FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[overboost]

You have already started to twist your original position. You have above a version by Ron Dennis that trys to avoid the team taking the blame, and since then we have a completely different version of events printed in the same paper after things settled down.

Anyway, with respect, and with your credibility and previous form, I have absolutely no interest in debating a 7 year historical event or indeed anything at all with you beyond this point

I am not sure what you are referring to cookin about twists of my original position? My view is that both Hamilton and Dennis/McLaren made errors that day and both admitted to them. Pretty straight forward.

Hamilton would have likely complained about his tires but at the end of the day he stuck to their plan, but then erred putting it in the gravel (with the knowledge his tires were toast).

And cookin your form speaks for itself!

[racechick]

Well you have changed your stance Overboost. You started off saying Whitmarsh and Dennis blamed Lewis...and they didn't. Now you're saying they both took the blame. That's a change of stance
Then you switched the focus to who McLaren were trying to beat ( Alonso or. Hamilton) it doesn't matter who, fact is they did that and got the strategy very wrong.
And you completely fail to address the points that the pitlane was much slippier than the rest of the track, making the worn to canvass tyres deadly , and the fact that Alonso had better tyres because he was stuck behind Massa for half the race.

[overboost]

Well you have changed your stance Overboost. You started off saying Whitmarsh and Dennis blamed Lewis...and they didn't. Now you're saying they both took the blame. That's a change of stance
Then you switched the focus to who McLaren were trying to beat ( Alonso or. Hamilton) it doesn't matter who, fact is they did that and got the strategy very wrong.
And you completely fail to address the points that the pitlane was much slippier than the rest of the track, making the worn to canvass tyres deadly , and the fact that Alonso had better tyres because he was stuck behind Massa for half the race.

Hopefully i can answer your points.

In my first post I said that both Whitmarsh and Dennis put blame on Hamilton for being too hard on his tires and that they also admitted that they could have called him in a lap earlier. So no change to my stance imo.

To your second point, I was just responding to your comment on being McLaren being fixated on beating both Raikkonen and Alonso where Dennis had said that Raikkonen didn't matter at all. I hadn't intended or thought that this changed the focus.

I would agree that the pit lane was slippier than the track, I should have stated that earlier. I had disagreed though that Hamilton's tires should be in worse shape than Alonso's because imo Hamilton had free air which is an advantage in controlling tire wear vs Alonso being in Massa's dirty air which can harm the tires.

I really don't think my stance has changed!

Here are Whitmarsh's and Dennis's quotes on Hamilton being too hard on his tires:

MW - "Lewis wanted to win this race in style and was clearly a little bit harder on his tyres than some of the drivers around him,"
RD - "He was very keen to maintain the lead and was so comfortable pulling out a gap on Kimi, although I suppose he gave the tyres just a little bit more of a hard time."

[racechick]

Well that sounds a much more reasonable stance than your first post. IMO.

Hamilton possibly was harder on his tyres , not disputing that, but McLaren knew this from the first tyre change and should have used that information accordingly. IE, when he said his tyres were shot they should have had him in.and they certainly should have if indeed Bridgestone did ask them to do so during the race.
Still I don't accept the words ' but the blame on him' . Being harder on tyres was contributory, they were pointing that out, but they also know they screwed up and didn't deny that.

Of course Lewis wanted to win the race, and he was doing what McLaren asked him in pursuit of that to the best of his ability.
He's a rookie here remember. Trying to win a race by doing what his team asked against his better judgement.

Most reports of that race say that Massa holding up Alonso made Alonso's tyres last better but I can't remember first hand from watching the race, only on what I've read. So I won't take that point any further.

Yes I did say that. Dennis was fixated on beating Kimi and Alonso, because they were the two championship contenders. But it doesn't really matter who he was fixated on, because the fact is that fixation clouded judgement. That's the point. Not who it was.

Anyway. I think we come closer to agreeing the situation . Well as close as we'll get anyway.

[Roth]

That kind of razor edge misfortune has often had a history of deciding championships. Prost was included in more than most, one way or another - none more gut wrenching for Nige fans than Adelaide '86. Has a title ever been more dramatically lost? MS tried to top it a couple of times, and Hamilton's first two seasons were a roller coaster of emotion. Alonso not being able to pass Petrov was a fizzer by comparrison.

[CookinFlat6]

We cant say China decided the 2007 WDC as Lewis had enough points in the bag going into the last race, and therefore the decision made by the guy who went on to become the worst TP in history cant count as the WDC could have been won with a spare race. I.e had it been the last race of the season then that gamble would not have been made by any type of feathered creature.

It was the gearbox 'glitch' that really disrailed his WDC, unlike alonso, who had it entirely in his hands to win the WDC as expected just by overtaking the rookie Petrov. How Alonso did not make a single attempt, not even one, is beyond me. Although after the flag he was quick to shake his fists at the rookie Petrov who commendably shrugged Alonso off and even made a swipe with his car for good measure

F1 needs characters like Petrov

[Hammer278]

^ Yeah the only reason I like Abu Dhabi, didn't have to watch the Fonz get his third and it was a highly amusing exchange between the Fonz and the now departed Petrov.

