Your Reject of the Year!

[jackanderton]

While the season is still ongoing, the only possible candidates are:

USF1 who never even made it, and:

Pedro De La Rosa, the only driver to have been ditched mid-season purely for performance reasons.



As for Schumacher, that's clearly undeserved. I liken his performance to the 7 times world champion snooker player Stephen Hendry, who is no longer an irresistible force, but talented enough to hold his own against anyone. Both of them, through age, have fallen back into the realm of mere mortals. It doesn't make them rejects though. Before you ask whether he's a reject you have to ask yourself whether Schumacher could still bring a race-winning car (which Mercedes clearly isn't) home for the win. The answer still has to be yes.

[coops]

Its too early for this.

Theres still time for a faltering Vettel to be caught on the pit-radio saying "Christian you TOLD me you wouldnt let Webber win!"

[LukeB]

Before you ask whether he's a reject you have to ask yourself whether Schumacher could still bring a race-winning car (which Mercedes clearly isn't) home for the win. The answer still has to be yes.

... unless his teammate is still running.

[madmark1974]

Before you ask whether he's a reject you have to ask yourself whether Schumacher could still bring a race-winning car (which Mercedes clearly isn't) home for the win. The answer still has to be yes.

... unless his teammate is still running.

I think Schumacher is a totally justifiable selection. Off the top of my head I can't think of anyone who has been overtaken so much this season. He seems to make the positions up at the start and then
go on to lose them (and more) and the race progresses. Being unable to overtake Alguersauri for most of a couple of races in a car cabable of qualifying 10 places higher on the grid is another reason,
and in case anyone mentions Coulthard and Bernoldi, I think everyone believes that race was Coulthard at his most rejectful ... Or at least joint most!

[jackanderton]

Rosberg has out-performed him but there are caveats to that, such as a)Rosberg is talented b)Schumacher has been out of the sport for a few years c)the car suits Rosberg, not Schumacher's driving style.

I'm loathe to defend Schumacher anyway as I absolutely hate the guy, but he's performed more or less exactly as I expected.

It isn't rejectful, it just means he's fallen into the clutches of ordinaryness.

[Cynon]

Its too early for this.

Theres still time for a faltering Vettel to be caught on the pit-radio saying "Christian you TOLD me you wouldnt let Webber win!"

^ - This.


But assuming the season ended now...

3. Di Grassi
2. Yamamoto
1. Schumacher

[Collieafc]

At this moment in time

3rd: Red Bull
Should have had at least the constructors title as good as theirs by now but due to team orders from the top and incompetence, its far from over.

2nd: The FIA
As has been touched upon earlier they are always interfering and are hardly consistant. Its a rarity now to not have them meddle in a race in some way. Its getting to the point where your better checking the results 24 hours after the race, in case penalties have been handed out

But in the lead so far (and this will surprise some of you who have seen me before)
1st: Michael Schumacher
No matter which side of the Schumi fence your on, hes a near shoe-in (or Schu-in? ) for it, no matter how you cut it. For those who support him, seeing him struggle both against an above average driver and team mate, as well as the likes of Alguasari is just depressing, with only Spa showing any of the Schumacher we really know. For those who hate him, Hungary. Nuff said. At least he could well win an award yet though!

Dishonourable mentions for Vettel, who has went from Golden boy to spoilt brat (figuratively speaking) as well as similar problems to Red Bull, HRT (Yamamoto. End of) and Bahrain as a season-opener

[Captain Hammer]

Its getting to the point where your better checking the results 24 hours after the race, in case penalties have been handed out

If penalties have been handed out, it's usually because someone has done something to warrant one.

[LukeB]

Its getting to the point where your better checking the results 24 hours after the race, in case penalties have been handed out

If penalties have been handed out, it's usually because someone has done something to warrant one.

It physically pains me to agree with you.

-
The only post-race penalty I can remember off the top of my head for this season was Schumacher at Monaco where he was guilty as charged. Did Alonso get one for not giving Kubica his place back (Silverstone I think)?

[mario]

Its getting to the point where your better checking the results 24 hours after the race, in case penalties have been handed out

If penalties have been handed out, it's usually because someone has done something to warrant one.

It physically pains me to agree with you.

-
The only post-race penalty I can remember off the top of my head for this season was Schumacher at Monaco where he was guilty as charged. Did Alonso get one for not giving Kubica his place back (Silverstone I think)?

