Brazilian GP***SPOILER****!!!!!

We are talking about innate physical attributes, not material possessions. Your analogy is completely off. Money is earned, Ferraris are acquired, there are no physical barriers to either.

The point I made earlier is that no matter how much you practice, you will never beat Tiger Woods. He wasn't born swinging a golf club but he was born with certain physical gifts that enable him to swing a golf club better than his peers. The same is true with auto racing.

Kimi came into the series with a grand total of 23 auto races to his name and was immediately impressive. Massa came to F1 with vastly more experience and did so poorly his first season replacing Kimi that Sauber fired him. Massa can drive a million laps and he will never have the natural abilities of a Kimi.

I don't get why this is so tough for you to understand?

 

You should have learned your craft by the time you reach F1, not while you are in it. Ask Ide.

 

'Doesn't matter, all is forgiven here once a driver joins Ferrari... '

Nice planet

 

Well said.

 

What that has to do with my comment, I don't know.

Then again, you make a habit of comments that make sense only to yourself.

 

Well, you state experience isn't necessarily the trump card so ...

One problem with your analysis is that Massa's current performance more or less matches Kimi's,
and he hasn't driven a million laps.

You once said something, I paraphrase, "progress takes places at the periphery", which is a great insight.
Progress also takes place non-linearly. Once a certain threshold is reached, prior calculations and limitations are null + void.
Massa has already broken through the threshold which you are so dearly holding on to.
LH's performance was a big story but Massa's improvement is up there.

Kimi has his style and his personality which set him apart.
He has been more consistent than Massa, I'll give you that, but
Massa is in the ballpark in his own style. (speaking of faux pas - look at LH.
if Massa had done that he would be crucified, but you won't do that with LH
because he was a rookie - that experience variable again)

Yes, Massa will have to improve, and win in spite of problems,
but I think there's a lot of potential there. And I happen to like his style.

 

Your thinking is very compartmentalized.

'Doesn't matter, all is forgiven here once a driver joins Ferrari... ' - you said this re: Alonso
so, it seems you're ready to change your mind when it suits your interests.

It was just humour.

 

FACT: Massa screwd the pooch several times this season, directly affecting his WDC chances, thus relegating him to the "support" driver... Woulda coulda shoulda, driven better at those 'moments' then maybe Kimi woulda coulda shoulda been the one to ensure Massa finished #1 not #3... Kimi deserved and earned the title, he raced until the final lap of the final race. even when things were bleak, he kept racing... while the others suddenly forgot how to drive... just like playing hard for only 3 quarters in a Football game...

 

No issues with the points results. And as Kimi acknowledged,
Massa's someone you want in your team in the '4th quarter'.

 

Other than the 4th place finish and the lack of a WDC...

He was 3rd in the standings last year. He is 4th this year. Yep, great leap in performance.

Rubens too won GPs and finished high up in the points standing. You think he was WDC material too? Or perhaps he was the beneficiary of driving a car better than his competition?

The fact is that the McLaren and the Ferrari were clearly superior cars to the rest of the field. Of those cars and its 4 drivers, Massa managed to finish 4th and was the only one out of contention for the WDC in the last race.

Explain to me what youthink that Massa has done that Rubens or Irvine had not done before him...other than manage to be outperformed by his teammate every year of his career in F1?

 

I was referring to the attitude of folks on this site. Perhaps this reference was too obtuse for you.

As I have stated many, many times before: my support of Ferrari is not dependant on who drives for the team nor am I willing to automatically exalt a driver's skill simply because he drives for Ferrari.

 

This thread reminds me of the US troops who found Japanese soldiers on some remote islands in the Pacific in 1950. They were still fighting WWII.

 

where do you come up with this mumbo jumbo? Money? Owning a Ferrari? ludicrous! Anyway...how the heck do you marginalize "talent"... there are many out there born with the "talent", "gift", "predisposition", but still work their @sses off!!! ridiculous how you make those born with certain gifts and their accomplishments less "noteworthy" when they excel. everyone with "talent" doesn't work to learn their craft? i don't know about you, but i've met tons of "talented" athletes who've worked their @sses off to nurture and continually develop their "talent"...and their accomplishments ARE noteworthy, they ARE inspiring to others. you make it sound like being born with "talent" means there will be no hurdles to overcome, that they won't have to persevere through hardships. good and bad luck still play a part. they still have to apply and maximize the "talent"...so just having "talent" isn't all in of itself. also met plenty of those born with "talent" who got left in the dust because their determination went awol, or they didn't deem it necessary to apply the "talent" fully. your Mom and Dad/ Dog example is funny, and again waaaaay off the mark. man, you sound like someone quite bitter...someone that surely was born with certain "talents" but wasn't gifted the "talents" that they wanted, and now whine about it... geesh...

