Ferrari ,MS ,Rubens &F1

[Pierre]

After last yesterdays performance ,their really should be no questions from anyone over the example shown by the Ferrari Team and its drivers.. The ?'s being continually raised can only be answered by the GP results at the end of the day..And Ferrari ,MS,RB &SHELL at the moment have the answers ,so as to get wins on the board...

[climb]

Dunno if I exactly catch your drift, But one thing is sure: ferrari's superiority came a long way, cos everithing is perfect in that team.
Others just have to learn and try and imitate.

[DriverT]

I didn't know anyone was raising questions about Ferrari...

[Pierre]

If you go back through some recent threads, questions,& answers about F1 , there is a distinct bias against FERRARI ,MS & RB. Their sucess is all due to their hard work ,they have now set a standard of which every team & competitor has to rise to. Most of these teams are capable of rising to the challenge, with the right culture in their oganisations.....

[DriverT]

Ohhh I see, he's referring to 10-10ths. OK. Yes, then, I agree.

[Adam43]

I would love this to be a thread about Ferrari and how well they are doing. Along with a discussion about the ins and outs of how they are achieving it.

Sadly it isn't and won't be.

bais against? I'm afraid it isn't limited to Ferrari. We have people anti-JPM, those who pull their finger nails out rather than watch McLaren win, anti-JV, anti-JV realistic talk, anti Max, anti-Bernie, anti-life, anti-antiness. All posting with the motive of being anti rather than discussing.

Now we have the motive of trying to put down the anti lot, which unfortunately only encourages the anti lot and what do we end up with. This isn't helped when the anti fires are stokes by those who go on about others being anti.

Vicious circle? Yes! Alternatively we can just discuss stuff. We are all fans etc... but the motivation to crow about something doesn't have to be their.

Also there perhaps should be a bit more use of mirrors, when questioning someone's biasness! Or use of Wrex's 'swap the names' technique.

Lets have a "How are Ferrari doing so well?" thread. I doubt this'll be it though.

[Bononi]

Hi Pierre.

If you look at some recent threads you'll see that the forum bias floats around what's happening in F1. There are (lots of) people who think we need to change and stop Ferrari being so dominant. But there are people who likes the way things are. It's completely normal in a huge forum like this one to have this tides of humour...

[Adam43]

humour, spot on.

[badoer fan]

Thing is, for any team/driver, if nearly half of people here support them, then that means that more than half don't! And it's very unlikely that more than half are going to support one team when there's 10 to choose from!

[Gt_R]

Yes, Ferrari came a long way to achieve what they had, and they could only congrat themselves for the achievement.

F1 isn't charity, and nobody give you success. Hence, the ability of Ferrari and their respective employees from drivers down to achieve such a dominant success is nothing short of amazing.

They've endured very tough times together...they've encountered doubts and downs. And they came out stronger.They don't slag each other, they don't sack people for mistakes..they just get down and work even harder.

It's not just about Ferrari and their drivers. It's the mechanics, it's their partners Bridgestones, Shell, and many many more... Ferrari, with their core team, have managed to influence everyone within the network to work towards a common goal together...and they succeeded.

It's all deserved..every bit of it. And what's important is they don't get conceited and take it easy..but rather to keep the motivation and workrate going.

It doesn't matter if there are bias or not, honestly. No matter who and where and what you are, there are bound to be people who like you as much as dislike you.

Watching every GP, there's still no cause for worry. Ferrari and Michael and RB's flags still fly more than any others!

Ferrari rule!

P.S Even if Ferrari falter and fall flat and glory-hunting fans flee...Ferrari fans will still stay around with the team.

[Pierre]

I could not have given a better explanation of ferrari's winning streak..They realy have raised the goal posts for all F1 teams and officialdom . Now let us see the other teams move in the same direction ...

[429CJ]

According Mika Salo's words, Ferrari is two years ahead of all the other teams.
They probably already have 2.4 litre V8 on the bench?

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Pierre
If you go back through some recent threads, questions,& answers about F1 , there is a distinct bias against FERRARI ,MS & RB. Their sucess is all due to their hard work ,they have now set a standard of which every team & competitor has to rise to.

As others have said, there is a bais against Ferrari, Michael and (to a certain extent, though not as much) Rubens, just as there is against JPM, JV, Kimi etc etc.

Ferrari has raised the level to an unpredidented level, and they do work very hard, however, they are a one man team, a man that they concentrate on solely, and thats Michael, Rubens is there to help thats all, and imo, thats why alot of the bias is leveled against the red team.

[Damon]

I concur with V. For me it's their very work ethic that makes me not like them! Yes it gets the results but it's a very self centred way of playing the game.