Quite a few of the complaints about the stewards are not for the application of penalties, but the failure to do so when somebody has broken the rules...

As for Silverstone, Alonso did indeed get a penalty for passing Kubica whilst off the track, and then refusing to concede the position - however, Alonso was given a drive through penalty, so the penalty was applied during, not post race.

There are another set of post race penalties, though - remember that several drivers in Valencia were given a 5 second time penalty for driving too quickly after the safety car was deployed? In that case, though, the penalties were relatively lenient, because all of those drivers were in the third sector at the time (and most of them within a few hundred metres of the safety car line), and could not have kept to the set time for returning to the pits without having to slow down dangerously (i.e. slamming the brakes on).

Generally, though, most of the penalties that the drivers have racked up were during practise sessions, and usually relate to minor transgressions (Webber being caught speeding in the pit lane in FP3 at Monaco, for example), which have been dealt with by fines (we've just had one now - Sutil has been fined $10,000 for proceeding to drive around after his suspension had collapsed, when the rules state that he should have stopped as soon as possible http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86932 )

[jpm]

It can only be USF1 can't it?

In any case, 3rd the FIA for blocking Stefan GP, 2nd Sakon Yamamoto/ Kolin Kolles, 1st USF1

[mario]

While the season is still ongoing, the only possible candidates are:

USF1 who never even made it, and:

Pedro De La Rosa, the only driver to have been ditched mid-season purely for performance reasons.

As for Schumacher, that's clearly undeserved. I liken his performance to the 7 times world champion snooker player Stephen Hendry, who is no longer an irresistible force, but talented enough to hold his own against anyone. Both of them, through age, have fallen back into the realm of mere mortals. It doesn't make them rejects though. Before you ask whether he's a reject you have to ask yourself whether Schumacher could still bring a race-winning car (which Mercedes clearly isn't) home for the win. The answer still has to be yes.

Peter Sauber has shown De La Rosa the door in a rather unceremonious manner, and then promptly stuck the boot in for good measure in the pre-race press conference:

No, nothing to do with the Monza result. The fact is that Kamui and Pedro were more or less the same level but Kamui scored more points. We are simply not sure about the potential of the car. With Nick we have a clear benchmark as we know him well. This is important with regards to the development of the new car.

Which is essentially a rather clear message that he thinks that De La Rosa wasn't pushing the car hard enough for them to fully learn what the car was capable of.

As for USF1, I'm not sure if they can technically be called an F1 Reject because of the fact that they never competed - and, for example, the teams index specifically mentions that the team has to have taken part in at least two races. I've asked about this more than once, and haven't received a satisfactory answer - are USF1 eligible, or not? To my mind, because they never competed, and their entry was voided, they are not eligible (although certainly worthy of a dishonourable mention for the rumours of chronic nepotism and incompetence).

[Phoenix]

As for USF1, I'm not sure if they can technically be called an F1 Reject because of the fact that they never competed - and, for example, the teams index specifically mentions that the team has to have taken part in at least two races. I've asked about this more than once, and haven't received a satisfactory answer - are USF1 eligible, or not? To my mind, because they never competed, and their entry was voided, they are not eligible (although certainly worthy of a dishonourable mention for the rumours of chronic nepotism and incompetence).

My guess was that they at least had to be in the entry list for at least one race (I was taking Masami Kuwashima's case as an example, even if it's a driver).

[FullMetalJack]

Suzuka only being the 4th last race. It should either be the last, or penultimate race at the earliest.

[CarlosFerreira]

As for USF1, I'm not sure if they can technically be called an F1 Reject because of the fact that they never competed - and, for example, the teams index specifically mentions that the team has to have taken part in at least two races. I've asked about this more than once, and haven't received a satisfactory answer - are USF1 eligible, or not? To my mind, because they never competed, and their entry was voided, they are not eligible (although certainly worthy of a dishonourable mention for the rumours of chronic nepotism and incompetence).

My guess was that they at least had to be in the entry list for at least one race (I was taking Masami Kuwashima's case as an example, even if it's a driver).

Hmmm... some of you may remember Álvaro Parente had an agreement to be Virgin's reserve driver before the season started, then there was some sort of problem with funding, and it never happened. Now, he was actually at the team's presentation and was presented to the world press as Virgin's reserve driver, but you wouldn't honestly call him a reject... nor should we call USF1 a reject team for that matter.

