RTSolvalou
(Banned)
- 1,188
removed
Villeneuve disagrees.Ferrari's driver philosophy was, is and has always been for a driver to have to prove himself at another team
I'm sure we can all bet things that we don't actually own...I'm willing to bet my house
Not to mention the way Vettel knows Adrian Newey is the best designer in Formula 1. So long as the team keep providing him with competitive cars, Vettel will stay with Red Bull.I don't see Vettel going to Ferrari as long as Alonso is still there and in his prime.
OMG Bruno Senna is in England!?!?!?! He must be joining Williams then, he couldn't possibly have gone to any number of other F1 organisations...
I know I've probably expanded a bit unneccesarily on your points...it's an interesting topic to me though
I wonder why Ferrari would at all be interested in the Driver who blocked their #1 driver from winning the 2010 championship though. I hate to whip out the suspicious eye but it could be a trap if true. Ferrari are the most devious team in the sport and I wouldn't put it past them to try to ruin someone's career, although I'm sure Alonso personally is over it.
I can only assume it's just filler rumors to take up the space between real news, and drivers stating the obvious/making excuses (not to mention Renault contradicting themselves here and here)
I think Petrov should change the background on his twitter, he's still got himself in the Renault costume there, replacing the image or leaving it blank would be a great stir.
---seperately
Looks like Williams are deliberately delaying on the driver announcement, just to put a sweetener on christmas day for Senna, Kobayashi or Sutil (I hope it's not Sutil).
I'm wondering how much Raikkonen is getting paid. I'm guessing he's had to come down drastically from his previous request.
There are rumours of Senna going to Williams, but remember, he could still sign as a 3rd driver. Yes yes I know Bottas is meant to be but Senna makes more sense, understudy to Barrichello for a season, bring Senna in for 2013, give him a season to prove himself alongside whoever, Maldonado, Bottas whoever gets the nod. Barrichello gets one last hurrah and Senna get a final opportunity to show his potential.
He's already had two, which is more than most drivers get (yes, his year with Hispania counts). And since he hasn't been very impressive, I hardly think he deserves a third chance.Senna get a final opportunity to show his potential.
He's already had two, which is more than most drivers get (yes, his year with Hispania counts). And since he hasn't been very impressive, I hardly think he deserves a third chance.
Yes, I agree. Petrov deserves a seat at Renault, not Senna.
You do realize Petrov/Renault have nothing to do with the topic PM responded to?
lol lol lol...you must be one of those prisonermonkey fanboys.
He's already had two, which is more than most drivers get (yes, his year with Hispania counts). And since he hasn't been very impressive, I hardly think he deserves a third chance.
Unfortuantely for you (and for Senna), it does count. You can't just go disqualifying a season's worth of results simply because they weaken your argument. If Hispania did not count as a Formula 1 team, they would not be in Formula 1. They are in Formula 1, so everything they do counts, for both them and the drivers.I wouldn't necessarily count his year at Hispania as a chance
Hehe, like prisonermonkey has any fans...
No, I was just ironically stating how nobody cares about the Petrov/Senna "Who was better - who deserves another year" discussion. Let's face it, probably none of them will drive next year because they never really made any impact. However, if a team needs money and they can bring it, who knows, maybe they might have another season.
I accept that the Hispania F110 was not a particularly good car. It was not particualrly a car at all. However, I find the notion that any results obtained in that car "don't count" because it was so poor to be a particularly flawed one. Karun Chandhok managed to score two 14th places - in Australia and Monaco - and Senna picked up a third in Japan, which was more than enough for the team to finish eleventh in the World Constructors' Championship standings, despite being the worst car on the grid. Therefore, the Hispania F110 had some value to it. It did not offer drivers a full opportunity to display their skills, but nor did it completely invalidate them. If Red Bull felt that Hispania was a good enough team for one of their highly-regarded young talents, then that alone should be an endorsement of the team's abilities.Peter, you're fighting a lost cause against PM's rhetoric. As you might expect with someone who thinks they can never be wrong, and runs away when caught red handed. PM will just continue to look at things at face value (despite being intelligent enough to know better) in an attempt to invalidate your points (which are fair enough), to more importantly try and make you out to be some fool. And yes, after a while he becomes far too easy to read.
I accept that the Hispania F110 was not a particularly good car. It was not particualrly a car at all. However, I find the notion that any results obtained in that car "don't count" because it was so poor to be a particularly flawed one. Karun Chandhok managed to score two 14th places - in Australia and Monaco - and Senna picked up a third in Japan, which was more than enough for the team to finish eleventh in the World Constructors' Championship standings, despite being the worst car on the grid. Therefore, the Hispania F110 had some value to it. It did not offer drivers a full opportunity to display their skills, but nor did it completely invalidate them. If Red Bull felt that Hispania was a good enough team for one of their highly-regarded young talents, then that alone should be an endorsement of the team's abilities.
Maybe I am simply taking things at face value, but Peter is the one disqualifying an entire season's worth of results without considering the actual merit of some of those individual results, simply so that he can further his opinion that Bruno Senna deserves another chance. The only problem with that logic is that team principals don't share his belief. If they did, Senna would already have a drive.
Vettel for example, undoubtedly an incredible talent, but some people are already calling him the best we've ever had. He has done what a lot of drivers could do, win in the best car. He may or may not be the best, but him dominating in what is the best car gives the ignorant eye an illusion that he is thrashing the competition on talent alone.
And:I wouldn't necessarily count his year at Hispania as a
But, like I said, I'm still waiting for an exaplantion on this:Sure driving the HRT was an opportunity, but for what? Little more than to race a car deemed legal under F1 Regulations in a Formula 1 weekend.
You still haven't explained how Senna "basically equalled" Vitaly Petrov. They had eight races together. They both finished six of them. Petrov finished ahead of Senna in five (and he beat Senna by four places on average; India and Abu Dhabi were the only races where Senna finished within three places of Petrov). How is that "basically equalling" anyone? Until you can explain your logic here, I'm not going to be able to take anything you say as a serious argument. Senna might have out-qualified Petrov, but that means nothing when Petrov finished the race miles ahead of him. In fact, Senna out-qualifying Petrov only makes Petrov's defeat of him worse, because Petrov had to come from behind.Senna also got a season and a half, most of it spent in a bad car beating all of his teammates, then inexperienced, comes along and basically equals his more experienced teammate at Renault.
He's already had two, which is more than most drivers get (yes, his year with Hispania counts). And since he hasn't been very impressive, I hardly think he deserves a third chance.