planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:38 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 1:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:54 am
Posts: 515
Zoue wrote:
From Alonso himself today:

Alonso wrote:
"We are happy with the chassis side but we are still not the best. There is still work to do - aerodynamically and mechanically - to be at the level of Mercedes and Ferrari. They are definitely ahead of everyone but we could be right behind them in terms of the chassis."


http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/10875991/fernando-alonso-believes-mclaren-car-is-right-behind-mercedes-and-ferraris

so it seems he doesn't think the chassis is poor and just as bad as the PU. But what does he know, right?


I am sorry Zoue, but is that so far away from what I have been saying all along?? The argument is, and honestly I have lost count how many times I have repeated this, that all McL issues were engine related and no chassis issues could be observed. I said that this was wrong and a percentage of the total time lost was chassis related.

Now you bring a comment made by Alonso himself where he says "we are happy with the chassis but we are not the best", :?

You now that meme where Jackie Chan has both his arms up with an expression of disbelief? I am feeling like that right now. But lets leave it at that. This has been taken far too long, I don't intend to change your opinions, I respect them. I ask for the same in return. Notice I have called nobody names here, even when some of you had made a vague attempt to even call me racist, comment that I decided to ignore. I have to say you have been at least respectful in expressing your opinion and arguments, and tried to remain neutral and put some brains behind your points, some have let their love for a driver impair their judgment.

I will leave it at this.

Regards


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 2:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3619
If you can only compare laps when both drivers are delighted with it then you'll be comparing 1 lap every three years. Seems like much the same gap as Max had to Dan who wasn't happy with the feeling in S3.

It happens.

On the updates. There was an upgrade to the intake system and a fuel upgrade from BP. Both were said to work well with Stoff reporting in FP that the intake upgrade helped him shift gears optimally for the first time.

Some confusion at the minute as to whether the upgraded intake system was on Alonso's car because of his engine problem in FP1 and it was said he was having to use an older PU. But that was for FP2 and there's been no word if it was changed again overnight for FP3 and Q. I'll keep my eyes peeled.

On the car upgrade wise there's a new front wing and revisions to floor and bargeboard. Both drivers have them.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 2:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3619
PRFAN wrote:
Zoue wrote:
From Alonso himself today:

Alonso wrote:
"We are happy with the chassis side but we are still not the best. There is still work to do - aerodynamically and mechanically - to be at the level of Mercedes and Ferrari. They are definitely ahead of everyone but we could be right behind them in terms of the chassis."


http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/10875991/fernando-alonso-believes-mclaren-car-is-right-behind-mercedes-and-ferraris

so it seems he doesn't think the chassis is poor and just as bad as the PU. But what does he know, right?


I am sorry Zoue, but is that so far away from what I have been saying all along?? The argument is, and honestly I have lost count how many times I have repeated this, that all McL issues were engine related and no chassis issues could be observed. I said that this was wrong and a percentage of the total time lost was chassis related.

Now you bring a comment made by Alonso himself where he says "we are happy with the chassis but we are not the best", :?

You now that meme where Jackie Chan has both his arms up with an expression of disbelief? I am feeling like that right now. But lets leave it at that. This has been taken far too long, I don't intend to change your opinions, I respect them. I ask for the same in return. Notice I have called nobody names here, even when some of you had made a vague attempt to even call me racist, comment that I decided to ignore. I have to say you have been at least respectful in expressing your opinion and arguments, and tried to remain neutral and put some brains behind your points, some have let their love for a driver impair their judgment.

I will leave it at this.

Regards


No-one called you racist, you were asked to explain what you meant by Kanye schooling Alonso. You ducked it which says everything.

And people were responding to your claims of no power issues, Alonso butchering corners he clearly nailed on video, only reliability was Honda's issue, no compromise d/f on the McLaren and Renault having equal power with Honda as proven by some technical boffins on a website you refused to name when asked.

Literally no-one claimed all the gap was PU related so to read you now as if you were somehow pushing against the tide and right all along is hilarious but not the daftest thing you've written in this thread.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 7:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
PRFAN wrote:
Zoue wrote:
From Alonso himself today:

Alonso wrote:
"We are happy with the chassis side but we are still not the best. There is still work to do - aerodynamically and mechanically - to be at the level of Mercedes and Ferrari. They are definitely ahead of everyone but we could be right behind them in terms of the chassis."


http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/10875991/fernando-alonso-believes-mclaren-car-is-right-behind-mercedes-and-ferraris

so it seems he doesn't think the chassis is poor and just as bad as the PU. But what does he know, right?


I am sorry Zoue, but is that so far away from what I have been saying all along?? The argument is, and honestly I have lost count how many times I have repeated this, that all McL issues were engine related and no chassis issues could be observed. I said that this was wrong and a percentage of the total time lost was chassis related.

Now you bring a comment made by Alonso himself where he says "we are happy with the chassis but we are not the best", :?

You now that meme where Jackie Chan has both his arms up with an expression of disbelief? I am feeling like that right now. But lets leave it at that. This has been taken far too long, I don't intend to change your opinions, I respect them. I ask for the same in return. Notice I have called nobody names here, even when some of you had made a vague attempt to even call me racist, comment that I decided to ignore. I have to say you have been at least respectful in expressing your opinion and arguments, and tried to remain neutral and put some brains behind your points, some have let their love for a driver impair their judgment.

I will leave it at this.

Regards

It's a million miles away from what you've been saying all along. Alonso is saying they could be right behind Ferrari and Mercedes in terms of chassis, which means the chassis is actually a pretty good one. Give them a decent PU and they'd be in Q3 every race at least. He's basically saying the chassis isn't their problem, which isn't the same as saying they don't have to develop it at all.

You're being disingenuous now by trying to make out all you've been claiming is that the McLaren isn't the very best chassis on the grid, better than Ferrari or Mercedes. If you'd simply said that, then there would have been different discussions. In fact, I'd already said to you that, given the PU deficit and the compromises McLaren have to make, it's impossible to say exactly how good the chassis is, but you've been insistent that the chassis is holding them back. No-one, AFAIAA, has ever tried to claim that McLaren has the best chassis on the grid so you're creating a bit of a strawman here.

The only way to interpret Alonso's comments above is that McLaren's problems are PU related. They have the basis of a very good chassis and with a decent PU would be challenging near the front. As to the rest of your points, Lotus49 has answered better than I so I'll leave it at that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 11:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1618
PRFAN wrote:
Zoue wrote:
From Alonso himself today:

Alonso wrote:
"We are happy with the chassis side but we are still not the best. There is still work to do - aerodynamically and mechanically - to be at the level of Mercedes and Ferrari. They are definitely ahead of everyone but we could be right behind them in terms of the chassis."


http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/10875991/fernando-alonso-believes-mclaren-car-is-right-behind-mercedes-and-ferraris

so it seems he doesn't think the chassis is poor and just as bad as the PU. But what does he know, right?


