Webber Sounding foolish [Archive]

truefan72

5th July 2007, 07:23

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/6268494.stm
see the above linked article.

He thinks that Hamilton's success is because of the tyres and that others had to adapt to the new bridgestones whereas he comes in as a novice ...or rather "naive" avvording to him.

For a driver who has accomplished fairly little in F1 he seems to be a bit full fo himslef. This isn't the first time I have noticed Webber's smmugness towards other drivers, courses or the press, but thist time it seems stupid. LH has achieved more in his first 8 races than Webber in his entire career, instead of giving him the proper kudo's he resorts to such useless statements. I can see a little resentment for LH's spectacular ascention to the top of the series, but those comments reak of downright jelousy and lack of respect.

I bet you anything that if the two of them where driving the same car, LH would still outclass webber under any condition.

I remember seeing Webber's extensive interviews at Indy and he always came off as exceptionally arrogand and smug.

ALL THE DRIVERS ARE NEW TO THE BRIDGESTONES WEBBER!

If anything, the rookies would have more trouble adapting to all the complexities of the F1 car. The tyres are like 5% of the equation of what makes a driver competitive, probably less ,especially now that everyone's on the same manufacturer.

Webber should just drive and keep his asinine comments to himself.

ArrowsFA1

5th July 2007, 08:41

Webber is not alone in commenting on how different the 2007 Bridgestones are, particularly for those drivers who were on Michelins last year, and it's clearly taking them time to adapt. Rookies don't need to adapt because they don't know anything different.

Tyres are a cruicial part of performance, both for driver and car, and I wouldn't dismiss Webber's comments.

XR8

5th July 2007, 10:24

True fan, I fail to see in this interview how weber is full of himself as he says that he is not understating hamiltons ability, just saying all the drivers that were used to the old tyres are taking a while to adapt. It appears that you are only reading every second word or are you just dead against weber for his acheivments.

AJP

5th July 2007, 11:20

Big Ben

5th July 2007, 11:57

I've came to the conclusion that MW is a bitter man... So let him say whatever he wants... Who gives a $h1t?

Gibbsy

5th July 2007, 12:01

Truefan = PSfan = still a twit.

taffy

5th July 2007, 12:19

what are webbers achievments?? a couple of fluked points in a Minardi at his home GP, because the rest of the field broke down or crashed out. Failure at Jaguar, same at Williams and not really doing the job at Red Bull.. Seems to me a case of sour grapes... Lewis has scored more points in his first half season in F1 than webber in the whole of his F1 career.. Wow.. what an achievment.

truefan72

5th July 2007, 13:33

I'm glad a few people are seeing it my way. I was fully expoecting the wrath of the Aussie contigent, but I call a spade a spade. Personally, I had always wished him well but after beinmg up close to him last year at a few races and this year at Indie, he has indeed come across as slightly snobbish in his attitude as an F1 race car driver.

As to the tyre issue, this is bty no means a significant factor in 2007 performance, infact the cars/drivers are all performing much faster this year than 2006.

1. Hamilton and other rookies had to adjust to the new tires as well, they are new to them too. They did drive F1 type cars the previous year and therefore equally had to adapt to the new tires.

2. It is a real cop-out and a slight to LH's ability to use that excuse.

3. I do beleive that if Webber wants to go dowen the road of having to make adjustments, then LH has had to adjust to a completely new car and all it's components vs Webber having to adjust to the tyres only.

It is not a given that he will always have a race seat, but he sure acts that way. I wish him continued success but also see fit to call him out when he makes foolhardy statements. gotta keep 'em honest.

Gibbsy

5th July 2007, 14:54

It is not a given that he will always have a race seat, but he sure acts that way. I wish him continued success but also see fit to call him out when he makes foolhardy statements. gotta keep 'em honest.

Well truefan, im sure that Mark Webber is just so grateful that you have seen fit, in your incredible wisdom, to appoint yourself the guardian of his honesty.

Well done. Id give you a pat on the back but i think you have already done so.

Time to get a life perhaps?

Gibbsy

5th July 2007, 14:57

Oh man, i just realised that this thread is titled "webber sounding foolish", started by a guy who considers himself the guardian of driver honesty.

The irony is so thick i could slice it with a cricket stump.

markabilly

5th July 2007, 15:08

O well, I would not dismiss webber's ability--in this day the car and especially how the car is set up according to the style of the driver, makes or breaks the very best.

Michael did not win 7 DCs because he was fastest, he won because he was the true team principal at Ferrari and could set up the car to his likng and to give him the best tool possible. That set-up ability is what made him great.

Now some drivers got it, but most rely on their engineers and resulting lap times to get the best of their car.

Put Scott Speed, Mark Webber, Ralfie, (or FA!!!!) in Hamie's car and set up the car to run to their style and work solely on that (and give Hamilton a taste of tranny problems and little glitches), and my money says that one of them is leading the WC by now instead of Hamie

markabilly

5th July 2007, 15:12

And put Hamie in a minardi or red bull or even a Honda (sigh!), and my money says that we all still be wondering whatever made anyone think that this Hamie guy could drive in Formula One, and after a couple of years, just maybe he finally scores a point, if he has super-talent and excellent luck

millencolin

5th July 2007, 15:21

i'm so tempted to correct so many people statements made here, but im not going too, im going to take a chill pill and relax. but let me say this...

