Maldonado. Not of this planet..

[Jasandjules]

Vaud said:

Did you not watch Max V last year? Who created overtakes where there really shouldn't have been any? (and crashed less)

I always thought Pastor could run a helmet design of

[FourWheelDrift]

Durzel said:

F1 has lost the only thing making it remotely interesting to watch nowadays.

(sorry)

Raikkonen hasn't retired so he'll still be around to crash into Bottas and moan to his pit crew during a race.

[hairyben]

REALIST123 said:

Vaud said:

REALIST123 said:

Whatever, if the money doesn't turn up he'll be gone, which clearly indicates that no one believes he's worth paying properly, though he's not on his own in that regard.

Will he be missed? Not by me and I suspect by precious few who don't have a finger in his quite well funded (up to now) pie.

Whilst I agree - is there any driver on the grid who doesn't bring some form of sponsor with them?

HAM? VET? I recall ALO brings Santander influence.

Probably not but there are a few, as you mention, for whom bringing along a sponsor is probably not a deal maker. For Maldonado and the like, no sponsor, no drive.

Or to put it another way, hamilton alonso etc's personal sponsorship is due to their talent, some bring a package in lei of it.

[pits]

London424 said:

Mr_Thyroid said:

pits said:

Hunt won a championship and was quick
Mika won two and was quick
Maldonado has won a race due to tyres and has done nothing but crash into people or objects on the track.......

Please expand. Single make tyres. Part of the game has always to use the tyres in the best way.

I supported Pastor for longer than most after that win but over the last 1-2 years have become tired of his antics and agree that it's time to go. But to try and dismiss his win as some crazy fluke or in any way underhand is churlish in the extreme.

I think the reference of tyres is because the 2012 season was comical in how the tyres were completely strange from 1 race to the next from one manufaturer to another even to drivers in the same team.

A different driver won the first 7 races as it was such a comedy.

As above, comedy tyres are the only reason he got lucky and it was just that, he got lucky. He has retired/crashed in 30% of his races, that's probably not that far away from Andrea de Cesaris, well maybe not that bad but pretty close, that's ignoring any fines he has received or practice crashes.

The man got banned from Monaco for life in 2005 after he ignored flags and crippled a marshal, the only reason he got to race there was his sponsors paid Monaco officials to let him in.

Sorry but the man is a danger to everyone on track and shouldn't be allowed to race, or have a super licence, I am surprised he has never killed anyone, how many times would he have crashed this year if he got sponsorship money? Don't worry the Venezuelan government will bail him out.

[Vaud]

pits said:

The man got banned from Monaco for life in 2005 after he ignored flags and crippled a marshal, the only reason he got to race there was his sponsors paid Monaco officials to let him in.

The latter part of your statement is not true. His father paid to compensate the marshall and his medical / rehabilitation, by all accounts - so by all means paint a negative picture, but please do it with accuracy as the tone of your post implies some form of corruption.

[John D.]

hairyben said:

REALIST123 said:

Vaud said:

REALIST123 said:

Whatever, if the money doesn't turn up he'll be gone, which clearly indicates that no one believes he's worth paying properly, though he's not on his own in that regard.

Will he be missed? Not by me and I suspect by precious few who don't have a finger in his quite well funded (up to now) pie.

Whilst I agree - is there any driver on the grid who doesn't bring some form of sponsor with them?

HAM? VET? I recall ALO brings Santander influence.

Probably not but there are a few, as you mention, for whom bringing along a sponsor is probably not a deal maker. For Maldonado and the like, no sponsor, no drive.

Or to put it another way, hamilton alonso etc's personal sponsorship is due to their talent, some bring a package in lei of it.

Quite.

[Megaflow]

Vaud said:

pits said:

The man got banned from Monaco for life in 2005 after he ignored flags and crippled a marshal, the only reason he got to race there was his sponsors paid Monaco officials to let him in.

The latter part of your statement is not true. His father paid to compensate the marshall and his medical / rehabilitation, by all accounts - so by all means paint a negative picture, but please do it with accuracy as the tone of your post implies some form of corruption.

The later part of his statement might very well be incorrect. But, that still means the first part is correct and he did cripple a marshal by ignoring flags, deliberately if memory serves. He should have been banned from ever setting foot in a race car again.

[The Moose]

Megaflow said:

The first part is correct and he did cripple a marshal by ignoring flags

The marshal is, I believe, not crippled and in fact back marshalling again.

[London424]

pits said:

London424 said:

Mr_Thyroid said:

pits said:

Hunt won a championship and was quick
Mika won two and was quick
Maldonado has won a race due to tyres and has done nothing but crash into people or objects on the track.......

Please expand. Single make tyres. Part of the game has always to use the tyres in the best way.

I supported Pastor for longer than most after that win but over the last 1-2 years have become tired of his antics and agree that it's time to go. But to try and dismiss his win as some crazy fluke or in any way underhand is churlish in the extreme.

