Ayrton would not have won anything in today's F1!

[kfzmeister]

Can you believe Piquet Jr? :eek:

Senna not good enough for today's F1 - Piquet Jr | News | Motorsport.com (http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/senna-not-good-enough-for-today-s-f1-piquet-jr/)

[CaptainRaiden]

Another gem from Junior is circulating around:

Piquet Jr: Timing good for Grosjean | Planet F1 | Formula One | News, Standings, Results, Features, Video (http://www.planet-f1.com/driver/18227/8005822/Piquet-Jr-Timing-good-for-Grosjean)


Nelson Piquet Jr has downplayed Romain Grosjean's achievements this season, saying "there is no phenomenon", there's just "luck".

Piquet Jr was dropped by Renault midway through the 2009 season after which the allegations of crashgate - the 2008 Singapore GP - came to light.

Replaced by Grosjean, the Frenchman did not have a good time at Renault and was dropped only to return into 2011, this time under the guidance of Eric Boullier.

Grosjean's second stint at the team, now known as Lotus, has been a lot more successful as he already has three podium finishes to his name.

However, Piquet Jr reckons Grosjean's success is thanks to the car and if former team-mate Fernando Alonso was driving the E20 Lotus would be leading the Championship.

"Had Alonso been there he would be winning the Championship with that car," Piquet Jr told TotalRace.

"Sure he (Grosjean) has improved a lot but there is no phenomenon. Nothing compared to Alonso.

"He is luck is that after F1 he got another season in GP2, found a sponsor and returned to F1 as a paying driver, right?

"Then things were, how do you say, right in his career. Timing was very good for him."

He added: "He's had a lot of luck, came at a time with a team-mate who is a little weak and a very good car."


One out of three things have happened:

1. Nelsinho is smoking some really good stuff.

2. The "crash" at Singapore and the subsequent send-off from F1 made him lose his marbles.

3. Helmut Marko has taken junior under his wing.

[heliocastroneves#3]

Piquet is doing a good job in NASCAR but is still not happy with the fact that he never got a fair chance in F1 because he had Alonso as his teammate and Flavio Briatore as his teamboss. I don't think a lot of rookies do like that tbh.

[Rollo]

Ayrton won Grands Prix for Lotus in cars which were usually unreliable and I think would have won the 1984 Monaco Grand Prix had it gone to completion.

Piquet's comments show that he knows nothing of history. Maybe he'd do better playing his PS-Wii-Box

[kfzmeister]

Now he's sorta explaining his comments. Anybody shed some light on whether he has a point here?
http://www.auto123.com/en/racing-news/f1-nelson-piquet-jr-clarifies-his-comments-about-ayrton-senna?artid=146888&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=racing

[Bruce D]

Well in a way his explanation makes sense. I do remember that Senna was good at engine development while Prost was better at chassis development, which is why they were such a super team at McLaren. And Senna was always running off to Brazil rather than doing winter testing. I remember in 1991 Gerhard Berger got very annoyed because he spent the whole winter testing the new Honda V12 engine, Senna arrived in Phoenix for the first race, said the engine wasn't good and then promptly won the race.

Senna would always have been a front runner in any car, although in this modern era it's doubtful how far he could have taken say a Marussia up from where it is. But as far as developing stuff is concerned I think Piquet Jr has a point here. But then again in the modern era how much development work do the current drivers do when compared to what was happening in the 70s and 80s?

[00steven]

Very ignorant statement. One, I would say, Piquet Jr. isn't even qualified to make.

[The Black Knight]

Another gem from Junior is circulating around:

Piquet Jr: Timing good for Grosjean | Planet F1 | Formula One | News, Standings, Results, Features, Video (http://www.planet-f1.com/driver/18227/8005822/Piquet-Jr-Timing-good-for-Grosjean)




One out of three things have happened:

1. Nelsinho is smoking some really good stuff.

2. The "crash" at Singapore and the subsequent send-off from F1 made him lose his marbles.

3. Helmut Marko has taken junior under his wing.

I pretty much agree with him about Grosjean and I do feel that Kimi is a bit weak and overrated.

However, I can't agree with him regards Ayrton. Pure speculation and nothing to back up his assertions. Ayrton was a great driver, far better than Nelsinho will ever be, so if he couldn't expected to win, Nelly definitely wouldn't.

[wedge]

Piquet Jr talking out of his backside as usual.

A despite winning in NASCAR's lower echelons he is a driver I hate to see succeed.


Well in a way his explanation makes sense. I do remember that Senna was good at engine development while Prost was better at chassis development, which is why they were such a super team at McLaren. And Senna was always running off to Brazil rather than doing winter testing.

Senna had Honda in his back pocket and it enabled him to have Ron Dennis under his thumb.

Pretty much why Prost left McLaren.

The reason why Senna had Honda in his back pocket was the work he did at Lotus. Not just the Honda engines. Lotus pioneered active suspension. Senna warmed to the technology whereas say Mansell wanted nothing to do with it. Can't remember which year but there was a Lotus with a clever ride height system.


