I'd love you to be proven correct..
Pre-Season Winter testing : 2014 Season
- Thread starter Greenlantern101
- Start date
- Status
If I am I'll be well fucked off!
Kewee
Race Winner
I'll stay with my prediction. Massa with his many years of experience will shine this year, Hamilton and Rosberg will take points off one another allowing Alonso to sneak in to take second or take the title away from Massa. Mercedes may clinch the Constructors title by having two very strong drivers. Plenty of podiums but not enough top steps due to an internal battle between Hamilton and Rosberg for wins.
It will be very interesting to see what peoples attitude to team orders are this year. Ferrari have been damned for it by the anti Alonso brigade, I wonder what those same people will say if Mercedes have to revert to team orders to gain the title for Hamilton or Rosberg. I have a feeling the silence will be deafening.
It will be very interesting to see what peoples attitude to team orders are this year. Ferrari have been damned for it by the anti Alonso brigade, I wonder what those same people will say if Mercedes have to revert to team orders to gain the title for Hamilton or Rosberg. I have a feeling the silence will be deafening.
Last edited:
My attitude to team orders will never change I don't like them and I never will, a driver who wins titles due to team orders is never gonna prove his worth to me he has to to it for himself without being handed wins by the team that FIFTY order was disgraceful in my book If I were a race driver there is no way I would want team orders to favour me and I would not follow them if they were given.
Lewis Hamilton has publicly stated that he does not want to benefit from team orders and I believe that any driver that does is just a pale imitation of the real thing I have no idea why teams favour one driver over another unless it is a seasoned driver over a rookie and the rookie is learning the ropes teams main aim is to win the WCC the WDC is of secondary consideration as it is the WCC that brings in the money..
So once again I completely fail to get your point Kewee, what do you mean by the silence will be deafening on the Merc situation? Do you honestly believe that Kimi is going to bow down to Alonso at Ferrari? Because I don't believe he will I believe those two will be taking points off each other all season long as most probably will be the at Mercedes, allowing someone like Massa or maybe even Button to sneak it away from them, and if that happens my silence definitely will be nowhere near silent..
Lewis Hamilton has publicly stated that he does not want to benefit from team orders and I believe that any driver that does is just a pale imitation of the real thing I have no idea why teams favour one driver over another unless it is a seasoned driver over a rookie and the rookie is learning the ropes teams main aim is to win the WCC the WDC is of secondary consideration as it is the WCC that brings in the money..
So once again I completely fail to get your point Kewee, what do you mean by the silence will be deafening on the Merc situation? Do you honestly believe that Kimi is going to bow down to Alonso at Ferrari? Because I don't believe he will I believe those two will be taking points off each other all season long as most probably will be the at Mercedes, allowing someone like Massa or maybe even Button to sneak it away from them, and if that happens my silence definitely will be nowhere near silent..
Last edited:
Kewee
Race Winner
Mephistopheles - My comment was not aimed at anyone personally, just a generalization that Lewis fans wouldn't be as vocal if team orders were implemented to help him as they were when team orders favored Alonso.
Unlike some fans I don't think Kimi will get the better of Alonso. That doesn't mean he won't beat Alonso occasionally, I just believe Alonso will end the season with significantly more points.
One final comment, there's no doubt Chapman favored Clark, Tyrrell made Stewart his No.1, Fangio wouldn't have started a single race in his career as anything other than number one. I think it's fair to say there's never been a World Champion, other than Alonso, who hasn't mounted his title defense without the benefit of No.1 status. Does this mean there's not a single World Champion from the past who you would rate?
The very nature of the sport we love is to reward the World Champion with number one status for two reasons. His success in reaching the top brings sponsorship dollars to his team and his talent in taking him to the top has earned him the right to be given the very best opportunity to defend his title by awarding him No.1 status.
Unlike some fans I don't think Kimi will get the better of Alonso. That doesn't mean he won't beat Alonso occasionally, I just believe Alonso will end the season with significantly more points.
