Would Montoya have won the WDC if he stayed in F1?

[Knowlesy]

Originally Posted by outflat

"Car control" is a funny thing.

The driver's who are best at controlling a car are the likes of Alonso and Schumacher - the fastest - their car control is so good you rarely see it out of shape.

The drivers who are generally hailed as having good car control - the likes of Montoya and Alesi - usually got the praise for catching the car from a big slide or whatever. But it was their lack of "car control" that surely got them into those situations in the first place!

Lets not praise drivers who make a lot of mistakes but catch them as having as good car control as those like Prost who always kept it smooth in the first place. In my opinion.

Is it lack of control or a style that suits an individual? I go with the latter personally. Didn't serve him too badly over his career.

And all this Alesi business. I'm sorry, he isn't even in the same league as Montoya and there are no similarities whatsoever.

[outflat]

I agree that Montoya is much better than Alesi ever was.

Alesi I'd put on a level with Brundle, Panis, etc - solid, may have a great day on occasion, but not superstar material.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by outflat

I agree that Montoya is much better than Alesi ever was.

Alesi I'd put on a level with Brundle, Panis, etc - solid, may have a great day on occasion, but not superstar material.

How old are you?

I'd say Montoya and Alesi were quite similar in most respects.On fire,when the car was good and conspicuous by their absence when not.And both were prone to the odd 'misguided missile' when things were really bad.

[jonboy1066]

IMO Montoya was another victim of being in the wrong team at the wrong time much like Button,Frentzen,Wurz,Davidson,Fisichella,Webber and loads more that I can't think of right now, yes he could have been WDC but not any more. Anyone could be champion with luck on his side, christ even Villeneurve managed a WDC and he's got no talent at all (IMO LOL) but Montoya's run out of chances now. He should be good to watch in NASCAR though.

[f1manoz]

Montoya certainly had the speed of a World Champion, but I think certain other aspects in the make up of a World Champion were missing.

Would he have been World Champion? Probably not. IMO he wouldn't have been at McLaren in 2007 (if he had stayed on that is) and would have moved to another team, and it's doubtful they would have been world beaters as every team was filled.

Could he have been World Champion? It's the age of 'What if?' question.

There is no doubting, though, that Montoya brought a large amount of excitement to Formula One and he is missed.

[bosch!]

No.

For so many reasons.

Mclaren had an unsuitable driver pairing in JPM and KR with damaged both drivers and the team (Firey latin, broody fin and Ron doing things by committee). Alonso and LH should be so much more conducive to progress.

I dont think that KR will be WDC either this year.

[Knowlesy]

Originally Posted by martyn bott

I'd say Montoya and Alesi were quite similar in most respects.On fire,when the car was good and conspicuous by their absence when not.And both were prone to the odd 'misguided missile' when things were really bad.

Alesi was not a winning driver. Exciting, but often completely dreadful.

[outflat]

Gerhard Berger, a sometimes-quick (albeit reasonably successful) playboy, usually showed Alesi the way home.

That says all we need to know about Jean.

[Pitstop]

To answer the question - No, he never could and never, ever, even came close.

(The media however, like to 'hype things up' , to make a few quid and help
diminish the planet by using miles of paper and their alter egos, by presenting him as a threat!! - Only one person benifited from his very, very, short presence in F1, and it was not him.

He was just a little 'glitch' a few years ago.

Game over.

[Teretonga]

Could he have won the WDC? Yes. He had the ability, the speed and the intelligence to put together a championship easily.
Would he? Probably not.
Because winning a WDC is so dependent on a team's ascendecy in technological advantages only one or two teams are likely to be regular winners in any one season. It is so much dependent on being in one of those two or three teams at the right time and being in the lead driver position.that winning a title is very much a case of being in the right place at the right time, probably more than ever.
Only two or three drivers in any one year will have a real chance of winning the WDC title (eg in 2007 Kimi, Massa Alonso... unless someone else is in a team which finds a major technological advantage)

So what was the likelihood of JPM being in such a position in the future? ...Very very small.