Hamilton... debuted in f1 in the best car on the grid

So i dont see it fit to compare Hamilton to Webber when their cars are lightyears apart.

As for what Webber said, thats not foolish, its fact as many other drivers have been saying that.

Ok im going to step back now....

millencolin

5th July 2007, 15:25

but I call a spade a spade.

Really? I call it a shovel... :p :

i'm so tempted to correct so many people statements made here, but im not going too, im going to take a chill pill and relax. but let me say this...

Hamilton... debuted in f1 in the best car on the grid

So i dont see it fit to compare Hamilton to Webber when their cars are lightyears apart.

As for what Webber said about the tyre situation, thats not foolish, its fact as many other drivers have been saying that.

Ok im going to step back now....

wedge

5th July 2007, 15:27

I think the 'adjusting to the BS tyres' problem is an easy answer to a much complex problem - namely the whole package of the car, driver and tyres.

Good examples being that Kimi has asked for a more 'pointy' Ferrari and Kubica having to drive this year's BMW with smoother steering inputs.

hugh_lee

5th July 2007, 16:27

why are we talking about webber anyway? surely, this season hasn't been boring

ioan

5th July 2007, 17:00

Rookies don't need to adapt because they don't know anything different.

:eek: What a big load of bull$hit you are talking there! Did you read what you wrote??? :rolleyes:

Roamy

5th July 2007, 17:08

markabilly

5th July 2007, 18:49

Webber has always been a NO-Show since his arrival. Kinda like luizzi and those drivers. He will be history soon - a year or two. Looks like Hamilton will be around for a very long time!! feeding fumes to Webber while he is there.

put your buddie hamie in a red bull, and hamie would be toast!!!! This is all about cars and especially set-up

take away a set up that the driver likes, and he might as well be in a minardi

And it don't take much of a change. One change almost completely unnoticed by the driver is enough, little more tire pressure, a little less pressure, an earlier pit stop, re-arrange ballast, or just a different power curve/map programmed into the engine that suits one but not the other....

oh but it is the same car......NOT :eek:

Hazell B

5th July 2007, 19:15

put your buddie hamie in a red bull, and hamie would be toast!!!! This is all about cars and especially set-up

Who is this 'hamie' you speak of?
That's probably the laziest and worst nicname I've ever heard :rolleyes:

All the other drivers have chance to set up their vehicles, not just Hamilton. All the other drivers, including Webber as the thread's about him, could have been offered a job in a better team - if they'd been seen as good enough of course ;) There's a reason Webber isn't in a better car and Hamilton's not in a heap of bolts ....

I don't think Webber meant any slight to Hamilton's ability or season so far, it just came over that way. He has a habit of sounding like a moaner.

Dave B

5th July 2007, 19:16

Webber was at pains to add that he was not diminishing Hamilton's achievements, which include finishing on the podium in all eight of his races and building up a 14-point world championship lead.

"Lewis has unquestionably a huge amount of talent and he has an amazing career ahead of him," Webber said.

Hardly the words of a bitter man. It's a bit of a non-story, a soundbite blown out of proportion.

truefan72

5th July 2007, 20:17

As I said and expected, The Aussie's (especially Gibby) will defend Webber no matter what. The fact that Hamilton drives a McClaren while Webber's in a Red Bull has no bearing on the statements he made.
1. He commented on the Tyres and sited Alonso as an example. The same Alonso who has won twice and finished other times on the podium and lies second in the championship. He also mentioned Raikkonen who has won twice and lies fourth in The championship. And then of course...he includes himself in that discussion
2. The issue of being a rookie and not knowing any better is so fatally flawed that it really isn't worth a serious discussion. I guess in Webber's mind, rookies are always going to do better than experienced F1 drivers becuase they are completely naiive to everything LOL!
3.Webber then claims that he is not knocking LH's performance, but essentially he is. A potent cocktail of Jealousy and Bitterness.
4. IF WE ARE GOING TO GO DOWN THE ROAD OF LH DRIVING FOR MCCLAREN AS A FACTOR, then yes, the McClaren is a much better car than the Red Bull. But that doesn't guarantee success. Can you honestly say that PDLR would be leading the championship after 8 races? Just sticking anyone in a good race seat by no means guarantees great results. You can go back to any of the top teams over the years and name me how many of them produced 2 great drivers. Few indeed.
5. This is the same Webber who passed up Renault, who left Williams, and from what I know, passed up BMW Sauber. Who can't stay long enough in one place to develop with the car. Who always seems to be chasing assumed greener pastures. Who's shortsightedness and lack of perceverance has basically relagated him to a Journeyman B-level driver.
Rooting for your favorite driver is one thing, but blindly following/defending him to the brinks of foolishness is living in denial. At least you show more loyalty than Webber ever did to any particular team. Very soon he shall blame you the fans for not showing him enough support as another reason for his lack of success.

Jimmy Magnusson

5th July 2007, 21:32

Listening to the interview included in the article, he didn't exactly sound "foolish". Simply said that the guys that had experience with the old tyres have had to change, while Hamilton have not had to do that. He also points out that Hamilton has "a huge amount of talent and he has an amazing career ahead of him". Perhaps all F1 drivers should simply be quiet from now on, as everything they say is either a) over-analyzed, b) misinterpritated or c) made a big fuzz about.

Marbles

5th July 2007, 22:29

So the guy with years of F1 experience who has driven on tens of different tyre compounds builds during his career is at a disadvantage to a guy who has no experience?

