Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules

Raikkonen

Go - Ferrari need someone closer to Vettel
32
62%
Stay - He's the perfect No 2
11
21%
Stay - in F1, but not in a Ferrari
9
17%
 
Total votes: 52

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

dompclarke wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:Placating Vettel should actually not supersede winning the championship. If Vettel were winning titles for them then by all means I would say don't rock the boat but that's not what's happening. They haven't gotten over the hump but yet they are complacent. With Ricciardo on the market, they showed no interest. I find that bizarre when they could easily have signed him and when there is such direct evidence that he would likely be an upgrade from what they have. Remember, they haven't won...
Well, apparently they believe in Vettel and believe him to offer them the best shot at winning a title. Ferrari are not stupid, and at Ferrari the team comes first - if they believe Ricciardo would have been a definite upgrade then they would have plunged for it. But apparently they don't and that "direct evidence" to them probably isn't that convincing.
There are a whole lot of unsupported assumptions in this post. If "the team comes first" at Ferrari then wouldn't they prioritize the WCC and not the WDC? Wouldn't they urgently look to replace an under-performing driver? Kimi has been at Ferrari for 5 years in this second stint and he hasn't even won a single race. He also consistently finishes behind at least one driver in an inferior car in the standings and yet they keep paying him to do that.

The "direct evidence" (not sure why you put it in quotes but I'll go with it) is the fact that Daniel was the stronger of the pair when he and Vettel were teammates. If that isn't direct evidence please tell me what is? I mean that genuinely.

Perhaps Vettel will get the job done for them in the end and all will work out but if it doesn't, they will have to acknowledge that they didn't maximize their chances.
Re the bit in bold
Ferrari often cause this with their strategy choices, when they appear to be using Kimi on track to help Seb (may not be their plan but does seem the obvious reason)
That in itself shows they are happy to sign a driver that will not challenge Vettel.
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)

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Zoue »

pokerman wrote:
dompclarke wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:Placating Vettel should actually not supersede winning the championship. If Vettel were winning titles for them then by all means I would say don't rock the boat but that's not what's happening. They haven't gotten over the hump but yet they are complacent. With Ricciardo on the market, they showed no interest. I find that bizarre when they could easily have signed him and when there is such direct evidence that he would likely be an upgrade from what they have. Remember, they haven't won...
Well, apparently they believe in Vettel and believe him to offer them the best shot at winning a title. Ferrari are not stupid, and at Ferrari the team comes first - if they believe Ricciardo would have been a definite upgrade then they would have plunged for it. But apparently they don't and that "direct evidence" to them probably isn't that convincing.
There are a whole lot of unsupported assumptions in this post. If "the team comes first" at Ferrari then wouldn't they prioritize the WCC and not the WDC? Wouldn't they urgently look to replace an under-performing driver? Kimi has been at Ferrari for 5 years in this second stint and he hasn't even won a single race. He also consistently finishes behind at least one driver in an inferior car in the standings and yet they keep paying him to do that.

The "direct evidence" (not sure why you put it in quotes but I'll go with it) is the fact that Daniel was the stronger of the pair when he and Vettel were teammates. If that isn't direct evidence please tell me what is? I mean that genuinely.

Perhaps Vettel will get the job done for them in the end and all will work out but if it doesn't, they will have to acknowledge that they didn't maximize their chances.
Re the bit in bold
Ferrari often cause this with their strategy choices, when they appear to be using Kimi on track to help Seb (may not be their plan but does seem the obvious reason)
That in itself shows they are happy to sign a driver that will not challenge Vettel.
Please tell me you've never done jury duty...

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Zoue »

pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:Placating Vettel should actually not supersede winning the championship. If Vettel were winning titles for them then by all means I would say don't rock the boat but that's not what's happening. They haven't gotten over the hump but yet they are complacent. With Ricciardo on the market, they showed no interest. I find that bizarre when they could easily have signed him and when there is such direct evidence that he would likely be an upgrade from what they have. Remember, they haven't won...
Well, apparently they believe in Vettel and believe him to offer them the best shot at winning a title. Ferrari are not stupid, and at Ferrari the team comes first - if they believe Ricciardo would have been a definite upgrade then they would have plunged for it. But apparently they don't and that "direct evidence" to them probably isn't that convincing.
Do you really believe they decided a driver that beat Vettel was not an upgrade on Kimi?
Ferrari's not the only team not to have taken Ricciardo though, is it? Or Alonso, for that matter. Why we making assumptions about Ferrari in particular?

