planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Jun 25, 2017 12:09 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic

Will Hülkenberg ever get a podium?
Yes 63%  63%  [ 43 ]
No 37%  37%  [ 25 ]
Total votes : 68
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2016 1:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7120
mikeyg123 wrote:
moby wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
moby wrote:
On the parent site, Hulk says " I could have been on the podium but could not get past the mid field cars"

This is the difference between a good driver and a top driver Nico. Your team mate was, and you were not even right behind him


Perez beat Hulk because he pitted on the right lap not because he could overtake midfield cars. Swap strategies and Hulk would have been third. Assuming he could get his tyres up to speed as quickly. I guess that is a big assumption.



Except that Hulk started infront of Perez. (Hulk 5 Perez 7)


Sorry, I don't get your point?



Not only would Hulk have been in a more advantageous position, and probably had the call on when to change, but Perez had to pass one more car and Hulk himself before gaining any advantage.

Had he kept the position, Hulk would have been 2 places higher than Perez.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2016 1:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10885
moby wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
moby wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
moby wrote:
On the parent site, Hulk says " I could have been on the podium but could not get past the mid field cars"

This is the difference between a good driver and a top driver Nico. Your team mate was, and you were not even right behind him


Perez beat Hulk because he pitted on the right lap not because he could overtake midfield cars. Swap strategies and Hulk would have been third. Assuming he could get his tyres up to speed as quickly. I guess that is a big assumption.



Except that Hulk started infront of Perez. (Hulk 5 Perez 7)


Sorry, I don't get your point?



Not only would Hulk have been in a more advantageous position, and probably had the call on when to change, but Perez had to pass one more car and Hulk himself before gaining any advantage.

Had he kept the position, Hulk would have been 2 places higher than Perez.


Yes but as I said it all came down on strategy call rather than Perez being able to overtake through the midfield. What Perez did do that others failed with was getting his slicks in the zone in a single lap.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2016 1:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7120
mikeyg123 wrote:
moby wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
moby wrote:
On the parent site, Hulk says " I could have been on the podium but could not get past the mid field cars"

This is the difference between a good driver and a top driver Nico. Your team mate was, and you were not even right behind him


Perez beat Hulk because he pitted on the right lap not because he could overtake midfield cars. Swap strategies and Hulk would have been third. Assuming he could get his tyres up to speed as quickly. I guess that is a big assumption.



Except that Hulk started infront of Perez. (Hulk 5 Perez 7)

Sorry, I don't get your point?



Not only would Hulk have been in a more advantageous position, and probably had the call on when to change, but Perez had to pass one more car and Hulk himself before gaining any advantage.

Had he kept the position, Hulk would have been 2 places higher than Perez.


Yes but as I said it all came down on strategy call rather than Perez being able to overtake through the midfield. What Perez did do that others failed with was getting his slicks in the zone in a single lap.




Which, as I originally said is (one of) the difference between a good driver and a top driver.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2016 7:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:21 am
Posts: 437
nixxxon wrote:
2012 Sauber was an upper midfield car. There were kinda fast on some tracks but slow on others. And 2012 was a strange season with lots of surprises in the first few races and most of the cars close in performance.


It wasn't midfield car:

"perhaps the best car in the field" - Helmut Marko

"It's not Perez who is the 'tyre whisperer', it's the car. If I was to drive my car as he drives his, then our tyres would wear out very quickly." - Jenson Button

"We have a very fast car that works very well on almost every circuit. We have the speed to win. We could have scored a lot more points." - Peter Sauber

"I am sure Michael would have won three races this year for Sauber" - Fernando Alonso

"There was a feeling from within the team that the car was actually superior to the identically-powered Ferrari and all that limited it was the driver line-up." - Autosport 2012 season review

_________________
I know what I'm talking about.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2016 8:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10885
Armchair Expert wrote:
nixxxon wrote:
2012 Sauber was an upper midfield car. There were kinda fast on some tracks but slow on others. And 2012 was a strange season with lots of surprises in the first few races and most of the cars close in performance.