Go on... get outta here.

truefan72

6th July 2007, 02:43

So the guy with years of F1 experience who has driven on tens of different tyre compounds builds during his career is at a disadvantage to a guy who has no experience?

Go on... get outta here.

LOL well said :)

markabilly

6th July 2007, 03:30

No he is at a disadvantage because he drives for an inferior team with engineers who do not know how to set up a car.

AND for those british dumb dumbs who think Hamie boy is setting up his own car ala Schmui, DUH DUH DUH

experience got nothing to do with it--pure luck and being Ron's boy is what it is all about

if left on their own, hamie would look worse in Red Bull than Luizzie and Speed-----------it is all about making the best car and giving the driver the best set up for him. If that don't happen the rest is BS.

Ron wants his boy to win because he is his boy AND afterall, when was the last time a Brit (or atleast he calls himself such) won a WDC?

When has a rookie last won?

Who would be better for Ronnie to have win? a grateful home grown boy or that already two timer Spaniard FA?

You be real stupid if you think ron dennis is going to let that opportunity of Hamie winning pass by--Hey more glory for big mac laren

So look for more loose wires in FA's tranny, so more early pit stops when for FA when FA has more fuel for more laps

Ranger

6th July 2007, 05:02

Sounds like another comment that was lost in translation - man those are coming in flocks lately.

You people are taking a slice of what Webber has said and basing your bashing on that when he has clearly reasoned that quote and clarified his point of view.

I agree with Dave Brockman 100% here.

Blackburn Buccaneer

6th July 2007, 05:34

i can't read webber's mind and i will take his words at face value. In hamilton's case, if he was doing poorly, it seems some would have said, see he's not good enough for the seat: he's doing well, and some say, it's not him it's the car/team/teammate...

I've been away from this too long: i'm gonna sit back and enjoy the total f1 scene as much as possible.
Personally, i enjoy the way hamilton sometimes throws that car around, and enjoyed kubica's drive after his accident.
F1 is still fun to watch.

truefan72

6th July 2007, 06:08

Blackburn Buccaneer

6th July 2007, 06:33

You have made those comments in other threads and it's getting a bit tired.
saying the same thing over and over doesn't make it more legitimate. I suspect you flat out don't like Hamilton, otherwhise you won't keep referring to him as Hamie boy which IMO carries some disturbing undertones

truefan72, me thinks you're facing what I'ld refer to as "invincible ignorance' good luck.

Cozzie

6th July 2007, 06:39

I won't defend him. Webber sounding foolish? Webber is foolish.

wmcot

6th July 2007, 06:43

Wow! There is more controversy in this thread than in Webber's comments.

I do find it hard to believe that many drivers (not just Webber) are having such difficulty adjusting to the Bridgestones when they have been racing for years in different classes and many different tires?

I wouldn't trivialize Hamilton's success by saying that he has no problems with the tires because he doesn't know any better! While the other drivers were doing thousands of testing miles to adjust to the tires, Hamilton had to learn the entire car, tires and all!

I'm not a true Hamilton fan as I've always followed Ferrari, but even I am willing to give credit to a remarkable talent in a rival team!

leopard

6th July 2007, 07:55

I do find it hard to believe that many drivers (not just Webber) are having such difficulty adjusting to the Bridgestones when they have been racing for years in different classes and many different tires?

Didn't williams last year also use the Bridgestone?

He might have problem driving the redbull the more proper addressee than the tire issue :confused:

Gibbsy

6th July 2007, 08:21

As I said and expected, The Aussie's (especially Gibby) will defend Webber no matter what. .

Reading comprehension not a strong point truefan?

Mark Webber is a millionaire sportsman at the very top rung of his sport. He needs me to defend him about as much as he needs you to keep him honest.

I did not defend him.

I attacked you.

leopard

6th July 2007, 08:25

Afaik, Usually Webber says about something objectively, He didn't mind to admit that Alonso was still the man to beat (long before he is teammated with Hamilton).

He might want to say (admit) that Brother Lewis has a fast self adjustment while mostly drivers, including him, have to struggle a bit before they gain the right comfortable rhythm on the new car and the new tires.

pino

6th July 2007, 08:42

Please quit personal attacks/comments...thanks :)

Blackburn Buccaneer

6th July 2007, 09:03

i think all of these drivers, webber included, are doing the best they can at the moment. I wish we could see all of them more often during the races. Some drivers are stronger in different areas. Some cars are stronger in different areas.
A team must play to its strength, and try to maximize its opponent's weaknesses. In any event, it would be more interesting, if we could see how they ALL go about winning.
a little more direct evidence.

VkmSpouge

6th July 2007, 11:03

While I think Mark Webber would have had a point with this comment towards the beginning of the season everyone has had 8 race weekends and countless miles in testing to get used to the new rubber, so any advantage a rookie would have had due to their ignorance of previous seasons' Bridgestones has long since disappeared.

And put Hamie in a minardi

And he would be in Champ Cars or GP2 :p :

jens

6th July 2007, 18:52

The tyres that Hamilton was racing last year, were slicks and a lot more different from current F1 tyres than those that more experienced F1 drivers had to drive with last year. So I simply can't find any advantage for Hamilton. A rookie is always with a disadvantage - everything is new to him and he has a lot to learn. But Lewis seems to be a quick learner, which maybe annoyes some other drivers (omg, how can I explain that a rookie is already better than me - it can't be possible!)? ??

jso1985

6th July 2007, 20:20

I think Webber forgets one important fact:

It's harder to adapt to something totally new than to something that has changed!

markabilly

6th July 2007, 21:49

I think Webber forgets one important fact:

It's harder to adapt to something totally new than to something that has changed!