Senna would always have been a front runner in any car, although in this modern era it's doubtful how far he could have taken say a Marussia up from where it is

There is only so much a great driver can do from polishing a turd. For instance Alonso got his Minardi regularly qualified on the penultimate row so I think Senna would have probably got third row from back. In a Caterham I think he would be fighting for points finish just as a Toleman in lesser hands would have been fighting for top 10 whereas Senna exceeded in getting points finish.


I pretty much agree with him about Grosjean and I do feel that Kimi is a bit weak and overrated.

Grosjean better in quali but Kimi is better racer. On balance I'd go for Kimi as he makes huge gains in races even though Grosjean is shedding his reputation as a lairy racer.

Kimi has better racecraft.

For instance in Hungary Grosjean took to much out of his tyre earlier in the stints but then had to switch to Kimi's tactics at conserving tyres and then attacking at the latter end of the stint. But by doing this Grosjean's final stint had no pace whatsoever whereas Kimi was blatantly the quicker car.

The other thing is Kimi is getting better with age adapting to this F1 malarkey. He should have won in Bahrain had he had more confidence but in Hungary he banged wheels with his own team mate.

[Jag_Warrior]

"Someone like Senna would not have won anything in F1 today," he (Piquet, Jr.) is quoted by Terra.

"He was very fast but he had no talent in terms of the technical and mechanical."

Yes, The Crashgate Kid is entitled to his (baseless) opinion. But considering that Piquet, Jr. does not have an engineering degree and Shigeru Uehara (chief NSX engineer at Honda in the early 90's) offers a completely opposite opinion, Piquet's words strike me as akin to Paris Hilton offering her opinion on the Higgs Boson particle. The reason the NSX wound up with a stiffer chassis than it originally had was because of Ayrton Senna's technical and mechanical input, according to Uehara. And from various accounts that I have read, it was the close relationship that Senna formed with the engineers (and other team members) that contributed to him being embraced and Prost being frozen out at McLaren.

Just drive your stock car/truck and try not to screw this one up, Nelson. Just accept your plight. No need to be bitter because you torpedoed your own career by lacking moral and ethical fiber.

[Malbec]

Ayrton won Grands Prix for Lotus in cars which were usually unreliable and I think would have won the 1984 Monaco Grand Prix had it gone to completion.

Would he though? Bellof was catching the pair of them at a stonking rate.

Would Senna have been as strong now? Not sure. Most of his championships were won with as dominant a combination as Schumacher had at Ferrari, no single team is as strong anymore. Also while Senna moved the game on in terms of professionalism and fitness today his level of fitness and dedication is seen as the norm.

Unlike Nelsinho I wouldn't have thought Senna's technical expertise was his weakness, at the time it was one of his strengths. However again today with the level of electronic monitoring and telemetry I don't think this expertise would give him the degree of advantage it used to. Sutil used to be mocked for his rather poor technical expertise and feedback, didn't stop him from being damned quick in an FI.

[tmx]

Looks like it was craps made up the journalist, much ado about nothing. I never go to motorsport.com and now I know to not go there.

[Malbec]

The reason why Senna had Honda in his back pocket was the work he did at Lotus. Not just the Honda engines. Lotus pioneered active suspension. Senna warmed to the technology whereas say Mansell wanted nothing to do with it. Can't remember which year but there was a Lotus with a clever ride height system.

I think the reasons for the Senna/Honda/Japan three way lovefest are more complex than that.

Firstly Senna made it clear that he was racing for Honda as much as the team he was signed up to at the time and he made a big effort to engage with the Japanese media. Then there was his personality that the Japanese deeply admired, aggressive to the extreme on track yet quiet, thoughtful and almost humble off it. Also he's Brazilian, a country the Japanese feel a deep affinity with. Ultimately few if any drivers have been taken to heart as much by Honda or the Japanese in general as he was to the extent that no Japanese driver has ever been close to equalling him in terms of popularity and that fanatical levels of support for him there probably equalled that in Brazil.

How much of this was him being political and wanting the best engine maker of the period as an ally and how much was down to genuine chemistry I don't know.

[Big Ben]

Nelson is entitled to share his opinion on Senna or Fittipaldi... and we are entitled to laugh at him.

[wedge]

Would Senna have been as strong now? Not sure. Most of his championships were won with as dominant a combination as Schumacher had at Ferrari, no single team is as strong anymore. Also while Senna moved the game on in terms of professionalism and fitness today his level of fitness and dedication is seen as the norm.

You could say the say the same for most other WDCs. Champions had the best car at some point during the season. It's the ability to consistently maximise the car when you don't have a race winning car.

But yes, the competition between teams is much closer.


How much of this was him being political and wanting the best engine maker of the period as an ally and how much was down to genuine chemistry I don't know.

A combination.

Even at Toleman he was adept at politics such as wanting better tyres and signing up with

I think he knew he could get away at playing the spoilt brat even up to 1993 he managed to get $1million race fees yet Ron Dennis wanted nothing to do with him.