I am sorry Zoue, but is that so far away from what I have been saying all along?? The argument is, and honestly I have lost count how many times I have repeated this, that all McL issues were engine related and no chassis issues could be observed. I said that this was wrong and a percentage of the total time lost was chassis related.

Now you bring a comment made by Alonso himself where he says "we are happy with the chassis but we are not the best", :?

You now that meme where Jackie Chan has both his arms up with an expression of disbelief? I am feeling like that right now. But lets leave it at that. This has been taken far too long, I don't intend to change your opinions, I respect them. I ask for the same in return. Notice I have called nobody names here, even when some of you had made a vague attempt to even call me racist, comment that I decided to ignore. I have to say you have been at least respectful in expressing your opinion and arguments, and tried to remain neutral and put some brains behind your points, some have let their love for a driver impair their judgment.

I will leave it at this.

Regards


Alonso himself says that the chassis is good. You somehow know better than him. You provide ZERO proof of your claim.

And you expect us to believe you over Alonso?

Amazing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 3:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:54 am
Posts: 515
Herb Tarlik wrote:
PRFAN wrote:
Zoue wrote:
From Alonso himself today:

Alonso wrote:
"We are happy with the chassis side but we are still not the best. There is still work to do - aerodynamically and mechanically - to be at the level of Mercedes and Ferrari. They are definitely ahead of everyone but we could be right behind them in terms of the chassis."


http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/10875991/fernando-alonso-believes-mclaren-car-is-right-behind-mercedes-and-ferraris

so it seems he doesn't think the chassis is poor and just as bad as the PU. But what does he know, right?


I am sorry Zoue, but is that so far away from what I have been saying all along?? The argument is, and honestly I have lost count how many times I have repeated this, that all McL issues were engine related and no chassis issues could be observed. I said that this was wrong and a percentage of the total time lost was chassis related.

Now you bring a comment made by Alonso himself where he says "we are happy with the chassis but we are not the best", :?

You now that meme where Jackie Chan has both his arms up with an expression of disbelief? I am feeling like that right now. But lets leave it at that. This has been taken far too long, I don't intend to change your opinions, I respect them. I ask for the same in return. Notice I have called nobody names here, even when some of you had made a vague attempt to even call me racist, comment that I decided to ignore. I have to say you have been at least respectful in expressing your opinion and arguments, and tried to remain neutral and put some brains behind your points, some have let their love for a driver impair their judgment.

I will leave it at this.

Regards


Alonso himself says that the chassis is good. You somehow know better than him. You provide ZERO proof of your claim.

And you expect us to believe you over Alonso?

Amazing.


Herb, you have provided ZERO data yourself, you are like that kid sitting behind the crowd whenever there is an argument backing the ones you side with but provide no meaningful input, you are the one in the back shouting "yeah yeah what he said", "take that", "tell them more Jonny", "told you so" but when fairy cakes hits the fan you are the first one out. You were the one trying to imply I was racist for the Kanye comment because you had no guts to just write it, a comment made, as others have done, due to his preference in music, not in account of the color of his skin, FYI I have west African blood in me, and I have family that they are beyond black, they are purple and dark blue, I chose not to dignify your comment with a reply, but now I must. Some here I respect because they defend their opinion with passion and back up their observations with knowledge, you don't seem to have and idea of what your are talking about, but you do have hyperactive typing skills. Search Dunning Kruger effect, there you go.

I have already made my point, Zoue and others have expressed theirs and that is alright. You have a ship in your shoulder, you keep coming back (after you completely made a mockery of your self in the race thread with the AMAZING HAMILTON PASS ON A STRAIGHT WITH DRS AND BETTER TIRES) is search of some credibility when you have none. We can agree to disagree, and leave it at that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 3:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
To be blunt, the car looks fairly decent at the moment. Solidly a midfield car. The "poor Alonso" narrative is wearing thin for me. Sure he's a top driver and deserving of a top car on merit but he made his bed and he must lie in it (at least until next year). I saw him pass two Williams cars on the straight today...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 4:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9720
Location: Ireland
sandman1347 wrote:
To be blunt, the car looks fairly decent at the moment. Solidly a midfield car. The "poor Alonso" narrative is wearing thin for me. Sure he's a top driver and deserving of a top car on merit but he made his bed and he must lie in it (at least until next year). I saw him pass two Williams cars on the straight today...

That was scant consolation for what was ultimately a backmarker level of performance by McLaren. They were outclassed by Toro Rosso, Renault (one of them anyway), Haas and Sauber today

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



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
To be blunt, the car looks fairly decent at the moment. Solidly a midfield car. The "poor Alonso" narrative is wearing thin for me. Sure he's a top driver and deserving of a top car on merit but he made his bed and he must lie in it (at least until next year). I saw him pass two Williams cars on the straight today...

That was scant consolation for what was ultimately a backmarker level of performance by McLaren. They were outclassed by Toro Rosso, Renault (one of them anyway), Haas and Sauber today

It wasn't down to pace, it was down to collisions on track. Without the on-track collisions, Alonso would likely have finished well into the points (particularly with Raikkonen, Bottas and Verstappen out). Alonso had the pace to make it to Q3 in this car. I know the narrative is that he walks on water but there's actually a limit to how big of a gap can be down to the driver alone; especially in dry conditions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 4:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9720
Location: Ireland
sandman1347 wrote:
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
To be blunt, the car looks fairly decent at the moment. Solidly a midfield car. The "poor Alonso" narrative is wearing thin for me. Sure he's a top driver and deserving of a top car on merit but he made his bed and he must lie in it (at least until next year). I saw him pass two Williams cars on the straight today...

That was scant consolation for what was ultimately a backmarker level of performance by McLaren. They were outclassed by Toro Rosso, Renault (one of them anyway), Haas and Sauber today

It wasn't down to pace, it was down to collisions on track. Without the on-track collisions, Alonso would likely have finished well into the points (particularly with Raikkonen, Bottas and Verstappen out). Alonso had the pace to make it to Q3 in this car. I know the narrative is that he walks on water but there's actually a limit to how big of a gap can be down to the driver alone; especially in dry conditions.

The collision certainly affected his race but he subsequently ran well with the Toro Rosso & Haas points battle early on. The pace faded later. I don't think points were ever on the cards

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



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 1:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 11:37 pm
Posts: 608
PRFAN wrote:
-ZeroGravityToilet- wrote:
PRFAN wrote:
You are wrong in your assumption.

