Grand Prix Rejects

Ferrim wrote:Has Webber been ROTR this year? I think he really deserves a nomination for being unable to win a race with that car.

No, but he's right in the running for Reject of the Year, I'd say!

Ferrim wrote:Has Webber been ROTR this year? I think he really deserves a nomination for being unable to win a race with that car.

He was considered for ramming into Massa at Italy and subsequently retiring...

Anyways, in no particular order...

Bruno Senna's Pit Strategist - what was he thinking???

Jarno Trulli - Two laps down on Ricciardo

Felipe Massa - Not for crashing into Hamilton (though it didn't help), but for foolishly breaking his suspension twice in one weekend.

Dishonourable Mentions
Rubens Barrichello
HRT
Mark Webber?

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:

Captain Hammer wrote:

fjackdaw wrote:The team would have had a call on this too. Either way, big deal, a strategy didn't quite work out - hardly reject of the race material.

It's not that Senna's strategy didn't work out - it's that Senna has been in a string of races where he cannot make his strategy work while his team-mate can. With the one exception of Singapore, Vitaly Petrov has had the upper hand over Bruno Senna ever since Belgium. I think it was a mistake to replace Heidfeld.

I think most people agree that Heidfeld should've stayed, but I think Group Bahar needed Senna's money.

Exactly - the signing of Bruno helped bring in several key sponsors for the team, and given that they are not in great financial shape I think that they had to go for it and hope that Senna could do an OK job. Overall, though, whilst Bruno Senna has generally struggled to keep up with Petrov, that is not entirely surprising given his lack of time in the car - we've seen how even experienced drivers have struggled to switch from one team to another during the season, let alone a relatively inexperienced driver like Bruno.
Besides, if it was reject worthy for Bruno to finish under 12 seconds behind his team mate (11th and 12th respectively), then by your logic Mark Webber, for example, was utterly hopeless given that he finished three places lower and over 25 seconds behind his team mate...

For me, the award goes to Massa, though, and not for the collision with Hamilton (which I'm sure will be discussed elsewhere at length), given that I agree that both drivers played their part in that accident. You see, to destroy your suspension once on those raised kerbs might be unfortunate, but when your team mate was deliberately avoiding the kerbs and other drivers are being warned over the radio to stay away from the kerbs, to continue hitting the kerbs in the way that he did was asking for trouble. After all, it is worth noting that yesterday, when he was complaining about the kerbs, he was the only one who was asking for changes, as neither the track owners or the FIA had any problems with those kerbs being there.

Mind you, Hamilton too had a poor race too, all things considered - he was beginning to pick up his pace just before his accident with Massa, but that accident cost him dearly and after that he really struggled to make any headway (he basically made no progress against the Mercedes drivers - in fact, the gap slightly increased once they went onto the hard tyres). I guess that it doesn't help your focus, though, when the media is digging through your private life after a fairly public break up...

Further down the field I'd have to say Williams had a fairly rubbish weekend again - both drivers admitted that their car simply lacked grip (the handling balance seems to have been OK), both drivers ran into each other off the start and cost Rubens very dearly (he effectively started the race a lap down and with little chance of making that time up) before Maldonado, who was actually staging a reasonably good comeback (fighting for 12th place at one point), had to retire with that transmission failure.

Massa. I think everyone else explained why.

golic_2004 wrote:I nominate the postponement of Metallica for India Rocks

http://www.metallica.com/page.asp?ps_ke ... um=twitter

It has been proven that Sebastian Vettel was the SOLE reason for Metallica's performance to be cancelled, just so he can get his way. So it is obvious that Vettel is reject of the race.

Captain Hammer wrote:I'm afraid it has to be Bruno Senna. There drivers around him - di Resta, Perez and Petrov - went for a reverse strategy, and made it work. Senna got hung out to dry when he was forced to make his final stop three laps from the end.

And it's not just an isolated episode: Senna has been thoroughly underwhelming for a few races now.

