Hungarian Grand Prix: 31 July
-
That's funny, Heng - there you are talking about shoulds and should-nots, and in the very next breath you're going on about how Alonso shouldn't b!tch. Now do we go with "shoulds" or don't we?
And if you want to talk about drivers exercising judgement, well, yeah, you're right. I suppose at the end of 2003 Kimi would have been ruing the day that he piled into the back of Pizzonia, costing him the points that would have made him 2003 WDC. Iceman - riiiiight.
2003's a great year for assessing Kimi's performance. Michelin had the edge over Bridgestone, and the WDC was almost within his grasp - almost.
Kimi could have made up the points he needed by pushing JPM (with a busted engine) at Monaco, but he played the percentages and hung back way too far to take advantage. Whoops - wrong percentages.
And what happened after the third pitstop in France? Kimi literally gave MS third place.
Oh, and the British GP, that's a real beauty. Some clown in a kilt literally hands Kimi the lead and what does he do? He gives not only first to Rubens, but second to JPM. Real cool.
Sure, there's no denying that Kimi's quick, very possibly quicker than Alonso. Hell, by Brazil 2003 I was hoping that he'd be WDC, and it was his to take while Ferrari were trying to find their feet mid-season, but in Monaco, France and Britain he played the percenatges. Think about it - what if he'd gunned it? Kimi's fast, but he's going to need the aggressiveness to go, "Oh no you don't" when another driver's having a good day. For a positive demonstration, watch Alonso holding off MS in the closing laps of Imola 2005. Kimi, on the other hand, is either romping off in the lead with a clearly superior car, or he's playing it so safe that more aggressive drivers rape him for points.
And sure, he doesn't b!tch about things like that - why should he gripe about being faster when other drivers are passing him for position? He just shrugs his shoulders, says "Oh well", then goes out and takes out his misplaced aggression by getting blasted at the end of the season, making a complete ass of himself.
If you want to call Alonso a hothead, I don't think there's anybody who would disagree with you on that one. Then again, Senna was regarded as one of the biggest hotheads around, especially when he won his first WDC in 1988. When it comes to wheel-to-wheel racing, it's going to make all the difference, it's going to make the crucial points to decide a WDC, and it's what makes the difference between a racer and a driver. -
lets see, when i mean the shoulds and should-nots, i mean talking about who should have won what race. Certainly not about what they should or should not be doing.Originally posted by Gedanken:That's funny, Heng - there you are talking about shoulds and should-nots, and in the very next breath you're going on about how Alonso shouldn't b!tch. Now do we go with "shoulds" or don't we?
And if you want to talk about drivers exercising judgement, well, yeah, you're right. I suppose at the end of 2003 Kimi would have been ruing the day that he piled into the back of Pizzonia, costing him the points that would have made him 2003 WDC. Iceman - riiiiight.
2003's a great year for assessing Kimi's performance. Michelin had the edge over Bridgestone, and the WDC was almost within his grasp - almost.
Kimi could have made up the points he needed by pushing JPM (with a busted engine) at Monaco, but he played the percentages and hung back way too far to take advantage. Whoops - wrong percentages.
And what happened after the third pitstop in France? Kimi literally gave MS third place.
Oh, and the British GP, that's a real beauty. Some clown in a kilt literally hands Kimi the lead and what does he do? He gives not only first to Rubens, but second to JPM. Real cool.
Sure, there's no denying that Kimi's quick, very possibly quicker than Alonso. Hell, by Brazil 2003 I was hoping that he'd be WDC, and it was his to take while Ferrari were trying to find their feet mid-season, but in Monaco, France and Britain he played the percenatges. Think about it - what if he'd gunned it? Kimi's fast, but he's going to need the aggressiveness to go, "Oh no you don't" when another driver's having a good day. For a positive demonstration, watch Alonso holding off MS in the closing laps of Imola 2005. Kimi, on the other hand, is either romping off in the lead with a clearly superior car, or he's playing it so safe that more aggressive drivers rape him for points.
And sure, he doesn't b!tch about things like that - why should he gripe about being faster when other drivers are passing him for position? He just shrugs his shoulders, says "Oh well", then goes out and takes out his misplaced aggression by getting blasted at the end of the season, making a complete ass of himself.