It wasn't midfield car:

"perhaps the best car in the field" - Helmut Marko

"It's not Perez who is the 'tyre whisperer', it's the car. If I was to drive my car as he drives his, then our tyres would wear out very quickly." - Jenson Button

"We have a very fast car that works very well on almost every circuit. We have the speed to win. We could have scored a lot more points." - Peter Sauber

"I am sure Michael would have won three races this year for Sauber" - Fernando Alonso

"There was a feeling from within the team that the car was actually superior to the identically-powered Ferrari and all that limited it was the driver line-up." - Autosport 2012 season review


If all that's true then I don't know why Perez, who has been very consistent ever since was so inconsistent then.

And as for Button's comments. He was clearly wrong because Perez is still doing it. But yes the Sauber was inconsistently good and probably a race winning car. Averaged out I would still describe it as upper midfield. Perhaps at a similar level or very slightly behind the Ferrari. Lets not forget in 2012 you had, Red Bull, Mercedes, Mclaren, Ferrari, Lotus, Williams and Sauber all fighting at the front. If you think 3 of those cars are better than the Sauber then I don't see how it can be better than "upper midfield".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2016 8:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 1416
Sauber was solid in Australia, lightning in Malaysia, solid in China, and nowhere in Bahrain. In the European season it was quick in Spain, impossible to judge at Monaco, very quick in Canada, quick in Valencia, quick prior to crash in Silverstone, and lightning in Hockenheim. It was slow in Hungary, before being extremely quick in both Belgium and Monza. Once the Asia season got underway, Sauber fell behind in the development race and weren't competitive beyond the midfield anymore (Suzuka being the only exception).

From Australia until Monza, the car was quick no doubt (but still inconsistent). Then it tailored off a bit with Japan being the only good form race after that. I feel like the Perez of today would definitely have scored more points with that car than he did back then. However, it was by no means a WDC winning car like some people seem to suggest.

Lastly, perhaps a car just as fast but even more wasted than the Sauber that year was Williams. Seriously, the FW34 was a car wasted by the drivers if I ever saw one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 8824
Location: Ireland
Armchair Expert wrote:
"There was a feeling from within the team that the car was actually superior to the identically-powered Ferrari and all that limited it was the driver line-up." - Autosport 2012 season review

So now the Sauber was faster than the 2012 Ferrari as well? I'm all for revisionism with hindsight and additional evidence but that's a step too far - Alonso driving the 5th best car and nearly winning the title. 6th best car if some people reckon the Williams was better as well!

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 12:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10885
mcdo wrote:
Armchair Expert wrote:
"There was a feeling from within the team that the car was actually superior to the identically-powered Ferrari and all that limited it was the driver line-up." - Autosport 2012 season review

So now the Sauber was faster than the 2012 Ferrari as well? I'm all for revisionism with hindsight and additional evidence but that's a step too far - Alonso driving the 5th best car and nearly winning the title. 6th best car if some people reckon the Williams was better as well!


Not making a comment either way but Sauber out qualified Massa in 9 races out of 20 and qualified within 3 tenths of Alonso in 9 races out of 20. So the argument could be made that if Massa is worse to only slightly better than Perez/Kobayashi then Sauber could have been the better car. Or if the gap between them and Alonso is 3 tenths then it is very close.

It's arguable IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 9:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 11:37 am
Posts: 698
Location: South London
mcdo wrote:
Armchair Expert wrote:
"There was a feeling from within the team that the car was actually superior to the identically-powered Ferrari and all that limited it was the driver line-up." - Autosport 2012 season review

So now the Sauber was faster than the 2012 Ferrari as well? I'm all for revisionism with hindsight and additional evidence but that's a step too far - Alonso driving the 5th best car and nearly winning the title. 6th best car if some people reckon the Williams was better as well!


