planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:44 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2019 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2913
pokerman wrote:
rodH wrote:
you guys seem to have a good recollection regarding what happened to Bourdais. What is the consensus regarding Zanardi's formula 1 issues? It seems like back then Williams was a mess and not fast, Ralf was sort of the favored driver in the team and Alex really struggled with not being able to drive the car as "hard" as the indycar. I know there was issues with brakes. where they were too touchy and he liked much more "feel" and feedback, and they even tried steel brakes to see if is would help, but they were far more heavy and effected other aspects of the car. I also seem to remember that he didn't like that he couldn't seem to make the car do what he wanted it to do, there was a fine like between driving it hard and going too far and just throwing it away, perhaps part of this was the grooved tires as well?

I know that some F1 elitists feel that Alex was just a poor driver and he only won in indycar/CART due to the lack of talent in that series (which was as deep as indycar had ever been, so this argument doesnt work) and also because he was on a lead team, with best engine (although over half the other teams were in Honda Reynards and when you compare this to F1 and say a Hamilton being in the AMG, which is far more dominant than any other car over the past few years, then this argument falls on its face as well). Alex was my favorite driver of all time, with Senna and Alonso also being in top 3 (Senna was when I was much younger and I wasn't as passionate and knowledgeable about the sport back then). I guess I like passionate drivers? One thing I have learned about racing, since I started racing a fairly high level of karting, is that how "hard" you drive, doesn't always equate to speed, but these guys somehow made it work in their given era's.

The bottom line is that both Bourdais and Zanardi lost to their F1 teammates.

One might well say that the bottom line is that Lewis Hamilton was outscored by Jenson Button over the three years that they were team-mates. Doesn't tell the story though, does it...

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2019 11:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7714
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
rodH wrote:
you guys seem to have a good recollection regarding what happened to Bourdais. What is the consensus regarding Zanardi's formula 1 issues? It seems like back then Williams was a mess and not fast, Ralf was sort of the favored driver in the team and Alex really struggled with not being able to drive the car as "hard" as the indycar. I know there was issues with brakes. where they were too touchy and he liked much more "feel" and feedback, and they even tried steel brakes to see if is would help, but they were far more heavy and effected other aspects of the car. I also seem to remember that he didn't like that he couldn't seem to make the car do what he wanted it to do, there was a fine like between driving it hard and going too far and just throwing it away, perhaps part of this was the grooved tires as well?

I know that some F1 elitists feel that Alex was just a poor driver and he only won in indycar/CART due to the lack of talent in that series (which was as deep as indycar had ever been, so this argument doesnt work) and also because he was on a lead team, with best engine (although over half the other teams were in Honda Reynards and when you compare this to F1 and say a Hamilton being in the AMG, which is far more dominant than any other car over the past few years, then this argument falls on its face as well). Alex was my favorite driver of all time, with Senna and Alonso also being in top 3 (Senna was when I was much younger and I wasn't as passionate and knowledgeable about the sport back then). I guess I like passionate drivers? One thing I have learned about racing, since I started racing a fairly high level of karting, is that how "hard" you drive, doesn't always equate to speed, but these guys somehow made it work in their given era's.

The bottom line is that both Bourdais and Zanardi lost to their F1 teammates.

One might well say that the bottom line is that Lewis Hamilton was outscored by Jenson Button over the three years that they were team-mates. Doesn't tell the story though, does it...

Oh, you didn't.... just.... mention..... that..........!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2019 11:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32823
rodH wrote:
pokerman wrote:
rodH wrote:
you guys seem to have a good recollection regarding what happened to Bourdais. What is the consensus regarding Zanardi's formula 1 issues? It seems like back then Williams was a mess and not fast, Ralf was sort of the favored driver in the team and Alex really struggled with not being able to drive the car as "hard" as the indycar. I know there was issues with brakes. where they were too touchy and he liked much more "feel" and feedback, and they even tried steel brakes to see if is would help, but they were far more heavy and effected other aspects of the car. I also seem to remember that he didn't like that he couldn't seem to make the car do what he wanted it to do, there was a fine like between driving it hard and going too far and just throwing it away, perhaps part of this was the grooved tires as well?

