April 05, 2006

Don't forget the fact the "One of the best drivers in the world" JPM managed to spin out on the warmup lap. Seemed to me that Alonso was able to get an early jump on the restarts over the competition. JPM out, Alonso in for McLaren '07?

posted by ormistoncoyote at 05:06 AM on April 05, 2006

No, Villneuve is not good. Oh, I am sorry, he is good at tearing up multi-million dollar cars. I would not let him drive a formula 3. He will never win another championship.

posted by kevinray at 08:22 AM on April 05, 2006

He was never that good. He's what I call a Nigel Mansell. Quick, daring, feisty, shows flashes of brilliance, but not the best of his time. He was lucky to land in a Williams to earn a championship. And he's past his prime. I wish he'd stay true to his word. At the beginning of the 2003 season, he said he had no business in F1 if he couldn't flat out beat Jenson Button. Button flat out beat him all season long. Still, he's not as bad as Barrichello.

posted by qbert72 at 09:53 AM on April 05, 2006

From the column: and while the Colombian wrested the car from crashing, the incident shut off the power of the car. Do the F1 cars have an emergency shut-down switch on the steering wheel or column? Living in the south (USofA) and on basic cable I dont get to see F1. Thanks for the column Mark, this way I can sound simi-intellegent while talking to my sister & her boyfriend who do see and follow F1 raceing.

posted by Folkways at 10:13 AM on April 05, 2006

Mansell is a British legend. Your bias is showing there, JJ. The biggest difference between Nigel and Jacques is that Nigel found his way in the best car of its time for a longer time than Jacques. Your numbers don't prove me wrong. Nigel was a quick, feisty driver, who was not the best of his time, but got close to it for a couple of seasons. Also, you've got your facts wrong on Jacques' championship race. There was no restart or spare car. Jacques babied his damaged car in to finish 3rd. At that time, he was the only driver even trying to pass Schumacher on the racetrack, so he has at least that going for him. I'll give to you that Mansell is a very likeable guy, who was involved in a lot of dramatic races. Nobody will ever forget him trying to push his car to the finish line. (Incidentally, the ITV announcers have not, as they were urging Button to "get out and push" his F1 after it stopped meters from the finish line. Button just stepped out and over the wall, showing us all that he surely is no Mansell himself.) Villeneuve, on the other hand, is a pretty despicable little fellow, full of himself and not a team player at all. But he was the second or third best driver in the world during much of the nineties, which is similar to Mansell's stature in his best years.

posted by qbert72 at 11:37 AM on April 05, 2006

*laughing* I'm loving that response - you've totally called me on two things that I thought I'd just wing (the spare car and the non-drives) and not look at too deeply. I concede that Villeneuve wasn't too bad - but I maintain that he was no Mansell *humming Land of Hope and Glory as I type* Regarding Button - apparently he could have finished but his team told him to park it short of the line (and sacrifice three points) so they could replace the engine before the next race without having to incur the 10 pole positions penalty. Something to do with the new rules that I don't quite understand. It was a spur of the moment cry from the team leader, and one they might live to regret. Just to dig my own rhetorical grave further and prove your point for you - to match his 31 wins, Nigel Mansell also had 31 crashes. I wonder what the cumulative cost was...

posted by JJ at 11:53 AM on April 05, 2006

Mansell IS a legend. Should have had at least 2 championships, was one of only a handful of drivers who in a straight fight, could beat Senna. You only have to see the 1989 Hungarian GP to see what a legend Mansell was. 12th to victory on a circuit notorious for having virtually no passing. (And this was before fuel stops started ruining F1.) As for the Aussie GP, I took great pleasure in seeing Ferrari leave Melbourne with nothing more than a big repair bill. I'm also on the verge of giving up on Montoya. I've been a fan since the day he started in F1, but geez, what a pitiful day. Spun on the parade lap. (In illustrious company though. Prost put himself out of the San Marino GP when he drove for Ferrari by doing that. Albeit it was soaking wet.) Was certainly an odd race. Usually you don't see the safety car more than twice a season, and we got it 4 times in one race. Well, Bernie and the FIA do seem to be taking some leafs out of NASCAR's book, so it makes sense:) The Aussie V8 races were great as well. (Acquired off the net. Fuck Speed and their butchered winter coverage.) As equally carnage laden, and they were much shorter races. Folkways: The NASCAR obsessed Speed show every F1 race. Imola is on CBS in a couple of weeks, though anyone who has seen CBS attempt to cover F1 knows it's got train wreck written all over it. A decent version airs a week later on Speed.) I live in Canada, but can't stomach TSN due to their Villeneuve obsession (plus Vic Rauter makes me want to hurt people), so I watch Speed. Much more enjoyable pre and post race, especially now this year we've got a live camera on the grid, and during the race it's nice to have some guys I like listening too rather than the dickheads from ITV. (Brundle excluded. If they fired everyone else and just let Brundle call the race on his own, I'd go back to the TSN broadcast probably. Love the Brundle.) So Bahrain was good, Malaysia was crap, and Australia was good. Imola is always a travesty, especially after they butchered the circuit in the wake of Senna's death, so the pattern should continue... It's interesting to compare the "VILLENEUVE VILLENEUVE VILLENEUVE" coverage in Canada with the surprisingly understated Scott Speed coverage in the US. They dedicate a 60 or so second segment to him on Speed (called, amusingly, Speed on Speed) and that's it really. And how long is it going to be before Jenson runs out of excuses for not winning? It's the tyres. It's the engine. It's the aero. It's the backmarkers. It's my time of the month...

