Grand Prix Rejects

mario wrote:Actually, we did see the incident that earned Gutierrez his penalty, albeit more by accident than by design - it was the moment when he went off track whilst fighting with Maldonado and the two Force India drivers, with the stewards ruling that running off track in that corner preventing him from losing his position to Maldonado.

Oh. I didn't remember that. My bad. I remember someone mentioning him holding it bravely on the outside of Blanchimont (which I didn't see) and he got a penalty for running wide or something like that. Or was that it before the di Resta and Maldonado collison, when NBC were at break, and I never got to see it?

Overall, though, I do agree that the TV directors have been rather poor at times when it comes to picking up battles in the mid to lower part of the field. How often do we see those below about 5th or 6th place - i.e. below the top three teams - unless it is to pick up a driver who would normally be towards the front of the field but is having to fight back through it (say, Hamilton in Silverstone). The commercial logic is sound - the top teams have the most important sponsors and are the most recognisable when it comes to promoting the sport - but at the same time it is difficult for those at the back of the field to make their presence known.

I have to agree with this. The top 6 get the most attention of all the teams. "It's all about the guys for the win" and stuff like that. Part of the logic behind that is true, but part of it I fell isn't true. I feel F1 is about all of the competing teams designing the best car and the drivers proving who has the best car and proving to the world they are best drivers. It is. But this includes everyone. The backmarkers too. I mean, back 10 - 15 years ago, McLaren and Ferrari had the best cars (and WIlliams, to an extent), but that doesn't mean they dominate. Back then, Minardi could all of a sudden find some huge sponsors and someone could buy them and turn them into midfielders and frontrunners again. Although that would be very unlikely to happen, what if it did? Minardi would be the focus of the viewer. Everyone I feel should be treated more fairly when it comes to airtime on the TV.

Equally, another thing that the TV broadcasters could make more use of would be the radio messages - sometimes the radio messages can throw up a very fascinating insight into what is going on both on and off the track. How many people know that, in Belgium, Massa reported Perez's move on Grosjean back to Smedley? Smedley might have said "It has nothing to do with you", but it suggests that Massa wanted to bring Perez's behaviour to the attention of race control, who also monitor the radio traffic, as soon as he saw him do that move.

Hell yes. More radio messages would be good for viewers, so that they, as you pointed out, would get a better insight on what's going on on track (for example, car problems) and off track (strategy). The fact is, we get very few of those radio messages, and about all I pay attention to anymore is the ones reporting incidents because they are different from the rather extremely typical Red Bull, Ferrari, or McLaren strategy call or the reporting of the most typical parts failure on Red Bull cars in the heat, alternators and gearboxes. I feel there is a lack of diversity in the radio messages, as well as a lack of radio messages in general, which make me slightly cringe whenever I'm really thinking about the subject.

go_Rubens wrote:

mario wrote:Actually, we did see the incident that earned Gutierrez his penalty, albeit more by accident than by design - it was the moment when he went off track whilst fighting with Maldonado and the two Force India drivers, with the stewards ruling that running off track in that corner preventing him from losing his position to Maldonado.

Oh. I didn't remember that. My bad. I remember someone mentioning him holding it bravely on the outside of Blanchimont (which I didn't see) and he got a penalty for running wide or something like that. Or was that it before the di Resta and Maldonado collison, when NBC were at break, and I never got to see it?

That was a few seconds before the di Resta-Maldonado collision - basically, their argument was that, had he not cut the track there and kept his foot down, he couldn't have then been in a position to take his position back when they went into the But Stop chicane.

go_Rubens wrote:

mario wrote:Equally, another thing that the TV broadcasters could make more use of would be the radio messages - sometimes the radio messages can throw up a very fascinating insight into what is going on both on and off the track. How many people know that, in Belgium, Massa reported Perez's move on Grosjean back to Smedley? Smedley might have said "It has nothing to do with you", but it suggests that Massa wanted to bring Perez's behaviour to the attention of race control, who also monitor the radio traffic, as soon as he saw him do that move.

