planetf1.com

How about Vettel, Hamilton and Alonso are all very good drivers and World Champions who all excel in differing areas.

_________________
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

I have never seen Vettel and Alonso driver around a car two seconds slower en still driving to a podium like Lewis did in 2009, if you can show it to me please do

Yeah right, do you believe it yourself ?

Believe what?

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."

Oh for god sake.

Just because Hamilton did that once, in a car that was equipped with KERS, doesn't mean he is suddenly the best driver in F1. One race does a career not make. Alonso scored a podium in 09 with a Renault that was just as bad if not worse than the McLaren at times as well. Vettel drove the race of his life in Japan 07 before he hit Webber, he was on for a podium in a STR that was no where near the front of the grid. He nearly got a podium in China that year too, from 14th on the grid. All have done miracles in average to poor cars at some stage. That is why they are great drivers, that is why they are considered the top 3.

Vettel, Alonso and Hamilton have all proved themselves to be part of F1's elite. Just accept that and move on. You are beginning to sound incredibly bitter.

_________________
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Finally. Someone mature enough to rise above the nonsense this thread has fallen into.

_________________
Forza Fernando !

Given Heikki is regarded as a rather nifty qualifier and was down the order, I'd say that LH was outperforming the car.

_________________
"Braver than a bullfighter with no knickers on!"

Give 'em hell Dani!

British Driver Supporter (and Daniel Ricciardo)

How does someone "Out perform" a car .

A car cannot suddenly be made to go faster than it is capable off. It defies physics.

There is no maximum performance of the machine that can be exceeded by changing drivers.

Remember too that throughout 2009 Lewis was getting the upgrades first so we don't know if they were identically spec'd cars.

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."

It's a figure of speech commonly used to mean that a driver is maximising the performance from a poor package. If you're going to be pedantic like that then there's no point having a discussion.

_________________
"Braver than a bullfighter with no knickers on!"

Give 'em hell Dani!

British Driver Supporter (and Daniel Ricciardo)

Alonso did nothing special that year, and the Vettel in Monza was just pure lucky after the big boys where cought by surprise by the weather

Not sure what relevance you think comparing '09 to '12 cars has cosidering rule changes, tyre changes etc

Also, you seem to just be saying that the McLaren was only 0.100 off Button's time, but that isn't the case, Hamilton was 0.100 off Buttons time, but Heikki (who i would probably regard as maybe even a better qualifier than Button) didn't even make it through to Q3, which if anything once again shows that Hamilton outperformed the car.

Also we should take into account that on average Hamilton is about 0.200 or something (maybe even more) faster than Button over a lap, as well as the fact that Button said this "We don't have the pace of the Red Bulls and the Toyotas. It's good over long runs but not in one lap." Which shows that the quali pace of the Brawn was not their actual pace so, once more the McLaren was not just 0.100 slower the Brawn.

But yeah if i just looked at the figures only, in the most myopic manner, as you are so fond of doing, then i would have probably would have come to that same conclusion as you as well.

There are quite some "experts" who believe, Hamilton can handle a not great car very well, maybe better than others
.




etc, etc.

All drivers have different strenghts, but one of Hamilton's is to drive around some problems, and get performance out of a suboptimal car, some others wouldn't

e.G. Korea 2012, IMO any other driver would have retired the car, with the broken anti roll bar& the astro turf, even the McLaren pitlane thought Lewis would not get the car home, and if he could, than far out of the points.

_________________
"Everything you can imagine is real." Pablo Picasso

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/02/04/w ... ngary-row/
Lewis reneges on a previous deal where drivers would get preference in qualifying alternatively... Dennis and Lewis then exchange words, and at the end, Alonso stops him in the pits, and stays a bit longer than was intended, which was conveyed by McLaren themselves. The exchange between Lewis and Dennis was cited as reason by stewards that Lewis was stopped in the box as a punishment and so McLaren got punished with exclusion of WCC points from that race. So unless you believe that someone in McLaren would've done something like that without an ok from Ron, when he's on the pitwall... Not only that, everytime he commented on the incident afterwards, he suggests "McLaren stopped Alonso" or, something to that effect. Or, do you presume that Ron's an idiot ( it is a scientific term, which denotes a person with low levels of intelligence) who doesn't now know whatever his team was involved in. He claimed to not know anything about spygate, till Alonso blackmailed (Ron's choice of words with this one, not mine) him.

_________________
My Top 5 drivers of all times:
1) Prost/ Schumacher
3) Fangio
4) Lauda
5) Brabham

if you don't like it, too bad! There's a reason why it says "My Top 5"

Gosh darn, i could have sworn it was Lewis crashing into Massa.

