Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The number of Kimi bashers has risen massively; Reasons?
Topic Started: Mar 1 2007, 10:48 AM (816 Views)
The Saint
Unregistered

I am sure that, had Eddie registered his team as Irish, then they would have played the Irish anthem - but I guess he didnt.

Quote Post Goto Top
 
styeffo
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
GordonB,Mar 1 2007
03:42 PM
ELUSIVEJIM,Mar 1 2007
11:37 AM
So you think that Alonso is like a Prost and Kimi is more a Senna type of driver?

I really like that analogy - yes that's exactly how I see it.

I was always a Schumi fan right back from when he started and I couldn't understand why people said that F1 got boring because he won all the time, but now I see Alonso, and I can't think of anything more boring than him winning all the time ...

just shows how hypocritical i am.

lol, but very honest....fair play to you.

<thumbs>
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
NewMrMe
Engineer
[ *  *  *  * ]
I can see two reasons for Kimi bashers.

1) I suppose that taking over from Schumacher also means Raikkonen has inherited being the anti-Ferrari mobs hate figure.

2) Schumacher fans that want Raikkonen to fail because if he does it will make Schumacher look better.

I find the Alonso/Prost Raikkonen/Senna analogies strange as to me there is something Sennaeaque about Alonso. I always thought the 2005 season was an echo of 1991. In 91 Senna won the first four races but after that Williams were the fastest car but with reliability gremlins. Senna settled for second or third when he couldn't match the Williams for pace but inherited positions when they failed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
safc_fan89
Member Avatar
safc_fan89
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
That's an interesting point. Probably best if there aren't these analogies because they are different drivers. Also the Alonso-Raikkonen battle we thought would start hasn't come to anything yet. Even in 2005 they rarely fought together on track.

In 91 was it a case of Senna settling for 2nd or 3rd, or racing as fast as he could and not being able to catch the Williams'?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
NewMrMe
Engineer
[ *  *  *  * ]
A bit of both. I think he was going as quick as he could without taking pointless risks. It was definitely a more mature approach then Senna. I think the Senna from three or four years earlier might have thrown away that championship trying to win impossible races.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · Formula 1 · Next Topic »
Add Reply