User avatar
Johnson
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Johnson »

Time for Kimi to go, he has taken a good seat for too long. One thing I don't understand about Kimi is why top teams continue to be interested in him on huge wages.

Ferrari knew he wasn't top quality better than anybody 2007-2009, they paid him to leave. Then re-signed him and were surprised he was slow? Now Mclaren are interested in him when he is guaranteed not top tier. I guess Mclaren isn't a top drive anymore, so it kind of makes sense.

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
dompclarke wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mds wrote: Well, apparently they believe in Vettel and believe him to offer them the best shot at winning a title. Ferrari are not stupid, and at Ferrari the team comes first - if they believe Ricciardo would have been a definite upgrade then they would have plunged for it. But apparently they don't and that "direct evidence" to them probably isn't that convincing.
There are a whole lot of unsupported assumptions in this post. If "the team comes first" at Ferrari then wouldn't they prioritize the WCC and not the WDC? Wouldn't they urgently look to replace an under-performing driver? Kimi has been at Ferrari for 5 years in this second stint and he hasn't even won a single race. He also consistently finishes behind at least one driver in an inferior car in the standings and yet they keep paying him to do that.

The "direct evidence" (not sure why you put it in quotes but I'll go with it) is the fact that Daniel was the stronger of the pair when he and Vettel were teammates. If that isn't direct evidence please tell me what is? I mean that genuinely.

Perhaps Vettel will get the job done for them in the end and all will work out but if it doesn't, they will have to acknowledge that they didn't maximize their chances.
Re the bit in bold
Ferrari often cause this with their strategy choices, when they appear to be using Kimi on track to help Seb (may not be their plan but does seem the obvious reason)
That in itself shows they are happy to sign a driver that will not challenge Vettel.
Please tell me you've never done jury duty...
The proof is in the pudding, when has ever Kimi challenged Vettel over a season, even in Vettel's poorest season of 2016 he was predominantly quicker than Kimi in the races.
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)

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:Placating Vettel should actually not supersede winning the championship. If Vettel were winning titles for them then by all means I would say don't rock the boat but that's not what's happening. They haven't gotten over the hump but yet they are complacent. With Ricciardo on the market, they showed no interest. I find that bizarre when they could easily have signed him and when there is such direct evidence that he would likely be an upgrade from what they have. Remember, they haven't won...
Well, apparently they believe in Vettel and believe him to offer them the best shot at winning a title. Ferrari are not stupid, and at Ferrari the team comes first - if they believe Ricciardo would have been a definite upgrade then they would have plunged for it. But apparently they don't and that "direct evidence" to them probably isn't that convincing.
Do you really believe they decided a driver that beat Vettel was not an upgrade on Kimi?
Ferrari's not the only team not to have taken Ricciardo though, is it? Or Alonso, for that matter. Why we making assumptions about Ferrari in particular?
Maybe because it's a thread about Kimi and Ferrari and not anyone else?
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)

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

Johnson wrote:Time for Kimi to go, he has taken a good seat for too long. One thing I don't understand about Kimi is why top teams continue to be interested in him on huge wages.

Ferrari knew he wasn't top quality better than anybody 2007-2009, they paid him to leave. Then re-signed him and were surprised he was slow? Now Mclaren are interested in him when he is guaranteed not top tier. I guess Mclaren isn't a top drive anymore, so it kind of makes sense.
Marketing?
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)

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Zoue »

pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
dompclarke wrote:
sandman1347 wrote: There are a whole lot of unsupported assumptions in this post. If "the team comes first" at Ferrari then wouldn't they prioritize the WCC and not the WDC? Wouldn't they urgently look to replace an under-performing driver? Kimi has been at Ferrari for 5 years in this second stint and he hasn't even won a single race. He also consistently finishes behind at least one driver in an inferior car in the standings and yet they keep paying him to do that.