- In Belgium, he started 7th, but made a stupid mistake at the first corner and finished 13th. Vitaly Petrov started 10th and scored points in 9th.
- In Italy, he started 10th and finished 9th, which is his best result to date. But even then, Petrov had been faster all weekend (he qualified 7th) before Liuzzi took him out.
- In Singapore, he started 15th and finished 15th. Petrov started 18th and finished 17th. Given the sharp downturn in performance, Renault were simply nowhere in Singapore (they got Reject of the Race then).
- In Japan, Senna started 9th and finished 16th. Petrov started 10th and scored more points.
- In Korea, Senna started 15th and finished 13th. Petrov started 8th, and although he crashed out, he was still faster than Senna at the time.
- And now, in India, Senna started 14th and finished 12th. Petrov had set a time quick enough for the top ten in qualifying, started 16th after his penalty, and finished 11th.

In short, Petrov is getting more out of the car than Senna. He is making strategies work when Senna isn't, he is qualifying in the top ten when the top ten is possible, and has scored twice as many points as Senna since Senna first got into the car.

You're blaming it all on Bruno here, which is starting to unsettle my nerves.

I nominate Bruno Senna's strategists. 9th place could have easily been his, and maybe more, if he had put the hard compound on at his one and only stop. Instead, he went and did a mammoth of laps on the soft compound, and had to pit to comply with the regulations, a few laps before the end of the race. He needs a new set of people on the pit wall. In Suzuka, he had a run in with the rumble strips which damaged his car, and he then went and did some of the most laps of anyone on the soft compound. Same thing with Korea, bad strategy after a poor start.

I'm just saying, it's not all his fault, and stop exaggerating, it's not like the gap is multiple seconds, he is usually only a few tenths off of Vitaly at most. And twice as many points as Bruno is 4 points, nothing to be hating on Senna for.

EDIT: Oh, he also had no KERS for most of the race, so, there you go.

I nominate Pirelli/the tyre regulations. Pirelly were way too conservative with their choices here, and the use both types of tyre rules has skewed the results slightly, especially near the back. Karthikeyan's being nominated for IIDOTR for being about 20 seconds ahead of Ricciardo and right behind D'Ambrosio, but both of those pitted in the last few laps because they hadn't used the hards yet (Ricciardo could possibly have matched Senna's strategy if he didn't get a puncture).

Williams - Slow, unreliable, and collided with each other on the first lap to boot! Truly they are the British equivalent to Dale Earnhardt, Jr. -- lots of hype, lots of fans, but no results.
The Stewards - Caved in to Hamilton's whining so as not to make him ragequit F1. If anyone MUST get a penalty, it should have been Hamilton (quit wrecking people and you won't get drive through penalties), but there should not have been a penalty at all.
Hamilton - Not for the collision with Massa, but for being a really bad lead driver over at McLaren. Why is Hamilton not the number 2 to Jenson Button? Button can go out and win WDCs while Hamilton crashes into all of his title rivals, and then perhaps Hamilton will find himself useful.

I refuse to give Webber ROTR because he's a clear #2 driver over there, and that's probably the best he has.

I don't think Massa covered himself on glory exactly, but...

1) Hamilton - Why not wait until the straight when he would have breezed past? Why risk a collision AGAIN? Answer - Because he's an idiot. And for that he deserves my 1st place yet again. His 'Why doesn't he like me?' act afterwards made it even worse.

2) Stewards - This was most definitely the F1 equivalent of one of those football matches where a ref gives every decision against one team, realises that he's got things wrong and/or that he won't get out of the ground alive, and gives the other team a soft penalty or suchlike as 'compensation'. At worst, this was a racing incident and neither driver penalised, to penalise Massa is ridiculous when Lewis's car was ahead at no point in the move.

Cynon wrote:Hamilton - Not for the collision with Massa, but for being a really bad lead driver over at McLaren. Why is Hamilton not the number 2 to Jenson Button? Button can go out and win WDCs while Hamilton crashes into all of his title rivals, and then perhaps Hamilton will find himself useful.

