Driver Is Kovalainen really that bad? - Page 2

FPV GTHO · 14 Feb 2009, 04:50 (Ref:2397253)

He didnt adapt well enough to the McLaren last year, something Alonso had no trouble with the year before other than some general issues with the tyres. If he still cant adapt this year, i dont think McLaren should keep him. Comparitively speaking, he performed worse than Fisichella did at Renault for both 05-06.

Dutton · 14 Feb 2009, 05:30 (Ref:2397258)

He would be very unlikely to beat Lewis over a season at the best of times. I believe he underperformed last year within the context of what was available to him. I also think he faces the challenges that any No 2 does. The latter two factors combined to make his performances relative to Lewis worse than Heikki's inherent talent could potentially produce.

I don't see why Mclaren would want to replace him. He can certainly do better than he did last year, and I am sure the team will be expecting that, but it isn't like they want/expect him to hugely challenge Lewis.

Number twos tend to be given quite a hefty perfomance deficit tolerance zone, as Ronspeak may put it, so I don't suppose HK is going to leave Mclaren at their behest any time soon.

Mr V · 14 Feb 2009, 09:27 (Ref:2397318)

This was in January's edition of F1 Racing, talking about what car was best last season.....

Quote:

David Coulthard - Kovalainen - who we all know has got the speed, talent and all the rest of it - wasn't able to either make himself work within the McLaren system, which is very moulded around Hamilton, or wasn't able to make the car work. So how could you say the McLaren was the best car?
Murray Walker - I think Kovalainen was more sinned-against than sinning, because everything that went wrong with the McLaren seemed to happen to him.

fanfisique · 14 Feb 2009, 13:31 (Ref:2397411)

McLaren has used the 2008 rear wing during the last couple of tests...what´s their target???

Check It Out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Rvomv4w0Us

runshaw · 14 Feb 2009, 13:32 (Ref:2397413)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super Hans

I've followed both Heikki's and Lewis's careers from FRenault onwards, and it is fairly clear who is the superior driver. If McLaren were to give them equal No.1 status, it'd still be Hamilton who came out on top.

I have also followed both careers very closely. That sums it up really. Hamilton is a world-beater in every sense of the word; multiple titles in junior formulae, huge amount of wins, extaordinary performances in an F1 car (that is stating the obvious). Heikki is extremely good, but falls far short of Hamilton.

juicy sushi · 14 Feb 2009, 14:48 (Ref:2397450)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satorian

I think it was the drivers that pushed the STR further up the field than it deserved to be. Mediocre car flung around by one exceptional and one pretty good driver.

the car wasn't mediocre. probably the best motor in the field, and a good newey designed chassis. vettel took advantage of the wet and ran hard when the better teams couldn't.

other than that, the results weren't mindblowing, but to call the car mediocre would be a mis-characterization...

Raven · 14 Feb 2009, 15:08 (Ref:2397456)

Quote:

Originally Posted by runshaw

I have also followed both careers very closely. That sums it up really. Hamilton is a world-beater in every sense of the word; multiple titles in junior formulae, huge amount of wins, extaordinary performances in an F1 car (that is stating the obvious). Heikki is extremely good, but falls far short of Hamilton.

Completely agree. All this heavy fuel nonsense is just more sour grapes from people who want to detract from Hamilton's accomplishments. If McLaren really wanted a pigeon alongside Lewis, it would've been easier to put Pedro de la Rosa in the car.

It's worth remembering that Heikki was only McLaren's 3rd choice for 08. Their first choice was in fact Rosberg and 2nd choice was Vettel.

McLaren, IMO, always seek to put the most competitive drivers available in their cars. If Kubica were to become available, I'm sure they'd want to partner him with Hamilton as well. Kovalainen has it all to prove in 2008.

BootsOntheSide · 14 Feb 2009, 20:53 (Ref:2397582)

Kovalainen didn't get the results his potential suggested last year. He went to McLaren with a pretty strong reputation as one of the future stars - at least equal to Rosberg and Vettel. Nico looked a good option for McLaren as he and Lewis were such close friends, while Nico would not have expected to beat Lewis (or complain if he didn't). It could be that the strong car and lower expectations of STR would have suited Heikki, or that Vettel's morale would have been sapped by running behind Lewis. It's early to decide which of those three is the more gifted, but Lewis is almost certainly best of the lot.

