Grand Prix Rejects

More to do with cars in general than F1 specifically, but with the reveal of the new Red Bull livery and my mixed feelings about it I'm going to come out with this: I hate matte paintjobs.

Simtek wrote:More to do with cars in general than F1 specifically, but with the reveal of the new Red Bull livery and my mixed feelings about it I'm going to come out with this: I hate matte paintjobs.

I'm generally with you on this - matte often looks rubbish. But on an F1 car , and leaving aside the theory that its special aero-paint, I think the Red Bull matte could be good. We now have quite a few dusk/evening/night races, and when the light goes low in the sky the reflections often make all the car colours indistinguishable ..so maybe the matte will help ( at least the lighter coloured bit) ..
We'll see ...squinting

Damon Hill is over-rated.

He won the title in a car that was light-years away from its nearest competition in '96, only having to surpass a rookie to do so. In '94, where he should have won the title (given that he had four extra races and a better car compared to Schumacher) he narrowly failed to do so, and in '95 he finished 30 points off the pace despite once again having the faster car (look at the Coulthard vs Herbert comparison there). Fast-forward to 1999, and he scored just seven points in a car that was good enough for Frentzen to finish third and win two races.

If Williams had signed Jean Alesi in 1993, I'm pretty sure he would have been a triple World Champion.

Oh, and his F3000 record (2 podiums in 28 attempts) is comparable to Jean-Denis Deletraz (2 podiums in 27 attempts).

Aislabie wrote:Damon Hill is over-rated.

He won the title in a car that was light-years away from its nearest competition in '96, only having to surpass a rookie to do so. In '94, where he should have won the title (given that he had four extra races and a better car compared to Schumacher) he narrowly failed to do so, and in '95 he finished 30 points off the pace despite once again having the faster car (look at the Coulthard vs Herbert comparison there). Fast-forward to 1999, and he scored just seven points in a car that was good enough for Frentzen to finish third and win two races.

If Williams had signed Jean Alesi in 1993, I'm pretty sure he would have been a triple World Champion.

Oh, and his F3000 record (2 podiums in 28 attempts) is comparable to Jean-Denis Deletraz (2 podiums in 27 attempts).

And he didn't impress against Van De Poele and Diniz either. But i don't think anyone outside of Great Britain does really rate Damon that high. Williams just has a thing with good enough but-not-quite-top drivers.
If you'd replace Ralf with someone better, Williams might even had more titles. But yeah, just like McLaren likes mediocre paint jobs, Williams likes mediocre drivers, preferrably unnoticeable. Just look at their test driver...

yannicksamlad wrote:

Simtek wrote:More to do with cars in general than F1 specifically, but with the reveal of the new Red Bull livery and my mixed feelings about it I'm going to come out with this: I hate matte paintjobs.

I'm generally with you on this - matte often looks rubbish. But on an F1 car , and leaving aside the theory that its special aero-paint, I think the Red Bull matte could be good. We now have quite a few dusk/evening/night races, and when the light goes low in the sky the reflections often make all the car colours indistinguishable ..so maybe the matte will help ( at least the lighter coloured bit) ..
We'll see ...squinting

I still am astonished that F1 cars are painted at all. I honestly didn't even realize it until I read the RBR shop manual they put out a few years back. They have to be the only top-flight racing cars on earth still painted.

Aislabie wrote:Damon Hill is over-rated.

Just for how many times this opinion has been ventured on here. Ibsey was the first back in 2010 but it's cropped up a few times since.

Short version - Hill fans disagree and will have reasons.

CoopsII wrote:

Aislabie wrote:Damon Hill is over-rated.

Just for how many times this opinion has been ventured on here. Ibsey was the first back in 2010 but it's cropped up a few times since.

Short version - Hill fans disagree and will have reasons.

Reason 1: His almost win in an Arrows. Probably his best race in F1 too.

Although I was an avid Hill fan back in the day, I do recognize for quite some time that he is probably one of the 'worst' World Champions. Having said that, I highly doubt Jean Denis Deletraz would have been world champion in Hill's place, despite my love for his F1 foray.

DanielPT wrote:

CoopsII wrote: Just for how many times this opinion has been ventured on here. Ibsey was the first back in 2010 but it's cropped up a few times since.

Short version - Hill fans disagree and will have reasons.

Reason 1: His almost win in an Arrows. Probably his best race in F1 too.

Although I was an avid Hill fan back in the day, I do recognize for quite some time that he is probably one of the 'worst' World Champions. Having said that, I highly doubt Jean Denis Deletraz would have been world champion in Hill's place, despite my love for his F1 foray.

I didn't follow F1 back then, but I approve greatly of Hill for making the most of demonstrably limited natural ability to become a World Champion, which Jean-Denis Deletraz never would have done, as you say.