The "direct evidence" (not sure why you put it in quotes but I'll go with it) is the fact that Daniel was the stronger of the pair when he and Vettel were teammates. If that isn't direct evidence please tell me what is? I mean that genuinely.

Perhaps Vettel will get the job done for them in the end and all will work out but if it doesn't, they will have to acknowledge that they didn't maximize their chances.
Re the bit in bold
Ferrari often cause this with their strategy choices, when they appear to be using Kimi on track to help Seb (may not be their plan but does seem the obvious reason)
That in itself shows they are happy to sign a driver that will not challenge Vettel.
Please tell me you've never done jury duty...
The proof is in the pudding, when has ever Kimi challenged Vettel over a season, even in Vettel's poorest season of 2016 he was predominantly quicker than Kimi in the races.
That's not proof, though. It's possible it's true, but it could also be possible that they appreciate a driver who won't rock the boat for team harmony, who will always put the team above himself, who is apolitical etc etc. Assuming it's about not challenging Vettel specifically is an assumption, not a conclusion driven by proof.

I get what you're saying, though. I think it points more to Ferrari being happy with a clear number one driver and a backup. But I don't think that's too dissimilar to other top teams, tbh

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Zoue »

pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote: Well, apparently they believe in Vettel and believe him to offer them the best shot at winning a title. Ferrari are not stupid, and at Ferrari the team comes first - if they believe Ricciardo would have been a definite upgrade then they would have plunged for it. But apparently they don't and that "direct evidence" to them probably isn't that convincing.
Do you really believe they decided a driver that beat Vettel was not an upgrade on Kimi?
Ferrari's not the only team not to have taken Ricciardo though, is it? Or Alonso, for that matter. Why we making assumptions about Ferrari in particular?
Maybe because it's a thread about Kimi and Ferrari and not anyone else?
The point is that Ricciardo hasn't exactly been inundated with offers from other teams, so why assume that it's a simple black and white decision?

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Zoue »

pokerman wrote:
Johnson wrote:Time for Kimi to go, he has taken a good seat for too long. One thing I don't understand about Kimi is why top teams continue to be interested in him on huge wages.

Ferrari knew he wasn't top quality better than anybody 2007-2009, they paid him to leave. Then re-signed him and were surprised he was slow? Now Mclaren are interested in him when he is guaranteed not top tier. I guess Mclaren isn't a top drive anymore, so it kind of makes sense.
Marketing?
technical?

mikeyg123
Posts: 17817
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by mikeyg123 »

Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Johnson wrote:Time for Kimi to go, he has taken a good seat for too long. One thing I don't understand about Kimi is why top teams continue to be interested in him on huge wages.

Ferrari knew he wasn't top quality better than anybody 2007-2009, they paid him to leave. Then re-signed him and were surprised he was slow? Now Mclaren are interested in him when he is guaranteed not top tier. I guess Mclaren isn't a top drive anymore, so it kind of makes sense.
Marketing?
technical?
Both?

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Zoue »

mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Johnson wrote:Time for Kimi to go, he has taken a good seat for too long. One thing I don't understand about Kimi is why top teams continue to be interested in him on huge wages.

Ferrari knew he wasn't top quality better than anybody 2007-2009, they paid him to leave. Then re-signed him and were surprised he was slow? Now Mclaren are interested in him when he is guaranteed not top tier. I guess Mclaren isn't a top drive anymore, so it kind of makes sense.
Marketing?
technical?
Both?
Quite likely.

damn, used two words :twisted:

User avatar
Blake
Posts: 6819
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Nebraska, USA
Contact:

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Blake »

Johnson wrote:Time for Kimi to go, he has taken a good seat for too long. One thing I don't understand about Kimi is why top teams continue to be interested in him on huge wages.
Maybe teams know more than the PF1 "experts"...

Or perhaps they think they can please their stockholders by throwing away money by not listening to F1 forums.

;)
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

Rockie
Posts: 2191
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Rockie »

What's funny in this thread is it being revived to start an unnecessary argument.

Will go back to what I said earlier folks just looking for Vettel to lose points and not the interest of Ferrari.

