quit?

That's called quitting while you're ahead. Ask Damon Hill if he feels any seasons in Formula 1 beyond 1996 were really necessary.

Winning the title would be a climatic end to Webber's very respectable F1 career. He's been great since day one, with that spectacular points finish in the Minardi; yet I don't think he's got the same sort of natural talent as the likes of Schumacher (not the lookalike who has been in the cockpit this year ), Vettel, or Alonso; I would rank him on a similar level as Button or Rosberg: excellent drivers who have shown promise from the start, but whose rise to success has been a tough and long process, with that elusive first win taking many years to come (don't you prove me wrong, Nico). The sort of people who may definitely win races and fight for a championship, possibly win one, but probably won't come close to becoming the next F1 legend. The kind of people who should be content with a single world championship to their names, unless their ego exceeds their actual ability.

Whoever wins, it is also to be expected that Red Bull's domination will face stronger competition next year, and that Vettel will have learned not to shoot himself in the foot anymore, making him even harder to beat. 2010 is really Webber's best hope of clinching the title, and I think he ought to retire right away if he does, unless he's fine with playing a supporting role next year (which is a ludicrous suggestion).

With Lotus maybe?

hahahaha

[swca92]

Why quit? I'm sure that Webber will continue next year, but I'm not sure if this happens with Red Bull..

With Lotus maybe?

Are you joking???

[cformula1]

Webber would never ever go to Lotus, he'd retire if that was his only option (although I see the Hill reference- WDC in 1996 with Williams, nowhere in 1997 with Arrows).

[phil1993]

Honestly thats the funniest one I've read all season. If you're being serious then I'd suggest a sectioning for you.

[mikhailv]

Seeing as Hamilton beat a two time world champion and would have been world champion but for a faulty gearbox I think he was the bollocks in terms of rookie performances. Not many rookies start their careers with five podiums in five races, even with a good car
Montoya and Kubica had decent rookie seasons, not fantastic. Raikkonen did well considering his lack of experience. Webber and Alonso excelled at Minardi. But you can argue that Montoya had more DNF's than finishes, Kubica and Raikkonen were beaten by Nick Heidfeld, and that Webber and Alonso had no pressure at Minardi. They did well, but to say they were just as good as Hamilton is pushing the boundaries.
Also don't you go insulting Phil like that - he's as informed a poster as there is on this forum and does a damn fine job editing our magazine. Don't make enemies here if you want to be taken seriously.

Not many start in the best car on the grid, let alone a 'good car'. Its not pushing boundries. either. mclaren and ferrari was the top 4 teams by a good 3 tenths, 4 tenths of a second. Often, massa fell behind, so all that was needed to be done was drive the car at the speed the car would go at. Lewis got too cocky, too soon. Monaco was a joke. He complained back then that he was number 2 because they were told to hold station. Then he goes and says a few years later that hes a driver who youd think you beat, but hed come back with another tenth or two and used monaco as an example. Alonso had lewis by the short and curlies that race, but few lewis fans accept that.

anyway, digressing. Webber and Alonso had plenty of preassure at minardi. Minardi always replaced drivers, Marquez was replaced by yoong at minardi in 01. Alonso was challenging the benetton of Fisichella, let alone on merit finished just outside the top 10 in japan. Backmarker teams feel just a smuch pressure as front running teams, because they are fighting to survive which is whole lot different than fighting for a win. How they drive in a backmarker team affect their future. they drive rubbish, they become the scott speed, liuzzi, albers etc, you drive good, your a heidfield or your a ralf schumacher. You drive brilliant? your an alonso, kimi, massa, barrichello. You can be a front runner, the pressure not to ruin your career in a backmarker is much more pressurising than fighting for a win.

Disagreeing with phil is insulting him? Your insulting me then. And what makes him informed? Does he work in F1? No. He, like me, have probably read endless amounts of books and watched the season reviews like me, from VHS 78 to 2010. doesnt mean i know things, I only know whats been recorded publicly and who cares who does what with this or that. I dont care who edits the magazine, if I disagre with something i will say it. Im not going to ball suck on this forum to the regular crew around here, I dont believe lewis set the bar for rookies. Why? There IS no wide bar for rookies. The only person who sets the bar, is the teams themselves. The minimum expectation is unique to each driver. Armchair fans? Yeah theyd probably say lewis set the bar. But fact remains, he was in the fastest car, and lewis or alonso deserved the championship equally. They finished on equal points, its no small feat to achieve, it was a solid first year. Couldnt have asked him to do more. The only thing I consider is the situation within the team. Alonso was a mard arse. But then, you watch the european GP which happened amist the arguments, and it was the start of him venting his anger on the track instead of throwing the dummy out. That to me, was the standout performance on 2007. lewis' standout performance to me, was unfortunatly marred by Kubica's crash. never the less, he was absolutly faultess that weekend, and I say its his best performance of 07, easily.

