Lotus back next year....whut

4th in the WCC? Not impressive?

Largest budget in F1 history. One single year of decent results, before going back to mediocore. Impressive? Not in the slightest. As I said before, 1 upwards blip in the constant downward spiral of Gascoynes cars does not prove he was a good designer. However rubbish cars that have crippled teams, and then 3-4 years of taping bits to a 5 year old chassis, and then watching your previous teams climb to success after dumping you does prove it.

He has produced one average car in his entire career. The rest are not worth speaking of. He is so up his own arse that it is unbelievable. How anyone can be sacked from this many teams and have this much poor results and still think he is worth a shot at it is beyond me. Nobody will employee him, and he has been forced to create a position for himself, just to keep himself in F1. There really is nothing good that can be said for his work.

The Lotus F1 team will be a failure as well. Political backing means when the going gets tough, the funding will get cut. Looking at failed F1 pay drivers, and local boys just to get the cash going doesn't suggest anything other than last by miles. Of all the new teams, Lotus is looking by far the most hilarious of them all right now. Before them it was Litespeed who were the most ridiculous application. I wonder what they have in common?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

Yep, Gascoyne = overrated garbage. As far as designing a decent F1 car is concerned, he's smoke and mirrors. There's no evidence whatsoever to prove he can actually do it.

To put the Jordan 1999 season in perspective, I think BMW's strong 2008 season results-wise stands comparison, only Jordan benefitted even more from McLaren/Ferrari n00b-ups than BMW did.

---

Over-rated yes, agreed but my whole to point to all this is that his 20 years experience is going to be an asset to a new team.

That is the question on these teams given the way they were selected.

Its not a case of whether or not they will make it (USF1 besides!) but how long will they last??

I dont think either of the selected teams will last upto 3 years either without changing ownership or just folding and I cant see USF1 making it all.

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

Over-rated yes, agreed but my whole to point to all this is that his 20 years experience is going to be an asset to a new team.

Experience isn't everything. I have cycled to school for 15 years. That doesn't mean that I'll win the Tour de France.

He's been fired by every single team he's been at. Time after time he's shown his inability to create a good car. Inability is not going to help a new team. If you're bad at something, you can't be of any help, no matter the experience you have. The experience loses its value when you're bad at something.

He may know the basics of building a car. What step comes first etc. But the car itself won't be good. If I was at the head of a new team, I'd hire a promising youngster. They're cheap and full of new ideas.

btw tony fernandez was just on 5live.

said he wants at least 1 experienced driver and hopes to be in a possition to anounce drivers possibly next week.

He has not been fired at every team.

Nick riding your bike? that is completley different lol!!!

Experience IS everything.

Let me put this to you, my old teacher was telling me her son used to be head Jordan mechanic for the rear of the car. What were his qualifications?? A degree?? No, college? Not at all. Did he even finish school? Not exactly. He turned upto 2 or 3 exams. English and Maths GCSE and the third was Science. All at C. So average. Why did he go to school, college? Well he pretty much spent all his time in a garage helping fix cars, and learning that! He persisted with jobs in motorsport, scored at Fortec for a year then straight to Jordan. I dont know where he is now because that was a few years back!! talking almost 10 years!!

Then theres another, I spoke to someone pretty high up at Rolls Royce aero engines, just talking and he said every year they get 100's of graduates and sack alot of them because though they are book-smart they lack the crucial experience, and they keep some so that they can gain that experience but most dont have a clue about even the most basic things, yet tell them to say calculate a pressure at x point in the engine and they will do it as if its turning on a light switch. He said many people work for Rolls Royce again dont have amazing qualifications but they stand out because of the experience they've had and what they can do and what they have learnt from that.

In terms of general car construction Mike will know techniques on how to speed it up, thats an example. Every new team will encounter problems, Mike with his 20 years experience will have at least an idea on how to get around these problems, perhaps in a beter way than someone with less experience. He may not be useful in a current team, but in a new team im sure he will be.

Never underestimate experience.

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

Experience isn't everything. I have cycled to school for 15 years. That doesn't mean that I'll win the Tour de France.

I LOL'D!! Gold +1

---

[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to. [www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 Central

Nickv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He may know the basics of building a car. What
> step comes first etc. But the car itself won't be
> good. If I was at the head of a new team, I'd hire
> a promising youngster. They're cheap and full of
> new ideas.

Stop talking crap. He's not an F1 leading designer (or even a leading motorsport one), but he's not completely crap. None of these cars are going to be good. They're all going to be slow and crap - it's about who's least crap.

