[Official] Canadian Grand Prix 2024

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Maybe Russell’s biggest weakness is in battle, but I remember another British driver Damon Hill having that problem. And he still won many races and a title

He's not 'weak' in battle though. He's a hard racer and likes to press on and move forward which he has no other choice to do with an awkward handlimg car like this Merc.

Loads of top drivers have made errors trying to attack with an inferior car.

[S griffin]

I disagree. Sometimes his moves pay off, but not always. As his car gets better, so does his confidence. I think once he is in front he will be hard to beat

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I disagree. Sometimes his moves pay off, but not always. As his car gets better, so does his confidence. I think once he is in front he will be hard to beat

Eh? Yes at the moment he doesn't have the car. That's my point!

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by chunterer

He's not 'weak' in battle though. He's a hard racer and likes to press on and move forward which he has no other choice to do with an awkward handlimg car like this Merc.

Loads of top drivers have made errors trying to attack with an inferior car.

Poor battling wheel-to-wheel and a propensity for throwing the car off the track show that he is “weak” though, to use your word.

It’s hardly new and he’s been doing it forever. Can clearly still recover it no doubt, but it is giving some concern.

The continuing Mr Saturday nickname has never ever been a compliment.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by peebee2

The continuing Mr Saturday nickname has never ever been a compliment.

I need to haul you up on this as it is not true, despite whatever paddock sources you may or may not have.

Mr Saturday was coined before he even joined Mercedes. It was the fact he completely dominated his Williams team mates during qualifying, almost without fail. This was a positive nickname, and was spoken about by George a few times.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree that George is a good or bad racer.

[S griffin]

I think the Mr Saturday thing was always a misnomer. It made people think he was only good on a Saturday. But it also showed George was good enough to become champ from the start. There are still question marks on his wheel to wheel racing, but there is no doubt he has the speed and mental capability to be champion

[Skam85]

Outqualifying a one-armed Robert Kubica and Nicholas Latifi isn't really the flex that the Mr Saturday commentators think it is either.

Doing better than a checked out Hamilton is a bit more impressive, I'll give him that though.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I need to haul you up on this as it is not true, despite whatever paddock sources you may or may not have.

Mr Saturday was coined before he even joined Mercedes. It was the fact he completely dominated his Williams team mates during qualifying, almost without fail. This was a positive nickname, and was spoken about by George a few times.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree that George is a good or bad racer.

I know it was from his Williams days. Beating his teammates was expected. Later-version Kubica was nowhere near pre-accident Kubica and Latifi was never anything more than a walking budget.

It was his reputation for qualifying in a good position and then rapidly racing to the back when the lights went out and the bullshit stopped.

I think he stopped mentioning it when he realised, or had pointed out to him, how negative a nickname it was/is.

[Adam43]

Or how people who like to be nasty turned it round to be a negative comment.

It was never really a comparison to team mates, more that car ended up somewhere it wasn’t expected to be.

Senna more poles than wins. Mr Saturday.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Skam85

Outqualifying a one-armed Robert Kubica and Nicholas Latifi isn't really the flex that the Mr Saturday commentators think it is either.

Doing better than a checked out Hamilton is a bit more impressive, I'll give him that though.

We say that now, but he was a rookie then, not a Mercedes factory driver. So when a rookie starts doing decent things, of course they get nick names.

If he'd entered as a Mercedes factory driver, then went on to beat Latifi it's different. But you can't say in hindsight it wasn't good because now he's a Mercedes driver.

[peebee2]

It seems hard for some to understand. The nickname didn’t come from doing “decent things.” It came from racing backwards from better grid positions. It was never complimentary.

[chillibowl]

so people in the paddock were making fun of a rookie for being fast in a crappy 2020/21 Williams on saturday?

weird joke. indeed this is very difficult to understand?

did whomever gave him that nickname think that Williams was a good car or something?

edit...i can see how being called Mr. Saturday can be an insult (like great in practice but terrible in the game) but imo it came across as complimentary when applied to a young GR.

[peebee2]

I never said it was an insult, or people were making fun of him.

I said it wasn’t complimentary. Not the same at all.

[Beau2]

The Mr. Saturday thing was interesting for a while because whilst George was always quick in qualifying he also had a habit of not getting the best results.

There were several times early in his career where he missed out on points when he shouldn't have. Sometimes it ewas the car, other times George bottled it and made mistakes. It was a running joke for a little while as he was actually outscored by Kubica, despite George generally being quicker.

As quick as he is George still has a habit of making mistakes and getting involved in incidents. Since he's been with Mercedes there are several examples of him being involved in incidents, most of which are his fault. He's really not much different to how Max was in his early days.

Composure wise, Russell is a million miles away from Lando Norris. It's impressive what Russell is doing to Hamilton, but I don't think he's quite championship calibre. Norris, Piastri and Leclerc show more consistentcy, imo.

