Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Vettel to Ferrari?
68 views
Skip to first unread message
Bigbird
Oct 15, 2012, 5:23:24 AM10/15/12
to
...in 2014
Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in 2014,
with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in 2014,
with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
Noj
Oct 15, 2012, 5:39:23 AM10/15/12
to
Bigbird wrote ...
Wonder what the Ferrari results will need to be?
Bigbird
Oct 15, 2012, 5:57:16 AM10/15/12
to
Brian Lawrence
Oct 15, 2012, 6:09:34 AM10/15/12
to
surprise either that 'Ferrari insiders' choose to make it public now, so
that Seb & Red Bull will get loads of questions over the next few
races.
--
Brian W Lawrence
Wantage
Oxfordshire
Brian Lawrence
Oct 15, 2012, 6:50:58 AM10/15/12
to
the 2013 season - midpoint would be most likely - Ferrari will either
be in 1st or 2nd in the Constructors, OR will have reached a certain
number of points.
Noj
Oct 15, 2012, 7:30:16 AM10/15/12
to
Brian Lawrence wrote ...
If they're 2nd to Red Bull, that'll put Seb on the spot.
Perhaps, someone will have to leak how RB are cheating, so he gets the
move, if he wants it. I've read that Ferrari pay their drivers a lot
more than RB.
Perhaps, someone will have to leak how RB are cheating, so he gets the
move, if he wants it. I've read that Ferrari pay their drivers a lot
more than RB.
AC
Oct 15, 2012, 7:31:39 AM10/15/12
to
Seems I can reply but not create a new thread. Arse.
Anyway, hope this comes off, it will be pretty fascinating to see how it
plays out, especially when Ferrari like to favour one driver. Maybe a
change in philosophy?
I do find this results thing a bit of a piss take though. I am surprised
Ferrari would go for that. I mean, either you want to drive for Ferrari,
or you don't. I thought Ferrari was supposed to be the special team. I'm
also kinda surprised Vettel would put much stock in that sort of thing
either. If Ferrari are leading mid-season or something, well, as we see,
it doesn't mean a lot. Alonso has been leading for a while, after Japan
did we expect Ferrari to be great next season? The whole thing sounds
cowardly and frankly dopey.
--
AC
Zeppo Marx
Oct 15, 2012, 8:43:04 AM10/15/12
to
On 15.10.12 11:57, Bigbird wrote:
>
> Perhaps that both cars have similar performance?
>
In terms of the cars, better or similar performance, as I would guess.
>
> Perhaps that both cars have similar performance?
>
However, I still cannot imagine those two Alpha males (FA and SV) in one
team. Especially one based on #1 and #2 driver strategy for many years.
Now, if this really is bound to happen, who would be the #1 and who
would be the #2?
FA went to Ferrari to become undisputed #1 and he is. And SV (against
all Horner's words) is de facto #1 at RBR. Would FA accept losing his
status in the team he invested a few years and many good results? Would
SV move from his #1 status in a good team just for the sake of moving?
Accepting the #2 at Ferrari?
I can imagine a lot, but both dropping their #1 status and accepting the
equal treatment? That I cannot.
John Briggs
Oct 15, 2012, 8:50:31 AM10/15/12
to
just the confusion which has held back McLaren. But perhaps Fernando
will now go back to McLaren?
--
John Briggs
RzR
Oct 15, 2012, 8:57:47 AM10/15/12
to
going their ways, its just going to be priceless to watch
Ar
Oct 15, 2012, 8:59:11 AM10/15/12
to
On 15/10/12 12:30, Noj wrote:
> Perhaps, someone will have to leak how RB are cheating,
Photocopier is broken.
> Perhaps, someone will have to leak how RB are cheating,
News
Oct 15, 2012, 9:10:13 AM10/15/12
to
WebSlave
Oct 15, 2012, 9:10:45 AM10/15/12
to
also remember that Red Bull is Vettel's management.
-Webs-
Bigbird
Oct 15, 2012, 10:20:36 AM10/15/12
to
John Briggs
Oct 15, 2012, 10:40:14 AM10/15/12
to
--
John Briggs
Alister
Oct 15, 2012, 10:41:45 AM10/15/12
to
blackmail
--
Better to be nouveau than never to have been riche at all.
AC
Oct 15, 2012, 10:57:19 AM10/15/12
to
--
AC
Alister
Oct 15, 2012, 11:02:29 AM10/15/12
to
to Redbull instead of Merc ;-)
--
A conclusion is simply the place where someone got tired of thinking.
Edmund
Oct 15, 2012, 11:39:02 AM10/15/12
to
On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 12:31:39 +0100, AC wrote:
> Bigbird wrote:
>> ...in 2014
>>
>> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in
>> 2014,
>> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>>
>> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
>> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
>>
>>
> Glad some one posted this, I tried twice and for some reason it failed.
> Seems I can reply but not create a new thread. Arse.
>
> Anyway, hope this comes off, it will be pretty fascinating to see how it
> plays out, especially when Ferrari like to favour one driver.
Right just the way all teams do for the last 200 years, they always favour
> Bigbird wrote:
>> ...in 2014
>>
>> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in
>> 2014,
>> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>>
>> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
>> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
>>
>>
> Glad some one posted this, I tried twice and for some reason it failed.
> Seems I can reply but not create a new thread. Arse.
>
> Anyway, hope this comes off, it will be pretty fascinating to see how it
> plays out, especially when Ferrari like to favour one driver.
the fastest driver with one exception, McLaren a few years back.
> Maybe a change in philosophy?
>
> I do find this results thing a bit of a piss take though. I am surprised
> Ferrari would go for that. I mean, either you want to drive for Ferrari,
> or you don't. I thought Ferrari was supposed to be the special team.
Why do you think so?
> I do find this results thing a bit of a piss take though. I am surprised
> Ferrari would go for that. I mean, either you want to drive for Ferrari,
> or you don't. I thought Ferrari was supposed to be the special team.
> I'm
> also kinda surprised Vettel would put much stock in that sort of thing
> either. If Ferrari are leading mid-season or something, well, as we see,
> it doesn't mean a lot. Alonso has been leading for a while, after Japan
> did we expect Ferrari to be great next season? The whole thing sounds
> cowardly and frankly dopey.
Bobster
Oct 15, 2012, 11:57:39 AM10/15/12
to
On 15 Oct, 14:43, Zeppo Marx <zeppo.m...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On 15.10.12 11:57, Bigbird wrote:
>
>
>
> > Perhaps that both cars have similar performance?
>
> In terms of the cars, better or similar performance, as I would guess.
> However, I still cannot imagine those two Alpha males (FA and SV) in one
> team. Especially one based on #1 and #2 driver strategy for many years.
Yes. Two bulls in one field. It's a difficult situation to manage.
> On 15.10.12 11:57, Bigbird wrote:
>
>
>
> > Perhaps that both cars have similar performance?
>
> In terms of the cars, better or similar performance, as I would guess.
> However, I still cannot imagine those two Alpha males (FA and SV) in one
> team. Especially one based on #1 and #2 driver strategy for many years.
Fred has done a fab job for Ferrari, and is contracted until end 2016.
Are Ferrari going to try to manage the situation of having two top
rank drivers?
Besides, it's only "sources". Nobody's seen the rumoured contract.
>
> Now, if this really is bound to happen, who would be the #1 and who
> would be the #2?
> FA went to Ferrari to become undisputed #1 and he is.
tainted goods after the abrupt parting with McLaren. But time heals
scars and Ferrari ended up with not too many options either. Seb was
still promising but not a clearly top rank driver. Hamilton was tied
up at McLaren. Button was thought to have got lucky with a very good,
controversial in terms of the rules car. Raikkonen was in snooze mode.
Who else was there to drag you back to the front of the field?
> And SV (against
> all Horner's words) is de facto #1 at RBR. Would FA accept losing his
> status in the team he invested a few years and many good results? Would
> SV move from his #1 status in a good team just for the sake of moving?
> Accepting the #2 at Ferrari?
lion's den. So was Jacques Villeneuve (though the lion was less
formidable). Graham Hill went to a Lotus team in which Clark ruled the
roost. Barrichello and Webber, allegedly getting shafted by their
teams, signed up for more of the same.
> I can imagine a lot, but both dropping their #1 status and accepting the
> equal treatment? That I cannot.
driver only has so much clout. Schumacher had his bluff called by
Montezemolo. Ferrari switched priorities to Massa in 2009 even though
they were paying Kimi more.
And what IS number one these days? You can't get priority on the spare
car because there isn't a spare car. You can't get priority on the new
engines because there isn't a new spec engine. You can't get all the
testing time etc etc. Teams WILL make a call at some stage, but all
they have to do is tell both drivers that they will take team orders,
then, when the cars are running in adjacent positions, they can swop
them around or tell them to hold position so as to favour the driver
they calculate represents their best chance of winning the WDC.
The sort of situation that Mansell or Schumacher got doesn't happen
any more.
Kerry Montgomery
Oct 15, 2012, 1:12:59 PM10/15/12
to
The most recent article I could find is from 1 year ago. At that time,
Vettel was managing himself.
Kerry
Zeppo Marx
Oct 15, 2012, 2:09:17 PM10/15/12
to
On 15.10.12 16:57, AC wrote:
>
> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>
AFAIK, he is having a longer term contract with Ferrari, 2014 included.
>
> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>
Maybe even longer.
Mark Jackson
Oct 15, 2012, 2:18:03 PM10/15/12
to
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541.
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew
he would never be caught. - William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin
kung fu
Oct 15, 2012, 2:20:12 PM10/15/12
to
Why? Does he want to commit career suicide? Ferrari are heading to
another 21 years without a WDC drought like it happened from
1979-2000. New drought will go from 2007-2028. Mark my words.
Alister
Oct 15, 2012, 4:27:12 PM10/15/12
to
win in a Ferrari?
Or are you saying he is only winning because of the Redbull Car?
--
It's all in the mind, ya know.