I think the reference of tyres is because the 2012 season was comical in how the tyres were completely strange from 1 race to the next from one manufaturer to another even to drivers in the same team.

A different driver won the first 7 races as it was such a comedy.

As above, comedy tyres are the only reason he got lucky and it was just that, he got lucky. He has retired/crashed in 30% of his races, that's probably not that far away from Andrea de Cesaris, well maybe not that bad but pretty close, that's ignoring any fines he has received or practice crashes.

The man got banned from Monaco for life in 2005 after he ignored flags and crippled a marshal, the only reason he got to race there was his sponsors paid Monaco officials to let him in.

Sorry but the man is a danger to everyone on track and shouldn't be allowed to race, or have a super licence, I am surprised he has never killed anyone, how many times would he have crashed this year if he got sponsorship money? Don't worry the Venezuelan government will bail him out.

I also forgot that Ham took pole but the bunglers in his pit crew didn't leave a large enough sample so was sent to the back...another nice stroke of luck.

[Megaflow]

The Moose said:

Megaflow said:

The first part is correct and he did cripple a marshal by ignoring flags

The marshal is, I believe, not crippled and in fact back marshalling again.

Does that make it ok?

[Vaud]

Megaflow said:

The Moose said:

Megaflow said:

The first part is correct and he did cripple a marshal by ignoring flags

The marshal is, I believe, not crippled and in fact back marshalling again.

Does that make it ok?

The point being made was that Megaflop made some broad brush statements that have been corrected.

I for one do not support their decision to allow him to race again at Monaco, but then I don't know the details of the settlement, nor am in a position to influence. They are a pretty conservative bunch in Monaco, so all parties must have been reasonably happy.

[Daston]

Lets also not forget him driving into the side of Hamilton at Spa on their way back to the pits following qualifying. That should have got him a ban, there is no reason to drive into a competitor on purpose.

[Smollet]

Daston said:

Lets also not forget him driving into the side of Hamilton at Spa on their way back to the pits following qualifying. That should have got him a ban, there is no reason to drive into a competitor on purpose.

Senna did it and he didn't get a ban.

[gherkins]

Bye, Pastor. Mind the door on the way ou...

Oh. Too late.

[Mr_Thyroid]

Smollet said:

Daston said:

Lets also not forget him driving into the side of Hamilton at Spa on their way back to the pits following qualifying. That should have got him a ban, there is no reason to drive into a competitor on purpose.

Senna did it and he didn't get a ban.

And Alonso deliberately ignored yellow flags causing the race stoppage at Brazil 2003...... no ban.

[Mr_Thyroid]

London424 said:

I think the reference of tyres is because the 2012 season was comical in how the tyres were completely strange from 1 race to the next from one manufaturer to another even to drivers in the same team.

A different driver won the first 7 races as it was such a comedy.

Still don't really understand this "lucky win" business. All the championship contenders finished the race (all those who would go on to finish in the top 9 champs positions in fact). All drivers were using the same tyres. What is lucky? He and Williams used the tyres the best and did a better strategy than Ferrari. He was, presumably, in a fundamentally worse car than Alonso but still beat him. It was the 5th race of the year on the main test track - the best teams with the most money, most data, most testing mileage should, and historically do win there.

What was lucky about the way Williams chose to use the tyres that day?

[Vaud]

I don't get all of the negativity personally. Some cheap jokes... (And expensive crashes)

On the upside, without his money there would have been a lot of jobs lost in Enstone and the team might not be there now to be saved...

[Muzzer79]

London424 said:

pits said:

London424 said:

Mr_Thyroid said:

pits said:

Hunt won a championship and was quick
Mika won two and was quick
Maldonado has won a race due to tyres and has done nothing but crash into people or objects on the track.......

Please expand. Single make tyres. Part of the game has always to use the tyres in the best way.

I supported Pastor for longer than most after that win but over the last 1-2 years have become tired of his antics and agree that it's time to go. But to try and dismiss his win as some crazy fluke or in any way underhand is churlish in the extreme.

I think the reference of tyres is because the 2012 season was comical in how the tyres were completely strange from 1 race to the next from one manufaturer to another even to drivers in the same team.

A different driver won the first 7 races as it was such a comedy.

As above, comedy tyres are the only reason he got lucky and it was just that, he got lucky. He has retired/crashed in 30% of his races, that's probably not that far away from Andrea de Cesaris, well maybe not that bad but pretty close, that's ignoring any fines he has received or practice crashes.

The man got banned from Monaco for life in 2005 after he ignored flags and crippled a marshal, the only reason he got to race there was his sponsors paid Monaco officials to let him in.

Sorry but the man is a danger to everyone on track and shouldn't be allowed to race, or have a super licence, I am surprised he has never killed anyone, how many times would he have crashed this year if he got sponsorship money? Don't worry the Venezuelan government will bail him out.