_________________
My Top 5 drivers of all times:
1) Prost/ Schumacher
3) Fangio
4) Lauda
5) Brabham

if you don't like it, too bad! There's a reason why it says "My Top 5"

I desperately needed a laugh... thanks!

_________________
My Top 5 drivers of all times:
1) Prost/ Schumacher
3) Fangio
4) Lauda
5) Brabham

if you don't like it, too bad! There's a reason why it says "My Top 5"

Lewis didn't drive a car that was two seconds down on pace to the podium on merit, if you are still referring to Hungary that car was essentially a B version of the car and had an ass load of updates. It definitely was not "2 seconds slower" then OR the race before in Germany.
http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/ ... 4/675.html

Hamilton was actually making calls to get the car scrapped after the British GP, hence the MP4-24 "B" came along.

If Australia is what you are trying to get at, then yeah he drove well, but he was also lucky enough to have most of the point scoring cars DNF. If that was Alonso or Vettel, you would be saying he just got lucky.

Wasn't the penalty imposed on Alonso for he himself blocking Hamilton in the pits and McLaren also got penalised WDC points for lieing to the stewards in order that Alonso didn't get penalsed?

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

Current Standing: 14th Position

Perhaps substantially was a slight overstatement but there definitely is a clear difference; On average (taking into account sessions where one car had problems, didn't set a lap etc.) the '08 STR (after they received the new model in Monaco, before that Vettel and Bourdais were real backmarkers, always qualifying around the 17th mark) was 0.864 slower than the fastest Q1/Q2 time (Q3 is discounted since, back then, it was done on varying fuel loads). On the other hand, up until Germany, and their big upgrade package, the '09 Mclaren was an average of 1.107 off the fastest Q1/Q2 time. A quarter of a second is a lot of time in Formula One. It's also worth considering the fact that the STR average gap is increased due to a rather mediocre Seb Bourdais being in one of the cars while the Mclaren had arguably the best qualifier of his generation in one car and, in the other, a man renowned for his quali pace. If you discount Bourdais's times then the STR is only, on average, 0.587 off the ultimate lap pace while, if we only look at Hamilton's times, he is an average of 1.146 off of it. I don't think anyone would argue that Vettel is over half a second quicker than Hamilton on a flying lap so, clearly, the STR was most definitely a better car

Anyway, laugh away...

_________________
"Braver than a bullfighter with no knickers on!"

Give 'em hell Dani!

British Driver Supporter (and Daniel Ricciardo)

The criticism of Alonso for 2007 is mostly for his childish, petulant behaviour off the track (and in the Hungaroring pitlane) rather than for his involvement in the spying scandal.[/quote]
Psst. It was Ron who ok'd Alonso holding Lewis, which was in order to honour pre-race agreement between the two drivers which Lewis reneged on.[/quote] really? [/quote]
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/02/04/w ... ngary-row/
Lewis reneges on a previous deal where drivers would get preference in qualifying alternatively... Dennis and Lewis then exchange words, and at the end, Alonso stops him in the pits, and stays a bit longer than was intended, which was conveyed by McLaren themselves. The exchange between Lewis and Dennis was cited as reason by stewards that Lewis was stopped in the box as a punishment and so McLaren got punished with exclusion of WCC points from that race. So unless you believe that someone in McLaren would've done something like that without an ok from Ron, when he's on the pitwall... Not only that, everytime he commented on the incident afterwards, he suggests "McLaren stopped Alonso" or, something to that effect. Or, do you presume that Ron's an idiot ( it is a scientific term, which denotes a person with low levels of intelligence) who doesn't now know whatever his team was involved in. He claimed to not know anything about spygate, till Alonso blackmailed (Ron's choice of words with this one, not mine) him.[/quote]
Wasn't the penalty imposed on Alonso for he himself blocking Hamilton in the pits and McLaren also got penalised WDC points for lieing to the stewards in order that Alonso didn't get penalsed?[/quote]

Yep, and it was clear on live tele that Ron was fuming when he pulled Alonsos mechanics headphones off, still, don't let this simple fact get in the way of Alonso fans making out it wasn't his fault but an instruction from Ron, which is absolutely laughable.

_________________

told

That is exactly how I feel, yet some posters feel the need to diminish and play down all 3 of them even though they are clearly excellent drivers and have all shown class and have driven some superb and dominating drives.

Also VettelMessi, days are gone when drivers are labelled as car breakers and cause there own mechanical failures. I could easily say the same for your boy in 2010, was it he who was breaking the car in the early stages causing all them DNFs? No.. so don't try and pin the blame of mechanical failure on Hamilton.

I'm beginning to think you've only watched the season review for 2012 as well anyway going off your knowledge of this year.