I know that some F1 elitists feel that Alex was just a poor driver and he only won in indycar/CART due to the lack of talent in that series (which was as deep as indycar had ever been, so this argument doesnt work) and also because he was on a lead team, with best engine (although over half the other teams were in Honda Reynards and when you compare this to F1 and say a Hamilton being in the AMG, which is far more dominant than any other car over the past few years, then this argument falls on its face as well). Alex was my favorite driver of all time, with Senna and Alonso also being in top 3 (Senna was when I was much younger and I wasn't as passionate and knowledgeable about the sport back then). I guess I like passionate drivers? One thing I have learned about racing, since I started racing a fairly high level of karting, is that how "hard" you drive, doesn't always equate to speed, but these guys somehow made it work in their given era's.

The bottom line is that both Bourdais and Zanardi lost to their F1 teammates.


LOL, I was looking for a little more detailed information, but thanks for the insight and summary.

As opposed to looking to make excuses for their failings?

They didn't deliver and then they were let go, I think the teams have a good enough understanding of the situation, if the drivers looked anything special they wouldn't get sacked.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place


Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2019 11:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32823
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
rodH wrote:
you guys seem to have a good recollection regarding what happened to Bourdais. What is the consensus regarding Zanardi's formula 1 issues? It seems like back then Williams was a mess and not fast, Ralf was sort of the favored driver in the team and Alex really struggled with not being able to drive the car as "hard" as the indycar. I know there was issues with brakes. where they were too touchy and he liked much more "feel" and feedback, and they even tried steel brakes to see if is would help, but they were far more heavy and effected other aspects of the car. I also seem to remember that he didn't like that he couldn't seem to make the car do what he wanted it to do, there was a fine like between driving it hard and going too far and just throwing it away, perhaps part of this was the grooved tires as well?

I know that some F1 elitists feel that Alex was just a poor driver and he only won in indycar/CART due to the lack of talent in that series (which was as deep as indycar had ever been, so this argument doesnt work) and also because he was on a lead team, with best engine (although over half the other teams were in Honda Reynards and when you compare this to F1 and say a Hamilton being in the AMG, which is far more dominant than any other car over the past few years, then this argument falls on its face as well). Alex was my favorite driver of all time, with Senna and Alonso also being in top 3 (Senna was when I was much younger and I wasn't as passionate and knowledgeable about the sport back then). I guess I like passionate drivers? One thing I have learned about racing, since I started racing a fairly high level of karting, is that how "hard" you drive, doesn't always equate to speed, but these guys somehow made it work in their given era's.

The bottom line is that both Bourdais and Zanardi lost to their F1 teammates.

One might well say that the bottom line is that Lewis Hamilton was outscored by Jenson Button over the three years that they were team-mates. Doesn't tell the story though, does it...

So you think that Bourdais and Zanardi out performed their teammates but it was only unlucky circumstances that lead to them getting beaten by their teammates?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place


Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2019 12:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7812
Location: Belgium
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
rodH wrote:
you guys seem to have a good recollection regarding what happened to Bourdais. What is the consensus regarding Zanardi's formula 1 issues? It seems like back then Williams was a mess and not fast, Ralf was sort of the favored driver in the team and Alex really struggled with not being able to drive the car as "hard" as the indycar. I know there was issues with brakes. where they were too touchy and he liked much more "feel" and feedback, and they even tried steel brakes to see if is would help, but they were far more heavy and effected other aspects of the car. I also seem to remember that he didn't like that he couldn't seem to make the car do what he wanted it to do, there was a fine like between driving it hard and going too far and just throwing it away, perhaps part of this was the grooved tires as well?