AC
Oct 15, 2012, 4:27:32 PM10/15/12
to
Mark Jackson wrote:
> On 10/15/2012 2:09 PM, Zeppo Marx wrote:
>> On 15.10.12 16:57, AC wrote:
>>>
>>> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>>
>> AFAIK, he is having a longer term contract with Ferrari, 2014
>> included. Maybe even longer.
>
> "Alonso is under contract to Ferrari until the end of 2016," says
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541.
>
Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
> On 10/15/2012 2:09 PM, Zeppo Marx wrote:
>> On 15.10.12 16:57, AC wrote:
>>>
>>> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>>
>> AFAIK, he is having a longer term contract with Ferrari, 2014
>> included. Maybe even longer.
>
> "Alonso is under contract to Ferrari until the end of 2016," says
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541.
>
--
AC
RzR
Oct 15, 2012, 4:29:46 PM10/15/12
to
On 15.10.2012. 22:27, Alister wrote:
> he is only winning because of the Redbull Car?
>
well fucking DUH!
> he is only winning because of the Redbull Car?
>
no newey, no vettel....
even webber can look good in that car...webber...lol
Zeppo Marx
Oct 15, 2012, 4:41:46 PM10/15/12
to
On 15.10.12 22:27, AC wrote:
>
> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>
Yeah, true. However, Fernando is on top of his game and I expect him to
>
> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>
stay there for quite some time (but at least 2013/2014). Kimi and MS wer
not (any more), for what reasons ever.
AC
Oct 15, 2012, 6:19:34 PM10/15/12
to
their game. Haven't been since. They were iffy when Kimi won, by default.
Given all the questions that every one is asking about Alonso and Vettel
in Ferrari together, an Alonso retirement is the only sure fire answer
to them.
Every other answer is mere hope and crossed fingers. So much so, I cant
wait. All 3 "hate" icons together waiting to explode? Fucking cant wait.
Senna / Prost all over again, but this time in red. Awesome. Bernie must
cancelling his Viagra subscription as I type.
No, I am not predicting an Alonso retirement, but given F1's history of
"surprises", ruling it out seems silly.
Oh, if this does come off, could Lewis jump to RBR? Could Merc simply be
a layover as it were?
--
AC
AC
Oct 15, 2012, 6:21:42 PM10/15/12
to
Edmund wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 12:31:39 +0100, AC wrote:
>
>> Bigbird wrote:
>>> ...in 2014
>>>
>>> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in
>>> 2014,
>>> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>>>
>>> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
>>> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>>>
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
>>>
>>>
>> Glad some one posted this, I tried twice and for some reason it failed.
>> Seems I can reply but not create a new thread. Arse.
>>
>> Anyway, hope this comes off, it will be pretty fascinating to see how it
>> plays out, especially when Ferrari like to favour one driver.
>
> Right just the way all teams do for the last 200 years, they always favour
> the fastest driver with one exception, McLaren a few years back.
OK, cant wait for "Alonso, Vettel is faster than you". I'll have a
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 12:31:39 +0100, AC wrote:
>
>> Bigbird wrote:
>>> ...in 2014
>>>
>>> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in
>>> 2014,
>>> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>>>
>>> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
>>> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>>>
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
>>>
>>>
>> Glad some one posted this, I tried twice and for some reason it failed.
>> Seems I can reply but not create a new thread. Arse.
>>
>> Anyway, hope this comes off, it will be pretty fascinating to see how it
>> plays out, especially when Ferrari like to favour one driver.
>
> Right just the way all teams do for the last 200 years, they always favour
> the fastest driver with one exception, McLaren a few years back.
little F1-gasm if that happens.
>
>> Maybe a change in philosophy?
>
> No!
>>
>> I do find this results thing a bit of a piss take though. I am surprised
>> Ferrari would go for that. I mean, either you want to drive for Ferrari,
>> or you don't. I thought Ferrari was supposed to be the special team.
>
> Why do you think so?
--
AC
AC
Oct 15, 2012, 6:23:07 PM10/15/12
to
Alister wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 09:23:24 +0000, Bigbird wrote:
>
>> ...in 2014
>>
>> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in 2014,
>> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>>
>> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
>> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
>
>
>
> Maybe Lewis should have stuck it out a bit longer so he could have gone
> to Redbull instead of Merc ;-)
>
Yeah, I wondered about that. Merc might be merely a step on the way to
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 09:23:24 +0000, Bigbird wrote:
>
>> ...in 2014
>>
>> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in 2014,
>> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>>
>> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
>> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
>
>
>
> Maybe Lewis should have stuck it out a bit longer so he could have gone
> to Redbull instead of Merc ;-)
>
Newey.
--
AC
AC
Oct 15, 2012, 6:25:06 PM10/15/12
to
still cant put a dominant car together. Imagine how awful they would be
with out all the extras. Seems that in reality, Ferrari are quite shit
at building F1 cars. Even Alonso's 0.5sec isn't helping.
Really, what a shit team.
--
AC
Edmund
Oct 15, 2012, 6:35:25 PM10/15/12
to
On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 23:21:42 +0100, AC wrote:
> Edmund wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 12:31:39 +0100, AC wrote:
>>
>>> Bigbird wrote:
>>>> ...in 2014
>>>>
>>>> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in
>>>> 2014,
>>>> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>>>>
>>>> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel,
>>>> 25,
>>>> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Glad some one posted this, I tried twice and for some reason it
>>> failed. Seems I can reply but not create a new thread. Arse.
>>>
>>> Anyway, hope this comes off, it will be pretty fascinating to see how
>>> it plays out, especially when Ferrari like to favour one driver.
>>
>> Right just the way all teams do for the last 200 years, they always
>> favour the fastest driver with one exception, McLaren a few years back.
>
> OK, cant wait for "Alonso, Vettel is faster than you". I'll have a
> little F1-gasm if that happens.
We know, we know.
> Edmund wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 12:31:39 +0100, AC wrote:
>>
>>> Bigbird wrote:
>>>> ...in 2014
>>>>
>>>> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in
>>>> 2014,
>>>> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>>>>
>>>> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel,
>>>> 25,
>>>> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Glad some one posted this, I tried twice and for some reason it
>>> failed. Seems I can reply but not create a new thread. Arse.
>>>
>>> Anyway, hope this comes off, it will be pretty fascinating to see how
>>> it plays out, especially when Ferrari like to favour one driver.
>>
>> Right just the way all teams do for the last 200 years, they always
>> favour the fastest driver with one exception, McLaren a few years back.
>
> OK, cant wait for "Alonso, Vettel is faster than you". I'll have a
> little F1-gasm if that happens.
>
>
>>> Maybe a change in philosophy?
>>
>> No!
>
> Good.
>
>
>>> I do find this results thing a bit of a piss take though. I am
>>> surprised Ferrari would go for that. I mean, either you want to drive
>>> for Ferrari,
>>> or you don't. I thought Ferrari was supposed to be the special team.
>>
>> Why do you think so?
>
> For the reason I gave.
Sorry, you are right, you thought so.
>
>>> Maybe a change in philosophy?
>>
>> No!
>
> Good.
>
>
>>> I do find this results thing a bit of a piss take though. I am
>>> surprised Ferrari would go for that. I mean, either you want to drive
>>> for Ferrari,
>>> or you don't. I thought Ferrari was supposed to be the special team.
>>
>> Why do you think so?
>
> For the reason I gave.
Edmund
Zeppo Marx
Oct 15, 2012, 8:01:23 PM10/15/12
to
On 16.10.12 00:19, AC wrote:
>
> Both were fine at the time, if anything Ferrari were not at the top of
> their game. Haven't been since. They were iffy when Kimi won, by default.
>
> Given all the questions that every one is asking about Alonso and Vettel
> in Ferrari together, an Alonso retirement is the only sure fire answer
> to them.
>
> Every other answer is mere hope and crossed fingers. So much so, I cant
> wait. All 3 "hate" icons together waiting to explode? Fucking cant wait.
> Senna / Prost all over again, but this time in red. Awesome. Bernie must
> cancelling his Viagra subscription as I type.
>
> No, I am not predicting an Alonso retirement, but given F1's history of
> "surprises", ruling it out seems silly.
AC, I get your points. Stranger things happened in F1 in the past.
>
> Both were fine at the time, if anything Ferrari were not at the top of
> their game. Haven't been since. They were iffy when Kimi won, by default.
>
> Given all the questions that every one is asking about Alonso and Vettel
> in Ferrari together, an Alonso retirement is the only sure fire answer
> to them.
>
> Every other answer is mere hope and crossed fingers. So much so, I cant
> wait. All 3 "hate" icons together waiting to explode? Fucking cant wait.
> Senna / Prost all over again, but this time in red. Awesome. Bernie must
> cancelling his Viagra subscription as I type.
>
> No, I am not predicting an Alonso retirement, but given F1's history of
> "surprises", ruling it out seems silly.
However, I don't see FA losing his mojo (like MS did) or his interest
(like KR did) anytime soon. So, FA leaving or accepting an equal
treatment to anyone coming to Ferrari, do not appear as logical
developments to me.
>
> Oh, if this does come off, could Lewis jump to RBR? Could Merc simply be
> a layover as it were?
>
the game? I mean, it's not like Ross forgot all about engineering and
Merc has no means to do better, no? Sure, this might be BMW/Honda/Toyota
story allover again. But then... it might be something else altogether.
Lewis might be a spoiled brat, but he *is* the fastest out there. And
even if he sometimes confuses himself with an hip hop star, he is not
stupid. So, he might have a deeper knowledge of the things coming in
2013. At Macca *and* Merc!
I know, it's hard to believe after 3 years of struggle, MS and Rosberg
fighting the midfield and all. But there also might be a chance that
they have learned something out of those years and Ross/Merc/LH combined
might surprise us all next year.
Well, at least that's what I am hoping for. Them breaking the RBR
monopoly and bringing the fight back to established teams (RBR, Macca,
Ferrari) in 2013. Which, BTW, I hope Lotus and Kimi could do as well.
They look to me like they are on the verge of getting their act together.
