Is Jo Ramirez also bitter?

[ratonmacias]

when villeneuve said that massa will contend for the title instead of kimi everybody said that it was because massa outshone him.

what will you say about Jo Ramirez?

and as valve would say link

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/56996

[Shifter]

Well we should think of Villnueve being bitter because of the unspectacular end to his carrer; this sounds more like just an honest opinion.

[futuretiger9]

There isn't much in F1 that Jo Ramirez has not seen. To me, he makes some interesting and accurate observations. He also has some valuable inside knowledge on which to base his opinions.

It must be irritating Kimi a little that everyone is talking up Massa's chances. Maybe Kimi will feel that he has a point to prove. It may be benefit him in the long term.

It's also significant that Ramirez is confident that Lewis Hamilton will be a sensation. Such a seasoned observer would not make such comments lightly.

[BeansBeansBeans]

Ramirez knows his onions, but only time will tell who comes out on top.

Personally, I think Kimi will beat Massa comfortably.

[futuretiger9]

Massa may have the upper hand initially, because of his momentum and position and stature within the team, but Kimi should come on stronger as the season progresses and he feels more comfortable.

[Garry Walker]

Massa will dismantle Kimi easily and expose him. KR is a very overrated driver. I found it funny last year and in 2005 how he struggled at times against a driver like Pedro de la Rosa

[Ranger]

Massa will dismantle Kimi easily and expose him. KR is a very overrated driver. I found it funny last year and in 2005 how he struggled at times against a driver like Pedro de la Rosa

So I'm going to suppose the fact that Kimi took JPM - a WDC contender- apart in the same machinery is irrelevant, because Felipe managed 2 wins in a far superior car (on days when the Ferrari was the quickest car by far, and when his team-mate struck trouble) in 2006 as opposed to 0 for Kimi... right?

[ratonmacias]

Well we should think of Villnueve being bitter because of the unspectacular end to his carrer; this sounds more like just an honest opinion.

so we have a double standard villeneuve is bitter but ramirez is honest while they are stating the same in their opinions.

[Bagwan]

You have to spell it out for them , Rat .

That double standard comes from them being bitter about Jacques , not Jacques being bitter about F1 .

Bit ironic , don't you think ?

[Garry Walker]

So I'm going to suppose the fact that Kimi took JPM - a WDC contender- apart in the same machinery is irrelevant, because Felipe managed 2 wins in a far superior car (on days when the Ferrari was the quickest car by far, and when his team-mate struck trouble) in 2006 as opposed to 0 for Kimi... right?

JPM was extremely overrated - He never did manage to squash Ralf as he was supposed to, in fact, they were usually equal. He also didnt impress me when he drove against Gene. So its only normal that Kimi had it easy against JPM. But my opinion on kimi is based on how he performed against Pedro, he wasnt that impressive at all and was quite often actually SLOWER than Pedro.

[Ranger]

JPM was extremely overrated - He never did manage to squash Ralf as he was supposed to, in fact, they were usually equal. He also didnt impress me when he drove against Gene. So its only normal that Kimi had it easy against JPM. But my opinion on kimi is based on how he performed against Pedro, he wasnt that impressive at all and was quite often actually SLOWER than Pedro.

Whatever you say. Felipe was clean outscored by Fisichella in 2004, does that mean Felipe is also extremely overrated? Because it sure doesn't mean he's going to crush Raikkonen like you say he will.

[janneppi]

so we have a double standard villeneuve is bitter but ramirez is honest while they are stating the same in their opinions.
Yes.
Think it like this, i can taste the bitternes coming from your initial post, your point in this was to accuse other members of hating your your guy.
I someone else, let's say Objectiveposter44 had put up the same link with a neutral commentary, it would be seen as objective and quite nice.
It's all about source credibility. :p :
JV may have been honest in his opinions, but they are somewhat clouded by his past, Mr Ramirez doesn't have the same baggage. :)

[ioan]

You have to spell it out for them , Rat .

That double standard comes from them being bitter about Jacques , not Jacques being bitter about F1 .

Bit ironic , don't you think ?

I'm not bitter about JV, I'm actually happy cause he finally left F1!

[ArrowsFA1]

Massa will dismantle Kimi easily and expose him. KR is a very overrated driver.

JPM was extremely overrated.
We have the beginnings of a pattern here :p :

[SGWilko]

All this stuff about JV, lets look at the facts....