The 2012 Ferrari was arguably closer to the best car on the grid than the 2014 Red Bull. Ricciardo winning the title in the 2nd best car of 2014 is a far more absurd notion than Alonso winning in the 5th best car of 2012.

Let's look at 2012 shall we. We had a very much on-form Vettel teamed-up with an aging Webber, a seriously unreliable McLaren, a clearly strong Lotus with Raikkonen who had been out of the sport for 3 years (and has since been battered by both Alonso and Vettel, though I realise that doesn't prove he was underperforming in 2012) and a crash happy Grosjean, and fast but inconsistent Williams and Sauber cars, with similar-natured drivers. And into the mix the unpredictable tyres which led to 7 different winners in 7 different races, a crash-fest in Valencia and Abu Dhabi...it's very possible that Ferrari was only 5th best - McLaren was let down by its car, Sauber and Williams (and Lotus to an extent) by its drivers.

I don't think the Williams was a better car - but it was certainly badly let down by the performances of its drivers. And though the Sauber had erratic car performances, I think it was overall an equal car.

_________________
NH#1: Quick Nick Heidfeld
NH#2: HULK SMASH

PF1 Pick 10 Podiums: 6 (2nd IND '11; 1st JPN '12; 1st MCO '13; 3rd DEU '16; 3rd USA '16, 3rd MEX '16)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 9:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:06 am
Posts: 2848
theferret wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Armchair Expert wrote:
"There was a feeling from within the team that the car was actually superior to the identically-powered Ferrari and all that limited it was the driver line-up." - Autosport 2012 season review

So now the Sauber was faster than the 2012 Ferrari as well? I'm all for revisionism with hindsight and additional evidence but that's a step too far - Alonso driving the 5th best car and nearly winning the title. 6th best car if some people reckon the Williams was better as well!


The 2012 Ferrari was arguably closer to the best car on the grid than the 2014 Red Bull. Ricciardo winning the title in the 2nd best car of 2014 is a far more absurd notion than Alonso winning in the 5th best car of 2012.

Let's look at 2012 shall we. We had a very much on-form Vettel teamed-up with an aging Webber, a seriously unreliable McLaren, a clearly strong Lotus with Raikkonen who had been out of the sport for 3 years (and has since been battered by both Alonso and Vettel, though I realise that doesn't prove he was underperforming in 2012) and a crash happy Grosjean, and fast but inconsistent Williams and Sauber cars, with similar-natured drivers. And into the mix the unpredictable tyres which led to 7 different winners in 7 different races, a crash-fest in Valencia and Abu Dhabi...it's very possible that Ferrari was only 5th best - McLaren was let down by its car, Sauber and Williams (and Lotus to an extent) by its drivers.

I don't think the Williams was a better car - but it was certainly badly let down by the performances of its drivers. And though the Sauber had erratic car performances, I think it was overall an equal car.

I disagree, the Sauber was really good at looking after it's tyres but the Ferrari was definitely faster overall package. I agree however that the Lotus was better though.

_________________
Danger is real, fear is choice.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Best Round Result: 1st (Monaco '12 & '15, Silverstone '14, Austria '15, Mexico '15, China '16)
Podiums: 11
2017 Championship Standing: Don't look, it's hideous!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 10:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 8824
Location: Ireland
specdecible wrote:
theferret wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Armchair Expert wrote:
"There was a feeling from within the team that the car was actually superior to the identically-powered Ferrari and all that limited it was the driver line-up." - Autosport 2012 season review

So now the Sauber was faster than the 2012 Ferrari as well? I'm all for revisionism with hindsight and additional evidence but that's a step too far - Alonso driving the 5th best car and nearly winning the title. 6th best car if some people reckon the Williams was better as well!


The 2012 Ferrari was arguably closer to the best car on the grid than the 2014 Red Bull. Ricciardo winning the title in the 2nd best car of 2014 is a far more absurd notion than Alonso winning in the 5th best car of 2012.

