Poll: Robert Kubica

[dribbler 6]

The most important thing to note is this, I am George, British, and know everything (yes, even that, and that, and that as well).

The End.

Fair enough, but would you do anything for love? I would, but i won't do that. Correction; I would but mrs drib won't.

[Piotr 0]

I love you too! Thx for remembering our anniversary!

I'm not convincing him of anything, 'cus I don't want him to like Nick at all. But as far as he criticizes Nick, I'll criticize KubeeTZa.

Actually, I respect Nick a lot. Now that he stopped trying to take Robert out of each race.

[F1_Fanatic 0]

I would love to see him win a race this season. He is a special talent considering the fact that he comes from a country whose citizens until recently could not even spell F1. The problem is that he performs when it is his day. He would end up on the podium on a day and not even score point on another. Heidfeld on the other hand is a regular point scorer. But I would still bank on him because he outperforms Heidfeld when its his day and his performance in contrast to Heidfeld seems to have gotten better without traction control.

[Piotr 0]

I would love to see him win a race this season. He is a special talent considering the fact that he comes from a country whose citizens until recently could not even spell F1. The problem is that he performs when it is his day. He would end up on the podium on a day and not even score point on another. Heidfeld on the other hand is a regular point scorer. But I would still bank on him because he outperforms Heidfeld when its his day and his performance in contrast to Heidfeld seems to have gotten better without traction control.

That's because Robert drives in a very "Polish" style - all or nothing, always try to be the fastest, push the car as much, and more, as possible. Several people here already remarked on it. So, when he is lucky, and the car is 100%, he achieves. But if you push all the time, things go wrong more often, the car breaks, etc. Nick is a workhorse. He does not dazzle, but he is very fast, very skilled, and you can count on him to bring home the bacon, if not the flowers. So, have Kubica pushing to get the win, have Nick driving to score the points. With a better car, Kubica gets more points. With a slower car, Nick will win (like in 2007). Perfect combination for Mario, at least for now.

[Rainmaster 7]

It's OK, I won't tell - you could of cleaned up though.

Fair enough, but would you do anything for love? I would, but i won't do that. Correction; I would but mrs drib won't.

I see your problem, it takes two to tango and she won't come to the dancefloor, might I suggest doing that thing you do, then she'll come around.

That's because Robert drives in a very "Polish" style - all or nothing, always try to be the fastest, push the car as much, and more, as possible. Several people here already remarked on it. So, when he is lucky, and the car is 100%, he achieves. But if you push all the time, things go wrong more often, the car breaks, etc. Nick is a workhorse. He does not dazzle, but he is very fast, very skilled, and you can count on him to bring home the bacon, if not the flowers. So, have Kubica pushing to get the win, have Nick driving to score the points. With a better car, Kubica gets more points. With a slower car, Nick will win (like in 2007). Perfect combination for Mario, at least for now.

Indeed, he even builds the car.

[Kati 0]

Actually, I respect Nick a lot. Now that he stopped trying to take Robert out of each race.

Great, we have a deal. I'll respect KubeeTZa as far as he keeps his nose out of Nick's way.

[Max Mosley 2]

It was bad enough when you two were arguing...

[Medilloni 6]

England didn't have any knowledgeable fans. And many are still biased boneheads just like every other national hero types.

The F1 circus wasn't even on TV until the late 70s. Extensive Cricket, Horse of the Year and Wimbledon type overkill coverage for the privileged few that's what was on BBC from the 50s to the late 70s. It was really the Mansell mania that made F1 popular in Britain in the 80s just like Alonso has don in Spain. Moss, Clark, Hill Sr., Stewart never existed, only with Hunt (and sometimes for the wrong reasons) did the casual brits found out that F1 exists.

Boneheads are everywhere, but your remarks about the coverage of F1 and motorsport in general are wide of the mark DOF. The 'priviledged few' that got the BBC?? in your dreams mate, I was watching f1 on the BBC in the very early 60's - and there's no way my family could be described as anything other than 'working class'.