No, more like old habits are hard to break--he does have a point. Put hamie in a red bull and watch him struggle--my guess is on a good day like once or twice a season, :rolleyes: he might out Q webber or dc, but never both at the same time--

forget thos days when it was possible to demonstrate great talent with an average car..........it ain't talent no more....if you want to see driving talent make a big difference lokk to motogp (although with motogp traction control, those days are less and less as well)

Hazell B

6th July 2007, 21:49

.... it is all about making the best car and giving the driver the best set up for him. If that don't happen the rest is BS.

Ron wants his boy to win ....

You be real stupid if you think ron dennis is going to let that opportunity of Hamie winning pass by....

Isn't it the case for every team and all the drivers? :confused:

Here's silly me thinking all the cars were there to race. I don't know only Hamilton was allowed to go full pelt and everyone else has only a part-time crew of idiots to help them :p :

Anyway, back in the real world, as I already said Webber wasn't being moody far as I read it. A little irritated at his lack of pace and seeking out excuses, but not nasty. Next year, once he's gotten a handle on those pesky tyres, he'll be back in the WDC running again as always :mark:

AJP

9th July 2007, 13:06

Ranger

9th July 2007, 13:11

truefan72

9th July 2007, 17:31

Because he said something on a different day, doesn't negate what he says before or after that. That article is just that; his comments on that particular day. It isn't a legal precedent whereby absolving all his previous or future statements.
If he says something foolish I will point it out. If he then goes on a few weeks later to amend his earlier statements and give the rookie his propers, then I too will commend that, as he has does.

If next week he sings a different tune, then we will review and comment on those statements. It is also interesting to note that he specifically mentions that hehas neither jeolousy or envy towards Hamilton. I am sure said in response to being questioned about that subject by the press. And their reason foir questioning him about that are squarely due to his previous statements regarding LH, tyres and being lucky.

I guess it was necessary for him to clear the air on his opinions and I hope that's trully the way he feels. I am sure those comments were part of a broader interview on a wider range of subjects.

It is probably frustrating for him to constantly be asked about LH, but good to see him respond in a more even-keeled manner. That's the best way to diffuse any controversy.

tacksharp

10th July 2007, 03:30

I'm amazed at how many people there are, both people in F1 and fans here, who fail to acknowledge Hamilton's remarkable achievement. Driving at McLaren or Ferrari has got to be the most pressure-filled position in motorsport. And besides the increased performance of the car, a rookie has to deal with longer races, more complicated strategy, and more off-the-track commitments and attention. There is no way a rookie has it easier than a veteran in any category. In the last few years only Schumacher and Alonso have driven as consistently as Hamilton has so far. He has yet to make a bonehead move. The closest he's come is that pit stop in the last race, but that only cost him a second or two.

And yes you can compare Hamilton and Webber. Webber has made a number of bonehead moves while Hamilton has yet to fail the potential of his car. Credit where credit is due.

We still have yet to witness Hamilton's performance over the course of a whole season, but he hasn't done anything yet to justify any description other than "a remarkable performance."

tacksharp

10th July 2007, 03:45

BTW there's nothing wrong with what Webber said in that interview. In motorcycle racing over the years I've seen many Dunlop riders who could not cope with Michelin tires, which was usually faster but less forgiving. My point (in the above post) is that Hamilton is disadvantaged in so many other ways relative to a veteran, that any theoretical advantage he has coping with the Bridgestone tires is a minor part of the equation.

The most important point is that he has yet to fail the potential of his car in a much higher pressure position than Alonso or Webber when they were driving for Minardi.

Schultz

10th July 2007, 04:07

truefan72

10th July 2007, 23:02

Wow, if a three page threa pops up when another F1 driver casts the most subtle, subtle, subtle doubt over his true skill, then i'd hate to see what happens when someone really criticises the guy. It's really disappointing that everyone has been so protective of the guy. There are 100,000's of thousands of people who now believe Lewis Hamilton is part of their family. I'm a Lewis fan, but i can tell i'm going to really dislike him soon. When someone gets so much support, I can't help but hope that he stuffs up soon. Then we'll see who his real fans are.

Trust me if Mark Webber, podiumed his first 9 races, and won 2 of them, as well as lead the championship by 12 points as a rookie, or for the sake of argument, in this the 2007 campaign, there would be a press frenzy over him, heralding him the next great F1 champ, anointing him as one of the best drivers in F1, he would suddenly get a huge fan base, have Australia and Australians going absolutely nuts over him. Would be asked to do every press interview, show up at every function, have his picture and life dissected, garner his own paparazzi following, Get tons of international press and WITHOUT FAIL a good number of posts in this forum dedicated to his achievements and such.

I wonder if at that point you would begin to start to dislike him, and if you would hope that he stuffs it up soon, so we could see who his real fans are.
I wonder if you would accept his competitors saying that the only reason he is succeeding is because he has adapted to the new tyres better because he drove Bridgestone’s last year.

I wonder.

Rollo

11th July 2007, 00:04

Hamilton... debuted in f1 in the best car on the grid

So i dont see it fit to compare Hamilton to Webber when their cars are lightyears apart.

