planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Jul 31, 2014 3:36 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2013 10:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:57 am
Posts: 214
mkone wrote:
Blake wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
My opinion is that Alonso dragged a car that was fourth best into a title fight. I consider what he did in 2012 as a great drive, and made him a worthy candidate for "driver of the year". It was one of the greatest drives of all time, despite falling short in the title chase.

Vettel, despite his many skills, rarely displays the ability to be able to wrestle an uncooperative car to a finish better than the machinery. The Ferrari never topped the time sheets in a straight-up fight and never set the quickest lap. I would expect 3rd, 4th, or a 5th place in the title.


I second this post.... 3-5th in the WDC in the Ferrari. People just don't realize how good Alonso was this year...
As Mark Webber put it, ""I don't think he put a wheel wrong all year," Webber is quoted as saying by Autosport..."
"Was it his best season ever in terms of what he did? It could well be. He couldn't have done much more."

My personal belief is that, despite the respect I have for what he accomplished this year, Vettel could not have done at Ferrari what Alonso did, and that is what it is. OK, Vettel fans you can start you bashing and name calling now!
;)

edited for typo - Blake


Alonso did make errors in 2012.

I hold him responsible for Grosjean's accident in Monaco. He clearly squeezed Grosjean onto Michael Schuumacher because he went for a gap that was disappearing all the time.

He is also responsible for his DNF in Suzuka. He tried to squeeze Raikonnen who did try to give him room, but wasn't able to get out of his way without either braking for him, or going off onto the grass completely.

He also went off at least a couple of times in Brazil. Or have people forgotten that. All on his own too!

My driver of the year would have to be Kimi.


Alonso doesn't squeeze people if he sees a gap he will commit to it and try and block as much as possible. Schumacher seems as if he has a PHD in squeezing... just look what he did couple years back to Massa Canada and recently Barachello.
You seem to have forgotten it was raining in Brazil and Alonso was on slicks, Vettel had similar issues but they bought him in early. Ferrari, I do not know what in Gods world they were doing keeping him out for that long.

_________________
Scuderia Ferrari F138


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 3:03 pm
Posts: 55
Vettelmessi wrote:
i think he would of scored more points than alonso at ferrari. would be tight though. its been hard to sperate the best 2 drivers in f1 recently with title fights going down to last race 2 of the past 3 seasons. i hope these 2 drivers can battle it out for years to come still. alonso v vettel can ecipse senna v prost imo

8O


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 4438
Location: Ireland
mkone wrote:
He also went off at least a couple of times in Brazil. Or have people forgotten that. All on his own too!

My driver of the year would have to be Kimi.

Really?

_________________
"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."


#14 for '14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 4808
ScuderiaFerrari wrote:
Alonso doesn't squeeze people


He really did squeeze Kimi at Suzuka and another very notable example was Monza 2011.

Quote:
You seem to have forgotten it was raining in Brazil and Alonso was on slicks, Vettel had similar issues but they bought him in early.


Not sure how you view this. Alonso and Vettel both pitted at the end of lap 10, up until which they both were running mediums. Alonso went off in lap 5 and 10.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 11:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 10:07 pm
Posts: 668
mds wrote:
He really did squeeze Kimi at Suzuka and another very notable example was Monza 2011.

I don't know how you saw Suzuka, but that was a racing incident, not a squeeze (and by the way, I do not agree with your attempt to put the blame squarely on Alonso). As for Monza 2011, please review the analysis that the BBC (or maybe Sky, I am not totally sure) did comparing the 2012 incident with the 2011 one. Unfortunately I do not have the link, maybe somebody else can provide it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 11:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 3585
Location: Belgium
morgana wrote:
mds wrote:
He really did squeeze Kimi at Suzuka and another very notable example was Monza 2011.

I don't know how you saw Suzuka, but that was a racing incident, not a squeeze (and by the way, I do not agree with your attempt to put the blame squarely on Alonso).

