Rosberg to Ferrari in 2020?
Discussion
Anyone who races in F1, even those who finish last and circulate several seconds slower than the best, have far more driving talent than any of us mere mortals could ever dream of, and it puts them up there in a very elite group of talented people.
Some in that group are better than others of course and any driver who has won the WDC can be considered to be the best of their time.
To argue that a guy who has won the F1 drivers title is not one of the best and most talented drivers to have ever existed is laughable.
You don't have to like them to understand this surely.
Some in that group are better than others of course and any driver who has won the WDC can be considered to be the best of their time.
To argue that a guy who has won the F1 drivers title is not one of the best and most talented drivers to have ever existed is laughable.
You don't have to like them to understand this surely.
Mr Tidy said:
But then it seems to be a more colourful place now he isn't there! 
2nd rate driver who got lucky just once IMHO - and since he retired as soon as he got a WDC, maybe he is aware of his limitations!
It shows how close the drivers in F1 are that a second rate driver can beat Lewis Hamilton over a 20 race season, luck does play a larger role than the minor differences in driver skill.2nd rate driver who got lucky just once IMHO - and since he retired as soon as he got a WDC, maybe he is aware of his limitations!
gibbon said:
To add some meat to my point, with actual facts, over a four year period-
'As teammates, Hamilton and Rosberg won 54 of 78 races over four seasons. Hamilton had 32 victories, 55 podium finishes and qualified ahead of Rosberg 42 times. Rosberg had 22 victories, 50 podium finishes and qualified ahead of Hamilton 36 times. During this period, Hamilton won the Formula One World Championship title twice, and Rosberg won the title once.'
Rosberg was a terrible driver and simply got lucky right? Come on....over four years, in the same machinery against the best driver of a generation, and one of the best qualifiers ever it was 42 v 36.
Rosberg was / is a world class formula 1 driver with huge amounts of determination and resolve, and composure beyond most in the sport.
You could also interpret the statistics as showing that Hamiliton only marginally performed better than a career midfield driver in the same equipment. Either Rosberg is almost as great as Hamilton or Hamilton is not as great as we British fans think he is. 'As teammates, Hamilton and Rosberg won 54 of 78 races over four seasons. Hamilton had 32 victories, 55 podium finishes and qualified ahead of Rosberg 42 times. Rosberg had 22 victories, 50 podium finishes and qualified ahead of Hamilton 36 times. During this period, Hamilton won the Formula One World Championship title twice, and Rosberg won the title once.'
Rosberg was a terrible driver and simply got lucky right? Come on....over four years, in the same machinery against the best driver of a generation, and one of the best qualifiers ever it was 42 v 36.
Rosberg was / is a world class formula 1 driver with huge amounts of determination and resolve, and composure beyond most in the sport.
Edited by gibbon on Tuesday 24th September 10:30
Monkeylegend said:
Anyone who races in F1, even those who finish last and circulate several seconds slower than the best, have far more driving talent than any of us mere mortals could ever dream of, and it puts them up there in a very elite group of talented people.
Some in that group are better than others of course and any driver who has won the WDC can be considered to be the best of their time.
To argue that a guy who has won the F1 drivers title is not one of the best and most talented drivers to have ever existed is laughable.
You don't have to like them to understand this surely.
You are falsely assuming that the drivers of that group who win the WDC are the best of that group, sometimes they are but many times they aren't. I don't think anyone here would argue that Rosberg was as good as Vettel, Alonso, Raikkonen, Ricciardo or even Verstappen who were all on the same grid as him in 2016.Some in that group are better than others of course and any driver who has won the WDC can be considered to be the best of their time.
To argue that a guy who has won the F1 drivers title is not one of the best and most talented drivers to have ever existed is laughable.
You don't have to like them to understand this surely.
If Hamilton hadn't overtaken Glock would Massa automatically be considered the best of his time? Or if Irvine had scored 3 more points in 1999?
WDC can be decided by many events outside of the drivers control and the difference between winning and losing is often well within the margin of luck.
DOCG said:
Monkeylegend said:
Anyone who races in F1, even those who finish last and circulate several seconds slower than the best, have far more driving talent than any of us mere mortals could ever dream of, and it puts them up there in a very elite group of talented people.
Some in that group are better than others of course and any driver who has won the WDC can be considered to be the best of their time.
To argue that a guy who has won the F1 drivers title is not one of the best and most talented drivers to have ever existed is laughable.
You don't have to like them to understand this surely.
You are falsely assuming that the drivers of that group who win the WDC are the best of that group, sometimes they are but many times they aren't. I don't think anyone here would argue that Rosberg was as good as Vettel, Alonso, Raikkonen, Ricciardo or even Verstappen who were all on the same grid as him in 2016.Some in that group are better than others of course and any driver who has won the WDC can be considered to be the best of their time.
To argue that a guy who has won the F1 drivers title is not one of the best and most talented drivers to have ever existed is laughable.
You don't have to like them to understand this surely.
If Hamilton hadn't overtaken Glock would Massa automatically be considered the best of his time? Or if Irvine had scored 3 more points in 1999?
WDC can be decided by many events outside of the drivers control and the difference between winning and losing is often well within the margin of luck.
Monkeylegend said:
I said both the best and one of the best didn't I.
WDC is nothing more than the best combination of driver and car of the course of a season, the biggest factor in the WDC is the strength of the opposition.
DOCG said:
Monkeylegend said:
I said both the best and one of the best didn't I.
WDC is nothing more than the best combination of driver and car of the course of a season, the biggest factor in the WDC is the strength of the opposition.
Monkeylegend said:
But by definition the best drivers usually migrate to the best cars. I am pretty certain those involved in F1 at the sharp end can spot talent and act accordingly.
Now that is an interesting point! Nico was in the Merc before they started to actually get properly good, he was in it for the long haul "for sure" with no guaranteed World Championship title. Was the hybrid rules even out when he moved across? I think all that was up in the air.Lewis however moved across when the team knew they had a strong car and had something to use to persuade him to join their team when they thought they would be in the thick end of the WCC and WDC.
I think the point I am making is some drivers end up in the best car through contracts and I guess scouting talent, others work with the team from the start and happen to still be there when the Team/car is solid....I guess you could say Mark Webber was also one of these drivers.
Before people jump down my throat obviously said drivers were doing a good job to be there in the first place and would have been dropped and as it happens Nico was WDC and Mark was very very close.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff