Winning is not always about getting there fast it is about getting there first.
Totally agree Dean. Andretti Green racing rolled the dice and it worked out for them. Great strategy can beat out strong driving all day long. With that Rossi now has his face on the Borg-Warner trophy
What I'm commenting on is the whole discussion I'm reading all over saying that F1 missed out with not having him as a signed driver. From a f1 talent acquisition viewpoint, I wouldn't say I'm overly impressed with the win. It shows he will listen to team orders and can drive conservatively but there is nothing in that particular performance that says wow I need to sign this guy.
It's not as if he didn't have a good car, when he led, it was exchanging the lead with Newgarden. And he stayed out of trouble.
Huge risk took a lot of skill to finish that way.
I just like that every now and then we are reminded that racing is as much a thinking mans game as it is just jumping in a car and driving it as fast as the driver can.
Getting off topic a little but it is why I never found autocross all that attractive. And why I gravitated towards endurance racing. Don't get me wrong I appreciate what a truly gifted driver can do with a car. As one of the "thinkers" on a team I realize my success was dependant on having talent behind the wheel. I just get great satisfaction seeing a race won every now and then by the guy/girl on the box. That I think is why I think I really liked this race.
bmw88rider wrote: What I'm commenting on is the whole discussion I'm reading all over saying that F1 missed out with not having him as a signed driver. From a f1 talent acquisition viewpoint, I wouldn't say I'm overly impressed with the win. It shows he will listen to team orders and can drive conservatively but there is nothing in that particular performance that says wow I need to sign this guy.
It wasn't the demonstration of driving skill that will make his stock go up. It's the fact that he can now preface his name with "Indianapolis 500 winner" and the sponsorship that that will bring. Even in F1.
My impression is that if there is ANY chance of the fuel getting the car to a first place finish, the team gladly rolls the dice. That is, a risky shot at winning is vastly preferable to stopping to be sure you save fourth. I bet the sponsors agree. Perhaps I'm wrong.
chuckles wrote: My impression is that if there is ANY chance of the fuel getting the car to a first place finish, the team gladly rolls the dice. That is, a risky shot at winning is vastly preferable to stopping to be sure you save fourth. I bet the sponsors agree. Perhaps I'm wrong.
The team also had 2 cars with very good chances of winning late in the race, so to hedge their bets they took a different strategy with each car. They'd either win it with Rossi and the fuel economy gamble, or with Munoz and his strong running car after a splash and go. They gambled on one car and went conservative on the other. It also helped Rossi quite a bit that he had 2 team mates running at the back of the field that were able to provide an aero tow down the straights for a bit.
In reply to STM317:
Excellent points.
Still, I was thinking more of races I've watched over the years rather than this one (which I had to miss.)
In reply to Tom_Spangler: I agree with the stock as I recall Hulkenburgs stock went up after winning 24 hours of Le mans. Unfortunately this year his stock looks to have him set at Force India or lower team. It will be interesting on what Alex decision will be this year and next year for his career. I would like to see him stay, but can understand if he wants to pursue F1 or Sports cars in Europe.
Congrats for Rossi, it will be interesting to see if he takes more risks now that he is in the points race for the championship. Also how well will he deal with the pressure, he has a double header to follow. I also wonder if Mikey will give him the support that RHR is getting.
You'll need to log in to post.