In an article on Autosport.com called "Why 2012 was Alonso's best", Ed Straw writes:
Quote:
Could it be that his willingness to put a risky squeeze on Kimi Raikkonen, a misjudgement that wiped out his Ferrari at the first corner, was caused by his realisation that drastic measures were needed to stop the Vettel/Red Bull combination from overhauling him?

Since the squeeze was a double movement, I find it hard not to agree that Alonso shot himself badly in the foot in Japan.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 4808
morgana wrote:
i don't know how you saw Suzuka, but that was a racing incident that apparently you are chosing to put on Alonso's shoulders, not a squeeze.


Look, when a driver is next to you with a significant part of the car, and you move his side resulting in the fact the driver has to go off-track or lift in order not to collide, that's a squeeze.

It was a racing incident, but a squeeze nonetheless.

Quote:
As for Monza 2011, please review the analysis that the BBC (or maybe Sky, I am not totally sure) did comparing the 2012 incident with the 2011 one, concluding that in 2011 Alonso always left Vettel enough space.


Who's talking about a comparison with the 2012 incident? Alonso moved, Vettel had to move accordingly or it would have been a nice crash. That is called "squeezing".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 10:07 pm
Posts: 668
mds wrote:
morgana wrote:
i don't know how you saw Suzuka, but that was a racing incident that apparently you are chosing to put on Alonso's shoulders, not a squeeze.


Look, when a driver is next to you with a significant part of the car, and you move his side resulting in the fact the driver has to go off-track or lift in order not to collide, that's a squeeze.

It was a racing incident, but a squeeze nonetheless.

Quote:
As for Monza 2011, please review the analysis that the BBC (or maybe Sky, I am not totally sure) did comparing the 2012 incident with the 2011 one, concluding that in 2011 Alonso always left Vettel enough space.


Who's talking about a comparison with the 2012 incident? Alonso moved, Vettel had to move accordingly or it would have been a nice crash. That is called "squeezing".

Which significant part of Raikkonen's car was alongside Alonso's in Suzuka? Raikkonen's front wing touched the back of Alonso's rear tyre; for example, if I am not mistaken the current overtaking rules state that in order to gain the position a car's front wing has to be level with the other car's rear wing, which Raikkonen's wasn't. This video is far from great, but at 0:10 you can see the moment in which Raikkonen's car raises dust from tocuhing the dirt - please check the position vs Alonso's car https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvnlrK6bfRs That is why I call it a racing incident, but not a squeeze, and why I disagree with your opinion that Alonso is to blame for this incident.

As fro Monza 2011, the analysis I mentioned shows how Vettel always had enough room for his car, something that he did not leave Alonso in 2012. That is why I think the second one is a squeeze, while the first one isn't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 6166
morgana wrote:
mds wrote:
morgana wrote:
i don't know how you saw Suzuka, but that was a racing incident that apparently you are chosing to put on Alonso's shoulders, not a squeeze.


Look, when a driver is next to you with a significant part of the car, and you move his side resulting in the fact the driver has to go off-track or lift in order not to collide, that's a squeeze.

It was a racing incident, but a squeeze nonetheless.

Quote:
As for Monza 2011, please review the analysis that the BBC (or maybe Sky, I am not totally sure) did comparing the 2012 incident with the 2011 one, concluding that in 2011 Alonso always left Vettel enough space.


Who's talking about a comparison with the 2012 incident? Alonso moved, Vettel had to move accordingly or it would have been a nice crash. That is called "squeezing".

Which significant part of Raikkonen's car was alongside Alonso's in Suzuka? Raikkonen's front wing touched the back of Alonso's rear tyre; for example, if I am not mistaken the current overtaking rules state that in order to gain the position a car's front wing has to be level with the other car's rear wing, which Raikkonen's wasn't. This video is far from great, but at 0:10 you can see the moment in which Raikkonen's car raises dust from tocuhing the dirt - please check the position vs Alonso's car https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvnlrK6bfRs That is why I call it a racing incident, but not a squeeze, and why I disagree with your opinion that Alonso is to blame for this incident.