[dr-baker]

I imagine US F1 are only as rejectworthy as Prodrive are aren't they? They were both awarded entries but never turned up. Heck, even Mastercard Lola made it out to qualify in Melbourne and occupied a pit garage in Brazil...

[Phoenix]

As for USF1, I'm not sure if they can technically be called an F1 Reject because of the fact that they never competed - and, for example, the teams index specifically mentions that the team has to have taken part in at least two races. I've asked about this more than once, and haven't received a satisfactory answer - are USF1 eligible, or not? To my mind, because they never competed, and their entry was voided, they are not eligible (although certainly worthy of a dishonourable mention for the rumours of chronic nepotism and incompetence).

My guess was that they at least had to be in the entry list for at least one race (I was taking Masami Kuwashima's case as an example, even if it's a driver).

Hmmm... some of you may remember Álvaro Parente had an agreement to be Virgin's reserve driver before the season started, then there was some sort of problem with funding, and it never happened. Now, he was actually at the team's presentation and was presented to the world press as Virgin's reserve driver, but you wouldn't honestly call him a reject... nor should we call USF1 a reject team for that matter.

Well, to be more specific, they should have turned up for at least one event, which USF1 failed to do.

[thehemogoblin]

It's probably Schumacher for me as of now. But there are still a bunch of candidates. I want this to thin down a bit before I judge wholly.

[Nessafox]

1) colles/HRT/Yamamoto/Senna: for managing to do even a slight developement (well the mirrors did change...) and for replacing chandhok. And Senna for being outperformed by yamamoto.
2) Liuzzi: why's he actually there? has he ever impressed or give the slightest hint he's above average?
3) Schumacher: that he has to adapt to the new cars and a car that doesn't fit his style is one excuse, that he drives around wildly, when he's not going to go to keep his position anyway, is something he can't find excuses for. So can't we.

[Myrvold]

And Senna for being outperformed by yamamoto.

What?

[Guzuky]

3rd. Red Bull Racing - Apparently having the best car, the second best designer of all time (behid Collin Chapman), a very fast pair drivers and being well-funded means nothing when common strategic errors, detrimental managerial favoritism and stupid driver's errors collude in your way to greatness

2. Michael Schumacher Arrogant prima donna who lives in perpetual denial even though the team remade the car to suit his style at the expense of his faster and more consistent teammate (demostrating that he wil never be a team player)

1st HRT A team that is not faster than a GP2 one and has less money should have never been in F1 in the first place. This team is a disgrace to F1 and will destroy the once promising carreer of Bruno Senna

[Captain Hammer]

1st HRT A team that is not faster than a GP2 one and has less money should have never been in F1 in the first place. This team is a disgrace to F1 and will destroy the once promising carreer of Bruno Senna

That's actually a pretty inaccurate statement. HRT have been much faster than GP2 cars on a number of occasions, usually when their car is suited to the aerodynamic qualities of a circuit.

[CarlosFerreira]

2. Michael Schumacher Arrogant prima donna who lives in perpetual denial even though the team remade the car to suit his style at the expense of his faster and more consistent teammate (demostrating that he wil never be a team player)

Well, it's not clear anywhere that the team redesigned the car to suit The Schu instead of Rosberg. They redesigned the car, all right - and both drivers were adamant they agreed on what the car needed. The improvements have been a failure, but Rosberg has stayed out in front everywhere, so I don't think the argument stands.

[mario]

2. Michael Schumacher Arrogant prima donna who lives in perpetual denial even though the team remade the car to suit his style at the expense of his faster and more consistent teammate (demostrating that he wil never be a team player)

Well, it's not clear anywhere that the team redesigned the car to suit The Schu instead of Rosberg. They redesigned the car, all right - and both drivers were adamant they agreed on what the car needed. The improvements have been a failure, but Rosberg has stayed out in front everywhere, so I don't think the argument stands.

In fact, Mark Hughes makes an interesting point in this article, as it appears that the redesigned car might have actually hindered, not helped, Schumacher. In the first seven of the season, Schumacher was qualifying approximately 0.14s behind Rosberg, but in the next seven, that gap widened to 0.36s. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 037790.stm
That drop in pace is also reflected in the points - in the first half of the year, Schumacher was scoring reasonably regularly, getting three top 6 finishes and 5 points scoring places in 7 races (had he not been penalised in Monaco, that would have been 6 points scoring places in 7 races, with Malaysia being his only DNF due to mechanical problems). However, whilst Schumacher is now struggling in the lower part of the top 10, Rosberg is still getting top 6 finishes on a fairly regular basis, and is just about keeping the team ahead of Renault.