I know that some F1 elitists feel that Alex was just a poor driver and he only won in indycar/CART due to the lack of talent in that series (which was as deep as indycar had ever been, so this argument doesnt work) and also because he was on a lead team, with best engine (although over half the other teams were in Honda Reynards and when you compare this to F1 and say a Hamilton being in the AMG, which is far more dominant than any other car over the past few years, then this argument falls on its face as well). Alex was my favorite driver of all time, with Senna and Alonso also being in top 3 (Senna was when I was much younger and I wasn't as passionate and knowledgeable about the sport back then). I guess I like passionate drivers? One thing I have learned about racing, since I started racing a fairly high level of karting, is that how "hard" you drive, doesn't always equate to speed, but these guys somehow made it work in their given era's.

The bottom line is that both Bourdais and Zanardi lost to their F1 teammates.

One might well say that the bottom line is that Lewis Hamilton was outscored by Jenson Button over the three years that they were team-mates. Doesn't tell the story though, does it...

So you think that Bourdais and Zanardi out performed their teammates but it was only unlucky circumstances that lead to them getting beaten by their teammates?
Pokerman, sometimes it is hard to take you seriously; that is not even close to what Tootsie was saying; he is saying that you need to delve deeper, look further than mere results, and - dare I say it? - look at reasons for failings as reasons instead of excuses.

rodH wrote:
you guys seem to have a good recollection regarding what happened to Bourdais. What is the consensus regarding Zanardi's formula 1 issues?
I wish I could remember who it was, but one writer thought years later that one of the problems affecting Zanardi's driving, was the difficulty of getting used to the grooved tyres then in use. He certainly wasn't the only one who suffered 'feel' issues with them.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2019 12:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16061
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
rodH wrote:
you guys seem to have a good recollection regarding what happened to Bourdais. What is the consensus regarding Zanardi's formula 1 issues? It seems like back then Williams was a mess and not fast, Ralf was sort of the favored driver in the team and Alex really struggled with not being able to drive the car as "hard" as the indycar. I know there was issues with brakes. where they were too touchy and he liked much more "feel" and feedback, and they even tried steel brakes to see if is would help, but they were far more heavy and effected other aspects of the car. I also seem to remember that he didn't like that he couldn't seem to make the car do what he wanted it to do, there was a fine like between driving it hard and going too far and just throwing it away, perhaps part of this was the grooved tires as well?

I know that some F1 elitists feel that Alex was just a poor driver and he only won in indycar/CART due to the lack of talent in that series (which was as deep as indycar had ever been, so this argument doesnt work) and also because he was on a lead team, with best engine (although over half the other teams were in Honda Reynards and when you compare this to F1 and say a Hamilton being in the AMG, which is far more dominant than any other car over the past few years, then this argument falls on its face as well). Alex was my favorite driver of all time, with Senna and Alonso also being in top 3 (Senna was when I was much younger and I wasn't as passionate and knowledgeable about the sport back then). I guess I like passionate drivers? One thing I have learned about racing, since I started racing a fairly high level of karting, is that how "hard" you drive, doesn't always equate to speed, but these guys somehow made it work in their given era's.

The bottom line is that both Bourdais and Zanardi lost to their F1 teammates.

One might well say that the bottom line is that Lewis Hamilton was outscored by Jenson Button over the three years that they were team-mates. Doesn't tell the story though, does it...

So you think that Bourdais and Zanardi out performed their teammates but it was only unlucky circumstances that lead to them getting beaten by their teammates?
Pokerman, sometimes it is hard to take you seriously; that is not even close to what Tootsie was saying; he is saying that you need to delve deeper, look further than mere results, and - dare I say it? - look at reasons for failings as reasons instead of excuses.

rodH wrote:
you guys seem to have a good recollection regarding what happened to Bourdais. What is the consensus regarding Zanardi's formula 1 issues?
I wish I could remember who it was, but one writer thought years later that one of the problems affecting Zanardi's driving, was the difficulty of getting used to the grooved tyres then in use. He certainly wasn't the only one who suffered 'feel' issues with them.


Zanardi also got pasted by Herbert at Lotus as well. I just don't think he was a good enough F1 driver.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2019 7:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7812
Location: Belgium
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
The bottom line is that both Bourdais and Zanardi lost to their F1 teammates.