The information (data) is out there look it up.

We have one driver in the car, it happens to be Alonso, leaving him out of the equation is extremely biased. If you are looking at the engine, chassis performance you must look at the driver. If some think he is above that and should not be looked at. Then the whole point is lost.


Bollocks.

Two words:

Stofffel
Vandoorne

There you have another driver with which to judge MacHonda.

You are being proven wrong time and again, but I guess you won't relent, trying to win by exhaustion.


Stoffel Vandoorne, 19th, 1:22.532

“I don’t really know what happened today. Yesterday I was feeling quite comfortable and confident in the car, happy with the performance, and everything was moving in the right direction to do a bit better today. It’s a shame we weren’t able to translate that in qualifying, because I think the potential was definitely there to get into Q2. It seems like we lost a bit of performance compared to yesterday, and at the moment there’s no real explanation why. But it’s been a difficult start to the season altogether, so hopefully tomorrow we can do something better.

“Today I struggled a bit in both sessions – everything felt a little bit more difficult – and I don’t really know why as I say. We need to analyze the data tonight and see what happened and what we can do for tomorrow. It’s not been an easy start to the weekend for the team again and the most important thing is that we get on top of those issues and have some smooth running for the rest of the weekend. I don’t have any targets for tomorrow – just to run a smooth race without any issues. I think strategy will be quite important and we’ll see what’s possible.

“Fernando getting through to Q3 shows that the car is going in the right direction. We just need to makes sure we put it all together. Everyone is keeping their head down and trying to push as much as they can to improve this situation, so hopefully we can see some improvements over the next few races.”

His comments from today, will that suffice? He did not had a good day today, he does not have a clear answer himself as to why, so will you say that he was driving at his best, 100% dialed in with his car? Will you say that his performance today is a good benchmark on which to compare Alonso with? Do you consider fair to Alonso to measure his achievement to a driver that, as per his own words, was struggling? Do you make any sense? In contrast look what Alonso said....

“Today is one of those days where everything goes right and everything is meeting and exceeding expectations. I’m definitely happy, surprisingly happy, after how our weekend started yesterday, and our qualifying results so far this season."

Here is a novel idea for you, lets compare them when they are both at their best. Stoffel has a good CV before F1, but he is still a rookie dealing with a very bas situation. He has done very well IMHO, lets hope he gets his issues solved. Maybe he will have a good day and out qualify Alonso, I expect you to be fair in that case if it happens, just like you are being now!


Point re chassis vs engine being?

You make little sense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 9:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3619
sandman1347 wrote:
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
To be blunt, the car looks fairly decent at the moment. Solidly a midfield car. The "poor Alonso" narrative is wearing thin for me. Sure he's a top driver and deserving of a top car on merit but he made his bed and he must lie in it (at least until next year). I saw him pass two Williams cars on the straight today...

That was scant consolation for what was ultimately a backmarker level of performance by McLaren. They were outclassed by Toro Rosso, Renault (one of them anyway), Haas and Sauber today

It wasn't down to pace, it was down to collisions on track. Without the on-track collisions, Alonso would likely have finished well into the points (particularly with Raikkonen, Bottas and Verstappen out). Alonso had the pace to make it to Q3 in this car. I know the narrative is that he walks on water but there's actually a limit to how big of a gap can be down to the driver alone; especially in dry conditions.


Big difference between 1 lap pace and race pace though. Because of the combustion problems and not as good MGU-H their race pace is shocking, he got stuck behind Kvyat who was on old softs compared to the new on Alonso's and he couldn't make a dent.

Doesn't matter how good the car is on the twisty bits where you can't overtake if you lack so much on the straights. In qualy that doesn't matter but in the race you can't go as fast you can on the twisty bits because you're in traffic but you still get killed on the straight.

Even without the T2 fiasco he'd have dropped like a stone, even the Sauber breezed past on the straights and has far better race pace because of the strong TJI and H on the Ferrari 2016 unit.

The only cars they passed were Williams at the end on old mediums after Alonso had just pitted for new Softs and had done his fuel saving and Stoff on Palmer near the end after his fuel saving(No idea what the tyres were).

Solidly midfield on Chassis tracks in Q sounds fair enough to me but in race pace they are plum last even on favourable tracks although not all chassis tracks have 150m DRS zones so they'd do better at Monaco,Hungary and Singapore etc...

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 10:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1618
PRFAN wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
PRFAN wrote:


http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/10875991/fernando-alonso-believes-mclaren-car-is-right-behind-mercedes-and-ferraris

so it seems he doesn't think the chassis is poor and just as bad as the PU. But what does he know, right?


I am sorry Zoue, but is that so far away from what I have been saying all along?? The argument is, and honestly I have lost count how many times I have repeated this, that all McL issues were engine related and no chassis issues could be observed. I said that this was wrong and a percentage of the total time lost was chassis related.

Now you bring a comment made by Alonso himself where he says "we are happy with the chassis but we are not the best", :?

You now that meme where Jackie Chan has both his arms up with an expression of disbelief? I am feeling like that right now. But lets leave it at that. This has been taken far too long, I don't intend to change your opinions, I respect them. I ask for the same in return. Notice I have called nobody names here, even when some of you had made a vague attempt to even call me racist, comment that I decided to ignore. I have to say you have been at least respectful in expressing your opinion and arguments, and tried to remain neutral and put some brains behind your points, some have let their love for a driver impair their judgment.

I will leave it at this.

Regards


Alonso himself says that the chassis is good. You somehow know better than him. You provide ZERO proof of your claim.

And you expect us to believe you over Alonso?

Amazing.


Herb, you have provided ZERO data yourself,[/quote]

Nonsense. I and others have posted how Alonso, McLaren's chief personnel, and Honda, have ALL stated that their primary problem is the Honda engine. Further, there is nothing but positive comments regarding the chassis from these people, INCLUDING HONDA that negates these statements. Your inability to understand this does not in any way, shape, or form negate this.

PRFAN wrote:
you are like that kid sitting behind the crowd whenever there is an argument backing the ones you side with but provide no meaningful input, you are the one in the back shouting "yeah yeah what he said", "take that", "tell them more Jonny", "told you so" but when fairy cakes hits the fan you are the first one out. You were the one trying to imply I was racist for the Kanye comment because you had no guts to just write it, a comment made, as others have done, due to his preference in music, not in account of the color of his skin, FYI I have west African blood in me, and I have family that they are beyond black, they are purple and dark blue, I chose not to dignify your comment with a reply, but now I must. Some here I respect because they defend their opinion with passion and back up their observations with knowledge, you don't seem to have and idea of what your are talking about, but you do have hyperactive typing skills. Search Dunning Kruger effect, there you go.

