International Racing Driver Of The Year

[Jean Todt 4]

Alonso is a good driver, still one of the best I agree.

But I still don't agree with anyone who says he contributed to Mclaren's improved performance. It is like being rude to the hard working engineers in Woking. If Alonso contributed so much to Mclaren in 2007, then Kimi developed Mclaren better in 2005? IMHO Mclaren's MP4/20 was their best ever car even though it didn't win any championships.

[The Rumble Strip 0]

Surely the feedback of a driver is used by the hard working engineers, who I agree need credit.

[Jean Todt 4]

Surely the feedback of a driver is used by the hard working engineers, who I agree need credit.

I support a driver just for the heck of it, and a driver's form never bothers me But I watch F1 for its speed and techno. Many things I have watched and learnt from F1 only helped me to understand and design (sports) cars better. I don't really know how is this sport going to become from this year on.

I consider all the drivers in F1 to be good enough, but there are some drivers who are more than good who do make some difference.

The driver who contributed the most to developing cars is Micheal, because he had the luxury.

[The Rumble Strip 0]

I'd agree with that.

To be fair, the technical side has never bothered me and my knowledge is somewhat lacking in that department.

I recently read an old interview with Ron Dennis in which he said Kimi was good at motivating the team by not getting upset about car failure. That in itself to an engineer must be a great fillip.

[Jean Todt 4]

I'd agree with that.

To be fair, the technical side has never bothered me and my knowledge is somewhat lacking in that department.

I recently read an old interview with Ron Dennis in which he said Kimi was good at motivating the team by not getting upset about car failure. That in itself to an engineer must be a great fillip.

Thats why they never bothered to fix the reliabiltiy till he said bye!

[The Rumble Strip 0]

It did also praise JPM though.

The interview was done in early 2006 and it pretty accurate as to how F1 for McLaren turned out.

It talked about Hamilton making the grade, McLaren partnering another team but more tellingly contained the sound bite that they intended to stick around F1.

[Max Mosley 2]

Alonso's so called car development is hyped to ridiculous extents [...] The role of the driver is vastly overstated.

Needless to say, Cav is totally correct. I don't believe the accounts of how Alonso supposedly transforms teams from midfield runners to champions. I also don't see any logic in how people guesstimate the magnitude of the imagined Alonso-effect. In fact there seem to be tons of questions about this theory that haven't been answered. Why does Alonso keep getting turned down by the top teams? Why did the team bosses not rate him highly last season (see below).

I agree that most, if not all, the drivers give feeback like "it understeers into turn 2" or "I'm skittering at the bus stop" or even "I've got snap oversteer coming out of 4". That sort of input would be 'basic' input. Just enough to let the engineers fiddle with the wings, or soften the suspension. Alonso brings a different level to it. As we saw at McLaren last year, he's perfectly capable of spending hours in a simulator nailing down set-ups. His accurate discussions with the engineers save time during tests. Instead of trying multiple laps with different wing, ballast settings to dial out understeer, Alonso specifically asks for what he wants..and is mostly right. This saves time and allows for further testing. He is also vocal within the team about what 'inherent' properties he wants the car to have (low front grip and heavy rear). Most drivers don't go this extra bit and it shows.

On telemetry...it won't show you an understeering car. It's basically a graph that maps a lap and monitors the position of brake and throttle. It has other info as well, but only the driver can relay understeer because it's relative.

I do agree in part but I'm not entirely convinced by this. For example, I heard that Hamilton spent more time in the simulator than Alonso at McLaren. The story seems credible given that Hamilton certainly has a good work ethic, as evidenced by McLaren's happiness with him and his fitness levels etc. In terms of dialling out understeer, I think the engineers will be well able to advise drivers who don't know how to do it, but most drivers in F1 relay back quite detailed instructions as it is. Also I suspect many teams will design their cars to match the characteristics their drivers want. Certainly I can't imagine Hamilton, or even Massa and Kimi, not kicking up a fuss to get the car the way they like it. I think the engineers have a lot of data showing how the cars are performing at all moments on track, so I'd imagine they would be able to identify understeer, without the driver even telling them. Probably they don't bother doing it because any decent driver in F1 is going to tell them anyway.

Yeah well wait until you get married, dear Graham. You will find yourself being surprisingly forgiving and a little too reasnoble. Thank you for reminding me. Michael was mighty, his team mate sucked. He won through superiority.