Let's look at 2012 shall we. We had a very much on-form Vettel teamed-up with an aging Webber, a seriously unreliable McLaren, a clearly strong Lotus with Raikkonen who had been out of the sport for 3 years (and has since been battered by both Alonso and Vettel, though I realise that doesn't prove he was underperforming in 2012) and a crash happy Grosjean, and fast but inconsistent Williams and Sauber cars, with similar-natured drivers. And into the mix the unpredictable tyres which led to 7 different winners in 7 different races, a crash-fest in Valencia and Abu Dhabi...it's very possible that Ferrari was only 5th best - McLaren was let down by its car, Sauber and Williams (and Lotus to an extent) by its drivers.

I don't think the Williams was a better car - but it was certainly badly let down by the performances of its drivers. And though the Sauber had erratic car performances, I think it was overall an equal car.

I disagree, the Sauber was really good at looking after it's tyres but the Ferrari was definitely faster overall package. I agree however that the Lotus was better though.

I'm with ya here

Were the Red Bull, McLaren and Lotus better cars than the Ferrari? Yes I believe so
Sauber and Williams? No

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10885
specdecible wrote:
theferret wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Armchair Expert wrote:
"There was a feeling from within the team that the car was actually superior to the identically-powered Ferrari and all that limited it was the driver line-up." - Autosport 2012 season review

So now the Sauber was faster than the 2012 Ferrari as well? I'm all for revisionism with hindsight and additional evidence but that's a step too far - Alonso driving the 5th best car and nearly winning the title. 6th best car if some people reckon the Williams was better as well!


The 2012 Ferrari was arguably closer to the best car on the grid than the 2014 Red Bull. Ricciardo winning the title in the 2nd best car of 2014 is a far more absurd notion than Alonso winning in the 5th best car of 2012.

Let's look at 2012 shall we. We had a very much on-form Vettel teamed-up with an aging Webber, a seriously unreliable McLaren, a clearly strong Lotus with Raikkonen who had been out of the sport for 3 years (and has since been battered by both Alonso and Vettel, though I realise that doesn't prove he was underperforming in 2012) and a crash happy Grosjean, and fast but inconsistent Williams and Sauber cars, with similar-natured drivers. And into the mix the unpredictable tyres which led to 7 different winners in 7 different races, a crash-fest in Valencia and Abu Dhabi...it's very possible that Ferrari was only 5th best - McLaren was let down by its car, Sauber and Williams (and Lotus to an extent) by its drivers.

I don't think the Williams was a better car - but it was certainly badly let down by the performances of its drivers. And though the Sauber had erratic car performances, I think it was overall an equal car.

I disagree, the Sauber was really good at looking after it's tyres but the Ferrari was definitely faster overall package. I agree however that the Lotus was better though.


Sauber out qualified Massa in very nearly half the races and qualified within 3 tenths of Alonso in half. So I think on stats alone the Ferrari/Sauber were comparable over one lap. Assuming you believe Alonso to be faster over one lap in 2012 than Perez and Kobayashi.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 3:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:06 am
Posts: 2848
BUMP x2

With the new season coming and with all the new changes I thought it would be a good time to re-bump this again.

So far for Nico we have 117 race entries, a best finish of 4th three times, 1 pole position, and yet still no podium. In fact, if Hülkenberg does not score a podium before Hungary this year, then he will tie with Adrian Sutil for most races entered without scoring a podium. However this year sees quite a few changes for Hülkenberg, a new team, a new team-mate, new regulations... so it could be his best chance to get that maiden podium.

What do you think? will he be able to do it or has his best opportunities passed?

Results before 1st Bump (2015)
Yes: 65% (28)
No: 35% (15)

Results before 2nd Bump (2016)
Yes: 60% (34)
No: 40% (23)

_________________
Danger is real, fear is choice.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Best Round Result: 1st (Monaco '12 & '15, Silverstone '14, Austria '15, Mexico '15, China '16)
Podiums: 11
2017 Championship Standing: Don't look, it's hideous!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 3:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 3738
Location: Michigan, USA
I've switched myself from the 'No' to the 'Yes' category.

