[Closed] The F1 Thread...

I've never really warmed to Hamilton in previous seasons, but he drove extremely hard to make it to the podium from what was last place - and not forgetting that he'd spun early on too, which would rattle most drivers.

As for Button, it's pretty obvious that he'll be elsewhere in 2015. It's a shame, his driving style belies his pace and until now he's been a good fit at McLaren.

@jambalaya

Are you going to write him off forever for his final years at mclaren, where the car was on a gradual decline? I too had written off Alonso because of his whining/extra help at Renault but his performance over the last 3 years puts hims tied #1 with Hamilton in my book. They both whine, Alonso over the radio, Hamilton in interviews, so what. I want to watch them race.

The context is this - the team don't need orders to secure the constructors championship, the drivers championship will be won by either of their drivers.

Actually thats a load of rubbish - the context is that the FIA will stop at nothing to change rules midseason to stop boring championship, its happened in the past and will happen in the future, so The TEAM must try to secure drivers or constructors titles ASAP!
If thats means stepping on Lewis' rather large Ego to put the title leading contender in P1 then thats what they should do.
Mercedes as a team has not won a title for a long, long , long time, they should do what must in order to secure it as soon as they can.

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/28517704 ]Mercedes rethink team orders[/url]

They've also got to protect the brand. Ferrari did a lot of damage to themselves in the way they handled 'team orders'.

I think Button will want to stay with McLaren next year as the new engine provider will give him all the cover /excuses he needs for another lackluster season. If he goes to another team with an existing driver and a stable car then it all gets a bit harder to find someone else to blame.

If Rosberg had any class the during his post race invertview, when asked about the team orders, he wouldn't have swereved the question about Hamilton being told to let him though.

The classy thing to do would be to tell the truth and say "If I were Hamilton I wouldn't have let me though either"

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/lewishamilton/5099332/McLarens-Lewis-Hamilton-apologises-for-lies-at-Australian-Grand-Prix.html ]Lewis never lies.[/url]

Blimey B2B why so much hate!

Lewis never lies.

The relevance of 5 year old article is...?

Just announced that Hamilton is after a 3 year 90 million euro deal from Mercedes. Yikes!

I was never a Hamilton fan until I attended a tour at McLaren. I was hoping for Button and was disappointed when Hamilton turned up as it was just after all his reported hissy fits bit in person he won me over mainly due to the way he engaged with the kids that were there.

I'm not a fan of the necklaces and ear rings and some of the things he comes out with in the spur of the moment but that's emotion and he still can't make his head rule his emotions. But on the track in the last few races he has shown he can drive and he can pass. It does seem as though he needs the kick up the arse of being at the back to bring out the best in him but that is just human nature.

The relevance of 5 year old article is...

haterz will hate....

As for contract, I hope he dosent stay at Merc beyond next year. I'd love to see him in a Ferrari or Redbull in 2016. Hopefully as a three times world champion.

I'd [b]love[/b] to see him in a Ferrari.

He's in a car which is off the pace, by doing the same as everyone else he would never have won

Rubbish. He was all over the back of Danny Ricc at Silverstone; it's not as if he's puttering along with Renault power like the RBR.

The quick pit was a tactical masterstroke; the inters were gormless. All the teams have the same weather radar. Only McLaren saw rain. Even Caterham told their drivers they were on the right tyre with dry.

And Rosberg couldn't get past LH with DRS assistant. What does that say?

Actually thats a load of rubbish - the context is that the FIA will stop at nothing to change rules midseason to stop boring championship, its happened in the past and will happen in the future, so The TEAM must try to secure drivers or constructors titles ASAP!
If thats means stepping on Lewis' rather large Ego to put the title leading contender in P1 then thats what they should do.
Mercedes as a team has not won a title for a long, long , long time, they should do what must in order to secure it as soon as they can.

Apparently not - the TEAM have admitted it was a mistake. So Hamilton did the right thing.

The season has been anything but boring- the last two races have been amazing.

Rosberg couldn't pass Verne or Hamilton, yet in the interview after the race, he seems to blame Hamilton for his poor showing in the race, lame!

But on the track in the last few races he has shown he can drive and he can pass.

A statistic from twitter...