As fro Monza 2011, the analysis I mentioned shows how Vettel always had enough room for his car, something that he did not leave Alonso in 2012. That is why I think the second one is a squeeze, while the first one isn't.

I believe the rules state that if any portion of the overtaking car is alongside then it must be given racing room, Kimi drove off the track because Alonso forced him off the track

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 2nd


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:06 am
Posts: 2325
RunningMan wrote:
Depends on how he got on with the team. Alonso has a really good relationship with the team and as a result, it makes the task abit easier, knowing you have a good team behind you.

I don't think Vettel would have been that far off. I don't think talent wise, there's that much difference between the two. Certainly not enough to produce a massive difference in points. On top of that, I don't think Alonso made that many driving mistakes that costed him that many points. Maybe a difference of 5 points.

I think they would fair very similarly. Vettel won't be a million miles away like some would like to believe.


Agreed.
Hamilton imo would be close to Fernando as well, and Kimi if he is as fast as he was before retiring in 2009.

_________________
http://grandprixratings.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:06 am
Posts: 2325
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
My opinion is that Alonso dragged a car that was fourth best into a title fight. I consider what he did in 2012 as a great drive, and made him a worthy candidate for "driver of the year". It was one of the greatest drives of all time, despite falling short in the title chase.

Vettel, despite his many skills, rarely displays the ability to be able to wrestle an uncooperative car to a finish better than the machinery. The Ferrari never topped the time sheets in a straight-up fight and never set the quickest lap. I would expect 3rd, 4th, or a 5th place in the title.


So right about Alonso's performances in the Ferrari!

Alonso's average grid position was 6.1, Vettel's 5.1 and Hamilton's 4.3.
Alonso's average race-finishing position was 3.2, Vettel's 3.3 and Hamilton's 5.5.

It is clear that the Ferrari was inferior in single-lap speed, therefore started further back on the grids. YET Alonso finished higher than the other two! His starts have become legendary, and the number of overtakes he managed, with no major errors.

Imo Alonso must rank up with any of the greatest drivers. The opposition Fernando faced from Schumacher, Raikkonen, Hamilton and Vettel has been at least as competitive as that of Senna and Prost: Piquet, Mansell, Berger and the young Michael S.

_________________
http://grandprixratings.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:16 am
Posts: 1006
POBRatings wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
My opinion is that Alonso dragged a car that was fourth best into a title fight. I consider what he did in 2012 as a great drive, and made him a worthy candidate for "driver of the year". It was one of the greatest drives of all time, despite falling short in the title chase.

Vettel, despite his many skills, rarely displays the ability to be able to wrestle an uncooperative car to a finish better than the machinery. The Ferrari never topped the time sheets in a straight-up fight and never set the quickest lap. I would expect 3rd, 4th, or a 5th place in the title.


So right about Alonso's performances in the Ferrari!

Alonso's average grid position was 6.1, Vettel's 5.1 and Hamilton's 4.3.
Alonso's average race-finishing position was 3.2, Vettel's 3.3 and Hamilton's 5.5.

It is clear that the Ferrari was inferior in single-lap speed, therefore started further back on the grids. YET Alonso finished higher than the other two! His starts have become legendary, and the number of overtakes he managed, with no major errors.

Imo Alonso must rank up with any of the greatest drivers. The opposition Fernando faced from Schumacher, Raikkonen, Hamilton and Vettel has been at least as competitive as that of Senna and Prost: Piquet, Mansell, Berger and the young Michael S.


:thumbup: :thumbup:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 10:07 pm
Posts: 668
pokerman wrote:
morgana wrote:
Which significant part of Raikkonen's car was alongside Alonso's in Suzuka? Raikkonen's front wing touched the back of Alonso's rear tyre; for example, if I am not mistaken the current overtaking rules state that in order to gain the position a car's front wing has to be level with the other car's rear wing, which Raikkonen's wasn't. This video is far from great, but at 0:10 you can see the moment in which Raikkonen's car raises dust from tocuhing the dirt - please check the position vs Alonso's car https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvnlrK6bfRs That is why I call it a racing incident, but not a squeeze, and why I disagree with your opinion that Alonso is to blame for this incident.