I have already made my point, Zoue and others have expressed theirs and that is alright. You have a ship in your shoulder, you keep coming back (after you completely made a mockery of your self in the race thread with the AMAZING HAMILTON PASS ON A STRAIGHT WITH DRS AND BETTER TIRES) is search of some credibility when you have none. We can agree to disagree, and leave it at that.


Simply laughable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 12:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
To be blunt, the car looks fairly decent at the moment. Solidly a midfield car. The "poor Alonso" narrative is wearing thin for me. Sure he's a top driver and deserving of a top car on merit but he made his bed and he must lie in it (at least until next year). I saw him pass two Williams cars on the straight today...

That was scant consolation for what was ultimately a backmarker level of performance by McLaren. They were outclassed by Toro Rosso, Renault (one of them anyway), Haas and Sauber today

It wasn't down to pace, it was down to collisions on track. Without the on-track collisions, Alonso would likely have finished well into the points (particularly with Raikkonen, Bottas and Verstappen out). Alonso had the pace to make it to Q3 in this car. I know the narrative is that he walks on water but there's actually a limit to how big of a gap can be down to the driver alone; especially in dry conditions.


Big difference between 1 lap pace and race pace though. Because of the combustion problems and not as good MGU-H their race pace is shocking, he got stuck behind Kvyat who was on old softs compared to the new on Alonso's and he couldn't make a dent.

Doesn't matter how good the car is on the twisty bits where you can't overtake if you lack so much on the straights. In qualy that doesn't matter but in the race you can't go as fast you can on the twisty bits because you're in traffic but you still get killed on the straight.

Even without the T2 fiasco he'd have dropped like a stone, even the Sauber breezed past on the straights and has far better race pace because of the strong TJI and H on the Ferrari 2016 unit.

The only cars they passed were Williams at the end on old mediums after Alonso had just pitted for new Softs and had done his fuel saving and Stoff on Palmer near the end after his fuel saving(No idea what the tyres were).

Solidly midfield on Chassis tracks in Q sounds fair enough to me but in race pace they are plum last even on favourable tracks although not all chassis tracks have 150m DRS zones so they'd do better at Monaco,Hungary and Singapore etc...

So I have to disagree with you here. A big part of the problem is the way that Alonso is trying to achieve his results. In this race, for example, we saw Pascal start further back in an even slower car and finish the race in the points. He didn't do it by being a turn 1 hero and then spending the entire race losing ground from what he gained on the first lap (Alonso's go-to strategy). He did it by pulling off an alternate strategy. This is arguably the wiser approach when in inferior machinery. We've seen Sergio Perez in recent years use this approach to secure results in lesser machines.

Ultimately I don't see Alonso even trying this. He seems content to overdrive the car and generally not even finish the races while getting fans talking about how great he is for his early race heroics...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 1:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3619
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
To be blunt, the car looks fairly decent at the moment. Solidly a midfield car. The "poor Alonso" narrative is wearing thin for me. Sure he's a top driver and deserving of a top car on merit but he made his bed and he must lie in it (at least until next year). I saw him pass two Williams cars on the straight today...

That was scant consolation for what was ultimately a backmarker level of performance by McLaren. They were outclassed by Toro Rosso, Renault (one of them anyway), Haas and Sauber today

It wasn't down to pace, it was down to collisions on track. Without the on-track collisions, Alonso would likely have finished well into the points (particularly with Raikkonen, Bottas and Verstappen out). Alonso had the pace to make it to Q3 in this car. I know the narrative is that he walks on water but there's actually a limit to how big of a gap can be down to the driver alone; especially in dry conditions.


Big difference between 1 lap pace and race pace though. Because of the combustion problems and not as good MGU-H their race pace is shocking, he got stuck behind Kvyat who was on old softs compared to the new on Alonso's and he couldn't make a dent.

Doesn't matter how good the car is on the twisty bits where you can't overtake if you lack so much on the straights. In qualy that doesn't matter but in the race you can't go as fast you can on the twisty bits because you're in traffic but you still get killed on the straight.

Even without the T2 fiasco he'd have dropped like a stone, even the Sauber breezed past on the straights and has far better race pace because of the strong TJI and H on the Ferrari 2016 unit.

The only cars they passed were Williams at the end on old mediums after Alonso had just pitted for new Softs and had done his fuel saving and Stoff on Palmer near the end after his fuel saving(No idea what the tyres were).

Solidly midfield on Chassis tracks in Q sounds fair enough to me but in race pace they are plum last even on favourable tracks although not all chassis tracks have 150m DRS zones so they'd do better at Monaco,Hungary and Singapore etc...

So I have to disagree with you here. A big part of the problem is the way that Alonso is trying to achieve his results. In this race, for example, we saw Pascal start further back in an even slower car and finish the race in the points. He didn't do it by being a turn 1 hero and then spending the entire race losing ground from what he gained on the first lap (Alonso's go-to strategy). He did it by pulling off an alternate strategy. This is arguably the wiser approach when in inferior machinery. We've seen Sergio Perez in recent years use this approach to secure results in lesser machines.

Ultimately I don't see Alonso even trying this. He seems content to overdrive the car and generally not even finish the races while getting fans talking about how great he is for his early race heroics...


For a start Pascal wasn't in a slower race car, you still seem to be under the impression McLaren can replicate quali pace in the race. They don't need the MGU-H in Q and they don't have efficiency with their combustion concept not working.

I don't think Alonso needs tips on how to drive in inferior machinery but there's not much you can do when you can't defend on the straights like everyone else can and you can only overtake when on brand new softs against worn mediums.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 1:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:04 pm
Posts: 685
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
To be blunt, the car looks fairly decent at the moment. Solidly a midfield car. The "poor Alonso" narrative is wearing thin for me. Sure he's a top driver and deserving of a top car on merit but he made his bed and he must lie in it (at least until next year). I saw him pass two Williams cars on the straight today...

That was scant consolation for what was ultimately a backmarker level of performance by McLaren. They were outclassed by Toro Rosso, Renault (one of them anyway), Haas and Sauber today

It wasn't down to pace, it was down to collisions on track. Without the on-track collisions, Alonso would likely have finished well into the points (particularly with Raikkonen, Bottas and Verstappen out). Alonso had the pace to make it to Q3 in this car. I know the narrative is that he walks on water but there's actually a limit to how big of a gap can be down to the driver alone; especially in dry conditions.