Hell yes. More radio messages would be good for viewers, so that they, as you pointed out, would get a better insight on what's going on on track (for example, car problems) and off track (strategy). The fact is, we get very few of those radio messages, and about all I pay attention to anymore is the ones reporting incidents because they are different from the rather extremely typical Red Bull, Ferrari, or McLaren strategy call or the reporting of the most typical parts failure on Red Bull cars in the heat, alternators and gearboxes. I feel there is a lack of diversity in the radio messages, as well as a lack of radio messages in general, which make me slightly cringe whenever I'm really thinking about the subject.

It can be interesting to listen to how some drivers work their ways through a race and what they think after a race too - F1Fanatic has started to collect the radio messages that are broadcast, and it is quite interesting to see what goes on behind the scenes as it were. It's also surprising to see how some drivers have a completely different impression of the cars they were driving - Gutierrez saying that his car felt good and he had good pace, for example, whereas Hulkenberg was complaining that his car was all over the place (with their problems reflected in their times too - Gutierrez did look like the quicker driver of the two).

I am really getting aggravated with the sheer number of drivers being thrown up the racing ladder as fast as they can. It's outrageous how many promising careers are absolutely ruined by teams that put the next big thing in their cars and expect them to perform like world champions. They need time to develop! Let them grow in the feeder series; it's what they are there for. Don't give them a year or two in a feeder series and expect them to perform excellently in the top tier, then fire them for under performing. Motorsports is about racing cars the fastest, not racing up the career ladder the fastest.

Hound55 wrote:I am really getting aggravated with the sheer number of drivers being thrown up the racing ladder as fast as they can. It's outrageous how many promising careers are absolutely ruined by teams that put the next big thing in their cars and expect them to perform like world champions. They need time to develop! Let them grow in the feeder series; it's what they are there for. Don't give them a year or two in a feeder series and expect them to perform excellently in the top tier, then fire them for under performing. Motorsports is about racing cars the fastest, not racing up the career ladder the fastest.

I have to agree that, sometimes, it is better to spend more time polishing you skills in a lower series than throwing yourself into the limelight when you are not ready. Even some of the greats in the sport intentionally chose not to rush into F1 - Prost carefully considered his options when moving into F1 and insisted that McLaren waited until 1980 before he raced, Clark built up experience in Formula Junior and sports car racing before moving into F1 and Schumacher racked up a couple of season in the German F3 series, along with sports car racing, before moving into F1.

Will Buxton had an excellent article (which I cannot find at the moment, but I'll try to dig it out if possible) about the overbearing pressure on drivers in junior series and the fact that so many drivers are pushed through the system and then spat out because they cannot adapt quickly enough to the situation.

It was already bad enough with sponsors desperate to cash in by being able to spot the next young hot shot before anybody else could, but he felt that the situation has been made worse by the expansion of Young Driver programs by the larger F1 teams. With those outfits keen to capitalise on their investment as soon as possible in case somebody else poaches them, their desire to rush them through the junior series and into a seat in F1 can sometimes be even worse (and unsurprisingly Red Bull's program got quite a bit of flack given that they tend to put their drivers under the heaviest pressure).

All of that seems to have narrowed the time that drivers are given to develop their skills in junior series - Buxton gave the example of one driver in GP2 being dismissed as "too inexperienced" by a team boss but, when he suggested another driver who had spent a few more years in the junior series, was told that the second driver was "too old" and "past it", despite that second driver being less than two years older than the first driver. Unfortunately, with junior series proving to be increasingly expensive, sponsors are not keen to pay for a driver to develop and hone his skills if they think they can get a better return by bumping him up a series, even if it detrimental in the shorter term for both parties.

Jean Alesi was 25 when he made his F1 debut, and Murray Walker was still describing him as a "young charger" for years afterwards, possibly even after he turned 30.

Jaime Alguersuari won't be 25 until the 2015 F1 season kicks off - and he's already had two and a half seasons and been confined to the scrapheap.

Make of that what you will.