[S griffin]

George has always been quick in qualifying. It’s just that pressure gets the better of him at time it seems. He’s always given it a good go though and shown he can mix it with the best. He can lead Merc to a title and needs to with Lewis leaving.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by peebee2

I never said it was an insult

<snip>

I said it wasn’t complimentary.

lol, ok.

[Greem]

Coincidentally, this being the Canadian GP thread, this discussion about George is getting all Groundhog Day...

[crmalcolm]

I recall Graham Hill receiving the moniker 'Mr Monaco'. At first, a lot of people thought it was a compliment, and had been earnt by his prowess on the streets of the principality.
If only he had known that it would soon be claimed that it was a negative term given to him, because 'insiders' felt that he could only perform well on one track. After a while, when it was pointed out by an anonymous forum poster that his reputation was for being a one-track performer, the thousands of people who had been using the nickname in praise realised the error of their ways.

The same was true of a certain A.Senna - who earnt himself the moniker 'Rain Master' (amongst others). Again, after a while, claims materialised that this was a negative term and only applied because people felt that without rain he was a poor driver. They highlight the fact that he had fallen to fifth from the start - or 'rapidly racing to the back when the lights went out' as it has also been termed, before putting in a single lap performance that was praised. Again, it took a few years and a persistent claim from a plucky individual on the internet to make everyone realise that he was only being given that name because it was being used to highlight the limited range of his abilities.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I recall Graham Hill receiving the moniker 'Mr Monaco'. At first, a lot of people thought it was a compliment, and had been earnt by his prowess on the streets of the principality.
If only he had known that it would soon be claimed that it was a negative term given to him, because 'insiders' felt that he could only perform well on one track. After a while, when it was pointed out by an anonymous forum poster that his reputation was for being a one-track performer, the thousands of people who had been using the nickname in praise realised the error of their ways.

The same was true of a certain A.Senna - who earnt himself the moniker 'Rain Master' (amongst others). Again, after a while, claims materialised that this was a negative term and only applied because people felt that without rain he was a poor driver. They highlight the fact that he had fallen to fifth from the start - or 'rapidly racing to the back when the lights went out' as it has also been termed, before putting in a single lap performance that was praised. Again, it took a few years and a persistent claim from a plucky individual on the internet to make everyone realise that he was only being given that name because it was being used to highlight the limited range of his abilities.

Perfect answer to all of this nonsense. Luckily we have another Grand Prix to talk about soon.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I recall Graham Hill receiving the moniker 'Mr Monaco'. At first, a lot of people thought it was a compliment, and had been earnt by his prowess on the streets of the principality.
If only he had known that it would soon be claimed that it was

Absolute LOL at the irony of someone comparing nicknames that came from scoring points, winning races and winning titles with a nickname that specifically came about from not gaining anything from a good position.

When I bump into Harry I’ll tell him that they should start using it again as some fans actually think it is a great honour.

[Adam43]

It seems hard for some to understand. It is clear some viewed it as complimentary.

It was initially complimentary, but then those that like to be nasty, appear clever and superior turned it around. So unfortunately that wouldn’t work anymore.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Adam43

It seems hard for some to understand. It is clear some viewed it as complimentary.

It was initially complimentary, but then those that like to be nasty, appear clever and superior turned it around. So unfortunately that wouldn’t work anymore.

I know you want to try and be right and a higher authority, but claiming things that aren’t true are true really won’t help.

It was never complimentary. Some innocent media types assumed it was, but they’d missed the irony too.

Anyway, at last cars are about to hit the track, and then we’ve got the big Spanish announcement to consume us.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I recall Graham Hill receiving the moniker 'Mr Monaco'. At first, a lot of people thought it was a compliment, and had been earnt by his prowess on the streets of the principality.
If only he had known that it would soon be claimed that it was a negative term given to him, because 'insiders' felt that he could only perform well on one track. After a while, when it was pointed out by an anonymous forum poster that his reputation was for being a one-track performer, the thousands of people who had been using the nickname in praise realised the error of their ways.

The same was true of a certain A.Senna - who earnt himself the moniker 'Rain Master' (amongst others). Again, after a while, claims materialised that this was a negative term and only applied because people felt that without rain he was a poor driver. They highlight the fact that he had fallen to fifth from the start - or 'rapidly racing to the back when the lights went out' as it has also been termed, before putting in a single lap performance that was praised. Again, it took a few years and a persistent claim from a plucky individual on the internet to make everyone realise that he was only being given that name because it was being used to highlight the limited range of his abilities.

This is the funniest (and daftest) thing I've read for quite a while.

[Born Racer]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Both Merc drivers had the car to win. Norris had the car to win. Piastri perhaps had the car to win. Verstappen didn't have the car to win but won fairly comfortably in the end. Pretty unusual all told.

I question the idea that he didn't have the car to win. The advantage might not be as consistently there with the Red Bull, but was it really behind Mercedes and McLaren in Canada?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by peebee2

I know you want to try and be right and a higher authority, but claiming things that aren’t true are true really won’t help.

It was never complimentary. Some innocent media types assumed it was, but they’d missed the irony too.

I guess it always been like Mr Paddock then.