Zeppo Marx
Oct 15, 2012, 8:04:17 PM10/15/12
to
On 16.10.12 00:25, AC wrote:
>
> Got to be said, Ferrari get all that extra money and influence, and they
> still cant put a dominant car together. Imagine how awful they would be
> with out all the extras. Seems that in reality, Ferrari are quite shit
> at building F1 cars. Even Alonso's 0.5sec isn't helping.
>
> Really, what a shit team.
>
AC, no! It was 0.6sec, remember! :)
>
> Got to be said, Ferrari get all that extra money and influence, and they
> still cant put a dominant car together. Imagine how awful they would be
> with out all the extras. Seems that in reality, Ferrari are quite shit
> at building F1 cars. Even Alonso's 0.5sec isn't helping.
>
> Really, what a shit team.
>
AC
Oct 15, 2012, 9:37:24 PM10/15/12
to
Zeppo Marx wrote:
> On 16.10.12 00:19, AC wrote:
>>
>> Both were fine at the time, if anything Ferrari were not at the top of
>> their game. Haven't been since. They were iffy when Kimi won, by default.
>>
>> Given all the questions that every one is asking about Alonso and Vettel
>> in Ferrari together, an Alonso retirement is the only sure fire answer
>> to them.
>>
>> Every other answer is mere hope and crossed fingers. So much so, I cant
>> wait. All 3 "hate" icons together waiting to explode? Fucking cant wait.
>> Senna / Prost all over again, but this time in red. Awesome. Bernie must
>> cancelling his Viagra subscription as I type.
>>
>> No, I am not predicting an Alonso retirement, but given F1's history of
>> "surprises", ruling it out seems silly.
>
> AC, I get your points. Stranger things happened in F1 in the past.
> However, I don't see FA losing his mojo (like MS did) or his interest
> (like KR did) anytime soon. So, FA leaving or accepting an equal
> treatment to anyone coming to Ferrari, do not appear as logical
> developments to me.
I agree, but we have this report. If Vettel does end up there, he isnt
> On 16.10.12 00:19, AC wrote:
>>
>> Both were fine at the time, if anything Ferrari were not at the top of
>> their game. Haven't been since. They were iffy when Kimi won, by default.
>>
>> Given all the questions that every one is asking about Alonso and Vettel
>> in Ferrari together, an Alonso retirement is the only sure fire answer
>> to them.
>>
>> Every other answer is mere hope and crossed fingers. So much so, I cant
>> wait. All 3 "hate" icons together waiting to explode? Fucking cant wait.
>> Senna / Prost all over again, but this time in red. Awesome. Bernie must
>> cancelling his Viagra subscription as I type.
>>
>> No, I am not predicting an Alonso retirement, but given F1's history of
>> "surprises", ruling it out seems silly.
>
> AC, I get your points. Stranger things happened in F1 in the past.
> However, I don't see FA losing his mojo (like MS did) or his interest
> (like KR did) anytime soon. So, FA leaving or accepting an equal
> treatment to anyone coming to Ferrari, do not appear as logical
> developments to me.
going to be No2, so something will have to give. Well, I say
"something", I mean Alonso.
Unless of course there is nothing true about the report.
>
>>
>> Oh, if this does come off, could Lewis jump to RBR? Could Merc simply be
>> a layover as it were?
>>
>
> Ferrari aside now, aren't we all writing off RossB & Merc too early in
> the game? I mean, it's not like Ross forgot all about engineering and
> Merc has no means to do better, no? Sure, this might be BMW/Honda/Toyota
> story allover again. But then... it might be something else altogether.
>
> Lewis might be a spoiled brat, but he *is* the fastest out there. And
> even if he sometimes confuses himself with an hip hop star, he is not
> stupid. So, he might have a deeper knowledge of the things coming in
> 2013. At Macca *and* Merc!
>
> I know, it's hard to believe after 3 years of struggle, MS and Rosberg
> fighting the midfield and all. But there also might be a chance that
> they have learned something out of those years and Ross/Merc/LH combined
> might surprise us all next year.
>
> Well, at least that's what I am hoping for. Them breaking the RBR
> monopoly and bringing the fight back to established teams (RBR, Macca,
> Ferrari) in 2013. Which, BTW, I hope Lotus and Kimi could do as well.
> They look to me like they are on the verge of getting their act together.
little bit more by now. Of course, if they do up their game, Hamilton
would be well placed to choose if RBR come knocking.
As I have suggested before, if the engines do change, then Merc might
have an edge to exploit, and what better place for Lewis to be, perhaps...
And yeah, it would be nice to see Merc and or Lotus challenge.
--
AC
AC
Oct 15, 2012, 9:38:21 PM10/15/12
to
--
AC
john.ku...@sympatico.ca
Oct 15, 2012, 9:56:32 PM10/15/12
to
On Monday, October 15, 2012 5:23:24 AM UTC-4, Bigbird wrote:
> ...in 2014
>
>
>
> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in 2014,
>
> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>
>
>
> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
>
> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>
>
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
Does that mean Ferrari have to be in a competitive position for Seb to move over to them? Otherwise he can choose to opt out?
> ...in 2014
>
>
>
> Double world champion Sebastian Vettel is set to join Ferrari in 2014,
>
> with Felipe Massa staying at the Italian team for 2013.
>
>
>
> Sources inside Ferrari say they have signed a contract with Vettel, 25,
>
> with an option to join in 2014 depending on their results.
>
>
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541
Noj
Oct 16, 2012, 1:12:29 AM10/16/12
to
Zeppo Marx wrote ...
<snippery>
>
> Ferrari aside now, aren't we all writing off RossB & Merc too early in
> the game? I mean, it's not like Ross forgot all about engineering and
> Merc has no means to do better, no? Sure, this might be BMW/Honda/Toyota
> story allover again. But then... it might be something else altogether.
>
> Lewis might be a spoiled brat, but he *is* the fastest out there. And
> even if he sometimes confuses himself with an hip hop star, he is not
> stupid. So, he might have a deeper knowledge of the things coming in
> 2013. At Macca *and* Merc!
>
> I know, it's hard to believe after 3 years of struggle, MS and Rosberg
> fighting the midfield and all. But there also might be a chance that
> they have learned something out of those years and Ross/Merc/LH combined
> might surprise us all next year.
>
> Well, at least that's what I am hoping for. Them breaking the RBR
> monopoly and bringing the fight back to established teams (RBR, Macca,
> Ferrari) in 2013. Which, BTW, I hope Lotus and Kimi could do as well.
> They look to me like they are on the verge of getting their act together.
Gary Anderson took a look at the current Mercedes during the BBC
programme. He pointed out that the front wing was a long way behind the
current designs of other teams. He said there was a large team at
Mercedes, but no apparent leader who was making decisions in the same
way that RB had Adrian Newey leading developments.
<snippery>
>
> Ferrari aside now, aren't we all writing off RossB & Merc too early in
> the game? I mean, it's not like Ross forgot all about engineering and
> Merc has no means to do better, no? Sure, this might be BMW/Honda/Toyota
> story allover again. But then... it might be something else altogether.
>
> Lewis might be a spoiled brat, but he *is* the fastest out there. And
> even if he sometimes confuses himself with an hip hop star, he is not
> stupid. So, he might have a deeper knowledge of the things coming in
> 2013. At Macca *and* Merc!
>
> I know, it's hard to believe after 3 years of struggle, MS and Rosberg
> fighting the midfield and all. But there also might be a chance that
> they have learned something out of those years and Ross/Merc/LH combined
> might surprise us all next year.
>
> Well, at least that's what I am hoping for. Them breaking the RBR
> monopoly and bringing the fight back to established teams (RBR, Macca,
> Ferrari) in 2013. Which, BTW, I hope Lotus and Kimi could do as well.
> They look to me like they are on the verge of getting their act together.
programme. He pointed out that the front wing was a long way behind the
current designs of other teams. He said there was a large team at
Mercedes, but no apparent leader who was making decisions in the same
way that RB had Adrian Newey leading developments.
Noj
Oct 16, 2012, 1:13:50 AM10/16/12
to
AC wrote ...
> >
>
> Got to be said, Ferrari get all that extra money and influence, and they
> still cant put a dominant car together. Imagine how awful they would be
> with out all the extras. Seems that in reality, Ferrari are quite shit
> at building F1 cars. Even Alonso's 0.5sec isn't helping.
>
> Really, what a shit team.
Do they need to win to achieve their aims? McLaren don't.
> >
>
> Got to be said, Ferrari get all that extra money and influence, and they
> still cant put a dominant car together. Imagine how awful they would be
> with out all the extras. Seems that in reality, Ferrari are quite shit
> at building F1 cars. Even Alonso's 0.5sec isn't helping.
>
> Really, what a shit team.
Bobster
Oct 16, 2012, 2:16:32 AM10/16/12
to
was retained by Ferrari in a non-driving role.
Contracts always have conditions in them or can be ended by mutual
consent. Ferrari fired Prost towards the end of the 1991 season when
he was contracted to them until end 1992. Fred did not have one-year
deal with McLaren.
Bigbird
Oct 16, 2012, 2:18:18 AM10/16/12
to
Keeping his arse covered. Of course 2014 will, unless Ferrari get their
way, be a very different year.
Zeppo Marx
Oct 16, 2012, 3:29:38 AM10/16/12
to
On 16.10.12 07:12, Noj wrote:
>
> Gary Anderson took a look at the current Mercedes during the BBC
> programme. He pointed out that the front wing was a long way behind the
> current designs of other teams. He said there was a large team at
> Mercedes, but no apparent leader who was making decisions in the same
> way that RB had Adrian Newey leading developments.
>
IMHO, they bought too many directors in the past. And then they have the
>
> Gary Anderson took a look at the current Mercedes during the BBC
> programme. He pointed out that the front wing was a long way behind the
> current designs of other teams. He said there was a large team at
> Mercedes, but no apparent leader who was making decisions in the same
> way that RB had Adrian Newey leading developments.
