Silly Season 2013/14

[djos]

No, I don't believe that they're wrong but Horner doesn't exactly look enthusiastic.

I suspect Horner is just playing the usual F1 games to try and keep lotus and Ferrari off balance.

[SectorOne]

I wasn't baiting folks, IMO it went to proving my earlier claim that RIC usually only gets beaten by JEV when the latter gets the new tire starting advantage.

Of course you weren´t, you just decided to spread false information.

Malaysia, Vergne out in Q1, Ricciardo out in Q2. 1 point for Vergne.
Monaco, Vergne made it into Q3, Ricciardo only Q2. 2 points for Vergne.
Canada, both made it into Q3, Vergne 6th and Ricciardo 10th. 8 points for Vergne, 15th for Ricciardo.

Instead of just rambling false information at least take 5 seconds to look at the actual facts.
All of Vergne´s points have come from being on equal or (if your little theory are to be believed) at a disadvantage, like Monaco.

Vergne has 3 points finishes, 4 retirements and 4 non-scoring races.
Ricciardo has 4 points finishes, 2 retirements and 5 non-scoring races.

[captainmorgan]

Question: why does Alonso make more than Vettel? If it is a matter of Newey, would Vettel make as much as Alonso if he were to switch teams?

[raymondu999]

Question: why does Alonso make more than Vettel? If it is a matter of Newey, would Vettel make as much as Alonso if he were to switch teams?

AFAIK Vettel is on a floating salary - a (relatively) low base retainer, then with various points, podium and win bonuses.

[aussiegman]

Of course you weren´t, you just decided to spread false information.
Malaysia, Vergne out in Q1, Ricciardo out in Q2. 1 point for Vergne.

Ummm, if Vergne was out in Q1 and Ricciardo made it through to Q2, then Ricciardo was ahead of Vergne so 1 point to Ricciardo not Vergne yes?? Not trying to spread false information are you??

[raymondu999]

Of course you weren´t, you just decided to spread false information.
Malaysia, Vergne out in Q1, Ricciardo out in Q2. 1 point for Vergne.

Ummm, if Vergne was out in Q1 and Ricciardo made it through to Q2, then Ricciardo was ahead of Vergne so 1 point to Ricciardo not Vergne yes?? Not trying to spread false information are you??

Vergne out in Q1, Ricciardo out in Q2 - qualifying
Vergne gets 1 point, Ricciardo nil pois - race

That is 1 race point, not 1 comparison point

[aussiegman]

OK that makes sense.

Anyway, so here’s a quick overview of 2013 for Toro Rosso including qualifying and race finishes as I see it (these are hard facts and a sensible points system from my view point).

My points system is:
1: A point is awarded for race finish above team mate and/or qualifying above team mate.
2: If a driver crashes out of the race, no race point awarded or deducted for that driver.
3: Mechanic failure or no-fault crash, no points awarded or deducted for either driver as this is something typically out of either drivers control.

Aust:
Qualifying:
JEV – Q2 – 13th
DR – Q2 – 14th
Race:
JEV – 12th
DR – Ret (mechanical issue: broken exhaust)
Vergne: 1
Ricciardo: 0

Malaysia
Qualifying:
JEV – Q1 – 17th
DR – Q2 – 13th
Race:
JEV – 10th
DR – Ret (mechanical issue: broken exhaust listed 18th as finished over 90% race distance)
Vergne: 1
Ricciardo: 1

China
Qualifying:
JEV – Q2 – 16th
DR – Q3 – 7th
Race:
JEV – 12th
DR – 7th
Vergne: 1
Ricciardo: 3

Bahrain
Qualifying:
JEV – Q2 - 16th
DR – Q2 - 13th
Race:
JEV – Ret (tyre damage)
DR – 16th
Vergne: 1
Ricciardo: 4

Spain
Qualifying:
JEV – Q2 – 12th
DR – Q2 – 11th
Race:
JEV – Ret (collision damage)
DR – 10th
Vergne: 1
Ricciardo: 5

Monaco
Qualifying:
JEV – Q3 - 10th
DR – Q2 – 12th
Race:
JEV – 8th
DR – Ret (hit by Grosjean from behind)
Vergne: 2
Ricciardo: 5

Canada
Qualifying:
JEV – Q3 - 7th
DR – Q3 – 10th
Race:
JEV – 6th
DR – 15th
Vergne: 4
Ricciardo: 5

UK
Qualifying:
JEV – Q2 - 12th
DR – Q3 - 5th
Race:
JEV – Retired (tyre damage)
DR – 8th
Vergne: 4
Ricciardo: 6