If anything, I am beginning to wonder if Mercedes are designing the car around Rosberg, not Schumacher - because whilst Schumacher has been unhappy with the balance of the car, and especially the lack of front end grip due to Mercedes's flawed weight distribution, we haven't had as many complaints from Rosberg.

1st HRT A team that is not faster than a GP2 one and has less money should have never been in F1 in the first place. This team is a disgrace to F1 and will destroy the once promising carreer of Bruno Senna

That's actually a pretty inaccurate statement. HRT have been much faster than GP2 cars on a number of occasions, usually when their car is suited to the aerodynamic qualities of a circuit.

Exactly - the only time that HRT were slower then a GP2 car was at Monaco, during the first practise session, and that was because of mechanical problems. For the major part of the year, they have been faster, and often by a noticeable margin. At Barcelona, the fastest GP2 qualifying time was 1m27.727 by Jules Bianchi, whereas Chandhok did a 1m26.750. In Turkey, as another example, Bruno Senna set a time of 1m31.266, whereas Valsecchi's pole time was a 1m34.860. Even at Monaco, the fastest lap set by a GP2 car was a 1m21.823 - which is still a couple of seconds off HRT's best laps at Monaco.

All in all, the stories that HRT are slower then GP2 cars are wide of the mark, and seem to be malicious rumours spread by top teams frustrated at behind held up by the HRT cars in the race.

Also, Guzuky, whilst Adrian Newey is undoubtedly a genius, some might dispute your suggestion that he is the second best designer of all time. For a start, what about Rory Byrne? He was the guy behind the Ferrari's in Schumacher's glory days at Ferrari, and some of his cars were just as, if not more dominant, then the cars that Newey designed. Officially, too, Byrne has also been the chief designer behind more championship winning cars, both at Ferrari and at Benetton - Byrne has been responsible for 7 championship winning cars, just ahead of Newey with 6 (because, unlike Newey, Byrne's cars were not just fast, but would also stay in one piece for long enough to reach the finishing line).

[Ferrim]

Pedro De La Rosa, the only driver to have been ditched mid-season purely for performance reasons.

You'll agree that Schumacher, Liuzzi and Petrov all have been more underperforming than DLR. The fact that they haven't been fired doesn't mean that DLR has to be nominated for ROTR only because he has been.

And I'm pretty much convinced that his performances are NOT the reason.

[Guzuky]

2. Michael Schumacher Arrogant prima donna who lives in perpetual denial even though the team remade the car to suit his style at the expense of his faster and more consistent teammate (demostrating that he wil never be a team player)

Well, it's not clear anywhere that the team redesigned the car to suit The Schu instead of Rosberg. They redesigned the car, all right - and both drivers were adamant they agreed on what the car needed. The improvements have been a failure, but Rosberg has stayed out in front everywhere, so I don't think the argument stands.

In fact, Mark Hughes makes an interesting point in this article, as it appears that the redesigned car might have actually hindered, not helped, Schumacher. In the first seven of the season, Schumacher was qualifying approximately 0.14s behind Rosberg, but in the next seven, that gap widened to 0.36s. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 037790.stm
That drop in pace is also reflected in the points - in the first half of the year, Schumacher was scoring reasonably regularly, getting three top 6 finishes and 5 points scoring places in 7 races (had he not been penalised in Monaco, that would have been 6 points scoring places in 7 races, with Malaysia being his only DNF due to mechanical problems). However, whilst Schumacher is now struggling in the lower part of the top 10, Rosberg is still getting top 6 finishes on a fairly regular basis, and is just about keeping the team ahead of Renault.

If anything, I am beginning to wonder if Mercedes are designing the car around Rosberg, not Schumacher - because whilst Schumacher has been unhappy with the balance of the car, and especially the lack of front end grip due to Mercedes's flawed weight distribution, we haven't had as many complaints from Rosberg.

1st HRT A team that is not faster than a GP2 one and has less money should have never been in F1 in the first place. This team is a disgrace to F1 and will destroy the once promising carreer of Bruno Senna

That's actually a pretty inaccurate statement. HRT have been much faster than GP2 cars on a number of occasions, usually when their car is suited to the aerodynamic qualities of a circuit.