Married men do seem slightly feeble to me, I must admit. Do women get surprisingly forgiving when married too? I can't imagine it, but wouldn't it be great!

Sorry to feed Fed Up's wank bank even more, but Lewis was also voted best driver of the year in F1 by the team bosses.

And what's more, he trounced Alonso. It was an anonymous vote where each team principal allocated points to drivers according to how good a job he thought they'd done in 2008. Lewis won on 88 points, with Massa just behind, but Alonso got a mere 50 points, level with Kubica.

Alonso is a good driver, still one of the best I agree.

But I still don't agree with anyone who says he contributed to Mclaren's improved performance. It is like being rude to the hard working engineers in Woking. If Alonso contributed so much to Mclaren in 2007, then Kimi developed Mclaren better in 2005? IMHO Mclaren's MP4/20 was their best ever car even though it didn't win any championships.

I agree.

To be fair, the technical side has never bothered me and my knowledge is somewhat lacking in that department.

Don't worry about it. Few F1 fans understand anything technical at all.

[Quiet One 15]

Needless to say, Cav is totally correct. I don't believe the accounts of how Alonso supposedly transforms teams from midfield runners to champions. I also don't see any logic in how people guesstimate the magnitude of the imagined Alonso-effect. In fact there seem to be tons of questions about this theory that haven't been answered.

No, he isn't and you know it. He was just writing rubbish after himself confessed he isn't watching F1 anymore. Nobody really took him seriously and I can't think you take him seriosuly, either. But I'll take the bait (you know you can count on me for that )

The "Alonso transform midfield runners to champions" or "he brought 6/10ths of a second" are baseless rubbish made by himself (once, while p**sed off) and anti Alonso posters (like...errr...you). Nobody claims he is the marvel guy who can make a Honda fly. But he does help more than the average driver. THAT is something widely recognized by the fans, the F1 teams and other drivers (no quotes, go search them, there are humdreds). He pushes his team forward like many other drivers (it is as baseless as a claim applied to him as it is applied to at least half of the field of which has been said so). He also is great at giving mechanical feedback (something less common among drivers). Go read last years mail exchange with DLR for a sample. This does not mean that he is the sole or even the main responsible for a team's increase in performance. NOBODY claims that except you, Cav and Shaliq. All people say is that he has more incidence than an average driver. If drivers can only contribute with a 1% to the developemen, then he is close to that percentage while other drivers are not. It's that simple.

Why does Alonso keep getting turned down by the top teams? Why did the team bosses not rate him highly last season (see below).

Turned down? You keep saying that. I can't see that being true (aside from Macca, which is obvious). BMW tried to lure him. Ferrari is obviously negotiating with him. Renault wanted him so desperately that I doubt they even have devised yet a plan B for when he leaves. Toyota, Honda, even Toro Rosso expressed at one moment or another that they would like to have him. If by "turning him down" you mean "they didn't hire Nando" then duh! You can't change drivers like you change your underwear (twice a year, in my case).

There are contract clauses, sponsor contracts, other drivers, schedules, etc. Ferrari and Nando didn't get to an agreement in time, it seems. There are lot of other interests involved (for example, kicking Kimi out will make look those who hired him as fools, I don't think they want to do it in a quick and dirty way if they can have Alonso later)

In short, that phrase is totally baseless and false.

I do agree in part but I'm not entirely convinced by this. For example, I heard that Hamilton spent more time in the simulator than Alonso at McLaren. The story seems credible given that Hamilton certainly has a good work ethic, as evidenced by McLaren's happiness with him and his fitness levels etc. In terms of dialling out understeer, I think the engineers will be well able to advise drivers who don't know how to do it, but most drivers in F1 relay back quite detailed instructions as it is. Also I suspect many teams will design their cars to match the characteristics their drivers want. Certainly I can't imagine Hamilton, or even Massa and Kimi, not kicking up a fuss to get the car the way they like it. I think the engineers have a lot of data showing how the cars are performing at all moments on track, so I'd imagine they would be able to identify understeer, without the driver even telling them. Probably they don't bother doing it because any decent driver in F1 is going to tell them anyway.

