The 2012 Driver transfer discussion/speculation thread
- Thread starter F1 fan
- 1,927 comments
- 117,519 views
- Status
- 3,915
- California
- gdwest1
Im hoping this can be the nail in the coffin regarding the Petrov-Senna debacle.
Seismica
Premium
- 4,346
- Guisborough
- GTP_Seismica
*adds fuel*
If Petrov gets Trulli's seat at Caterham then we'll have to see them on-track in what will likely be a similar car with the same engine.
- 3,915
- California
- gdwest1
Maybe they should do a round of Wii boxing to see who is best.
Or, Race of Champions, perhaps? Brazil vs Russia.
Or, Race of Champions, perhaps? Brazil vs Russia.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Going by reports from Brazil, this must be the sixth time Senna has signed a contract with Williams.
- 29,952
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
Make sure Sutil doesn't take part!
- 5,379
- Yokohama
- F1fan1
Spot of barbed wire in the glove?
- 3,035
- Kingston, Jamaica
- pj-gm
- PJwasHere876
Driver traits such as the one you mentioned don't stay written in stone. It's arguable that he wasn't able to be competitive in race trim due to his lack of testing, ever. Aside from one day this time last year, he had never taken part in a F1 Test Session. Now he's got the chance to, so he may be able to erase that trait. But I could be wrong.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
- 3,035
- Kingston, Jamaica
- pj-gm
- PJwasHere876
He wasn't an inconsistent driver in GP2, which does suggest that his inconsistency is not something that is just a part of his driving, rather, it is present in his driving as a result of his lack of experience with F1's current regulations.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
- 3,035
- Kingston, Jamaica
- pj-gm
- PJwasHere876
Yes, but not right away. It took some people quite a few races to get back up to speed. Even so, there is one, key thing, which has gone right past you everytime I've mentioned it, that everyone else around him this season has had, which Senna hasn't. Pre-season testing. He didn't have the several hundreds of km's and weeks of practice prior to the start of the season that the rest did. That is a considerable disadvantage, which you've hardly paid any mind so as to help your argument.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
In-season development programs these days are so intense that by the time Senna got to drive the R31 in Belgium, it had undergone several major changes and was a very different car to the one used in pre-season testing.
Even if he had driven in pre-season testing, it would not have helped his cause. The primary purpose of the winter test sessions is to gather data on the car's performance to aid in-season development. The drivers actually learn the cars and what they are capable of quite quickly.
Even if he had driven in pre-season testing, it would not have helped his cause. The primary purpose of the winter test sessions is to gather data on the car's performance to aid in-season development. The drivers actually learn the cars and what they are capable of quite quickly.
- 996
- Vancouver
- jcm-16
Fixed
Malaysia http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2011/846/849.html [updated endplate, Used in race]
Turkey http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2011/850/859.html [Revised front wing]
Canada http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2011/857/873.html [Tested new rear wing, not used for race]
Germany http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2011/862/885.html [Tested 'Red Bull Style' exhausts for future, not used in the race]
Hungary http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2011/859/889.html [Three front wings tested, Nurburgring spec wing used]
These are all minor changes
- 3,915
- California
- gdwest1
So basically they made 3 changes all year?
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
No, they made quite a few to try and get the FEE to work more efficently.
Peter. is simply suggesting that the reason why Bruno Senna was not up to speed was because he missed out on pre-season testing. This, however, is inherently misleading. Teams are limited to just 15,000km of testing, which must be split between their drivers. Most split it 50-50, to give their drivers equal opportunity in the car, which means that Vitaly Petrov and Nick Heidfeld got roughly 7,500km testing each at the start of the year.
However, when Senna stepped into the car, Petrov and Heidfeld had each done eleven races with the team. That's eleven 300km events, plus roughly the same distance (or more) during Friday and Saturday practice. This brings the total distance to somewhere in the region of 6,600km, or nearly 90% of what had been covered.
The bottom line is that Peter. is making excuses for Senna's general lack of performance in 2011. First he tried to claim that Senna's 2010 results should be ignored because the car was bad. Now he's suggesting that the only reason why Senna was off the pace was because he did not drive the car during winter testing. Even if this was true, it still completely disregards the way Senna would have been out of the car for eight months between March and September.
Peter. is simply suggesting that the reason why Bruno Senna was not up to speed was because he missed out on pre-season testing. This, however, is inherently misleading. Teams are limited to just 15,000km of testing, which must be split between their drivers. Most split it 50-50, to give their drivers equal opportunity in the car, which means that Vitaly Petrov and Nick Heidfeld got roughly 7,500km testing each at the start of the year.