One might well say that the bottom line is that Lewis Hamilton was outscored by Jenson Button over the three years that they were team-mates. Doesn't tell the story though, does it...

So you think that Bourdais and Zanardi out performed their teammates but it was only unlucky circumstances that lead to them getting beaten by their teammates?
Pokerman, sometimes it is hard to take you seriously; that is not even close to what Tootsie was saying; he is saying that you need to delve deeper, look further than mere results, and - dare I say it? - look at reasons for failings as reasons instead of excuses.

rodH wrote:
you guys seem to have a good recollection regarding what happened to Bourdais. What is the consensus regarding Zanardi's formula 1 issues?
I wish I could remember who it was, but one writer thought years later that one of the problems affecting Zanardi's driving, was the difficulty of getting used to the grooved tyres then in use. He certainly wasn't the only one who suffered 'feel' issues with them.


Zanardi also got pasted by Herbert at Lotus as well. I just don't think he was a good enough F1 driver.
You may have more information on the team than I do. I only seem to recall that the team was in decline. If even in top teams "the other driver" can be forgotten about, I'm hesitant to see too much in this pasting. In fact, as I recall, when he had his massive accident on the Raidillon, every comment I read or heard was that he had made a mistake, that he was off the racing line. As it happened right in front of my eyes, and with a friend watching at the bottom of the Raidillon confirming, I knew this was utter nonsense. Only much later did it come out his active suspension had had a failure.

I have no idea how he really compared with Johnny. Just as I don't know how Johnny would have fared had Benetton known he was in one of their cars some time later.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2019 7:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16061
Fiki wrote:
]You may have more information on the team than I do. I only seem to recall that the team was in decline. If even in top teams "the other driver" can be forgotten about, I'm hesitant to see too much in this pasting. In fact, as I recall, when he had his massive accident on the Raidillon, every comment I read or heard was that he had made a mistake, that he was off the racing line. As it happened right in front of my eyes, and with a friend watching at the bottom of the Raidillon confirming, I knew this was utter nonsense. Only much later did it come out his active suspension had had a failure.

I have no idea how he really compared with Johnny. Just as I don't know how Johnny would have fared had Benetton known he was in one of their cars some time later.


Lotus didn't seem to have an issue running both Herbert and Hakkinen the year before...

You need to explain away a lot to make the case for Zanardi in F1.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 09, 2019 8:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7812
Location: Belgium
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
]You may have more information on the team than I do. I only seem to recall that the team was in decline. If even in top teams "the other driver" can be forgotten about, I'm hesitant to see too much in this pasting. In fact, as I recall, when he had his massive accident on the Raidillon, every comment I read or heard was that he had made a mistake, that he was off the racing line. As it happened right in front of my eyes, and with a friend watching at the bottom of the Raidillon confirming, I knew this was utter nonsense. Only much later did it come out his active suspension had had a failure.

I have no idea how he really compared with Johnny. Just as I don't know how Johnny would have fared had Benetton known he was in one of their cars some time later.


Lotus didn't seem to have an issue running both Herbert and Hakkinen the year before...
Touché, Mikey. How about "yes, but that was the year before"? Or, perhaps the team were unable to accommodate Zanardi's driving style? I honestly don't have any clear answers to why Alex didn't thrive in F1. One factor I do take into consideration is the fact that he had never been in a British/English team. Or simply for the reason I already mentioned.

mikeyg123 wrote:
You need to explain away a lot to make the case for Zanardi in F1.
There's no need to explain things away, looking for the reasons why is interesting enough on its own. The thing that should make us take another look is simple enough; he may not have convinced in his first stint, but was impressive enough in the US to be given a second chance. It's true that Williams weren't exactly the team they were 5 years before, but they were far from being down and out.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 09, 2019 9:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16061
Fiki wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
]You may have more information on the team than I do. I only seem to recall that the team was in decline. If even in top teams "the other driver" can be forgotten about, I'm hesitant to see too much in this pasting. In fact, as I recall, when he had his massive accident on the Raidillon, every comment I read or heard was that he had made a mistake, that he was off the racing line. As it happened right in front of my eyes, and with a friend watching at the bottom of the Raidillon confirming, I knew this was utter nonsense. Only much later did it come out his active suspension had had a failure.