_________________
Vodafone Mclaren Mercedes

The relevance is perspective. In Bahrain '09 the McLaren was closer to the front runners than the McLaren in'12.

Different rules tyres etc doesn't come into it Because I'm not on about total lap times but the difference between the cars. If you remove the 3 backmarkers not racing in 2009 the fastest lap difference between the front and rear of the field was around 2 seconds in both years. So the spread remained pretty much the same.

If the lap time difference in one year is 1 second and in the next is 2 seconds then the latter car is comparably slower. As is the case here.


As for the quali times not being Brawns real pace thats why I also included fastest laps in my post.

Incase you missed them
2009 fastest laps
1 9 Jarno Trulli Toyota 1:34.556
3 22 Jenson Button 1:34.588
6 1 Lewis Hamilton 1:34.915
Difference of 0.359 Between Lewis and fastest lap

2012 fastest laps.
1 1 Sebastian Vettel 1:36.379
7 4 Lewis Hamilton 1:37.733
difference of 1.354

Hence why I say the McLaren in '09 wasn't the whole 2 seconds off the pace it is claimed. Around Bahrain the MP24-27 was closer to the 2 seconds a lap slower than the MP4-24. So the MP4-27 was comparably slower to the front runners than the 24.

Heikki also wasn't getting the upgrades at the same time as Lewis. I showed that earlier in the thread so the likely hood is he was on a different older spec car is high and therefore not a decent comparison to show how fast Lewis car should have been. Or how much he was "Out performing it"

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."

+1

_________________
Driver Instructor & Test Driver

Assuming the data above is accurate, even that data suggests that Vettel is much better. The "allegedly" best qualifier was slower than his teammate and Vettel was much faster:

"The '09 Mclaren was an average of 1.107 off the fastest Q1/Q2 time."
"if we only look at Hamilton's times, he is average of 1.146 off of it."

These two data together indicate Hamilton was just a bit slower than his teammate on the average ( Lewis's results alone was worse than the McLaren average)

On the other hand
"the '08 STR .... was 0.864 slower than the fastest Q1/Q2 time"
"If you discount Bourdais's times then the STR is only, on average, 0.587 off the ultimate lap pace while"
This also tells that Vettel was a lot faster than Bourdais. To have "Vettel only" results have an impact of 3 tenths (0.864 vs 0.587) Vettel should be about 6 tenths faster than Bourdais on the average.

You've completely missed the point though, yes Heikki was, on average, closer to the ultimate lap than Lewis (it is skewed slightly by one awful weekend for Lewis at Silverstone) but that's not what I'm arguing. I am saying that the '08 STR was closer to the front than the '09 Mclaren. Which it was. Even if we just look at Bourdais's data (who was, let's be honest, awful), he was still, on average, closer to the front than Hamilton. Are you going to argue that Bourdais is a better qualifier than Hamilton?

_________________
"Braver than a bullfighter with no knickers on!"

Give 'em hell Dani!

British Driver Supporter (and Daniel Ricciardo)

No, and I have never understood how people came up with such an explanation for McLaren's penalty, when all they had to do was to read what the stewards said.

McLaren was penalised because the stewards decided that they had no need to keep Hamilton waiting for 20 secs on the pits, and then Alonso was penalised because of the following ten secs Hamilton had to wait.

Alonso was penalised for impeading his team mate Morgana. McLaren were punished for the way they handled the whole thing and brining the sport into disrepute. Everyone knows that much.

_________________
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Indeed, Dennis was fuming, but as we all know he had just had a radio exchange with Hamilton in which they exchanged what could be mildly described as "a few harsh words" - to the point that McLaren felt forced to issue an statement denying that Hamilton had used the f-word in that conversation.

So instead of blaming others for not letting facts get in their way, please review the facts yourself.

As for why McLaren was penalised, again have a look at my post above and review the facts.

The full stewards report:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/61373

Again, this is the full decision by the stewards:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/61373

"The explanation given by Alonso as to why at the expiration of the 20 second period he remained in his pit stop position for a further 10 seconds is not accepted. The Stewards find that he unnecessarily impeded another driver, Hamilton, and as a result he will be penalised by a loss of 5 grid positions.

The explanation given by the team as to why they kept Alonso stationary for 20 seconds after completion of his tyre change and therefore delayed Hamilton's own pit stop is not accepted.

The actions of the team in the final minutes of Qualifying are considered prejudicial to the interests of the competition and to the interests of motor sport generally. The penalty to be applied is that such points (if any) in the 2007 Formula One Constructors Championship as accrue to the team as a result of their participation in the 2007 Hungarian Grand Prix wilt be withdrawn."

