Nobody here is saying HRT were good, or fast or anything like that. So I don't understand why anyone is banging on about how wrong people are when they say things like "Good showing with so few laps"
The fact remains that they cannot run their complete package due to a failed crash test (or so we are told), they still got two cars out for the practice and quali sessions.
raymondu999 wrote:You mean including the fact that Liuzzi is an F1 veteran and this is Jerome's first attempt in qualifying pressure?
Yes actually, Jerome had completed over 210 laps of testing in this virgin car, and and Virgin as a team probably completed somewhere in the regeon of double that. Yes it was his first ever taste of qualifying, so lets look at Timo Glock who doesn't have that problem. Glock set a time of 1:29.858. Liuzzi (who has - I'm guessing - similar levels of experienc in F1) set a time a whopping 3.1 seconds slower at 1:32.978.
Now nobody here is going to argue 3seconds slower than an already slow Virgin acing F1 car is good. BUT considering the fact that up until this race they had done NOT A SINGLE LAP of testing that is actually a pretty good showing. Then consider the fact they have a slightly compromised package by using their old wing.
If anyone would like more evidence to suggest this was a surprisingly good showing:
Mercedes: (I'll use them as an example as I only have access to fastest times from tests and Vettel for example completed 93 laps on the first day of testing thus making an unfair comparison.) Nico Rosberg only completed 9 las. So we can look at this. His fastest time was 1.19.930. By day 3 that Mercedes - in the hands of Michael - was lapping at 1:14.537.
Now I'm not saying that Mercedes were going for absolute pace on that first day (as HRT were in quali) BUT it shows that pace is there to be found as they start to understand the car.
Yes, the organisation of the tea is a complete joke, but who knows? Given 3 races who's to say the potential pace of that car is not in fact better than the Virgin car. Then which team are the mugs? The ones that built a car on time but then couldn't do anything with it? Or the ones who couldn't finish the thing on time but kept working and got a car that was NOT the slowest in the pack (which would therefore be a step in the right direction for HRT over last year).
And before we criticise them for not having the cars ready - Ferrari didn't introdoce their 2003 challenger until (I think) the 3rd race that year, choosing instead to start with the F2002.
I'm NOT saying HRT have done "well" or "good" or indeed that my hypothetical scenario above will plan out (for all I know the thing could be a complete dog of a car and wont improve at all lol). What I am saying is: GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES they might just be vindicated.
I for one like the minnows, nobody complained when Minardi failed to meet the 107% rule (which did happen on occasion) and nobody really complained much about the Super Aguri team, who actually became quite liked IIRC (despite their 4year old basic tub!!!!)
All I'm saying is: Given them a break. More teams is good for F1. You need Minnows, its something F1 has always had, and started to loose at the turn of the century.
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.