Challenges for the title in his rookie season in F1, clinches the title the following year.

Has a mediocre season, in a mediocre car with an undeveloped engine in '98.

Joins BAR with his friend and manager, Craig Pollock. Has many mediocre years in an abysmal car, run by an abysmal team. JV still sticks with it....

It's not until David Richards comes on the scene that BAR finally have direction, but JV/CP & DR don't get on, and JV eventually leaves, presumably under duress......

Has three starts in the Renault, but does not have time to adjust....

Joins Sauber, starts to settle in, and shows promise. Despite BMW's best efforts to oust him, he races under BMW Sauber, and continues to improve.

Leaves as BMW replaces him with Kubica late in the season, just as the car comes good.

Personally, I think he still had lots to offer F1, but most teams found it hard to adapt to his radical style of car setup.

[ioan]

Personally, I think he still had lots to offer F1, but most teams found it hard to adapt to his radical style of car setup.

I don't believe that the teams didn't like the setup style of his car, after all teams will always set the car up so that it suits the best the driver so that he is able to get the best results.

No, they couldn't adapt to his inflated ego and equally big mouth.

[SGWilko]

I don't believe that the teams didn't like the setup style of his car, after all teams will always set the car up so that it suits the best the driver so that he is able to get the best results.

I recall his first year at Sauber, he had many arguments with his engineers about setup. When he finally got them thinking like him, the results improved.

Link, no idea, but it was reported in Autosport I think, if you want to go trawling through the web site. Something for a rainy day perhaps......?

[ioan]

Something for a rainy day perhaps......?

Not for JV's sake. Thanks anyway.

[Bagwan]

Not for JV's sake. Thanks anyway.

No , of course you wouldn't .
That would back up someone else's opinion , wouldn't it ?

"I'll always try to back it up" gets a bit transparent when you don't .
Look up irony in your dictionary .

"I don't believe that the teams didn't like the set-up style of his car..."
Ask Patrick Head . He ran Jacques and won .

In this case , JV won in the battle with the ego of the engineer .
And , he won the title the same year .

[ioan]

No , of course you wouldn't .
That would back up someone else's opinion , wouldn't it ?

"I'll always try to back it up" gets a bit transparent when you don't .
Look up irony in your dictionary .

"I don't believe that the teams didn't like the set-up style of his car..."
Ask Patrick Head . He ran Jacques and won .

In this case , JV won in the battle with the ego of the engineer .
And , he won the title the same year .

Bagwan you're his fan, you want to protect your idol, why don't you search for those comments and provide a link for us non-believers?!

I stated that teams did go his way and their technical divergences weren't the ones that lead to JV being ousted from F1.

[Bagwan]

Bagwan you're his fan, you want to protect your idol, why don't you search for those comments and provide a link for us non-believers?!

I stated that teams did go his way and their technical divergences weren't the ones that lead to JV being ousted from F1.

That's what you stated , and that's what I refuted .

Patrick Head fought tooth and nail with JV over set-up . That's well known .

Reynard fought tooth and nail with JV over the design of the car being too flexy , and eventually was allowed to , with help and direction from his engineer , Jock Clear , fasten CF boards to the sides of the tub to stiffen it . That's well known as well .

Then Willis came on board and agreed with JV and JC , saying the car was a dinosaur .

At that point , he had gotten his way once , and won .
Then , he had not gotten his way (in a car said to be designed for him) , and a respected designer said he should have , and he lost out .

Then came Richards with his lies .

He left , and soldiered in a car designed for Alonso's radical style for 3 races , and then went to Sauber .

At Sauber he again battled the engineers with traction control that was uncontrollable . This time , the engineers were at the supplier end , so the struggle was even more frustrating .
This is also well known .


You know these things .

You don't need links .

[ioan]

That's what you stated , and that's what I refuted .

Patrick Head fought tooth and nail with JV over set-up . That's well known .

Reynard fought tooth and nail with JV over the design of the car being too flexy , and eventually was allowed to , with help and direction from his engineer , Jock Clear , fasten CF boards to the sides of the tub to stiffen it . That's well known as well .

Then Willis came on board and agreed with JV and JC , saying the car was a dinosaur .

At that point , he had gotten his way once , and won .
Then , he had not gotten his way (in a car said to be designed for him) , and a respected designer said he should have , and he lost out .

