Autosport Top 50 Drivers Of 2006

[Jem of the Shire 0]

not on any lists

but isnt this a bit sad, like we're back in primary school?

[Jem of the Shire 0]

Did Heidfeld do anything impressive in 2006?

Because Kubica did. He was one of the most impressive rookies during last 10 years.

come on, thats a massive exaggeration. Whats he done except get a podium? He hasnt raced a full season yet, we dont know how good he really is

[milaszewski 0]

I know it's the testing only, but Kubica did 2nd best time on Jerez track, with Michael Schumacher on the 1st position (in the whole year 2006). He does much more overtaking than his team mate. He is one of the most spectacular drivers in F1. In the past he showed equal performance to Lewis Hamilton in the F3, despite the fact he didn't have huge sponsorship as Lewis had. He's a brilliant race driver.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

I know it's the testing only, but Kubica did 2nd best time on Jerez track, with Michael Schumacher on the 1st position (in the whole year 2006). He does much more overtaking than his team mate. He is one of the most spectacular drivers in F1. In the past he showed equal performance to Lewis Hamilton in the F3, despite the fact he didn't have huge sponsorship as Lewis had. He's a brilliant race driver.

He certainly looks promising but wait until he has the long stuggle of a full F1 season. At the moment I see no reason why he should beat Heidfeld.

[pabloh20 1]

On this one occasion I agree with some censorship. Personally I think being insulted is good for the soul and I never want anyone banned just for insulting me. I also think everyone should have the right to insult each other from time to time, and should take a few insults on the chin, as Kati did rather well. I also defend Ulrick's right to be racist, and by his own admission, he takes up the offer gladly.

However, everyone must have the right to post their opinions here without having to endure spiteful comments designed purely to prevent them from enjoying the forum and from expressing themselves. There can be no valid defense of such spiteful actions on free speach grounds. If insults arise naturally in the course of a debate then I would be inclined to let them go, but when the only aim is to disrupt another's right to post, then they are unacceptable imho.

This latest comment is clearly intended not to make any reasonable point, but purely to drive a poster away from the forum, in the knowledge that she left once before, after arguments turned ugly. Imho this is unacceptable and disrupts the forum for everyone, not least because the vast majority of the forum want this particular poster to stay.

Btw I'm actually near Chester right now for a day or two

I don't mind insults at all, Murray, especially when they arise in the course of a heated debate, but I think there's a line and Hermy has not only crossed the line on many occassions, but he is actually so far past it he cannot see the line anymore. I know I probably take offence at insults to other people more than I do when somebody insults me and I also know that Kati is more than capable of looking after herself, but it was just completely uncalled for, there was no prior reasoning for that comment at all and it's not the first time he's done it......or the second.........or...... etc. I have had disagreements with a few people on here, misunderstandings, heated debates and yet there is only 1 person I would say I really can't get along with and that's hermy - I'm not sure I'm alone in that either

You are welcome to come over, but I am liable to fall asleep at any given moment in time !!

My mum had one as well, and she does not feel ill, so i think it is all OK

I say this in the highest respect for Pumpdoc and the other staff, but i feel this site needs more consistancy in its moderating. What i did (although stupid i will admit) was nothing like as rude as that yet i ended up with a 7 day suspension. It just has to be clamped down on IMO, maybe someone needs to raise this issue with the site's administrator

Well i did eventually admit i made a mistake with you, i basically misread you, in general terms you seem like a nice guy, ive pretty much forgotten it now anyway, i was having some problems at the time so i was a bit more tetchy and highly strung than usual anyways, and even if it hadn't been resolved i do not keep grudges anyway

I know and as I said at the time it takes 2 to tango, but I was still pleasantly surprised all the same!!

Shane I was suprised you got banned, but I think it was another mod who banned you. I also got a warning for it at the time, which I accept because I was being annoying and antagonistic towards you, but I have said a lot worse to hermy, though it is usually in response to his ever so insightful comments! I do think the mods do a good job, though, because to be fair there can be a lot of posts to go through. I've noticed that with not being on here quite so much - when you come back, there's loads to read!!

not on any lists

but isnt this a bit sad, like we're back in primary school?