>
Merc CEO spending too much time around the tracks and team. And Haug is
not the gung-ho guy Merc really needs. I think they have way to many
Chefs cooking there.
AC
Oct 16, 2012, 3:35:26 AM10/16/12
to
Bobster wrote:
> On 15 Oct, 22:27, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>> Mark Jackson wrote:
>>> On 10/15/2012 2:09 PM, Zeppo Marx wrote:
>>>> On 15.10.12 16:57, AC wrote:
>>
>>>>> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>>
>>>> AFAIK, he is having a longer term contract with Ferrari, 2014
>>>> included. Maybe even longer.
>>
>>> "Alonso is under contract to Ferrari until the end of 2016," says
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541.
>>
>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>
> I'd bet that Kimi got every cent that was due to him.
Yup, and while you are there bet on the sun rising tomorrow. We know
> On 15 Oct, 22:27, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>> Mark Jackson wrote:
>>> On 10/15/2012 2:09 PM, Zeppo Marx wrote:
>>>> On 15.10.12 16:57, AC wrote:
>>
>>>>> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>>
>>>> AFAIK, he is having a longer term contract with Ferrari, 2014
>>>> included. Maybe even longer.
>>
>>> "Alonso is under contract to Ferrari until the end of 2016," says
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541.
>>
>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>
> I'd bet that Kimi got every cent that was due to him.
Kimi got ever penny.
> MS retired and
> was retained by Ferrari in a non-driving role.
>
> Contracts always have conditions in them or can be ended by mutual
> consent. Ferrari fired Prost towards the end of the 1991 season when
> he was contracted to them until end 1992. Fred did not have one-year
> deal with McLaren.
>
--
AC
AC
Oct 16, 2012, 3:36:52 AM10/16/12
to
--
AC
AC
Oct 16, 2012, 3:38:31 AM10/16/12
to
of a performance indication than 2012 is for 2013.
--
AC
Noj
Oct 16, 2012, 3:49:40 AM10/16/12
to
Zeppo Marx wrote ...
And one - Nick Fry - who'd have problems doing the washing up.
Noj
Oct 16, 2012, 3:57:21 AM10/16/12
to
AC wrote ...
McLaren have thrown away too many championships to be that worried about
winning them.
Look at this year - they started with the fastest car, then they allowed
Button to fuck around with it for no particular reason. Hamilton had to
fix it and just when it looked to be okay, the started making bollocks
after bollocks with silly things that shouldn't break. Why? Because
they couldn't be arsed to find out what was wrong with the gearbox.
Gary Anderson was stunned to see that Hamilton's car was left unattended
between practice 1 & 2. No one worked on the car or checked it over.
Big surprise in practice 2, it wasn't working properly and he only
qualified in 9th place.
Want to win - my arse.
winning them.
Look at this year - they started with the fastest car, then they allowed
Button to fuck around with it for no particular reason. Hamilton had to
fix it and just when it looked to be okay, the started making bollocks
after bollocks with silly things that shouldn't break. Why? Because
they couldn't be arsed to find out what was wrong with the gearbox.
Gary Anderson was stunned to see that Hamilton's car was left unattended
between practice 1 & 2. No one worked on the car or checked it over.
Big surprise in practice 2, it wasn't working properly and he only
qualified in 9th place.
Want to win - my arse.
Edmund
Oct 16, 2012, 4:56:57 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 02:01:23 +0200, Zeppo Marx wrote:
> On 16.10.12 00:19, AC wrote:
>>
>
> Lewis might be a spoiled brat,
True.
> On 16.10.12 00:19, AC wrote:
>>
>
> Lewis might be a spoiled brat,
> but he *is* the fastest out there.
> And even if he sometimes confuses himself with an hip hop star, he is
> not stupid. So, he might have a deeper knowledge of the things coming in
> 2013. At Macca *and* Merc!
Mercedes ) to see.
Knowing what a sneaky bastard he is, that might not have been plain
stupidity after all.
Edmund
Bobster
Oct 16, 2012, 5:29:36 AM10/16/12
to
On 16 Oct, 09:35, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> Bobster wrote:
> > On 15 Oct, 22:27, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> >> Mark Jackson wrote:
> >>> On 10/15/2012 2:09 PM, Zeppo Marx wrote:
> >>>> On 15.10.12 16:57, AC wrote:
>
> >>>>> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>
> >>>> AFAIK, he is having a longer term contract with Ferrari, 2014
> >>>> included. Maybe even longer.
>
> >>> "Alonso is under contract to Ferrari until the end of 2016," says
> >>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541.
>
> >> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>
> > I'd bet that Kimi got every cent that was due to him.
>
> Yup, and while you are there bet on the sun rising tomorrow. We know
> Kimi got ever penny.
>
> > MS retired and
> > was retained by Ferrari in a non-driving role.
>
> OK, had his contract run out?
Dunno. I don't recall talk of him having a seat for 2007, so either
> Bobster wrote:
> > On 15 Oct, 22:27, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> >> Mark Jackson wrote:
> >>> On 10/15/2012 2:09 PM, Zeppo Marx wrote:
> >>>> On 15.10.12 16:57, AC wrote:
>
> >>>>> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>
> >>>> AFAIK, he is having a longer term contract with Ferrari, 2014
> >>>> included. Maybe even longer.
>
> >>> "Alonso is under contract to Ferrari until the end of 2016," says
> >>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541.
>
> >> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>
> > I'd bet that Kimi got every cent that was due to him.
>
> Yup, and while you are there bet on the sun rising tomorrow. We know
> Kimi got ever penny.
>
> > MS retired and
> > was retained by Ferrari in a non-driving role.
>
> OK, had his contract run out?
the contract was up at the end of 2006 or he was on a year-by-year
deal with Ferrari.
Bobster
Oct 16, 2012, 5:34:59 AM10/16/12
to
On 16 Oct, 10:56, Edmund <nom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe, but he already twittered the McLaren data for everyone ( Hint:
> Mercedes ) to see.
> Knowing what a sneaky bastard he is, that might not have been plain
> stupidity after all.
I doubt there was much in the those tweeted traces that a rival team
> Maybe, but he already twittered the McLaren data for everyone ( Hint:
> Mercedes ) to see.
> Knowing what a sneaky bastard he is, that might not have been plain
> stupidity after all.
couldn't have figured out already anyway - like where Jenson was
faster than Lewis, who was faster in a straight line etc.
Indeed it may have hurt him more than the team. It may have sent a
signal out to other teams that Lewis is a loose cannon and that he
doesn't maintain a public facade of unity (as Schumacher did with
Ferrari even when engines were blowing up on parade laps).
Mark
Oct 16, 2012, 6:04:32 AM10/16/12
to
doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
Mercedes. Who would know? Doing it in plain view makes no sense
whatsoever.
Cock-up and stupidity trumps conspiracy 9 times out of 10...but if you
want to see conspiracy, it's everywhere - get your tin hats on!
Edmund
Oct 16, 2012, 6:31:26 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:04:32 +0000, Mark wrote:
> Bobster <mega...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 16 Oct, 10:56, Edmund <nom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe, but he already twittered the McLaren data for everyone ( Hint:
>>> Mercedes ) to see.
>>> Knowing what a sneaky bastard he is, that might not have been plain
>>> stupidity after all.
>>
>> I doubt there was much in the those tweeted traces that a rival team
>> couldn't have figured out already anyway - like where Jenson was faster
>> than Lewis, who was faster in a straight line etc.
>>
>> Indeed it may have hurt him more than the team. It may have sent a
>> signal out to other teams that Lewis is a loose cannon and that he
>> doesn't maintain a public facade of unity (as Schumacher did with
>> Ferrari even when engines were blowing up on parade laps).
>
> "Hamilton the cheat" is an obsession with Edmund. The fact that it
> doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
>
> If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
> Mercedes. Who would know? Doing it in plain view makes no sense
> whatsoever.
It does, it is done before and it fooled you. The latter was easy because
> Bobster <mega...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 16 Oct, 10:56, Edmund <nom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe, but he already twittered the McLaren data for everyone ( Hint:
>>> Mercedes ) to see.
>>> Knowing what a sneaky bastard he is, that might not have been plain
>>> stupidity after all.
>>
>> I doubt there was much in the those tweeted traces that a rival team
>> couldn't have figured out already anyway - like where Jenson was faster
>> than Lewis, who was faster in a straight line etc.
>>
>> Indeed it may have hurt him more than the team. It may have sent a
>> signal out to other teams that Lewis is a loose cannon and that he
>> doesn't maintain a public facade of unity (as Schumacher did with
>> Ferrari even when engines were blowing up on parade laps).
>
> "Hamilton the cheat" is an obsession with Edmund. The fact that it
> doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
>
> If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
> Mercedes. Who would know? Doing it in plain view makes no sense
> whatsoever.
of your love for Lewis who cannot do wrong it your eyes.
>
> Cock-up and stupidity trumps conspiracy 9 times out of 10...but if you
> want to see conspiracy, it's everywhere - get your tin hats on!
No there never was any conspiracy anywhere ever, right?
> Cock-up and stupidity trumps conspiracy 9 times out of 10...but if you
> want to see conspiracy, it's everywhere - get your tin hats on!
Tell that to yourself and your friends who make up insane conspiracy
stories about a driver you all hate so much...
Edmund
Bobster
Oct 16, 2012, 6:43:13 AM10/16/12
to
On 16 Oct, 12:04, Mark <mpco...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
portable medium, and he'd need to know WHAT data to dump. I'd bet that
he doesn't even have access to the really interesting stuff.
> Doing it in plain view makes no sense whatsoever.
It doesn't, but then doing even what he did do made little sense. Not
Lewis's smartest moment.
<snip>
> "Hamilton the cheat" is an obsession with Edmund. The fact that it
> doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
>
> If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
> Mercedes. Who would know?
Somebody would. Hamilton would have to dump data onto some kind of
> doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
>
> If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
> Mercedes. Who would know?
portable medium, and he'd need to know WHAT data to dump. I'd bet that
he doesn't even have access to the really interesting stuff.