If you want to call Alonso a hothead, I don't think there's anybody who would disagree with you on that one. Then again, Senna was regarded as one of the biggest hotheads around, especially when he won his first WDC in 1988. When it comes to wheel-to-wheel racing, it's going to make all the difference, it's going to make the crucial points to decide a WDC, and it's what makes the difference between a racer and a driver.
U're gonna have to refresh me, which was the race he piled into Pizza. Monaco... well no overtaking there is there? UK, well his car had a problem. At least he didn't throw it off the road so much that he damaged it. As for playing percentages, I doubt if u can be 100% sure about that. 03 was a very mixed season, and who knows how good the McLaren was? Besides, it was bloody fragile then as well, and the team might have asked him to bring it home in the points ya dig? I will still doubt that Kimi plays percentages because the way I see it, I sometimes WISH he'd slow down a bit and maybe the car won't break. IF he were playing percentages, I'd certainly want him to push a bit more. But I don't, because he isn't. Anyways, Alonso was outclassed much of last year by Trulli and I felt that he'd lost the plot in 04. Sure is nice that he's bucked up now, but he needs to temper his hotheadness with intelligence. Like I said, bollocks without brains is no use. I'm sure u can appreciate this point yourself? -
Kimi/Pizza was Spain 03.
So should and should not only applies to track marshalls and not drivers?
Under normal circumstances, there's no overtaking at Monaco. However, the opening may be there when the guy ahead is in trouble like JPM was - Kimi had to be there to take advantage of it but he was too busy playing the percentages.
Now, look at Nurburgring - Kimi and McLaren both said that Kimi's a key player in the decision making process. But you're saying when he makes a bad call, it's the team asking him to bring the points home? Pretty convenient excuse, isn't that?
One thing's for sure, Mclaren have lost their ability to make cars that will go the distance. Since the beryllium ban, Macs have only either been fast and unreliable or slow and unreliable. In light of this, Raikonnen needs to make hay while the sun shines, like in Hungary. If he'd done more of that in '03, he would have stood a bloody good chance of becoming WDC.
By the same measure, I'll agree with you about Alonso last year - after '03, '04 was pretty lame. Certainly Alonso could do without anymore Canada '05's.
It's actually looking a bit like Senna/Prost. Senna needed more of Prost's style of judgement, and Prost needed Senna's aggressiveness. Switch Alonso with Senna and Kimi with Prost, and we might just have a real WDC fight for the next couple of years. -
ged ged... when i talk about should and shouldnots i mean there is no point talking about who should have won this race or that. What's won's won, whats lost's lost, no point talking about the shoulds where the WDC is concerned.Originally posted by Gedanken:Kimi/Pizza was Spain 03.
So should and should not only applies to track marshalls and not drivers?
Under normal circumstances, there's no overtaking at Monaco. However, the opening may be there when the guy ahead is in trouble like JPM was - Kimi had to be there to take advantage of it but he was too busy playing the percentages.
Now, look at Nurburgring - Kimi and McLaren both said that Kimi's a key player in the decision making process. But you're saying when he makes a bad call, it's the team asking him to bring the points home? Pretty convenient excuse, isn't that?
One thing's for sure, Mclaren have lost their ability to make cars that will go the distance. Since the beryllium ban, Macs have only either been fast and unreliable or slow and unreliable. In light of this, Raikonnen needs to make hay while the sun shines, like in Hungary. If he'd done more of that in '03, he would have stood a bloody good chance of becoming WDC.
By the same measure, I'll agree with you about Alonso last year - after '03, '04 was pretty lame. Certainly Alonso could do without anymore Canada '05's.
It's actually looking a bit like Senna/Prost. Senna needed more of Prost's style of judgement, and Prost needed Senna's aggressiveness. Switch Alonso with Senna and Kimi with Prost, and we might just have a real WDC fight for the next couple of years.
anyhows, i suppose, if u could combine senna and prost into one, u'd get the ultimate racing driver. And i suppose kimi and alonso combined would be the same too. but u know what's scary? There IS one such driver who seems to be a almost perfect combination of senna + prost, or kimi + alonso. Thats the red baron himself. his only archilles heel is in a wheel to wheel fight.
u know what tho? I still haven't seen kimi and alonso duke it out on the track side by side. screw the 05 rules.