[grumpy1]

The thing that is lost on some people is,as others have said, is Ferrari have this dominace through hard work.They have constantly worked on improving and the team works as one,for one goal and that is winning.They have achived that and then some.
For Ferrari to be challanged other teams have to put there heads down and ar$e$ up and work.Its no good complainig Ferrari are superiour to the rest if the rest are not prepared to work hard to catch up.
It seems on current form only BAR and Williams are trying.(I can't include the Mac because they have enough problems finishing let alone winning)
I agree budgets have I lot to do with it so do away with the fancey transports and motor homes and find more sponsers prepared to get into F1.Thats what the marketing departments are supposed to do not drink champers and live it up.Get them working as well.
It really irritates me when all we here are there so good lets change the rules to bring them back to feild.
People its been tried and look whats happened.Ferrari found a way to go even faster.You could proably chang the rules so that Ferrari could only run a V6 and they would find a way to make it competitve.
To cut it short its time for the others to put up or shut up.Find a way to catch up or accept your lot and position in the sceam of things and move on.
RANT OVER

The Grumpy1

[tblincoe]

if anyone questions ferrari's work ethic they are just plain dumb

[Gt_R]

I know that such a topic is going to start a fight sooner or later...but let's try keep it out.

I understand the thoughts of those who don't like Ferrari. The way Ferrari made some poor decisions regarding MS/RB make the fans of rival drivers/teams have something to fault Ferrari with.

FERRARI LOVES MS. It's quite simple really, because in a way, Ferrari's personnels Jean Todt and the engineers/mechanics look to MS as sort of a "savior" from the downs before he came. And people tend to overlook one fact when they criticise MS, is that MS really mix with the mechanics well and appreciate their effort. It's not the mouth service other drivers do on the post-race conference..it behind the door. Look at pictures of MS inviting the team to his karting track for a day out.

Ferrari is more than merely a team. They are almost like a family. Look at Williams? You think JPM would congrat Ralf when Ralf beat him and vice versa?

Sure, RB is made to sacrifice a few races for the benefits of MS. But once again, as 1999 had shown...Ferrari's policy is not for Michael's benefits, but rather for Ferrari's benefits. It's the goal to win WDC/WCC, and to different extent all teams practice the same things. If ever one fine day MS suddenly get's into a slump like Mika/Hill/JV had in their final years, and RB is way faster...do you think Ferrari would be stupid to just let RB make way? I think not.

People say it's in the contract... Then did Ferrari breach the contract in 1999? Willi could have sued Ferrari because if it's in the contract and Irvine won that year, it could cost MS millions in marketing. But because there's no grounds, Ferrari and MS did their best to aid Irvine. Ferrari has been consistent with this policy and i don't see any double standards.

Besides that, RB otherwise have the same equipment and first rate treatment at Ferrari. Ferrari didn't bar RB from tests, didn't stop RB from having the neccessary data, and they provided RB with his own set of engineers just like MS had his. RB had his chance.

People have to face that fact that RB, as quick a driver as he is, is simply not fast enough to beat MS yet. It's just common sense that any team put more hope into the driver where they see the most hope of victory. There are some bad decisions by Ferrari, but beyond those bad decisions, things often get blown way out of proportion.

Last year, Ferrari have been consistently good to both drivers...but still the complains come. This year, people harp on the difference in strategy, which is a real pity because they don't understand Ferrari's thinking. It is quite silly for people to think Ferrari is sabotaging RB even before the race began.

Criticising the 2 stop strategy for example. People say how Ferrari compromises Ruben's race.. but obviously they overlooked the fact that Fisichella had a great result using 2-stop strategy..and the same happens in Spain.

And Rubens himself is given the option to go with either one of the strategies...he opted for the one he used. Bridgestones are faster and quicker and more consistent over a longer distance..Not forgetting that in Nurburgring MS went for a slightly more risky strategy, and is greatly helped by Kimi's obstruction.

Harping on the past mistakes doesn't make F1 any better tomorrow. But different people have different interest, and while people may not agree, it's almost undeniable Ferrari did a far greater job at running an F1 team than any of their rivals now. Just look at BAR, Webber, etc..they know what made Ferrari/MS tick and are trying to imitate. And the strange thing is that sometimes Ferrari get criticised for certain things, yet the same thing goes on in another team it is either overlooked or defended...the blame game isn't consistent.

And as a Ferrari fan for over a decade, i must say i'm very proud of Ferrari today. It's really just that they deserve such success after struggling for so long in the 80s and 90s. And they have every reason and right to feel proud of their success too.