Ok, you are dismissing things that nobody else dares to. First things first. Lewis spends more time in the simulator than Nando. So what? Nobody questions Lewis works ethics. Totally irrelevant. What stands out if the amount of useful data. I could spend a year non stop in a simulator without being able to tell the mechanics anything more useful than "wow, awesome!".

Most drivers DO NOT give detailed instructions. Kimi, among others, is known for giving just general indications. Mike explained it quite well. If you still think that a computer can replace the last bits of info needed so a driver can extract the most of his own car, then you are way off reality. I don't even think you really believe that, having watched F1 for some years now.

And what's more, he trounced Alonso. It was an anonymous vote where each team principal allocated points to drivers according to how good a job he thought they'd done in 2008. Lewis won on 88 points, with Massa just behind, but Alonso got a mere 50 points, level with Kubica.

Kudos for Lewis! Now please explain what do they mean by "a good job" and we can start discussing if that adds anything to this discussion. Does it mean Lewis won more than Nando? That he spent more hours in the simulator? That he is nicer than Alonso? I haven't seen the questionaire so I really don't know.

Don't worry about it. Few F1 fans understand anything technical at all.

I am guilty of charge But that does not rule common sense out, mind you.

Last words: Saying that Nando gives good technical feedback does not mean any disrespect toward the engineers or mechanics. It is obvious that they don't feel offended by that either. Watch the entire crew of Renault happy as they can be carrying Nando at Singapore. They didn't seem offended at all with him!

[Max Mosley 2]

Crikey. If you print off and bind that one up, you could sell it in bookshops.

No, he isn't and you know it. He was just writing rubbish after himself confessed he isn't watching F1 anymore. Nobody really took him seriously and I can't think you take him seriosuly, either. But I'll take the bait (you know you can count on me for that )

The "Alonso transform midfield runners to champions" or "he brought 6/10ths of a second" are baseless rubbish made by himself (once, while p**sed off) and anti Alonso posters (like...errr...you). Nobody claims he is the marvel guy who can make a Honda fly. But he does help more than the average driver. THAT is something widely recognized by the fans, the F1 teams and other drivers (no quotes, go search them, there are humdreds). He pushes his team forward like many other drivers (it is as baseless as a claim applied to him as it is applied to at least half of the field of which has been said so). He also is great at giving mechanical feedback (something less common among drivers). Go read last years mail exchange with DLR for a sample. This does not mean that he is the sole or even the main responsible for a team's increase in performance. NOBODY claims that except you, Cav and Shaliq. All people say is that he has more incidence than an average driver. If drivers can only contribute with a 1% to the developemen, then he is close to that percentage while other drivers are not. It's that simple.

Never underestimate the Cav. He is wise beyond mortal comprehension.

I thought I already said in this thread that Alonso contributes more than most drivers do to car development. But what I'm trying to get clear is how much of a difference he makes. In fact, it seems to me that people do often say he transforms midfield teams to champions. People have consistently said Alonso is responsible for McLaren and Renault's fortunes over recent years. If they'd said he made a small positive difference to his teams, over and above most other drivers, then I would agree, but usually people go much further than that.

Turned down? You keep saying that. I can't see that being true (aside from Macca, which is obvious). BMW tried to lure him. Ferrari is obviously negotiating with him. Renault wanted him so desperately that I doubt they even have devised yet a plan B for when he leaves. Toyota, Honda, even Toro Rosso expressed at one moment or another that they would like to have him. If by "turning him down" you mean "they didn't hire Nando" then duh! You can't change drivers like you change your underwear (twice a year, in my case).

There are contract clauses, sponsor contracts, other drivers, schedules, etc. Ferrari and Nando didn't get to an agreement in time, it seems. There are lot of other interests involved (for example, kicking Kimi out will make look those who hired him as fools, I don't think they want to do it in a quick and dirty way if they can have Alonso later)

In short, that phrase is totally baseless and false.

McLaren don't want him, as you say, and surely Ferrari chose not to employ him too. The latter might change their mind in the future but it seems to me that they chose Kimi and Massa over a very available Alonso, so far. Btw how often do you change your chauffeur?

Ok, you are dismissing things that nobody else dares to. First things first. Lewis spends more time in the simulator than Nando. So what? Nobody questions Lewis works ethics. Totally irrelevant. What stands out if the amount of useful data. I could spend a year non stop in a simulator without being able to tell the mechanics anything more useful than "wow, awesome!".