German
Qualifying:
JEV – Q2 - 16th
DR – Q3 - 6th
Race:
JEV – Retired (hydraulic failure)
DR – 12th
Vergne: 4
Ricciardo: 7

Hungry
Qualifying:
JEV – Q2 - 14th
DR – Q3 – 8th
Race:
JEV – 12th
DR – 13th
Vergne: 5
Ricciardo: 8

So for Qualifying and race finishes it ends up Ricciardo 8pts vs Vergne 5pts

Add in points back in for those races where damage occurred:
Ricciardo 12 pts vs Vergne 8pts

Highest Qualifier:
Ricciardo 5th @ Britich GP

Highest Finish:
Vergne 6th @ Canada

Current Championship:
Vergne 13th - 13 pts
Ricciardo 14th – 12pts

So as said, IMHO I do not think the Championship points are the only measure you should use. You could then add in things like fastest laps and then unquantifiable things that we never see such as ability to help develop the car etc.

These are just my measures of a well rounded driver. RBR have a prima donna and a No: 1. Ricciardo is a solid No: 2 and a potential (very big) maybe No: 1. But over all I think he has done enough to deserve a seat...

[djos]

Well done, i was considering doing something similar but you've nailed it!

It's clear RBR see things like this too or they wouldn't have ruled out JEV.

[iotar__]

Well, I look at how good a driver is, and all the teams do, by looking at their results over an extended period of time because it eliminates the excuses. Two seasons is certainly enough. I see an awful lot of talk about how fast Grosjean is and how he was going to beat Raikkonen but over two season he's been heavily outscored and it's Raikkonen with the two victories.

I'm just not seeing it in this case unfortunately.

Are you trying to replace Verg-Ricci with Gros-Raikk ? I'm in, but only for one post about Lotus's driver choices and policy, a bit long but it's a serious business not some twitter bs, some of it related to previous posts.

You (broadly) may be replacing RG in your dreams using some non existent logic, like he needs to wake up after Hungary as opposed to DiR (huh?) or ignoring all aspects mentioned many times. If it was worth it I would ask about the results, speed and skills compared to rookies in the last three seasons. Let's start from China to Valencia, races 3-8 of the first full season, then Hung/Singap or even USA/Silvers, then 2013 Malay/Bahr, especially Germany as an example of team pathology and Hungary. Extended enough for you? [Is 2008-9 losing to Massa in your extended period?] That would be my arguments 'for' (overtakes included), meanwhile RB are still waiting for Vergne to develop basics, Hulk was out-raced/paced by a pensioner , Di Resta can't say he's faster than Sutil and Ricciardo's achievement is being better than Vergne. True but selective, still better than "it's Total money that's preventing my 'loser driver nr 3' Lotus seat".

In a team like Lotus with a tight budget and big ambitions it's crucial how you spend your money. This is what running the team is all about, making choices about areas you can save on and those you can't. Now they do it in the wrong direction, Raikkonen is not worth the kind of money they're throwing away on him - crazy, even if you include some sponsorship. Not to mention WCC money lost caused by long-term "one driver" policy, team orders cost. Nothing has changed since 2012 in terms of driving, car is better and they made a team-mate disappear for a while, that's all. They still need someone as a reference point for car's potential. Hungary/Germany/partly Bahrain compared to China/Barcelona/partly Bahrain. Last season, same thing, races mentioned above. Wins: nothing special, prove nothing, DNF while running second, could have happened to either, to KR mostly through team orders, AUS odd win in special circumstance, proof: not repeated since.

Funny how NOW they realised that you need to risk to win and not safely collect money bonuses (driver). Like in Bah, Chin, Barc, Germ, Hung? I thought these were perfect performances 11/10. NOW they realized that construction championship even exists (team). "Top driver" with top pay-check but without top performances despite having everything tailor-made to his needs - team orders, updates, team-mate's position, car, set up, personnel. Meanwhile other areas suffer, like preparation for 2014 and losing technical director mid season. It's like they forgot that all the driver's supposed marketing value means little without car and results. Age is another factor: you don't get better at 35. If your starting point is bad qualifying, bad starts, lost position on opening laps, poor overtaking and in general passive driving, game over after few laps instead of fighting for wins, examples above, then it's not hard to predict 2014 and beyond.