Then came Richards with his lies .

He left , and soldiered in a car designed for Alonso's radical style for 3 races , and then went to Sauber .

At Sauber he again battled the engineers with traction control that was uncontrollable . This time , the engineers were at the supplier end , so the struggle was even more frustrating .
This is also well known .


You know these things .

You don't need links .

I stated that he never left a team because fights over the setup of the car. And if you check out you will see that he stayed some time at every team (not Renault, but he didn't have a long term contract with them) in spite of this setup related conflicts and he left because of personality related conflicts (he didn't stand to be replaced by Sato or Kubica so he left the teams before his contract ran out).
So I still don't see when did I state something that wasn't right.

[raphael123]

hi ioan, did you ever check up your f1 racing magazines about comments made by ron dennis and frank williams regarding montoya?

and garry walker, montoya quite comfortably beat ralf :)

[ArrowsFA1]

In answer to the original question, of course he's not bitter. He's been asked his opinion and given it, as has Damon Hill and others in the lead up to the new season.

[Garry Walker]

Whatever you say. Felipe was clean outscored by Fisichella in 2004, does that mean Felipe is also extremely overrated? Because it sure doesn't mean he's going to crush Raikkonen like you say he will.

The Felipe that the mentally weak Fisi beat was a different driver compared to the one we have now. Even Peter Sauber thinks Massa was/is faster than Kimi.

Massa will dominate Kimi and crush him.

[Osella]

and garry walker, montoya quite comfortably beat ralf :)

On what, exactly are you basing that!?
The whole reason he left Williams was because Ralf rattled him and the argument he had with the team at the French GP (when Ralf was on a roll) was what lead to him leaving them.

He also finished behind Ralf on points at the end of the season more than once (the same number of times he finished ahead!)

In 2001 he won just once (but was a rookie admittedly) when Ralf won three races, in 2002 didn't win at all (Ralf did), in 2003 both won twice, and in 2004 Juan was better over the course of the season, but that was one season in four!!

I really, really don't mind people having favourite drivers, but to make thoughtless comments like this really bugs me!!

P.S. Ralf Schumacher is a distinctly average F1 driver, not rubbish, but not championship material in all probability. And Montoya really did diddly-squat against him or Raikkonen, except in the occasional race.. He has never comfortably beaten his team-mate in F1!

As for the point of this thread, I don't think Ramirez is bitter, he has seen a lot in F1, but he has also got things wrong about drivers. I find it interesting that people are so ready to accept that 'he must be right about Hamilton because he's closely involved with McLaren', yet dismiss another driver he comments about, but has never had any contact with, and has been contracted to McLaren's biggest rivals for the last 4 years!...

Yes, he is no longer involved with McLaren in the same way he was, but I still think his comments are misguided regarding Massa..

[raphael123]

On what, exactly are you basing that!?
The whole reason he left Williams was because Ralf rattled him and the argument he had with the team at the French GP (when Ralf was on a roll) was what lead to him leaving them.

He also finished behind Ralf on points at the end of the season more than once (the same number of times he finished ahead!)

In 2001 he won just once (but was a rookie admittedly) when Ralf won three races, in 2002 didn't win at all (Ralf did), in 2003 both won twice, and in 2004 Juan was better over the course of the season, but that was one season in four!!

I really, really don't mind people having favourite drivers, but to make thoughtless comments like this really bugs me!!

P.S. Ralf Schumacher is a distinctly average F1 driver, not rubbish, but not championship material in all probability. And Montoya really did diddly-squat against him or Raikkonen, except in the occasional race.. He has never comfortably beaten his team-mate in F1!



Oh please, I really, really don't mind people disliking certain drivers, but to make thoughtless comments like this really bugs me!.

Don't you watch the races? Or do you just look at the statistics? Statistics only give you half a picture. In 2001, his rookie season, after a pretty average start - by the end of the season he completely had the upperhand on Ralf. In qualifying and in races. He suffered very poor reliability, and would have won at least 3 races in his rookie season bar mechanical failures. Unless your one of these people who blame drivers for mechanical failures, if so, there's not much point discussing these things with you :) .

In 2002 JPM beat Ralf, statistically too, as reliability improved. It's also important to notice JPM lost many more points than Ralf on reliability issue (when you look at how many points were lost when they suffered mechanical failures!)