Most drivers DO NOT give detailed instructions. Kimi, among others, is known for giving just general indications. Mike explained it quite well. If you still think that a computer can replace the last bits of info needed so a driver can extract the most of his own car, then you are way off reality. I don't even think you really believe that, having watched F1 for some years now.

Yes I agree Lewis's work ethic isn't in question. I only raised the issue as folk said Alonso's contribution was, in part, spending longer in the simulator than anyone else. Kimi of course is exceptionally lazy - I'd think most drivers give fairly detailed instructions, especially the top ones. I don't think I said you can set up a car perfectly just from a computer model. The issue is how much time does Alonso add in reality over and above other top drivers, like Massa, Lewis, Kubica etc.

Kudos for Lewis! Now please explain what do they mean by "a good job" and we can start discussing if that adds anything to this discussion. Does it mean Lewis won more than Nando? That he spent more hours in the simulator? That he is nicer than Alonso? I haven't seen the questionaire so I really don't know.

Well if anyone has an electronic copy it would be handy if they posted it for us. But I hardly think the team bosses would interpret the poll in any of those ways. Surely they would vote on who was the best driver, which intuitively means who performed best overall, taking into account all the contributions made by the drivers during the year.

[DOF_power 0]

Surely every car has a baseline, altered as the design takes shape.

Take the FW14B, perhaps the best F1 car ever. Did that not use a FW14 as a baseline.

In theory, but in practice the active suspensions made it handle quite different, like a different car.

[Quiet One 15]

Crikey. If you print off and bind that one up, you could sell it in bookshops.

That's the quiet one for you!

Never underestimate the Cav. He is wise beyond mortal comprehension.

Oh, I don't. Believe me.

I thought I already said in this thread that Alonso contributes more than most drivers do to car development. But what I'm trying to get clear is how much of a difference he makes. In fact, it seems to me that people do often say he transforms midfield teams to champions. People have consistently said Alonso is responsible for McLaren and Renault's fortunes over recent years. If they'd said he made a small positive difference to his teams, over and above most other drivers, then I would agree, but usually people go much further than that.

How much of a difference? Too hard to establish. First, not all driver/car equations are the same, nor in the same team in the same year. You can't put a number on that without being subject to controversy. You can, however, feel the difference. Let me give you an example that would not make you as mad as Alonso. Lewis. Judging from his performace, the guy is crap. For each flawless drive (which almost every driver at a top team had at one moment or another, see Massa), Lewis had made 2 moves so dumb they would have embarrassed Ide. This year's chamipnship with almost no serious opposition (unless you consider Massa the new Schumi) he still managed to almost lose it if it weren't for Glock. Along with last year's WDC by Kimi, and Rosberg Sr's WDC, was one of the less convincing winnings in F1 history. Still, you consider him one of the best drivers with a potential for being one of the great names in F1 history. You know what? Me too. Based on what? A lot of feelings we get after watching enough F1. Talent isn't always a mensurable quantity. But you can still recognize it. Alonso's contribution to improve a team cannot be easily measured (forget about the 6/10ths crap) but it is there.

McLaren don't want him, as you say, and surely Ferrari chose not to employ him too. The latter might change their mind in the future but it seems to me that they chose Kimi and Massa over a very available Alonso, so far. Btw how often do you change your chauffeur?

Ferrari? Really? Can you give more details of a single hint that any top team didn't want him besides the fact that they didn't hire him? You could say the same about Lewis, as I can't see caravans of team bosses marching to his house to tempt him away from Macca. The fact that deals were not closed is not the same as saying that they had no interest. The interest was obvious. You need to twist the evidence too much to make it look as if they didn't want him.

Yes I agree Lewis's work ethic isn't in question. I only raised the issue as folk said Alonso's contribution was, in part, spending longer in the simulator than anyone else. Kimi of course is exceptionally lazy - I'd think most drivers give fairly detailed instructions, especially the top ones. I don't think I said you can set up a car perfectly just from a computer model. The issue is how much time does Alonso add in reality over and above other top drivers, like Massa, Lewis, Kubica etc.

Again, hard to say. But Nando's skills have been praised a number of times in that regard, even by other team's members. I never heard such praise for Massa, Lewis or Kubica. I never heard much praise about Nando's relationship with the press, for example, but I keep hearing how nice are DC, Webbo and Button. So I guess those 3 are better than Nando. Not too adventurous a guess, I think.