Alguersuari really is the perfect example of a driver who was becoming a very quick and consistent driver yet got dumped anyway.
He easily deserved the STR seat for 2012 yet Toro Rosso foolishly wanted new drivers anyway. Once he was dropped his F1 future was already over.
Vergne and Ricciardo are good drivers and have proved their worth but Alguersuari deserved to stay in Grand Prix racing.

dinizintheoven wrote:Jean Alesi was 25 when he made his F1 debut, and Murray Walker was still describing him as a "young charger" for years afterwards, possibly even after he turned 30.
Jaime Alguersuari won't be 25 until the 2015 F1 season kicks off - and he's already had two and a half seasons and been confined to the scrapheap.
Make of that what you will.

Thats showbiz (F1), I guess.

CoopsII wrote:

dinizintheoven wrote:Jean Alesi was 25 when he made his F1 debut, and Murray Walker was still describing him as a "young charger" for years afterwards, possibly even after he turned 30.
Jaime Alguersuari won't be 25 until the 2015 F1 season kicks off - and he's already had two and a half seasons and been confined to the scrapheap.
Make of that what you will.

Thats showbiz (F1), I guess.

I didn't think Alesi was all that old, until I checked his Wikipedia page and discovered that he turns 50 next year.

The same for young Johnny Herbert as well.

The sight of seeing Robin Frijns a man who should be in F1 just sitting on the sidelines doing nothing while Sergey Sirotkin who's a teenager is about to get a drive just sums up the money problems at the moment. Before the YDT at Silverstone i had no idea who Kimiya Sato was and his performance in today's AutoGP race was weak to say the least. We also had Susie Wolff who doesn't deserve to be anywhere near an F1 car (Sorry Baker) she was only a few tenths ahead of the Caterham's and Marussia's of all cars. And then you have the sight of the GP2 crash boys Cecotto and Canamasas having tests and also Roldolfo Gonzalez having a Marussia reserve drive plus the likes of Jake "1 podium in my entire career" Rosenzweig and Daniel "3 points in my time in FR3.5 and GP2 combined" de Jong staying in GP2 while Frijns gets booted out for money problems then i just don't see the point. I never really liked Frijns but seeing him get kicked out like this has made me have a change of heart towards him. Please can someone give him a reserve drive because of his talent and not because he brings money PLEASE?!!

Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:The sight of seeing Robin Frijns a man who should be in F1 just sitting on the sidelines doing nothing while Sergey Sirotkin who's a teenager is about to get a drive just sums up the money problems at the moment. Before the YDT at Silverstone i had no idea who Kimiya Sato was and his performance in today's AutoGP race was weak to say the least. We also had Susie Wolff who doesn't deserve to be anywhere near an F1 car (Sorry Baker) she was only a few tenths ahead of the Caterham's and Marussia's of all cars. And then you have the sight of the GP2 crash boys Cecotto and Canamasas having tests and also Roldolfo Gonzalez having a Marussia reserve drive plus the likes of Jake "1 podium in my entire career" Rosenzweig and Daniel "3 points in my time in FR3.5 and GP2 combined" de Jong staying in GP2 while Frijns gets booted out for money problems then i just don't see the point. I never really liked Frijns but seeing him get kicked out like this has made me have a change of heart towards him. Please can someone give him a reserve drive because of his talent and not because he brings money PLEASE?!!

These days Kimi, money decides everything for which drivers to hire. Except if you are Red Bull, Ferrari, McLaren, and Mercedes. Which I don't like myself, I agree with that. But you can't blame the teams for being in financial trouble and having to sign pay drivers. I mean, the mid to lower crop of the field in terms of teams are all not that safe (unless you are Toro Rosso or Force India, but even they are unstable at the moment) and pay drivers are more or less for one of their last ditch effort to save the teams and/or a new sponsorship deal, which isn't as likely.