One final comment, there's no doubt Chapman favored Clark, Tyrrell made Stewart his No.1, Fangio wouldn't have started a single race in his career as anything other than number one. I think it's fair to say there's never been a World Champion, other than Alonso, who hasn't mounted his title defense without the benefit of No.1 status. Does this mean there's not a single World Champion from the past who you would rate?
The very nature of the sport we love is to reward the World Champion with number one status for two reasons. His success in reaching the top brings sponsorship dollars to his team and his talent in taking him to the top has earned him the right to be given the very best opportunity to defend his title by awarding him No.1 status.
Last edited:
Are actually being serious? Because if you are you are very wrong. As far as I recall Alonso was always the No 1 boy under his best mate Briatore also as I am sure that Hamilton did not have No1 status in 2008 and neither did Button In 2009 despite Barrachelo's blah blah blahs and machinations and he certainly didn't get 2010 when he joined McLaren and neither did Alonso when he joined McLaren in 2007 although his arrogance lead him to believe he should have done, and Damon Hill absolutely definitely did not have No1 status in 1996 unless you believe being sacked half way through the season is a sign of having No 1 status and neither did Villeneuve in 1997, hell I could go on for ever giving you names of drivers who won the championship without No1 status, are really ong to state that Alonso is the only one when in actual fact he did no such thing..?
On your first point winning the world championship does not automatically give a driver the right to have No1 status why should it each season is new and each driver deserves his chance at winning, and on your second point there is nothing to stop a driver jumping teams or retiring once he has won the WDC it has happened plenty of times in the past Jenson did it, and plenty of other drivers have as well so what's in it for the team when a driver takes his crown else where?
Last edited:
Kewee
Race Winner
Mephistopheles ….. The year I was referring to was Alonso not being given No.1 Status during his year at McLaren despite the sponsorship dollars he took to the team as World Champion and the promises made to him by Ron Dennis.
I'll cover the others you mentioned.
There's no doubt Hamilton was the favored driver at McLaren in 2008, Kovoleinen didn't get a look in and there's also no doubt Button was Brawns favored driver in 2009, Barrichello was less than happy during the last third of the season.
Villeneuve in 1997 only lost once to his teammate. He was clearly treated as No.1. Are you suggesting Frentzen had equal status? When Hill won the title in 1996 he was clearly No.1, a position Villeneuve took over in 1997 when Hill moved to Arrows. Hill certainly wasn't sacked in 1996, his championship year. I'll stand by my comment that it's normal for a driver to be given No.1 status when they're the current Champion so as to give them and the team the best opportunity of defending the drivers Title and that applies, whether they stay with the same team or move teams. The only team that puts their drivers on equal status regardless of whether one is the current World Champion or not is McLaren, and it's fair to say their driver management has cost them dearly over the years. You didn't take me up on the drivers I mentioned, Fangio in particular, the most favored driver in the sports history and also arguably the greatest.
Incidentally I didn't say Alonso was the only driver to win the title without having No.1 status. I said he was the only driver who had to mount his defense of the title without having No.1 status, that means something very different.
No wonder we have so many disagreements, you often mis-read my postings. Just read more carefully Mephistopheles
I'll cover the others you mentioned.
There's no doubt Hamilton was the favored driver at McLaren in 2008, Kovoleinen didn't get a look in and there's also no doubt Button was Brawns favored driver in 2009, Barrichello was less than happy during the last third of the season.
Villeneuve in 1997 only lost once to his teammate. He was clearly treated as No.1. Are you suggesting Frentzen had equal status? When Hill won the title in 1996 he was clearly No.1, a position Villeneuve took over in 1997 when Hill moved to Arrows. Hill certainly wasn't sacked in 1996, his championship year. I'll stand by my comment that it's normal for a driver to be given No.1 status when they're the current Champion so as to give them and the team the best opportunity of defending the drivers Title and that applies, whether they stay with the same team or move teams. The only team that puts their drivers on equal status regardless of whether one is the current World Champion or not is McLaren, and it's fair to say their driver management has cost them dearly over the years. You didn't take me up on the drivers I mentioned, Fangio in particular, the most favored driver in the sports history and also arguably the greatest.