Would you have said this if you were on somebody's list??

Ok, I revise my list

Everybody........well, almost!

[Kati 0]

Actually it was like:

- Hi

- Get the **** outta here u *****!

I went *. . .* So I did a Fisichella on JV and answered on the italian way

BTW I'm on a list????? Ooooh I'm so thankful! I'll do mine *not on any order*:

Pabloh20

Murray Walker

Shane

Ykick

Autumnpuma

C21

Sorry for small list, I'm still a bit *. . . *

[Null 0]

Spengler was just as good, if not better, than Button. Either Spengler's way too far down or Button's too high up. I'm gonna say a bit of both.

Also, Jason Plato was bloody awesome in BTCC this year, where the hell is he?

[tifosi too! 0]

This is a best of 2006 list not a best of all time. read the title

And how exactly did you assume I was referring to the best of all time Check again...

Just painted yourself into a corner with that, MS did nothing exceptional it was the FIA banning the damper, throwing bulls##t penaltys and Bridgestone making a better tyre that made the Ferrari car superior and MS just drove it like always. Massa being more then a match for him in his debut season proves this, Schumacher is nothing without a superior car when against top drivers like Mika and Alonso.

If you really cant believe that then why wasent MS doing such an exceptional thing from the start? Alonso always driver's for maximium so whay didnt MS at the start of the year? Clearly MS isent a real racer in this situation.

Take your pick at which you think happened.

[Shane2 0]

Well if you are referring to 2006 i think you are sadly mistaken as well. In the first half of 2006 Alonso was flawless, whereas Michael made 2 very critical mistakes, in the second half of the year he only came back because of Renault's mass damper ban, and a vastly superior bridgestone tyre. To call it the greatest comeback ever, when he didnt even win the WDC is a little bit narrow minded in my opinion.

[tifosi too! 0]

Well if you are referring to 2006 i think you are sadly mistaken as well. In the first half of 2006 Alonso was flawless, whereas Michael made 2 very critical mistakes, in the second half of the year he only came back because of Renault's mass damper ban, and a vastly superior bridgestone tyre. To call it the greatest comeback ever, when he didnt even win the WDC is a little bit narrow minded in my opinion.

I didn't call it that !!Are you reading someone else's posts??Anyway it was a spectacular comeback and of course the "machinery" allowed it.However he was always ahead of Massa, which indicates he probably made the best use of what he was driving.Not everybody does that.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

It was a great comeback no matter which way you look at it, I dont think any other driver could've done what MS did this year. Having said that, MS probably could've won the title had it not been for the monaco incident and the unneccesary collision with Heidfeld at Hungary. I wouldnt say Alonso is an arrogant person but I get the impression that he sometimes feels he's better than everyone else and so they should all bow to him, i'm sure he doesnt mean to give that impression though

[Shane2 0]

I didn't call it that !!Are you reading someone else's posts??Anyway it was a spectacular comeback and of course the "machinery" allowed it.However he was always ahead of Massa, which indicates he probably made the best use of what he was driving.Not everybody does that.

Alonso did the same thing, and won the title so whats your point?

I don't get where you think alonso acts like he is better than everyone Jemstride, that was Schumacher's forte not his. I get the impression of a young man totally focused on getting into the car, doing his job, and enjoying it. Someone with that level of focus is bound to get honked off when a decision is made like was made at Monza.

And i don't see why everyone raves so much about schumacher's comeback, it wasnt that special, Renault where wrongfooted with the ban of the TMD and brisgestone just chose that moment to bring out a superior tyre. Put any of the top drivers in that ferrari and they would have achieved pretty similar results.

[tifosi too! 0]

Alonso did the same thing, and won the title so whats your point?

I don't get where you think alonso acts like he is better than everyone Jemstride, that was Schumacher's forte not his. I get the impression of a young man totally focused on getting into the car, doing his job, and enjoying it. Someone with that level of focus is bound to get honked off when a decision is made like was made at Monza.

