mikhailv wrote:Perez isnt that good a driver. I'll explain. He had 3 podiums. 2nd, 2nd and a 3rd. thats 51 points. In malaysia, he got a podium due to freak weather conditions. In canada, he got a podium due a reverse tyre strategy thanks to his poor qualifying. In Monza, he got a podium thanks to a reverse tyre strategy after again being outqualified comprehensively by Kamui.
51 points of his 66 came from 3 podiums due to reverse strategy after a poor saturday of his own making, and a freak weather race. Now, Perez had 14 non point finishes and 6 point finishes. Compared to kamui, who had 9 points finishes, was outqualifed by perez 11-9. Perez could only score 6 more points than Kobayashi despite have two podium finishes more than Kamui and even a chance to win a race.
Sorry, Perez is the wrong man for Mclaren. All they have done is made the team weaker and weaker. Im telling you now, had Mclaren handled 2007 much much better. Mclaren wouldve dominated F1 in 2007, 2008 and I dare say 2010 with Alonso/lewis. In 2012 they let lewis down by costing him 100 points in failures.
I think mclaren are screwed. Perez is still unproven IMO. He was really crashprone at the end of the season, failed to score in the last 6 or 7 races didnt he? Take his 2 reverse strategies away, and his tally is pretty dire. I dont really see how he can improve. Theres hasnt been no flashes of brilliance you saw from Vettel, Kimi, Alonso, lewis or Schumacher in their early days.
Ontop of that, I cant see him or Jenson outperforming a car. I cant see them pulling the magic that only Lewis or Alonso can do. I cant see either driving around a problem and adapting. Didnt ferrari get rid of perez because he was almost half a second slower than Bianchi in the simulator, and that Perez wasnt adaptable?
I strongly disagree with your point of view,
let me try to explain my self with an example, if you watch monza many people speak about perez overtakes over the two Ferraris and thats was easy,the real skill of driving and speed was in the the start of the race and the next 13 laps.
Perez start the race in 12 with hard tyres everybody in front of him had soft tyres and that tyres are at least .300 secs faster that hard tyres and easy to get the right temperature to work
, despite he had slowe tyres was able to overtake rosberg senna one force india after a few laps he was behind his teamate with soft tyres and the other force indiain front kamui with better tyres was unble to overtake the force india, in the next laps Perez overtakes Kamui and the other force india and start to chasing Kimi.
All of this happen in around 13 laps, and to be clear about soft tyres the optimal window to works was around 13- to 15 laps all the other drives had normal tyres and perez was able to overtake a Mercedes(please dont forgot this its the best cars in straights in monza) , Williams, Sauber, and Force India and after that was able to take care of his hard tyres for many laps ahead and whe he swicth to soft tyres was easiest to overtake old hard tyres cars.
I understand that point of view, but the softer tyres started to overheat did they not, meaning they were outside the operating temperature whereas the harder compound suited the hotter temperatures, then later in the race when the temperature cooled, the soft tyres came into their own. He again underqualified compared to Kamui, which is my point. He succeeds when he underqualifies, has more tyres, and goes on the reverse. Its how he got where he was in Canada. Reverse tyre strategies are his only two podiums without adverse conditions, and they only come when he underqualifies and has more tyres, he also had the choice of what tyres to use so he used a fresh set as opposed to the ones you qualify on, this is my point.
You take his reverse strategy away, you take away 54% of his points. To me, its just not impressive in the slightest, and the Sauber was a very, very good car,id say it ended up being 5th best, equal with Force India at the end. Look at Spa, both cars were right up there before Kamikaze Grosjean.
Which begs the question of how will he do fighting at the top? We've seen how he mixes in racing; collisions. He is very Jenson like; give him the suited car and they are in their own element, but as soon as something isn't suited, I doubt jenson and perez' capability. I dont see a leader, I see two drivers which you cant rely on either when the going gets tough. If you had a bad car and you needed rescuing, you need Hamilton or Alonso or Kimi. Mclaren in the past 7 years, have lost ALL 3 of those drivers!
Thats how im looking at Mclaren. Who knows, maybe Perez really will be a changed man come Australia, but i just dont really see anything, theres no spark or something to make me think 'hey, theres some real speed here'. Id say Hulkenberg wouldve been the better bet for mclaren.