Webber was turned down in favour of Fernando Alonso at Renault in 2002 for the 2003 season and I think that in all honesty history has in fact proved that decision to be 100% correct. Alonso scored 2 World Championships there.
For Lewis to debut in "the best car" I think is something of a misnomer. At the start of this year, pundits were saying that Kimi would sweep the title without a fight and that simply has not happened.

You don't get the best car without a considerable amount of testing. Lewis Hamilton as a driver has obviously at some point put in the testing and given back meaningful data to McLaren, and thus they've jumped from third to first.

Lewis in 9 races has accumulated 70 points and two Grand Prix wins as opposed to Webber's 71 points and zero Grand Prix wins in five years. If Webber was that good a driver then he'd already be in a Championship winning car - he isn't. Dennis' decision to put Lewis Hamilton in that McLaren has not only been proven but it's paying dividends.

If Webber's car isn't up to par then part of the blame must squarely fall on him and DC, after all they are the drivers who would have put in the test miles before the season started.

ShiftingGears

11th July 2007, 00:57

If Webber's car isn't up to par then part of the blame must squarely fall on him and DC, after all they are the drivers who would have put in the test miles before the season started.

Bull****! They aren't the ones who designed it. They give feedback to the engineers. By that logic I'm blaming Schumacher and Barrichello for Ferrari's 2005 season, Even though you know how many championships the pair contributed to.

Rollo

11th July 2007, 01:20

Bull****! They aren't the ones who designed it. They give feedback to the engineers. By that logic I'm blaming Schumacher and Barrichello for Ferrari's 2005 season, Even though you know how many championships the pair contributed to.

You should partly blame Schumacher and Barrichello for Ferrari's 2005 season, likewise you should also partly blame Alonso for Renault's 2005 season. Teams when designing a motor car do not do so in isolation. Many miles of testing are conducted beforehand and adjustments are made to them.

In 2007 Williams has jumped ahead of Webber which is surprisingly odd isn't it considering that it's supposedly a worse car? Since Webber is alomst the only person from either Red Bull or Williams that has moved, then the co-incidence is perhaps too big too ignore.
Are DC and Webber providing useful data to improve the car? If their best result (and only one of 2 points scoring ones) this year is a fifth, then in all likelyhood not really.

To be perfectly honest I think that Mark Webber is a nice chap - which is entirely wrong for Formula One. The people who do the best in F1 happen to be the biggest *******s, that is, those people who will do anything to win at any cost. I don't think that Webber has ever had that much of a bite, or else he'd already be in a top car winning races.

Schultz

11th July 2007, 02:51

I wonder if at that point you would begin to start to dislike him, and if you would hope that he stuffs it up soon, so we could see who his real fans are.
I wonder if you would accept his competitors saying that the only reason he is succeeding is because he has adapted to the new tyres better because he drove Bridgestone’s last year.

I wonder.

See this is why I have a problem with your whole opinion on this thread. You are taking Webber's statements completely out of context. I don't know how Webber could have brought the tire issue up and been any more congratulatory to Hamilton. You are sensing an undertone to Webber's speech that quite simply is not there. And then, when your attention is directed to another article in which Webber is wholly respectful of hamilton, you just ignore it saying that it does not abrogate what he said earlier. but yet, there is nothing in his earlier article which contradicts what he said in the sportal article. Sounds like your reading too much into this. I think you've been waiting for an article where Webber has been rude or arrogant, and this is the best you can come up with. Only reason you might get support over this is because you are trying to harness the love of Hamilton in the process. Sad.

Mickey T

11th July 2007, 13:25

Webber was turned down in favour of Fernando Alonso at Renault in 2002 for the 2003 season and I think that in all honesty history has in fact proved that decision to be 100% correct.

No, you have it the wrong way around.

Webber turned down Renault, against the advice of Flavio (driver manager Flavio, not team manager Flavio).

No amount of accurate driver feedback and engineering input will recover an inherent engineering shortcoming. there is an expression in this business that you can't polish a turd. a driver's feedback can polish a gem and win races in it. they can polish a poor car all they like, but they'll still look pretty ordinary.

truefan72

11th July 2007, 23:58

See this is why I have a problem with your whole opinion on this thread. You are taking Webber's statements completely out of context. I don't know how Webber could have brought the tire issue up and been any more congratulatory to Hamilton. You are sensing an undertone to Webber's speech that quite simply is not there. And then, when your attention is directed to another article in which Webber is wholly respectful of hamilton, you just ignore it saying that it does not abrogate what he said earlier. but yet, there is nothing in his earlier article which contradicts what he said in the sportal article. Sounds like your reading too much into this. I think you've been waiting for an article where Webber has been rude or arrogant, and this is the best you can come up with. Only reason you might get support over this is because you are trying to harness the love of Hamilton in the process. Sad.

Quite wrong my friend.
How you conveniently forget your own statements and then criticise me for selective memory is the height of hypocracy and trully sad.

1. I don't need to garner the love of LH, he gets plenty of that these days
2. I had always been a supporter of Webber throughout the years and in the very same manner, continue to do so
3. I can be critical about statements that a particular driver makes. It neither indicates may disdain for them or affection for another. There is a line from being a fan to a fanatic. Not seeing any fault in your favorite driver at any point no matter the outlandishness would place you in the latter. Furthermore, I did not igonore the article and if you bothered to read the post I commended him on clarifying his comments towards LH. Evern going so far as to saying that I hope it reflects his postion going forward. You can't erase the past or what he said previously though and those statements in my mind were foolish.