And regarding the previous post - how many times the opinion has popped up in the time that I've... not been a member of the forums?

Hill > Villneuve

Wallio wrote:Hill > Villneuve

That's an interesting one to debate, really.

1996 (Williams-Renault)

• Damon Hill - 97 points (8 wins)
• Jacques Villeneuve - 78 points (4 wins)

1997 (Williams-Renault)

• Jacques Villeneuve - 81 points (7 wins)
• Heinz-Harald Frentzen - 42 points (1 win)

1999 (Jordan-Mugen Honda)

• Heinz-Harald Frentzen - 54 points (2 wins)
• Damon Hill - 7 points (Best: 4th)

On F1 results alone, the jury's out, but Villeneuve had success in CART, whereas Hill did not have any notable success in F3000. Although Hill beat Villeneuve in his rookie season, it was Villeneuve and not Hill who Frank Williams chose to keep on. That said, Hill put in that drive for Arrows, whereas Villeneuve did so badly with BAR that they dropped him for Takuma Sato (which may have been to do with his Honda links, but still)

Wallio wrote:Hill > Villneuve

That's not really unpopular, though.

This wrote:

Wallio wrote:Hill > Villneuve

That's not really unpopular, though.

Graham Hill greater than Gilles Villeneuve? Not unpopular?

Oh, you meant...

Simtek wrote:

This wrote:

Wallio wrote:Hill > Villneuve

That's not really unpopular, though.

Graham Hill greater than Gilles Villeneuve? Not unpopular?

Oh, you meant...

What? Phill Hill is miles better than Jacques Villeneuve Sr.

Every Hill has at least 1 driver's title. There is 1 title between all three Villeneuves. And it doesn't even belong to the most popular one...

This debate is as old as the Hills.

Are there any more Hills on the horizon?

The hills are alive with the sound of Accepterais-tu?

This wrote:The hills are alive with the sound of Accepterais-tu?

*Puts on earphones, cranks up sound, turns on JV*

Izzyeviel wrote:Are there any more Hills on the horizon?

Nah, they're all over the hill now.

This wrote:

Wallio wrote:Hill > Villneuve

That's not really unpopular, though.

No it's not. I don't much care foe either of them, but thought I would throw my lot in with the Hill defenders. He at least knew what size firesuit to wear......

AustralianStig wrote:This debate is as old as the Hills.

Come on, the song came out less than a year ago

Because we're talking about The Weeknd's The Hills, isn't it?

It's about time this thread came back...


I think after how this season has gone so far - his performance and his general attitude to everything and everyone - I actually dislike Sebastian Vettel even more this year than I ever did before. I have no nice words for the guy.

Rob Dylan wrote:I think after how this season has gone so far - his performance and his general attitude to everything and everyone - I actually dislike Sebastian Vettel even more this year than I ever did before. I have no nice words for the guy.

While I don't dislike him to the point of Malaysia 2012, the shine that he built up last year in my eyes is definitely fading. This season is reminding me more of the petulant driver who turned off so many in his early Red Bull career.

Rob Dylan wrote:It's about time this thread came back...

I think after how this season has gone so far - his performance and his general attitude to everything and everyone - I actually dislike Sebastian Vettel even more this year than I ever did before. I have no nice words for the guy.

I don't want to make excuses for him, but look at it from his point of view.

He's moved to Ferrari to win. That's his aim. Now, in 2015, he was the best of the rest and he had that chance to take victory every time the Mercedes cars were unable to do so. He was expecting so much more from this season; he wanted to be the one to take the fight to the Silver Arrows and become the outside shot at a world title. It's not panned out that way; Red Bull have supplanted Ferrari as the 2nd-best team and the Scuderia are a team who have become ravaged by infighting.

Then, you have Vettel's overall luck this season. Technical issues have been a mitigating factor in his results, and the car has been below-par; he's managed just six podiums all year from a year he thought would be an improvement on the last. He is frustrated, and understandably so.

When you get in the car, put that helmet on and pull the visor down, you are living on adrenaline and emotion. You're trying to do your absolute best, and when you put in the effort for scant reward that only feeds the frustration. Vettel saw a chance of a podium this weekend, and was hunting down Verstappen like a cheetah chasing an impala. At the site of his eventual attempt to pass Verstappen, his prey slipped away through cutting the corner, and he was convinced he had a case for the stewards. At that time, he is not going to think "oh, well, if I wait this out he might get a penalty", because F1 drivers have made a living from a single-minded, one-track approach.

His pleas were robust, and he shouldn't have said any of what he did. However, I don't think that anybody else would have done anything different in the circumstances given above. It's easy to sit in our armchairs and take the moral high ground, but if you take everything into context; the emotions, the adrenaline, the frustration and the feeling of helplessness despite all of the effort put in, then it's quite understandable to react like that.

