What Now For Massa?

[Jem of the Shire 0]

Have a read of this jem...

http://www.gptoday.c..._60#entry358512

It's in reference to Perez' arrogance. As for Maldonado's I saw that arrogance in him very early on. He's acting like an a**hole now, but he's always been one from what I can see. He brought nothing to Williams accept sponsorship money that wasn't his.

I'm glad both these guys will soon be out of the top teams and hopefully out of F1 for good... unless of course Lotus come knocking. Then I'll even buy their damn t-shirts again and watch in glee as they combust and hopefully go kaput.

Ah yes the Walrus. Have you guys actually noticed that some of the cars now almost resemble that look? It hit me this year actually. I was going, you know what the designs on some of the cars now, remind me a little of the walrus. I know they are not as wide as it was, but the outside uprights do look similar on some of the cars now.

I miss the Williams from the Ralf and Montoya era. They won races! They were fast, and that was probably the last genuine period of time Williams were a top top team.

Yea, was good in 2003 when both Williams drivers were fighting for the championship along with Schuey & Kimi (sadly not DC).

And in 01-02 when Montoya used to occasionally get right up Schuey's nostrils, loved those moments.

[KoolMonkey 0]

I wish Monty had stuck around. He had real skills and potential and not since JV had an Indycar/Champ car driver come in and actually done well. He was ballsy and quick. I hope he's happy in Nascar, but I did hear he might end up back in Indycar after maybe losing his ride. He should have tried harder to stay in F1, but maybe he was just over it and didn't have the discipline to keep his weight down.

[Emmcee 0]

Bah villeneuve jumped into the best car on the grid when he came to f1, made him look alot and I mean alot better than he actually was. In equally machinery like the others, he failed to impress IMO. Montoya did the same, jumped into one of the best cars and this just slingshots them into stardom and makes them look better than they really are. If you can hold your own when the car isn't so good or you join a lower team, that's when you notice the real talent. Atleast with JV we have seen him drive crap with crap cars, Montoya we havnt.

[KoolMonkey 0]

Bah villeneuve jumped into the best car on the grid when he came to f1, made him look alot and I mean alot better than he actually was. In equally machinery like the others, he failed to impress IMO. Montoya did the same, jumped into one of the best cars and this just slingshots them into stardom and makes them look better than they really are. If you can hold your own when the car isn't so good or you join a lower team, that's when you notice the real talent. Atleast with JV we have seen him drive crap with crap cars, Montoya we havnt.

The flaw to that notion is that JV almost beat Hill in his rookie year. Thus it's moot whether the car was the best or not. JV was the real deal. You don't become an IndyCar Champ and win the Indy 500 on luck alone or just by having the best car. Thus he proved in his first year in F1 just how good he was. And in his second he won the championship.

JV in his Bar/Honda years, well that's a different sad discussion for another day.

One thing to consider here... ALL the top drivers from the past 20-30 years were at some point in the best cars. Thus does that diminish Senna, Prost, Mansell or Schumi's results? Of course not. Thus this whole thing about JV, it's been going on for years and it's based on having blinders on. You can't state he had the best car, thus he wasn't really that good, and exclude all the other situations whereby other great drivers had the best car too.

[Emmcee 0]

But that all depends on how highly you rate Damon Hill and for me, he was good, but not great.

[KoolMonkey 0]

Doesn't matter how highly or lowly you rate Damon. He went toe to toe with Schumi. And was involved in one of the 2 most controversial incidents in Schumi career.

The point is still valid about JV however. You can't denigrate his achievements and put that sole down to the car, and then say great things about other drivers who all had great cars too. It's one or the other. Either JV is a good driver, or he isn't due to the car as you say. Thus that means Senna, Prost and all the others cannot be great either because they all at some point had the best car to drive.

[Emmcee 0]

Senna, Prost and co. drove the best cars yes, but they drove some dogs and were able to still win or score big points. JV, after 1997 was crap, frentzen almost beat him in 1998. He might have been the real deal in champcar, but not f1 sorry. And besides hill went toe to toe with schumi in a "better" car than Schumi and was only in contention because Schumi missed 3 races, this allowed hill to close the gap to Schumi heading into the last round. Even Schumi said he didn't expect to win the title, he said senna would have won it, better car better driver.