If lewis didnt hold up alonso in indianopolis, mclaren would be WDC. If lewis didnt go against the teams wishes, and complained in hungary, mclaren would have the WDC with alonso. But then, if Alonso drove the car in canada properly, it would have helped. If he didnt make enemies with mclaren, it would have helped. If mclaren didnt screw lewis over in china, he would have easily won the WDC.

The TEAM failed BOTH drivers in my eyes. Alonso fans shouldnt put hatred to Lewis, and vice versa. Its neithers true fault, both made the same amount of mistakes overall, whether it was self inflicted or team inflicted. Digressing again

Enemies? Good for me. I like enemies. If having an alternative opinion to the regular crew means your an enemy. Im happy with that.

[phil1993]

Not many start in the best car on the grid, let alone a 'good car'. Its not pushing boundries. either. mclaren and ferrari was the top 4 teams by a good 3 tenths, 4 tenths of a second. Often, massa fell behind, so all that was needed to be done was drive the car at the speed the car would go at. Lewis got too cocky, too soon. Monaco was a joke. He complained back then that he was number 2 because they were told to hold station. Then he goes and says a few years later that hes a driver who youd think you beat, but hed come back with another tenth or two and used monaco as an example. Alonso had lewis by the short and curlies that race, but few lewis fans accept that.

Indeed, Alonso was on another planet that weekend and was controlling the race. McLaren handled it badly (like they did a lot in 2007) as they pitted Hamilton at a time where he could have gone faster, so the conception was that he could have challenged Alonso which he couldn't have done.

Webber and Alonso had plenty of preassure at minardi. Minardi always replaced drivers, Marquez was replaced by yoong at minardi in 01. Alonso was challenging the benetton of Fisichella, let alone on merit finished just outside the top 10 in japan. Backmarker teams feel just as much pressure as front running teams

The pressure is different though. The pressure of being a backmarker team is the funding to survive. The pressure of a frontrunning team is for you to deliver the title. Every race matters near the front but at the back one bad race is not a tragedy - its if you keep mucking up is when it turns bad. Don't forget that Alonso wasn't exactly vulnerable. Yes he was young, but he did have a lot of backing already.

Disagreeing with phil is insulting him? Your insulting me then. And what makes him informed? Does he work in F1? No. He, like me, have probably read endless amounts of books and watched the season reviews like me, from VHS 78 to 2010. doesnt mean i know things, I only know whats been recorded publicly and who cares who does what with this or that. I dont care who edits the magazine, if I disagre with something i will say it. Im not going to ball suck on this forum to the regular crew around here

Thanks.

I dont believe lewis set the bar for rookies. Why? There IS no wide bar for rookies. The only person who sets the bar, is the teams themselves. The minimum expectation is unique to each driver. Armchair fans? Yeah theyd probably say lewis set the bar. But fact remains, he was in the fastest car, and lewis or alonso deserved the championship equally. They finished on equal points, its no small feat to achieve, it was a solid first year. Couldnt have asked him to do more. The only thing I consider is the situation within the team. Alonso was a mard arse. But then, you watch the european GP which happened amist the arguments, and it was the start of him venting his anger on the track instead of throwing the dummy out. That to me, was the standout performance on 2007. lewis' standout performance to me, was unfortunatly marred by Kubica's crash. never the less, he was absolutly faultess that weekend, and I say its his best performance of 07, easily.

But if Lewis wasn't great then how come very very few other rookies can beat their team mate in their first season? Petrov. Where's he? Hulkenberg, AKA "The new Hamilton" - where is he? Also beating your team mate in a lower team is easier than in a big team against someone like Alonso. Hamilton scored in 15 out of 17 races (I think?) which is very impressive and Alonso in 16 out of 17 (again, I think?) and that indeed is a remarkable feat. To say that Lewis was average in his first season is just bitter.

If lewis didnt hold up alonso in indianopolis, mclaren would be WDC. If lewis didnt go against the teams wishes, and complained in hungary, mclaren would have the WDC with alonso. But then, if Alonso drove the car in canada properly, it would have helped. If he didnt make enemies with mclaren, it would have helped.

Yeah, ifs and buts all the time happen in every season. If Alonso didn't go to the FIA McLaren would have been WCC.

The TEAM failed BOTH drivers in my eyes. Alonso fans shouldnt put hatred to Lewis, and vice versa. Its neithers true fault, both made the same amount of mistakes overall, whether it was self inflicted or team inflicted. Digressing again

Yup, just the expectations were different. Alonso wasn't expected to throw his toys out of the pram - he was expected to act like a double world champion. Equally, McLaren were expected to favour the double world champion rather than the rookie superstar. But Alonso's issues with the tyres - issues which also hit Raikkonen - meant that mid-season Lewis had a 12 or 14 point lead which left them in a situation which was ultimately going to screw them.

Enemies? Good for me. I like enemies. If having an alternative opinion to the regular crew means your an enemy. Im happy with that.

I have no comment to this.

[swca92]

To accuse someone of being consistently biased and of talking bollocks is pretty insulting to me. I'd like to know what you'd consider insulting. I'll happily debate with you on rookie performances, just don't go saying that other posters are this or that.