[tblincoe]

rubens is just not the driver that michael is, esp. with this years car. people just have a hard time coming to grips with a driver as dominant as michael, so they try and bring him down by making excuses for his victories.

[freud]

Originally posted by Damon
I concur with V. For me it's their very work ethic that makes me not like them! Yes it gets the results but it's a very self centred way of playing the game.

I agree completely.

[RWC]

Some odd views expressed here

Ferrari's winning streak is nothing to do with ferrari's work ethic per se
ANY of the top teams could do the same with micheal driving for them

As much as i dislike the guy sometimes it must be acknowledged that ferrari would be a total shambolic mess without him

And since the subject of 'questions being asked' has been mentioned it must also be acknowledged that ferrari (because of michael) DO tend to push the limits of the rules way too much and too often

Take away MS but keep everybody else at the team (including any driver you want in michaels place) and they will again be an 'allmost' team

[Mr V]

Originally posted by tblincoe
if anyone questions ferrari's work ethic they are just plain dumb

I take it you are referring to me here tb

Originally posted by tblincoe
rubens is just not the driver that michael is, esp. with this years car. people just have a hard time coming to grips with a driver as dominant as michael, so they try and bring him down by making excuses for his victories.

If you ever come across some of my posts regarding you'll notice that i have the utmost admiration for Michaels talent and willing concede that Rubens is not as good as Michael. I have posted in another thread that it annoys me that Ferrari continue to put Michael on a 3 stopper and Rubens on a 2 stopper, which is the slower stratergy and they have done for the last 3 or 4 races.

Put both drivers on the same stratergy, let them fight it out, Michael would still win anyway, he is the better driver, especially in this years car.

[Gt_R]

Quote:"I have posted in another thread that it annoys me that Ferrari continue to put Michael on a 3 stopper and Rubens on a 2 stopper, which is the slower stratergy and they have done for the last 3 or 4 races."

I'm sorry MrV, if i haven't made it clear enough. Firstly, the 2 stop strategy has been used only twice in the recent 3 races - not "last 3". In Monaco both drivers took a 2-stopper.

Secondly, once again it's easy to brush off Ferrari's strategy without thoroughly looking at it from Ferrari's viewpoint.

Let me just quote both Rubens and Ross Brawn after Nurburgring.
Rubens :" 'Yesterday, we felt Michael was a bit quicker, so rather than aiming to try and get second place on the grid and start on the dirty side, the team OFFERED me another option AND I LIKED IT. Running two stops almost worked as I went from seventh to second, but it was not good enough to take first place."

Ross:"'Occasionally it can be difficult to judge how the tyres will develop in the race, so having our drivers on two different strategies allowed the team to cover both bases. This choice paid off in Barcelona and it did again here. Rubens drove perfectly, even though in some stages of the race he was unable to push as hard as he wanted as the tyres did not perform quite as we had expected."

I think those two explanations are more than sufficient to explain what had actually happened. Instead of jumping to conclusion that Ferrari plans another slower strategy to compromise Rubens, both in Barcelona and Nurburgring the strategy paid off handsomely.

Ferrari's aim is not "Ahhh..i'm happy today so let's put both drivers on the same strategy and let them fight while i drink tea.". Their aim is to beat the competitor...and they've done it brilliantly.

[krt917]

Yes, and I suspect that Rubens is quite happy to do something different to MS. Scuey is driving so well at the moment that Rubens seems unlikely to beat him on the same strategy. Trying something different means:
a) Once in a while, it will be better and he can beat Michael;
b) They can 'race' each other hard without having to go wheel-to-wheel. This is desirable, from Ferrari's point of view, for a number of reasons, including not having the pair 'do a Williams'.

[Red]

Australia: MS win Rubens second - absolutely identical strategies. (Rubens pits first each time, 1 lap later Michael)

Malaysia: Michael wins, Rubens 4. Identical strategies as well, Rubens pitting last this time

Bahrain: MS win Rubens second. Again same 3 stops

San Marino: Michael wins, Rubens 6th. 3 stops for both

Barcelona: 1/2 Ferrari. MS-3 stops, RB 2

Monaco both on same strategy, and Rubens was behind Michael when that accident occured.

Ring: 1/2 Ferrari, different strategies.

I don't know what's the problem. 7 races and in all of them Michael beat Rubens. In 5 of the cases, they had similar strategies, however out of those 5 in only 2 cases did Rubens come close.

When they ran different strategies (that's 2 cases Mr V, not 3-4 ), Rubens always did well and came in second place.

[Mr V]

Ok, i made a mistake, it was 2 races only.

Wonder why Michael hasn't been offered the 2 stop stratergy and Rubens 3?