posted by Drood at 05:25 PM on April 05, 2006

Drood: The question ought to be, "How long before Schumacher runs out of excuses?" Last year it was the tyres, this year it's... what, exactly?

posted by rodgerd at 06:01 PM on April 05, 2006

ECC: Alonso isn't the best driver in the sport right now, that'd be Raikkonen IMO. However, Alonso is by FAR the cleverest. he knows how to maxmize everything to his advantage, without burying his teammate into a contractually obligated number two role like a certain other champion... As for Rubens... All those years up against Schumacher. To be destroyed by a driver with Jenson's pedigree (no wins, spotty consistency)... Doesn't reflect too well on the driver some seem to think is god in human form. (I am not one of them, but that's a diatribe for another time.) Rodger: Thanks for the first genuine laugh I've had all day:) Yeah, that's very a good question. When his car is just average, he shows none of the flashes of genius Senna did (Schumacher has never put in a Donnington-esque performance for example), and look at Malaysia. He was beaten by Massa, a driver nobody rates very highly, and he'd started about 7 places further back on the grid than his lauded teammate. Folk: Thought you might like to know:) I believe CBS have rights to others as well. No doubt they'll mention it on April 23rd. (The Sunday around then anyway.) They'll probably ruin it by bringing Danny Sullivan in, and letting a 3 year old edit the race (like they did with Monaco a few years ago), but you'll still get to see the supposed pinnacle of motorsport, albeit in tarnished form. (US network TV has no idea how to deal with any racing outside of NASCAR with it's copious commercial friendly yellow flag periods.)

posted by Drood at 02:34 AM on April 06, 2006

I'm so glad Nigel fans are coming out of the woodwork. I hope I don't sound like I'm dissing Nigel, because I'm not. If I was, I would have talked about the infamous Canadian GP where he shut off his car while waving to the crowd on the last, (non) victorious lap. That was priceless. I'll concede that Nigel has had a better career than Jacques, and that they are not the same type of driver at all. Nigel was a lot closer to Gilles in spirit. He was reckless, spectacular and mighty quick, albeit inconsistent. I'd place Nigel just under Gilles in terms of talent, but this kind of discussion can go on all night. But I still think Jacques Villeneuve doesn't get enough credit outside Canada (where he's revered beyond common sense, unfortunately). Most everyone writes off Jacques as an average driver with a famous dad. I thought the same thing when he was brought in from Japan where he had average F3 results to compete in the American Atlantic series, backed by ample funding from a tobacco company. In Atlantic, he was shown the way around more often than not by his teammate (Claude Bourbonnais) or by competitors from lesser budget teams (David Empringham, Patrick Carpentier), who all seemed to possess greater natural speed than him. Yet Villeneuve was the one who got a CART seat, on a top team no less. How unfair, he's getting in on his surname, everybody thought. Two years later, he had won the CART championship. Four years later, the F1 World championship. All drivers have a ceiling. They will win everything on their way up until they reach their ceiling. Then they'll fade away. David Empringham, once regarded as the fastest driver in Canada, is now racing in the Grand Am cup. Jacques Villeneuve could push his ceiling higher as he progressed up the racing ranks. Each time he climbed up a series, he was more dominating than he was in the inferior series. That is rare, and a true talent. He is the first one since Mario Andretti to successfully transition from CART to Formula 1. CART is not the highest caliber series, and a bad preparation for F1. Ask Michael Andretti, another guy with a famous dad. Villeneuve stepped out of an Indycar and into an F1, and proceeded to beat his experienced teammate (another daddy's son, by the way) on his first race, while all eyes were on him, expecting him to tank. He was in the hunt for the championship on his rookie season until the last race. Tell that to golden boy Montoya. He won it the next year, against a guy widely regarded as the greatest driver and competitor of F1 history. Yes, he had the better car, but for a couple of years he was the only one in the field even attempting to take positions on the racetrack, as he did on Schumacher in the last race. Villeneuve's ceiling was not in his driving. His ambition got the best of him. He wanted to be Schumacher instead of Schumacher, and build a winning team around him. But he is no Schumacher, and the BAR experience robbed him of his best years.

posted by qbert72 at 09:38 AM on April 06, 2006

Underwhelmed by Speed's coverage? Yeah, I seem to be the only person that prefers them:) And as soon as Button pulled over Steve Matchett on Speed said that was probably why they were doing it. So you may be underwhelmed, but they called that exactly right:) I didn't like the old qualifying over two days. When we got coverage of the second day in England, if it was wet, it was all for nothing. (We only got Friday qualifying for one British GP if I recall.) I like the new format of qualifying. It's been very exciting and fun, especially near the end of each session as you see whose not gonna make it. Love it. But the engine rules now are moronic. Of course in 2008, they lose the grid penalty, but get 15kg's of ballast for the race. So instead of a penalty which, as the likes of Kimi etc... have shown, can be overcome, you now carry the penalty for the entire race. Alonso vs Kimi? Well I was so excited to see Montoya vs Kimi, and that's really not panned out AT ALL! So yeah, I'll go with Fred vs Kim:) I could see Montoya going to Toyota though. Lot of similar letters in their names:)

posted by Drood at 05:33 PM on April 06, 2006