-
Ah, there we go, Heng. So let's stay away from shoulds and shouldn'ts altogether and not go down the "Alonso shouldn't be b!tching" path, eh? If Alonso wants to whinge, recite poetry or sing an aria while he's driving, it's of no consequence.
Like I said in an earlier post, MS is one of the last few who raced with the old guard, but I don't think that means that he's close to being as good as either Prost or Senna - even in 1993 Senna was driving around MS' much-feared chop, in the wet no less, like he didn't even notice it.
That said, MS is arguably the best out there, which really doesn't say much about the quality of the current drivers compared to those of the early 90's. Let's face it - these days you get to see more exciting wheel-to-wheel racing in even Formula Ford.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not blaming the drivers. The fact is the current formula's an absolute abortion and Max Mosley ought to be strung up by what little evidence of balls he has.
I've said it for years, and I'll say it again: shrink the wings, bring slicks back, put a proper manual transmission back in, drop all the Radio Shack crap, sacrifice a virgin to a volcano and let's have some real racing again. -
I do wonder, is it not possible to go back to having wheel to wheel racing without demoting F1 cars to the level of go-karts? We got lots of wheel to wheel in the turbo era u know. who can forget Rene Arnoux n Giles V's non-stop wheel banging for the last few laps of the Dijon 79 GP?Originally posted by Gedanken:Ah, there we go, Heng. So let's stay away from shoulds and shouldn'ts altogether and not go down the "Alonso shouldn't be b!tching" path, eh? If Alonso wants to whinge, recite poetry or sing an aria while he's driving, it's of no consequence.
Like I said in an earlier post, MS is one of the last few who raced with the old guard, but I don't think that means that he's close to being as good as either Prost or Senna - even in 1993 Senna was driving around MS' much-feared chop, in the wet no less, like he didn't even notice it.
That said, MS is arguably the best out there, which really doesn't say much about the quality of the current drivers compared to those of the early 90's. Let's face it - these days you get to see more exciting wheel-to-wheel racing in even Formula Ford.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not blaming the drivers. The fact is the current formula's an absolute abortion and Max Mosley ought to be strung up by what little evidence of balls he has.
I've said it for years, and I'll say it again: shrink the wings, bring slicks back, put a proper manual transmission back in, drop all the Radio Shack crap, sacrifice a virgin to a volcano and let's have some real racing again. -
Hot damn, now we're talking - there's no school like the old school. Not only GV/Arnoux, but Mansell/Piquet and Senna/Prost gave us some damn good racing.
Things were good till about the end of 1992. Hell, the way it looks, it all started going downhill when semi-auto gearboxes came in. John Barnard has a lot to answer for. :X -
I'm not sure how many ppl been to race school here. The 1st thing the instructor teaches u is to finish races.. if you cannot even finish.. dun tok abt winning. You need to learn how to nurse ur brakes.. tyres, clutches, engine, transmission.. even suspension. Your driving style and techniques are all formulated to ensure your car last the race and then learn how to win it.Originally posted by HENG@:u know that this line u uttered actually shows that kimi is a racer not a driver. like ged said, a driver plays percentage games. Kimi goes for win or bust, this is a very racy psychological mindset. A driver wants to finish the race. A racer wants to win it. Just this line alone can't state more clearly how much of a racer Kimi is. So thanks for supporting Kimi unintentionally.
take rally for instance.. if you cannot "take care" of your car.. wats the point if you toping the 1st few SS.. then car distroyed.. cannot finish the balance SS?
So, a real racer will understand this simple formula.. DNF=Loser
"win or bust" mindset=gambler >< racer
Cheers..
-
Depending upon your objective, siaokao, Heng may either be the best or worst person to talk to about race school.
In any case, it's understood that, as I said in another thread, that to finish first, first you have to finish. We're talking about the qualities of being a driver and a racer as two distinct and separate qualities, but any successful racing driver will need to have both qualities to some extent. -
Even FIA recognised that the real winners are consistent finishers, hence they decided to reward the top 8 positions (up from 6) beginning from the 2002 season onwards.Originally posted by siaokao:I'm not sure how many ppl been to race school here. The 1st thing the instructor teaches u is to finish races.. if you cannot even finish.. dun tok abt winning. You need to learn how to nurse ur brakes.. tyres, clutches, engine, transmission.. even suspension. Your driving style and techniques are all formulated to ensure your car last the race and then learn how to win it.
take rally for instance.. if you cannot "take care" of your car.. wats the point if you toping the 1st few SS.. then car distroyed.. cannot finish the balance SS?