GP2 is more open, because there is no great technological battle to play, as is the IRL and Champcar but Monty had already been there, done that.... NASCAR is much more open, much more dependent on driver skill and with a whole lot more opportunity for a driver to carry a car...

[Mark Webber]

simply put NO

[Knowlesy]

That was credible until I clapped eyes on your sig.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by Mark Webber

simply put NO

There are a few of them out there aren't there

I'd say yes, he could have, after all he very nearly did it in '03.

In this month's F1 racing magazine, he was voted 25th quickest driver of all time, but descirbed (and i'm going from memory here) "proberbly the biggest waste of natural god given talent ever" or something like that and i'd have to agree.

[Peter Mallett]

Yes Mr V,

We walked this path a few seasons ago. He was never going to get his head together in order to get that championship. I once referred to him as a dork and that was my point. He was wasting himself. Hungary 2003(?) a case in point, I think, where he overdrove to catch Raikkonen and ultimately lost points with a damaged car.

[Knowlesy]

The only points he lost in 2003 were Australia really, where he spun away a lead (how he managed to lead in that car I don't know). Two points. He had a spin in Hungary, but lost nothing whatsoever.

Oh, there was Canada too....so that's probably four points there as you'd have to assume he'd have had a go at Michael.

Aside from that you had eighteen to twenty points lost to car failures in Austria and Japan. That's the really costly stuff.

Had he had equal reliability to Schumacher, it would have been a close call. At the end of the day, Ferrari's bulletproof reliability won the day.

[BootsOntheSide]

The real question marks are his temperament and development skill - for raw speed he was as good as anyone, but maybe the current F1 era didn't 100% suit him, and working for Ron Dennis definitely didn't. 2006 would have surely been his last year at a top team.

[Knowlesy]

Some did say he was a driver from the seventies plonked in the noughties!

[luke]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Alesi was not a winning driver. Exciting, but often completely dreadful.

Dreadful is the wrong word. Alesi had alot of natural talent more so then say Montoya. Just he was rarely in the best car which Montoya has had once and one of the best cars at times.

[luke]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

The only points he lost in 2003 were Australia really, where he spun away a lead (how he managed to lead in that car I don't know). Two points. He had a spin in Hungary, but lost nothing whatsoever.

Oh, there was Canada too....so that's probably four points there as you'd have to assume he'd have had a go at Michael.

Aside from that you had eighteen to twenty points lost to car failures in Austria and Japan. That's the really costly stuff.

Had he had equal reliability to Schumacher, it would have been a close call. At the end of the day, Ferrari's bulletproof reliability won the day.

Then again Ralf would have been in the running if it wasn't for his testing accident and Kimi would have won if it wasn't for his engine failure at the European Grand Prix.

2003, the right man won. He did of course win 6 races that year.

Montoya is a great natural driver. One of the best at the time. Just way too aggressive and not consistent enough and made some silly moves at times. Great, but I wouldn't say championship material like Kimi.

[Knowlesy]

Originally Posted by luke

Dreadful is the wrong word. Alesi had alot of natural talent more so then say Montoya. Just he was rarely in the best car which Montoya has had once and one of the best cars at times.

Dreadful is perhaps wrong. How about embarrassing?

Originally Posted by luke

Then again Ralf would have been in the running if it wasn't for his testing accident

No he wouldn't, because prior to his testing accident he had a whole series of no scores and poor races.

Originally Posted by luke

and Kimi would have won if it wasn't for his engine failure at the European Grand Prix.

That is why I say it would have been close. If reliability had been equal all round, then Montoya or Kimi would have been big beneficiaries. It is pointless to speculate really, but I think if all had been equal, Montoya would have shaded the title. As I say though, pointless really.

Originally Posted by luke

2003, the right man won. He did of course win 6 races that year.

Agree to some extent, he did win most races. And some excellent ones at that. But then there were those totally lacklustre days in the summer...