[i]"#F1 factoid: Hamilton has made up 50 places in the last 4 races. I know he has a fast car but 50….!!"[/i]

Good article here from Will Buxton
http://willthef1journo.wordpress.com/2014/07/28/new-coke/

Will always writes good stuff and is a great commentator

The teams will pretty much always look after their own agenda rather than what's best for the show.
Take the incident of the FIA allowing Merc to change Hamilton's brake discs in parc ferme for safety reasons, pretty much all of the Team Principals argued against it - Mattiacci was a breath of fresh air though and I take it Claire Williams backed his position too.

[i]Q: (Péter Farkas – Autó-Motor).
Question to all of you. Obviously it is very surprising to learn that the FIA has allowed a change of brake material in parc ferme. Have you got a clear explanation from the FIA yet, why did they let them do it and, do you think it's acceptable? And do you think there is a danger that things you start to ask to change brake materials and even something else in parc ferme before the race after that.

Christian Horner:
Look, from our perspective it was very interesting to see the way the FIA dealt with it. Theoretically it is a change in car specification and the interesting thing for us to observe was how the FIA dealt with it, the precedent it sets going forward. So should that circumstance occur again, the precedent is now extremely clear and I'm sure there will be further discussion on it and where does that stop? Obviously we'd like to change the engine in parc ferme but that's not quite allowed. I'm sure there'll be further discussion. It was intriguing to see the decisions that were made.

Q:
Eric?

Eric Boullier:
Well our position is quite similar to Christian's one. It was a little bit of a surprise to see they could change their brakes obviously. And even if some specs were similar, the rule on parc ferme are very strict. So, as Christian says, it is a serious precedent and we'll see how it develops in the future.

Q:
Marco?

Marco Mattiacci:
From me it's a different perspective from my colleagues – even though I understand where they're coming from. I think in Formula One where everybody is debating about the show, to see a driver from the 20 spot arrive to the podium, for me is a great thing to sell to people and honestly, to pull the trigger, because changing the brakes that are the same spec, probably they don't have a great impact on the performance, honestly to go to ruin the day for Hamilton was not my principle about racing, so I don't see the need. It is clear we need consistency in the approach of the FIA but I think we have seen a great race from a guy and we didn't feel it was the case to ruin that show.

Q:
Claire?

Claire Williams:
I don't think I have anything to add to that.

Q:
Vijay?

Vijay Mallya:
My concern is the precedent that it sets. The FIA rules basically say that if a component is similar in mass, inertia and function, I guess that's the definition under which the change of brakes was allowed. Going forward, under parc ferme conditions, one could also argue that the rear wing settings could be changed because the same mass, inertia and function are retained. So long as this is not used as an unhealthy precedent going forward for changes under parc ferme conditions, that is the way I would look at it.

Q:
Monisha?

Monisha Kaltenborn:
Well, the FIA took probably a surprising decision here but I think more important is to see that they realise that they need to clarify the matter. I'm a bit less concerned about the precedent being set here because if you look at the cases that have gone through the FIA, different courts or tribunals, you very rarely see a certain consistency there because you can't bring up cases from the past but every case is looked at individually, so I'm not that concerned. I tend to agree with Marco, that it just shows you no matter what would have happened, have you also given a penalty, still a driver can come up, right in front, and I think that's the remarkable part about it and shows the dominance of the team.[/i]

50 passes in 4 races. In your face haters!

Hes still a miserable sod.

So is Alonso. If his face gets any longer he won't be able to fit it in his helmet.

His demeanor doesn't detract from his talent, though.

Hes still a miserable sod.

They aren't paid presenters or actors. They are focused/driven/distance mutha ****ers.

Name one racing driver who was a joking, funny wise-crackin comedian?

I can only say this after observing on TV - but I think Mika looks the funnest/nicest bloke of them all.

They're all 'miserable sods' when they have their race heads on, away from the track, they are mostly pretty normal.

They aren't generally miserable, it's just the focus required to do the job is all encompassing

We can't expect sportsmen to be entertainers too, it's a big ask on a driver to drive a car with millimeter precision, to carry the corporate message for sponsors, to be physically fit and to deliver the right lines on cue.

However...

Name one racing driver who was a joking, funny wise-crackin comedian?

James Hunt and Graham Hill spring to mind...then there's the legendary japes of the 1960s Grand Prix set, which included driving a car into a hotel swimming pool to settle a bet about headlights working underwater.

And there's Gerhard Berger.