I think McLaren do traditionally operate with a #1 and a #2. I'm sure a decent offer could have tempted Mansell or Piquet, or a young charger like Alesi, when Berger joined for his 3-years as Senna's subservient team-mate. Coulthard's reputation was about equal to Mika's when he joined in 1996, but it soon became clear which was the faster - and yet the pairing remained for 6 years. I expect that Ron hoped and dreamt that Lewis would match Fernando in 2007, but did he realistically expect him to match a double world champion?

ralf fan · 14 Feb 2009, 21:45 (Ref:2397601)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bononi

I think he's the perfect number two. Even better than RB or Berger.

Sorry but you don't get more 'no.2' than Rubens. Future 'no.2's' will be compared against Rubens for decades.

runshaw · 15 Feb 2009, 03:05 (Ref:2397672)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BootsOntheSide

I expect that Ron hoped and dreamt that Lewis would match Fernando in 2007, but did he realistically expect him to match a double world champion?

Thats a very good point. I think most people expected Hamilton to be good and worry Alonso. Yet it became clear, even before the season started some would say, that Hamilton not only matched his double world champion team-mate, but overshadowed him convincingly.

Back on track. Massa's performance allowed many to question why Raikkonen was so dismal in the same year. And people acknowledge that Kubica was miles ahead of Heidfeld. The gaps between all those team-mates I just mentioned were big. But the gap between Hamilton and Heikki wasn't just big; it was significant.

Kimi only finished 1 place down on Massa, yet it is clear who was the better driver in 2008 at Ferrari. Kubica was only 2 places in front of Heidfeld, but its easy to see who shined in the BMW. Hamilton finished 6 places above Kovalainen. Not much can be said.

**GTRMagic** · 15 Feb 2009, 03:16 (Ref:2397676)

Quote:

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

I think 2009 will be his year...

Did he put out a press release to that effect?

Ralf's Girl · 15 Feb 2009, 15:27 (Ref:2397848)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satorian

Correcting for fuel he actually had quite a few convincing qualifying outings. Throughout the season I started to wonder why he didn't start a fuss about always being fueled heavier than Lewis.

Probably because it would have stirred up trouble, which is precisely what McLaren were trying to avoid when they looked for a replacement for Alonso. It's hardly an accident that they went for a driver whose temperament is about as far-removed from Alonso's as it could get.

JeremySmith · 15 Feb 2009, 16:00 (Ref:2397863)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralf's Girl

Probably because it would have stirred up trouble, which is precisely what McLaren were trying to avoid when they looked for a replacement for Alonso. It's hardly an accident that they went for a driver whose temperament is about as far-removed from Alonso's as it could get.

I don't think that had anything to do with it to be honest....The drivers are given equal opportunity to shine at McLaren.

**Bononi** · 15 Feb 2009, 19:04 (Ref:2397919)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

I don't think that had anything to do with it to be honest....The drivers are given equal opportunity to shine at McLaren.

I agree, give them both a good wax and they'll make the cars shine like brand new ones... equally !!!

Teretonga · 15 Feb 2009, 19:22 (Ref:2397929)

Coulthard was at least the equal of Mika in his first two years at McLaren, and in 1997 was actually superior....until Jerez and the following years Australian GP.

Kovalainen went to McLaren with a good reputation as a coming man. He actually looked exciting until the tyre went flat at Barcelona.

Later performances were up and down but he may have been the victim of team race strategies and some genuine bad luck.
After his win he was expected to be more aggressive with a monkey off his back but in fact the rest of his season was horrible.
My jury is still out, although I initially believed he was very good, at least an equal to Button and Massa.

Massa upped his game last year though so I would now put him well ahead.
Kovalainen has it all to do this year. He needs consistency and a string of podiums backed up with consistent qualifying performances in the top six would help restore some faith in him.

If he doesn't produce I can't see him staying long term. Mclaren will look for another up and coming driver to replace him.

**Bononi** · 15 Feb 2009, 19:48 (Ref:2397942)

And beat Hamilton.