Big difference between 1 lap pace and race pace though. Because of the combustion problems and not as good MGU-H their race pace is shocking, he got stuck behind Kvyat who was on old softs compared to the new on Alonso's and he couldn't make a dent.

Doesn't matter how good the car is on the twisty bits where you can't overtake if you lack so much on the straights. In qualy that doesn't matter but in the race you can't go as fast you can on the twisty bits because you're in traffic but you still get killed on the straight.

Even without the T2 fiasco he'd have dropped like a stone, even the Sauber breezed past on the straights and has far better race pace because of the strong TJI and H on the Ferrari 2016 unit.

The only cars they passed were Williams at the end on old mediums after Alonso had just pitted for new Softs and had done his fuel saving and Stoff on Palmer near the end after his fuel saving(No idea what the tyres were).

Solidly midfield on Chassis tracks in Q sounds fair enough to me but in race pace they are plum last even on favourable tracks although not all chassis tracks have 150m DRS zones so they'd do better at Monaco,Hungary and Singapore etc...

So I have to disagree with you here. A big part of the problem is the way that Alonso is trying to achieve his results. In this race, for example, we saw Pascal start further back in an even slower car and finish the race in the points. He didn't do it by being a turn 1 hero and then spending the entire race losing ground from what he gained on the first lap (Alonso's go-to strategy). He did it by pulling off an alternate strategy. This is arguably the wiser approach when in inferior machinery. We've seen Sergio Perez in recent years use this approach to secure results in lesser machines.

Ultimately I don't see Alonso even trying this. He seems content to overdrive the car and generally not even finish the races while getting fans talking about how great he is for his early race heroics...


The guy is a communication genius.. but what else could he do? He doesn't have the car to win the championship so the best solution is to "focus" on his teammate and blow him out of the water and let everyone know that he drove the best lap of his life. He needs to keep himself relevant and outshine Vettel and Hamilton at the front.

As it stands, you have more to lose driving a Ferrari or Mercedes than a McLaren for a driver of Alonso caliber. Just look at the ratings and how easy it is for him(unlike Hamilton and Vettel) to get the 10 and 9.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 3:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
Lotus49 wrote:
For a start Pascal wasn't in a slower race car, you still seem to be under the impression McLaren can replicate quali pace in the race. They don't need the MGU-H in Q and they don't have efficiency with their combustion concept not working.

I don't think Alonso needs tips on how to drive in inferior machinery but there's not much you can do when you can't defend on the straights like everyone else can and you can only overtake when on brand new softs against worn mediums.

I'll have to look into your claim that McLaren is slower in the races than Sauber. I'm really not convinced of that but I will take a look. In terms of the bolded statement; you can try to do a one-stopper instead of racing as if you're in a car that's capable of scoring on raw pace. Unfortunately nursing the tires and waiting to come good until later in the race does not make you look so spectacular unless it actually works out. These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9720
Location: Ireland
sandman1347 wrote:
These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.

:uhoh: If he did it the other way around you'd criticise him for not having good enough starts, therefore not maximising his final result

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



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 3:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.

:uhoh: If he did it the other way around you'd criticise him for not having good enough starts, therefore not maximising his final result

I'm not criticizing him. I think he's one of the greats. I'm just not convinced he is that invested in trying to score a point or two for McLaren in a car that is so far off the pace. I think his primary concern is keeping his stock high so that he can potentially make the move to a legitimate contender next year.

The car is not good enough to do much on merit but I don't see any effort to mitigate the lack of pace with alternative strategy. I just see someone driving really scrappy and aggressive as though there is nothing to lose. He's certainly had some great qualy laps and starts this year but there are no points on offer for that and we've actually seen a much younger driver in a backmarker car (Pascal) score points this season. Also guys like Perez and Ocon have been unbelievably consistent in cars that are maybe 6th-7th best on the grid. I actually think there are drivers in the middle and towards the back that have done better than Alonso this year.

Sure the car and its many gremlins are undeniably primarily to blame but I'm not seeing much in the way of adaptation or resourcefulness. His decision to sit out the Monaco GP is indicative of how invested he is IMO. His constant radio transmissions berating the car and talking himself up are about as subtle as a bull in a china shop...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 3:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3619
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
For a start Pascal wasn't in a slower race car, you still seem to be under the impression McLaren can replicate quali pace in the race. They don't need the MGU-H in Q and they don't have efficiency with their combustion concept not working.

I don't think Alonso needs tips on how to drive in inferior machinery but there's not much you can do when you can't defend on the straights like everyone else can and you can only overtake when on brand new softs against worn mediums.

I'll have to look into your claim that McLaren is slower in the races than Sauber. I'm really not convinced of that but I will take a look. In terms of the bolded statement; you can try to do a one-stopper instead of racing as if you're in a car that's capable of scoring on raw pace. Unfortunately nursing the tires and waiting to come good until later in the race does not make you look so spectacular unless it actually works out. These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.


They switched to a three stopper too early but that was their gamble and they went the wrong way, it can happen. It sounds fanciful to suggest the pit wall would decide their strategies to allow a diver to try and look good rather than do what they think will get them the best result but you're free to think what you want of course. It's not like no-one else thought 1 or 2 stoppers would be vulnerable towards the end on worn tyres.

I don't think there was any fireworks in Spain, he got unlucky in T1/2, got stuck behind RoGro so they switched to a three stopper then came out behind Sainz and Kvyat to watch Sainz get let past Kvyat leaving him stuck behind him even though Kvyat had old tires.

Then they get their inevitable fuel saving and disappearance in the middle of the race and not great pace on the mediums but at least it was reliable this time and they picked off a couple of Williams struggling with their tyres when he put on new softs and that was that.

All very meh past T2 on the first lap but they just didn't have the grunt on the straights where all the action was happening so any speed advantage over a lot of the midfield through the corners and S3 amounted to diddly squat in the race.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 4:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3619
sandman1347 wrote:
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.

:uhoh: If he did it the other way around you'd criticise him for not having good enough starts, therefore not maximising his final result

I'm not criticizing him. I think he's one of the greats. I'm just not convinced he is that invested in trying to score a point or two for McLaren in a car that is so far off the pace. I think his primary concern is keeping his stock high so that he can potentially make the move to a legitimate contender next year.

The car is not good enough to do much on merit but I don't see any effort to mitigate the lack of pace with alternative strategy. I just see someone driving really scrappy and aggressive as though there is nothing to lose. He's certainly had some great qualy laps and starts this year but there are no points on offer for that and we've actually seen a much younger driver in a backmarker car (Pascal) score points this season. Also guys like Perez and Ocon have been unbelievably consistent in cars that are maybe 6th-7th best on the grid. I actually think there are drivers in the middle and towards the back that have done better than Alonso this year.

