Saint Devote
15th November 2009, 03:35
An interesting question is how do teams decide who their second driver ought to be. If a team has a star driver such as in the case of Mclaren where Hamilton, given even the sniff of a quick car will make the car work. Problem is that he has a tendency to throw it into the scenery at crucial times such as Monte Carlo and Monza in 2009.
Mika Hakkinen questioned why Woking would rid themselves of Kovaleinen because while his races are generally average, he is a good development driver, is a hard working team member and works well with Lewis. Maybe its because he is usually not in a position to back Lewis up?
Hamilton as we have seen is not phased by whoever his teammate is so Raikkonen would be no problem – but Kimi is not the sort to develop the car while Lewis races ahead to win.
Therefore is it wise for Mclaren to end his contract?
A car designed these days is dominated by the control tire situation and the car will turn out to have a tendency towards either understeer or oversteer.
For me the ideal situation is what Williams have for 2010 and I would have thought that Mclaren, if they had gotten rid of Kovaleinen would have tried to sign Hulkenberg – his racing pedigree is as good as Hamilton’s. Barrichello adapts well and Nico H is expected to do well.
Maybe that is what Ferrari were thinking when the hired Alonso and retained Massa. Question is will Massa accept that – there is potential for rebellion at Ferrari.
Another good pairing will be Button and Rosberg at Brawn. Both are experienced and Rosberg can handle oversteer and adapt where Jenson cannot should that situation arise again. Here’s athought – no driver that has left Williams has ever won in f1 in another team. Rosberg to be the first?
Thoughts in this matter which involves a team's strategy, their number one driver, budget and car's design tendency?
Mika Hakkinen questioned why Woking would rid themselves of Kovaleinen because while his races are generally average, he is a good development driver, is a hard working team member and works well with Lewis. Maybe its because he is usually not in a position to back Lewis up?
Hamilton as we have seen is not phased by whoever his teammate is so Raikkonen would be no problem – but Kimi is not the sort to develop the car while Lewis races ahead to win.
Therefore is it wise for Mclaren to end his contract?
A car designed these days is dominated by the control tire situation and the car will turn out to have a tendency towards either understeer or oversteer.
For me the ideal situation is what Williams have for 2010 and I would have thought that Mclaren, if they had gotten rid of Kovaleinen would have tried to sign Hulkenberg – his racing pedigree is as good as Hamilton’s. Barrichello adapts well and Nico H is expected to do well.
Maybe that is what Ferrari were thinking when the hired Alonso and retained Massa. Question is will Massa accept that – there is potential for rebellion at Ferrari.
Another good pairing will be Button and Rosberg at Brawn. Both are experienced and Rosberg can handle oversteer and adapt where Jenson cannot should that situation arise again. Here’s athought – no driver that has left Williams has ever won in f1 in another team. Rosberg to be the first?
Thoughts in this matter which involves a team's strategy, their number one driver, budget and car's design tendency?