> Doing it in plain view makes no sense whatsoever.
Lewis's smartest moment.
>
> Cock-up and stupidity trumps conspiracy 9 times out of 10...but if you
> want to see conspiracy, it's everywhere - get your tin hats on!
Indeed.
> Cock-up and stupidity trumps conspiracy 9 times out of 10...but if you
> want to see conspiracy, it's everywhere - get your tin hats on!
Bigbird
Oct 16, 2012, 7:05:44 AM10/16/12
to
Bobster wrote:
> On 16 Oct, 12:04, Mark <mpco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > "Hamilton the cheat" is an obsession with Edmund. The fact that it
> > doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
> >
> > If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
> > Mercedes. Who would know?
> Somebody would. Hamilton would have to dump data onto some kind of
> portable medium, and he'd need to know WHAT data to dump. I'd bet that
> he doesn't even have access to the really interesting stuff.
>
Like taking a picture on his phone? Try keeping in the context of
> On 16 Oct, 12:04, Mark <mpco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > "Hamilton the cheat" is an obsession with Edmund. The fact that it
> > doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
> >
> > If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
> > Mercedes. Who would know?
> Somebody would. Hamilton would have to dump data onto some kind of
> portable medium, and he'd need to know WHAT data to dump. I'd bet that
> he doesn't even have access to the really interesting stuff.
>
Edmunds post.
Mark
Oct 16, 2012, 9:38:28 AM10/16/12
to
Edmund <nom...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:04:32 +0000, Mark wrote:
>>
>> "Hamilton the cheat" is an obsession with Edmund. The fact that it
>> doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
>>
>> If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
>> Mercedes. Who would know? Doing it in plain view makes no sense
>> whatsoever.
>
> It does, it is done before and it fooled you. The latter was easy because
> of your love for Lewis who cannot do wrong it your eyes.
Go back and read my posts over the years. I think you'll find you've
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:04:32 +0000, Mark wrote:
>>
>> "Hamilton the cheat" is an obsession with Edmund. The fact that it
>> doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
>>
>> If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
>> Mercedes. Who would know? Doing it in plain view makes no sense
>> whatsoever.
>
> It does, it is done before and it fooled you. The latter was easy because
> of your love for Lewis who cannot do wrong it your eyes.
got me mixed up with someone else.
>> Cock-up and stupidity trumps conspiracy 9 times out of 10...but if you
>> want to see conspiracy, it's everywhere - get your tin hats on!
>
> No there never was any conspiracy anywhere ever, right?
> Tell that to yourself and your friends who make up insane conspiracy
> stories about a driver you all hate so much...
sense as a conspiracy.
You really need to stop attacking anyone who disagrees with you,
though...
Noj
Oct 16, 2012, 10:23:30 AM10/16/12
to
Bigbird wrote ...
>
> Bobster wrote:
>
> > On 16 Oct, 12:04, Mark <mpco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > "Hamilton the cheat" is an obsession with Edmund. The fact that it
> > > doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
> > >
> > > If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
> > > Mercedes. Who would know?
> > Somebody would. Hamilton would have to dump data onto some kind of
> > portable medium, and he'd need to know WHAT data to dump. I'd bet that
> > he doesn't even have access to the really interesting stuff.
> >
>
> Like taking a picture on his phone? Try keeping in the context of
> Edmunds post.
>
When Fred was passing all that Ferrari data around, Lewis was kept out
of the loop because he hadn't got a clue how to use computers.
There you go - what Bobby Boy wanted to say, but in 2 lines - not 200.
>
> Bobster wrote:
>
> > On 16 Oct, 12:04, Mark <mpco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > "Hamilton the cheat" is an obsession with Edmund. The fact that it
> > > doesn't make sense doesn't matter.
> > >
> > > If he wanted to leak the data to Mercedes, he just leaks the data to
> > > Mercedes. Who would know?
> > Somebody would. Hamilton would have to dump data onto some kind of
> > portable medium, and he'd need to know WHAT data to dump. I'd bet that
> > he doesn't even have access to the really interesting stuff.
> >
>
> Like taking a picture on his phone? Try keeping in the context of
> Edmunds post.
>
of the loop because he hadn't got a clue how to use computers.
There you go - what Bobby Boy wanted to say, but in 2 lines - not 200.
John Briggs
Oct 16, 2012, 11:38:41 AM10/16/12
to
On 16/10/2012 08:35, AC wrote:
> Bobster wrote:
>> On 15 Oct, 22:27, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>>> Mark Jackson wrote:
>>>> On 10/15/2012 2:09 PM, Zeppo Marx wrote:
>>>>> On 15.10.12 16:57, AC wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>>>
>>>>> AFAIK, he is having a longer term contract with Ferrari, 2014
>>>>> included. Maybe even longer.
>>>
>>>> "Alonso is under contract to Ferrari until the end of 2016," says
>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541.
>>>
>>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>>
>> I'd bet that Kimi got every cent that was due to him.
>
> Yup, and while you are there bet on the sun rising tomorrow. We know
> Kimi got ever penny.
>
>> MS retired and
>> was retained by Ferrari in a non-driving role.
>
> OK, had his contract run out?
Yes, it had. It was exactly the same situation as this year - he was
> Bobster wrote:
>> On 15 Oct, 22:27, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>>> Mark Jackson wrote:
>>>> On 10/15/2012 2:09 PM, Zeppo Marx wrote:
>>>>> On 15.10.12 16:57, AC wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> What if Alonso is preparing to retire by then?
>>>
>>>>> AFAIK, he is having a longer term contract with Ferrari, 2014
>>>>> included. Maybe even longer.
>>>
>>>> "Alonso is under contract to Ferrari until the end of 2016," says
>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/19941541.
>>>
>>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>>
>> I'd bet that Kimi got every cent that was due to him.
>
> Yup, and while you are there bet on the sun rising tomorrow. We know
> Kimi got ever penny.
>
>> MS retired and
>> was retained by Ferrari in a non-driving role.
>
> OK, had his contract run out?
offered a new contract, but didn't sign it because he didn't like the
terms (specifically, that he wouldn't have clear No. 1 status.)
--
John Briggs
a425couple
Oct 16, 2012, 12:16:16 PM10/16/12
to
"Zeppo Marx" <zeppo...@gmx.net> wrote in message...
> stay there for quite some time (but at least 2013/2014). Kimi and MS wer
> not (any more), for what reasons ever.
Well, if I recall correctly, MS was still at very good form,
and Ferrari offered him a good contract, and waited,
and waited, and MS delayed, trying to chose between
staying, or retiring (OK valid enough).
Ferrari decided they could not wait forever for him to
make up his mind (OK, that's also valid). So, they
moved on to protect themselves.
And so, indecision being a decision of it's very own style,
life goes on, & he was "retired".
> On 15.10.12 22:27, AC wrote:
>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>
> Yeah, true. However, Fernando is on top of his game and I expect him to
>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>
> stay there for quite some time (but at least 2013/2014). Kimi and MS wer
> not (any more), for what reasons ever.
Well, if I recall correctly, MS was still at very good form,
and Ferrari offered him a good contract, and waited,
and waited, and MS delayed, trying to chose between
staying, or retiring (OK valid enough).
Ferrari decided they could not wait forever for him to
make up his mind (OK, that's also valid). So, they
moved on to protect themselves.
And so, indecision being a decision of it's very own style,
life goes on, & he was "retired".
Noj
Oct 16, 2012, 12:43:08 PM10/16/12
to
a425couple wrote ...
Replace Ferrari with Mercedes and you've got 2012.
John Briggs
Oct 16, 2012, 12:43:20 PM10/16/12
to
On 16/10/2012 17:16, a425couple wrote:
> "Zeppo Marx" <zeppo...@gmx.net> wrote in message...
>> On 15.10.12 22:27, AC wrote:
>>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>>
>> Yeah, true. However, Fernando is on top of his game and I expect him
>> to stay there for quite some time (but at least 2013/2014). Kimi and
>> MS wer not (any more), for what reasons ever.
>
> Well, if I recall correctly, MS was still at very good form
No, it was obvious to all of us that he had lost it.
> "Zeppo Marx" <zeppo...@gmx.net> wrote in message...
>> On 15.10.12 22:27, AC wrote:
>>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>>
>> Yeah, true. However, Fernando is on top of his game and I expect him
>> to stay there for quite some time (but at least 2013/2014). Kimi and
>> MS wer not (any more), for what reasons ever.
>
> Well, if I recall correctly, MS was still at very good form
--
John Briggs
John Briggs
Oct 16, 2012, 12:44:56 PM10/16/12
to
>
> Replace Ferrari with Mercedes and you've got 2012.
And I would say that it is for exactly the same reason - status within
> Replace Ferrari with Mercedes and you've got 2012.
the team.
--
John Briggs
Bigbird
Oct 16, 2012, 12:58:30 PM10/16/12
to
John Briggs
Oct 16, 2012, 1:09:31 PM10/16/12
to
--
John Briggs
Bigbird
Oct 16, 2012, 1:29:13 PM10/16/12
to
If not I take issue with your phrasing.
AC
Oct 16, 2012, 1:49:52 PM10/16/12
to
and driver, but I do think McLaren might be in a bit of trouble. Im
still not completely convinced that despite all they say, they could
afford to keep Hamilton there. I wonder if several factors have drained
income, and with that performance. And that is a spiral we have seen
before.
But, no matter what any one says, I will always believe that McLaren
expect to win, and that not winning hurts. This is the team who think
being second is merely the first of the losers. Sure they could survive
with out winning, but they don't want that at all.
--
AC
John Briggs
Oct 16, 2012, 1:52:23 PM10/16/12
to
clear pattern which maps across to what happened this year at Mercedes.
--
John Briggs
Bobster
Oct 16, 2012, 1:55:45 PM10/16/12
to
On 16 Oct, 18:43, John Briggs <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On 16/10/2012 17:16, a425couple wrote:
<snip>
> On 16/10/2012 17:16, a425couple wrote:
> > Well, if I recall correctly, MS was still at very good form
>
> No, it was obvious to all of us that he had lost it.