4. And most importantly, I was responding to your post directly, in which you said the following; "I'm a Lewis fan, but i can tell i'm going to really dislike him soon. When someone gets so much support, I can't help but hope that he stuffs up soon. Then we'll see who his real fans are."

My entire post that followed that statement was directly in respones to that. I layed out a very fair and pluasible argument there and am still waiting for your response to that. Would you or would you not wish Webber to stuff it and start disliking him based on that scenario. Could you simply answer my question instead of avoiding the topic and going into a general diatribe.

Once again, it is so hilarious how you conveniently avoided any mention of your own comments just a few posts ago. Please answer the question based on your very own ctriteria.

Rollo

12th July 2007, 02:11

No, you have it the wrong way around.

Webber turned down Renault, against the advice of Flavio (driver manager Flavio, not team manager Flavio).

What you're inferring is despite the fact that Flavio Briatore took Alonso from Minardi from a race seat in 2001 to be the test driver in 2002 at Renault, and that Alonso spent several thousand miles in testing in 2002, that he should hire another "outside" driver to replace the outgoing Jensen Button rather than the driver he'd groomed in the meantime.

Sorry. Your theory doesn't fit the facts. Please show me evidence to the contrary.

No amount of accurate driver feedback and engineering input will recover an inherent engineering shortcoming. there is an expression in this business that you can't polish a turd. a driver's feedback can polish a gem and win races in it. they can polish a poor car all they like, but they'll still look pretty ordinary.

Brilliant drivers will shine through despite and in spite of their cars. Hence the reason why Kimi was snapped up by McLaren, why Alonso was given the drive and why Lewis Hamilton is currently in McLaren now. Damon Hill nearly made an Arrows win in 1997, Aryton Senna made his mark with a brillant showing in a Toleman, even Michael Schumacher showed what he could do in a Jordan. Talent is a difficult thing to suppress.

Why do you suppose the McLaren is currently winning races? I think a great deal of credit must go to the drivers. I mean obviously their data is useful in pulling up McLaren from a very distant third to top of the stack, by rights those cars should be wearing numbers 5 & 6. If it was all the car, then why haven't Renault won races? The only change of staff from 2006 to 2007 is one man.

Hamilton tested for McLaren as early as 2004 and was publicly announced as a driver on Nov 30 2006. I very much think that the miles put in by Alonso and Hamilton between November and March turned that car into a race winner.

Turd polished, wins races!

Ranger

12th July 2007, 03:26

Methinks the point of the thread has dried up and we are now going off-topic.

Gibbsy

12th July 2007, 07:41

What you're inferring is despite the fact that Flavio Briatore took Alonso from Minardi from a race seat in 2001 to be the test driver in 2002 at Renault, and that Alonso spent several thousand miles in testing in 2002, that he should hire another "outside" driver to replace the outgoing Jensen Button rather than the driver he'd groomed in the meantime.

Sorry. Your theory doesn't fit the facts. Please show me evidence to the contrary.

Brilliant drivers will shine through despite and in spite of their cars. Hence the reason why Kimi was snapped up by McLaren, why Alonso was given the drive and why Lewis Hamilton is currently in McLaren now. Damon Hill nearly made an Arrows win in 1997, Aryton Senna made his mark with a brillant showing in a Toleman, even Michael Schumacher showed what he could do in a Jordan. Talent is a difficult thing to suppress.

Why do you suppose the McLaren is currently winning races? I think a great deal of credit must go to the drivers. I mean obviously their data is useful in pulling up McLaren from a very distant third to top of the stack, by rights those cars should be wearing numbers 5 & 6. If it was all the car, then why haven't Renault won races? The only change of staff from 2006 to 2007 is one man.

Hamilton tested for McLaren as early as 2004 and was publicly announced as a driver on Nov 30 2006. I very much think that the miles put in by Alonso and Hamilton between November and March turned that car into a race winner.

Turd polished, wins races!

Perhaps Rollo you would like to explain how Mark Webbers feed back is going to make a difference to the reliability of the RB3s gear box. Or the ability of its fuel flap to stay shut.....

Because I always thought that F1 teams hire smart people known as "engineers" to design and improve these aspects of the car. By your logic I guess I was wrong, and it is actually MW and DC up all night in the red bull factory (Caffeine fuelled ofcourse), debating the finer points of the schematics of the troublesome seamless shift gearbox..... ordering what changes are to be made and generally making all key decisions.

Silly me.

I will however agree that good drivers shine in average cars. Mark Webber qualifying a Jaguar on the front 2 rows 3 times in 2 years being a perfect example.

Rollo

12th July 2007, 14:49

Because I always thought that F1 teams hire smart people known as "engineers" to design and improve these aspects of the car.

You make a valid point, this is what engineers do. It may surprise you that F1 teams also hire "drivers" to actually push things like accelerator pedals and turn steering wheels. However like still driving an Austin Parkway, eating salad or supporting Carlton, better options have come alone since Mark Webber.

I haven't before and still do not rate the chap as capable of winning a GP; Lewis has already done this twice this year. Blame it on the car if you like, but it still doesn't change the fact. Even Nick Heidfeld in similar machinery was better than Webber.

