FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

Discuss the sport you love with other motorsport fans

Formula One related discussion.
#232777
I don't for one minute believe that Willi Weber's quote of Martin W would be verbatim. For me it's not significant either.

What is significant, and for me not surprising, is that Martin W was actually talking to Willi.

As person I think Jensen Button is OK, he's said a few silly things, but then haven't we all. I'm also happy for him that he won a WDC.

Having said that, IMO, he is not a good enough driver for a McLaren - the car deserves a better driver.

I'm a firm believer that you don't judge a driver by a race or a season, but over a career. Here's how Jensen has performed and how the car he was driving performed over his career so far:-
2000 Williams 3rd Button 8th
2001 Benetton 7th Button 17th
2002 Renault 4th Button 7th
2003 BAR 5th Button 9th
2004 BAR 2nd Button 3rd
2005 BAR 6th Button 9th
2006 Honda 4th Button 6th
2007 Honda 8th Button 15th
2008 Honda 9th Button 18th
2009 Brawn 1st Button 1st
2010 McLaren 2nd Button 5th

Jensen's raced 191 times for 9 wins (6 in one of the most dominant cars an F1 season has ever seen - the 2009 Brawn).

Take out his worst and best years and you have 156 races for 3 wins.

There's no malice in this, just putting it out there. I will also go on record and say that anyone earning a drive in an F1 car up to now is already a great driver.

Hm, that juxtaposition of team rankings and his final rank is deceptive: e. g., in 2005 with BAR finishing in 6th it means that there were 10 drivers that year (teams ranked 1-5) that drove a better placed car than him, thus, his 9th rank is actually an indication that he outperformed at least one of those 10 drivers. Hence, if you take this into account, then there were only a few years (2000, 2001, 2008, 2010) when he underperformed - in 2008 the 18th spot actually is still within the car's performance. So, 3 years underperformance, the rest of the time he either outperformed the car or was just within the expectations.
#232781
Sure is. The only thing more ridiculous would be if two teams owned by different people both tried to pitch up with the same branding despite being completely unrelat...


Oh. Right.


:rofl: you're the best :thumbup:

As for Toro Rosso, as long as Jaime keeps his seat, I don't care what happens to them. It can only get better than the current management, there's no evolution and no incentive...
#232782
Hm, that juxtaposition of team rankings and his final rank is deceptive: e. g., in 2005 with BAR finishing in 6th it means that there were 10 drivers that year (teams ranked 1-5) that drove a better placed car than him, thus, his 9th rank is actually an indication that he outperformed at least one of those 10 drivers. Hence, if you take this into account, then there were only a few years (2000, 2001, 2008, 2010) when he underperformed - in 2008 the 18th spot actually is still within the car's performance. So, 3 years underperformance, the rest of the time he either outperformed the car or was just within the expectations.


If you want to compare his achievements against the car's potential as a baseline here's how it looks:-
JBRecord1.JPG


So twice in eleven years he outperformed baseline (but only by 1 and 2). 9 out of eleven he achieve or underachieved baseline.

Also, as I previously pointed out, take out his best and worst year and you have 156 races for 3 wins.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
#232784
Hm, that juxtaposition of team rankings and his final rank is deceptive: e. g., in 2005 with BAR finishing in 6th it means that there were 10 drivers that year (teams ranked 1-5) that drove a better placed car than him, thus, his 9th rank is actually an indication that he outperformed at least one of those 10 drivers. Hence, if you take this into account, then there were only a few years (2000, 2001, 2008, 2010) when he underperformed - in 2008 the 18th spot actually is still within the car's performance. So, 3 years underperformance, the rest of the time he either outperformed the car or was just within the expectations.


If you want to compare his achievements against the car's potential as a baseline here's how it looks:-
JBRecord1.JPG


So twice in eleven years he outperformed baseline (but only by 1 and 2). 9 out of eleven he achieve or underachieved baseline.

Also, as I previously pointed out, take out his best and worst year and you have 156 races for 3 wins.


That's what I was saying, 4 years underperformance, with 2008 being still within expectation (I cut him some slack there).
And c'mon: saying he outperformed baseline but only by 1 and 2 is not very nice. In 2009 he couldn't very well be better than 1st, now could he? Yet, you score a 0 differential. So, he should get some bonus points or something for achieving world championship.