He put in some good drives that year. One of them ironically at Monaco
>
> No, it was obvious to all of us that he had lost it.
where he finished in the points after being sent to the back of the
grid. He also put in a good come-back drive at Brazil. He won 7 races,
the same number as Alonso, and was 13 points off at the end of the
season. Not bad for somebody who had lost it.
If he'd had stayed retired we'd have been able to remember a guy going
out near the top when he was still able to mix it at the front.
Noj
Oct 16, 2012, 2:17:43 PM10/16/12
to
AC wrote ...
<snippery>
>
> Well, I'll grant you that I don't think things are 100% now between team
> and driver, but I do think McLaren might be in a bit of trouble. Im
> still not completely convinced that despite all they say, they could
> afford to keep Hamilton there. I wonder if several factors have drained
> income, and with that performance. And that is a spiral we have seen
> before.
They will have to start paying for engines next year. That'll cost them
£8m. Track kits are also becoming more expensive, due to the transport
costs of fetching them from Aus to Europe in a canoe.
There is talk that Vodafone is cutting sponsorship or even leaving,
which gave rise to rumours of Coke taking over. Coke have rival
products to Red Bull and might want to cash in on the image RB have got
in sport.
> But, no matter what any one says, I will always believe that McLaren
> expect to win, and that not winning hurts. This is the team who think
> being second is merely the first of the losers. Sure they could survive
> with out winning, but they don't want that at all.
The "second is first loser" is thrown out regularly by athletes, it's a
sound bite that means fuck all. Much the same as the LH "thanks to all
the guys for helping me win" speech he trots out on the slowing down lap
after every victory. I wish just once we could hear Kimi or someone
telling the team that he was seriously fucked off and someone should get
the sack for fucking up his race.
<snippery>
>
> Well, I'll grant you that I don't think things are 100% now between team
> and driver, but I do think McLaren might be in a bit of trouble. Im
> still not completely convinced that despite all they say, they could
> afford to keep Hamilton there. I wonder if several factors have drained
> income, and with that performance. And that is a spiral we have seen
> before.
£8m. Track kits are also becoming more expensive, due to the transport
costs of fetching them from Aus to Europe in a canoe.
There is talk that Vodafone is cutting sponsorship or even leaving,
which gave rise to rumours of Coke taking over. Coke have rival
products to Red Bull and might want to cash in on the image RB have got
in sport.
> But, no matter what any one says, I will always believe that McLaren
> expect to win, and that not winning hurts. This is the team who think
> being second is merely the first of the losers. Sure they could survive
> with out winning, but they don't want that at all.
sound bite that means fuck all. Much the same as the LH "thanks to all
the guys for helping me win" speech he trots out on the slowing down lap
after every victory. I wish just once we could hear Kimi or someone
telling the team that he was seriously fucked off and someone should get
the sack for fucking up his race.
Bigbird
Oct 16, 2012, 2:42:15 PM10/16/12
to
rather that it is not inconsistent with the widely held notion that he
had no.1 status before that time.
> - which shows a
> clear pattern which maps across to what happened this year at
> Mercedes.
these last few years and how it might have changed next year?
Zeppo Marx
Oct 16, 2012, 2:50:28 PM10/16/12
to
On 16.10.12 19:55, Bobster wrote:
>
> If he'd had stayed retired we'd have been able to remember a guy going
> out near the top when he was still able to mix it at the front.
>
Well, I know that MS is not highly regarded in this group because of his
>
> If he'd had stayed retired we'd have been able to remember a guy going
> out near the top when he was still able to mix it at the front.
>
undeniable lack of proper sportsmanship. But I still think his second
stint in F1 should be judged separately. I, for my part, see it that
way. For me, it just showed that he is a real racer, with petrol in his
blood. He could have chosen to do whatever else he desires in this
world. And, with reported fortune of some €600M in his account, he could
have done so easily. But he chose to take the offer presented to him (no
one was forced to do this) and do F1 again.
Apparently the comeback didn't pan out the way MS and Merc hoped it
will. And by coming back he even screwed up some of his best statistics
(average ranking per race, average points per race, average pols per
race, average wins per race are only a few that came to mind, but there
might be others). But I still admire his guts. It takes brass balls to
do what he did, IMHO.
So, in regard to his second stint in F1, I'll remember the guy who:
- won it all and still chose to come back after 3 years of retirement
and try it again.
- knew he would not be able to get a winner car his first season but who
believed he can help create one for the next. Or the year after.
- fought as good and as hard as he could, even if he couldn't match the
best of them (whereby at least a part of this fact is owned to the car
he was driving)
- did what he loves most, at an age where other top athletes already
forgot that they were one once.
- was earning reported $30M per season, although younger (and possibly
better) drivers need to bring top dough just to be able to enter the F1.
In my book, that's not the worst he could do with 3 years of his life.
Especially at his age.
John Briggs
Oct 16, 2012, 3:17:05 PM10/16/12
to
have No. 1 status.
>> - which shows a
>> clear pattern which maps across to what happened this year at
>> Mercedes.
>
> Not at all. What are you claiming with regard to status in the team
> these last few years and how it might have changed next year?
--
John Briggs
Bobster
Oct 17, 2012, 1:43:17 AM10/17/12
to
On 16 Oct, 20:50, Zeppo Marx <zeppo.m...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On 16.10.12 19:55, Bobster wrote:
>
>
>
> > If he'd had stayed retired we'd have been able to remember a guy going
> > out near the top when he was still able to mix it at the front.
>
> Well, I know that MS is not highly regarded in this group because of his
> undeniable lack of proper sportsmanship. But I still think his second
> stint in F1 should be judged separately. I, for my part, see it that
> way. For me, it just showed that he is a real racer, with petrol in his
> blood. He could have chosen to do whatever else he desires in this
> world. And, with reported fortune of some 600M in his account, he could
> have done so easily. But he chose to take the offer presented to him (no
> one was forced to do this) and do F1 again.
I don't know what he was expecting to achieve, what his reasons for
> On 16.10.12 19:55, Bobster wrote:
>
>
>
> > If he'd had stayed retired we'd have been able to remember a guy going
> > out near the top when he was still able to mix it at the front.
>
> Well, I know that MS is not highly regarded in this group because of his
> undeniable lack of proper sportsmanship. But I still think his second
> stint in F1 should be judged separately. I, for my part, see it that
> way. For me, it just showed that he is a real racer, with petrol in his
> blood. He could have chosen to do whatever else he desires in this
> world. And, with reported fortune of some 600M in his account, he could
> have done so easily. But he chose to take the offer presented to him (no
> one was forced to do this) and do F1 again.
and how much satisfaction he got (or didn't get). I must confess I
didn't think he'd stick at it for three seasons, but I don't know
whether to praise him for his persistence or point a finger at him for
not realising that he was yesterday's man.
I think your take on things is valid, although I differ with it. It
would be interesting to know if Mercedes (the parent company, not the
race team) think they got their money's worth. Schumacher may have
remained a potent icon for marketing purposes.
Next year we'll find out how good Merc really are. Hamilton is a known
quantity. It may be that the team are short of a top flight driver. It
may be that there are other flaws.
Bobster
Oct 17, 2012, 2:01:17 AM10/17/12
to
On 16 Oct, 17:38, John Briggs <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
<snip>
on the table before Merc signed Hamilton. Rosberg was already
guaranteed a seat for 2013.
2006 seems to have been the final chapter of an internal power
struggle within Ferrari with Montezemolo asserting himself over the
Schumacher/Todt clique. My reading of that situation was that Monty
was concerned about the long-term good of Ferrari whilst he perceived
Schumacher, Todt and co being concerned only with their own repuation.
And I think his concerns were valid. Schumacher could retire any time
he liked, taking the rest of the super team with him whilst Ferrari
would have to live on with an unplanned succession. Implied in all of
this is that Schumacher could have driven on for Ferrari in 2007, but
on Monty's terms.
2012 is less clear to me, except that Schumacher's bargaining position
(if he was trying to bargain) was clearly weakened by having been
consistently out performed by a not particularly illustrious team mate
and the availability of one of the fastest drivers currently in F1.
<snip>
> Yes, it had. It was exactly the same situation as this year - he was
> offered a new contract, but didn't sign it because he didn't like the
> terms (specifically, that he wouldn't have clear No. 1 status.)
OK... that presupposes that Schumacher turned down what ever offer was
> offered a new contract, but didn't sign it because he didn't like the
> terms (specifically, that he wouldn't have clear No. 1 status.)
on the table before Merc signed Hamilton. Rosberg was already
guaranteed a seat for 2013.
2006 seems to have been the final chapter of an internal power
struggle within Ferrari with Montezemolo asserting himself over the
Schumacher/Todt clique. My reading of that situation was that Monty
was concerned about the long-term good of Ferrari whilst he perceived
Schumacher, Todt and co being concerned only with their own repuation.
And I think his concerns were valid. Schumacher could retire any time
he liked, taking the rest of the super team with him whilst Ferrari
would have to live on with an unplanned succession. Implied in all of
this is that Schumacher could have driven on for Ferrari in 2007, but
on Monty's terms.
2012 is less clear to me, except that Schumacher's bargaining position
(if he was trying to bargain) was clearly weakened by having been
consistently out performed by a not particularly illustrious team mate
and the availability of one of the fastest drivers currently in F1.
Bigbird
Oct 17, 2012, 2:24:20 AM10/17/12
to
You're unconvincing.
>
> > > - which shows a
> > > clear pattern which maps across to what happened this year at
> > > Mercedes.
> >
> > Not at all. What are you claiming with regard to status in the team
> > these last few years and how it might have changed next year?
>
> We can infer the same.
along with you.
Personally I fail to see any similarity other than MS has not signed a
new contract.
"We" can as easily infer you have a non-sequitur based on a fallacy.
Zeppo Marx
Oct 17, 2012, 2:33:34 AM10/17/12
to
On 17.10.12 07:43, Bobster wrote:
>
> Next year we'll find out how good Merc really are. Hamilton is a known
> quantity. It may be that the team are short of a top flight driver. It
> may be that there are other flaws.