And i don't see why everyone raves so much about schumacher's comeback, it wasnt that special, Renault where wrongfooted with the ban of the TMD and brisgestone just chose that moment to bring out a superior tyre. Put any of the top drivers in that ferrari and they would have achieved pretty similar results.

It was a Ferrari-MS comeback and it is impressive considering 2005.The Williams "empire" fell in '97 and still hasn't comeback as well as Mclaren although they are much closer to the top.If the "comeback" was not impressive, I guess neither did the championship by fernando since Renault always had a car capable of victory, with or without the mass dampers,Michelin was on top of the game especially at first and later on had a highly competitive run against BS but never dropped out.When did Renault or Michelin fail to perform?They were pushing Ferrari and BS all the way and they were being pushed, but no one dominated the other.If that's the case then nothing is impressive in this sport.

[Shane2 0]

How the hell is that a comeback. Ferrari had one bad season, and that more than anything else was due to the fact they couldn't work the chassis in with the tyres needed. I would also like to point out that williams lost their works engine deal, and that cost them, i would hardly consider 1 inconsistant year the fall of an empire, when you consider the problems that faced williams after 97. The point which you are quiet clearly missing, is that the mass damper ban cost renault At least half a second a lap, and when you consider that initially put it behind 2, possibly 3 of the fast teams until they caught up with performance i would hardly call that capable of winning.

For a start, the bridgestone tyre was vastly superior at Indy, as was the case at Hockenheim, Magny Cours, and Brazil as well (and japan in qualifying). At the end of a day, what use is making a comeback if you end it by losing anyway. Even the less ignorant ferrari fans can admit that the Mass Damper ban cost renault dearly, it is not hard for people to see that they where severely crippled. I would liken ferrari's comeback to knocking out a boxer with concussion and brain damage. They are already screwed, ferrari just delivered the final blow. It is simple: there was nothing great about schumacher's attempted comeback. Deal with it and move on.

[Schumikonen 2]

I personally think Kubica is better than heidfeld that isn't a mistake. Agree about the point about fisi though

Agreed

This is a best of 2006 list not a best of all time. read the title

Hmm im gonna have to disagree there. Michael retired through error in Australia, he dropped points in Monaco entirely through his own stupid actions, and he was generally scruffy in the first half of the season. He was not the best driver in 2006, and the points table does not lie. For the record, that engine failure did not win FA the championship either, in case you are forgetting FA also had one in monza where schumacher took 10 points, so all that did was equalise things, FA would stilll have won the WDC with engine failures taken out of the equation. Your point about massa is also kinda invalid considering he had a vastly superior car to kimi practically all season.

Yeah but with all theses he was almost the WDC and you are not pointing here when Ferrari called both drivers to pit giving FA the chance to take a position in front of him and ruining MS chances for that day. that was the only race that FA could beat MS after USA, MS ended his career like the best driver of 2006 and the best of all time.

About Kimi it would be fear to say that he had a vastly superior car comparing to most of the teams, only Renault and Ferrari were better and his team mate was not the best one he could get and that is where thoses 65 points came from.

[Schumikonen 2]

Just painted yourself into a corner with that, MS did nothing exceptional it was the FIA banning the damper, throwing bulls##t penaltys and Bridgestone making a better tyre that made the Ferrari car superior and MS just drove it like always. Massa being more then a match for him in his debut season proves this, Schumacher is nothing without a superior car when against top drivers like Mika and Alonso.

If you really cant believe that then why wasent MS doing such an exceptional thing from the start? Alonso always driver's for maximium so whay didnt MS at the start of the year? Clearly MS isent a real racer in this situation.

Take your pick at which you think happened.

Just a simple question to you and I want you to answer it yes or no.

It was MS winning races before the Mass Damper were banned?

About Brigestone it is the same for Alonso, he was not doing anything great he just had the best tire in the best car, then Ferrai became better and so did Brigestone.

MS is nothing without the best car and that why Alonso was WDC driving a Minardi right?

MS was indeed doing such exceptional thing from the start, he was the only one who stopped Renault from the beggining of the season when even Fifi won a race.