**Adam43** · 15 Feb 2009, 20:12 (Ref:2397950)

As the thread is already off topic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Coulthard was at least the equal of Mika in his first two years at McLaren, and in 1997 was actually superior....until Jerez and the following years Australian GP.

Nah, Mika was great in 1997 and was actually unlucky. So many victories lost. DC got a fluke win at Melbourne. His win in Monza was down to Mika's puncture. Mika could/should have won at Silverstone and Nurburgring. Mika's mid to end of season form was fantastic, but it netted few results.
I'm not having a go at DC, but I feel Mika was the better driver in '97.

Ralf's Girl · 15 Feb 2009, 20:38 (Ref:2397968)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

I don't think that had anything to do with it to be honest....The drivers are given equal opportunity to shine at McLaren.

I think they have equality in terms of the machinery that they're given to race with (although it's remarkable that Lewis went through the season without any car failures in races, and Heikki had several, if you're into the theory of bias...), but I have absolutely no doubt that McLaren didn't want another Alonso. They purposely picked a driver who wouldn't kick up a fuss about getting beaten by Lewis, because anybody who does will go the same way as Alonso.

Raven · 15 Feb 2009, 21:46 (Ref:2398018)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralf's Girl

I think they have equality in terms of the machinery that they're given to race with (although it's remarkable that Lewis went through the season without any car failures in races, and Heikki had several, if you're into the theory of bias...), but I have absolutely no doubt that McLaren didn't want another Alonso. They purposely picked a driver who wouldn't kick up a fuss about getting beaten by Lewis, because anybody who does will go the same way as Alonso.

What drivers currently in F1 (and available for 08) would you include in the category of being "another Alonso" ?

JeremySmith · 15 Feb 2009, 22:15 (Ref:2398056)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralf's Girl

I think they have equality in terms of the machinery that they're given to race with (although it's remarkable that Lewis went through the season without any car failures in races, and Heikki had several, if you're into the theory of bias...), but I have absolutely no doubt that McLaren didn't want another Alonso. They purposely picked a driver who wouldn't kick up a fuss about getting beaten by Lewis, because anybody who does will go the same way as Alonso.

They want the talent of Alonso, who would not? just not the attitude that came with it..The let's "pick this type of driver" to partner Hamilton does not hold water does it now..

Super Hans · 16 Feb 2009, 08:48 (Ref:2398338)

It's ironic that a team which paired-up Prost & Senna, Kimi & JPM and Alonso & Hamilton is being accused of having a sinister driver hierarchy by supporters of a team which paired Michael Schumacher with Irvine & Barrichello for 10 years.

Glen · 16 Feb 2009, 10:09 (Ref:2398385)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

I don't think that had anything to do with it to be honest....The drivers are given equal opportunity to shine at McLaren.

Not.

Obviously not.

The exact opposite!

Super Hans · 16 Feb 2009, 10:20 (Ref:2398389)

I'd say the truth was somewhere in between.

The drivers at McLaren are given equal equipment, but the quicker driver seems to be favoured in terms of strategy.

This is only natural, in my opinion.

**Bononi** · 16 Feb 2009, 13:19 (Ref:2398480)

Like we all know for sure what happens. But we have seen something along the same lines in the past, and last season was so clear - Germany comes to mind - that we have a #1 and a #2. Equal equipment - who knows, equal treatment - follow the hierarchy.

Glen · 16 Feb 2009, 13:57 (Ref:2398504)

Will be interesting to see which driver gets the best out of the new specification. Hamilton has been very hard on tyres so far, and the news regs do give the teams problems with rear tyre grip and wear - it might just be that the 2009 car is more HK's cup of tea than LH's.

It is interesting to note that McLaren are not testing their 2009 rear wing - I wonder if they are still trying to find enough downforce at the back.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What Happened To Kovalainen?	OSTKURVE	Formula One	51	16 Dec 2007 15:53
Heikki Kovalainen	luke	Formula One	57	28 Aug 2007 20:39
Kovalainen to Williams?	Alwaysfirst	Formula One	26	20 Jun 2007 07:53
Heikki Kovalainen	F1Pete	Rallying & Rallycross	17	14 Dec 2004 01:10
Another double for Kovalainen	Tweed	National & International Single Seaters	33	21 Aug 2004 11:00