I see Renault as competing for podiums as early as this year, and certainly by next year. My 'No' vote was based on the likelihood that he would never get a seat with a top team, so now that he has I expect him to do so. He may or may not break Sutil's record before getting his podium, though.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 3:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:06 am
Posts: 2848
Exediron wrote:
I've switched myself from the 'No' to the 'Yes' category.

I see Renault as competing for podiums as early as this year, and certainly by next year. My 'No' vote was based on the likelihood that he would never get a seat with a top team, so now that he has I expect him to do so. He may or may not break Sutil's record before getting his podium, though.

I think the biggest change for Hülkenberg is no longer having Perez for a team mate, every time the Force India had an opportunity to be on the podium it was Perez and not Hülkenberg who took it. Nico in my opinion should be able to beat Palmer more often than not, which improves his chances greatly, yet ironically I still see he will have to beat Perez when one of the top 3 places is up for the taking.

_________________
Danger is real, fear is choice.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Best Round Result: 1st (Monaco '12 & '15, Silverstone '14, Austria '15, Mexico '15, China '16)
Podiums: 11
2017 Championship Standing: Don't look, it's hideous!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 4513
Location: Mumbai, India
specdecible wrote:
Exediron wrote:
I've switched myself from the 'No' to the 'Yes' category.

I see Renault as competing for podiums as early as this year, and certainly by next year. My 'No' vote was based on the likelihood that he would never get a seat with a top team, so now that he has I expect him to do so. He may or may not break Sutil's record before getting his podium, though.

I think the biggest change for Hülkenberg is no longer having Perez for a team mate, every time the Force India had an opportunity to be on the podium it was Perez and not Hülkenberg who took it. Nico in my opinion should be able to beat Palmer more often than not, which improves his chances greatly, yet ironically I still see he will have to beat Perez when one of the top 3 places is up for the taking.


Perez always got the upper hand because he has a knack for being kind on tires, which means he could run longer stints. He also seemed more aggressive or shall I say took opportunities that came his way.

Hulk I feel always played safe. He'd prefer to get the points more than trying to fight harder to get more.

Force India never played favourites with Perez. It's just that his driving style & wanting to risk for glory made his pit strategies work.

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:06 am
Posts: 2848
UnlikeUday wrote:
specdecible wrote:
Exediron wrote:
I've switched myself from the 'No' to the 'Yes' category.

I see Renault as competing for podiums as early as this year, and certainly by next year. My 'No' vote was based on the likelihood that he would never get a seat with a top team, so now that he has I expect him to do so. He may or may not break Sutil's record before getting his podium, though.

I think the biggest change for Hülkenberg is no longer having Perez for a team mate, every time the Force India had an opportunity to be on the podium it was Perez and not Hülkenberg who took it. Nico in my opinion should be able to beat Palmer more often than not, which improves his chances greatly, yet ironically I still see he will have to beat Perez when one of the top 3 places is up for the taking.


Perez always got the upper hand because he has a knack for being kind on tires, which means he could run longer stints. He also seemed more aggressive or shall I say took opportunities that came his way.

Hulk I feel always played safe. He'd prefer to get the points more than trying to fight harder to get more.

Force India never played favourites with Perez. It's just that his driving style & wanting to risk for glory made his pit strategies work.

I didn't mean to imply that there was any favoritism at FI between the drivers, more of a case that Perez is better at capitalizing on opportunities than Hülkenberg is. Now that Perez isn't his team-mate anymore, should the Renault be fast enough Nico should be able to beat Palmer and not the other way around.