I question why Sergey Sirotkin is even getting an F1 drive. I feel he isn't experienced enough to deserve an F1 seat, and I feel he is there for the money. The Russians want him in the second Sauber car, and I think that is what you would expect. But the thing is, the Russians I feel have another alternative instead of Sirotkin. Vitaly Petrov. I mean, Petrov is a decent driver who brings good money with him to begin with, and surely it wouldn't be hard for him to strike a deal with the oil company that wants Sergey there? If Sauber have booted Frijns for now, and the Russians still want Sirotkin in the car, then Sauber can help out with Sirotkin into becoming a mature driver while Petrov gets a chance to prove himself to other teams and possibly save his F1 career by bringing his money to another team. Possibly reuniting with Lotus for example.

With all this talk about Vitaly Petrov being the saviour of Sauber, I can't help thinking I heard at the end of last year that he'd lost all his sponsors, but actual news about this - or anything about him since the end of last season - is thin on the ground. This, for instance, is the best I could find. His personal website's gone to the cyber-grave, Oksana Kosachenko stopped being his manager to take up a job at Caterham which she has now left... it all looks like a bit of a mess. It seems Petrov is one of those drivers for whom the image of the pay-driver with a bottomless pit of money behind him will never die, and even if he improved to the level where he could beat all of the current World Champions in a straight fight in the same car, and Michael Schumacher in his prime, and - in for a kopeck, in for a rouble, Senna, Prost, Stewart, Clark, Fangio, Ascari, Nuvolari, come one come all - he still wouldn't be hired by any team if he didn't bring that enormous bag of sponsorship money.

And as Sauber are finding out, the problem with Russian sponsors is that although many of them seem to be very keen to get their names and logos onto the car, this is not matched by their enthusiasm to hand over the required amount of cash for doing so. If I was going to be a massive cynic I'd say a Russian sponsorship deal has more than a few Mafia-esque overtones about it; it's as if, rather than saying to Monisha Kaltenborn "put our logos on the car and then we will give you 50 million dollars", it's that they approached her about the deal, and now they're holding a gun to her head and saying "put our logos on the car and then we won't kill you".

I've always found myself wondering why, if China is now so awash with cash as we're led to believe, there hasn't been a Chinese team yet. It's what I thought the fate of Super Aguri would be, before they ceased to exist altogether. Even so, the Chinese bosses would most likely insist on a Chinese driver, and when you've got Ma Qing-Hua, Ho-Pin Tung and Cheng Congfu to choose from, that's not what I'd call the recipe for success... more like the recipe to be blown into the weeds by Caterham.

go_Rubens wrote:

Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:The sight of seeing Robin Frijns a man who should be in F1 just sitting on the sidelines doing nothing while Sergey Sirotkin who's a teenager is about to get a drive just sums up the money problems at the moment. Before the YDT at Silverstone i had no idea who Kimiya Sato was and his performance in today's AutoGP race was weak to say the least. We also had Susie Wolff who doesn't deserve to be anywhere near an F1 car (Sorry Baker) she was only a few tenths ahead of the Caterham's and Marussia's of all cars. And then you have the sight of the GP2 crash boys Cecotto and Canamasas having tests and also Roldolfo Gonzalez having a Marussia reserve drive plus the likes of Jake "1 podium in my entire career" Rosenzweig and Daniel "3 points in my time in FR3.5 and GP2 combined" de Jong staying in GP2 while Frijns gets booted out for money problems then i just don't see the point. I never really liked Frijns but seeing him get kicked out like this has made me have a change of heart towards him. Please can someone give him a reserve drive because of his talent and not because he brings money PLEASE?!!

These days Kimi, money decides everything for which drivers to hire. Except if you are Red Bull, Ferrari, McLaren, and Mercedes. Which I don't like myself, I agree with that. But you can't blame the teams for being in financial trouble and having to sign pay drivers. I mean, the mid to lower crop of the field in terms of teams are all not that safe (unless you are Toro Rosso or Force India, but even they are unstable at the moment) and pay drivers are more or less for one of their last ditch effort to save the teams and/or a new sponsorship deal, which isn't as likely.