[url= http://mclaren-soul.tumblr.com/post/52799706471/ayrton-senna-and-gerhard-berger-the-jokes ]Here.[/url]

James Hunt

They must get fed up of it though (not that I wouldn't swap)

Mark Webber said that he got asked the same question by a journalist 22 times one weekend, despite having answered it in the press conference.
The media is on steroids these days not like in the 60s and 70s

James Hunt would have never coped with today's media. Infact if you've seen the film and assuming the scene had some truth to it, he punched a journalist out.

Nor would someone with his lifestyle cope with driving a modern F1 car.

Irrespective of which driver you think should have won the race on the weekend, the first safety car deployed into the middle of the pack decided the outcome and ruined the race IMHO.

Kona TC - Member

Irrespective of which driver you think should have won the race on the weekend, the first safety car deployed into the middle of the pack decided the outcome and ruined the race IMHO.

The first safety car was deployed in front of Rosberg wasn't it? The top 4 cars passed the pitlane entry so couldn't box and swap their tyres. Is that what you meant?

In any case I don't see how you could consider it ruined the race. Bloody excellent from where I was watching. Action packed start to finish.

The first safety car was deployed in front of Rosberg wasn't it?

No

The top 4 cars passed the pitlane entry so couldn't box and swap their tyres

Rosberg was 1st at this point in the race.

with every SC there are going to be winners and losers.
some may pre-empt and gamble a tyre change, others stay out, others might have just changed a lap earlier, edit: and others may have to stack in the pits, and others get held up on pit release.
would have to watch it again to see where Rosberg was at the point that the crash happened (and shown on the TV feed), and compare that to Rosberg's position at the point the SC moved off.

retro83 - Member
The first safety car was deployed in front of Rosberg wasn't it?

dooosuk - Member
No

retro83 - Member
The top 4 cars passed the pitlane entry so couldn't box and swap their tyres

dooosuk - Member
Rosberg was 1st at this point in the race.

I don't understand what you're saying. Am I talking about the wrong safety car (ericson I think?) or is it that I'm missing a bit (only watched the beeb highlights)

[IMG] [/IMG]

Rosberg and whoever the next three behind him were did not(/could not) pit and the rest did.

Still arguing about Rosberg NOT winning?

[img] [/img]

hora - Member

Still arguing about Rosberg NOT winning?

If that's to me, no.

He lost and he lost fair and square by basically not racing his socks off like a certain better driver; Messers Hamilton. A much better driver with pedigree.

The scene where Hunt punched that journalist is completely made up.

Graham Hill and Hunt would have been my first two names for funny F1 drivers.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/10997982/Bernie-Ecclestone-offers-20-million-to-drop-bribery-trial-as-Formula-One-chief-feels-the-strain-of-burdensome-case.html ]he's a "bribeaholic"[/url]

Nico was disadvantaged by the safety car in that he missed the chance to pit.
Otherwise he would have been more likely to keep his first position.

Lewis drove a good race and was more aggressive, hence his excellent progression from near last to third.

Did that safety car get a 10 second penalty for crossing the white line on the pit lane exit?

I see bernie has reversed the decision on restarts after a safety car.

I am sure all the top drivers have been disadvantaged at some time or another by the timing of the safety car...

@eddiebaby - yep, F1 generally in the news for the right reasons at the mo so no need for BE to prolong his half assed ideas to get media attention. Give it a couple of weeks when the summer break means that F1 news is thin on the ground and he'll be back with ideas about reintroducing traction control and ABS or running the GP as 6 separate 10 lap sprints to allow the media to schedule more ad breaks or something.

Hamilton was massively disadvantaged in Germany when Sutil's spin didn't trigger a safety car - if it was, then Rosberg's lead would have been nullified, allowing Hamilton to be on Rosberg's gearbox with 10 laps to go

Safety cars are good - as is unreliability - because without it, this year would be pretty dull with a massively dominant car, running similar strategies, finishing first & second - a bit like Schumacher & Irvine/Massa back in the day

That particular phase was the only time i stopped watching F1

bang on boltonjon.

Irrespective of which driver you think should have won the race on the weekend, the first safety car deployed into the middle of the pack decided the outcome and ruined the race IMHO.

Nico was disadvantaged by the safety car in that he missed the chance to pit.
Otherwise he would have been more likely to keep his first position.

Alonso also missed the [Ericsson] safety car cut off point, didn't seem to disadvantage his final position much.
What did he do in the - off the pace - Ferrari that Rosberg didn't in his - fastest car in the race - Mercedes?