>
I hope Merc will up their game. I fear they will not.
>
> Next year we'll find out how good Merc really are. Hamilton is a known
> quantity. It may be that the team are short of a top flight driver. It
> may be that there are other flaws.
>
I may have listened to one too many interviews with Haug, MS, NR and
even RB telling how, although the result was not showing it, there is a
progress and next races will show it.
I think I mentioned that in another thread: Merc talk reminds me of an
very old pub in the old city of Cologne. When you enter it, the first
thing you see is an old, battered enamel sign out of 1920s saying "Free
Beer Tomorrow!"
Bobster
Oct 17, 2012, 4:24:12 AM10/17/12
to
On 15 Oct, 14:43, Zeppo Marx <zeppo.m...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On 15.10.12 11:57, Bigbird wrote:
>
>
>
> > Perhaps that both cars have similar performance?
>
> In terms of the cars, better or similar performance, as I would guess.
> However, I still cannot imagine those two Alpha males (FA and SV) in one
> team. Especially one based on #1 and #2 driver strategy for many years.
>
> Now, if this really is bound to happen, who would be the #1 and who
> would be the #2?
> FA went to Ferrari to become undisputed #1 and he is.
Or is he?
James Allen reports a recent quote from Montezemolo: "first Fernando
should win the world title and then we will certainly not put anyone
alongside him who would bother him. It is the case that the decisions
on drivers are taken by us, obviously sharing them with him."
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2012/10/first-alonso-should-win-the-title-then-we-wont-hire-a-team-mate-who-bothers-him/
Now I read that as
1) We make the driver selections, not Fernando. He's kept in the loop
but that's all.
2) Fernando's achievements are not such that he is guaranteed number 1
status and thus a non-threatening number 2.
> On 15.10.12 11:57, Bigbird wrote:
>
>
>
> > Perhaps that both cars have similar performance?
>
> In terms of the cars, better or similar performance, as I would guess.
> However, I still cannot imagine those two Alpha males (FA and SV) in one
> team. Especially one based on #1 and #2 driver strategy for many years.
>
> Now, if this really is bound to happen, who would be the #1 and who
> would be the #2?
> FA went to Ferrari to become undisputed #1 and he is.
Or is he?
James Allen reports a recent quote from Montezemolo: "first Fernando
should win the world title and then we will certainly not put anyone
alongside him who would bother him. It is the case that the decisions
on drivers are taken by us, obviously sharing them with him."
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2012/10/first-alonso-should-win-the-title-then-we-wont-hire-a-team-mate-who-bothers-him/
Now I read that as
1) We make the driver selections, not Fernando. He's kept in the loop
but that's all.
2) Fernando's achievements are not such that he is guaranteed number 1
status and thus a non-threatening number 2.
John Briggs
Oct 17, 2012, 5:52:50 AM10/17/12
to
On 17/10/2012 07:01, Bobster wrote:
> On 16 Oct, 17:38, John Briggs<john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> <snip>
>> Yes, it had. It was exactly the same situation as this year - he was
>> offered a new contract, but didn't sign it because he didn't like the
>> terms (specifically, that he wouldn't have clear No. 1 status.)
>
> OK... that presupposes that Schumacher turned down what ever offer was
> on the table before Merc signed Hamilton. Rosberg was already
> guaranteed a seat for 2013.
No, it doesn't - Massa was "guaranteed" a seat for 2007. I think the
> On 16 Oct, 17:38, John Briggs<john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> <snip>
>> Yes, it had. It was exactly the same situation as this year - he was
>> offered a new contract, but didn't sign it because he didn't like the
>> terms (specifically, that he wouldn't have clear No. 1 status.)
>
> OK... that presupposes that Schumacher turned down what ever offer was
> on the table before Merc signed Hamilton. Rosberg was already
> guaranteed a seat for 2013.
initial idea was that Mercedes would have a "dream team" of Schumacher
and Hamilton and McLaren could have Rosberg.
--
John Briggs
Bobster
Oct 17, 2012, 6:06:59 AM10/17/12
to
signed (2011 IIRC) a contract extension that would keep him at Merc
until end 2013 at least. His was never the backside on the line. I
think the version of events in the public domain is likely to be the
truth and is certainly plausible: Schumacher was not communicating
what is intentions were, Hamilton became available and Merc pounced.
2007, as I recall, was a game of 3 drivers, 2 seats, with Massa being
incumbent but not having a guarantee. In fact the only one who had any
guarantee of anything at all was Raikkonen, who was going to get a non-
trivial payout if Ferrari didn't give him a drive. Massa's seat was
only guaranteed once Schumacher decided to retire. Todt might have had
other ideas, but it turned out that he only thought he was running
Ferrari.
Zeppo Marx
Oct 17, 2012, 6:17:21 AM10/17/12
to
On 17.10.12 10:24, Bobster wrote:
>
> Or is he?
>
> James Allen reports a recent quote from Montezemolo: "first Fernando
> should win the world title and then we will certainly not put anyone
> alongside him who would bother him. It is the case that the decisions
> on drivers are taken by us, obviously sharing them with him."
> http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2012/10/first-alonso-should-win-the-title-then-we-wont-hire-a-team-mate-who-bothers-him/
>
> Now I read that as
> 1) We make the driver selections, not Fernando. He's kept in the loop
> but that's all.
> 2) Fernando's achievements are not such that he is guaranteed number 1
> status and thus a non-threatening number 2.
>
Interesting read. And, if true, I am supporting his view.
>
> Or is he?
>
> James Allen reports a recent quote from Montezemolo: "first Fernando
> should win the world title and then we will certainly not put anyone
> alongside him who would bother him. It is the case that the decisions
> on drivers are taken by us, obviously sharing them with him."
> http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2012/10/first-alonso-should-win-the-title-then-we-wont-hire-a-team-mate-who-bothers-him/
>
> Now I read that as
> 1) We make the driver selections, not Fernando. He's kept in the loop
> but that's all.
> 2) Fernando's achievements are not such that he is guaranteed number 1
> status and thus a non-threatening number 2.
>
However, those are words only. We already had many situations in F1
(especially but not exclusively from Ferrari side) which were
diametrically opposed to things we all could witness on tracks and
around F1 business.
I am not claiming one way or the other is the sole truth and I am used
to take anything said and written in F1 with a healthy grain of salt.
Nevertheless, I still believe that FA went to Ferrari to become the
undisputed #1. And that he became exactly that is my opinion based on
facts we all witnessed.
Bigbird
Oct 17, 2012, 7:04:08 AM10/17/12
to
Hamilton subsequent to Schumacher failing to sign (not refusing ie.
rejecting an offer as such).
a425couple
Oct 17, 2012, 9:58:18 AM10/17/12
to
"Bobster" <mega...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
For whatever it may turn out to be worth,
Someone at "Autoweek" in the last month wrote
of the opinion that over the 2011-2012 winter Brawn
was able to add some vital manager & designer people,
and although it was too late for the 2012 car,
that is was quite likely to show big improvement next year.
And, adding some perspective to it,
Brawn & MS at Benneton, took 3 years to advance
to serious numbers of GP wins.
Brawn & MS at Ferrari, took 4 years to advance
to really serious numbers of GP wins.
We will see.
Someone at "Autoweek" in the last month wrote
of the opinion that over the 2011-2012 winter Brawn
was able to add some vital manager & designer people,
and although it was too late for the 2012 car,
that is was quite likely to show big improvement next year.
And, adding some perspective to it,
Brawn & MS at Benneton, took 3 years to advance
to serious numbers of GP wins.
Brawn & MS at Ferrari, took 4 years to advance
to really serious numbers of GP wins.
We will see.
a425couple
Oct 17, 2012, 10:04:48 AM10/17/12
to
"John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message...
Sheesh!!
So, in your opinion, when M. Schumacher could only win
7 GPs in a year, that showed that 'obviously' "that he had lost it."
I had thought that you did not like MS?
That above opinion of yours is a mighty high complement to him!
So, in your opinion, when M. Schumacher could only win
7 GPs in a year, that showed that 'obviously' "that he had lost it."
I had thought that you did not like MS?
That above opinion of yours is a mighty high complement to him!
WrongWayWade
Oct 17, 2012, 10:13:03 AM10/17/12
to
RzR wrote:
>> all Horner's words) is de facto #1 at RBR. Would FA accept losing his
>> status in the team he invested a few years and many good results?
>> Would SV move from his #1 status in a good team just for the sake of
>> moving? Accepting the #2 at Ferrari?
>>
>> I can imagine a lot, but both dropping their #1 status and accepting
>> the equal treatment? That I cannot.
>
> having both crying bitches like alonso and vettel when things arent
> going their ways, its just going to be priceless to watch
I'm looking forward to "Sebastian is faster than you.... Do you acknowledge
this tranmission?"
> On 15.10.2012. 14:43, Zeppo Marx wrote:
>> On 15.10.12 11:57, Bigbird wrote:
>>>
>>> Perhaps that both cars have similar performance?
>>>
>>
>> In terms of the cars, better or similar performance, as I would
>> guess. However, I still cannot imagine those two Alpha males (FA and
>> SV) in one team. Especially one based on #1 and #2 driver strategy
>> for many years. Now, if this really is bound to happen, who would be the
>> #1 and who
>> would be the #2?
>> FA went to Ferrari to become undisputed #1 and he is. And SV (against
>> On 15.10.12 11:57, Bigbird wrote:
>>>
>>> Perhaps that both cars have similar performance?
>>>
>>
>> In terms of the cars, better or similar performance, as I would
>> guess. However, I still cannot imagine those two Alpha males (FA and
>> SV) in one team. Especially one based on #1 and #2 driver strategy
>> for many years. Now, if this really is bound to happen, who would be the
>> #1 and who
>> would be the #2?
>> all Horner's words) is de facto #1 at RBR. Would FA accept losing his
>> status in the team he invested a few years and many good results?