I also forgot that Ham took pole but the bunglers in his pit crew didn't leave a large enough sample so was sent to the back...another nice stroke of luck.

I don't buy into this 'luck' theory either.

1. He had the same tyres as everyone else that day.

2. I didn't see Bruno Senna (his team-mate) sitting on his gearbox for the whole race, or even coming close. For all you fact-fans, Senna started 17th on the grid, with a qualifying time over 2.5 seconds slower than Maldonado's (pole) time. He crashed out late in the race.
Now, Bruno was unequivocally not comparable to his uncle in terms of speed, but surely in the same car he should have at least been up there?

3. Williams finished 8th in that season's championship. I didn't see Force India (7th) or Sauber (6th) winning races due to these "lucky" tyres?

Some things undoubtedly went Pastor's way - Hamilton's demotion probably being one of them - but he drove a very, very good race to win as he did.

For the sake of clarity - I am not a Maldonado fan. I firmly believe his time in F1 is up and he's had his chance.

However, he did have speed on occasion - Spain 2012 being one of those (few) occasions.

[anonymous-user]

Muzzer79 said:

London424 said:

pits said:

London424 said:

Mr_Thyroid said:

pits said:

Hunt won a championship and was quick
Mika won two and was quick
Maldonado has won a race due to tyres and has done nothing but crash into people or objects on the track.......

Please expand. Single make tyres. Part of the game has always to use the tyres in the best way.

I supported Pastor for longer than most after that win but over the last 1-2 years have become tired of his antics and agree that it's time to go. But to try and dismiss his win as some crazy fluke or in any way underhand is churlish in the extreme.

I think the reference of tyres is because the 2012 season was comical in how the tyres were completely strange from 1 race to the next from one manufaturer to another even to drivers in the same team.

A different driver won the first 7 races as it was such a comedy.

As above, comedy tyres are the only reason he got lucky and it was just that, he got lucky. He has retired/crashed in 30% of his races, that's probably not that far away from Andrea de Cesaris, well maybe not that bad but pretty close, that's ignoring any fines he has received or practice crashes.

The man got banned from Monaco for life in 2005 after he ignored flags and crippled a marshal, the only reason he got to race there was his sponsors paid Monaco officials to let him in.

Sorry but the man is a danger to everyone on track and shouldn't be allowed to race, or have a super licence, I am surprised he has never killed anyone, how many times would he have crashed this year if he got sponsorship money? Don't worry the Venezuelan government will bail him out.

I also forgot that Ham took pole but the bunglers in his pit crew didn't leave a large enough sample so was sent to the back...another nice stroke of luck.

I don't buy into this 'luck' theory either.

1. He had the same tyres as everyone else that day.

2. I didn't see Bruno Senna (his team-mate) sitting on his gearbox for the whole race, or even coming close. For all you fact-fans, Senna started 17th on the grid, with a qualifying time over 2.5 seconds slower than Maldonado's (pole) time. He crashed out late in the race.
Now, Bruno was unequivocally not comparable to his uncle in terms of speed, but surely in the same car he should have at least been up there?

3. Williams finished 8th in that season's championship. I didn't see Force India (7th) or Sauber (6th) winning races due to these "lucky" tyres?

Some things undoubtedly went Pastor's way - Hamilton's demotion probably being one of them - but he drove a very, very good race to win as he did.

For the sake of clarity - I am not a Maldonado fan. I firmly believe his time in F1 is up and he's had his chance.

However, he did have speed on occasion - Spain 2012 being one of those (few) occasions.

Perhaps the point is that, particularly at that time, results were simply down to who managed tyres best and little to do with which cars or, more to the point, drivers were fastest or had the best racecraft, which is surely what F1 should be about.

[London424]

Mr_Thyroid said:

London424 said:

I think the reference of tyres is because the 2012 season was comical in how the tyres were completely strange from 1 race to the next from one manufaturer to another even to drivers in the same team.

A different driver won the first 7 races as it was such a comedy.

Still don't really understand this "lucky win" business. All the championship contenders finished the race (all those who would go on to finish in the top 9 champs positions in fact). All drivers were using the same tyres. What is lucky? He and Williams used the tyres the best and did a better strategy than Ferrari. He was, presumably, in a fundamentally worse car than Alonso but still beat him. It was the 5th race of the year on the main test track - the best teams with the most money, most data, most testing mileage should, and historically do win there.

What was lucky about the way Williams chose to use the tyres that day?

I'm really not sure why it's such a big deal to get a lucky win. Every driver on the grid who has won more than one race has likely had a lucky win in there somewhere.

The luck was in none of the teams had any idea about what the tyres were going to do. It was also luck that the fastest guy got DQ'd and sent to the back. It's not like you can rely on someone getting DQ'd is it? There's no science to that.

Again, it's not a big deal to me. He can always say he won a GP and good on him.