You're very sleek with how you put it there: putting 2 positives vs. 9 neutral + negative, thus, lumping the neutral ones (that incidentally include his world champion season!) with the 4 (or 3) negatives and making them appear so much bigger.
You could easily state it the other way:
So 4 times in eleven years he underperformed, 7 out of eleven he achieved or outperformed baseline.
This sounds much less negative than how you put it while saying the same thing (apart from the parentheses).
Such editorial tactics I'd expect from the likes of Mark Hughes, but not from a true tifoso :wink:
#232790
You're very sleek with how you put it there: putting 2 positives vs. 9 neutral + negative, thus, lumping the neutral ones (that incidentally include his world champion season!) with the 4 (or 3) negatives and making them appear so much bigger.
You could easily state it the other way:
So 4 times in eleven years he underperformed, 7 out of eleven he achieved or outperformed baseline.
This sounds much less negative than how you put it while saying the same thing (apart from the parentheses).
Such editorial tactics I'd expect from the likes of Mark Hughes, but not from a true tifoso :wink:


We were talking about a driver for a McLaren, not just any F1 car - they are a perennial leading team and, therefore, IMO, warrant exceptional drivers. So, the comparison I was making was Jensen's career record against what you might expect from an "exceptional" driver. For me, an exceptional driver should be constantly doing significantly better than baseline. Now, if you want me to talk about how good Jensen would be for a team like Force India, Williams or Torro Rosso, I might have couched my comparisons in the terms you used.

if you go back and read my original post, I gave Jensen a thumbs ups especially as a driver. I don't want what I say to be construed any other way, but, I also have the view that, as a pure driver, he's not quite up to my impression of McLaren standards.

It's interesting that you jump to Jensen's defense from such a benign post but have nothing to say about another driver being called a "pxxxx"
#232793
What Jenson is good for, doesnt measure in wins or loses ! He is a great guy and teammate! And thats good enough for me! J_Lew is the best duo on the grid :clap:

Oh and I forgot,he is a WDC as well :twisted:
#232818
You're very sleek with how you put it there: putting 2 positives vs. 9 neutral + negative, thus, lumping the neutral ones (that incidentally include his world champion season!) with the 4 (or 3) negatives and making them appear so much bigger.
You could easily state it the other way:
So 4 times in eleven years he underperformed, 7 out of eleven he achieved or outperformed baseline.
This sounds much less negative than how you put it while saying the same thing (apart from the parentheses).
Such editorial tactics I'd expect from the likes of Mark Hughes, but not from a true tifoso :wink:


We were talking about a driver for a McLaren, not just any F1 car - they are a perennial leading team and, therefore, IMO, warrant exceptional drivers. So, the comparison I was making was Jensen's career record against what you might expect from an "exceptional" driver. For me, an exceptional driver should be constantly doing significantly better than baseline. Now, if you want me to talk about how good Jensen would be for a team like Force India, Williams or Torro Rosso, I might have couched my comparisons in the terms you used.

if you go back and read my original post, I gave Jensen a thumbs ups especially as a driver. I don't want what I say to be construed any other way, but, I also have the view that, as a pure driver, he's not quite up to my impression of McLaren standards.

It's interesting that you jump to Jensen's defense from such a benign post but have nothing to say about another driver being called a "pxxxx"

Not jumping to his defense, just wanting to make sure he gets a fair deal from you. As a driver he leaves me cold unlike some others.
#232821
You're very sleek with how you put it there: putting 2 positives vs. 9 neutral + negative, thus, lumping the neutral ones (that incidentally include his world champion season!) with the 4 (or 3) negatives and making them appear so much bigger.
You could easily state it the other way:
So 4 times in eleven years he underperformed, 7 out of eleven he achieved or outperformed baseline.
This sounds much less negative than how you put it while saying the same thing (apart from the parentheses).
Such editorial tactics I'd expect from the likes of Mark Hughes, but not from a true tifoso :wink:


We were talking about a driver for a McLaren, not just any F1 car - they are a perennial leading team and, therefore, IMO, warrant exceptional drivers. So, the comparison I was making was Jensen's career record against what you might expect from an "exceptional" driver. For me, an exceptional driver should be constantly doing significantly better than baseline. Now, if you want me to talk about how good Jensen would be for a team like Force India, Williams or Torro Rosso, I might have couched my comparisons in the terms you used.

if you go back and read my original post, I gave Jensen a thumbs ups especially as a driver. I don't want what I say to be construed any other way, but, I also have the view that, as a pure driver, he's not quite up to my impression of McLaren standards.

It's interesting that you jump to Jensen's defense from such a benign post but have nothing to say about another driver being called a "pxxxx"

Not jumping to his defense, just wanting to make sure he gets a fair deal from you. As a driver he leaves me cold unlike some others.


When you say cold, do you mean your spine tingles and you get all shivery?

On another note... I poked around ESPN but couldn't find the Toro Rosso news... can you summarize? From the gist of it, it's that they may be up for sale or that they've already got an interested buyer?
#232830
You can't rate Jenson's career by his race wins, as until 2009, he never had a car capable of fighting for wins. He had a stellar 2004 career, it's only thanks to him that BAR could beat a Renault team progressing year by year (that would win the championship in the following year) yet your statistic rates him as 0. He did in 2009 what the Red Bulls couldn't do in 2010 - a steady influx of wins to secure his championship, in a year the Brawn was only the best car for half the time - while in 2010 the Red Bull was clearly the best all over the year. Still, zero. The Honda in 2007 and 2008 was a total pig. Still, in 2007 he earned all of his team's points.