If you have any doubts about Lopez's naive approach check the latest development, now it's about Renault: http://www.f1zone.net/news/renault-fact ... pez/20168/ 1. Without KR threat of leaving they didn't need it, which is laughable, a bit late for that? 2. As a factor in negotiations, what's the alternative if not RB, Ferrari or retirement? 3. To pretend that it's not about money. Tell that to Allison then, both in terms of salary and 2014 preparations. One loses interest after they predictably mess it up on the track, Germany was simply a (self)robbery, and now need to sit in lap dog position for Raikkonen drama to end. Considering that it's not that interesting to speculate about the line up next season, it would be a surprise if a car is anywhere near the competitiveness of E21, the only question is if they will go for record in useless team orders. Unless Kubica comes back I now don't care.

[netoperek]

Unless Kubica comes back I now don't care.

And apparently that is not such an unprobable option. After German Rally (which RK ended 1st in WRC2 and 5th overall), Kubica said he has some interesting options in both rallying and racing. In few last interviews he's constantly stating that this year in WRC2 is about gaining rallying experience in case he stays there or having a good fun in rehabilitation process in case he would go back to racing. Yesterday's statement says he'll make a final decision in month or two.

[WhiteBlue]

The real story is not Kimi Raikkonen, but rather Fernando Alonso. He’s fed up with the results at Ferrari and wants action. The only way he can get that, apart from shouting at them in five languages, is to threaten to leave. Ferrari don’t really believe he will depart, but they have to make contingency plans just in case he “does a Lewis” and defies the logic of the moment. The only obvious choice if Fernando goes is Kimi.

my saying since anno pocahontas
it takes until Alonso has decided what he wants to do in 2014 or 2015
going by his mimic and body language he is still not a happy camper

[SectorOne]

Of course you weren´t, you just decided to spread false information.
Malaysia, Vergne out in Q1, Ricciardo out in Q2. 1 point for Vergne.

Ummm, if Vergne was out in Q1 and Ricciardo made it through to Q2, then Ricciardo was ahead of Vergne so 1 point to Ricciardo not Vergne yes?? Not trying to spread false information are you??

You are free to edit this post if you want. I´m strictly talking about what really matters at the end of the day.
Things you can take home with you on a piece of paper in black and white so i´m only focused on real points, not made up ones.

[Hail22]

Mark Webber has confirmed Daniel Ricciardo will be taking his seat at Red Bull:

http://tensport.com.au/news/newsarticle ... cement.htm

[WhiteBlue]

When this writer asked Bernie Ecclestone if he thought that Felipe Massa would be staying at Maranello, he replied: “They should be more worried about hanging on to Alonso…”
... While many observers struggle to understand why Alonso might want to leave Ferrari, it may well be that he simply has fears about the competitiveness of the 2014 powertrain package.

another nail in the coffin...

It would be a huge coup for Red Bull to lure Alonso away from Ferrari. Not only would they get the best line up with potentially six championships between the guys but also they would weaken Ferrari significantly. How can you demonstrate crushing superiority any better than by humiliating the mighty Scuderia which used to have first pick from the top talent of F1 racers for generations? The same team that called Red Bull in a very patronizing way "Only a drinks company". It would be just the sweetest revenge for Mateschitz to show Montezemlo what a drinks company can do in F1. I can imagine the sniping that would go down if they manage to achieve it.

"Hey, we got ourselves a private GP from Ecclestone and we can even use Ferrari as a junior team to train our driving talent. Not so bad for a drinks company, I would say."

[aussiegman]

You are free to edit this post if you want.

I can't edit a thing you post but ok, maybe the mods might, but I don;t see anything controversial in this one.

I´m strictly talking about what really matters at the end of the day. Things you can take home with you on a piece of paper in black and white so i´m only focused on real points, not made up ones.

Sure no problem, but you have ignored all the fact in my previous post and thrown in the only one thing counts in the end. I can assure you the teams look a lot deeper into this than simply points.

So to refresh you points made, please point out what is not a simple black and white fact?
Including qualifying and race finishes in a fair system of excluding non-driver finishes the tally is Ricciardo 8pts vs Vergne 5pts.
Add in points back in for those races where damage occurred and you get to Ricciardo 12 pts vs Vergne 8pts.
Ricciardo is the Highest Qualifier with 5th at the British GP.
Vergne has the highest finish with a 6th in Canada.
Current Championship points are Vergne 13th with 13 pts to Ricciardo 14th with 12pts.

Anything here not a fact therein?

What you are advocating is that the only thing that matters is championship points? Given the current state of the PIrelli tyre lottery that is a very one dimensional way to look at driver performance and the teams are smarter than that.

If, for instance say we had a driver with 2 podium finishes but crashed out every other race would you still take him over a driver that finished every race and made solid constructors points but accumulated 1 point less?

RBR don't want anyone that could threaten or compete for the No: 1 seat Vettel occupies, lest he gets upset and defects in a hissy fit.