I have no idea how he really compared with Johnny. Just as I don't know how Johnny would have fared had Benetton known he was in one of their cars some time later.


Lotus didn't seem to have an issue running both Herbert and Hakkinen the year before...
Touché, Mikey. How about "yes, but that was the year before"? Or, perhaps the team were unable to accommodate Zanardi's driving style? I honestly don't have any clear answers to why Alex didn't thrive in F1. One factor I do take into consideration is the fact that he had never been in a British/English team. Or simply for the reason I already mentioned.

mikeyg123 wrote:
You need to explain away a lot to make the case for Zanardi in F1.
There's no need to explain things away, looking for the reasons why is interesting enough on its own. The thing that should make us take another look is simple enough; he may not have convinced in his first stint, but was impressive enough in the US to be given a second chance. It's true that Williams weren't exactly the team they were 5 years before, but they were far from being down and out.


I've no doubt he was exceptional in America. I think we see quite often that a formula can suit a driver a lot more than another. I'm saying he wasn't a good F1 driver. I'm not saying he wasn't good at driving anything.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 09, 2019 10:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7812
Location: Belgium
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
]You may have more information on the team than I do. I only seem to recall that the team was in decline. If even in top teams "the other driver" can be forgotten about, I'm hesitant to see too much in this pasting. In fact, as I recall, when he had his massive accident on the Raidillon, every comment I read or heard was that he had made a mistake, that he was off the racing line. As it happened right in front of my eyes, and with a friend watching at the bottom of the Raidillon confirming, I knew this was utter nonsense. Only much later did it come out his active suspension had had a failure.

I have no idea how he really compared with Johnny. Just as I don't know how Johnny would have fared had Benetton known he was in one of their cars some time later.


Lotus didn't seem to have an issue running both Herbert and Hakkinen the year before...
Touché, Mikey. How about "yes, but that was the year before"? Or, perhaps the team were unable to accommodate Zanardi's driving style? I honestly don't have any clear answers to why Alex didn't thrive in F1. One factor I do take into consideration is the fact that he had never been in a British/English team. Or simply for the reason I already mentioned.

mikeyg123 wrote:
You need to explain away a lot to make the case for Zanardi in F1.
There's no need to explain things away, looking for the reasons why is interesting enough on its own. The thing that should make us take another look is simple enough; he may not have convinced in his first stint, but was impressive enough in the US to be given a second chance. It's true that Williams weren't exactly the team they were 5 years before, but they were far from being down and out.


I've no doubt he was exceptional in America. I think we see quite often that a formula can suit a driver a lot more than another. I'm saying he wasn't a good F1 driver. I'm not saying he wasn't good at driving anything.
Make that unsuccessful in F1 rather than not a good F1 driver, and I agree. But I certainly see what you mean. I just can't work out why. Making it to F1 is exceptional as it is.

I have said this before, and perhaps it is a question for a F1 engineer, but I wonder on what basis teams select one driver over another. They seem to get it wrong as often as they get it more or less right.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 09, 2019 10:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16061
Fiki wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
]You may have more information on the team than I do. I only seem to recall that the team was in decline. If even in top teams "the other driver" can be forgotten about, I'm hesitant to see too much in this pasting. In fact, as I recall, when he had his massive accident on the Raidillon, every comment I read or heard was that he had made a mistake, that he was off the racing line. As it happened right in front of my eyes, and with a friend watching at the bottom of the Raidillon confirming, I knew this was utter nonsense. Only much later did it come out his active suspension had had a failure.

I have no idea how he really compared with Johnny. Just as I don't know how Johnny would have fared had Benetton known he was in one of their cars some time later.