User avatar
mds
Posts: 11443
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by mds »

sandman1347 wrote: More assumptions. You assume that they "are not stupid" (presumably that they cannot be making a mistake with their overall decision). You assume that their decision not to sign Daniel is data-driven. You are making a ton of assertions without any real evidence behind them. You seem to not realize that Ferrari, as a team, have more often been a soap opera than champions. I'd like you to consider the possibility that they might be wrong or dysfunctional or motivated by commercial interests, etc. Just consider the possibility that Ferrari are not handling everything perfectly because the evidence actually suggests that that is the case.
Yes, I am assuming Ferrari have their reasons for keeping Vettel. What do you think, they throw darts at a board with driver faces on it?

Anyway, we can keep this short if that's going to be your position: every single alternative reality one would entertain is based on assumptions.
Go Vandoorne :( - Verstappen - Vettel!

User avatar
mds
Posts: 11443
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by mds »

pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:Placating Vettel should actually not supersede winning the championship. If Vettel were winning titles for them then by all means I would say don't rock the boat but that's not what's happening. They haven't gotten over the hump but yet they are complacent. With Ricciardo on the market, they showed no interest. I find that bizarre when they could easily have signed him and when there is such direct evidence that he would likely be an upgrade from what they have. Remember, they haven't won...
Well, apparently they believe in Vettel and believe him to offer them the best shot at winning a title. Ferrari are not stupid, and at Ferrari the team comes first - if they believe Ricciardo would have been a definite upgrade then they would have plunged for it. But apparently they don't and that "direct evidence" to them probably isn't that convincing.
Do you really believe they decided a driver that beat Vettel was not an upgrade on Kimi?
An upgrade on Vettel.
Go Vandoorne :( - Verstappen - Vettel!

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
dompclarke wrote: Re the bit in bold
Ferrari often cause this with their strategy choices, when they appear to be using Kimi on track to help Seb (may not be their plan but does seem the obvious reason)
That in itself shows they are happy to sign a driver that will not challenge Vettel.
Please tell me you've never done jury duty...
The proof is in the pudding, when has ever Kimi challenged Vettel over a season, even in Vettel's poorest season of 2016 he was predominantly quicker than Kimi in the races.
That's not proof, though. It's possible it's true, but it could also be possible that they appreciate a driver who won't rock the boat for team harmony, who will always put the team above himself, who is apolitical etc etc. Assuming it's about not challenging Vettel specifically is an assumption, not a conclusion driven by proof.

I get what you're saying, though. I think it points more to Ferrari being happy with a clear number one driver and a backup. But I don't think that's too dissimilar to other top teams, tbh
Well that's all I'm saying which is a thread about Kimi after all.
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)

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote: Well, apparently they believe in Vettel and believe him to offer them the best shot at winning a title. Ferrari are not stupid, and at Ferrari the team comes first - if they believe Ricciardo would have been a definite upgrade then they would have plunged for it. But apparently they don't and that "direct evidence" to them probably isn't that convincing.
Do you really believe they decided a driver that beat Vettel was not an upgrade on Kimi?
Ferrari's not the only team not to have taken Ricciardo though, is it? Or Alonso, for that matter. Why we making assumptions about Ferrari in particular?
Maybe because it's a thread about Kimi and Ferrari and not anyone else?
The point is that Ricciardo hasn't exactly been inundated with offers from other teams, so why assume that it's a simple black and white decision?
He's had interest from McLaren and Renault as far as I'm aware but you can make comparison with Mercedes but then again Bottas I would say is doing enough to keep his seat.
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)

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Johnson wrote:Time for Kimi to go, he has taken a good seat for too long. One thing I don't understand about Kimi is why top teams continue to be interested in him on huge wages.

Ferrari knew he wasn't top quality better than anybody 2007-2009, they paid him to leave. Then re-signed him and were surprised he was slow? Now Mclaren are interested in him when he is guaranteed not top tier. I guess Mclaren isn't a top drive anymore, so it kind of makes sense.
Marketing?
technical?
Kimi's technical ability, I thought such things were a myth and drivers merely luck into good cars?
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)

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

Rockie wrote:What's funny in this thread is it being revived to start an unnecessary argument.

