[karizma_devil]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

I think you misunderstood my post completely. I was replying to this :



Where karizma_devil is trying to imply that the Ferrari is a very average car, which it clearly is not. A car capable of challenging consistently for podiums is not a very average car.

What you're trying to imply is that the 2011 Ferrari is an average year by their own standards which is a different issue altogether and one that I agree with.

I actually meant average in the sense , just look at Massa's year , he has not even looked to challenge for podiums.
Ferrari are the third best team , that means 5th best car ( 2 RBR , 2 Mclarens). Alonso has consistently managed to threaten these top 4 cars. He has made very few mistakes this season (Race mistake - Canada , and a few Q1's).

No denying Vettel has driven out & out fast , but he has the machinery at his disposal, he drives confidence from his car. Look at Alonso or Button , they have clearly out performed their cars .

I feel Massa is a complete waste ! Would look to see Kubica in Ferrari.

[Hatari]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

I think you misunderstood my post completely. I was replying to this :



Where karizma_devil is trying to imply that the Ferrari is a very average car, which it clearly is not. A car capable of challenging consistently for podiums is not a very average car.

What you're trying to imply is that the 2011 Ferrari is an average year by their own standards which is a different issue altogether and one that I agree with.

A Ferrari that is unable to challenge for race wins is a very average car.
Given Massa's lack of form, that has resulted in a poor season.

[PuntoMania]

Originally Posted by karizma_devil

I actually meant average in the sense , just look at Massa's year , he has not even looked to challenge for podiums.
Ferrari are the third best team , that means 5th best car ( 2 RBR , 2 Mclarens). Alonso has consistently managed to threaten these top 4 cars. He has made very few mistakes this season (Race mistake - Canada , and a few Q1's).

No denying Vettel has driven out & out fast , but he has the machinery at his disposal, he drives confidence from his car. Look at Alonso or Button , they have clearly out performed their cars .

I feel Massa is a complete waste ! Would look to see Kubica in Ferrari.

Massa cannot be used as a reliable indicator as he has been highly inconsistent in many races and has had Hamilton crash into him whenever he's doing well in a race. I smell a conspiracy between Hamilton and Alonso

Alonso has done well, but Vettel has definitely been a real revelation this year. Has he made even a single mistake all year long ?

Very few champions have driven with the machine like consistency of Vettel this year. Most recent examples include Schumacher in his reign and Alonso in 2006.

I find it extremely hard to rate any driver on this grid above Sebastian Vettel in 2011.

Originally Posted by Hatari

A Ferrari that is unable to challenge for race wins is a very average car.
Given Massa's lack of form, that has resulted in a poor season.

This is just pointless.
Any car that is able to challenge for the top 5 positions in a race is NOT average. I dont know why you're going around in circles with the same point.

We're talking about F1 cars here, not about a single team alone.

[anachronix]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

This is just pointless.
Any car that is able to challenge for the top 5 positions in a race is NOT average. I dont know why you're going around in circles with the same point.

We're talking about F1 cars here, not about a single team alone.

A car not capable of even fighting for the podiums is an average car indeed. We are talking about F1 cars where even 0.009 second difference could decide a pole position.

The Ferrari is slow, they have seized development on the car whereas RB/Mclaren/Mercedes have continued developing their cars until now. Its an average car now which is slightly faster than the Mercedes!

[PuntoMania]

Originally Posted by anachronix

A car not capable of even fighting for the podiums is an average car indeed. We are talking about F1 cars where even 0.009 second difference could decide a pole position.

The Ferrari is slow, they have seized development on the car whereas RB/Mclaren/Mercedes have continued developing their cars until now. Its an average car now which is slightly faster than the Mercedes!

An average car is one that fights midfield for example like the Force India or Renault.

Any car that is capable of fighting for position 1-5 in Formula 1 is a good car by any standards. It takes a humongous amount of effort to fight at that position consistently. Unless you think that in F1 there are just 3 spots that matter.

Ferrari is fighting at the top of the grid which makes it decidedly NOT average.

This is all just perception anyways, I think a lot of people here seem to think that in F1 there are just 2 cars that are good and the rest are all average or shite. No disrespect meant but that would mean calling cars like the Jordan of 1999 for example (which was in a similar position as today's Ferrari) an average car which is ridiculous.

I dont even want to get into stuff like lap charts to compare Ferrari's race pace with Mclaren and Red Bull, because that would make this whole argument even more ridiculous. Ferrari have had the pace to challenge the Mclarens on many occasions and even the Red Bull in the odd race.

I blame Steve Slater for this myth . Everytime Alonso is shown on the screen nowdays Slater is on with his idiotic "You can almost see him wringing that steering wheel so hard" comments which has you guys bought

[anachronix]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

An average car is one that fights midfield for example like the Force India or Renault.

Any car that is capable of fighting for position 1-5 in Formula 1 is a good car by any standards. It takes a humongous amount of effort to fight at that position consistently. Unless you think that in F1 there are just 3 spots that matter.

There are lot many things that takes a team into the top 5 positions. You are talking about just one part of it that we see on our TV screens! Its the development of a car through a season, it depends on how much money the team is capable of throwing in for all the resources to develop cars and sustain the competition through the season. Ferrari has failed bigtime again this season!

Like Brawn said "...that standing still is falling backwards in F1".

With the kind of money that Ferrari spends through a season, a season where the driver is over 100 points behind the Champion and over 200 points behind the constructor champions is shame. Its an average car.

It is not everytime that you will see someone do what a BrawnGP did with limited budget and the way F1 rules are evolving.

This is all just perception anyways, I think a lot of people here seem to think that in F1 there are just 2 cars that are good and the rest are all average or shite. No disrespect meant but that would mean calling cars like the Jordan of 1999 for example (which was in a similar position as today's Ferrari) an average car which is ridiculous.