Lotus didn't seem to have an issue running both Herbert and Hakkinen the year before...
Touché, Mikey. How about "yes, but that was the year before"? Or, perhaps the team were unable to accommodate Zanardi's driving style? I honestly don't have any clear answers to why Alex didn't thrive in F1. One factor I do take into consideration is the fact that he had never been in a British/English team. Or simply for the reason I already mentioned.

mikeyg123 wrote:
You need to explain away a lot to make the case for Zanardi in F1.
There's no need to explain things away, looking for the reasons why is interesting enough on its own. The thing that should make us take another look is simple enough; he may not have convinced in his first stint, but was impressive enough in the US to be given a second chance. It's true that Williams weren't exactly the team they were 5 years before, but they were far from being down and out.


I've no doubt he was exceptional in America. I think we see quite often that a formula can suit a driver a lot more than another. I'm saying he wasn't a good F1 driver. I'm not saying he wasn't good at driving anything.
Make that unsuccessful in F1 rather than not a good F1 driver, and I agree. But I certainly see what you mean. I just can't work out why. Making it to F1 is exceptional as it is.

I have said this before, and perhaps it is a question for a F1 engineer, but I wonder on what basis teams select one driver over another. They seem to get it wrong as often as they get it more or less right.


I think that's a different thing. Mika Salo was a good F1 driver but not particularly successful. Zanardi showed nothing in F1 to suggest he was any good at it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 09, 2019 9:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:42 pm
Posts: 184
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
]You may have more information on the team than I do. I only seem to recall that the team was in decline. If even in top teams "the other driver" can be forgotten about, I'm hesitant to see too much in this pasting. In fact, as I recall, when he had his massive accident on the Raidillon, every comment I read or heard was that he had made a mistake, that he was off the racing line. As it happened right in front of my eyes, and with a friend watching at the bottom of the Raidillon confirming, I knew this was utter nonsense. Only much later did it come out his active suspension had had a failure.

I have no idea how he really compared with Johnny. Just as I don't know how Johnny would have fared had Benetton known he was in one of their cars some time later.


Lotus didn't seem to have an issue running both Herbert and Hakkinen the year before...
Touché, Mikey. How about "yes, but that was the year before"? Or, perhaps the team were unable to accommodate Zanardi's driving style? I honestly don't have any clear answers to why Alex didn't thrive in F1. One factor I do take into consideration is the fact that he had never been in a British/English team. Or simply for the reason I already mentioned.

mikeyg123 wrote:
You need to explain away a lot to make the case for Zanardi in F1.
There's no need to explain things away, looking for the reasons why is interesting enough on its own. The thing that should make us take another look is simple enough; he may not have convinced in his first stint, but was impressive enough in the US to be given a second chance. It's true that Williams weren't exactly the team they were 5 years before, but they were far from being down and out.


I've no doubt he was exceptional in America. I think we see quite often that a formula can suit a driver a lot more than another. I'm saying he wasn't a good F1 driver. I'm not saying he wasn't good at driving anything.


Good point, I realize that sometimes a certain driver might be more suited for a certain car and feel than another car, and that may just be the case in Zanardis situation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2019 10:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 8:07 am
Posts: 1235
Same stats for Zanardi

Av Class When Both Finished
Zanardi vs Bernard: 16/18 (+2)
---------------------------------
Zanardi vs de Cesaris: 9/8 (-1)
Zanardi vs Salo: 13/10 (-3)
Zanardi vs Herbert: 10/6.2 (-3.8)
Zanardi vs Schumacher: 8.7/3.3 (-5.4)

Ahead When Both Finished
Zanardi vs Bernard: 1/0
Zanardi vs Herbert: 1/4
Zanardi vs de Cesaris: 0/1
Zanardi vs Salo: 0/1
Zanardi vs Schumacher: 0/3

Reliability was so bad back then! Still he had a full run against Herbert and Ralf and didn't get near either of them. Qualifying not much better (15-4 to Herbert,11-5 to Ralf)

_________________
"I'd rather lose a race going fast enough to win it, than win one going slow enough to lose it".
-Stirling Moss


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Black_Flag_11, Siao7 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group