This team have had even less time than the other new teams to prepare, so getting someone experienced is going to make the best of a bad situation. He knows the steps to take, so time won't be wasted diving down avenues only to have to go over them again at a later date. A promising youngster, while potentially being better in the long run, isn't going to have as much of a chance to get a car actually on the grid.

He's not the best designer, but that doesn't mean he's not one of the best men for the job.

A promising youngster, while potentially being better in the long run, isn't going to have as much of a chance to get a car actually on the grid.

That's what I'm aiming at, it's better for the long run. Teams are there for the longer run. I think that you could think that the first year was going to be a learning year anyway, so you could just hire a young guy and see where you end up. Yes, you probably will make mistakes that won't be made when Gascoyne is leading everything, but since the teams won't have much aims, if any at all, they can more or less afford those mistakes, throw away the first year and come better out of it when the second year starts. This could obviously be scaring away potential sponsors though.

Honestly I have no idea how long it takes to build an F1 car from scratch, so that the car may not be on the grid on time if you hire a youngster is quite a problem.

It is far more efficient to let a 'youngster' learning his stuff alongside a teacher.

This is not like say Jamies/Grosjeans posistion.

If the driver makes a mistake well thats just driving, and its better prep for next year. As for someone co-ordinating the design of an F1 car thats different. The people with the money could get very impatient very quickly and pull the plug.

With 3 new teams it is crucial to be the best of them and get a good solid first year. You dont want to get half-way through the design of the car and find something is majorly wrong. At this stage you can not go back. These are costly mistakes which could determine the future of the team. Mclaren have shown us with the best people and tools it is no easy task to get it right.

Let a youngster learn under no pressure. Besides that there will be team of people wanting answers about various aspects of the car. The last thing you need is a young indecisive person leading such a huge project.

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

Nickv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's what I'm aiming at, it's better for the
> long run. Teams are there for the longer run. I
> think that you could think that the first year was
> going to be a learning year anyway, so you could
> just hire a young guy and see where you end up.
> Yes, you probably will make mistakes that won't be
> made when Gascoyne is leading everything

I think getting a car on the grid at all with a rookie lead designer would be quite an achievement to be honest. It's very, very late to be starting a team from scratch.

You won't find me defending his track record, but in such an instance, unless there is someone better qualified out there with past experience of leading a design team (and plenty of it), then he's the best guy for the job.

I highly doubt Gascoyne would accept having a younger guy around to learn from him. He'd basically be setting up the team the 1st year knowing he'd be shadowed by a younger guy to replace him. If Gascoyne goes somewhere I expect him to force a 2-year stay or 1 entire year without a backup for himself.

It is quite weird the hostility for this guy. I actually don't think that his track record actually goes in synch with his cars. There is a lot of grey area regarding what is produced. Arguably other people have made much better with less. Granted. But that is a rare few.

He hasn't exactly had the best moments in which to showcase his ability, it seems for the most of it there has always been something major in the way of a clean run. I think a lot of the 'big name' designers seem to have easy paths with little distraction. Certainly no lack of funding or micromanagement problems such as at Jordan and Toyota respectively.

Jordan had a lot of cash problems, which could obviously cause issues for his R&D department.

Tyrrell again, lack of research funding limiting design? Benetton... didn't exactly have the best of engines in the early 00's but I don't remember them being that awful.

There are a lot of factors to how a car is designed and how it performs - you could have the most amazing car design, unflawed, but without the rest of the components, driver combination, management etc, you will never see its full potential. For all we know, the 1995 Footwork or the 1990 Leyton House could have been the greatest most successful cars... if they had different drivers/engines/gearboxes...

A lot of ifs and buts.

So looking at a raw car design, how exactly, and how to prove, if it is a 'good design' or not - in its purest design form?

Without tyres, gearboxes, engines, radiators blah blah it is just a shell.

Nobody has and nobody can test that. Too many additional variables. So to say Mr Gas has a poor track record IS rather harsh and needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Yes he has been sacked a lot, but who are we to know why exactly? I can point out more reasons for him LIKELY to have failed than reasons that have actually been released by his ex teams. That speaks volumes to me.

And he came across as a decent chappie when he commentated earlier for the BBC for a short stint.


Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it

Regarding him getting sacked it could just be down to cost/benefit. After the team realize the mistake and tried reestructuring his contract he could have said "no, that's unacceptable" and left with an early termination fee paid.

do we have any quotes or articles of teams criticising Mike specifically at all? I can't remember many...


Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it

Ive been doing a little digging over the last few days to try and figure out what is exactly wrong with him.

All ive found is:

[www.flagworld.com]

[www.rugby-forums.com]

[www.autoevolution.com]

[www.paddocktalk.com]

[news.bbc.co.uk] - suggests they agreed to part ways. His disagreements with Toyota were known to all. Was he the 'loud mouth' Willis should have been at BAR??