As fro Monza 2011, the analysis I mentioned shows how Vettel always had enough room for his car, something that he did not leave Alonso in 2012. That is why I think the second one is a squeeze, while the first one isn't.

I believe the rules state that if any portion of the overtaking car is alongside then it must be given racing room, Kimi drove off the track because Alonso forced him off the track

I don't think so:
"Thanks to Charlie Whiting who sent a letter to every team.

"any driver defending his position on a straight and before any braking area may use the full width of the track during his first move provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason."

To further clarify the situation he later added: "For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a 'significant portion'."

Autosport.com"

http://www.racedepartment.com/forum/thr ... ers.53470/

As I said, since I understand that Raikkonen's front wing hit Alonso's tyre from behind I don't think it can be said that the front wing was alongside the rear wheel. I said level with the other car's rear wing, but I think that we can agree that in order to be at least alongside the rear wheel the front wing has to be at least level with the rear wing?

Edit: I have realised that we are going off topic here. Shall we move this discussion to another thread? We may even consider opening a thread in the in-depth section to discuss how the overtaking rule was/should have been interpreted in this and other overtakes - I am sure there will be plenty of incidents in the future that will lead to the same discussion, it may be helpful to have all of them together in one discussion thread.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 5156
If one had to pick one, I think the majority would put the blame on Alonso rather than on Kimi. But really it was a racing incident.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Rosberg - Bottas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 4808
morgana wrote:
As I said, since I understand that Raikkonen's front wing hit Alonso's tyre from behind I don't think it can be said that the front wing was alongside the rear wheel.


Raikkonens front wing clipped Alonso's tyre on re-entry of the track. By then Raikkonen had lost some terrain with regards to Alonso.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZoESZe0mCs => at around :32 and onwards it's pretty clear they were actually (front) wheel to (rear) wheel.

edit: also:
Quote:
As fro Monza 2011, the analysis I mentioned shows how Vettel always had enough room for his car, something that he did not leave Alonso in 2012.


Yup, Vettel drives two wheels off-track just for fun :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPnQC3eEYqg => pause at :07.

Image

For me, that's a squeeze. If it isn't for you, well, clearly we have different definitions for squeezing and we can stop discussing it.


Last edited by mds on Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:48 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 6166
morgana wrote:
pokerman wrote:
morgana wrote:
Which significant part of Raikkonen's car was alongside Alonso's in Suzuka? Raikkonen's front wing touched the back of Alonso's rear tyre; for example, if I am not mistaken the current overtaking rules state that in order to gain the position a car's front wing has to be level with the other car's rear wing, which Raikkonen's wasn't. This video is far from great, but at 0:10 you can see the moment in which Raikkonen's car raises dust from tocuhing the dirt - please check the position vs Alonso's car https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvnlrK6bfRs That is why I call it a racing incident, but not a squeeze, and why I disagree with your opinion that Alonso is to blame for this incident.

As fro Monza 2011, the analysis I mentioned shows how Vettel always had enough room for his car, something that he did not leave Alonso in 2012. That is why I think the second one is a squeeze, while the first one isn't.

I believe the rules state that if any portion of the overtaking car is alongside then it must be given racing room, Kimi drove off the track because Alonso forced him off the track

I don't think so:
"Thanks to Charlie Whiting who sent a letter to every team.

"any driver defending his position on a straight and before any braking area may use the full width of the track during his first move provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason."

To further clarify the situation he later added: "For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a 'significant portion'."

Autosport.com"

http://www.racedepartment.com/forum/thr ... ers.53470/

As I said, since I understand that Raikkonen's front wing hit Alonso's tyre from behind I don't think it can be said that the front wing was alongside the rear wheel. I said level with the other car's rear wing, but I think that we can agree that in order to be at least alongside the rear wheel the front wing has to be at least level with the rear wing?