Well, before this year, Hamilton could go a more than a handful of races before turning to shite. And he can be very quick - after all, he's the only person not driving a Red Bull to qualify on pole all year. If he keeps this up, though, he might find McLaren ready to back Button quite early in 2012 if he doesn't start on the right foot.

Reading all the comments which were first in this thread. I think most people are jumping the gun a bit. I saw Alguersuari being nominated. Why not wait until the whole weekend is over before nominating.

and to get it in early, my ROTR for Abu Dhabi will be Rosberg for running over half his pit crew

My nominations:

Lewis Hamilton: First the yellow flag penalty, then the bad start which set up the collision with Massa about 30 laps later, and then does sod-all for the rest of the race.
Williams: Hit each other off the start, Maldonado's gearbox cries no more and Barrichello takes an eternity to pass a Hispania
Kamui Kobayashi: I want the Pre-Britain Kamui back.

But my ROTR is:

Felipe Massa: When it rains, it pours.

Peter wrote:You're blaming it all on Bruno here, which is starting to unsettle my nerves.

Senna is the one in the car. The burden of responsibility falls with him. The team have to come up with a good strategy, but Senna is the one who has to make it work. And there is nothing to stop him from making a mid-race strategy call, the way we saw Button do it in Australia last year. If I'm blaming Senna, it's because he deserves it. You're the one who keeps pushing blame away from him.

stupot94 wrote:Reading all the comments which were first in this thread. I think most people are jumping the gun a bit. I saw Alguersuari being nominated. Why not wait until the whole weekend is over before nominating.

I believe some were making that point early on as well, weren't they? Hense my nomination then for ROTQ...

Captain Hammer wrote:

Peter wrote:You're blaming it all on Bruno here, which is starting to unsettle my nerves.

Senna is the one in the car. The burden of responsibility falls with him. The team have to come up with a good strategy, but Senna is the one who has to make it work. And there is nothing to stop him from making a mid-race strategy call, the way we saw Button do it in Australia last year. If I'm blaming Senna, it's because he deserves it. You're the one who keeps pushing blame away from him.

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:

Cynon wrote:Hamilton - Not for the collision with Massa, but for being a really bad lead driver over at McLaren. Why is Hamilton not the number 2 to Jenson Button? Button can go out and win WDCs while Hamilton crashes into all of his title rivals, and then perhaps Hamilton will find himself useful.

Well, before this year, Hamilton could go a more than a handful of races before turning to shite. And he can be very quick - after all, he's the only person not driving a Red Bull to qualify on pole all year. If he keeps this up, though, he might find McLaren ready to back Button quite early in 2012 if he doesn't start on the right foot.

Being fast is one thing, being mature enough to actually make effective use of that speed is quite another thing, which is why Button is the better driver.

My nominations:

Rubens Barrichello - who?

Kamui Kobayashi - where has THE Kamui gone?

Cynon wrote:

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:

Cynon wrote:Hamilton - Not for the collision with Massa, but for being a really bad lead driver over at McLaren. Why is Hamilton not the number 2 to Jenson Button? Button can go out and win WDCs while Hamilton crashes into all of his title rivals, and then perhaps Hamilton will find himself useful.

Well, before this year, Hamilton could go a more than a handful of races before turning to shite. And he can be very quick - after all, he's the only person not driving a Red Bull to qualify on pole all year. If he keeps this up, though, he might find McLaren ready to back Button quite early in 2012 if he doesn't start on the right foot.

Being fast is one thing, being mature enough to actually make effective use of that speed is quite another thing, which is why Button is the better driver.

Exactly, I wasn't saying he otherwise. My point was that at this stage in the season it's all very academic supporting one driver over another - McLaren's going to finish 2nd no matter what, they have nothing to lose by giving the drivers equal treatment. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

BlindCaveSalamander[quote="Cynon wrote:

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:

Cynon wrote:Hamilton - Not for the collision with Massa, but for being a really bad lead driver over at McLaren. Why is Hamilton not the number 2 to Jenson Button? Button can go out and win WDCs while Hamilton crashes into all of his title rivals, and then perhaps Hamilton will find himself useful.