Incidentally I didn't say Alonso was the only driver to win the title without having No.1 status. I said he was the only driver who had to mount his defense of the title without having No.1 status, that means something very different.
No wonder we have so many disagreements, you often mis-read my postings. Just read more carefully Mephistopheles
Last edited:
Kewee
Race Winner
Mephistopheles ….. I've just read another of your postings where you didn't actually mis-quote me you invented something I didn't say at all. You asked if I honestly believed Kimi was going to bow down to Alonso. Sorry? where did I say that.
I believe they'll battle right through the season and Alonso will come out on top.
As long as people keep making up things I haven't said I'll keep correcting you, why wouldn't I?
I believe they'll battle right through the season and Alonso will come out on top.
As long as people keep making up things I haven't said I'll keep correcting you, why wouldn't I?
Last edited:
I think it's your inference Kewee that Ferrari has always had team orders and your prediction Alonso will win the title therefore by default you consider Alonso the number one, no?
There is a time and place for team orders. And that's when one driver is clearly the one throughout the season that is more likely to win. I'd say maybe half or two thirds through in most circumstances but could be sooner. To have them from day one stinks.
There is a time and place for team orders. And that's when one driver is clearly the one throughout the season that is more likely to win. I'd say maybe half or two thirds through in most circumstances but could be sooner. To have them from day one stinks.
The Artist.....
Champion Elect
We could go through a massive list where you're wrong. Kewee
Fangio- he wasn't given number 1 status, he was the de facto number 1 - his performance meant that he didn't need assistance!
Similarly with Jim Clark, Graham Hill et al. Villeneuve was not given number 1 status in 1997 but again was the de facto number 1.
I suppose what you're saying is that Alonso isn't good enough to be the de facto number 1-
Certainly if "Alonso is the only driver not to be treated as a number 1 when defending his title" can only be read as suggesting that since he wasn't de facto number 1 either given all the examples, then he can't be as good as all that....
(Not that that's what I believe though, just trying to interpret the madness)
Fangio- he wasn't given number 1 status, he was the de facto number 1 - his performance meant that he didn't need assistance!
Similarly with Jim Clark, Graham Hill et al. Villeneuve was not given number 1 status in 1997 but again was the de facto number 1.
I suppose what you're saying is that Alonso isn't good enough to be the de facto number 1-
Certainly if "Alonso is the only driver not to be treated as a number 1 when defending his title" can only be read as suggesting that since he wasn't de facto number 1 either given all the examples, then he can't be as good as all that....
(Not that that's what I believe though, just trying to interpret the madness)
"I think it's fair to say there's never been a World Champion, other than Alonso, who hasn't mounted his title defense without the benefit of No.1 status." - Kewee
Sorry mate but not true.
Ayrton Senna 1989
Boom!
Plenty of McLaren examples - Lauda, Button, Senna...
Alan Jones in 1981 retired for this reason, Emerson Fittipaldi cited Chapman not pulling Peterson aside in 1973 as the reason he left Lotus.
I notice that Raikkonen was not treated as number 1 in 2008 when he was behind in the Championship.
Kewee
Race Winner
Just got home, Well that opened a can of worms. We could agree on some and disagree on others so I won't start though a few of you have pointed out errors in my argument.
Can't resist commenting on one of your points though The Artist..... Alonso not good enough to be de facto No.1
He was the only driver in the modern era to take back to back World Championships off Schumacher. Regardless of what you say there's no argument against a statistic like that.
Can't resist commenting on one of your points though The Artist..... Alonso not good enough to be de facto No.1
He was the only driver in the modern era to take back to back World Championships off Schumacher. Regardless of what you say there's no argument against a statistic like that.
The Artist.....
Champion Elect
Kewee,
Sorry, just looking for some logic in your garbage post above.
If Alonso wasn't a number 1 when defending his championship, then using the examples of Fangio (de facto number 1, not contractual number 1), Clark (ditto), Senna (ditto) - Even Jacques Villeneuve... etc., then Alonso mustn't have been the de facto number 1 either.