Gibbsy

13th July 2007, 10:11

You make a valid point, this is what engineers do. It may surprise you that F1 teams also hire "drivers" to actually push things like accelerator pedals and turn steering wheels. However like still driving an Austin Parkway, eating salad or supporting Carlton, better options have come alone since Mark Webber.

I haven't before and still do not rate the chap as capable of winning a GP; Lewis has already done this twice this year. Blame it on the car if you like, but it still doesn't change the fact. Even Nick Heidfeld in similar machinery was better than Webber.

Gotta love how you have basically accpepted that all the points you have made so far in this thread are stupid and have fallen back on to "I dont like MW because i think he is crap"

Who bettered who when MW and NH were team mates is a matter open to debate. I would say that Mark was quicker, when Heidfeld had a little more luck. Nick is now regularly proving himself a top driver, no shame for Webber to have matched him.

jens

13th July 2007, 19:37

About feedback and driver's role in testing. It's a very widely spread opinion that only Jarno and Ralf are awful test drivers, whereas all the other drivers are great at testing, just the team is at fault. :p :

Mickey T

14th July 2007, 01:26

What you're inferring is despite the fact that Flavio Briatore took Alonso from Minardi from a race seat in 2001 to be the test driver in 2002 at Renault, and that Alonso spent several thousand miles in testing in 2002, that he should hire another "outside" driver to replace the outgoing Jensen Button rather than the driver he'd groomed in the meantime.

Sorry. Your theory doesn't fit the facts. Please show me evidence to the contrary.

Well, if you'd been following F1 for a while, you'd know that this is ibid - a fact not under debate. it is a long way removed from a theory. if you asked anybody with any actual contemporary knowledge of F1, you'd know this.

This has been widely acknowledged by Mark, by Frank Williams and by Flavio himself. Mark acknowledged that he made an extreme error in not having enough faith in Flavio's recommendation. he wanted to take Williams to the top.

Brilliant drivers will shine through despite and in spite of their cars. Hence the reason why Kimi was snapped up by McLaren, why Alonso was given the drive and why Lewis Hamilton is currently in McLaren now. Damon Hill nearly made an Arrows win in 1997, Aryton Senna made his mark with a brillant showing in a Toleman, even Michael Schumacher showed what he could do in a Jordan. Talent is a difficult thing to suppress.

Why do you suppose the McLaren is currently winning races? I think a great deal of credit must go to the drivers. I mean obviously their data is useful in pulling up McLaren from a very distant third to top of the stack, by rights those cars should be wearing numbers 5 & 6. If it was all the car, then why haven't Renault won races? The only change of staff from 2006 to 2007 is one man.

Hamilton tested for McLaren as early as 2004 and was publicly announced as a driver on Nov 30 2006. I very much think that the miles put in by Alonso and Hamilton between November and March turned that car into a race winner.

Turd polished, wins races!

I think you should perhaps try to understand a little more about how the sport works before you continue down this road. with between 200 and 450 people in an F1 team - quite apart from the engine development staff and the outside suppliers - the three drivers are small, but important, parts of the performance.

you need to understand the quantity and quality of the data available to engineers, then the importance of prioritisation of development directions (because almost everything about a racing car is a goal conflict). this is management, not drivers.

are you really suggesting the mclaren is a turd polished? you must be joking.

you are right, there are many instances of poor cars doing well here and there (often in the wet, as in Senna's case with the Toleman), but a brilliant driver in a poor car will never win. can you honestly say you knew Alonso's name when he was with Minardi?

a large part of the perception issues with Mark in races comes from his brilliance in qualifying, which often results in bad cars racing in unrepresentative positions, then slipping backwards closer to the car's racing abilities. The Jaguars and the 05 Williams were both known as poor starting cars, which didn't help either.

Valve Bounce

14th July 2007, 02:38

Trust me if Mark Webber, podiumed his first 9 races, and won 2 of them, as well as lead the championship by 12 points as a rookie, or for the sake of argument, in this the 2007 campaign, there would be a press frenzy over him, heralding him the next great F1 champ, anointing him as one of the best drivers in F1, he would suddenly get a huge fan base, have Australia and Australians going absolutely nuts over him. Would be asked to do every press interview, show up at every function, have his picture and life dissected, garner his own paparazzi following, Get tons of international press and WITHOUT FAIL a good number of posts in this forum dedicated to his achievements and such.

I wonder.

I doubt it very much - not in the middle of the footy season here. :p :

Valve Bounce

14th July 2007, 02:46

Well, if you'd been following F1 for a while, you'd know that this is ibid - a fact not under debate. it is a long way removed from a theory. if you asked anybody with any actual contemporary knowledge of F1, you'd know this.

This has been widely acknowledged by Mark, by Frank Williams and by Flavio himself. Mark acknowledged that he made an extreme error in not having enough faith in Flavio's recommendation. he wanted to take Williams to the top.

I think you should perhaps try to understand a little more about how the sport works before you continue down this road. with between 200 and 450 people in an F1 team - quite apart from the engine development staff and the outside suppliers - the three drivers are small, but important, parts of the performance.

you need to understand the quantity and quality of the data available to engineers, then the importance of prioritisation of development directions (because almost everything about a racing car is a goal conflict). this is management, not drivers.

are you really suggesting the mclaren is a turd polished? you must be joking.

you are right, there are many instances of poor cars doing well here and there (often in the wet, as in Senna's case with the Toleman), but a brilliant driver in a poor car will never win. can you honestly say you knew Alonso's name when he was with Minardi?

a large part of the perception issues with Mark in races comes from his brilliance in qualifying, which often results in bad cars racing in unrepresentative positions, then slipping backwards closer to the car's racing abilities. The Jaguars and the 05 Williams were both known as poor starting cars, which didn't help either.