Well if anyone has an electronic copy it would be handy if they posted it for us. But I hardly think the team bosses would interpret the poll in any of those ways. Surely they would vote on who was the best driver, which intuitively means who performed best overall, taking into account all the contributions made by the drivers during the year.

My sentiments, exactly. As they were not just judging who made his team improve the most, I am not amazed to see that Lewis "trounced" Alonso.

On the track, though, he barely did that

[The Rumble Strip 0]

Given his protestations, it is very apparent that Ferrari chose not to employ Nando for the 2009 season as a deal would have been reached quicker than you can say Luca Di wotsit.

[Quiet One 15]

Given his protestations, it is very apparent that Ferrari chose not to employ Nando for the 2009 season as a deal would have been reached quicker than you can say Luca Di wotsit.

Yet they are in what seems like quite advanced negotiations to hire him for 2010/2011 for 4 years.

The fact that they didn't hire him for 2009 does not prove anything. Macca closed the deal with him in 2005 for the 2007 season. Does that mean that they "turned him down" for 2006?

I can't see what it proves.

[Rainmaster 7]

Yet they are in what seems like quite advanced negotiations to hire him for 2010/2011 for 4 years.

The fact that they didn't hire him for 2009 does not prove anything. Macca closed the deal with him in 2005 for the 2007 season. Does that mean that they "turned him down" for 2006?

I can't see what it proves.

That's because it doesn't prove anything and is a crap argument.

[cavallino 2]

Toyota, Honda, even Toro Rosso expressed at one moment or another that they would like to have him.

I would like him to drive me to school too.

If by "turning him down" you mean "they didn't hire Nando" then duh! You can't change drivers like you change your underwear (twice a year, in my case).

There are contract clauses, sponsor contracts, other drivers, schedules, etc.

Lame excuses. Nando doesn't drive for a top team becase no top team wants him. OTherwise they would have him.

Ferrari and Nando didn't get to an agreement in time, it seems.

Yep, these things take years and years and years.

Ok, you are dismissing things that nobody else dares to. First things first. Lewis spends more time in the simulator than Nando. So what?

He also made a losing car into a championship winning one after Alonso left.

Never underestimate the Cav. He is wise beyond mortal comprehension.

Precisely. I predicted Kimi's downfall and Fettel's rise among other things at the beginning of '08.

Judging from his performace, the guy is crap.

At this stage of his career, Alonso was being crapped on by Trulli.

Ferrari? Really? Can you give more details of a single hint that any top team didn't want him besides the fact that they didn't hire him?

You answered yourself..

[cavallino 2]

No, he isn't and you know it. He was just writing rubbish after himself confessed he isn't watching F1 anymore.

Noone here seems to watch it either judging by the quality of the posts

The "Alonso transform midfield runners to champions" or "he brought 6/10ths of a second" are baseless rubbish made by himself

Umm our wintery feline buddy said that 6/10ths means on some tracks he is worth less than 6 tenths and on some more. Get that. On some tracks, Alonso adds more than 6/10, perhaps a second thanks to his development work. That is what someone who presumably watches F1 asserts And I am the troll..

Nobody claims he is the marvel guy who can make a Honda fly.

That is precisely what they insist, that he brought Renault from the bottom of the midfield to number 3, so I presume he can do the same with Honda?

But he does help more than the average driver.

Does he? Do you have anything more than frozen housecat's imaginary anecdotes to justify it? All I hear is Renault were bad, they got better therefore Alonso is god. As I showed, that argument can be applied to Kimi, Massa, Fettel Kid, many drivers. Yes only Alonso gets credit.

the F1 teams and other drivers (no quotes, go search them, there are humdreds).

That is rubbish. Not a single driver has made any such comment. Not a single team principle, except perhaps Flavio in one of his great oratory performances.

He also is great at giving mechanical feedback (something less common among drivers). Go read last years mail exchange with DLR for a sample.

This one?

"Hola amigo, I think Ferrari fill their tyres with fart gas, can we do it too? I could even replenish it mid race."

All people say is that he has more incidence than an average driver.

Which average driver? How average? Mclaren actually improved after he left, becoming champions.

Turned down? You keep saying that.

