He had the fastest car in 2005 by far. How can anyone say for sure that he is the fastest?
I honestly think that everyone wants him to be the next flying Finn so they put him on a pedestal that he doesn't deserve to be on. If he wasn't Finnish, no-one would be talking about him as the fastest.
If he was so fast he wouldn't have lost that one on one battle with Montoya in Brazil in 2005. It seemed like whenever Montoya was focused he had the beating of Raikkonen. Heidfeld beat him in 2001 when they were teammates at Sauber and Coulthard beat him in 2002 when they were teammates at Mclaren. Alonso has never been beaten by a teammate. Raikkonen has been beaten twice(2001 to Heidfeld and 2002 to Coulthard).
2007-02-26 02:55:21 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Auto Racing ➔ Formula One
Alonso never been beaten by team mate???
How about the 2001 season then when team mate Tarso Marques finished 22nd in the championship from 13 starts whilst Alonso finished in 23rd position from 17 starts!
What's the point coming on here spouting figures if you cannot get your info correct?!
D'oh! Thicko!
2007-02-26 03:14:02 · answer #1 · answered by slowpokesrool 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Here are your answers to your questins.
He lost out in his battle with montoya in brazil 2005 because before his secong pits stopn there was a lot of traffic in front of him so he had to pit earleir, not making use of his extra fuel.
Heidfeld beat him in 2001 because raikkonen was in his first year in f1 after just 21 races for formula renalt while nick was in his secong year in f1.
Coulthard beat him in 2002 only because coulthard had a more reliable car. Kimi's qulifying was far better than davids.
I agree that alonso has never been beaten by his team mate but think bout 2004. Jarno has ahead of him in the championship in the first half of the season but only after Trulli's arguament with Flavio did alonso start outperforming him.
If you have any doubt about kimi being the fastest man on track look back into 2003. Mclaren was much slower than Williams or Ferrari yet he almost managed to win the world title. The reason why kimi has not been a champion till now is because either his maclaren would not reach the finish line or it was not fast enough.
2007-03-01 07:42:59 · answer #2 · answered by Nitin T F1 fan 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ok, let's get a couple of things straight. Kimi is pure talent. Can he develop a car? No. But he can win when the car is reliable. He is the case and point.
1. How many times was Kimi in a position to win and the car died on him?
2. How many times did he out qualify his teammates, from Sauber, to Mclaren? ( How many times did he do it with more fuel on board?)
3. During the 2005 season when he did have the fast MP4-20, and he put in a good qualifying lap or a for 1-3 position start, and he suffered an engine change and had to be penalized 10 spots and still got on the podium because of his race pace?
4. Who was the driver in 2005, who started from the pitlane, and passed 17 drivers and pulled the most spectaculor move on the last lap on Fischella who started in second place, to win the suzuka grand prix?
I will give you an even better example. During the 2003 season, when every team had a new car. Mclaren Mercedes had a two year old car. Remember MP4-17D? The heavily revised Mclaren because the MP4-18 was fast but too fragile to even waste. What did Kimi do? He took Schumacher to the last race of the season. Coulthard showed the true pace of the MP4-17D, with his low qualifying and race pace. He took Schumacher to the last race off of talent and speed alone.
By him being Finnish has nothing to do with him being fast. Kimi realistically should be a 2 time champion. 2003 and 2005. But it was Mclaren who let him down. If Kimi was so slow, why did Mika ( a fellow flying finn himself) push for Ron to sign for him before Mika's sabatical? Mika just incase you didn't know, is a 2 time world champion himself. Obiously he saw something in Kimi.
Do we not forget that Kimi was only given a provisional super liscense to race with Sauber because of his relatively low racing experience, and he not only parlayed that into a drive with Sauber but caught the eye of Ron Dennis who signed him.