Sure the car and its many gremlins are undeniably primarily to blame but I'm not seeing much in the way of adaptation or resourcefulness. His decision to sit out the Monaco GP is indicative of how invested he is IMO. His constant radio transmissions berating the car and talking himself up are about as subtle as a bull in a china shop...


Then you've not been watching, sorry. Here's Honda's take on what he was doing in Oz for example.
Quote:
(on Alonso driving) While defending the position from Ocon, Alonso also kept him within 1sec to let him use DRS so that Hulk who was coming behind them wouldn't overtake Ocon. It wouldve been tough to keep the position if Hulk had gone ahead of Ocon. But he didn't show any slightest opportunity. Furthermore, he was saving fuel at the same time, so that was extraordinary/inhuman driving indeed. Truly incredible.

https://sportiva.shueisha.co.jp/clm/mot ... it___f1_2/

I think people need to stop listening to what he says on the radio and assuming that is what is giving people the impression he's having a good season and look instead at what he's doing, what the car problems are he's dealing with, where his teammate is in the same car and what McHonda are saying about his performance if we're going to listen to anyone.

It's not a conspiracy or mind control via radio, he's just driving very well and these regs seem to suit his style down to the ground. Spain was meh but there's not much he could do after T1 to recover when you can't overtake or defend with a 157m DRS and a big power deficit.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 4:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.

:uhoh: If he did it the other way around you'd criticise him for not having good enough starts, therefore not maximising his final result

I'm not criticizing him. I think he's one of the greats. I'm just not convinced he is that invested in trying to score a point or two for McLaren in a car that is so far off the pace. I think his primary concern is keeping his stock high so that he can potentially make the move to a legitimate contender next year.

The car is not good enough to do much on merit but I don't see any effort to mitigate the lack of pace with alternative strategy. I just see someone driving really scrappy and aggressive as though there is nothing to lose. He's certainly had some great qualy laps and starts this year but there are no points on offer for that and we've actually seen a much younger driver in a backmarker car (Pascal) score points this season. Also guys like Perez and Ocon have been unbelievably consistent in cars that are maybe 6th-7th best on the grid. I actually think there are drivers in the middle and towards the back that have done better than Alonso this year.

Sure the car and its many gremlins are undeniably primarily to blame but I'm not seeing much in the way of adaptation or resourcefulness. His decision to sit out the Monaco GP is indicative of how invested he is IMO. His constant radio transmissions berating the car and talking himself up are about as subtle as a bull in a china shop...


Then you've not been watching, sorry. Here's Honda's take on what he was doing in Oz for example.
Quote:
(on Alonso driving) While defending the position from Ocon, Alonso also kept him within 1sec to let him use DRS so that Hulk who was coming behind them wouldn't overtake Ocon. It wouldve been tough to keep the position if Hulk had gone ahead of Ocon. But he didn't show any slightest opportunity. Furthermore, he was saving fuel at the same time, so that was extraordinary/inhuman driving indeed. Truly incredible.

https://sportiva.shueisha.co.jp/clm/mot ... it___f1_2/

I think people need to stop listening to what he says on the radio and assuming that is what is giving people the impression he's having a good season and look instead at what he's doing, what the car problems are he's dealing with, where his teammate is in the same car and what McHonda are saying about his performance if we're going to listen to anyone.

It's not a conspiracy or mind control via radio, he's just driving very well and these regs seem to suit his style down to the ground. Spain was meh but there's not much he could do after T1 to recover when you can't overtake or defend with a 157m DRS and a big power deficit.

Nah I've been watching. I think Australia was his best performance this year but he was aided by the fact that it was so difficult to overtake at that track (as evidenced by the 5 overtakes during the entire race). It's not about a conspiracy or mind control lol. It's simply about the way fans are processing what they see from him. His skill as a driver is not in any way in question here for the record. It's just that his every action is seen as Herculean in that car and he's making the most of it. I don't think Alonso is the type of person who can get excited about scoring a point here and there. I think he's all about winning a championship and he needs to put himself in position to do that before his time is up. I think that's his focus right now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 4:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1618
sandman1347 wrote:
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.

:uhoh: If he did it the other way around you'd criticise him for not having good enough starts, therefore not maximising his final result

I'm not criticizing him. I think he's one of the greats. I'm just not convinced he is that invested in trying to score a point or two for McLaren in a car that is so far off the pace. I think his primary concern is keeping his stock high so that he can potentially make the move to a legitimate contender next year.


He'd be a fool to do anything otherwise. McLaren Honda has pretty much proven themselves to be an absolute basket case of a racing team.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 4:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3619
sandman1347 wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mcdo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.

:uhoh: If he did it the other way around you'd criticise him for not having good enough starts, therefore not maximising his final result

I'm not criticizing him. I think he's one of the greats. I'm just not convinced he is that invested in trying to score a point or two for McLaren in a car that is so far off the pace. I think his primary concern is keeping his stock high so that he can potentially make the move to a legitimate contender next year.

The car is not good enough to do much on merit but I don't see any effort to mitigate the lack of pace with alternative strategy. I just see someone driving really scrappy and aggressive as though there is nothing to lose. He's certainly had some great qualy laps and starts this year but there are no points on offer for that and we've actually seen a much younger driver in a backmarker car (Pascal) score points this season. Also guys like Perez and Ocon have been unbelievably consistent in cars that are maybe 6th-7th best on the grid. I actually think there are drivers in the middle and towards the back that have done better than Alonso this year.

Sure the car and its many gremlins are undeniably primarily to blame but I'm not seeing much in the way of adaptation or resourcefulness. His decision to sit out the Monaco GP is indicative of how invested he is IMO. His constant radio transmissions berating the car and talking himself up are about as subtle as a bull in a china shop...


Then you've not been watching, sorry. Here's Honda's take on what he was doing in Oz for example.
Quote:
(on Alonso driving) While defending the position from Ocon, Alonso also kept him within 1sec to let him use DRS so that Hulk who was coming behind them wouldn't overtake Ocon. It wouldve been tough to keep the position if Hulk had gone ahead of Ocon. But he didn't show any slightest opportunity. Furthermore, he was saving fuel at the same time, so that was extraordinary/inhuman driving indeed. Truly incredible.

https://sportiva.shueisha.co.jp/clm/mot ... it___f1_2/

I think people need to stop listening to what he says on the radio and assuming that is what is giving people the impression he's having a good season and look instead at what he's doing, what the car problems are he's dealing with, where his teammate is in the same car and what McHonda are saying about his performance if we're going to listen to anyone.