There has not been a single credible report linking Alonso to a top team, except his own assertion that he would like to drive for Ferrari. Please ignorethe tabloid crap.

[cavallino 2]

BMW tried to lure him.

source?

Ferrari is obviously negotiating with him.

Never reported in a reputable source.

Renault wanted him so desperately that I doubt they even have devised yet a plan B for when he leaves.

I think Alonso needs a plan B for when Renault leaves..

[The Rumble Strip 0]

If and I use the word if, Nando approached McLaren and not the other way round looking for 2007 then yes I would agree, McLaren did not turn him down for 2006.

I therefore admit it is possible the same situation exists at Ferrari for 2010.

Who knows.

[Quiet One 15]

source?

http://www.motorsport-total.com/f1/news/20...n_08090736.html

I am sure you can translate it yourself.

Oh, and spare me the "that is not a reputable source". All these were rumours, of course. And nobody will ever sign an affidavit stating that they approached a driver. We will never know BMW and FA really had a 3 year pre contract signed. But this was widely quoted last year. And this and this add to the picture, as Kubica hints it was ultimately Alonso's decision not to join BMW. I could go on for hours but I hate looking for news. Mostly when all I will get are sarcastic comments about the sources from someone who wasn't even aware (it seems) that Alonso was strongly linked with BMW halfway trhough last season.

Never reported in a reputable source.

Again, besides the fact that this will never be "reported" until/if the deal is closed and Alonso officially leaves Renault, making all counterarguments useless, "La Gazzeta dello Sport" might have it wrong with the details, but they are just adding yet another story based on the ongoing negotiations between Ferrari and Alonso, rumours that kept surfacing again and again without ever being denied by Alonso or Di Montezemolo. You can wait for a reputable source, but the Pope seems unwilling to make any statements on this issue any day soon.

I think Alonso needs a plan B for when Renault leaves..

Sadly, I agree with you on this.

[The Rumble Strip 0]

He won't be overlooked that's for sure.

[Max Mosley 2]

Off topic, does anyone else ever find women frustrating to talk to sometimes? Sometimes you ask them a perfectly innocent question and they kind of skirt the issue. Then you ask a follow up question, to clarify the first answer, and they then seem to deliberately avoid stating any clear opinion. As you can imagine, I find talking to people too timid to have an opinion very annoying, so I can't resist trying to pin them down. But then the women feel like I'm berating them, when all I really want is to know their opinion, and I feel like an a##hole for upseting them.

Tbh you guys remind me of that too sometimes. Don't take it the wrong way - I love you all like I love women! The convo is like this:

Alonso is a technical God. He makes an enormous difference and transforms teams from midfield runners to champions.

Wow! How does he do that?

A mixture of things.

Like what?

Not entirely sure, really.

OK, well, how much time does he add?

Sometimes more, sometimes less.

Sometimes more than what?

What?

Well, what's the typical time gain from having Alonso in your team?

It varies.

Yes but what's the average ball park figure that we're talking about?

Impossible to measure.

OK, well is it 0.6s/lap as Alonso himself once said?

Hey! Don't try to make the technical God that is Alonso look bad by... quoting him.

Sorry. If Alonso is the main explanation for McLaren and Renault doing better recently, then it must be an enormous chunk of time?

Nobody ever said Alonso was the only explanation for that.

Yes, but you did say above that Alonso transforms teams.

Don't try to make me look bad by... quoting me.

Sorry, silly me.

You're forgiven, just this once.

So, just to be clear, is Alonso the main factor explaining those teams' improvements or not?

Nobody ever said he was the only factor!

Yes I know that but is he the main factor?

Look, let me put it this way, if all the drivers have normal human skin, Alonso's is better moisturised than most.

Hmm...I see. Let's try a different tack. What reasons do we have for thinking Alonso makes this huge difference?

Are you kidding? Just look at Renault!

So he was the main explanation for their improvement?

Hey! You're quoting people again...This is your final warning.

So sorry. Well, any other reasons?

Not reasons as such, but I have a definite hunch.

You have a hunch?

Yes, I have a hunch.

Right... So we're not sure how Alonso makes such a huge difference, nor how much of a difference it is, nor whether it was the main factor in the teams' upturns, nor how we know any of this at all?

Now you get it!