To battle through the back/midfield so many years and eventually get a shot of running at the front... that was the best thing about 2009 for me - to give Button and Webber a very deserved chance.
#232831
You're very sleek with how you put it there: putting 2 positives vs. 9 neutral + negative, thus, lumping the neutral ones (that incidentally include his world champion season!) with the 4 (or 3) negatives and making them appear so much bigger.
You could easily state it the other way:
So 4 times in eleven years he underperformed, 7 out of eleven he achieved or outperformed baseline.
This sounds much less negative than how you put it while saying the same thing (apart from the parentheses).
Such editorial tactics I'd expect from the likes of Mark Hughes, but not from a true tifoso :wink:


We were talking about a driver for a McLaren, not just any F1 car - they are a perennial leading team and, therefore, IMO, warrant exceptional drivers. So, the comparison I was making was Jensen's career record against what you might expect from an "exceptional" driver. For me, an exceptional driver should be constantly doing significantly better than baseline. Now, if you want me to talk about how good Jensen would be for a team like Force India, Williams or Torro Rosso, I might have couched my comparisons in the terms you used.

if you go back and read my original post, I gave Jensen a thumbs ups especially as a driver. I don't want what I say to be construed any other way, but, I also have the view that, as a pure driver, he's not quite up to my impression of McLaren standards.

It's interesting that you jump to Jensen's defense from such a benign post but have nothing to say about another driver being called a "pxxxx"

Not jumping to his defense, just wanting to make sure he gets a fair deal from you. As a driver he leaves me cold unlike some others.


When you say cold, do you mean your spine tingles and you get all shivery?

On another note... I poked around ESPN but couldn't find the Toro Rosso news... can you summarize? From the gist of it, it's that they may be up for sale or that they've already got an interested buyer?

Cold - indifferent.
That's all I got about TR, it was embedded in the newsflash (full content in OP).
#232866
This Jenson Button controversy is very related at how good his team mates were, because if they comparatively scored a lot of points, it would pushed up the team position and vice versa.
Anyway, I find fairer DD’s system than Spanky’s one.
Jenson isn’t in my top five, but I find him a solid driver and I like him as a person. I believe that most people was surprised with his 2010 performance comparatively with Lewis, until he had a problem at the beginning of a race because, supposedly, a mechanic lost something in the car that blocked the radiator airing conduct.
About Toro Rosso I’ve said before that Jaime is one of those so called pay drivers. There’s an agreement between Red Bull and Repsol to introduce Red Bull in Moto GP and Repsol in F1 and Jaime is involved in it. In fact the 2010 125cc champion was in a Repsol/Red Bull team.
#232901
Hulkenberg a threat to Button. Right.

-Checks the 2010 stats for Hulkenberg again-

...Yeahhhhh...Not buyin' it*.

Anyway, Force India would be well advised to pick up DiResta, but as for which of either Sutil or Liuzzi should be ejected...Liuzzi has a contract. So...




*Footnote: I noticed at the end of the season, when the dropped him, Williams made a point of saying they still thought he was championship-material. Which inevitably leads to the question "Why in the name of Mandatory Pitstops did you just drop him?". It's also remarkably similar to behaviour Williams has displayed time and again in the past. Damon Hill, Jenson Button...Is Frank running a recruiting agency for the rest of the grid or something?



You said in another thread you think Jenson is the best driver on the grid, people challenged it, you gave an explanation, and people accepted it as a valid opinion.


Now your making sarcastic comments cause someones saying they think Hulk would be better then Button, and you throw the toys?!

Dont give what you cant take, not everyone agrees with you and i dont know what forums your used to but people are going to rip into your fav driver from time to time and youve got to take it, disagree with it with your own opinion, but dont ridicule it because you dont like it, thats the first sign of fanboyitis
#232908
Why are your post always so hostile in their context FRAFPDD:confused: ! If the current path this thread is going down continues I see a:
images35.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
#232913
Why are your post always so hostile in their context FRAFPDD:confused: ! If the current path this thread is going down continues I see a:
images35.jpg



hey! they wouldnt always seem, and thats what it is SEEMS hostile, if there wasnt such bullcrap to sift through, not calling jensonb bullcrap, but i actualyl feel recently this forums gone a new positive route (as echoed by whatsburning in another thread) and if jensonb actually takes on board my post, a straight-talking post is whats needed i should add rather then beating round the bush, then people wont just write him off as a jenson fanboy and as another respectable forumner.

It sounds awful self righteous and arrogant, but its not, its just ive noticed how much better its got in here, and if we can colletivelyit needs to be a collective effort) sort/stamp out the last niggles, then we're sorted. Hostile is the wrong word to describe what im doing as my intentions are good. :yes:

See our F1 related articles too!