We all know why they were penalised Morgana. Regardless of what that report says. The FIA were livid with both Alonso and Dennis that weekend for good reasons.

_________________
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

We know zilch, Laura, other than what the report says, because as far as I know we were never given the benefit to look at the transcription of the team radio exchanges. Now, if we are to disregard official communications and to go with what we believe, then we are free to pick wichever version suits us - including the one that states that FIA overruled stewads after they had approved of Alonso's pole position:
"FIA overruled stewards and determined that the two-time defending Formula One champion and his McLaren team had delayed teammate Lewis Hamilton during a pit stop and denied him a chance to make another qualifying run.
(....)
The stewards went ahead and sanctioned the qualifying placings — with Alonso first and Hamilton second — but one hour later FIA issued a statement overturning the results and penalizing Alonso.

FIA's statement said that McLaren kept Alonso stationary for 20 seconds after the completion of a tire change and "therefore delayed Hamilton's own pit stop."

Edit: sorry, the link to the quote was missing - here it is http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/m ... ying_N.htm

In any case, please note that what I am disputing is that McLaren was penalised for covering up for Alonso: as per the stewards statement, they were penalised because of the first 20 secs of Hamilton's delay. I am fine with your statement that FIA was not happy with either Alonso or Dennis (the team).

No, I did not miss your point but just made another one with the data I.e that Lewis was just a little bit slower than his teammate while Vettel was about 6 tenths faster than his...
Vettel +0.587
Bourdais + 1.141 (based on 0.864 average)

Heiki + 1.068 (based on 1.107 average)
Lewis + 1.146
On average Heiki, Lewis and Bourdais (almost same average as Lewis) hand the cars were about 1.1 second slower than best times and on Vettel's hand the difference was 6 tenths compared to best times.

Secondly, on overall season performance 2008 Torro Rosso was 6th placed car in WCC while McLaren 2009 was the 3rd in WCC!!! You have picked the Torro Rosso better 2008 period (Monaco onward) vs McLaren's worst 2009 period (pre Germany) for the comparison.

Yeah, this man was so noble, that's why he is right in berating Alonso.
The sole championship Scheckter won was when Villeneuve was told to stay behind him by Ferrari. If Villeneuve had gone ahead, he would've been champion.

It's different from Massa helping Raikkonen in 2007, BTW, because in 2007 Massa was out of the fight. In 1979, both drivers were in the fight, Villeneuve was winning and was going to be crowned champion, not Scheckter, but Ferrari decided who should be champion, not Jody's superior driving. So, I find it pretty funny of a politically-decided champion commenting on Alonso's politics in 2007.

Look how Ferrari ordered Gilles Villeneuve to play No.2 to allow Scheckter win his one and only title.

(I may be a bit late reading this story but...)
I can't believe Jody Scheckter came out with this. His problem with Alonso is more or less that Alonso hit back when he wasn't given No.1 status. Scheckter himself relied on No.1 status to claim the 1979 WDC. Absolute hypocrite.

_________________
"I am a believer, but I start each Grand Prix with 195 liters of fuel behind me," he explains. "I don't rely entirely on God, I rely on Prost."

i guess Mclaren admitting to having Ferrari info is not proof enough for you that they are not claiming innocent...they just didn't want Alonso rambling on in the future,good business

so how exactly is Scheckter being a hypocrite? did he say anything about disliking the fact that Alonso is #1? he said his problem with Alonso has to do with his involvement in the spy scandal.
what has that got to do with Ferrari and #1 status?

again what has that got to do with anything? Scheckter's comments seem to be about Alonso selling Mclaren down the river,it has nothing to do with Ferrari driver status so why do people bring that up except for the fact that they are mad that someone isn't worshipping the ground that Alonso walks on?

i hate comments like these,it's why people say Hamilton fans are childish because it's full of rubbish like this,Alonso just like Hamilton drove the wheels of his Renault when he could,i remember Silverstone watching him and Lewis battle for 15th,16th place,it was the highlight of the race for me,you see two guys grabbing the car by the scruff of the neck and wringing every bit of performance out of it,sliding around the race track because that's how shitty the car was,then you have Vettel who together with his teammate and the whole crew got it bang on right on set up and gave the field a spanking thanks to pure pace and good thinking/good strategy..
i can't understand how people can keep a straight face and say ohh he did nothing.

Oh come on! Scheckter doesn't mention the spy scandal once.

It should be obvious to see he's referring to Alonso's poor reaction to not getting preferential treatment. And I find it hypocritical when it comes from a man whose 1 WDC relied on preferential treatment.

_________________
"I am a believer, but I start each Grand Prix with 195 liters of fuel behind me," he explains. "I don't rely entirely on God, I rely on Prost."