_________________
Danger is real, fear is choice.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Best Round Result: 1st (Monaco '12 & '15, Silverstone '14, Austria '15, Mexico '15, China '16)
Podiums: 11
2017 Championship Standing: Don't look, it's hideous!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 4513
Location: Mumbai, India
specdecible wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
specdecible wrote:
Exediron wrote:
I've switched myself from the 'No' to the 'Yes' category.

I see Renault as competing for podiums as early as this year, and certainly by next year. My 'No' vote was based on the likelihood that he would never get a seat with a top team, so now that he has I expect him to do so. He may or may not break Sutil's record before getting his podium, though.

I think the biggest change for Hülkenberg is no longer having Perez for a team mate, every time the Force India had an opportunity to be on the podium it was Perez and not Hülkenberg who took it. Nico in my opinion should be able to beat Palmer more often than not, which improves his chances greatly, yet ironically I still see he will have to beat Perez when one of the top 3 places is up for the taking.


Perez always got the upper hand because he has a knack for being kind on tires, which means he could run longer stints. He also seemed more aggressive or shall I say took opportunities that came his way.

Hulk I feel always played safe. He'd prefer to get the points more than trying to fight harder to get more.

Force India never played favourites with Perez. It's just that his driving style & wanting to risk for glory made his pit strategies work.

I didn't mean to imply that there was any favoritism at FI between the drivers, more of a case that Perez is better at capitalizing on opportunities than Hülkenberg is. Now that Perez isn't his team-mate anymore, should the Renault be fast enough Nico should be able to beat Palmer and not the other way around.


Spec, I didn't try to imply that You meant that. That was just said.

One more aspect were the tires. Perez could make his tyres last longer. This year, I feel his advantage may get negated.

I really want Hulk to get a podium. He deserves so much more than he's got in F1 till now.

The Renault will surely improve this year & that should really make life easir for Hulk.

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 9:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 10885
I still think Hulk will get a podium.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 9:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1637
If it's to be this year, I reckon it will be the back end of the year, as I can see Renault out-developing Haas, Williams and FI. Maybe that's wishful thinking because I've always had a soft spot for the Enstone team.

So I think he'll take Sutil's record, but claim a podium afterwards.

I wonder what odds you'd get on Palmer taking a podium this year?

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 4513
Location: Mumbai, India
Herb wrote:
If it's to be this year, I reckon it will be the back end of the year, as I can see Renault out-developing Haas, Williams and FI. Maybe that's wishful thinking because I've always had a soft spot for the Enstone team.

So I think he'll take Sutil's record, but claim a podium afterwards.

I wonder what odds you'd get on Palmer taking a podium this year?


Renault no doubt will get stronger enough to make the Hulk a visit to the podium.

Palmer even looked quick in the tests. He could help Renault's chances in the WCC.

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1637
UnlikeUday wrote:
Herb wrote:
If it's to be this year, I reckon it will be the back end of the year, as I can see Renault out-developing Haas, Williams and FI. Maybe that's wishful thinking because I've always had a soft spot for the Enstone team.

So I think he'll take Sutil's record, but claim a podium afterwards.

I wonder what odds you'd get on Palmer taking a podium this year?


Renault no doubt will get stronger enough to make the Hulk a visit to the podium.

Palmer even looked quick in the tests. He could help Renault's chances in the WCC.


Just to make sure. That wasn't a dig at Palmer. I think he is underrated by many. He was unlucky last year in a few races. His drive in Oz in particular I felt deserved points (he finished 11th if I recall correctly)

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 9:44 am
Posts: 135
I believe with the team switch there is still some hope for Nicodrian Sutilberg.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 6:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:06 am
Posts: 3180
I think Hulk and Perez were equal driver-rated in 2015 and 2016, and that both are under-rated. Also agree that Palmer is showing promise, but was not yet at Hulk's level as at end 2016. I voted for a podium for Hulk but of course it all depends on the Renault. Always one of my favourite teams. What Renault have done for Red Bull in 2016 gives one hope :thumbup:

_________________
http://grandprixratings.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Black_Flag_11, pokerman and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group