I question why Sergey Sirotkin is even getting an F1 drive. I feel he isn't experienced enough to deserve an F1 seat, and I feel he is there for the money. The Russians want him in the second Sauber car, and I think that is what you would expect. But the thing is, the Russians I feel have another alternative instead of Sirotkin. Vitaly Petrov. I mean, Petrov is a decent driver who brings good money with him to begin with, and surely it wouldn't be hard for him to strike a deal with the oil company that wants Sergey there? If Sauber have booted Frijns for now, and the Russians still want Sirotkin in the car, then Sauber can help out with Sirotkin into becoming a mature driver while Petrov gets a chance to prove himself to other teams and possibly save his F1 career by bringing his money to another team. Possibly reuniting with Lotus for example.

Frijns lost his GP2 seat, not his Sauber reserve role. He'll be supplemented by Sirotkin, not supplanted.

kevinbotz wrote:Frijns lost his GP2 seat, not his Sauber reserve role. He'll be supplemented by Sirotkin, not supplanted.

Oh. Well then, it seems all hope has been lost for now...

What right do these Russian sponsors have to put Sirotkin in the car if (supposedly) there are worries about their reliability? If Sauber want a state-backed pay driver, they'd do better with Rodolfo Gonzalez or Jose Maria Lopez.

watka wrote:What right do these Russian sponsors have to put Sirotkin in the car if (supposedly) there are worries about their reliability? If Sauber want a state-backed pay driver, they'd do better with Rodolfo Gonzalez or Jose Maria Lopez.

I question this. Surely they have a right to put Sirotkin in the second car if they are Sauber's sponsors. But with the worries of reliability, I don't know.

For some reason, I feel Sauber are taking a risk in doing this deal.

go_Rubens wrote:

watka wrote:What right do these Russian sponsors have to put Sirotkin in the car if (supposedly) there are worries about their reliability? If Sauber want a state-backed pay driver, they'd do better with Rodolfo Gonzalez or Jose Maria Lopez.

I question this. Surely they have a right to put Sirotkin in the second car if they are Sauber's sponsors. But with the worries of reliability, I don't know.

For some reason, I feel Sauber are taking a risk in doing this deal.

It may be a major risk, but when the team has been running at a loss (the figures from Rencken estimate their losses at £15 million for 2011 alone), their suppliers are reportedly complaining about not being paid, Ferrari is alleged to be threatening to cut off engine supplies over lack of payment and their lead driver wants to leave the team over unpaid salaries, it looks like it is a risk that they have to take if they want to merely survive.

mario wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:

watka wrote:What right do these Russian sponsors have to put Sirotkin in the car if (supposedly) there are worries about their reliability? If Sauber want a state-backed pay driver, they'd do better with Rodolfo Gonzalez or Jose Maria Lopez.

I question this. Surely they have a right to put Sirotkin in the second car if they are Sauber's sponsors. But with the worries of reliability, I don't know.

For some reason, I feel Sauber are taking a risk in doing this deal.

It may be a major risk, but when the team has been running at a loss (the figures from Rencken estimate their losses at £15 million for 2011 alone), their suppliers are reportedly complaining about not being paid, Ferrari is alleged to be threatening to cut off engine supplies over lack of payment and their lead driver wants to leave the team over unpaid salaries, it looks like it is a risk that they have to take if they want to merely survive.

My question is, when did the Sauber money fiasco begin? I never heard of it until before the German Grand Prix.

Rant coming up.

Who designed the new points system F1 uses now? I mean, there are no points in it, it's just pointless.

go_Rubens wrote:
Rant coming up.

Who designed the new points system F1 uses now? I mean, there are no points in it, it's just pointless.

I'm afraid I don't...



...see your point.

Ataxia wrote:I'm afraid I don't...



...see your point.

I think the points system they use now is ridiculous. I mean, the gaps in points between first and second make no sense to me, as well as using numbers like 25, 18, 15, etc. when the old points system wasn't broke and didn't need fixing.

go_Rubens wrote:

Ataxia wrote:I'm afraid I don't...



...see your point.

I think the points system they use now is ridiculous. I mean, the gaps in points between first and second make no sense to me, as well as using numbers like 25, 18, 15, etc. when the old points system wasn't broke and didn't need fixing.