Moss, Denny Hulme, Jack Brabham and through to Stewart et al were worshipped here. Virtually all GP's were covered, the news and sports progs covering in depth F1 news (as tech would allow then), articles on the 'greats' and the sad times such as Lorenzo Bandini's death. Le Mans was covered throughout the day, Saloons at Chrystal Palace and the fabulous F2 scene with current GP drivers battling against the regulars. And that's just a fraction of what my brain cell has retained.

Some of the above is why our racing scene got to be one the best the soonest - 'cos the exposure was enough to inspire young people to get into the sport. Yeah, sport-wise we've had our sh!t, but not with motorsport.

Sorry DOF, I enjoy most of your posts, but Jaysus, you're wide of the mark on this one.

[DOF_power 0]

F1 only was covered on BBC since 78 with the Montreal GP if I'm not mistaken, and what was on TV before that oftenly were only shown as clips in Grandstand or something like that.

Motorsport coverage was poor to non-existent everywhere, in fact motorsport only started to be an audience bringer in the 1980s (F1 in Europe, Japan, Brazil; NASCAR Cup and CART Indycar in the USA). Whatever was before was darkness, inexistent.

And worshiped by who, those few tens of thousands/hundred thousands that attended the races ?!

Don't make me laugh.

The documentary Champions Forever mentions about 2 million watching GP in the days of Stewart and Cevert. And that's an optimistic figure, most likely the real figures being 1 to 1.5 million.

In most countries there (where F1 is watched today) there was even a single damned race .

[Medilloni 6]

F1 only was covered on BBC since 78 with the Montreal GP if I'm mistaken, and what was on TV before that oftenly were only shown as clips in Grandstand or something like that.

Motorsport coverage was poor to non-existent everywhere, in fact motorsport only started to be an audience bringer in the 1980s (F1 in Europe, Japan, Brazil; NASCAR Cup and CART Indycar in the USA). Whatever was before was darkness.

And worshiped by who, those few tens of thousands/hundred thousands that attended the races ?!

Don't make me laugh.

Motorsport was covered by both chanels, and no you're not mistaken, most of it was recorded and highlights shown - but still enough to give an hours coverage for a GP, and still frequent coverage of them and other events. The fact that it wasn't an audience maker had nothing to do with coverage, the chanels had such p!ss poor methods of measuring it they couldn't give a toss.

And come on, you were talking about coverage, what do you expect from those times? In car footage with the camera man strapped to the car? You're the one that harps on about the 'good old days', I'm surprised - sounds like you weren't around in the early sixties? If so, that explains 'whatever was before was darkness'

Worshipped? Who mentioned that? But still, I'd say it's reasonable to say most sports on the box in those years inspired kids - whatever sport it was - purely because it was in their living rooms on a box instead of the radio.

So, either you witnessed it and we're doing a grumpy old men impression, or you didn't and you're guessing/going from hearsay. Which one is it DOF?

Should this be moved to 'Historic'

Edit: I did! Spot the deliberate mistake...

[Jean Todt 4]

It's OK, I won't tell - you could of cleaned up though.

[DOF_power 0]

Motorsport was covered by both chanels, and no you're not mistaken, most of it was recorded and highlights shown - but still enough to give an hours coverage for a GP, and still frequent coverage of them and other events. The fact that it wasn't an audience maker had nothing to do with coverage, the chanels had such p!ss poor methods of measuring it they couldn't give a toss.

And come on, you were talking about coverage, what do you expect from those times? In car footage with the camera man strapped to the car? You're the one that harps on about the 'good old days', I'm surprised - sounds like you weren't around in the early sixties? If so, that explains 'whatever was before was darkness'

Worshipped? Who mentioned that? But still, I'd say it's reasonable to say most sports on the box in those years inspired kids - whatever sport it was - purely because it was in their living rooms on a box instead of the radio.

So, either you witnessed it and we're doing a grumpy old men impression, or you didn't and you're guessing/going from hearsay. Which one is it DOF?

Should this be moved to 'Historic'

Edit: I did! Spot the deliberate mistake...

I'll repeat again, whatever it was it was darkness.

Motorsport "did not exist" back then.

Highlights does not equal coverage in my book, and nor do some enthusiasts such as yourself make a big audience.