And yes MS drove it like always, like the best driver in the field, do I have to remind you that Alonso almost lost in the first race to MS even when like you just said he didn't have the best tire nor the best car? do I have to remind you that MS won in Imola and Nurburgring and beside starting in the last position in Monaco he manage to finish in the point? do i have to remind you that nobody thought that he could be leading the WDC when canada race was over? and that he was for a race tha WDC leader?

Why don't you read a little about this season intead of doing pointless coments like this one, let's talk about baseball if you are better in that.

[Schumikonen 2]

When I said comeback I meant that in one point of the season everybody thought that everything was lost for him and like I said before he managed to be leading the WDC to the point that Alonso called this a "miracle" because nobody was expecting his "comeback".

Even for Alonso that was a great thing and some blind Alonso's fans here still say that this it was nothing, what a shame

[Schumikonen 2]

How the hell is that a comeback. Ferrari had one bad season, and that more than anything else was due to the fact they couldn't work the chassis in with the tyres needed. I would also like to point out that williams lost their works engine deal, and that cost them, i would hardly consider 1 inconsistant year the fall of an empire, when you consider the problems that faced williams after 97. The point which you are quiet clearly missing, is that the mass damper ban cost renault At least half a second a lap, and when you consider that initially put it behind 2, possibly 3 of the fast teams until they caught up with performance i would hardly call that capable of winning.

For a start, the bridgestone tyre was vastly superior at Indy, as was the case at Hockenheim, Magny Cours, and Brazil as well (and japan in qualifying). At the end of a day, what use is making a comeback if you end it by losing anyway. Even the less ignorant ferrari fans can admit that the Mass Damper ban cost renault dearly, it is not hard for people to see that they where severely crippled. I would liken ferrari's comeback to knocking out a boxer with concussion and brain damage. They are already screwed, ferrari just delivered the final blow. It is simple: there was nothing great about schumacher's attempted comeback. Deal with it and move on.

Do somebody here knows about the Cause and effect law?

Everything has a Cause and everything produce an effect, I can not say it in a simple way probably Murray can give me a little help in this, you are trying to find a cause and an effect for what MS did, and you will find it but that doesn't change the situation that he did a great comeback, and I can aply the same rules for Alonso in aeveru situation so you must admit that he did a great comeback and it doesn't matter the reasons or causes that you can find he just did it, and that's it.

[tifosi too! 0]

How the hell is that a comeback. Ferrari had one bad season, and that more than anything else was due to the fact they couldn't work the chassis in with the tyres needed. I would also like to point out that williams lost their works engine deal, and that cost them, i would hardly consider 1 inconsistant year the fall of an empire, when you consider the problems that faced williams after 97. The point which you are quiet clearly missing, is that the mass damper ban cost renault At least half a second a lap, and when you consider that initially put it behind 2, possibly 3 of the fast teams until they caught up with performance i would hardly call that capable of winning.

For a start, the bridgestone tyre was vastly superior at Indy, as was the case at Hockenheim, Magny Cours, and Brazil as well (and japan in qualifying). At the end of a day, what use is making a comeback if you end it by losing anyway. Even the less ignorant ferrari fans can admit that the Mass Damper ban cost renault dearly, it is not hard for people to see that they where severely crippled. I would liken ferrari's comeback to knocking out a boxer with concussion and brain damage. They are already screwed, ferrari just delivered the final blow. It is simple: there was nothing great about schumacher's attempted comeback. Deal with it and move on.

why don't you rad closer to what people write?The LEGITIMATE ban of the mass dampers did effect Renault but they remained frontrunners, didn't they?You deny that?Like it or not in F1 not all teams can bounce back in a year after a bad season.Williams still is a good example so as mclaren and Ferrari before '96.If you are losing steadily and then start gaining again, then its a comeback isn't it?In the first half of the season, did anyone seriously expected Ferrari and MS to fight for the title?

[devilsinskirts 0]

do I have to remind you that MS won in Imola and Nurburgring and beside starting in the last position in Monaco he manage to finish in the point?

The 4th and 5th races of the season. As you also pointed out, Michael nearly won in Bahrain, meaning that Ferrari were actually only off the pace for two races.