Yes. So if Alonso is enormously better than Kimi and Massa, why haven't Ferrari signed him?

Any number of reasons.

Like what?

Well, why didn't they sign Senna either?

You mean the totally unproven rookie or the late great one?

Ayrton, obviously.

He's dead.

Exactly! See? Driver talent isn't the only factor in whether a driver gets signed.

Right... Well, how come Alonso makes a monumental difference compared to any other driver, yet wasn't voted best driver overall by the team principals?

Perhaps they interpreted the question as meaning best driver in bed?

I think that's unlikely.

Exactly! You don't absolutely definitely know for sure that Lewis didn't win because of his stamina in bed as testified to by 'big' Ron.

Right. That's true. You got me there.

[freaky2 1]

Yes. So if Alonso is enormously better than Kimi and Massa, why haven't Ferrari signed him?

Any number of reasons.

Like what?

Well, why didn't they sign Senna either?

You mean the totally unproven rookie or the late great one?

Ayrton, obviously.

He's dead.

Exactly! See? Driver talent isn't the only factor in whether a driver gets signed.

Right... Well, how come Alonso makes a monumental difference compared to any other driver, yet wasn't voted best driver overall by the team principals?

Perhaps they interpreted the question as meaning best driver in bed?

I think that's unlikely.

Exactly! You don't absolutely definitely know for sure that Lewis didn't win because of his stamina in bed as testified to by 'big' Ron.

Right. That's true. You got me there.

The rest is pretty accurate, Mr. Murray, but the bolded bits are questions you (always) ask that I still find irrelevant.

Time will tell who is better and for now your endless discussions are tiring me.

[Quiet One 15]

*sigh*

No, Mr. Muzza, you are not making an innocent question to clarify my opinion. Nor is Cav. You guys like winding people up. That's ok. But it is frustrating trying to maintain a conversation when the other side is just making a show of dialectic escapism. It is fun to have you and Cav mental skills around for argumenting with or against you. It is not os fun when you are not really doing anything but having fun with the argument per se seeing how can you ridicule the other side's point of view without ever making a clear point of view from your side.

I laughed at Cav's childish fit. Because I guessed it was intended as such. With you, it is harder even if we get along better than I do with him.

I will try to reply to some of your comedy sketch. I am sure it will not be enough, yet.

Alonso is a technical God. He makes an enormous difference and transforms teams from midfield runners to champions.

YOUR understanding of what we say. Of course that is idiotic. Assuming we make such an idiotic claim makes much easier for you to berate my argument. Now, please let me know YOUR argument. Or no...let me make it for you: "Alonso is an a##, even a 5 year old can setup a car better than him. A Commodore 64 can not only make a better setup considering every factor involved, it can also predict the outcome of the next 100 years WDCs needing only the price of a dozen of eggs in a local market as a starting data"

Should I really reply based on that assumption? Do you really think that? I guess not. Well, nobody thinks ALonso is a technical God. Nobody ever said it.

Does he make a difference? Yes, it seems so. Does he transform midfield runners to champions? Not by himself, but read this random article I found just by seraching for "dennis alonso technical input" on Google. You will find thousands. And not only from SPanish media (That's why I searched it in English)

Wow! How does he do that?

A mixture of things.

Like what?

Not entirely sure, really.

OK, well, how much time does he add?

Sometimes more, sometimes less.

Sometimes more than what?

What?

Well, what's the typical time gain from having Alonso in your team?

It varies.

Yes but what's the average ball park figure that we're talking about?

Impossible to measure.

OK, well is it 0.6s/lap as Alonso himself once said?

Hey! Don't try to make the technical God that is Alonso look bad by... quoting him.

Sorry. If Alonso is the main explanation for McLaren and Renault doing better recently, then it must be an enormous chunk of time?

Nobody ever said Alonso was the only explanation for that.

So, let me see if I understand. You are expecting just a quantity. Maybe a percentage, or a specific number of seconds per lap? You know that there is no way to put a number on such things. How honest is Ron Dennis? Can you put a number on THAT? What is your point, really? Maybe that'll help.

Yes, but you did say above that Alonso transforms teams.

Don't try to make me look bad by... quoting me.

Sorry, silly me.

You're forgiven, just this once.