And then come 2003, again JPM beat Ralf, but this time by an even bigger margin! While JPM was a title contender till near the end of the season (and lets not forget he was in a world of his own in Japan until reliability failure), Ralf was not at any time a title contender, in what was the best car from for the 2nd half of the season.

And then 2004, JPM scored MORE than twice as many points as Ralf! His performances were better, and reliabilty was even between both drivers.

So what you said was completely INCORRECT. Ralf beat Montoya on points ONCE! In JPM's rookie season! And even then it was down to his better reliability. So Ralf only beat JPM one in 4 seasons, not the other way round as you claimed.

Then as for the reasons of JPM's departure, the French GP was catalyst for leaving. But there was more to it than that, one major reason being Sam Michael's promotion, the guy who had been working closely with Ralf since 97 at the time, and were good friends. JPM saw an opportunity to move to a better team, and did so...not much wrong in that.

Anyway, I hope you are big enough to admit the errors in your previous post, and admit you were wrong about Ralf having the better of JPM, as that was clearly not the case. Over the 4 seasons JPM had much worse reliability (mainly in Season 1 & 2) yet still outshined him 3.5/4yrs.

I look forward to your reply to this post :)

[ArrowsFA1]

This has moved into History and Nostalgia (http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=111) territory which, I believe, relates to the point that pino was making in his Goodbye... (http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115380) thread :dozey:

[ioan]

Don't you watch the races? Or do you just look at the statistics? Statistics only give you half a picture.

And "very subjective" feeling don't even give you the other half of the picture, just some kind of self inducted reality.
I'll take statistics over your feeling any day.

[raphael123]

And "very subjective" feeling don't even give you the other half of the picture, just some kind of self inducted reality.
I'll take statistics over your feeling any day.

Well then your missing out. As I said, stats give you half a picture only.
For example, we were discussing Montoya's 1 victory in his debut season, compared to Ralf's 3 in that season. That would definately suggest Montoya had a good first season, but he wasn't a patch on Ralf. But if you actually look at what happened in the races, Montoya was heading for a win in Brazil and in Hockenheim quite comfortably but for incidents/car failure completely outside his control. But if you just look at the stats for the race all it says is he got pole and had fastest lap, but failed to convert it into victory. But he didn't fail due to driver error. I don't think many people would argue Montoya was heading for victory in those races, therefore in this instant it isn't exactly 'subjective', or if it is it's the common subjective view with 99.9% of the viewers.

The same can apply for Schumacher in 95, where he would have beaten Mansell's then record of 9 victories but for rookie mistakes by Hill cost him that chance. In the end he beat that record anyway 10yrs later, but the people who watched those races know very well that he was more than good enough that year to do so. The same can apply to 94, where you can more than make a case that Adelaide wouldn't have happened in the first place had Schumacher been unfairly punished and the title would and should have been decided long before then.

Still, if you want to look at the history of F1 just through your statistics book, go for it, but your the one who is missing out, not me. Saying, that, I can understand why Schumacher fans would do that. That way it ignores all the controversy in his career, which anyone who has watched his career will be fully aware of, but the stat's won't show that. Same for Senna, Clark etc who would all won surely won more had they not died. As I said, it's your loss if you only want to see F1 with a statistical book. Why bother watching the races some could argue, just look at the results when the race is completed :)

[ioan]

Well then your missing out. As I said, stats give you half a picture only.
For example, we were discussing Montoya's 1 victory in his debut season, compared to Ralf's 3 in that season. That would definately suggest Montoya had a good first season, but he wasn't a patch on Ralf. But if you actually look at what happened in the races, Montoya was heading for a win in Brazil and in Hockenheim quite comfortably but for incidents/car failure completely outside his control. But if you just look at the stats for the race all it says is he got pole and had fastest lap, but failed to convert it into victory. But he didn't fail due to driver error. I don't think many people would argue Montoya was heading for victory in those races, therefore in this instant it isn't exactly 'subjective', or if it is it's the common subjective view with 99.9% of the viewers.

The same can apply for Schumacher in 95, where he would have beaten Mansell's then record of 9 victories but for rookie mistakes by Hill cost him that chance. In the end he beat that record anyway 10yrs later, but the people who watched those races know very well that he was more than good enough that year to do so. The same can apply to 94, where you can more than make a case that Adelaide wouldn't have happened in the first place had Schumacher been unfairly punished and the title would and should have been decided long before then.