I don't understand why people complain that drivers are well-oiled PR machines, but then complain about the real, raw human aspect of those drivers. Vettel's at least shown passion and fight to be the best, and he's getting slaughtered for it.

Ataxia wrote:When you get in the car, put that helmet on and pull the visor down, you are living on adrenaline and emotion. You're trying to do your absolute best, and when you put in the effort for scant reward that only feeds the frustration. Vettel saw a chance of a podium this weekend, and was hunting down Verstappen like a cheetah chasing an impala. At the site of his eventual attempt to pass Verstappen, his prey slipped away through cutting the corner, and he was convinced he had a case for the stewards. At that time, he is not going to think "oh, well, if I wait this out he might get a penalty", because F1 drivers have made a living from a single-minded, one-track approach.

It's more than just thinking that he had a case for the stewards - Auto Motor und Sport have managed to get hold of the radio transmissions for Ricciardo, Vettel and Verstappen during those final laps.

Those transcripts show that, for at least two laps, Vettel was originally being told by his engineers that Verstappen had been ordered by race control to move over:

Lap 68 - Ferrari to Vettel: We're on it with Charlie.
Lap 68 - Ferrari to Vettel: Ok, Verstappen has to give you the position. Watch for Ricciardo behind!

Lap 69 - Ferrari to Vettel: 3 laps to go.
Lap 69 - Vettel to Ferrari: Move! Move, for f**** sake!
Lap 69 - Ferrari to Vettel: He has been informed. He has to move.

That, I think, adds a lot more context to his complaints - having originally been told that what Verstappen did was wrong and that he had to had over the position, Vettel was then being told by the team that Whiting had suddenly reversed his position and was telling him to fight it out on track. It would also make more sense as to why Vettel started swearing at Whiting as well, as he might well have felt that he was being lied to by him.

As an aside, whilst Ricciardo might have been somewhat diplomatic after the race, the radio transcripts shows that he wasn't happy about Verstappen's behaviour either, as he also had a go at him for cutting that corner.

The Circuit Gilles Villeneuve at Montreal would be better off with IndyCar from 2018 onwards than with F1.

If F1 were still racing at Indianapolis with the race being held in early May before practice begins for the Indy 500 (in the time slot currently occupied by the GP of Indianapolis), the big draw at the ticket office would still be the Indy 500.

F1's chances to succeed at the proposed Weehawken / New Jersey street circuit would be much higher if they were to run it as a double bill with IndyCar running on the Saturday of the same weekend, in the afternoon after the F1 qualifying session.

Watching F1 on TV is boring.

Motorsport is dangerous.

Touring Car racing should be the means by which classic tracks are kept alive - Brands Hatch, Monza, Nordschleife, Buenos Aires / Potrero de los Funes (whichever); no need to worry about F1, as it will next year have outgrown every circuit in the world anyway

Aislabie wrote:Touring Car racing should be the means by which classic tracks are kept alive - Brands Hatch, Monza, Nordschleife, Buenos Aires / Potrero de los Funes (whichever); no need to worry about F1, as it will next year have outgrown every circuit in the world anyway

I have a suspicion that that is indeed MSV's business model - not just BTCC/TOCA, but BARC's championships, single-make touring car championships (like Mini, Aston Marin, Lotus, etc.) and so forth. I t seems to make up a majority of their racing calendar.

Performance-wise, 2012 was Pastor Maldonado's worst season in Formula 1.

Rob Dylan wrote:Performance-wise, 2012 was Pastor Maldonado's worst season in Formula 1.

But it is also where he peaked the highest, in Spain!

dr-baker wrote:

Rob Dylan wrote:Performance-wise, 2012 was Pastor Maldonado's worst season in Formula 1.

But it is also where he peaked the highest, in Spain!

Yeah, that's his point. Spain and Abu Dhabi made people forget how bad he was elsewhere. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with that, my memory isn't good enough to have a decent opinion, that's just what he said.

I would really like the Benetton team to return to Formula One.

My brain is trying to convince me of this:
With hindsight, Esteban Gutierrez showed that he was in fact an entirely competent option for Haas, and may have been harshly treated to be replaced by KMag.

Aislabie wrote:My brain is trying to convince me of this:
With hindsight, Esteban Gutierrez showed that he was in fact an entirely competent option for Haas, and may have been harshly treated to be replaced by KMag.

It"s that Gutierrez has an 11th place curse, and cursed drivers aren't a bright prospect. Asking Gutierrez to score points is a bit like asking Amon to win races...

This wrote:

Aislabie wrote:My brain is trying to convince me of this:
With hindsight, Esteban Gutierrez showed that he was in fact an entirely competent option for Haas, and may have been harshly treated to be replaced by KMag.