From the first TV transmission in 36 (was it) till the late 70s motorsport/Grand Prix racing struggled with little or no coverage and with little or no ratings, and the 80s really was the big bang.

[Medilloni 6]

I'll repeat again, whatever it was it was darkness.

Motorsport "did not exist" back then.

Highlights does not equal coverage in my book, and nor do some enthusiasts such as yourself make a big audience.

From the first TV transmission in 36 (was it) till the late 70s motorsport/Grand Prix racing struggled with little or no coverage and with little or no ratings, and the 80s really was the big bang.

DOF, you said,

England didn't have any knowledgeable fans.

That's total, unfounded bollocks, and you know it. If that was the case, then how come the knowledgeable fans that we didn't have any of are...

....still biased boneheads just like every other national hero types.

So that's bollocks too. If we didn't have any, how could we then have some that were boneheads?

You also said,

The F1 circus wasn't even on TV until the late 70s

It was, and given the technology available at the time, it was damn good. Your opinion of

Highlights does not equal coverage in my book

is just that, your opinion, it's not a fact. Indeed, we had more coverage of other forms of motorsport until the 70's than we do now - drag racing included.

Yeah, I'd agree with this,

It was really the Mansell mania that made F1 popular in Britain in the 80s just like Alonso has don in Spain

.

...except to say that it seemed more like the kind of following that the Beckams got, so the introduction of the boneheads started around then

But this bit is the main reason why I'm disputing what you've said,

Moss, Clark, Hill Sr., Stewart never existed, only with Hunt (and sometimes for the wrong reasons) did the casual brits found out that F1 exists.

I can only assume that's your opinion too? There were just as many dedicated fans around then as there are now, considering the media exposure the sport got then, and gets now. In fact I'd guess more so, considering that they had to go to race meeitings and visit a paper shop to get their weekly Autosport rather than surf the 'net - for that you had to be keen.

The fan base in the UK for F1 and all things motorsport has been massive since well before the 70's and 80's you mention - very possible in the top 3 in the world - and probably still is. This isn't to knock other countries, or brag, it's just simply that motorsport has been a bigger part of our sporting culture for longer than most other countries without surviving or being spurred on by national heroes for short bursts of time.

I'm not getting on a high horse about this to wind you up DOF, just that this time your opinion is not close to the facts.

So, the darkness. Have you based your opinions on the fact that you were around to witness TV coverage in the UK in the 60's or not?

[DOF_power 0]

That's total, unfounded bollocks, and you know it. If that was the case, then how come the knowledgeable fans that we didn't have any of are...

So that's bollocks too. If we didn't have any, how could we then have some that were boneheads?

Knowledgeable fans are the exception to the rule, as I painfully know.

You also said,

It was, and given the technology available at the time, it was damn good. Your opinion of is just that, your opinion, it's not a fact. Indeed, we had more coverage of other forms of motorsport until the 70's than we do now - drag racing included.

The moment there was TV transmission of the entire race for each and every of all the world championship races, you can say there was TV coverage.

...except to say that it seemed more like the kind of following that the Beckams got, so the introduction of the boneheads started around then

Witch is exactly what brings the big audiences. F1 is big not because of quality of on-track duels, nor driver skill, nor innovation, but because of the drivers personalities and the fans worship/hate relationships.

Motorsport per se barley brings any audience.

But this bit is the main reason why I'm disputing what you've said,

I can only assume that's your opinion too? There were just as many dedicated fans around then as there are now, considering the media exposure the sport got then, and gets now. In fact I'd guess more so, considering that they had to go to race meeitings and visit a paper shop to get their weekly Autosport rather than surf the 'net - for that you had to be keen.

The fan base in the UK for F1 and all things motorsport has been massive since well before the 70's and 80's you mention - very possible in the top 3 in the world - and probably still is. This isn't to knock other countries, or brag, it's just simply that motorsport has been a bigger part of our sporting culture for longer than most other countries without surviving or being spurred on by national heroes for short bursts of time.

I'm not getting on a high horse about this to wind you up DOF, just that this time your opinion is not close to the facts.

So, the darkness. Have you based your opinions on the fact that you were around to witness TV coverage in the UK in the 60's or not?