It's not a conspiracy or mind control via radio, he's just driving very well and these regs seem to suit his style down to the ground. Spain was meh but there's not much he could do after T1 to recover when you can't overtake or defend with a 157m DRS and a big power deficit.

Nah I've been watching. I think Australia was his best performance this year but he was aided by the fact that it was so difficult to overtake at that track (as evidenced by the 5 overtakes during the entire race). It's not about a conspiracy or mind control lol. It's simply about the way fans are processing what they see from him. His skill as a driver is not in any way in question here for the record. It's just that his every action is seen as Herculean in that car and he's making the most of it. I don't think Alonso is the type of person who can get excited about scoring a point here and there. I think he's all about winning a championship and he needs to put himself in position to do that before his time is up. I think that's his focus right now.


I can agree with some of that but I think it's overplayed that it's because it's Alonso or the radio or what he says after the race is what's influencing people rather than what they're actually watching. We saw next to nothing in Spain in the race and the reaction is as you'd expect. Tepid at best. You see something different in Oz or Bahrain and it's appreciated and well received.

I'd only add I don't believe McHonda would allow him to put showcasing himself above scoring points in every race.

I can see why they did it for Monaco and the Indy500 because they want him to extend and Brown wants to enter McLaren in other series in the future including Indy and it's a marketing stroke of genius but the idea they'd just let him throw away results or actively help him impress other teams every race so he can leave them is some weird masochistic conspiracy nonsense for me.

A bit Kravitz-y (and not the good one with the guitar). :o

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 7:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 8:06 pm
Posts: 377
sandman1347 wrote:
I'll have to look into your claim that McLaren is slower in the races than Sauber. I'm really not convinced of that but I will take a look. In terms of the bolded statement; you can try to do a one-stopper instead of racing as if you're in a car that's capable of scoring on raw pace. Unfortunately nursing the tires and waiting to come good until later in the race does not make you look so spectacular unless it actually works out. These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.


I keep hearing that one of the Honda's biggest problems is how thirsty it is; Alonso has to spend half the race with the engine turned down to save fuel. Then, when his car is light on fuel and he puts on his last set of tires, he gets the green light to drive flat out and tries to set a fastest lap to keep himself entertained.

I assume he's also allowed to use more fuel early in the race when it's your best chance to get track position.

For average race pace just look at the final total race time... they could choose to spread out their pace more evenly, but the final result should be about the same.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 11:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:42 pm
Posts: 121
I was watching something over the weekend (can't remember if it was on TV NBCSN broadcast) or From Peter Windser youtube channel, but someone with some respect in the industry is convinced that the Chassis has bigger issues than the team will admit. I am not so sure. I am really not even sure ANYONE has any idea how good or bad the chassis is because they can't tune it for the proper aerogrip with the engine being so down on power.

It was interesting that he caught and passed the 2 williams like they were standing still and it wasn't just in the corners. It seems like sometimes we get glimpes where the honda motor does compete for a little while and then it fades away (maybe it has to do with overheating issues, worrying about reliability when pushed 100%, etc....).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
carlisimo wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I'll have to look into your claim that McLaren is slower in the races than Sauber. I'm really not convinced of that but I will take a look. In terms of the bolded statement; you can try to do a one-stopper instead of racing as if you're in a car that's capable of scoring on raw pace. Unfortunately nursing the tires and waiting to come good until later in the race does not make you look so spectacular unless it actually works out. These races where he produces fireworks early and then flames out as the race progresses seem to consistently convince people that he's the second coming.


I keep hearing that one of the Honda's biggest problems is how thirsty it is; Alonso has to spend half the race with the engine turned down to save fuel. Then, when his car is light on fuel and he puts on his last set of tires, he gets the green light to drive flat out and tries to set a fastest lap to keep himself entertained.

I assume he's also allowed to use more fuel early in the race when it's your best chance to get track position.

For average race pace just look at the final total race time... they could choose to spread out their pace more evenly, but the final result should be about the same.

I hear you but I think you're missing an important point. Staying out longer increases the chances that you will profit from a safety car or some other unexpected thing (especially with these virtual safety car periods). This is basically what enabled Pascal to have the result he had in the race. By approaching the race like everyone else, you lose out to the faster cars even if you're able to gain track position early.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 12:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3619
rodH wrote:
I was watching something over the weekend (can't remember if it was on TV NBCSN broadcast) or From Peter Windser youtube channel, but someone with some respect in the industry is convinced that the Chassis has bigger issues than the team will admit. I am not so sure. I am really not even sure ANYONE has any idea how good or bad the chassis is because they can't tune it for the proper aerogrip with the engine being so down on power.

It was interesting that he caught and passed the 2 williams like they were standing still
and it wasn't just in the corners. It seems like sometimes we get glimpes where the honda motor does compete for a little while and then it fades away (maybe it has to do with overheating issues, worrying about reliability when pushed 100%, etc....).


Traction out of the last corner. Both Williams were on 30 lap old mediums and he was on new softs at that stage so the difference early on the straight made all the difference. Also past his fuel saving stage by then.

Look during the rest of the race. DRS+New Softs and he couldn't get past a STR on old Softs without DRS. Equal tyres +DRS and he couldn't get past the Haas. But the Sauber breezed past them.

Even if he'd got lucky at the start he'd have been defenseless on that straight without DRS against the FI's but may have had a big enough gap over the rest of the midfield through the rest of the lap before we got on the straight to hold on but there was only a couple of tenths separating the midfield cars even in Q so it would have been tough in the race, especially when he had to fuel save.

Nothing went right in the race, got screwed at the start and got screwed again with the VSC, he pitted the lap before it came out and lost 13s to Kvyat and the midfield battle right there.

One to forget.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 5:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:42 pm
Posts: 121
Next big "power unit upgrade" for Honda is Canada?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 7:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3619
rodH wrote:
Next big "power unit upgrade" for Honda is Canada?


That's the last target I read yeah. Not set in stone though as it's more a case of when it's ready it will be brought in, they said they won't do it with allocation in mind but when it's ready and they're aiming for Canada.

And they'll really need it for then because the 3 after Monaco are Canada,Baku and Austria which are all power tracks.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:54 am
Posts: 515
rodH wrote:
I was watching something over the weekend (can't remember if it was on TV NBCSN broadcast) or From Peter Windser youtube channel, but someone with some respect in the industry is convinced that the Chassis has bigger issues than the team will admit. I am not so sure. I am really not even sure ANYONE has any idea how good or bad the chassis is because they can't tune it for the proper aerogrip with the engine being so down on power.