Still, if you want to look at the history of F1 just through your statistics book, go for it, but your the one who is missing out, not me. Saying, that, I can understand why Schumacher fans would do that. That way it ignores all the controversy in his career, which anyone who has watched his career will be fully aware of, but the stat's won't show that. Same for Senna, Clark etc who would all won surely won more had they not died. As I said, it's your loss if you only want to see F1 with a statistical book. Why bother watching the races some could argue, just look at the results when the race is completed :)

They all make mistakes, and all of them get unlucky at a moment or other, not only JPM or MS, Ralf also and the others too, so in the end statistics are right if you want to judge someone.

[raphael123]

They all make mistakes, and all of them get unlucky at a moment or other, not only JPM or MS, Ralf also and the others too, so in the end statistics are right if you want to judge someone.

Is that you doing 'everything I post is my own opinion and I\'ll always try to back it up!?

I didn't say JPM was the only one to get unlucky! All your saying here is statistics are the same for everyone, and I don't argue against that point. My point is that statistics only give you half a picture. If you can't see that well....

Did you join in the discussion (and I'm glad you did :) ) because you agreed with Osella in that Ralf was the better of the two (Ralf & JPM)? Or do you really believe that stats tell you the full picture?!

[ioan]

Did you join in the discussion (and I'm glad you did :) ) because you agreed with Osella in that Ralf was the better of the two (Ralf & JPM)? Or do you really believe that stats tell you the full picture?!

Both!

[Haddock]

Ramirez left Mclaren before Raikkonen started driving for the team, iirc.

A cursory read of his autobiography makes quite clear that if Ramirez is bitter towards anyone, its his former employer, Mr Dennis (not to say he doesn't have immense respect for what Ron has been able to achieve).

I reckon Ramirez' opinion is an honest observer's take on the facts. I also reckon he'll be proven utterly wrong, but time will tell.

[ratonmacias]

Ramirez left Mclaren before Raikkonen started driving for the team, iirc.

A cursory read of his autobiography makes quite clear that if Ramirez is bitter towards anyone, its his former employer, Mr Dennis (not to say he doesn't have immense respect for what Ron has been able to achieve).

I reckon Ramirez' opinion is an honest observer's take on the facts. I also reckon he'll be proven utterly wrong, but time will tell.

why do you think that ramirez is bitter towards ron dennis? i read his book in sapnish and i never thought he was bitter at mclaren.

[Haddock]

why do you think that ramirez is bitter towards ron dennis? i read his book in sapnish and i never thought he was bitter at mclaren.

Maybe the translation to English confused matters (or did Ramirez write it in English in the first place ?- I don't know)

It was by no means an extended personal attack on Dennis or anything - but there were odd asides - like the podium debacle at Indianapolis in 2001, or the sponsor fiasco in which Dennis' attitude basically scuppers an otherwise done deal, which suggested the two weren't exactly a mutual admiration society.

Can't imagine the book would make comfortable reading for Michael Andretti or the Fittipaldis either.

By the by, I don't mean this as any criticism of Ramirez - and the book is much more interesting than some anodyne "everyone I met was wonderful, talented, friendly etc etc" memoir would have been

[Osella]

Ramirez left Mclaren before Raikkonen started driving for the team, iirc.

A cursory read of his autobiography makes quite clear that if Ramirez is bitter towards anyone, its his former employer, Mr Dennis (not to say he doesn't have immense respect for what Ron has been able to achieve).

I reckon Ramirez' opinion is an honest observer's take on the facts. I also reckon he'll be proven utterly wrong, but time will tell.

Which is pretty much what I reckon (and yes, I have read the book-in English ;) )

As I recall, he ceased working for the team at the end of 2001, but attended many races with McLaren in a 'non-executive' role.

I also seem to recall similar comments made about Dennis by Gordon Murray regarding the McMerc SLR, and by Coulthard (thinly veiled) regarding his 'we do things this way because I say so' approach. (Witness the beard vs the identikit Alonso/Hamilton sideburns :eek: ;) )

[Osella]

I didn't say JPM was the only one to get unlucky! All your saying here is statistics are the same for everyone, and I don't argue against that point. My point is that statistics only give you half a picture. If you can't see that well....