It"s that Gutierrez has an 11th place curse, and cursed drivers aren't a bright prospect. Asking Gutierrez to score points is a bit like asking Amon to win races...

More seriously, I would say that the bigger issue is that Gutierrez doesn't seem to have shown much of an upwards trend in terms of his performances.

We've seen how some drivers have started their careers badly, but managed to turn that around with hard work and dedication - Grosjean would be a good example, going from his difficulties at Renault and the low point of that one race ban to becoming a much more respected driver.

It may be that Gutierrez has potential, but at times there has been a feeling that he lacked a sense of self criticism and failed to accept, like some other drivers, that he had to change his approach to the sport. He came across as being difficult to work with whilst at Haas, whilst at Sauber there was a sense that, although his second season was relatively better than the previous one, he had also somewhat plateaued that year too.

Ferrari are only where they are because Mercedes were a bit crap at the start of the season. It's all downhill from here Tifosi boys (and girls).

I too have been of the opinion since around the Canada weekend that Ferrari's urge in form has been largely helped by a downturn or at least a period of disorganisation on the Mercedes front. They have done well so far, but I don't expect them to win another three races in the second half of this year. I mean, I'll eat my words if they do, but I'm not expecting it

Rob Dylan wrote:I too have been of the opinion since around the Canada weekend that Ferrari's urge in form has been largely helped by a downturn or at least a period of disorganisation on the Mercedes front. They have done well so far, but I don't expect them to win another three races in the second half of this year. I mean, I'll eat my words if they do, but I'm not expecting it

In the opening part of the year, Mercedes were having to recover from a number of setbacks - the need to change their suspension system after Ferrari's queries to the FIA, not to mention that the car was overweight when it first hit the track and the nosecone that they introduced at the Spanish GP was the one they originally wanted to use, but the introduction had to be delayed because it failed the original crash tests. They also had problems with their new gearbox, forcing them to revert to an older unit (reportedly 6kg heavier) for the opening races.

Furthermore, as we saw with Lauda's rather angry response to his decision, Rosberg's sudden decision to quit also caused quite a bit of internal chaos as the team suddenly had to find a replacement at short notice. There was also the internal reorganisation necessitated by Paddy Lowe's decision to leave the team for Williams, albeit one they could at least plan for over a slightly longer period.

Mind you, whilst it is true that Mercedes took a bit of a backward step, at the same time Ferrari managed to make some quite clever leaps with their design as well (particularly the design of the sidepods). Overall, I would say that it was more of a combination of factors - not just a case of Mercedes stumbling a bit, but also Ferrari making good progress in the off season.

I'd say that, in recent races, there have been a few key turning points - the first would be the updates introduced in the Spanish GP (the new aero kit, plus updates to the suspension system and new lighter parts, including that new gearbox, to bring them back down under the weight limit), which means that Mercedes no longer have to compromise quite so much on their design philosophy.

The next would be the set up work they did back in the factory between the Monaco and Canadian GPs, particularly on the softer tyre compounds - something quite important given Pirelli are now beginning to move towards less conservative allocations as the tyres are holding up fairly well.

It could also be said that it is now Ferrari that are beginning to be hit by technical disruptions too. Amid claims that the team was caught in the oil burning scandal, with the team reportedly having to remove extra oil supply lines, their qualifying performance has dipped in recent races.

There have also been a few whispers that the upgraded engine which they have introduced hasn't been as much of a step forward as they would have liked, particularly with regards to reliability - and it is true that, in the first half of this year, both Ferrari's (and Vettel in particular) have gone through their component allocations more rapidly than Mercedes, giving them an initial early advantage but perhaps now hindering their ability to introduce upgrades later in the season.

However, I am wary of writing them off too soon, much as a number of people seem to be doing now. Mercedes do have a few advantages right now, particularly in terms of engine allocations - I can see Vettel potentially having to take grid penalties later this year - but Ferrari do still seem to have a solid aero platform that they can build upon.

Brendon Hartley , notwithstanding the affection of the English-language press, is an entirely average, but respectable, single seat driver, who demonstrates that the differences are small between drivers so that actually a lot of the junior formula drivers wouldn't be disgraced if they turned up in F1 ( just like Brendan ) .
He's personable, but he's not really quick , is he? World Series, and GP2 he maybe didnt get a proper run at, but 3rd in GB F3 championship ( and not much success in the Euro F3 championship ) are not great evidence that he's any better than three-quarters of the F2 grid.

I'd agree at least in saying that I have been underwhelmed by the pace of both the new Toro Rosso drivers. But I'd also say that Toro Rosso hadn't developed at all over the summer break, and the chassis was not nearly as competitive post-Hungary. I think the first half of 2018 will tell us a lot more about the comparative pace of Gasly and Hartley, at least to their predecessor in Sainz.