However, when Senna stepped into the car, Petrov and Heidfeld had each done eleven races with the team. That's eleven 300km events, plus roughly the same distance (or more) during Friday and Saturday practice. This brings the total distance to somewhere in the region of 6,600km, or nearly 90% of what had been covered.
The bottom line is that Peter. is making excuses for Senna's general lack of performance in 2011. First he tried to claim that Senna's 2010 results should be ignored because the car was bad. Now he's suggesting that the only reason why Senna was off the pace was because he did not drive the car during winter testing. Even if this was true, it still completely disregards the way Senna would have been out of the car for eight months between March and September.
- 2,073
- Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- mrvajj
So you are saying the real reason Senna wasn't quite as good as Petrov was because he had done MUCH less mileage in the Renault?
PS the 2010 Hispania was a rubbish car.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
No, I'm saying that the "real" reason why Senna was not as good as Petrov is not so simple as one variable that, if changed, will suddenly see a dramatic turn of events.
Look at Vitaly Petrov as a prime example of this. At the end of 2010, a lot of people believed that he should not have been retained for 2011. But during the winter off season, he did a whole host of things: he moved from Valencia to somewhere near Enstone, he learned more English (and some of the team learned some Russian), he found a new engineer and a new trainer and his simulator programme was changed to focus on the circuits he knew best. When 2011 started, it was a completely different Vitaly Petrov who started the season.
So to say "it's this one thing" that makes Senna slow is a ridiculous concept. Giving him more winter testing time isn't going to change anything. Not that there is anything to be changed - I firmly believe we've seen everything that we're going to see from Bruno Senna. It would be a mistake for Williams to take him, a sign that they're more interested in a pay check than in turning themselves around. They need someone like Kobayashi, Alguersuari or maybe d'Ambrosio. They're settling for Senna.
Look at Vitaly Petrov as a prime example of this. At the end of 2010, a lot of people believed that he should not have been retained for 2011. But during the winter off season, he did a whole host of things: he moved from Valencia to somewhere near Enstone, he learned more English (and some of the team learned some Russian), he found a new engineer and a new trainer and his simulator programme was changed to focus on the circuits he knew best. When 2011 started, it was a completely different Vitaly Petrov who started the season.
So to say "it's this one thing" that makes Senna slow is a ridiculous concept. Giving him more winter testing time isn't going to change anything. Not that there is anything to be changed - I firmly believe we've seen everything that we're going to see from Bruno Senna. It would be a mistake for Williams to take him, a sign that they're more interested in a pay check than in turning themselves around. They need someone like Kobayashi, Alguersuari or maybe d'Ambrosio. They're settling for Senna.
- 2,073
- Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- mrvajj
Didn't Senna outrace those guys in GP2?
- 996
- Vancouver
- jcm-16
They made three small front wing changes up prior to Spa. The car didn't change much in that time.
According to Prisonermonkeys, Senna had approximately 14100km less driving then in the car Petrov.
This is clearly not something that would affect a driver's consistency, or trust in the car. Clearly, Senna should've been instantly reaching his maximum potential in his first race at Spa. Why would having 14100km less expierence in a car make you slower then your full potential. [End of sarcastic rant]
- 3,915
- California
- gdwest1
d'Ambrosio is in the same position Senna was in during 2010. Why does he get a chance at Williams?
- 4,579
- Houston, TX
- astrosdude91
Can we please get off the Senna-Petrov argument? It's annoying. And we've pretty much covered every aspect of it several times.
Anyways, I would much rather see Sutil get the Williams seat. He deserves it more than anyone else in contention, save for maybe Rubens.
Anyways, I would much rather see Sutil get the Williams seat. He deserves it more than anyone else in contention, save for maybe Rubens.
- 3,915
- California
- gdwest1
And argue what though? This thread is going to die probably when the first test comes anyways.
- 4,579
- Houston, TX
- astrosdude91
Who said that we had to argue anything though?
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
As has been well documented, GP2 is a guide to a driver's performance. But it is not infallible.
And for someone who had 14,100km less experience in the car, Senna somehow managed to qualify seventh in his first race. Why do you think that's the only factor that would have influenced his performance? I am simply pointing out the assumptions that Peter. is making. He seems to think that if Senna were to have taken part in Renault's winter testing program, he would have been a hundred times better, as if this was the only thing that led to Senna disappointing.
Because d'Ambrosio actually did something notable. He managed to out-qualify and out-race a highly-rated team mate on a semi-regular basis, and he was often very close to Glock when he did not. Senna, on the other hand, was frequently out-qualified and out-raced by a team-mate who, while more experienced, was not highly-rated.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Mark this day in your diary, ladies and gentlemen. January 17th, 2012: the beginning of the end of Williams.
- Status
Similar threads
