Best Sub Driver this season

[pb btcc]

which sub driver do you think has done the best job after only knowing that there were going be racing just before a Practice session

[Craig]

Gene.

[ralf fan]

Gene

[ASCII Man]

Mean Gené

[Thorstone]

Gené

[Knowlesy]

Sato. He made an instant impact. In more than one way.

Gene was excellent too, though.

Who will vote for Baumgartner?

[Jordi]

Gené

[BARrouette]

Gene cause Sato had practice jappan for so long and he had a new motor that s why he done good.

[Adam43]

I bet Gene had far more running at Monza than Sato has at Suzuka before this years respective GP.

I voted Gene though.

[KA]

Adam- think you're spot on with that assessment of Sato's alleged Suzuka experience- if I'm right in assuming Suzuka isn't part of the regular F1 test schedule, then Sato's Suzuka experience prior to today is probably about 1 GP distance (and the associated practice/qualifying sessions) more than it was at the start of last year's Japanese GP- before which, in the Thursday press conference, when asked when he'd last raced at Suzuka, his reply was:

'It was the beginning of 98 because I had a scholarship from Suzuka Racing School in Japanese F3'

Bearing in mind that he had no racing experience (other than a little karting?) prior to the Suzuka School in 97, and since mid-1998 his career was almost exclusively in UK or European series, then he probably has LESS experience of Suzuka than many current F1 drivers, (let alone someone like Firman who's raced regularly in Japan for two or three years...)

I think he did a good job today, but if we're looking for the best stand-in performance of the year, then maybe Gene's just shades it

[Mr V]

Originally posted by BARrouette
Gene cause Sato had practice jappan for so long and he had a new motor that s why he done good.

Didn't Gene say after the race at Monza that he was lucky that it (his race) happened there as he'd just done a week of testing at the circuit in the week before hand?

Both Gene and Sato drove very well, but Gene only got 1 more point driving a Williams than Sato did driving a BAR, so Sato gets my vote. (plus he managed in one eace to score half the points that Villeneuve did in fifteen races )

[Raven]

Good subbing from Gene and Sato, but I give the nod to Sato.

[MichaelH]

Gene. Again.

[Inigo Montoya]

Sato... Its easy to get great results in a great car, just ask Mika Salo

[BertMk2]

Sato. Gene did well but the Williams has been a consistent front running car all year and he'd tested at Monza the previous week, Sato took the erratic BAR into the points at a track where he hadn't tested.

[jetsetter]

Gene

[high contrast]

The question as posed limits down our options somewhat! Gene or Sato, nothing in bar the qualifying, but taking into the relative performances of their respective cars not to mention engines I'd say SATO!

Had the question just said "who was the best sub"...there would have been greater options for debate...Davidson was subbing for 4 drivers at Suzuka! Webber,Wilson,Button and Sato. Last year for Fisichella after his accident, Panis, Villenuve, and Yoong! When is this kid going to get a decent crack at F1?
How many other young men are there walking about the F1 paddock with 25,000kms F1 mileage under their belts with a moulded seat in 4 differant teams spares trucks!?

[Knowlesy]

Originally posted by Inigo Montoya
Sato... Its easy to get great results in a great car, just ask Mika Salo

Oh, that Finnish lad who qualified an F399 at the back of the grid at Hungary once?

[garagegirl]

I would say sato, but only because I missed the other races, and don't really think I can comment fairly

[Adam43]

Originally posted by knowlesy
Oh, that Finnish lad who qualified an F399 at the back of the grid at Hungary once?

And also gifted Irvine a win at Hockenheim. I think you are being unfair. IIRC four races, two outstanding, two poor. And Ferrari lost there way on set-ups without Michael.

[GP Racer]

Its got to be Sato, for showing us what team BAR are capable of without JV around.

[Knowlesy]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore
And also gifted Irvine a win at Hockenheim. I think you are being unfair. IIRC four races, two outstanding, two poor. And Ferrari lost there way on set-ups without Michael.

So 50% poor races is a good job is it. He had six races too - he was great at Hockenheim, Austria he was woeful, Hungary he was embarrassing, Belgium and Nurburgring were rubbish and Monza was quite average.

[Knowlesy]

So that'll be 33% good races, then.

[Adam43]

Originally posted by knowlesy
So that'll be 33% good races, then.

as good a strike rate as Irvine then

[neilap]

I say Sato because he did not have the car that Gene had nor the experience.