Well, before this year, Hamilton could go a more than a handful of races before turning to shite. And he can be very quick - after all, he's the only person not driving a Red Bull to qualify on pole all year. If he keeps this up, though, he might find McLaren ready to back Button quite early in 2012 if he doesn't start on the right foot.

Being fast is one thing, being mature enough to actually make effective use of that speed is quite another thing, which is why Button is the better driver.

Exactly, I wasn't saying he otherwise. My point was that at this stage in the season it's all very academic supporting one driver over another - McLaren's going to finish 2nd no matter what, they have nothing to lose by giving the drivers equal treatment. Sorry if I didn't make that clear./quote]

Hmm, okay, so I guess we're on the same page then.

Really can't agree with the criticism of Lewis. For a start he did the only interesting thing in an otherwise tedious race. Secondly, he was trying to overtake by going into a corner better than his rival, rather than rely on the Mario Kart DRS. Thirdly, the stewards judged that the collision was Massa'a fault. (Ok that was a surprise.). But anyway, don't slag off racers for actually trying to race.

My nominations would be :-

Williams - Sadly pathetic once more.
Massa - Htting the orange kerb two times running was pretty poor.

Cynon wrote:

Captain Hammer wrote:

Peter wrote:You're blaming it all on Bruno here, which is starting to unsettle my nerves.

Senna is the one in the car. The burden of responsibility falls with him. The team have to come up with a good strategy, but Senna is the one who has to make it work. And there is nothing to stop him from making a mid-race strategy call, the way we saw Button do it in Australia last year. If I'm blaming Senna, it's because he deserves it. You're the one who keeps pushing blame away from him.

Anyway, back to Bruno vs. Vitaly. Bruno can't get good results with poor strategy, and considering how F1 is today, tyre strategy means everything. Yes, Bruno could make a mid race strategy call, but you're calling his poor results, an inability to get the best out of the car and make the strategy work. How can he make a bad tyre strategy work? If Senna got the hards on at his first stop, 9th would have easily been his, but the strategy ,that the team, not Bruno, chose, was just plain wrong, and cost him points yet again.

You also need to understand that Bruno is jumping in mid season, which is never easy to do. He's had very limited time in the car, and with these Pirelli tyres, so just hasn't been able to find that 'sweet spot' as yet. How the tyres grip the road, their wear rate, and driving style adjustments to make to adapt to that wear whenever it happens, plus several other things, are still yet to be perfected by him. He's only done 6 races, as opposed to Vitaly's 18, plus Vitaly's several weeks of off season testing before the season began, as opposed to the 1 day Bruno was given.

I'm going to nominate Captain Hammer. Just because I can.

Captain Hammer wrote:

Peter wrote:You're blaming it all on Bruno here, which is starting to unsettle my nerves.

Senna is the one in the car. The burden of responsibility falls with him. The team have to come up with a good strategy, but Senna is the one who has to make it work. And there is nothing to stop him from making a mid-race strategy call, the way we saw Button do it in Australia last year. If I'm blaming Senna, it's because he deserves it. You're the one who keeps pushing blame away from him.

With respect that is a daft point. Button has experience from 2 million GP's driving everything from the worst to the best cars on the grid. Senna only started racing F1 proper about 2 months ago. Strangely Button makes better strategy calls than Senna, so what??

So Senna needs to start learning to make better strategy calls if he wants to stay in the sport. You can't stand still in Formula 1 - you always have to learn and perfect your racecraft. Being able to read the circuit and the conditions and make the appropriate strategy call is one of those skills.

Peter wrote:How can he make a bad tyre strategy work?