Did you join in the discussion (and I'm glad you did :) ) because you agreed with Osella in that Ralf was the better of the two (Ralf & JPM)? Or do you really believe that stats tell you the full picture?!

Indeed statistics could be used to prove just about anything you wish, for example that Michael was 'run close' in the 1994 championship and won it by just 1 point :rolleyes: . Or that Keke Rosberg was the 'best' driver of 1982.

As you say, there are many things you could look at regarding JPM vs Ralf, but the whole point with Montoya was that he was supposed to win Williams titles, but he just doesn't really have the temerity for that. Also, I don't believe he was better than Ralf (better is such a subjective word!) More talented in a wheeled bathtub probably, more likely to bin the car trying hard, rather than finding a good setup, almost certainly!
Which would you rather watch, and which would you rather have on your F1 team (which costs you 75 Million pounds a year...?) And than try and work out which is better...

But I still maintain that Montoya never comfortably beat any teammate in F1, and I don't really think that most people would argue that. He may have made himself more popular, but then F1 has never been a popularity contest!

But that's the end of it, first because this is waaaaay off topic, and secondly I believe that the way a driver treats his equipment does have an influence on his reliability rate :) :) :) ...just look at Alain Prost!

[raphael123]

Indeed statistics could be used to prove just about anything you wish, for example that Michael was 'run close' in the 1994 championship and won it by just 1 point :rolleyes: . Or that Keke Rosberg was the 'best' driver of 1982.

As you say, there are many things you could look at regarding JPM vs Ralf, but the whole point with Montoya was that he was supposed to win Williams titles, but he just doesn't really have the temerity for that. Also, I don't believe he was better than Ralf (better is such a subjective word!) More talented in a wheeled bathtub probably, more likely to bin the car trying hard, rather than finding a good setup, almost certainly!
Which would you rather watch, and which would you rather have on your F1 team (which costs you 75 Million pounds a year...?) And than try and work out which is better...

But I still maintain that Montoya never comfortably beat any teammate in F1, and I don't really think that most people would argue that. He may have made himself more popular, but then F1 has never been a popularity contest!

But that's the end of it, first because this is waaaaay off topic, and secondly I believe that the way a driver treats his equipment does have an influence on his reliability rate :) :) :) ...just look at Alain Prost!

Osella, you stated Ralf was better, and pointed to the fact that Ralf beat JPM in the Drivers Championship 3 times out of 4. I simply pointed out it was the other way round, JPM beat Ralf in the Drivers championship 3/4!!

Montoya only had 2 full time team-mates in F1, he beat Ralf comfortably apart from his 1st couple of season (unless scoring more than twice the points your team-mate isn't comfortable?), and Kimi beat Montoya.

In what way would you say Ralf was better then? Montoya finished higher up the championships more times than not (3/4), more poles, more fastest laps, though fewer wins, more podiums, and more points, and for half the wages Ralf was on. And if you do blame JPM for an engine failure fair enough. 99% of the people involved in F1 disagree with you, but when you add up reliability failures, Montoya and ralf suffered more or less the same (bar 1 or 2), the main difference is Montoya suffered reliability issues such as hydraulic failures (is he to blame for that too?) while he was heading for wins/podiums, while the majority of Ralfs failures seemed to occur while he was languishing down the middle of the pack.

How you can say Ralf was better than JPM over those 4yrs, when not only do the stats show a different story, but also watching the races would give you an insight into that!

As you said earlier, with a slight change of direction, I really, really don't mind people disliking certain drivers, but to make thoughtless comments like this really bugs me!

And IOAN, your saying statistics give you the full picture. Yet if that is the case, how can you say Ralf is better than JPM, when stats (according to you) prove otherwise?

As your sig says, back up what your say if you really think that is true - which it obviously isn't!

[Garry Walker]

n 2001, his rookie season, after a pretty average start - by the end of the season he completely had the upperhand on Ralf. In qualifying and in races. He suffered very poor reliability, and would have won at least 3 races in his rookie season bar mechanical failures.

In the last 5 races, Ralf outqualified JPM 3:2, so your claim that JPM was totally beating Ralf is absolutely wrong.
He did have poor reliability indeed, but Ralf was overall easily the better driver. JPM would have won 2 races, not 3 - At Brazil he wouldnt have had the pace in the rain to compete against DC or even MS.



