Driver Is Kovalainen really that bad? - Page 6

Raven · 30 Mar 2009, 20:42 (Ref:2429295)

Give it a rest Glen. You'd be singing a different tune about luck had Heikki been struck with needing a gearbox change in qualifying and incurring a grid penalty.

Heikki instigated the accident he got caught up in. Luck had little to do with it.

Lewis drove a smart race and came away with a better result than just about everyone expected given the car's competitiveness right now.

Dutton · 30 Mar 2009, 20:52 (Ref:2429303)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taprobane

Indeed, I wasn't claiming that the car was the only difference between the two. I think it's obvious Hamilton is the faster driver however the two have rather different styles so the development of the car towards Hamilton would at the same time hamper Heikki.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super Hans

Which is the way almost every successful team has operated since time immemorial.

And I maintain that McLaren offer their No.2 driver a better shot than most leading teams.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satorian

I think it's a fair thing to say that Hamilton is a somewhat better driver than Kovalainen, which as an impression was reinforced by the team therefore giving somewhat more attention/resources/focus to Hamilton, which likely supported the comparatively better results.

Thank goodness we have Ferrari being the bastion of equality, eh?

Mr V · 30 Mar 2009, 20:53 (Ref:2429306)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

HK didn't get much of a chance - quali was good though.

It was ashame for Heikki (although as Raven rightly points out, everything was Heikki's fault in the race

) but not only quali, from what i saw, Heikki seemed to have the better speed of the 2 all weekend.

**gomick** · 30 Mar 2009, 20:59 (Ref:2429315)

Rubens was the lucky one - how strong is his car... Webber & Heikki, wrong place, wrong time - as is the usual that happens when you are consistently in the pack...

Knowlesy · 30 Mar 2009, 22:14 (Ref:2429372)

Well is it really a coincidence that the same drivers get clobbered/do the clobbering?

It is unlucky at times, but also there are other factors.

**gomick** · 30 Mar 2009, 22:17 (Ref:2429374)

The best thing is to be at the head of the pack, not amongst it....

RaiseYourFist · 30 Mar 2009, 22:27 (Ref:2429382)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

Ironically enough, I think if they had stuck to "Plan A" in 2007 then Fernando would have delivered the title for them and Lewis would have gained great experience. I suspect that Hamilton blossomed so quickly that they got impatient for the dream to come true and ended up backing the wrong driver.

I think if they fully backed Hamilton in 2007 then he wouldve been a 2x WDC now

Mr V · 30 Mar 2009, 22:34 (Ref:2429384)

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaiseYourFist

I think if they fully backed Hamilton in 2007 then he wouldve been a 2x WDC now

Maybe so, but on the other hand, 1 less point and he'd be a no x WDC now

Knowlesy · 30 Mar 2009, 22:49 (Ref:2429392)

One more point and he'd be a two time champ.

**gomick** · 30 Mar 2009, 23:46 (Ref:2429432)

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaiseYourFist

I think if they fully backed Hamilton in 2007 then he wouldve been a 2x WDC now

That was never going to happen with Alonso in the team...

MikeManNZ · 31 Mar 2009, 03:23 (Ref:2429495)

To be honest when FA left (and thank the lord that he did, he and Flav deserve each other) I was surprised the Pedro de la Rosa did not get the seat. He did a great job filling in the years before when needed and would have been a nice experianced driver for LH to get some F1 race craft from.

Ohhh well we have what we have now.

Mr V · 31 Mar 2009, 06:40 (Ref:2429527)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

One more point and he'd be a two time champ.

Without a doubt. My point being that it's that close from being "all or nothing" (for want of a better phrase). Of course, 1 more point and Fernando could have been a 3 x (on the trot) WDC and i remain convinced that had he stayed at McLaren in 2008 he'd have been 4 x WDC (and got the job done quicker), but thats just one more "what if" in F1.

Bleu · 31 Mar 2009, 09:59 (Ref:2429637)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

One more point and he'd be a two time champ.

Two actually - he would have lost to Kimi on a tiebreaker, if he had finished 6th in Brazil for example.

Kovalainen was faster than Lewis in all practice sessions but we need to see what his race pace is, hopefully that happens in Malaysia.

Glen · 31 Mar 2009, 11:06 (Ref:2429679)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raven

Give it a rest Glen. You'd be singing a different tune about luck had Heikki been struck with needing a gearbox change in qualifying and incurring a grid penalty.

Heikki instigated the accident he got caught up in. Luck had little to do with it.

Lewis drove a smart race and came away with a better result than just about everyone expected given the car's competitiveness right now.

No I wouldn't. Hamilton was very unlucky to get a gearbox failure, and went on to drive an outstanding race (as I've said repeatedly). However there was a funny kind of silver lining to his situation, which was that he wasn't in the middle of the mid-field scramble when it all went wrong.

To say the start chaos was caused by HK is just daft - very frequently there is a bump and a crash and a chain reaction in the start, and very seldom is it possible or fair to blame one particular driver.

Was a shame that we didn't get to see Heikki's practice and quali pace (which was as good as Hamilton's) play out in the race itself.

ECW Dan Selby · 31 Mar 2009, 12:12 (Ref:2429738)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

No I wouldn't. Hamilton was very unlucky to get a gearbox failure, and went on to drive an outstanding race (as I've said repeatedly). However there was a funny kind of silver lining to his situation, which was that he wasn't in the middle of the mid-field scramble when it all went wrong.

To say the start chaos was caused by HK is just daft - very frequently there is a bump and a crash and a chain reaction in the start, and very seldom is it possible or fair to blame one particular driver.

Was a shame that we didn't get to see Heikki's practice and quali pace (which was as good as Hamilton's) play out in the race itself.

Agreed - I'm very much looking forward to Malaysia (ok, for many reasons...) to see his pace in comparison to Lewis. Hamilton's been heavily praised for his performance at Australia (and rightfully so), but to see these 2 push eachother would be very interesting.

Interesting point made above somewhere regarding De la Rosa - I have to agree. I think he would have been a solid #2 for Hamilton.

Selby

VIVA GT · 31 Mar 2009, 12:23 (Ref:2429744)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glen

No I wouldn't. Hamilton was very unlucky to get a gearbox failure, and went on to drive an outstanding race (as I've said repeatedly). However there was a funny kind of silver lining to his situation, which was that he wasn't in the middle of the mid-field scramble when it all went wrong.

To say the start chaos was caused by HK is just daft - very frequently there is a bump and a crash and a chain reaction in the start, and very seldom is it possible or fair to blame one particular driver.

Was a shame that we didn't get to see Heikki's practice and quali pace (which was as good as Hamilton's) play out in the race itself.

Are you saying the start chaos was due to the BBC's choice of theme tune?

Glen · 31 Mar 2009, 12:28 (Ref:2429745)

No. Diana Ross.

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