Do you honestly think Renault would give him a strategy that they knew would not work? Paul di Resta, Sergio Perez and Vitaly Petrov were the only drivers who went for the reverse strategy, starting on harder tyres. Everyone else started on softs and finished on the hards. Bruno Senna was the only driver in a points position who had to make his final stop for hard tyres three laps from the end of the race. How else do you explain that? Of everyone on the grid using the same or similar strategy to Senna, Senna is the only one who failed to make it work. And it wasn't the first time he's done it, either.

Captain Hammer wrote:So Senna needs to start learning to make better strategy calls if he wants to stay in the sport. You can't stand still in Formula 1 - you always have to learn and perfect your racecraft. Being able to read the circuit and the conditions and make the appropriate strategy call is one of those skills.

Peter wrote:How can he make a bad tyre strategy work?

Do you honestly think Renault would give him a strategy that they knew would not work? Paul di Resta, Sergio Perez and Vitaly Petrov were the only drivers who went for the reverse strategy, starting on harder tyres. Everyone else started on softs and finished on the hards. Bruno Senna was the only driver in a points position who had to make his final stop for hard tyres three laps from the end of the race. How else do you explain that? Of everyone on the grid using the same or similar strategy to Senna, Senna is the only one who failed to make it work. And it wasn't the first time he's done it, either.

So he failed to make his strategy work. He was still closer to Petrov than in Korea or Japan. Please explain why Senna deserves ROTR when we have the utter ridiculousness of Massa and Hamilton, as well as the utter lack of anything resembling competitiveness from Williams and Barrichello.

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:He was still closer to Petrov than in Korea or Japan.

Right, because "Oh, you were closer than you were before" has the same value as "You beat him".

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:Please explain why Senna deserves ROTR when we have the utter ridiculousness of Massa and Hamilton

Because that was a racing incident. I don't think Massa really deserved his penalty, as he had the racing line and Hamilton was not in front of him at the time of the contact.

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:as well as the utter lack of anything resembling competitiveness from Williams and Barrichello

Which is soemthing that we've come to expect from them. It's no like they've been scoring points in every race they've started.

Captain Hammer wrote:

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:He was still closer to Petrov than in Korea or Japan.

Right, because "Oh, you were closer than you were before" has the same value as "You beat him".

No, it doesn't. But it's better than being miserably slow and unable to learn from his mistakes over the weekend. It also shows he is making some progress. You can't just jump into an F1 car mid-season and match your teammate from the get-go nowadays.

Captain Hammer wrote:

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:Please explain why Senna deserves ROTR when we have the utter ridiculousness of Massa and Hamilton

Because that was a racing incident. I don't think Massa really deserved his penalty, as he had the racing line and Hamilton was not in front of him at the time of the contact.

I wasn't entirely talking about the incident between them - Hamilton was rubbish in his first stint, and at best would've been aiming at fighting Webber for 4th. Then he spends the rest of the race unable to catch the Mercedes' at all - I don't think the contact damaged his car that badly. Meanwhile, Massa was not performing particularly badly in the race, but that was undone by the incident, which I blame both drivers for. Then he goes and wrecks his suspension on the kerbs. Again.

Senna gained two positions over the race - adjusting for Massa and Buemi, who would've most likely finished ahead of him, he would've finished where he started. It's not a brilliant performance, but again, he's making some progress. If he is to get ROTR at some point, he should get it for a performance like Japan or Korea. He should not get it for a race that was not among his worst.

Captain Hammer wrote:

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:as well as the utter lack of anything resembling competitiveness from Williams and Barrichello

Which is soemthing that we've come to expect from them. It's no like they've been scoring points in every race they've started.

And Bruno Senna has... uhm, scored... once.

As for Massa, it is possible that his suspension was already weakened before the Sunday crash.

It doesn't excuse the fact that he hit the kerb again, but he was obviously erratic after not only being taken out, but then given a penalty for it, and then his front wing failed. So I guess without Hamilton's influence, Massa probably wouldn't have done it.

Myrvold wrote:And Bruno Senna has... uhm, scored... once.

Williams are an obvious Reject. Senna has been less obvious, but just as Rejectful. I think he's been riding his Spa qualifying result, really; he had one good lap on debut for his team, and everyone overlooks what has happened since.