Most of what you say is true. However, I'd like to point out that the Honda team is closer to 700.

As for Alonso and Minardi - well I did. When he qualified that Minardi, with no more than just a shakedown run, at Albert Park, I thought that his next trick would be to walk on top of the water across the Lake. And I have said so. I also thought that Mark's first drive for Minardi at Albert Park was probably his greatest achievement in terms of astonishment. Even SchM went to congratulate him.

Unfortunately, mark put all his eggs on Franks tanks instead of listening to Flav (as you pointed out) with a disastrous season of unreliability to follow. Why Flav chose heiki over Mark for the Renault this year I cannot fathom.

truefan72

14th July 2007, 19:53

Most of what you say is true. However, I'd like to point out that the Honda team is closer to 700.

As for Alonso and Minardi - well I did. When he qualified that Minardi, with no more than just a shakedown run, at Albert Park, I thought that his next trick would be to walk on top of the water across the Lake. And I have said so. I also thought that Mark's first drive for Minardi at Albert Park was probably his greatest achievement in terms of astonishment. Even SchM went to congratulate him.

Unfortunately, mark put all his eggs on Franks tanks instead of listening to Flav (as you pointed out) with a disastrous season of unreliability to follow. Why Flav chose heiki over Mark for the Renault this year I cannot fathom.

It was more on Webber than Flav for the 2007 campaign. As I recall webber announced his move to RBR real early in the silly season instead of biding his time and fielding offers. Either he has been getting bad managerial advice or he himself has been making these poor career choices. But given the chance to sign up with Renault would have been impetus enough for me to kick back and wait for some offers before committing to any one team.
He is driving a Renault powered car though ;)

Mickey T

15th July 2007, 17:48

yep, Valve, honda is just like Ferrari and toyota.

these teams build their own chassis and engines, hence the greater staffing levels.

the staffing levels i've quoted refer to chassis-only teams, from Toro Rosso to Williams etc.

and the renault team deal was all done and dusted with heikki well before mark signed with RBR. it wasn't announced, but it had been long-since signed.

the card that forced everybody's hand there, if you remember, was renault's panicked reaction when alonso signed with mclaren. they signed fisi almost immediately to a two-year deal, and heikki had already had his race-deal organised.

the reason they couldn't sign mark that early was that williams had the option on him for this year, but would have to stump up more money for him, because there was a big third-year step-up clause. mark's management had to wait until that lapsed (otherwise, williams would have been within its rights to sell mark itself).

Valve Bounce

16th July 2007, 00:04

I didn't know that Heiki had his race deal organised. Sorry about that.

Gibbsy

16th July 2007, 07:16

Valve Bounce

16th July 2007, 09:54

They would have definitely preferred Mark if Elvis was unavailable. :p :

Mickey T

16th July 2007, 17:25

Thanks for the insight Mickey.

Having said all that though. Do you believe Renault would have preferred mark to either of their current drivers if they had the chance to do it all over again?

Heikki is a very talented young guy and i think they'd have been happy to keep him.

fisi, on the other hand, had been comprehensively outpaced and outraced by fernando, and has spent two relatively unthreatening years in the world-champion car. you could argue that his results there were as good as he was ever going to get, and you'd lose little by cutting him loose.

given their time again, i think they'd wait and take mark. my sources indicate taking fisi again was senior renault (the car company, not the f1 team) politicking to be seen as a vote of confidence in reaction to alonso's departure.

of course, the wild card is that flavio is not in the habit of pairing up two of his drivers within one team. one inevitably gets the better of the other (or is perceived to, and in F1 perception becomes reality), which devalues the loser. not in flav's interest to devalue any of his guys...

Racehound

16th July 2007, 22:34

http://sportal.com.au/default.aspx/motorsport-news-display/webber-praises-rookies-rise-30750

this article should shut you all up...
this is a pretty good assessment of how Webber really is.

I'll wait until one of you takes something out of context here...
im not gonna take anything out of context here, but something seems to have slipped everyones notice ..........with schumi announcing his retirement last year everyone in the close season was talking about f1 is gonna lose so much publicity without him in f1!!!!!!.......yet now we are in the middle of 1 of the best seasons with the most public interest for years!!!!.....no wonder schumacher is keeping such a low profile in the paddock when he turns up for the odd race!!!!! :)

Valve Bounce

17th July 2007, 01:03

im not gonna take anything out of context here, but something seems to have slipped everyones notice ..........with schumi announcing his retirement last year everyone in the close season was talking about f1 is gonna lose so much publicity without him in f1!!!!!!.......yet now we are in the middle of 1 of the best seasons with the most public interest for years!!!!.....no wonder schumacher is keeping such a low profile in the paddock when he turns up for the odd race!!!!! :)

I don't know what SchM has to do with Webber but then neither does Elvis. Next, we'll find David and Posh making a splash in F1 and maybe take over one of the struggling teams, like Honda. All this has absolutely nothing to do with Mrk, but I am sensing that everyone else is getting bored stiff with this subject.