About Montoya. I have really nothing bad to say about him. But it is a proven fact that Montoya had a hard time adapting to the driving characteristics of the Mclaren. (Read F1 Racing Mag.) He wanted changes left and right. Kimi never once asks for changes, he just drives. Nothing more nothing less.
I think you need to do some research before you ask questions. And if you think that any of the facts that I gave you are wrong? Go to F1-live.com and do some research. Oh, and to add one more point. Ferrari had their eye on Kimi since the 2003, Schumacher already named him as his successor at Ferrari 2 years before he retired. He had to be something to catch the eye of a seven time world champion and one of the most dominant racing teams in F1 history....
If you don't know, ask somebody.........And you just might learn something.
Kimi Raikkonen is the Flying Finn
2007-02-26 18:02:14 · answer #3 · answered by Chris H 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Kimi is fast no doubt if not the fastest. Put all the top drivers in the same machinery and kimi will hands down. By same machinery I mean reliable too.
But lots of time raw speed alone isn't enough to win a championship. As Jackie Stewart once said " I doesn't matter if you are the fastest. You need to win" which is everything and all that matters.
There have been a number of drivers who have raw speed over the years but weren't in a competitive car. Jean Alesi comes to my mind, Mika also languished for years before McLaren delivered a competitive car.
Race Craft is vital. But yes in terms of driving talent alone I will Kimi the thumbs up.
2007-03-01 03:17:40 · answer #4 · answered by vaddadi 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He has the ice-man rep because he consistently drives a fast race without making many mistakes. I think in order to do that, you have to have a bond with the mechanics to effectively communicate areas to improve upon while taking the pressure of having to drive a perfect race. We don't know for sure if he's the fastest, but it's up to the marketing department (and news media) to construct a story around the characters and make the sport more interesting. For example, the invincibility status of Schumi and his rivalry with "super overtaker" montoya is what drew me to the sport in the first place.
2007-02-27 06:48:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
He is fast.
He took a car that wasn't truely competitive over the last 3 years and drove it's wheels off. His problem has been the car's terrible reliability, almost certainly costing him 1 if not 2 world championships. Fellow drivers say he is one of the fastest around, and you can't argue with them. Also telemerty has shown he drives the car harder than anyone else to try and squeeze every last tenth out of the car.
This year, in a truly reliable car, her will be a major force in the title race.
2007-02-26 12:27:00 · answer #6 · answered by parkesmatt 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Without going into the argument of whether or not he is indeed the fastest, the fact remains that a lot of clever people with years of experience in racing have fought over Kimi's signature on the contract. Jean Todt, Luca Montezemolo, Ron Dennis, Martin Whitmarsh, Flavio Briatore to name a few. They don't get things wrong that often, so I tend to believe them when they say Kimi is fast.
2007-02-27 04:36:47 · answer #7 · answered by rockpool248 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
AND I QUOTE..........." Alonso has never been beaten by a teammate".................Absolutely WRONG if i remember correctly FISI has one a race or two in the past 2 seasons
Examples; Malaysian Grand prix 3/19/2006, Austrailian Grand Prix 3/6/2005,............Iam no genuis here, but something tells me Alonso has been beaten by his teamates Multiple times. Iam not even a Renault fan and i Pulled this one out of my head.
Next time use a lil common sense......
GO FELIPE AND KIMI F2007
2007-02-28 01:11:58 · answer #8 · answered by justin s 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm a huge kimi fan but what worries me is does he drive the car too hard? was the reliability problem on the mclaren genuine or was it due to kimis driving style, i hope it was mclaren and kimi can get the championship, this season will tell for sure
2007-02-26 13:44:14 · answer #9 · answered by eyesinthedrk 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
A lot of people refer to how many times he was leading a race when his Mercedes went Kablooie. The argument is if he just had a reliable race car, he would have won a championship by now.
Ferrari has reliablity, now he will either confirm those arguments or be seen as slightly overrated.
2007-02-26 11:05:11 · answer #10 · answered by Tinalera 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