[Rollo]

Would Senna have been as strong now? Not sure. Most of his championships were won with as dominant a combination as Schumacher had at Ferrari, no single team is as strong anymore. Also while Senna moved the game on in terms of professionalism and fitness today his level of fitness and dedication is seen as the norm.

Unlike Nelsinho I wouldn't have thought Senna's technical expertise was his weakness, at the time it was one of his strengths. However again today with the level of electronic monitoring and telemetry I don't think this expertise would give him the degree of advantage it used to. Sutil used to be mocked for his rather poor technical expertise and feedback, didn't stop him from being damned quick in an FI.

Yes but had Senna been around today, he would have been shaped by the same forces as other drivers today.
The Senna born in 1960 would be a different Senna to one born in 1987. To that end, Senna's contemporary would have been Vettel.

The sheer and utter ruthlessness that 60 Senna showed would have been identical to an 87 Senna. Conditions are vastly different, but I still suspect that our hypothetical Senna would have been in a top team (probably in Massa's or Webber's seat) and been winning GPs anyway.

Senna did make a Toleman score fastest laps and did win grands prix in the Lotus. Piquet Jr. did neither the Renault, even though Alonso proved that the car was capable of winning grands prix.


Would he though? Bellof was catching the pair of them at a stonking rate.

Bellof would have had to have passed both of them. That's a tall very order indeed.

[Bruce D]

The reason why Senna had Honda in his back pocket was the work he did at Lotus. Not just the Honda engines. Lotus pioneered active suspension. Senna warmed to the technology whereas say Mansell wanted nothing to do with it. Can't remember which year but there was a Lotus with a clever ride height system.


Funny I've just finished reading the 1987 Autocourse annual (got 86-89 on a mega bargain recently) and he states that he left Lotus because he wasn't happy with the progress of the active suspension system. They dropped it in 1988 too.

[The Black Knight]

Yes but had Senna been around today, he would have been shaped by the same forces as other drivers today.
The Senna born in 1960 would be a different Senna to one born in 1987. To that end, Senna's contemporary would have been Vettel.

The sheer and utter ruthlessness that 60 Senna showed would have been identical to an 87 Senna. Conditions are vastly different, but I still suspect that our hypothetical Senna would have been in a top team (probably in Massa's or Webber's seat) and been winning GPs anyway.

Senna did make a Toleman score fastest laps and did win grands prix in the Lotus. Piquet Jr. did neither the Renault, even though Alonso proved that the car was capable of winning grands prix.



Bellof would have had to have passed both of them. That's a tall very order indeed.

Yep, people always go on about Senna in that race but Bellof was faster than both of them and another amazing talent who life was cut too short. Senna was the kind of driver that would have been in a top team no matter what and, in my opinion, he would have kicked Vettel's ass.

[kfzmeister]

..he would have kicked Vettel's ass. Vettel who?

[Knock-on]

Jr is a disgrace and a twat. End of story.

[CNR]

*/it must be asked/*

*/if now only 8 or so cars finished the race would he be in the 8 ?/*
*/1985 Best 11 results only counted towards the championship untill 1990/*

4 years for first win ?
Honda the best at that time Williams-Honda (http://www.motorsportforums.com/results/team/1987/2183.html) won the year before
*/time to take off the rose colored glasses/*

Best 11 results only counted towards the championship ?

webber wins 2010
Vettel
5 wins 25 points 125
2 2nds 18 points 36
3 3rds 15 points 15
1 4th 12 points 12
Vettel 188 points
Alonso
5 wins 25 points 125
2 2nds 18 points 36
3 3rds 15 points 15
1 4th 12 points 12
Alonso 188 points
Webber
4 wins 25 points 100
4 2nds 18 points 72
2 3rds 15 points 30
1 5th 10 points 10

[wedge]

he would have kicked Vettel's ass.

He would have told him where to shove his finger.

Actually, I think he would have made him do it...

"Who's the daddy? Say my name, biyatch!"

[tfp]

Jr is a disgrace and a twat. End of story.

:laugh:


He would have told him where to shove his finger.

Actually, I think he would have made him do it...

"Who's the daddy? Say my name, biyatch!"

:rotflmao:

Love this thread :D

[TheFamousEccles]

why is this even a topic? A nobody shooting his mouth off about a dead guy? The mid-season break is taking it's toll, seems there is nothing left to talk about.

[Garry Walker]

Senna's **** was worth more than Piquet will ever be. I don't think this deserves any additional comments.

[F1boat]

For once, I agree with Garry.

[Jag_Warrior]

For once, I agree with Garry.

My sentiments as well. :)

[Mekola]

At the moment, I'm following more the "battle" between the progression of Bruno Senna against the F1 landmarks of Nelsinho rather than the unethical question about the abilities of Ayrton to be or not in nowadays F1. Last race Bruno scored the fastest lap in an F1 GP, thing that Nelsinho never did in his short F1 career.