Originally Posted by luke

Montoya is a great natural driver. One of the best at the time. Just way too aggressive and not consistent enough and made some silly moves at times. Great, but I wouldn't say championship material like Kimi.

No, he won no titles in his time in F1 so not championship material. Which Kimi isn't yet either.

Not yet.

[Clive]

There's lots of "ifs" etc in this thread which seem to get away from the initial question - would JPM have won the F1 WDC in a McLaren. No! For all the reasons mentioned already.

[Pro Racer]

i don't rekon he would have and i also reckon thats half the reason he left F1.

[luke]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Dreadful is perhaps wrong. How about embarrassing?

I really don't know what you had against Alesi. All the same should be said for Montoya if that is the case for Alesi..

No he wouldn't, because prior to his testing accident he had a whole series of no scores and poor races.

What? He was a couple of points off what Montoya had and had a number of wins and top finishes. Just as good as Montoya if not better.

That is why I say it would have been close. If reliability had been equal all round, then Montoya or Kimi would have been big beneficiaries. It is pointless to speculate really, but I think if all had been equal, Montoya would have shaded the title. As I say though, pointless really.

The right man won. And Montoya as champion over Kimi and especially Michael would taken the credibility away for that years title. Better drivers in the past that never won a title deserved more.

Agree to some extent, he did win most races. And some excellent ones at that. But then there were those totally lacklustre days in the summer...

lacklustre days in the summer? That one race at the nurburgring when he got taken out by Montoya and then the one off, off the pace race at Hungary. Other then that one race the rest was down to bad luck like at Hockenheim with the puncture etc..

No, he won no titles in his time in F1 so not championship material. Which Kimi isn't yet either. Not yet.

Not championship material yet? Kimi came with in a couple of points and runner up twice to the title. He is championship material and a much more brilliant driver then Montoya ever was. That's why he was at Ferrari. And none of the top teams wanted Montoya.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by luke

What? He was a couple of points off what Montoya had and had a number of wins and top finishes. Just as good as Montoya if not better.

Between the time JPM finally got his season up and running (Monaco) and Italy, he scored 64 points and had 8 of 8 podiums, Ralf managed 38 points. Incidently, in that same 8 race period, Michael managed 4 podiums and 44 points, Kimi 3 podiums and 35 points, so...

Originally Posted by luke

Montoya as champion over Kimi and especially Michael would taken the credibility away for that years title. Better drivers in the past that never won a title deserved more.

To say that had he won it would have not been credible is a totally blinkared view! Or, of course, are you saying, to put things in context that Michael's 1994 title isn't credible because he didn't have to beat Senna to it, only Damon Hill?

[luke]

Originally Posted by Mr V

Between the time JPM finally got his season up and running (Monaco) and Italy, he scored 64 points and had 8 of 8 podiums, Ralf managed 38 points. Incidently, in that same 8 race period, Michael managed 4 podiums and 44 points, Kimi 3 podiums and 35 points, so...


To say that had he won it would have not been credible is a totally blinkared view! Or, of course, are you saying, to put things in context that Michael's 1994 title isn't credible because he didn't have to beat Senna to it, only Damon Hill?

Michael, Kimi along with Juan and Ralf were the main top drivers leading the fight for most of the year.
At Silverstone it was Montoya 55. Ralf 53. That gap by the time they got to Monza when Ralf was put out with the testing crash which injured him and ended his chance of the title Montoya had a little 11 points over him around that.
I still stand by what I said, Montoya wasn't the only driver in the running, Ralf WAS until his accident. Kimmi was a much stronger force to be reckoned with, hence he kept the title battle alive right untill the end and Juan kept it going just one more race then Ralf. The right man won the title; Michael Schumacher Who won 6 races and was dominant and the best and one of the best the whole and most of the year. Montoya had some good races just like DC, Barrichello, Alonso, Fisichella.
As I said the right man won the title, and you can clearly see the title went to the right driver who won double the races Montoya did.
I'm trying to think when I even mentioned Senna...And that's irrelevant as Senna scored no points that year so it had no affect on the title and what it meant.