Edit: I have realised that we are going off topic here. Shall we move this discussion to another thread? We may even consider opening a thread in the in-depth section to discuss how the overtaking rule was/should have been interpreted in this and other overtakes - I am sure there will be plenty of incidents in the future that will lead to the same discussion, it may be helpful to have all of them together in one discussion thread.

Just one last point then, i'm referring to the intial move by Alonso when Kimi's car was partially alongside which forced him off the track not when the contact was made when Kimi was trying to get back onto the track

_________________
PFI Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place

2014: Currently 2nd


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 4438
Location: Ireland
mds wrote:
morgana wrote:
As I said, since I understand that Raikkonen's front wing hit Alonso's tyre from behind I don't think it can be said that the front wing was alongside the rear wheel.


Raikkonens front wing clipped Alonso's tyre on re-entry of the track. By then Raikkonen had lost some terrain with regards to Alonso.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZoESZe0mCs => at around :32 and onwards it's pretty clear they were actually (front) wheel to (rear) wheel.

edit: also:
Quote:
As fro Monza 2011, the analysis I mentioned shows how Vettel always had enough room for his car, something that he did not leave Alonso in 2012.


Yup, Vettel drives two wheels off-track just for fun :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPnQC3eEYqg => pause at :07.

Image

For me, that's a squeeze. If it isn't for you, well, clearly we have different definitions for squeezing and we can stop discussing it.

I dunno what you're looking at but I can see a clear gap between the cars that Vettel has opted not to use.

_________________
"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."


#14 for '14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 4808
Keep in mind Alonso had been moving left, forcing Vettel to react promptly, take another arc and thus being forced off-track with two wheels. For me that right there is a clear squeeze.

At least we're not discussing the Raikkonen squeeze anymore. So that whole "Alonso doesn't squeeze" thing can be thrown in the bin.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 4438
Location: Ireland
mds wrote:
Keep in mind Alonso had been moving left, forcing Vettel to react promptly, take another arc and thus being forced off-track with two wheels. For me that right there is a clear squeeze.

At least we're not discussing the Raikkonen squeeze anymore. So that whole "Alonso doesn't squeeze" thing can be thrown in the bin.

Oh let it go. Anthony Davidson debunked your theory in the most public way possible.

Suzuka was a racing incident but if blame had to be placed on someone it would have to be Alonso. He reacted poorly to Button moving in on his right.

The only thing that bugged me about that entire scenario was that Alonso shouldn't even have been there! If Raikkonen hadn't spun in qualifying, Alonso wouldn't have been near him on the grid, wouldn't have touched him off the start, would've collected a handful of points and won the WDC... :(

_________________
"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."


#14 for '14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:48 pm
Posts: 1329
mcdo wrote:
mds wrote:
morgana wrote:
As I said, since I understand that Raikkonen's front wing hit Alonso's tyre from behind I don't think it can be said that the front wing was alongside the rear wheel.


Raikkonens front wing clipped Alonso's tyre on re-entry of the track. By then Raikkonen had lost some terrain with regards to Alonso.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZoESZe0mCs => at around :32 and onwards it's pretty clear they were actually (front) wheel to (rear) wheel.

edit: also:
Quote:
As fro Monza 2011, the analysis I mentioned shows how Vettel always had enough room for his car, something that he did not leave Alonso in 2012.


Yup, Vettel drives two wheels off-track just for fun :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPnQC3eEYqg => pause at :07.

Image

For me, that's a squeeze. If it isn't for you, well, clearly we have different definitions for squeezing and we can stop discussing it.

I dunno what you're looking at but I can see a clear gap between the cars that Vettel has opted not to use.


also don't forget the rule was different that year


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 3585
Location: Belgium
mcdo wrote:
mds wrote:
Keep in mind Alonso had been moving left, forcing Vettel to react promptly, take another arc and thus being forced off-track with two wheels. For me that right there is a clear squeeze.

At least we're not discussing the Raikkonen squeeze anymore. So that whole "Alonso doesn't squeeze" thing can be thrown in the bin.