In 2002 JPM beat Ralf, statistically too, as reliability improved. It's also important to notice JPM lost many more points than Ralf on reliability issue (when you look at how many points were lost when they suffered mechanical failures!) BS. Both Ralf and JPM had 3 car related failures in 2002, and Ralf was also once taken out by Rubens in a really dumb move (australia)
In qualifying JPM and Ralf were around equal that year, and the same is true for races - Ralf would have actually beaten him on points had he not had an engine failure in the last few laps at suzuka.



And then come 2003, again JPM beat Ralf, but this time by an even bigger margin! While JPM was a title contender till near the end of the season (and lets not forget he was in a world of his own in Japan until reliability failure), Ralf was not at any time a title contender, in what was the best car from for the 2nd half of the season. LOL. Ralf was a title contender for sure, After Silverstone (where Ralf lost points due to bad luck) they were on equal points, then came Hockhenheim and Rubens once again took Ralf out. Before that many thought Ralf was actually the main rival for MS, not jpm.
At hungary Ralf had an amazing drive, and due to team-orders didnt overtake JPM when JPM spun. Then he suffered an accident in testing and couldnt compete at Monza. Thats where Ralfs championship battle ended. But insiders at Williams claimed that they beleived Ralf would have won the Monza GP, whereas JPM couldnt. Ralf also easily owned JPM in qualifying.



And then 2004, JPM scored MORE than twice as many points as Ralf! His performances were better, and reliabilty was even between both drivers.

Ralf missed 6 races because of a back injury!!! But thats irrelevant when one wants to hype jpm huh? oh and Ralf had 3 car-related DSQ, whereas JPM only had 2. JPM took part in all 18 races, whereas Ralf only took part in 12. Ralf was also taken out by JPM at germany and lost a podium at canada due to illegal brakes (jpm lost his 4th place)



So what you said was completely INCORRECT. Ralf beat Montoya on points ONCE! In JPM's rookie season! And even then it was down to his better reliability. So Ralf only beat JPM one in 4 seasons, not the other way round as you claimed.
JPM and Ralf were equal throughout their 4 seasons, no matter what JPM hypers say.

[Bagwan]

so we have a double standard villeneuve is bitter but ramirez is honest while they are stating the same in their opinions.

Here's the point of the thread for those who seem to have lost it .

Brutal honesty taken sometimes as bitter , and other times as just brutal .

[ratonmacias]

man i feel bad for the halfie fans another 4 to 5 years of following a mediocre driver.

back to topic ecclestone also said the same is he bitter?

[raphael123]

In the last 5 races, Ralf outqualified JPM 3:2, so your claim that JPM was totally beating Ralf is absolutely wrong.
He did have poor reliability indeed, but Ralf was overall easily the better driver. JPM would have won 2 races, not 3 - At Brazil he wouldnt have had the pace in the rain to compete against DC or even MS.

Ralf beat Montoya in ualifying 3:2? But what about the race?! Montoya won in Monza while Ralf came home 3rd. In Indy while JPM had hydraulics failure while heading for a podium, Ralf spun off, and in Japan JPM finished 2nd, and quite easily, while Ralf limped home in 5th. So even though Montoya had 1 mechanical in those last 3 races compared to Ralf’s 0, he managed a 1st and a 2nd, while Ralf managed a 3rd and a 6th, and a spin. How you can say Ralf was equal to Montoya at the end of the season is baffling. And why not go a further race back – Belgium? Montoya looking strong for a potential win from his form in practice and in qualifying (pole), unfortunately his engine let him down before we got to find out. But a podium at the minimum was on the cards! Hungary in fairness JPM was nowhere, and Ralf was very good. The race before that JPM was heading for a maiden GP win, but his engine let go, allowing Ralf to win. So there you go, that’s a rough account of the last 6 GP’s of the season, which I would say constitute for a ‘end of season’ showing. Apart from Hungary, JPM had the upperhand on Ralf the other 5 times. To state otherwise is ridiculous.



BS. Both Ralf and JPM had 3 car related failures in 2002, and Ralf was also once taken out by Rubens in a really dumb move (australia)
In qualifying JPM and Ralf were around equal that year, and the same is true for races - Ralf would have actually beaten him on points had he not had an engine failure in the last few laps at suzuka.


Montoya headed into Japan with a 5pt lead or something isn’t it?. Was Ralf heading for 2nd place when he retired with engine failure? If not it wouldn’t have made any difference.