Will go back to what I said earlier folks just looking for Vettel to lose points and not the interest of Ferrari.
I understand that reasoning like wanting Bottas out of Mercedes last year.
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)

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:Placating Vettel should actually not supersede winning the championship. If Vettel were winning titles for them then by all means I would say don't rock the boat but that's not what's happening. They haven't gotten over the hump but yet they are complacent. With Ricciardo on the market, they showed no interest. I find that bizarre when they could easily have signed him and when there is such direct evidence that he would likely be an upgrade from what they have. Remember, they haven't won...
Well, apparently they believe in Vettel and believe him to offer them the best shot at winning a title. Ferrari are not stupid, and at Ferrari the team comes first - if they believe Ricciardo would have been a definite upgrade then they would have plunged for it. But apparently they don't and that "direct evidence" to them probably isn't that convincing.
Do you really believe they decided a driver that beat Vettel was not an upgrade on Kimi?
An upgrade on Vettel.
Well that's something else again. :)
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)

davidheath461
Posts: 2000
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:11 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by davidheath461 »

Remember that Kimi and Vettel were the 2 drivers who got the most heavy beating from their teammates back in 2014.

User avatar
mds
Posts: 11443
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by mds »

davidheath461 wrote:Remember that Kimi and Vettel were the 2 drivers who got the most heavy beating from their teammates back in 2014.
That honor would probably go to Magnussen, Perez, Chilton and Maldonado before it's Vettel's turn.
Go Vandoorne :( - Verstappen - Vettel!

Paolo_Lasardi
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Paolo_Lasardi »

mds wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:Remember that Kimi and Vettel were the 2 drivers who got the most heavy beating from their teammates back in 2014.
That honor would probably go to Magnussen, Perez, Chilton and Maldonado before it's Vettel's turn.
Magnussen actually (narrowly) beat Button in qualifying (in contrast to the other mentioned drivers) - in his rookie season. Just saying ...

User avatar
mds
Posts: 11443
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by mds »

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
mds wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:Remember that Kimi and Vettel were the 2 drivers who got the most heavy beating from their teammates back in 2014.
That honor would probably go to Magnussen, Perez, Chilton and Maldonado before it's Vettel's turn.
Magnussen actually (narrowly) beat Button in qualifying (in contrast to the other mentioned drivers) - in his rookie season. Just saying ...
Sure, but who beats who is decided on Sundays, right?
Go Vandoorne :( - Verstappen - Vettel!

pokerman
Posts: 35327
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by pokerman »

mds wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
mds wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:Remember that Kimi and Vettel were the 2 drivers who got the most heavy beating from their teammates back in 2014.
That honor would probably go to Magnussen, Perez, Chilton and Maldonado before it's Vettel's turn.
Magnussen actually (narrowly) beat Button in qualifying (in contrast to the other mentioned drivers) - in his rookie season. Just saying ...
Sure, but who beats who is decided on Sundays, right?
That still doesn't dictate who may have been the best driver.
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)

Paolo_Lasardi
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Paolo_Lasardi »

mds wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
mds wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:Remember that Kimi and Vettel were the 2 drivers who got the most heavy beating from their teammates back in 2014.
That honor would probably go to Magnussen, Perez, Chilton and Maldonado before it's Vettel's turn.
Magnussen actually (narrowly) beat Button in qualifying (in contrast to the other mentioned drivers) - in his rookie season. Just saying ...
Sure, but who beats who is decided on Sundays, right?
Right. But certainly losing out on Saturdays and Sundays to your teammate (Vettel) is a "more heavily beating" than losing out "only" on Sundays (Magnussen). Talking about the questionable "honor" of "most heavily beating from their teammates". And, mind you, I am not defending the original claim. Just saying that Magnussen is a bad example to make your case.

User avatar
mds
Posts: 11443
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by mds »

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
mds wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
mds wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:Remember that Kimi and Vettel were the 2 drivers who got the most heavy beating from their teammates back in 2014.
That honor would probably go to Magnussen, Perez, Chilton and Maldonado before it's Vettel's turn.
Magnussen actually (narrowly) beat Button in qualifying (in contrast to the other mentioned drivers) - in his rookie season. Just saying ...
Sure, but who beats who is decided on Sundays, right?
Right. But certainly losing out on Saturdays and Sundays to your teammate (Vettel) is a "more heavily beating" than losing out "only" on Sundays (Magnussen). Talking about the questionable "honor" of "most heavily beating from their teammates". And, mind you, I am not defending the original claim. Just saying that Magnussen is a bad example to make your case.
Depends on what one is considering. Was looking at percentage of points obtained.