Exactly - the only time that HRT were slower then a GP2 car was at Monaco, during the first practise session, and that was because of mechanical problems. For the major part of the year, they have been faster, and often by a noticeable margin. At Barcelona, the fastest GP2 qualifying time was 1m27.727 by Jules Bianchi, whereas Chandhok did a 1m26.750. In Turkey, as another example, Bruno Senna set a time of 1m31.266, whereas Valsecchi's pole time was a 1m34.860. Even at Monaco, the fastest lap set by a GP2 car was a 1m21.823 - which is still a couple of seconds off HRT's best laps at Monaco.

All in all, the stories that HRT are slower then GP2 cars are wide of the mark, and seem to be malicious rumours spread by top teams frustrated at behind held up by the HRT cars in the race.

Also, Guzuky, whilst Adrian Newey is undoubtedly a genius, some might dispute your suggestion that he is the second best designer of all time. For a start, what about Rory Byrne? He was the guy behind the Ferrari's in Schumacher's glory days at Ferrari, and some of his cars were just as, if not more dominant, then the cars that Newey designed. Officially, too, Byrne has also been the chief designer behind more championship winning cars, both at Ferrari and at Benetton - Byrne has been responsible for 7 championship winning cars, just ahead of Newey with 6 (because, unlike Newey, Byrne's cars were not just fast, but would also stay in one piece for long enough to reach the finishing line).

About Schumacher and the car: I'm basing my opinion in what happened in the run-up to the Monaco Grand Prix where Brawn said that the weight distribution was changed because 'michael prefers a pointy car' and Rosberg saying that he was not happy with the way things were going and that he thought the development was not going in the right direction. Has the team continued to develop the car aroung Rosberg (and I'm no saying that it has not happennedd but if it did it is not clear to me) he would have got more podiums and better results.That Rosberg have been outperforming Michael is either Rosberg doing his best to assert his position in the team or Michael underperforming by himself but I don't think it has to do with the team supporting Rosberg at all.

About HRT being slower than a GP2 car: You are all right that it only happened in Monaco (I should have included that in my argument) but to happen even once is a disgrace. F1 is the pinnacle of motor racing and either you have the money and the technical knowledge or get out.

About Newey being the second best designer of all time: I'm basing my opinion on innovation: the electronic gizmos in the late 80s early 90s, the dropped nose, the wider front tires and the frontal geometry where the regulations changed in the late 90's and all the solutions he introduced now (blown diffuser, the design of the nose, the raised nose, experimenting with materials in order to have flexi wings that passed the old test, the pullrod suspension) and I rest my case. Chapman cars were not reliable but who contributed more to F1? Byrne or Chapman? And not all reliability problems were directly attributable to Newey's designs since the Mercedes engines of the early 2000s were WMD's in their own right.

Byrne was an excelent designer, just as Brawn is an excelent technical director and they deserve all the glory they have, but, in my opinion, they were not as innovative or risk taking as Newey.

An interesting point, nobody argued against Red Bull beign candidates to ROY, hummm...

Please forgive my terrible English...

[TomWazzleshaw]

Please forgive my terrible English...

What are you going on about? That was near perfect English from a Puerto Rican... I am impressed.

[CarlosFerreira]

Please forgive my terrible English...

What are you going on about? That was near perfect English from a Puerto Rican... I am impressed.

I'll agree with this, but without the dig on Puerto Rico. Serious, you English is very good.

As to the Merc development, which I've been on about - they seriously have no idea what they're up to. They screwed up with the car in the first place, and now are left to run a dog until the end of 2010 - while working out the best for the 2011 car.

[coops]

Serious, you English is very good.

Was that intentional?

[TomWazzleshaw]

I'll agree with this, but without the dig on Puerto Rico. Serious, you English is very good.

As to the Merc development, which I've been on about - they seriously have no idea what they're up to. They screwed up with the car in the first place, and now are left to run a dog until the end of 2010 - while working out the best for the 2011 car.

I wasn't really making a dig on Puerto Rico... I was just trying to point out that for a non-native speaker his English is near perfect but I must have done a bad job at it. (And much better than some of the stuff most native speaker write )

And come to think of it the BAR/Honda/Brawn/Mercedes design team have been very hit and miss over the past decade so who knows what we're going to get

[CarlosFerreira]

Serious, you English is very good.

Was that intentional?

No, that was me being a poor speller, soon to incur in thehemogolin's wrath. And Wizzie, Vaya con Dios.

[eagleash]

Serious, you English is very good.

Was that intentional?