They may both have had 3 mechanical failures, but it’s what they lose from those mechanical failures which I was referring to. It’s fair to say Montoya lost the chance to win Malaysia when he tangled with Michael and was unfairly penalised too on top of everything. Surprisingly even Michael Schumacher had admitted that he stewards made the wrong decision (which I noticed you admit to that in one of your other posts) The general consensus in the paddock at the time was that MS was the one who should have been penalised if anyone (in reality it was a racing accident, there was no need for any penalty), definitely not JPM. The same happened in Brazil, where JPM was the fastest car out there, but due to an incident on lap one, where someone turned in front of him, he would have been fighting at the top end of the grid. In Monaco and Canada Montoya had reliability issue costing him some big points. It was again the 2nd half of the season where Montoya started to dominate Ralf, while in the first half they were pretty evenly matched, but Montoya’s inconsistent or bad luck, getting involed with other drivers cost him a lot of points, while Ralf maximised the situation. In the 2nd half Ralf faded, just like he did the previous year, and the year before that against Button.

Generally though, I would agree with you that Ralf and JPM were quite evenly match, giving the slight edge to Montoya as he scored more points, and while he didn’t score the points Ralf did in the first half of the season, he had the speed as watching the races will show you. While in the 2nd half of the season, though JPM scored more points than Ralf, Ralf didn’t show he was as quick as Montoya, in a way JPM did in the first half.



LOL. Ralf was a title contender for sure, After Silverstone (where Ralf lost points due to bad luck) they were on equal points, then came Hockhenheim and Rubens once again took Ralf out. Before that many thought Ralf was actually the main rival for MS, not jpm.
At hungary Ralf had an amazing drive, and due to team-orders didnt overtake JPM when JPM spun. Then he suffered an accident in testing and couldnt compete at Monza. Thats where Ralfs championship battle ended. But insiders at Williams claimed that they beleived Ralf would have won the Monza GP, whereas JPM couldnt. Ralf also easily owned JPM in qualifying.


Ralf was still considered a title contender till Silverstone, but that was at the halfway stage Garry. And wasn’t he behind JPM on points at that point of the season? At that stage both were seen as potential title contenders, but in the end, as the previous 2 seasons, Ralf faded, while Montoya got stronger in the 2nd half of the season. If you look at the races which they both competed in Montoya did the better job. And Montoya too suffered from bad luck that year, running away with victory in Japan till his car let go.




Ralf missed 6 races because of a back injury!!! But thats irrelevant when one wants to hype jpm huh? oh and Ralf had 3 car-related DSQ, whereas JPM only had 2. JPM took part in all 18 races, whereas Ralf only took part in 12. Ralf was also taken out by JPM at germany and lost a podium at canada due to illegal brakes (jpm lost his 4th place)


I must apologise, that did slip my mind. That doesn’t mean we can’t compare their seasons. In the races they both competed in together JPM got a 5th, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 8th, 5th, 7th, 1st, while Ralf got a 4th, 7th, 7th, 6th, 2nd, 5th. These were the point finishes, but you can clearly see that when either of them finish a race, JPM is the one who finishes near the top end of the point scoring positions, while Ralf, bar a 4th and a 2nd is down the low end of the point scoring positions. So even then, Ralf only just about managed to score more than half the points JPM did, on 3 times the wages JPM was on!!


JPM and Ralf were equal throughout their 4 seasons, no matter what JPM hypers say.

If only you could back that up though!! The stats prove otherwise. And as I’ve said, the stats only give you half of a story. You need to watch the races too. And once you’ve done that, it’s clear to all JPM had the upperhand for 75% of their time together. Saying that, I’m not surprised you can’t see that after reading a comment of yours, which you stated you don’t think Schumacher did anything wrong in Monaco 06!!

[ioan]

Why isn't this thread moved to the History and Nostalgia?

[raphael123]

Why isn't this thread moved to the History and Nostalgia?

Maybe it's my fault for bringing it back up. Sorry - I haven't been on here for a couple of weeks, and only just read Garry's reply - and had to reply to what he said!

Ioan, it reminds me, you never did back up for opinion like you said you always try and do. I'm still interested in hearing how you can say that stats give you the full picture, and yet state Ralf was better than Montoya, when the stats show Montoya did a much better job than Ralf. Be interesting to see you explain that to people...if you can..and got the time of course :)