So yes, Michael did well to recover from what looked like a desperate position after three races, but it could not be called a superhuman effort.

Now if he had been using the '96 car this season and achieved the same, I would be hailing him as the greatest racing driver ever. He didn't, and he's not.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

i've never liked schuey at all but even I thought he did an incredible job this year coming from 25 points down to level with alonso at 1 point.

i think it may be an exaggeration to say that the mass damper ban caused the renaults to be half a second slower per lap, i also disagree with the comment that they fell below other teams, cos they didnt

[Shane2 0]

why don't you rad closer to what people write?The LEGITIMATE ban of the mass dampers did effect Renault but they remained frontrunners, didn't they?You deny that?Like it or not in F1 not all teams can bounce back in a year after a bad season.Williams still is a good example so as mclaren and Ferrari before '96.If you are losing steadily and then start gaining again, then its a comeback isn't it?In the first half of the season, did anyone seriously expected Ferrari and MS to fight for the title?

I doubt that, i have still never seen anything that proves the mass damper had any effect on the car's aerodynamics, which was the ruling it was banned under.

i've never liked schuey at all but even I thought he did an incredible job this year coming from 25 points down to level with alonso at 1 point.

i think it may be an exaggeration to say that the mass damper ban caused the renaults to be half a second slower per lap, i also disagree with the comment that they fell below other teams, cos they didnt

Well if you see the point that renault where about .1s ahead of ferrari on ultimate pace up till canada, and about .4 behind them in Hungary (in the dry), turkey, and monza i think that tells a different story. They only went back ahead when the performance was clawed back (a little bit in Turkey though Alonso owed that one some luck).

@Schumikonen, for about 3 races Renault fell behind McLaren and Ferrari so no, they wern't still a frontronning team IMO. At the start of the season, the tyres where about equal, and Alonso had a slightly better car, it took ferrari a while to find the sweet spot on their chassis. The michelin may have been a touch better, but nothing to the degree of the superiority of the bridgetstone in the second half of the season.

Face it: your golden boy was beaten fair and square, he lost the title, and a comeback is only a comeback when it results in a win. I seem to be the only one remembering that he still ended up losing the title by 15 points.

[tifosi too! 0]

I doubt that, i have still never seen anything that proves the mass damper had any effect on the car's aerodynamics, which was the ruling it was banned under.

Well if you see the point that renault where about .1s ahead of ferrari on ultimate pace up till canada, and about .4 behind them in Hungary (in the dry), turkey, and monza i think that tells a different story. They only went back ahead when the performance was clawed back (a little bit in Turkey though Alonso owed that one some luck).

@Schumikonen, for about 3 races Renault fell behind McLaren and Ferrari so no, they wern't still a frontronning team IMO. At the start of the season, the tyres where about equal, and Alonso had a slightly better car, it took ferrari a while to find the sweet spot on their chassis. The michelin may have been a touch better, but nothing to the degree of the superiority of the bridgetstone in the second half of the season.

Face it: your golden boy was beaten fair and square, he lost the title, and a comeback is only a comeback when it results in a win. I seem to be the only one remembering that he still ended up losing the title by 15 points.

1-well the FIA experts thought so... But Autumnpuma would agree with you!

2-Exactly when renault weren't frontrunners in 2006??

3-Superiority of Bridgestone?As i said before at the second half they gave each other a run for their money, but i didn't see any Bridgestone superiority.Did anyone else here notice BS ruling the tracks in the second half?

4-MS didn't become 2006 champion ?? Who is it then???????

[Shane2 0]

The FIA experts also penalised alonso for holding up massa, when massa was at minimum 100m behind him, and 400m behind him at most points of the lap, so it shows how smart they are

[tifosi too! 0]

The FIA experts also penalised alonso for holding up massa, when massa was at minimum 100m behind him, and 400m behind him at most points of the lap, so it shows how smart they are

Those were the monza stewards and not the same one's that ruled over the MD.Also I 'm not sure if that penalty was wrong.I don't know the full aerodynamic effect it had on the car behind, even though i know a lot about the subject.I 'm no aerodynamist...