If you're beating your teammate on Saturdays but lose out overall then that makes a case for very bad race management.
Go Vandoorne :( - Verstappen - Vettel!

User avatar
Exediron
Posts: 8132
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Location: Michigan, USA
Contact:

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Exediron »

mds wrote:
davidheath461 wrote:Remember that Kimi and Vettel were the 2 drivers who got the most heavy beating from their teammates back in 2014.
That honor would probably go to Magnussen, Perez, Chilton and Maldonado before it's Vettel's turn.
That depends on what metric you use. By point percentage, Vettel is ahead of the others you named - however, by head-to-head results he is ahead of only Magnussen and Chilton.

Vettel vs. Ricciardo: 167-238 points (70%), 3-11 ahead when both finished
Perez vs. Hulkenberg: 59-96 points (61%), 7-7 ahead when both finished
Magnusen vs. Button: 55-126 points (43%), 3-14 ahead when both finished
Maldonado vs. Grosjean: 2-8 points (25%), 4-4 ahead when both finished
Chilton vs. Bianchi: 0-2 points (0%), 1-8 ahead when both finished

As we all know, points are a pretty misleading way of reading a teammate battle. Perez vs. Hulkenberg and Maldonado vs. Grosjean are badly misrepresented by their respective points hauls, and were in fact even in terms of better finishes. Magnussen fared only slightly worse against Button than Vettel did against Ricciardo, while Chilton was quite conclusively dominated by Bianchi.

I would agree with your basic point that Vettel was not in the top two of poor performances compared to a teammate for 2014, but I don't think he was behind all the people you named either. Chilton and Kimi I believe were the two with the worst head-to-head record against their teammates.
PICK 10 COMPETITION (6 wins, 18 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion

User avatar
mds
Posts: 11443
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by mds »

Exediron wrote: I would agree with your basic point that Vettel was not in the top two of poor performances compared to a teammate for 2014, but I don't think he was behind all the people you named either. Chilton and Kimi I believe were the two with the worst head-to-head record against their teammates.
Respect your assessment :thumbup:
Go Vandoorne :( - Verstappen - Vettel!

User avatar
DOLOMITE
Posts: 1549
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 8:07 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by DOLOMITE »

what about now? anyone want to change their vote?
"I'd rather lose a race going fast enough to win it, than win one going slow enough to lose it".
-Stirling Moss

mas
Posts: 2011
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by mas »

Kimi is still quick enough for a mid-pack team but he probably doesn't deserve a race winning car any more. We all get older and slow up, no disgrace. He probably could still beat Grosjean and Magnusson though in the Haas, it's just that in a potentially title winning Ferrari he's getting exposed as not quite up to Hamilton/Vettel level especially as his tyre whispering days are apparently gone. Give the kid LeClerc a go especially as Ricciardo is now taken or even Alonso at this late stage. Seriously this potentially title winning Ferrari is being wasted by the impetuous Vettel and the race slow Raikonnen. I would like to see LeClerc in because if he is to be a future great which I think he could be I would like him to start early on the records.

KingVoid
Posts: 2850
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by KingVoid »

Zoue wrote:Ferrari's not the only team not to have taken Ricciardo though, is it? Or Alonso, for that matter. Why we making assumptions about Ferrari in particular?
It's interesting how Ferrari have shown zero interest in signing either Ricciardo or Alonso.

It shows that they have plenty of faith in Vettel. They have simulator data and telemetry on both Alonso and Vettel. The fact that they were happy to replace Alonso with Vettel and even rejected Alonso when he asked for a seat in 2017 kinda suggests that Alonso isn't really any faster than Vettel.

More consistent, sure, but faster? Nope.

