Of course, it sucked! That’s why it was so much fun to watch.
Every single corner and most straights were like his special invitation to disaster, yet disaster seemed as uninterested in him as you are.
Well, let me put it this way: when Keke was in his prime, his peers were men like Gilles Villeneuve, Didier Pironi, Nigel Mansell (a tad later than the latter two, true), Carlos Reutemann… any of those I’d pick over Rosberg for pure style alone, with Gilles obviously being the king of them all. Mind, I’m not saying these were among the most clever drivers of all time, but by God, they were more exciting to watch then Rosberg.
I hear Rosberg’s son Niko is doing well in F3000 right now, IIRC. So, maybe Jacques Villeneuve and Damon Hill aren’t the only drivers to follow in their father’s footsteps!
Oops, almost forgot Michael Andretti there. Who can forget the impression he made in his single F1 year? 
More random thoughts:
Montoya was “making nice” for the camera and the viewing audience. Gordon wouldn’t even qualify for an F1 race if they still used the 120% rule. (but I could be wrong)
Rosberg was indeed fun to watch, and indeed undeserving of the title. I remember one race where he spun down the crowded front straight, managed to keep it off the ways and kept going. That was kinda cool.
Coldfire, I certainly don’t love Senna. I think he was a whiney cry-baby and increadable poor sport. Yes, he could drive in the wet, big-freakin’ deal. He couldn’t take an uncompetitive car and win consistantly like Prost or Schumacher. He had to have the best car to achieve what he did. Had he not killed himself, he may have killed someone else on the track with his hot-headed bullshit. He should have had his ass kicked in the pits on more than one occasion. I’m really glad that Schumacher will relagate him to a little-regarded footnote in the record books eventually. Sure, he is easily in the elite of drivers, but I’m glad he is gone from the sport.
(gosh, that was kind of harsh! :eek: )
You pretty much nailed Schumacher. Unfortunatly, he has displayed some pretty poor sportsmanship on the track as well in the past. Prost was a dick sometimes in the paddock, but kept it pretty clean on the track, for the most part.
Of course, I was always an Arnoux fan, so what the hell do I know? 
I still don’t know why I would want to get the bear.
Howyadoin,
I’ve got to go with Mario Andretti. He raced F1 when drivers weren’t just actuators for control systems, and excelled. He raced Indycars from the days of front-engine roadsters to the harum-scarum turbo monsters, and excelled. If NASCAR hadn’t turned auto racing into sponsor worship, “Mario Andretti” would still be synomymous with “race car driver” in the US.
Look at the achievements:
54 Champ Car wins
4 Champ Car Championships
1 Indy 500 win
1 NASCAR win
1 IROC Championship
3 Sebring 12 Hour wins
1 Formula One Championship
12 Formula One wins
8 Formula 5000 wins
1 Daytona 6 Hour win
1 Pikes Peak win
If you consider versatility as part of the “clever” equation, Mario wins hands down.
If you look at career success from a financial standpoint, Mario has made a good-sized fortune both during and after his career.
Michael Schumacher may have a higher net worth, but Mario didn’t get the bloated contracts that Schumie got. He relied more on investments and marketing.
Just one face ran’s opinion…
-Rav
ummm… make that synonymous…
Am totally with you on this Coldfire.Schumacher rocks! Although I admit that Senna and Prost were pretty good drivers but for some reasons Micheal outguns them.
If anyone recalls the 1995 season you will be pretty much agreeing to what I say here.IIRC 1995 had a high number of wet races and the way Micheal dominated each event made you would wonder why the other drivers were paid their money for.
In the current lot of drivers I think no one comes close to Schumacher in terms of understanding the working of thier machines.This guy constantly updates his driving skills according to the conditions lap to lap.I think in the Canadian grand prix I managed to see one whole lap onboard.Schumacher was changing the brake balance to suit the next sector of the lap while still driving at the same speed(and keeping kid brother Ralf and Montoya on his heels)!IMHO the reason why Schumacher isnt that successful this year is because he doesnt get much time to setup the car due to the restricted time on track.
Not to forget that when Schumacher joined Ferrari in 1996,the car was a underpowered, (relatively)non-aerodynamic car which used to oversteer a lot.Schumacher modified his driving style to suit the charecteristics of the car for the whole season(winning some races in between)!
Regarding the OP I have a very good reason to believe that his technical director Ross Brawn is the best in the business.If you have seen the British GP of 1999(I think) where Micheal was awarded a 10 second stop and go penalty for overtaking under a yellow flag 3 laps from the finish, and Micheal didnt have enough lead to come in to the pits,stop for 10 seconds and exit and lead the race(and if he didnt take the penalty within 3 laps he would be disqualified).So as per Ross Brawn’s instructions Micheal put 2 blistering laps and came into the pits on the last lap of the race and stopped for 10 seconds and crossed the Start/Finish line in the pits, thus winning the race.If this is a good example of brilliant strategy then nothing is.
Bruce_Daddy,the circuit on which Montoya and Gordon raced was an oval.In F1 the maximum time you lose is when you negotiate corners.Agreed driving on oval circuits is tough but its like walking on a bed of roses when you compare it to negotiating hairpins and chicanes.
Again just my 2 cents.
Nope.