Oh let it go. Anthony Davidson debunked your theory in the most public way possible.

Suzuka was a racing incident but if blame had to be placed on someone it would have to be Alonso. He reacted poorly to Button moving in on his right.

The only thing that bugged me about that entire scenario was that Alonso shouldn't even have been there! If Raikkonen hadn't spun in qualifying, Alonso wouldn't have been near him on the grid, wouldn't have touched him off the start, would've collected a handful of points and won the WDC... :(
Whereas you are right about different starting positions and possibly different outcomes of the start, the fact is that Alonso went left to block off Räikkönen, and came too late to do so. During an interview afterwards, he said he didn't understand why Kimi didn't lift. I don't think there's a better indication that Alonso squeezed on purpose, and caused his own DNF.
Also; if Räikkönen hadn't spun, he might well have ended up closer to Alonso than Alonso might have wished.

Again from Autosport, this time from the race report:
Quote:
Alonso remained fairly sanguine about what could have been a mortal blow to his championship bid. His start wasn't fantastic and Button and Kimi Raikkonen went either side of him. Although Alonso certainly didn't make any dramatic moves, neither did he leave sufficient space for the faster-moving Lotus on the outside. They banged wheels twice, and that did enough damage to send Alonso spinning into retirement.


Vettel versus Alonso at Monza was "debunked" by Davidson? I remember discussing that phase here on the forum, and I can't recall having been convinced by what he showed.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 4438
Location: Ireland
Fiki wrote:
mcdo wrote:
mds wrote:
Keep in mind Alonso had been moving left, forcing Vettel to react promptly, take another arc and thus being forced off-track with two wheels. For me that right there is a clear squeeze.

At least we're not discussing the Raikkonen squeeze anymore. So that whole "Alonso doesn't squeeze" thing can be thrown in the bin.

Oh let it go. Anthony Davidson debunked your theory in the most public way possible.

Suzuka was a racing incident but if blame had to be placed on someone it would have to be Alonso. He reacted poorly to Button moving in on his right.

The only thing that bugged me about that entire scenario was that Alonso shouldn't even have been there! If Raikkonen hadn't spun in qualifying, Alonso wouldn't have been near him on the grid, wouldn't have touched him off the start, would've collected a handful of points and won the WDC... :(
Whereas you are right about different starting positions and possibly different outcomes of the start, the fact is that Alonso went left to block off Räikkönen, and came too late to do so. During an interview afterwards, he said he didn't understand why Kimi didn't lift. I don't think there's a better indication that Alonso squeezed on purpose, and caused his own DNF.
Also; if Räikkönen hadn't spun, he might well have ended up closer to Alonso than Alonso might have wished.

Again from Autosport, this time from the race report:
Quote:
Alonso remained fairly sanguine about what could have been a mortal blow to his championship bid. His start wasn't fantastic and Button and Kimi Raikkonen went either side of him. Although Alonso certainly didn't make any dramatic moves, neither did he leave sufficient space for the faster-moving Lotus on the outside. They banged wheels twice, and that did enough damage to send Alonso spinning into retirement.


Vettel versus Alonso at Monza was "debunked" by Davidson? I remember discussing that phase here on the forum, and I can't recall having been convinced by what he showed.

True! Kimi could also have put in a solid lap and could still have been close to Alonso on the grid. It would be wrong to suggest that could not have happened.

I still don't think events would have transpired as they did. But saying that, if Alonso was further up the grid maybe Grosjean would have rear-ended him instead of Webber (and picked up another race ban for meddling with a Ferrari :-P ).

And I dunno about you but I think the general consensus is that Davidson's run-through was spot on.

_________________
"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."


#14 for '14


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: Ahwooga, Alienturnedhuman, AusFer, Blake, Dark, DOLOMITE, Guia, HKA_, James14, Lt. Drebin, orion_f1, sandman1347, shoot999, TakumaSatoforthewin, thingy003, UnlikeUday, wolfticket 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
[ Time : 0.186s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]