So, a real racer will understand this simple formula.. DNF=Loser
"win or bust" mindset=gambler >< racer
Cheers.. -
Which creates a whole new set of problems such as drivers who play the percentages - boring. I much prefer the 11-best-results system of the late 80's / early 90's because it made for much better racing. With either system, the winner still had to finish, and the FIA just bollixed one more good thing by changing the rules.
-
but an F1 race is a "sprint" category race. Those things u talk about are more applicable for endurance racing. And yes I've done both sprint races AND 24 hours endrance racing so I know the diff. U know what? The problem we're tackling here is component failure. Where the component fails due to manufacturing flaws u can conserve or u can push, trust me, it will still fail. I've suffered from that a few times. Besides, u're talking about a very low basic level of racing. The instructor HAS to teach u to finish races because when u start learning to race your skills are so unpolished that u basically create a lot of wear and tear when u change gear, turn the wheel, brake etc, ok? At my level we already no longer talk about that sort of basics because everybody is drilled in the art of driving without causing undue and unnecessary wear and tear on the machine. We're discussing a higher level where such basics are already covered and not within the scope of discussion.Originally posted by siaokao:I'm not sure how many ppl been to race school here. The 1st thing the instructor teaches u is to finish races.. if you cannot even finish.. dun tok abt winning. You need to learn how to nurse ur brakes.. tyres, clutches, engine, transmission.. even suspension. Your driving style and techniques are all formulated to ensure your car last the race and then learn how to win it.
take rally for instance.. if you cannot "take care" of your car.. wats the point if you toping the 1st few SS.. then car distroyed.. cannot finish the balance SS?
So, a real racer will understand this simple formula.. DNF=Loser
"win or bust" mindset=gambler >< racer
Cheers..
A real racer like Ayrton Senna always pushed the machine to its limits. Just too bad that Maccies lasted longer back then. Alain Prost was more of a driver. Never really able to fight wheel to wheel like Kimi or Alonso or Montoya does. Michael Schumacher's another one who loses out fighting wheel to wheel. As for Jacques, well when he fights wheel to wheel, everybody loses out!
A driver, in the world of sprint racing, is someone who conserves the car. A racer is someone who goes all out.
As for race school, don't tell me u went to one. THAT's all they taught u? -
u know what? im just going to keep watching Dijon 79 over and over again and pretend I'm watching modern day F1.Originally posted by Gedanken:Which creates a whole new set of problems such as drivers who play the percentages - boring. I much prefer the 11-best-results system of the late 80's / early 90's because it made for much better racing. With either system, the winner still had to finish, and the FIA just bollixed one more good thing by changing the rules. -
Of coz we are talking abt component failures! A car dun just go up in smoke.. surely some components failed. Sure, we are talking basics here and we may not be as polish a "race" driver as u, but i hope at your level, you have not fogotten your basics..
well.. looks like Heng has done it all.. and apparently know it all too. I guess the "race" schools i attended is nothing close to the 24hrs races he is doing now. And if he says F1 is a sprint race.. what else can I say?
Have a good day everyone.. -
component failures due to manufacturing defects or design error WILL go 'boom' whether u try to conserve the car or not, because they're already flawed from the beginning. Here we're not talking about component failure arising from mistreatment of the machine by the driver. Think u need to understand that when we say "racer mentality" it doesn't mean driving the car ragged like a newbie. Maybe u need to consider that we're viewing the issue from 2 very different levels of playing field.Originally posted by siaokao:Of coz we are talking abt component failures! A car dun just go up in smoke.. surely some components failed. Sure, we are talking basics here and we may not be as polish a "race" driver as u, but i hope at your level, you have not fogotten your basics..
well.. looks like Heng has done it all.. and apparently know it all too. I guess the "race" schools i attended is nothing close to the 24hrs races he is doing now. And if he says F1 is a sprint race.. what else can I say?
Have a good day everyone..
btw, u might want to consider what is actually classified as a sprint category race and what is considered an endurance event under FIA classification rules, not under our local SMSA's jargons.