Ed24 wrote:As for Massa, it is possible that his suspension was already weakened before the Sunday crash.

It doesn't excuse the fact that he hit the kerb again, but he was obviously erratic after not only being taken out, but then given a penalty for it, and then his front wing failed. So I guess without Hamilton's influence, Massa probably wouldn't have done it.

To be honest I think that the damage might well have been done even before that point - Massa had also been hitting those kerbs fairly aggressively during the practise sessions (especially on his simulated qualifying runs), so it is possible that he'd already started damaging his suspension long before that coming together in the race.

As for the front wing, Ferrari have announced that they are holding an internal investigation to find out why it has been behaving in the way it did, given that the flexing of the front wing only appeared to occur when the car was relatively lightly fuelled. I think that might well have given him problems during the race anyway, and forced him to pit for a replacement as he did (the FIA had inspected that front wing after the practise sessions and it seems that they were not at all happy with the design, to the extent that Massa might have been black flagged had he continued).

I think I will rejectfuly change my mind and go with Massa on this one. It was a GP to forget and a very anonymous season.

I think that after 2012 we might risk having the first season, since 1969 without a Brazilian driver in F1. Since that season they've had greats like Emerson Fittipaldi, Nelson Piquet and Ayrton Senna. After Senna they've had Rubens and Massa who went on to win races and fight for titles. It is a bit that sad for that era in the Brazilian motorsport to be coming to an end. Senna is only there because of the money and the name, Rubens is biding his time for a few years now and Massa, well, I can't see him staying in F1 after leaving Ferrari at the end of next year, or sooner. Probably the only person who might help Massa to stay at Ferrari is Alonso and so we can hope to find promising drivers coming up the ranks from which the most promising driver appears to be Felipe Nasr who won British F3 this year.

DanielPT wrote:I think I will rejectfuly change my mind and go with Massa on this one. It was a GP to forget and a very anonymous season.

I think that after 2012 we might risk having the first season, since 1969 without a Brazilian driver in F1. Since that season they've had greats like Emerson Fittipaldi, Nelson Piquet and Ayrton Senna. After Senna they've had Rubens and Massa who went on to win races and fight for titles. It is a bit that sad for that era in the Brazilian motorsport to be coming to an end. Senna is only there because of the money and the name, Rubens is biding his time for a few years now and Massa, well, I can't see him staying in F1 after leaving Ferrari at the end of next year, or sooner. Probably the only person who might help Massa to stay at Ferrari is Alonso and so we can hope to find promising drivers coming up the ranks from which the most promising driver appears to be Felipe Nasr who won British F3 this year.

All things must pass, I guess. Who'd have thought we'd have Les Grands Prix without any French drivers at all, especially after the great heyday of the 1970s?

fjackdaw wrote:

DanielPT wrote:I think I will rejectfuly change my mind and go with Massa on this one. It was a GP to forget and a very anonymous season.

I think that after 2012 we might risk having the first season, since 1969 without a Brazilian driver in F1. Since that season they've had greats like Emerson Fittipaldi, Nelson Piquet and Ayrton Senna. After Senna they've had Rubens and Massa who went on to win races and fight for titles. It is a bit that sad for that era in the Brazilian motorsport to be coming to an end. Senna is only there because of the money and the name, Rubens is biding his time for a few years now and Massa, well, I can't see him staying in F1 after leaving Ferrari at the end of next year, or sooner. Probably the only person who might help Massa to stay at Ferrari is Alonso and so we can hope to find promising drivers coming up the ranks from which the most promising driver appears to be Felipe Nasr who won British F3 this year.

All things must pass, I guess. Who'd have thought we'd have Les Grands Prix without any French drivers at all, especially after the great heyday of the 1970s?

It is true. But arguably Brazil had way more success with their drivers than France, who only have one F1 champion (but what champion) despite boasting many more participants than Brazil.

