2017 Formula One silly season thread

Who is available that would make a difference?

Ricciardo and Verstappen are both locked-in and both would probably do better than Vettel based on their performance at Red Bull and Ferrari seems to work best when they have a designated #1 and #2 driver.

Alonso? We'd probably see a return of the fireworks of 2007 at McLaren which directly contributed to Kimi winning the WDC that year.
 
So..... apparently Alonso is talking to Williams?
 
I don't really see how they can afford him...unless martini steps in of course!
 
Williams is really off-form this year. I mean compared to McLaren they're doing okay, but if Honda can ever get their act together, the McLaren chassis looks to be substantially better. I'm just worried this could be yet another of Alonso's "wrong moves" if he does go.

In IndyCar, Chip Ganassi Racing is going to be losing both Max Chilton and Tony Kanaan at Season End so that would open up two spots if Alonso is serious about moving over. Though losing Chilton's money might have an impact on their competitiveness.
 
Last edited:
If only they awarded points for practices hm?

I guess scoring 12 points today (despite the penalty) is another sign of mediocrity.
 
I guess scoring 12 points today (despite the penalty) is another sign of mediocrity.

I mean he only did to Bottas what Vettel was unable to do with Hamilton but I guess since he had Ricciardo in front of him afterwards he's mediocre.
 
I think you both need to consult a dictionary about the word mediocre. It requires context. I'm a mediocre driver and so are you two, he's mediocre for the top teams in F1, which makes him one of the best of the world. But go ahead and take stuff out of context.
 
Weird, I don't see the word context in that definition, I don't understand how consulting a dictionary was supposed to help then. :confused:
 
adjective
1.
of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barelyadequate:
The car gets only mediocre mileage, but it's fun to drive.

1580-90; < Middle French < Latin mediocris in a middle state, literally, atmiddle height, equivalent to medi(us) mid1+ Old Latin ocris ruggedmountain, cognate with Greek ?kris, akin to ?kros apex; compare Umbrianocar hill, citadel


Basically, middle of the pack. Not bad, not good. But in order to establish mediocrity you need to look at what you're comparing it with, that's what I meant by context. In the example it says the car gets mediocre mileage, compared to what?? Other cars of course.

What I said was:

Whatever you care about, having a very good #1 and a very mediocre #2 does not seem to work.


In this case, I'm comparing him with other #2s (from top teams, not counting paid drivers or any bollocks like that):
Bottas is squeezing the most he can out of that Mercedes and doing right by his team, he's not out of the championship run even, taking podiums and wins. He has the fastest car in the grid and is taking his opportunities while playing #2 when he needs to.
Verstappen has had bad luck with reliability and arguably there is no 1 and 2 inside Red Bull but he's got the 3rd fastest car, and despite his position in the WDC, RB is a firm 3rd in the WCC as it should.

Now let's look at a team with a poor #2, Toro Rosso:
Sainz Jr is bringing in 36 out of the teams 40 points, and with the same car, Kvyat is not doing jack shit other than ruining other people's races again and again. Note, I am not comparing Raikkonen with Kvyat.
STR should be good enough at the moment to be over Williams easily, but an underperforming #2 is bringing them down.
 
Last edited:
Top