I have been following F1 from the late 90's and have tried to watch every race from the early 2000's. I have seen enough of F1 to get over these perceptions.

I dont even want to get into stuff like lap charts to compare Ferrari's race pace with Mclaren and Red Bull, because that would make this whole argument even more ridiculous. Ferrari have had the pace to challenge the Mclarens on many occasions and even the Red Bull in the odd race.

Ferrari dont have the pace, I never really wanted to say this... but Alonso is really putting the car in better position than it really deserves.

I blame Steve Slater for this myth . Everytime Alonso is shown on the screen nowdays Slater is on with his idiotic "You can almost see him wringing that steering wheel so hard" comments which has you guys bought

Its been a while since I heard Slater on TV

I watch it on BBC these days

[Hatari]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

Any car that is able to challenge for the top 5 positions in a race is NOT average. I dont know why you're going around in circles with the same point.

We're talking about F1 cars here, not about a single team alone.

The definition of success/failure in F1 is different for each team in F1.
For HRT a good finish is just getting both cars to the finish. For Sauber a great result is placing 6th in the construcors above Force India.

Ferrari view F1 differently compared to any other team.
Their ENTIRE road car branding strategy is dependant on the excellence achieved in F1. (Have you ever seen a Ferrari advertisment? )
Therefore, a car not challenging for race wins regularly is looked at as being average.

I am not suggesting that Mclaren, Red Bull and Mercedes are comfortable not winning. But their parent companies/Board (and fans) are more understanding, and accept failure slightly better than Ferrari. Being unable to achieve excellence in F1 will hurt the Ferrari brand/aura far more than its competitors. I repeat. This year has been a drubbing..
(I predicted Vettel being WDC as far back as April http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/intl-m...appy-f1-2.html . )

Herein lies the difference. Hope clear.

[PuntoMania]

Originally Posted by Hatari

The definition of success/failure in F1 is different for each team in F1.
For HRT a good finish is just getting both cars to the finish. For Sauber a great result is placing 6th in the construcors above Force India.

Ferrari view F1 differently compared to any other team.
Their ENTIRE road car branding strategy is dependant on the excellence achieved in F1. (Have you ever seen a Ferrari advertisment? )
Therefore, a car not challenging for race wins regularly is looked at as being average.

I am not suggesting that Mclaren, Red Bull and Mercedes are comfortable not winning. But their parent companies/Board (and fans) are more understanding, and accept failure slightly better than Ferrari. Being unable to achieve excellence in F1 will hurt the Ferrari brand/aura far more than its competitors. I repeat. This year has been a drubbing..
(I predicted Vettel being WDC as far back as April http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/intl-m...appy-f1-2.html . )

Herein lies the difference. Hope clear.

I dont know if you're intentionally trying to be vague here, but let me just remind you, one more time, what post I was referring to :

"Vettel can only prove himself if he get a very average car , ( like alonso's ferrari) and still he is motivated enough to fight for Point finishes, not wins."

1. We're not discussing Ferrari's standards
2. We're not saying anything about what their board of directors wants

All I'm trying to say is, Alonso's Ferrari may be average by their own standards (please note the emphasis), but as far as Formula 1 is concerned this years Ferrari is far from being any sort of average car since it has had the pace to challenge for podiums and the odd race win. Its a front runner.

I wonder if you even read what others post, man.

[PuntoMania]

Originally Posted by anachronix

There are lot many things that takes a team into the top 5 positions. You are talking about just one part of it that we see on our TV screens! Its the development of a car through a season, it depends on how much money the team is capable of throwing in for all the resources to develop cars and sustain the competition through the season. Ferrari has failed bigtime again this season!

Like Brawn said "...that standing still is falling backwards in F1".

With the kind of money that Ferrari spends through a season, a season where the driver is over 100 points behind the Champion and over 200 points behind the constructor champions is shame. Its an average car.

Already replied to this in the previous post.

Originally Posted by anachronix

It is not everytime that you will see someone do what a BrawnGP did with limited budget and the way F1 rules are evolving.

Brawn GP's car was one of the most expensive in history. Honda started work on it since 2007. I know its way off topic, but just wanted to clear that up.

Originally Posted by anachronix

I have been following F1 from the late 90's and have tried to watch every race from the early 2000's. I have seen enough of F1 to get over these perceptions.

So, in your perception, you think a car capable of challenging for podiums and the odd race win is an average car ?

Originally Posted by anachronix

Ferrari dont have the pace, I never really wanted to say this... but Alonso is really putting the car in better position than it really deserves.

It has been a good, solid performance by Alonso agreed, but its not nearly as earth shattering as you're making it out to be.

Originally Posted by anachronix

Its been a while since I heard Slater on TV

I watch it on BBC these days

You lucky prick !

[Hatari]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

I dont know if you're intentionally trying to be vague here, but let me just remind you, one more time, what post I was referring to :

"Vettel can only prove himself if he get a very average car , ( like alonso's ferrari) and still he is motivated enough to fight for Point finishes, not wins."

1. We're not discussing Ferrari's standards
2. We're not saying anything about what their board of directors wants

All I'm trying to say is, Alonso's Ferrari may be average by their own standards (please note the emphasis), but as far as Formula 1 is concerned this years Ferrari is far from being any sort of average car since it has had the pace to challenge for podiums and the odd race win. Its a front runner.

I wonder if you even read what others post, man.

Stud, i'm trying EVERYTHING to get through to you!
I give up. Cant make it any simpler.

[PuntoMania]

Originally Posted by Hatari

Stud, i'm trying EVERYTHING to get through to you!
I give up. Cant make it any simpler.

This smiley is just perfect for this situation.