I'd say Massa will still get a drive for 2013. Of course it depends on who replaces him at Ferrari, if that happens. If it's Perez, I think Sauber would be interested in taking Massa back, particularly if Kobayashi's recent downturn in form continues. Renault could also be interested depending if Kubica returns, as Renault are clearly looking for an experienced driver, and Massa could fill that role.

If Smedley were to move with Massa, going to a British team would also make sense as I think Rob currently spends half his time in the UK and half in Italy.

Warren Hughes wrote:I'm going to nominate Captain Hammer. Just because I can.

This

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:

Captain Hammer wrote:So Senna needs to start learning to make better strategy calls if he wants to stay in the sport. You can't stand still in Formula 1 - you always have to learn and perfect your racecraft. Being able to read the circuit and the conditions and make the appropriate strategy call is one of those skills.

Peter wrote:How can he make a bad tyre strategy work?

Do you honestly think Renault would give him a strategy that they knew would not work? Paul di Resta, Sergio Perez and Vitaly Petrov were the only drivers who went for the reverse strategy, starting on harder tyres. Everyone else started on softs and finished on the hards. Bruno Senna was the only driver in a points position who had to make his final stop for hard tyres three laps from the end of the race. How else do you explain that? Of everyone on the grid using the same or similar strategy to Senna, Senna is the only one who failed to make it work. And it wasn't the first time he's done it, either.

So he failed to make his strategy work. He was still closer to Petrov than in Korea or Japan. Please explain why Senna deserves ROTR when we have the utter ridiculousness of Massa and Hamilton, as well as the utter lack of anything resembling competitiveness from Williams and Barrichello.

I'm sure it's no coincident that Petrov is Senna's team mate; or that The Captain was trying to pin Reject Of The Race on him from as early as P1.

What did Petrov do that was Rejectful? He out-qualified Senna (before his penalty was applied - and if he had made it into Q3, he could have started ahead of Senna even after the penalty was applied), and he finished in front of Senna.

Captain Hammer wrote:

Myrvold wrote:And Bruno Senna has... uhm, scored... once.

Williams are an obvious Reject. Senna has been less obvious, but just as Rejectful. I think he's been riding his Spa qualifying result, really; he had one good lap on debut for his team, and everyone overlooks what has happened since.

Its not that, its just that you have been making it seem a lot worse than it actually is. He's never more than 2 tenths behind Vitaly, if ever behind Vitaly, because he's managed to outqualify him already, which you've completely forgotten. Bad tyre strategy and just general misfortune have costed him good results, as well as his own rookie mistakes, like at Spa. If he put hards on at his first stop, he would have undoubtedly taken 9th, and beaten Vitaly.

Goodness, you're having him out to be the next Jacques Villineuve minus the first 3 good years. You're stretching the gap between them, and forgetting that this man has relatively little experience with the car and the tyres, jumped in mid season after half a year out of it all, and is always close to him.

Peter wrote:Its not that, its just that you have been making it seem a lot worse than it actually is. He's never more than 2 tenths behind Vitaly, if ever behind Vitaly, because he's managed to outqualify him already, which you've completely forgotten. Bad tyre strategy and just general misfortune have costed him good results, as well as his own rookie mistakes, like at Spa. If he put hards on at his first stop, he would have undoubtedly taken 9th, and beaten Vitaly.

Then again from memory Senna came in earlier than most of his immediate rivals so he may have been gobbled up by them anyway during the pitstop phase (Remember, the gap between the tyres was so big that you were generally better off on used soft tyres than to switch to the hards which was why Schumacher went from behind Rosberg to quite a long way up the road without the mistake on pit exit)

But 30 laps or so on the hard tyres may have overall been faster than 30 laps on softs, because the softs would be pretty worn by then unless you're a Sauber, while the hards would still have life in them. Not only that, but if he had hards, he wouldn't have had to pit again, so he would have done a 1 stop just fine, so points were a possibility anyway. He was in excess of 10 seconds ahead of anyone before he stopped a few laps before the end if I'm correct.