On the fact that there was little or no coverage.

How the hell could there be anything called "coverage" when it was only in 78 that BBC started to show the full championship Grand Prix races ?!

[Medilloni 6]

1) Knowledgeable fans are the exception to the rule, as I painfully know.

2) The moment there was TV transmission of the entire race for each and every of all the world championship races, you can say there was TV coverage.

3) Witch is exactly what brings the big audiences. F1 is big not because of quality of on-track duels, nor driver skill, nor innovation, but because of the drivers personalities and the fans worship/hate relationships.

Motorsport per se barley brings any audience.

4) On the fact that there was little or no coverage.

How the hell could there be anything called "coverage" when it was only in 78 that BBC started to show the full championship Grand Prix races ?!

1) Sorry DOF, but I'm getting the impression that your idea of a knowledgeable fan is one that agrees with you.

2) Pedantic is the word that springs to mind. So there's no TV coverage in the UK? The adverts mean that "transmission of the entire race for each and every of all the world championship races" is not full coverage by your reckoning?

3) Sorry, that's your opinion again DOF, it's not based on fact is it? By saying this, you're saying that fans aren't watching because of Kimi, Alonso and other top drivers skill and on-track entertainment (which you're inferring ). Whether you like it or not (and it seems obvious you don't) people are watching the drivers, the teams, the politics - the whole shooting match. They are not watching purely because of the car. If you don't agree with that, then run a poll on here.

4) We already did that one.

The one we didn't do, was:

So, the darkness. Have you based your opinions on the fact that you were around to witness TV coverage in the UK in the 60's or not?

I'd still like to know whether you talk from witnessing the 'lack of coverage' (having been around then) or whether it's your opinion. So, what's the answer?

[DOF_power 0]

1] Nope, it's people with little or no knowledge of GP/F1 racing. You know the types that elected Kubica as one of the all time greats, in poll not long ago, but didn't even mentioned Fangio, Clark and Co. because for them those guys didn't even existed.

Here's the "brains" of the fans:

all time F1 greatest

1st: Ayrton Senna,

2nd: Michael Schumacher

3rd: Nelson Piquet

4th: Nigel Mansell

5th tie: Mika Hakkinen and Robert Kubica

7th: Kimi Raikkonen

8th: Alain Prost

That's cause there memories/knowledge only goes back to the 1980s at best (surprise surprise).

As I said it, what was before was darkness, it didn't existed.

Juan Manuel Fangio, Jim Clark, Jack Brabham, Jackie Stewart or Niki Lauda (according to the fans) NEVER EXISTED, I repeat NEVER EXISTED, mark my words.

2] "transmission of the entire race for each and every of all the world championship races" aka F1/GP coverage started in 1978, not before. Capisci !!!

An no motorsport was NOT a hot TV item (or media item for that matter) unless someone got injured and/or killed.

3] Why did Nakajima said there were more people at a pre-season testing in Spain at a GP2 race ?!

What "skill and on-track entertainment" did those 99% Alonso fans see at a damned pre-season testing session ?!

4] ?!

[Max Mosley 2]

I'm not getting on a high horse about this to wind you up DOF

Oh go on, Med. Be a devil.

Anyway it's an amusing argument. DOF tends to be a tad blinkered. Seems to me there was at least partial coverage in England way back in the 60s as Med says. Nevertheless if DOF is trying to argue that Spain is 40 years behind England in F1 knowledge, coverage and popularity, I'd be the last person to disagree.

[DOF_power 0]

It's not restricted to Spain. Poland never knew about F1 till Kubica, Germany wasn't too warmed about F1 till Schumacher (and now audiences have gone down by 23% and people are no longer getting up early to watch the first races without Schuey).

Britain had an oscilation with F1.

[AleHop 0]

I remember some type of coverage when Fittipaldi and Lauda were still driving. And it is funny here in Spain when you see a very fast car driving dangerously people shout: where are you going, Fittipaldi? But first live coverage I remember here was Mansell, Prost, Senna...