 

Because we're talking about driving a car, not bench pressing it.
(If an old coot can get a Red Bull into the points, ... )

If Tiger were to stop practicing, a lot of people would beat him afore long.

I simply don't agree that skills are "physical attributes". They can be learned.

Precisely.

Just having talent isn't enough. But if it takes work and effort on top of talent, then how does one, with absolute certainty, distinguish between someone who "doesn't have it" and someone who doesn't have it yet?

By the talent theory, Hamilton will never be a champion, because he choked this year, and so always will.

 

OK, I had misunderstood.


>He was 3rd in the standings last year. He is 4th this year. Yep, great
>leap in performance.

Look at Kimi - 2nd. 7th. 2nd. 5th. 1st. Hell, look at the stock market.
The world just doesn't operate in a linear fashion. Which is why
I think LH will have worse results in 08.


>Rubens too won GPs and finished high up in the points standing.
>You think he was WDC material too? Or perhaps he was the beneficiary of driving a car better than his competition?

Both. He wasn't in contention + he was in a better car.



>Of those cars and its 4 drivers, Massa managed to finish 4th and was the >only one out of contention for the WDC in the last race.


He did finish_ 4th, in the process sacrificing personal points so that Kimi remained in contention.
I'm v.happy for Kimi, but that doesn't settle anything.

Quite the contrary, Massa did better than expected.
As did LH.



>Explain to me what you think that Massa has done that Rubens or Irvine had not done before him...
>other than manage to be outperformed by his teammate every year of his career in F1?

Massa (and Kimi) has years ahead of him, is one of the fastest,
most determined drivers, is racing better than ever and
is still improving = huge potential.
RB's + EI's results are finite quantities.

The problem I have with your general approach is that you are
trying to lock things down, to compartmentalize everything into
blk/white, 0's/1'ns, and frankly that only works with dead things
+ to a lesser extent what has been.

 

No matter how much you practice, you will never beat Tiger Woods. No matter how much theory of golf or mechanics of golf swings you study, you will never beat Tiger Woods.

The point that is being made is that at a certain point, you will reach the best of your abilities. However the best of your abilities may not be as good as the best of someone else's abilities.

There are thousands of baseball players playing professionally in the US, there is only one Alex Rodriguez. Why is that? Has Alex taken more batting practice than everyone else? Does Alex study pitchers more than anybody else?

No. All of these professional players are working to the best of their abilities but the maximum potential of some exceed the maximum potential of others.

Is Massa improving? He ought to be. Does Massa have the innate skills and talents such that his maximum potential exceeds drivers such as Kimi, Alonso, or Hamilton? Absolutely not. Masa can drive all he wants, he will never be as good a driver as these other three nor has he demonstrated anything to suggest that he is anything other than just another Rubens or Irvine. Both of them won races, set fastest laps, and won pole positions in the Ferrari too. Can Massa win in a Renault as Alonso did or in a sub-par McLaren as Kimi did? Not in a million years.

He has NEVER, EVER beaten a teammate in identical machinery. Never. Not once. He was beaten by Heidfeld, he was beaten by Fisichella. he was so poor a driver in his first year that he was canned by Peter Sauber. That's right, he was FIRED by the team.

How you can look at a mediocre driver such as this who has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in a Ferrari that the two previous #2 drivers hadn't done and somehow come to the conclusion that he is a WDC in waiting is utterly baffling.

 

Let me know when I can buy the algorithm that allows you to predict potential with such absolute accuracy.

 

Easy. When you fail to outperform your teammate every year you are in F1...

 

You're contradicting yourself at every step.

'Easy' failed to predict he would b signed by F after his prior results.
'Easy' failed to predict Massa would do as well as he did in 07 after his prior results.
'Easy' failed to predict Massa's contract would be renewed after this season's results.
'Easy' and MS taking an interest in M's career makes things complicated.

So, let me know when I can buy that algo.

 

i think you're missing a lot of what is going on here... it depends on what skills you're talking about...

to see who 'has it' and who doesn't, just look closely. and it depends on the type of 'talent' in question.

that last line about hamiltion, errr... now i'm beginning to see how/where you're coming from... you're just not getting the gist here.

 

and YOU, know the resons behind all that? err ok, please send me a copy of his contract, and the EXACT thinking inside the Ferrari management. stop kidding yourself, Ferrari, like any other team, is playing a chess game.

 

why is this so hard for some to grasp???

 

Unlike you I didn't claim I can predict potential.

You can't prove anything and therefore your opinion is just as valid as others' opinion.

 

There is a diff between understanding something and agreeing with something.

 

+1

You aren't saying you know exactly what Massa's physical limitations are, unlike senna3xwc. For the guys that root for him, we believe in him. For others, they don't believe him. But to state over and over AS FACT that he doesn't have what it takes is ridiculous. Nobody knows except the big guy upstairs.