User avatar
Exediron
Posts: 8132
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Location: Michigan, USA
Contact:

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Exediron »

KingVoid wrote:
Zoue wrote:Ferrari's not the only team not to have taken Ricciardo though, is it? Or Alonso, for that matter. Why we making assumptions about Ferrari in particular?
It's interesting how Ferrari have shown zero interest in signing either Ricciardo or Alonso.

It shows that they have plenty of faith in Vettel. They have simulator data and telemetry on both Alonso and Vettel. The fact that they were happy to replace Alonso with Vettel and even rejected Alonso when he asked for a seat in 2017 kinda suggests that Alonso isn't really any faster than Vettel.

More consistent, sure, but faster? Nope.
Didn't we already have a giant thread on this topic that eventually got shut down? Their lack of interest in replacing Vettel with Alonso proves no such thing. It just proves that - for some reason - they don't want to replace Vettel with Alonso.
PICK 10 COMPETITION (6 wins, 18 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion

mas
Posts: 2011
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by mas »

Vettel doesn't think he is bigger than a team is probably the answer. These days it is now a series ;).
Last edited by mas on Sat Sep 08, 2018 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Invade
Posts: 3050
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Invade »

Exediron wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
Zoue wrote:Ferrari's not the only team not to have taken Ricciardo though, is it? Or Alonso, for that matter. Why we making assumptions about Ferrari in particular?
It's interesting how Ferrari have shown zero interest in signing either Ricciardo or Alonso.

It shows that they have plenty of faith in Vettel. They have simulator data and telemetry on both Alonso and Vettel. The fact that they were happy to replace Alonso with Vettel and even rejected Alonso when he asked for a seat in 2017 kinda suggests that Alonso isn't really any faster than Vettel.

More consistent, sure, but faster? Nope.
Didn't we already have a giant thread on this topic that eventually got shut down? Their lack of interest in replacing Vettel with Alonso proves no such thing. It just proves that - for some reason - they don't want to replace Vettel with Alonso.
Plus 1.

KingVoid
Posts: 2850
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by KingVoid »

Exediron wrote:Didn't we already have a giant thread on this topic that eventually got shut down? Their lack of interest in replacing Vettel with Alonso proves no such thing. It just proves that - for some reason - they don't want to replace Vettel with Alonso.
OK, let me ask you two simple questions

1. Do you agree that Ferrari have a good idea of how Vettel compares to Alonso?

2. Do you agree that if Ferrari knew that Vettel was slower than Alonso, they probably would not build their team around him like they are doing now?

User avatar
Invade
Posts: 3050
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Invade »

Alonso may have been fast to such a degree that there's a reasonable buffer until some imaginary threshold for it being worth it to build around a similarly fast but potentially slightly slower driver.

Paolo_Lasardi
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by Paolo_Lasardi »

KingVoid wrote:
Exediron wrote:Didn't we already have a giant thread on this topic that eventually got shut down? Their lack of interest in replacing Vettel with Alonso proves no such thing. It just proves that - for some reason - they don't want to replace Vettel with Alonso.
OK, let me ask you two simple questions

1. Do you agree that Ferrari have a good idea of how Vettel compares to Alonso?
D
2. Do you agree that if Ferrari knew that Vettel was slower than Alonso, they probably would not build their team around him like they are doing now?
Considering how Ferrari kept Massa and is keeping Räikkönen despite better drivers available, I am skeptical about your reasoning, tbh.

sandman1347
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Raikkonen: Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

Post by sandman1347 »

KingVoid wrote:
Exediron wrote:Didn't we already have a giant thread on this topic that eventually got shut down? Their lack of interest in replacing Vettel with Alonso proves no such thing. It just proves that - for some reason - they don't want to replace Vettel with Alonso.
OK, let me ask you two simple questions

1. Do you agree that Ferrari have a good idea of how Vettel compares to Alonso?

2. Do you agree that if Ferrari knew that Vettel was slower than Alonso, they probably would not build their team around him like they are doing now?
1. Possibly though without actually bench-marking them in the same car, there will still be some guess work involved.
2. Not necessarily. If Alonso is only marginally quicker than Vettel but was a significant drain on team morale, they might feel that the slight performance drop-off is worth the improved team atmosphere.

There are a lot of possibilities really and I think you are overreaching with your assertions here.

Post Reply