[Quiet One 15]

Are we really discussing F1 TV ratings? I mean, who cares if UK people watched races since the stone age or 7 million people watches it compared to a measle 3 persons in Belize (2 of them, because the remote broke up and couldn't switch channels)?

If you are a bigotry fan, you will still being so even after 70 years of drinking F1 car's oil. For the record, my country has a long and illustrious story of both racing and watching motorsports, still being immensely popular here despite the fact that our last F1 driver was Mazzacane (I am aware that "F1 driver" in this case is an overstatement). If we talk about football it would be even worse. After more than a century of football being the main passion of the argentinians, we still act like idiotic fans.

So again, would somebody please explain to me how in Zeus name the time people have watched or the quantity of TV spectators is related to the crap they are capable to utter when discussing a sport?

What a waste of time!

[Max Mosley 2]

It's not restricted to Spain. Poland never knew about F1 till Kubica, Germany wasn't too warmed about F1 till Schumacher (and now audiences have gone down by 23% and people are no longer getting up early to watch the first races without Schuey).

I agree.

What a waste of time!

[DOF_power 0]

I remember some type of coverage when Fittipaldi and Lauda were still driving. And it is funny here in Spain when you see a very fast car driving dangerously people shout: where are you going, Fittipaldi? But first live coverage I remember here was Mansell, Prost, Senna...

The first live coverage F1 race anywhere anytime I belive was the 1960 or 1961 Monaco GP. Monza was (also) televised live in the 60s in Italy. The 1950s GPs were impossible as the 2h max limit came later.

Here's some sample of "TV Coverage" from the good ol' days.

[Medilloni 6]

1] Nope, it's people with little or no knowledge of GP/F1 racing. You know the types that elected Kubica as one of the all time greats, in poll not long ago, but didn't even mentioned Fangio, Clark and Co. because for them those guys didn't even existed.

Here's the "brains" of the fans:

all time F1 greatest

1st: Ayrton Senna,

2nd: Michael Schumacher

3rd: Nelson Piquet

4th: Nigel Mansell

5th tie: Mika Hakkinen and Robert Kubica

7th: Kimi Raikkonen

8th: Alain Prost

That's cause there memories/knowledge only goes back to the 1980s at best (surprise surprise).

As I said it, what was before was darkness, it didn't existed.

Juan Manuel Fangio, Jim Clark, Jack Brabham, Jackie Stewart or Niki Lauda (according to the fans) NEVER EXISTED, I repeat NEVER EXISTED, mark my words.

2] "transmission of the entire race for each and every of all the world championship races" aka F1/GP coverage started in 1978, not before. Capisci !!!

An no motorsport was NOT a hot TV item (or media item for that matter) unless someone got injured and/or killed.

3] Why did Nakajima said there were more people at a pre-season testing in Spain at a GP2 race ?!

What "skill and on-track entertainment" did those 99% Alonso fans see at a damned pre-season testing session ?!

4] ?!

Fine. All of the above is more bollocks that doesn't prove or back up your points, again, it's just your opinion and the way you see things. I'll ignore the deviations above and ask again, one last time,

So, the darkness. Have you based your opinions on the fact that you were around to witness TV coverage in the UK in the 60's or not?

If you don't answer it straight, I'll know you live by the info you find on the 'net.

Edit: And on why fans watch F1, why don't you start the thread that questions why they do? I'll show my arse in Burton's window if you're not proved horrifyingly wrong. I double dog dare you

[Null 0]

1) - pre season testing costs MUCH less than going to a GP. For people like me (aka students who don't enjoy parting with their money), testing is the only option which won't drain a significant proportion of your bank account.

[Null 0]

Anyway DOF - if you hate current F1 so much (which you evidently do, even if you are reluctant to admit it), then just stop watching it, simple as. Go and watch your F1 history videos and enjoy how wonderful they are, before technological progression "ruined" it all. And stop moaning about "bad this, bad that", "ooh it was better in my day" because, to be frank, it makes you come across as a grumpy, argumentative old man. Yes, it MAY have been better - but today is not 30 years ago - today is today. Today will NEVER be 30 years ago. 30 years ago is what shaped the "horrors" of today! So LET GO and ACCEPT you'll never get your precious history back!