Again, your claim and your assumption on what transforming a team really means. YOu know that nobody thinks that Alonso can turn a team around by himself. I recognized that a billion times yet you still ignore that just for ridiculing purposes. Sad. And of course, does nothing to disrpove my claims.

So, just to be clear, is Alonso the main factor explaining those teams' improvements or not?

Nobody ever said he was the only factor!

Yes I know that but is he the main factor?

Look, let me put it this way, if all the drivers have normal human skin, Alonso's is better moisturised than most.

Hmm...I see. Let's try a different tack. What reasons do we have for thinking Alonso makes this huge difference?

Are you kidding? Just look at Renault!

So he was the main explanation for their improvement?

Hey! You're quoting people again...This is your final warning.

So sorry. Well, any other reasons?

Not reasons as such, but I have a definite hunch.

You have a hunch?

Yes, I have a hunch.

Right... So we're not sure how Alonso makes such a huge difference, nor how much of a difference it is, nor whether it was the main factor in the teams' upturns, nor how we know any of this at all?

Now you get it!

By now you should be able to tell how wrong that depiction of the arguments is. No need to even bothering replying to that comic strip except to say that your failure to understand a non mathematical concept coupled with the total lack of a real counteargument makes this kind of reasoning seem valid to you.

Again, please give me YOUR assumptions and we will discuss.

What? You already said them? Oh, yes, let me quote you (for real, I am not as unfair as you):

Basically I agree with you all that Alonso is better at setting up and developing a car than almost any other driver around today. I just disagree, I think, on the overall importance of this ability in a driver. I can imagine Alonso would be able to develop an extra tenth out of a Ferrari compared to an on form Kimi or a Felipe, whereas Kimi might be half a tenth a lap faster in a typical, given car.

Now...will you answer yourself about why you think the bolded bit? Do you have any numbers or is it just a hunch?

Yes. So if Alonso is enormously better than Kimi and Massa, why haven't Ferrari signed him?

Any number of reasons.

Like what?

Well, why didn't they sign Senna either?

You mean the totally unproven rookie or the late great one?

Ayrton, obviously.

He's dead.

Exactly! See? Driver talent isn't the only factor in whether a driver gets signed.

Right... Well, how come Alonso makes a monumental difference compared to any other driver, yet wasn't voted best driver overall by the team principals?

Perhaps they interpreted the question as meaning best driver in bed?

I think that's unlikely.

Exactly! You don't absolutely definitely know for sure that Lewis didn't win because of his stamina in bed as testified to by 'big' Ron.

Right. That's true. You got me there.

To be honest, you seem obsessed with that argument even if it makes even less sense than any of the previous ones. You replied to yourself, though with the Ayrton example. Why Ferrari din't hire Ayrton in his last seasons? Can you PROVE that Alonso was "turned down" due to some factor by the top teams? (your claim, by the way)

[Rainmaster 7]

Off topic, does anyone else ever find women frustrating to talk to sometimes? Sometimes you ask them a perfectly innocent question and they kind of skirt the issue. Then you ask a follow up question, to clarify the first answer, and they then seem to deliberately avoid stating any clear opinion. As you can imagine, I find talking to people too timid to have an opinion very annoying, so I can't resist trying to pin them down. But then the women feel like I'm berating them, when all I really want is to know their opinion, and I feel like an a##hole for upseting them.

Tbh you guys remind me of that too sometimes. Don't take it the wrong way - I love you all like I love women! The convo is like this:

It feels like you skirt the issue with this post, Andres already gave you a good reply further up the page. I know as a man of science it must be your natural inclination to put a figure on everything, but as you know it's just not possible to do with some things which aren't black and white. There is simply no way to know how much Alonso improves a team, but there is evidence to suggest that he does improve a team more than most of the other drivers in F1 (be it through better mechanical feedback, motivating the team, or more likely both of those things).

[Medilloni 6]

Off topic, does anyone else ever find women frustrating to talk to sometimes? Sometimes you ask them a perfectly innocent question and they kind of skirt the issue. Then you ask a follow up question, to clarify the first answer, and they then seem to deliberately avoid stating any clear opinion. As you can imagine, I find talking to people too timid to have an opinion very annoying, so I can't resist trying to pin them down. But then the women feel like I'm berating them, when all I really want is to know their opinion, and I feel like an a##hole for upseting them.

Why not try shutting the fcuk up and concentrate on the foreplay?