Either that or you're talking a pile of horse shit.
Sorry, just looking for some logic in your garbage post above.
If Alonso wasn't a number 1 when defending his championship, then using the examples of Fangio (de facto number 1, not contractual number 1), Clark (ditto), Senna (ditto) - Even Jacques Villeneuve... etc., then Alonso mustn't have been the de facto number 1 either.
Either that or you're talking a pile of horse shit.
Kewee
Race Winner
You have access to Fangio's, Clark's, Senna's etc. contracts do you The Artist..... You don't so your posting makes no sense, so I'm not sure who's talking a pile of …………….. and I'm unsure what this has to Alonso taking two titles off Schumacher.
He was the only driver in the modern era to take back to back World Championships off Schumacher. Regardless of what you say there's no argument against a statistic like that.
No, but it is a very, very contrived measure of greatness, especially since you and I both know that given the opportunity Damon Hill would have in the 1997 Williams.
The Artist.....
Champion Elect
Kewee
You know something, no i don't. But then, I can look at evidence; I can remember some evidence of drivers being asked to move over for their team mate; Massa for Alonso, Barrichello for Schumacher, Patrese for Mansell. In the cases of Clark, Fangio, Senna etc., they didn't need anyone to move over, they were fast enough on their own. You'll notice that it wasn't me criticising Alonso - I have always made clear that it was trying to find some logic in your garbage posts.
Stirling Moss has outright said in the past that the reason he didn't beat Fangio was because he wasn't fast enough; he won in Britain in 1955, and on that day, Fangio said that Moss was just faster!
You have a clear pattern to your posts.
1. Post a statement that is absolute garbage.
2. Backtrack a little when challenged.
3. Deny deny deny - or try to fudge the subject. (Also, given the opportunity, you edit your posts to try and make it look like you haven't talked garbage).
You've done it on this thread already, you've done it on the Schumacher injury thread, so just give up.
You know something, no i don't. But then, I can look at evidence; I can remember some evidence of drivers being asked to move over for their team mate; Massa for Alonso, Barrichello for Schumacher, Patrese for Mansell. In the cases of Clark, Fangio, Senna etc., they didn't need anyone to move over, they were fast enough on their own. You'll notice that it wasn't me criticising Alonso - I have always made clear that it was trying to find some logic in your garbage posts.
Stirling Moss has outright said in the past that the reason he didn't beat Fangio was because he wasn't fast enough; he won in Britain in 1955, and on that day, Fangio said that Moss was just faster!
You have a clear pattern to your posts.
1. Post a statement that is absolute garbage.
2. Backtrack a little when challenged.
3. Deny deny deny - or try to fudge the subject. (Also, given the opportunity, you edit your posts to try and make it look like you haven't talked garbage).
You've done it on this thread already, you've done it on the Schumacher injury thread, so just give up.
Last edited:
The Artist.....
Champion Elect
He was the only driver in the modern era to take back to back World Championships off Schumacher. Regardless of what you say there's no argument against a statistic like that.
Mika Hakkinen?
Yet again, a garbage-like statement from Kewee.
Kewee
Race Winner
I'll restate what started this disagreement with my original statement. The very nature of the sport we love is to reward the World Champion with number one status for two reasons. The additional sponsorship dollars he brings to a team, and the earned right to be given the best opportunity to defend his title. In most cases this is true though there will always be examples that can be disputed though surprisingly few. The comment regarding Fangio is not open to argument which is why I used him as an example. One of his titles was won when Collins handed him his car when Fangio's broke down.
Regarding the Schumacher injury thread I'd be very careful before you even go there. I've never offered an opinion on Michael Schumachers condition. All my postings have simply been information released from reliable news sources to inform people who care and would like to read updated news releases. Like everyone I hope for good news one day.
Regarding the Schumacher injury thread I'd be very careful before you even go there. I've never offered an opinion on Michael Schumachers condition. All my postings have simply been information released from reliable news sources to inform people who care and would like to read updated news releases. Like everyone I hope for good news one day.
- Status
Similar threads