And please with the road course stuff. The Winston Cup (soon to be Nextel) guys go to Watkins Glen and Sears Point every year and do just fine thankyouverymuch.
[hijack]
I went to Indy last winter and took the ride around the track in the bus and watched the movie in the little theater. I wasn’t mad or surprized that NASCAR made up about 10 seconds of the 45 minute movie given that the track has such a long and storied history, I expected as much since NASCAR has only been there since '94(?). They know what pays the bills, though. 95% of the merch. in the store was NASCAR
[/hijack]
So Montoya was sandbagging?
Well, there must be a few drivers who competed in NASCAR and F1. What do those drivers think, and in which were they more successful?
I notice from The_Raven’s post that Mario Andretti had an F1 Championship, but no NASCAR championship.
What’s the 120% rule? I tried to Google “120% rule + IRL”, but it didn’t seem to help.
Only Tony Stewart has won both the Winston Cup and IRL titles, I believe. He’s said before that all that’s left for him to achieve is the Indianapolis 500 trophy.
I don’t know about cleverest, but the stupidest was Dick Dastardly and Muttely cos they always set traps et al. when they obviously had the fastest car anyway!!!
Oh and for The Office gurus the best driver actually is Simon from IT (landed it, said 'i dont know what you were worried about)
In F1, before the current method used for qualifying, to make a grid, your speed needed to be within 120% of pole position.
Example: Schumacher sets pole of 1:30.00
The final spot on the grid has to be at least 1:48.00
(I think I did the math right. :o )
This proved too much for a couple of regular back-markers and they had to sit out a few races. Depending on the length of the lap and the domination of the pole sitter, qualifying could be pretty tricky. I seriously doubt a NASCAR could have made the cut at many circuits.
Of course, this has all changed and all you need to do now is pretty much show up and stay on the tarmac and you’re in the show.
I think Montoya’s comments about Gordon being “as competitive as anybody else” were made for the benefit of the press and the TV show that the test was taped for. He didn’t necessarily “sandbag” but I doubt he really put much effort into the lap. In reality, there are only about 6 people in the world who are “competitive” in F1 at any given moment. :rolleyes:
Bruce_Daddy, I didn’t mean to put down NASCAR drivers, not too much, anyway. I’m sure Jeff Gordon is a very capable racer, and so are most NASCAR drivers, probably. Still, like I said, I just don’t consider it to be the pinnacle of motor racing. It’s not because it’s American or anything: I don’t consider the European Touring Car Championships the pinnacle, either. It’s exciting, probably extremely difficult to do, and great fun to watch: but if a 100 kilogram 45 year old can win a race in such a class, it’s obviously nowhere near as straining as F1 is.
As for Gordon driving Montoya’s car, and whether Montoya was giving it all that day: Gordon lapped “respectable 1:16’s”, which would put Montoya’s time in the low to mid 1:15’s. The fastest race lap during the 2002 US Grand Prix at that same circuit was a 1:12.738 (Barichello), and the pole qualifying lap (meaning a set-up closer to what Gordon drove, as he didn’t have 200 KG’s of fuel on board) was a smokin’ 1:10.790 (Michael Schumacher). I think it’s fair to say Juan Pablo was going easy on Jeff that day. 
Still, that doesn’t matter, Gordon was quickly learning the car’s ins and outs, and did impress the Williams team. I’m sure he could have become even quicker given more laps, BUT, the real question is, how would he handle a race distance? An F1 grand prix is at least 300 kilometers in length, during which one is subjected to immense temperatures and G-forces. Not seldom F1-drivers have to be practically lifted from their cars after a race (Jarno Trulli in Germany, anyone?). Given the average physique of a NASCAR driver (even Gordon), I’d say he would not even have come close.
gatopescado, it’s the 107% rule, not 120%. And no, it’s not in use anymore since the introduction of one lap qualifying. Your opinion on Senna is… duly noted. Let’s agree to disagree.
As for Mario Andretti, well, he’s certainly one of the most versatile racers this planet’s ever seen. And he certainly was a deserving F1 champ back in 1978. But as far as pure cleverness goes - he’s not on par with my top 3, mentioned above.
Supposed to be “NASCAR guy”!
These guys are very good at what they do, but going left and right in an open-wheeled car ain’t it!
Why won’t this asshole use “Preview”?
120? :smack: I was tryin’ to give the Minardi team a break!
Man, do I feel stupid!
As far as my opinion on Senna goes, you can say it isn’t widely shared.
I don’t pull my head out of my ass because I need a reason for my breath to smell as bad as it does.
Sure it is. Just ask Alain Prost.
Howyadoin,
Remember that Jeff Gordon’s background was in open-wheel racing, and his original goal was to race in IndyCar. Unfortunately, his timing was off, as everybody was snatching up European drivers like the immortal Bertrand Gachot and Olivier Groulliard after seeing Nigel Mansell romp over the field. This left Gordon no option but to go to NASCAR.
Also remember that his NASCAR road course performances have been pretty good considering the bloatware he has to muscle around.
I’m not putting him in Andretti’s league regarding versatility, but he coulda been a contender in open-wheel racing.
-Rav
Wow, Gordon got passed up because of Gachot and Grouillard? Now that is a raw deal. Talk about two BAD F1 drivers!