[KoolMonkey 0]

Frentzen almost won the Championship, so it's not a dishonor to have been almost beaten by him. It's ok, people see things differently. The main reason people don't like JV nowdays is because of what comes out of his mouth. But he was fantastic and great driver, and his accomplishments have matched only a few select few. Schumi rated JV extremely highly. The quality of JV's bad cars were worse than Senna and Prost's bad cars. I mean they were not winning in the equivlaent of Marussia's and HRTs, they were winning in the modern day Williams, Force Indias and Saubers, compared with the RBR.

To say JV was crap after his Williams days is right in a way, but you have to look at the disaster that was BAR that sadly for him pretty much totaled his career. But then again, even years past that, Button didn't look so hot in their cars either. Some teams just cannot get it together no matter how much money they through at it, and they eventually leave like Honda, Toyota and BMW.

Winning will never be considered a failure. A one off race yes, if a driver never comes close to that again, but not 2 seasons of scoring race wins. Just look at all the sub par drivers who were put in good cars who DIDN'T win. Heikki won one race. Trulli won one race. I could go on. They certainly had good to great cars. So a car does not make a driver a winner, but if given all the ingredients a driver can do very very well. At any rate, I certainly do not have the desire to continually go back to the is it the car, or is it the driver that makes more of the difference.

[Emmcee 0]

Villeneuve was outpaced by frentzen, Massa and panis, all of which were supposedly number 2 to JV. Button got a few poles when the BAR/Honda wasn't so crash hot, I will never hold JV in the class of great drivers,buts this is just my opinion, your right to have yours and iam right to have mine, whether either of us are right who knows but anyway.

Ohh your forgot Maldonado, he won a race to.

[KoolMonkey 0]

Maldonado wasn't mentioned because he's not even in the same class as Trulli or Heikki. He's a glitch, and anomaly that the universe will soon expunge and correct for us.

[Emmcee 0]

Maldonado wasn't mentioned because he's not even in the same class as Trulli or Heikki. He's a glitch, and anomaly that the universe will soon expunge and correct for us.

No, he is sadly what this sport is becoming. Arrogant rich kids who pay for there seats. Few years from now, wouldnt surprise me if atleast 80-85% of the grid was pay drivers, if f1 continues down its regular season regulation changes.

[KoolMonkey 0]

I don't think we're going in that direction. Case in point, Maldonado has been tossed out with the garbage and Perez right behind him. It doesn't matter if they find new seats, the thing here is that their current teams want real drivers, not prima donna divas with huge sponsorship.

[Emmcee 0]

I don't think we're going in that direction. Case in point, Maldonado has been tossed out with the garbage and Perez right behind him. It doesn't matter if they find new seats, the thing here is that their current teams want real drivers, not prima donna divas with huge sponsorship.

Maybe there realising it's distorting the sport and there teams.

[Massa 0]

I challenge someone to make a case that this grid...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F1_1995#Drivers_and_constructors

...is better than this grid...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F1_2013#Teams_and_drivers

If you don't think 1995 is a fair year, explain why and request a substitute. I picked it because it was the midpoint of the 90s, an allegedly better time for the sport.

[KoolMonkey 0]

1995, damn I'll have to immerse myself in that era again. I was just a youngin and was traveling around the world, so was not really able to keep up to date with F1. 2005 might have been a better pick maybe, but we'll go with 1995. Will post some thoughts when I get the chance to properly look that year over.

[Emmcee 0]

I see 1995 the reversal of 1994. 1994 Williams was the best car. Senna

Should have been champion, but we all know what happened, But Schumi was disqualified from three races and was still able to win the title in the insuperior Benetton.

1995- roles were reversed Benetton was the best car and Williams was struggling to keep up. The result, Schumi winning title by over 60 points (old points system) and a record 9 wins in a season. So I think that's how I compare hill to Schumi, simply not as good. To also win 3 races in 96 driving that dog Ferrari, which is equivalent to this years Mclaren, was pretty impressive, especially that win at Barcelona in the rain that year.