[v4.sportnetwork.net] - Suggests the 'gardening leave' at Renault was due because he left for Toyota. As all teams do when a key figures leaves for another team, they are placed on gardening leave.

[www.grandprix.com]

[www.crash.net]

[www.independent.co.uk]

Also, not an article but rather an opinion, so very much take it with a pinch of salt but...

When Mike joined Jordan in 98 he said the car Anderson designed was flawed, and then set to work on 99 car and it was obviously a great improvment. Then when Mike left Jordan who stepped back into the frame?? Anderson and well the results speak for themselves. But as Dan said money could have been the issue.

Turns out he was no sacked from Jordan OR Renault.

Funny that.

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

It will most notably come down to who will be the least rubbish out of the three. I'm sure none of the teams are expecting any instant results next year, and for them to think so is laughable. The first year will be about survival. Nothing more, nothing less, and then they can start to build upon that. So Mike may not be great, loved or even respected in some fields, he will have some ideas, albeit they may not be good ones, but he will have some. And his experience in previous F1 cars will play a little into his hands.

I for one, living in Norwich, am quite happy about Lotus coming back, even if it is name only. I'm not looking at it from a nostalgic aspect but more from a point where it will create new jobs. I'm sick of hearing about unemployment in the bloody EDP so this will be a good thing in my book lol.

2010 is going to be interesting though, if you split it up into three major fights. The main title protagonists between Red Bull/Brawn/McLaren and Ferrari, the midfield fight between Williams/Toyota/Force India/Renault (if they stick around) and the back of the pack fight between Manor/Campos/Team America (@#*^ Yeah!)/Torro Rosso and potentially Sauber (if they are allowed to continue competing).

I for one am looking forward to 2010, and will be looking to the season opener with great anticipation for all these wonderful battles!

Turns out he was no sacked from Jordan OR Renault.

Come on, he was as good as sacked from Renault. He was placed on gardening leave and either had to go or be told to go. His last teams are Force India and Toyota, both who sacked him for poor performances, and he even tried to take Force India to court over it. Not sure if that went anywhere, I haven't seen anything since the original release saying he was doing that.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

He took FI to court because he hadnt ran his contract and felt he needed his money (god knows why after being a millionaire anyway). It didnt go anywhere because of I think what comes down to a 'verbal contract' on clauses he did not meet.

Renault put him on gardening leave because he signed for Toyota. From what ive read the races leading upto the announcment of Toyota including the race win he did not turn up (some say because his new born baby arrived, others because the Toyota deal with them with a wheelbarrow of money had been signed).

As for Toyota they agreed to seperate partys. I assume what that means is "we will pay off your contract now go". But it was clear to everyone Mike had gripes with key figures about development paths.

No report/article mentions being sacked due to performance, Toyota and FI make it as clear as glass Mike had major disagreements with key people, and that he was difficult to work with NOT that he did not perform to expectations.

he main title protagonists between Red Bull/Brawn/McLaren and Ferrari, the midfield fight between Williams/Toyota/Force India/Renault (if they stick around) and the back of the pack fight between Manor/Campos/Team America (@#*^ Yeah!)/Torro Rosso and potentially Sauber (if they are allowed to continue competing).

I think the big question for '10 is where will Brawn,RBR and Force India be??

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

I think Brawn's package will still be a top contender, maybe not consistently for wins but consistent none-the-less, the amount of prize money, and the sponsorship that they will recieve will be enough to keep the team in development, plus the rules aren't going to change much so the Brawn car may still be up there. Red Bull on the other hand, Adrian Newey will probably fire something good out of the bag and keep them up there, provided that the Renault engine remains in the car, they will be at least third, maybe higher if they bag a better engine.

Force India I think will be a Q2 regular now. It all depends on the package in 2010, much with any of the cars. But I think McLaren and Ferrari will be back up to the top, more so if Alonso goes there. It would be very interesting to see Button/Barrichello/Hamilton/Alonso and hopefully Massa all fighting for the top spot. Kimi might go to rally soon, but if he stays to fill in for Massa if he continues to recouperate then I think it will be interesting, although it all depends now on how well the teams will do without KERs. Will Ferrari's package be better next year without it? Will McLaren struggle with their development? Will Brawn be able to keep ontop? I hope so, they've been the revelation this season, and I really like Button and Barrichello. They both deserve this after so many seasons of being overshadowed, be it with awful cars or dictating team-mates. They should still be up there given the funding and the value of the team now.

F1 is exciting again! I've loved the last three years! I've enjoyed the turmoils and the triumphs.