Except for the fact that with today's ultra-reliability, most of the points over the last few seasons would be hoarded between the top 5/6 teams.

go_Rubens wrote:I think the points system they use now is ridiculous. I mean, the gaps in points between first and second make no sense to me, as well as using numbers like 25, 18, 15, etc. when the old points system wasn't broke and didn't need fixing.

I believe that the idea was to provide a greater incentive for drivers to fight for the lead and higher positions in the race by giving them a higher weighting, points wise, than before. Added to that, the idea to stretch the points down to 10th place was also a way of spreading the points out a bit and giving the smaller teams chances to score points too (especially the newest teams, though they are yet to make that breakthrough).

Salamander wrote:Except for the fact that with today's ultra-reliability, most of the points over the last few seasons would be hoarded between the top 5/6 teams.

Under the 2003-9 system, Williams are yet to score (again!) and Sauber have only 1 point, that being from the second race. Surprisingly, Toro Rosso would have scored under any points system after the 1950s-60s, thanks to Vergne.

good_Ralf wrote:

Salamander wrote:Except for the fact that with today's ultra-reliability, most of the points over the last few seasons would be hoarded between the top 5/6 teams.

Under the 2003-9 system, Williams are yet to score (again!) and Sauber have only 1 point, that being from the second race. Surprisingly, Toro Rosso would have scored under any points system after the 1950s-60s, thanks to Vergne.

But they'd be outscored by Sauber in the 50's points system, thanks to Gutierrez Gutierrez's fastest lap.

I don't think celebrities should be allowed in the paddock or on the grid, at all.

SgtPepper wrote:I don't think celebrities should be allowed in the paddock or on the grid, at all.

Felipe Massa's little boy should be allowed everywhere though. How cute is he?!

LellaLombardi wrote:

SgtPepper wrote:I don't think celebrities should be allowed in the paddock or on the grid, at all.

Felipe Massa's little boy should be allowed everywhere though. How cute is he?!

Driver's family is fine, as long as Jenson's father is forced to do his shirts up to the top.

And the Hoff should always be allowed.

LellaLombardi wrote:And the Hoff should always be allowed.

Obviously!

SgtPepper wrote:

LellaLombardi wrote:And the Hoff should always be allowed.

Obviously!

Team Button should always be allowed on the grid. Wonder if they'll come to Webber's leaving party in Brazil

I'll get my coat...

That 'get out of the car before the end of qualifying' PR move was shockingly cynical.

This isn't sodding X Factor Red Bull.

The phrase 'top lel' is vastly overused in the PMMF subforums. Please stop.

SgtPepper wrote:That 'get out of the car before the end of qualifying' PR move was shockingly cynical.

This isn't sodding X Factor Red Bull.

I quite liked that, especially as for a moment he thought he'd cocked up and got out too early Was it an attempt to emulate that time when Prost did it?

eurobrun wrote:The phrase 'top lel' is vastly overused in the PMMF subforums. Please stop.

If anything it's underused.

I'm not sure I know what top lel is. Does it mean top level? A typo meaning Top LOLs?

dr-baker wrote:I'm not sure I know what top lel is. Does it mean top level? A typo meaning Top LOLs?

It's Lella Lombardi's mother telling her which shelf the Oxo cubes are on...

Ataxia wrote:

dr-baker wrote:I'm not sure I know what top lel is. Does it mean top level? A typo meaning Top LOLs?

It's Lella Lombardi's mother telling her which shelf the Oxo cubes are on...

dr-baker wrote:I'm not sure I know what top lel is. Does it mean top level? A typo meaning Top LOLs?

It's the toppest of all lels.

apple2009 wrote:

dr-baker wrote:I'm not sure I know what top lel is. Does it mean top level? A typo meaning Top LOLs?

It's the toppest of all lels.

Yeah. Useful. But what the hell IS a lel???

One thing which I find really annoying are these computer generated ads on the F1 TV broadcast. I want to see the real pictures from the race, not digitally modified ones. In case you haven't noticed yet, I mean these.