No, that was me being a poor speller, soon to incur in thehemogolin's wrath. And Wizzie, Vaya con Dios.

I'll add it to the list *sigh*......

Whilst we're on the subject of designers (we're not, but we were), What about John Barnard & Gordon Murray. Newey was around in their heyday but wasn't then the top designer. Perhaps not helped by being at lesser teams of course.
He was also fired by March (Leyton House) & moved aside at Williams.

[P_Friesacher]

And what about Austria's very own Gustav Brunner?
.
.
.
Well, maybe not...

[TomWazzleshaw]

And what about Austria's very own Gustav Brunner?
.
.
.
Well, maybe not...

Gustav pulled off some miracles with Minardi but I wouldn't call him the best designer of them all.

[mario]

I'll add it to the list *sigh*......

Whilst we're on the subject of designers (we're not, but we were), What about John Barnard & Gordon Murray. Newey was around in their heyday but wasn't then the top designer. Perhaps not helped by being at lesser teams of course.
He was also fired by March (Leyton House) & moved aside at Williams.

Murray did have a few flops, as have been detailed on this very website - the ultra low Brabham in 1986, whilst brilliant in conception (and it worked as intended - Murray recorded a significant boost in downforce due to cleaner airflow over the top surface of the car, especially for the rear wing), had a lot of problems. OK, quite a few of those were down to the BMW engine, but there were also quite a few problems with cooling due to insufficient airflow through the radiators. But, on the other hand, he was behind some inspired designs, like the 1988 Mclaren, and has had a fair bit of success in his time.
Furthermore, unlike a number of retired F1 designers, he is still experimenting outside of F1, with his T25 city car (and in that, he deserves some credit, because he hasn't just designed a new car, but the entire production line).

Barnard too was no slouch - he gave us the first carbon fibre composite chassis, the modern sculpted sidepod and the paddle shift semi automatic transmission, which is not a bad resume, and he was behind the MP4/2 series of cars, which won 31 races from 1984 to 1986 whilst he was in charge of development at Mclaren.

That said, Newey had shown promise at March, as the car was good for quite a few points along the way - and, for those who are interested, was the first car that Newey designed with a blown diffuser. That said, he was beaten to the idea by quite some margin - Renault had a blown diffuser in 1983 (which was why Prost was able to mount a title bid in 1983, before Brabham caught up at the end of the season).

[FullMetalJack]

As to the Merc development, which I've been on about - they seriously have no idea what they're up to. They screwed up with the car in the first place, and now are left to run a dog until the end of 2010 - while working out the best for the 2011 car.

That could really backfire, BMW 2009 for example. Kubica could have won the 2008 championship but decided to work on 2009, which was their worst season. We were all expecting Heidfeld and Kubica to challenge for the championship in 2009 and they couldn't. So don't assume that 2011 is going to be a great year either for Mercedes. It might be, but don't assume.

[eagleash]

The BT55 was horrible & more or less a mobile test bed. As well as being low line it had a Weissman 7 speed g'box. Or as one wag put it at the time "pick a No between 0 & 14; that's how many you've got".
The damn thing also lost it's rear wing costing us Elio, at Paul Ricard. (On a test day).
His injuries were minor, but he couldn't get out of the car, there were few marshalls & it took half an hour for a 'copter to arrive. He died of smoke inhalation. Rule changes followed.
This disaster didn't stop McLaren employing him subsequently. Result MP4/4 which used some ideas from the BT55.

[CarlosFerreira]

As to the Merc development, which I've been on about - they seriously have no idea what they're up to. They screwed up with the car in the first place, and now are left to run a dog until the end of 2010 - while working out the best for the 2011 car.

That could really backfire, BMW 2009 for example. Kubica could have won the 2008 championship but decided to work on 2009, which was their worst season. We were all expecting Heidfeld and Kubica to challenge for the championship in 2009 and they couldn't. So don't assume that 2011 is going to be a great year either for Mercedes. It might be, but don't assume.

Oh, I'm not assuming they'll be successful. But I do reckon their current car is probably beyond help, so might as well move on.

[CarlosFerreira]

The BT55 was horrible & more or less a mobile test bed. As well as being low line it had a Weissman 7 speed g'box. Or as one wag put it at the time "pick a No between 0 & 14; that's how many you've got".

First recorded study of quantum gearbox-ing? Magnificent.

[eagleash]

Dunno, I had a Honda Accord with two 3rds 2 5ths & 2 reverses once