It was interesting that he caught and passed the 2 williams like they were standing still and it wasn't just in the corners. It seems like sometimes we get glimpes where the honda motor does compete for a little while and then it fades away (maybe it has to do with overheating issues, worrying about reliability when pushed 100%, etc....).


gpupdate has some comment Stoffel made about it, and I consider him more neutral on his opinions. He said something about the chassis needing some upgrades and that they expect them soon.

that "someone with some respect" might be on to something. But who knows.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 4:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4559
Location: Michigan, USA
Apparently Vandoorne - whom you just said to be neutral in his opinions - also thinks the engine is extremely down on power, saying that his hit with Massa was due to him not expecting the Brazilian to have caught him so quickly on the straight:

Asked if he wasn't expecting Massa to be alongside him, Vandoorne replied: "Yes, exactly. He was so far behind and I was using all the tools I had to be as quick as possible at the end of the straight, so for him to be there was quite embarrassing."

Full article here: http://www.racer.com/f1/item/140499-van ... ssing-pace

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #3)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 10:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1618
Exediron wrote:
Apparently Vandoorne - whom you just said to be neutral in his opinions - also thinks the engine is extremely down on power, saying that his hit with Massa was due to him not expecting the Brazilian to have caught him so quickly on the straight:

Asked if he wasn't expecting Massa to be alongside him, Vandoorne replied: "Yes, exactly. He was so far behind and I was using all the tools I had to be as quick as possible at the end of the straight, so for him to be there was quite embarrassing."

Full article here: http://www.racer.com/f1/item/140499-van ... ssing-pace


Yep. This echoes exactly Alonso's statement that he, "never raced with less power in his life". Alonso was shocked and bewildered at how cars far behind him simply ate his lunch at the end of the straights, all because he was driving THE most under powered car of his career.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 23, 2017 8:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10801
Lotus49 wrote:
mds wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Below 2015 power levels?

Could it be that they have to run the engine at such a conservative mode that it is making actually less than the 2015 unit?

Because if that is not the case then they really have no idea what they are doing. Jeez...


It's incredible if true.


I'm a bit surprised this seems to be news... IIRC it was already stated during the first test that the new PU didn't reach the power levels of the 2015 unit, and that they would need at least a couple of months to fix it.


I just thought they were talking about the version that ended the season last year to be honest when they talked about not hitting the previous version. I must have just assumed that they couldn't have failed by that much lol, more specifically the backwards step with the ERS is what's surprising me.

P.S. Since you're the guy that brought Stoff (And Max) to my attention a few years ago in the feeder series thread I think you should be the one to start his official thread off if you're up for it. :nod:


Hey Lotus49, only read this just now. It's a good idea and I will do so, I have some ideas to make a good opening post.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 1:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5873
Location: Nebraska, USA
Fernando received a couple of very nice "surprises" after his performance at the Indy 500...

1.) a pretty healthy paycheck even though he finished 24th in the final standings.... approximately $300,000 USD.
His response to this was "I have to tell the guys in Formula 1" according to German broadcaster RTL... "its a really good thing that you have here, and I think a lot of F1 drivers will be coming soon."

2.) a somewhat controversial Rookie of the Year Award and the money ($50,000 USD) that comes with it. Ed Jones, also a rookie finished 3rd, and out qualified Alonso as well. If I remember right Jones was ahead of Alonso when his engine blew as well. It is easy to make a case for either one of them obviously. Alonso led several laps and was a contender for the win, where as Jones came on late, however I suspect that Nando's pre-race and race leading performance was probably the difference maker.

All told, it could make for a tough decision by Alonso at the end of this year, as he reportedly has said that he want to be where he has a chance to win, and there well may not be such a seat available to him in F1 next year.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4559
Location: Michigan, USA
Blake wrote:
2.) a somewhat controversial Rookie of the Year Award and the money ($50,000 USD) that comes with it. Ed Jones, also a rookie finished 3rd, and out qualified Alonso as well. If I remember right Jones was ahead of Alonso when his engine blew as well. It is easy to make a case for either one of them obviously. Alonso led several laps and was a contender for the win, where as Jones came on late, however I suspect that Nando's pre-race and race leading performance was probably the difference maker.

I am somewhat sympathetic to Jones and his team, but you have to bear in mind the wording of the Rookie of the Year award:

"Selection criteria for Rookie of the Year should be based upon (a) the driver’s skill, (b) sportsmanship, (c) accessibility and conduct during the month, and (d) finishing position. Each criteria should be considered the same as any other."

I would say Jones only really has a solid argument to beat Alonso in the final category, and so if you give them equal weight (as it says you should) I think Alonso's win is fair.

PS: Jones did not out-qualify Alonso; he started 11th, with Alonso 5th. He might have set a faster time on Sunday, however - I'd have to look that up. (EDIT: He didn't - #29 231.300, #19 230.578)

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #3)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 4:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 5873
Location: Nebraska, USA
My bad on the qualifying. Personally, I have no problem with Alonso getting the award, I think he deserved it too... unfortunate for Jones though.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 5:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4559
Location: Michigan, USA
Blake wrote:
My bad on the qualifying. Personally, I have no problem with Alonso getting the award, I think he deserved it too... unfortunate for Jones though.

Yeah, agreed. Jones had a more than solid drive, and in a normal year he would probably have been rookie of the year, so I can totally understand why he feels a little snubbed when this super-driver from Europe with a huge following and all this media attention comes over and practically has his name on the trophy before he ever sets foot on the track. That must feel a little bit unfair to him, and I do understand that.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #3)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 10:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7798
Alonso gave the 500 a big media boost in Europe. I suppose that counts as a contribution to be taken into account.

I have never watched any more than highlights of indy 500 previously, but did sit through it this year and read reports on the qualifying. As a driver in isolation I don't think he deserves it, but if you consider it as services to motorsport, than its fair enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 12:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 6753
moby wrote:
Alonso gave the 500 a big media boost in Europe. I suppose that counts as a contribution to be taken into account.

I have never watched any more than highlights of indy 500 previously, but did sit through it this year and read reports on the qualifying. As a driver in isolation I don't think he deserves it, but if you consider it as services to motorsport, than its fair enough.

How so, out of interest?

I must admit I didn't follow Jones' race as close as Alonso but I thought Alonso was one of the best drivers of the day, in contention for the win in places 1-4 more or less throughout but then was screwed by the last caution. On performance alone I'd give it to Alonso, he out qualified and IMO he outraced Jones.


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: No registered users 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