>> Would SV move from his #1 status in a good team just for the sake of
>> moving? Accepting the #2 at Ferrari?
>>
>> I can imagine a lot, but both dropping their #1 status and accepting
>> the equal treatment? That I cannot.
>
> having both crying bitches like alonso and vettel when things arent
> going their ways, its just going to be priceless to watch
I'm looking forward to "Sebastian is faster than you.... Do you acknowledge
this tranmission?"
a425couple
Oct 17, 2012, 10:29:20 AM10/17/12
to
"John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message...
> Noj wrote:
>> a425couple wrote ...
>>> "Zeppo Marx"<zeppo...@gmx.net> wrote in message...
>>>> On 15.10.12 22:27, AC wrote:
>>>>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>>>> Yeah, true. However, Fernando is on top of his game and I expect him to
>>>> stay there for quite some time (but at least 2013/2014). Kimi and MS
>>>> wer
>>>> not (any more), for what reasons ever.
>>>
>>> Well, if I recall correctly, MS was still at very good form,
>>> and Ferrari offered him a good contract, and waited,
>>> and waited, and MS delayed, trying to chose between
>>> staying, or retiring (OK valid enough).
>>> Ferrari decided they could not wait forever for him to
>>> make up his mind (OK, that's also valid). So, they
>>> moved on to protect themselves.
>>> And so, indecision being a decision of it's very own style,
>>> life goes on,& he was "retired".
>>
>> Replace Ferrari with Mercedes and you've got 2012.
Yes.
>> a425couple wrote ...
>>> "Zeppo Marx"<zeppo...@gmx.net> wrote in message...
>>>> On 15.10.12 22:27, AC wrote:
>>>>> Wasn't Kimi under contract when he left Ferrari? What about MS?
>>>> Yeah, true. However, Fernando is on top of his game and I expect him to
>>>> stay there for quite some time (but at least 2013/2014). Kimi and MS
>>>> wer
>>>> not (any more), for what reasons ever.
>>>
>>> Well, if I recall correctly, MS was still at very good form,
>>> and Ferrari offered him a good contract, and waited,
>>> and waited, and MS delayed, trying to chose between
>>> staying, or retiring (OK valid enough).
>>> Ferrari decided they could not wait forever for him to
>>> make up his mind (OK, that's also valid). So, they
>>> moved on to protect themselves.
>>> And so, indecision being a decision of it's very own style,
>>> life goes on,& he was "retired".
>>
>> Replace Ferrari with Mercedes and you've got 2012.
> And I would say that it is for exactly the same reason - status within the
That opinion of 2006 fails to pass logic.
Your posted opinion requires the belief that MS after having
won 7 WDCs, and 5 of them with Ferrari, and in that
year having won 7 GPs, was worried about his status
as regards new driver Massa who had won 2 GPs.
No. MS then, as now, was indecisive as to the offered
contract, because he had valid personal choices as to
what he WANTED to do (with the rest of his life).
(IMHO, it is nice, when one has been fortunate and
lucky enough, to have real choices!
Do I really want to keep doing this? )
AC
Oct 17, 2012, 1:07:56 PM10/17/12
to
Noj wrote:
> AC wrote ...
>
> <snippery>
>
>>
>> Well, I'll grant you that I don't think things are 100% now between team
>> and driver, but I do think McLaren might be in a bit of trouble. Im
>> still not completely convinced that despite all they say, they could
>> afford to keep Hamilton there. I wonder if several factors have drained
>> income, and with that performance. And that is a spiral we have seen
>> before.
>
> They will have to start paying for engines next year. That'll cost them
> £8m.
Indeed.
> AC wrote ...
>
> <snippery>
>
>>
>> Well, I'll grant you that I don't think things are 100% now between team
>> and driver, but I do think McLaren might be in a bit of trouble. Im
>> still not completely convinced that despite all they say, they could
>> afford to keep Hamilton there. I wonder if several factors have drained
>> income, and with that performance. And that is a spiral we have seen
>> before.
>
> They will have to start paying for engines next year. That'll cost them
> £8m.
> Track kits are also becoming more expensive, due to the transport
> costs of fetching them from Aus to Europe in a canoe.
>
> There is talk that Vodafone is cutting sponsorship or even leaving,
> which gave rise to rumours of Coke taking over. Coke have rival
> products to Red Bull and might want to cash in on the image RB have got
> in sport.
>
>
>> But, no matter what any one says, I will always believe that McLaren
>> expect to win, and that not winning hurts. This is the team who think
>> being second is merely the first of the losers. Sure they could survive
>> with out winning, but they don't want that at all.
>
> The "second is first loser" is thrown out regularly by athletes, it's a
> sound bite that means fuck all. Much the same as the LH "thanks to all
> the guys for helping me win" speech he trots out on the slowing down lap
> after every victory. I wish just once we could hear Kimi or someone
> telling the team that he was seriously fucked off and someone should get
> the sack for fucking up his race.
>
decades ago.
--
AC
John Briggs
Oct 17, 2012, 4:31:51 PM10/17/12
to
1 status. MS was accordingly offered a contract without that - which he
wouldn't sign. Ferrari therefore went ahead with Kimi and Massa - and
announced MS's retirement.
--
John Briggs
Bigbird
Oct 17, 2012, 4:49:18 PM10/17/12
to
these assertions have any basis in fact?
Zeppo Marx
Oct 17, 2012, 5:26:01 PM10/17/12
to
On 17.10.12 22:31, John Briggs wrote:
>
> No. Ferrari wanted Kimi, but he refused to sign if MS had guaranteed No.
> 1 status. MS was accordingly offered a contract without that - which he
> wouldn't sign. Ferrari therefore went ahead with Kimi and Massa - and
> announced MS's retirement.
You write like this are a well documented facts. No "I believe" or "in
>
> No. Ferrari wanted Kimi, but he refused to sign if MS had guaranteed No.
> 1 status. MS was accordingly offered a contract without that - which he
> wouldn't sign. Ferrari therefore went ahead with Kimi and Massa - and
> announced MS's retirement.
my view" or whatever would point out that this are your own opinion and
NOT facts.
So, can you please provide sources which could show it is so?
John Briggs
Oct 17, 2012, 6:13:34 PM10/17/12
to
--
John Briggs
John Briggs
Oct 17, 2012, 6:14:25 PM10/17/12
to
rest of us.
--
John Briggs
Bigbird
Oct 17, 2012, 6:30:38 PM10/17/12
to
like you...especially the things that never happened.
Bigbird
Oct 17, 2012, 6:31:24 PM10/17/12
to
Zeppo Marx
Oct 18, 2012, 3:03:17 AM10/18/12
to
On 18.10.12 00:13, John Briggs wrote:
>> So, can you please provide sources which could show it is so?
>
> Weren't you here at the time? We went over it all then.
I was here at the time (as in RASF1) but not there (as at Ferrari or
>> So, can you please provide sources which could show it is so?
>
> Weren't you here at the time? We went over it all then.
Merc or as at the respective negotiation tables). So, all I know is that
we discussed the rumors, the articles written about it, TV reports, many
opinions here, elsewhere and whatnot. But I have *NO* knowledge of the
facts, whether those concerning the real reasons for MS leaving Ferrari
nor real reasons him leaving Merc. I haven't seen neither of his
contracts and the paragraphs in there. And, at least to my knowledge,
nobody else here has this kind of intimate knowledge of the *facts*.
Some argue that MS didn't sign the contracts with Ferrari and Merc
because he was not granted the #1 role for the future. Might be. But it
is a speculation only. Even if the majority here agreed that MS must
have had the #1 role written down in his past contracts and not any more
in his new, this does not make it real, true or fact.
Bobster
Oct 18, 2012, 4:57:18 AM10/18/12
to
https://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.sport.f1/msg/86ff876e67f419e1?hl=en-GB
Notes
1) Massa went to Ferrari on an initial one year deal for 2006.
2) Schumacher's contract was due to expire end 2006.
3) According to the author, Tom Rubython, when Montezemolo signed
Raikkonen the decision about who would drive the other Ferrari in 2007
had not been made - other than it was not going to be Valentino Rossi.
So at that point Schumacher could have still signed, but presumably on
Montezemolo's terms as Raikkonen's signing meant that Montezemolo was
prepared to override whatever Schumacher and Todt wanted.
4) The situation arose in the first place because the contracts of the
top 3 drivers - Alonso, Raikkonen, Schumacher were all going to expire
at the same time. This meant that if Montezemolo didn't move when he
did he could end up being short of options to secure Ferrari's driver
strength in the long term. Schumacher might go end 2006 or end 2007
and in the meantime the two best potential replacements would have
done other deals.
Of course the article is a mixture of fact and extrapolations from the
fact. And there are things to read between the lines. Schumacher's
decision to retire was not made, or at least not communicated to
Ferrari, immediately after Raikkonen was signed. Was he genuinely
undecided about his future, was he not prepared to sign unless he
maintained a position of power, was he waiting to see if he could
secure an eighth championship, or was he just trying to jerk
Montezemolo around? We don't know.
Zeppo Marx
Oct 18, 2012, 9:20:17 AM10/18/12
to
On 18.10.12 10:57, Bobster wrote:
> Of course the article is a mixture of fact and extrapolations from the
> fact. And there are things to read between the lines. Schumacher's
> decision to retire was not made, or at least not communicated to
> Ferrari, immediately after Raikkonen was signed. Was he genuinely
> undecided about his future, was he not prepared to sign unless he
> maintained a position of power, was he waiting to see if he could
> secure an eighth championship, or was he just trying to jerk
> Montezemolo around? We don't know.
>
Agreed.
> fact. And there are things to read between the lines. Schumacher's
> decision to retire was not made, or at least not communicated to
> Ferrari, immediately after Raikkonen was signed. Was he genuinely
> undecided about his future, was he not prepared to sign unless he
> maintained a position of power, was he waiting to see if he could
> secure an eighth championship, or was he just trying to jerk
> Montezemolo around? We don't know.
>
0 new messages