[Roth]

We cant say China decided the 2007 WDC as Lewis had enough points in the bag going into the last race, and therefore the decision made by the guy who went on to become the worst TP in history cant count as the WDC could have been won with a spare race. I.e had it been the last race of the season then that gamble would not have been made by any type of feathered creature.

It was the gearbox 'glitch' that really disrailed his WDC, unlike alonso, who had it entirely in his hands to win the WDC as expected just by overtaking the rookie Petrov. How Alonso did not make a single attempt, not even one, is beyond me. Although after the flag he was quick to shake his fists at the rookie Petrov who commendably shrugged Alonso off and even made a swipe with his car for good measure

F1 needs characters like Petrov

I wouldn't even have put it down to the team's call, which was a bad one but nothing to do with luck. If he'd had that little break of luck like he takes a slightly different line, brakes a fraction earlier or later, misses a damp patch, whatever, coming in, kept it out of the gravel, he'd have pitted, gone on to win or finish second and take the title. That's the small margins I'm referring to. In '99 MS breaks a leg instead if getting out and walking away, '84 Prost loses out by half a point losing the points in a race he was leading, '88 he loses out on a technicality despite scoring more points; Brazil '12 Vettel does everything he can to crash but still gets enough points depriving Alonso again, which is the flip side.

We're all aware these things happen, so there's hoopla about double points now, which again would be misfortune because in a normal season Hamilton would effectively be champion already.

[CookinFlat6]

well put, these foilbles are what have always made F1 particularily exciting - that so many things can derail what would be more straightforward in other sports

'88 he loses out on a technicality despite scoring more points

However 88 is hardly a technicality, it was actually the rules for that year, and both drivers had this in mind when taking chances in certain races. If Lewis loses to bad luck in the last race, it wouldnt be a technicality - it would be bad luck coupled with an unsporting rule. Prost didnt lose to bad luck or a technicality, he lost full stop. You coud argue that the rule was unsporting but that would be a stretch as it was designed to promote wins above cruising and collecting.

This is too far in the past to be worthy of serious debate now, and I understand where you are coming from

[overboost]

Well that sounds a much more reasonable stance than your first post. IMO.

Hamilton possibly was harder on his tyres , not disputing that, but McLaren knew this from the first tyre change and should have used that information accordingly. IE, when he said his tyres were shot they should have had him in.and they certainly should have if indeed Bridgestone did ask them to do so during the race.
Still I don't accept the words ' but the blame on him' . Being harder on tyres was contributory, they were pointing that out, but they also know they screwed up and didn't deny that.

Of course Lewis wanted to win the race, and he was doing what McLaren asked him in pursuit of that to the best of his ability.
He's a rookie here remember. Trying to win a race by doing what his team asked against his better judgement.

Most reports of that race say that Massa holding up Alonso made Alonso's tyres last better but I can't remember first hand from watching the race, only on what I've read. So I won't take that point any further.

Yes I did say that. Dennis was fixated on beating Kimi and Alonso, because they were the two championship contenders. But it doesn't really matter who he was fixated on, because the fact is that fixation clouded judgement. That's the point. Not who it was.

Anyway. I think we come closer to agreeing the situation . Well as close as we'll get anyway.

Sorry for any misunderstanding!

Actually though I should point out that the first stop for Hamilton and the other three leaders was fuel only, they all left the wets on for the 'second' stint. Being able to manage these tires until the second pit window was the key to the race and added on top of this was the desire to win the championship in China which meant finishing ahead of Alonso. The who does factor in.

Hamilton being too hard on his tires is what caused the race to begin to unravel, and Dennis desperately clinging to the plan and have Hamilton beat Alonso to take the title that day sealed the deal.

A fascinating race.

[What's Burning?]

Some digs at the press conference today.

I've never been one to want to win the championship by not winning.

I think we'll be seeing fireworks and the desperate thrusts to try and make something happen over the next two races. Should Hamilton leave Brazil with a lead, he should end both his and Rosberg's race at turn one in Abu Dhabi... why risk it?

But Hamilton is and always will be a racer. I hope that it works out for him, life can have a strange sense of humor and Nico has said he'd be very proud of his championship should it fall on his lap through the misfortune of a DNF for his teammate at Abu Double.

Such fun!

[LiamCatterson]

So it seems like Nico is finally letting his German heritage of hypocrisy within F1 unleash...

Stating how the d‎ouble points id‎ea is fantastic....Would‎n't be saying that if he were in Lewis' position...

[CookinFlat6]

To be fair, Nico was having a laugh with that, his real point is that he wont mind the situation as long as he gets the points. As opposed to thje hypocrisy of turning around and saying he loves the rule now

[The Second Coming]

To be fair, Nico was having a laugh with that, his real point is that he wont mind the situation as long as he gets the points. As opposed to thje hypocrisy of turning around and saying he loves the rule now

It does confirm to us all exactly what kind of person he is. (No minerals.)

[What's Burning?]

it's all part of the natural process of rationalizing the reality he's now facing. It's not every year a driver get's a real shot at a championship