FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[McLamilton]

F1live:
In what might be interpreted as a parting shot, Heikki Kovalainen has suggested that he did not enjoy equal treatment as Lewis Hamilton's McLaren team-mate in 2008 and 2009, something also alleged by Fernando Alonso during his time with the Woking-based team.

The Finn is now linked with a move to Toyota or Renault, while McLaren weighs up the various pros and cons of pairing Hamilton next year with Kimi Raikkonen or Jenson Button. McLaren insists it operates without a driver hierarchy, but Kovalainen painted a different picture in conversation with the Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat.

"It was always difficult to accept that Lewis was always the first to receive the new parts,” he said. "I have never wanted to make a big deal about it, but it would have been nice to just once had the new parts on my car, particularly after we lost the chance of winning the championship.
Click here to find out more!

"I could have complained publicly but instead wanted to show the team that I always give maximum effort with the car that I have, and I think they realise that."

Kovalainen also alleges that he has not enjoyed equal status in terms of race strategies.

"Every time this season - when Hamilton and I are in the third part of qualifying - I had to do it with more fuel. If you take into account the quantities of fuel, I would have had pole position several times," he insists.

Kovalainen admits his performances at times this season could have been better, but does not rule out staying at McLaren in 2010.

"I am 100% sure that McLaren has not yet made a decision. We'll see what they do.”



Here we go again: happy bitching to y'all

I think that it's not called unequal treatment. Lewis has proven himself through his on-track performances and his results, whereas Heikki has not.

Look at it this way. Supposing you were a parent and you had two kids, who both sat the GCE 'O' Levels in the same year. One of your kids did well, but the other kid performed terribly and almost failed the examination. Would you give both kids an equal reward, despite their performances, or would you choose to reward the kid who did well, but not the other?

Think about it.

Cause, it's a similar sort of thing, isn't it?

[Tony_sa]

no nut ... you dont want to go there..... not even close

[racechick]

Its a shame some people on her (mentioning no names) are so blinded by their dislike of lewis that they cannot see things for what they are and have to make snide digs and comments about his family all the time.

Giving lewis the best equipment when only one is avaiable(even supposing that is consistantly the case-which it isnt) is not the same as favouring one driver over the other. Lewis has earnt the right to those priveledges by being consistently quicker and scoring more points. Just as lewis as a rookie earnt the priveledge of being treated equally to a double world champion-by going as fast, being as good, scoring as many points. Alonso's gripe was that he didnt want parity he wanted number one status, well that year he didnt earn it.

If Heikki had consistently outqualified and outperformed Lewis then he would have earnt the right to the best strategy and the first of the upgrades. McLaren don't make this decision before the season starts-thats where they differ from Ferrari's strategy when Michael raced.

[Juliet P]

Its a shame some people on her (mentioning no names) are so blinded by their dislike of lewis that they cannot see things for what they are and have to make snide digs and comments about his family all the time.

Giving lewis the best equipment when only one is avaiable(even supposing that is consistantly the case-which it isnt) is not the same as favouring one driver over the other. Lewis has earnt the right to those priveledges by being consistently quicker and scoring more points. Just as lewis as a rookie earnt the priveledge of being treated equally to a double world champion-by going as fast, being as good, scoring as many points. Alonso's gripe was that he didnt want parity he wanted number one status, well that year he didnt earn it.

If Heikki had consistently outqualified and outperformed Lewis then he would have earnt the right to the best strategy and the first of the upgrades. McLaren don't make this decision before the season starts-thats where they differ from Ferrari's strategy when Michael raced.

Unusual for me to agree with one of these posts, but hey, I think this is broadly right.

[scotty]

If Heikki had consistently outqualified and outperformed Lewis then he would have earnt the right to the best strategy and the first of the upgrades. McLaren don't make this decision before the season starts-thats where they differ from Ferrari's strategy when Michael raced.

In light of the first sentence there, is it really that different? Not having a dig, just an observation... because Schumacher's team mates rarely held a candle to him in all fairness... (argh, feels dirty giving him a compliment )

[vaptin]

If mcalren are right to favour lewis then ferrari were right to favour Shumacher - it certainly proved successful

[RA Dunk]

Its a shame some people on her (we all know who your talking about anyway) are so blinded by their dislike of lewis that they cannot see things for what they are and have to make snide digs and comments about his family all the time.

Giving lewis the best equipment when only one is avaiable(even supposing that is consistantly the case-which it isnt) is not the same as favouring one driver over the other. Lewis has earnt the right to those priveledges by being consistently quicker and scoring more points. Just as lewis as a rookie earnt the priveledge of being treated equally to a double world champion-by going as fast, being as good, scoring as many points. Alonso's gripe was that he didnt want parity he wanted number one status, well that year he didnt earn it.

If Heikki had consistently outqualified and outperformed Lewis then he would have earnt the right to the best strategy and the first of the upgrades. McLaren don't make this decision before the season starts-thats where they differ from Ferrari's strategy when Michael raced.

Spot on

[racechick]

If Heikki had consistently outqualified and outperformed Lewis then he would have earnt the right to the best strategy and the first of the upgrades. McLaren don't make this decision before the season starts-thats where they differ from Ferrari's strategy when Michael raced.

In light of the first sentence there, is it really that different? Not having a dig, just an observation... because Schumacher's team mates rarely held a candle to him in all fairness... (argh, feels dirty giving him a compliment )

But the difference is making the decision before the season started.Rubens may have given Michael a run for his money but wasnt allowed the chance.

[Tony_sa]

If mcalren are right to favour lewis then ferrari were right to favour Shumacher - it certainly proved successful

whoa !! ferrari favouring shumi in no way can be compared with mclaren. ferrari had plenty one-two's at the same time. Heiki started off well until it appears he may have lost his motivation. in my mind it was due to what he was complaining about many a time since then...

[scotty]

If Heikki had consistently outqualified and outperformed Lewis then he would have earnt the right to the best strategy and the first of the upgrades. McLaren don't make this decision before the season starts-thats where they differ from Ferrari's strategy when Michael raced.

In light of the first sentence there, is it really that different? Not having a dig, just an observation... because Schumacher's team mates rarely held a candle to him in all fairness... (argh, feels dirty giving him a compliment )

But the difference is making the decision before the season started.Rubens may have given Michael a run for his money but wasnt allowed the chance.

I know what you mean about Schumacher being the definite number 1 before the start of the season, but nevertheless my point still stands. The differential in performance between Schumacher and Barrichello at Ferrari surely cannot be attributed to favouritism alone. Same thing with this current 'situation' at McLaren.

[racechick]

If Heikki had consistently outqualified and outperformed Lewis then he would have earnt the right to the best strategy and the first of the upgrades. McLaren don't make this decision before the season starts-thats where they differ from Ferrari's strategy when Michael raced.

In light of the first sentence there, is it really that different? Not having a dig, just an observation... because Schumacher's team mates rarely held a candle to him in all fairness... (argh, feels dirty giving him a compliment )

But the difference is making the decision before the season started.Rubens may have given Michael a run for his money but wasnt allowed the chance.

I know what you mean about Schumacher being the definite number 1 before the start of the season, but nevertheless my point still stands. The differential in performance between Schumacher and Barrichello at Ferrari surely cannot be attributed to favouritism alone. Same thing with this current 'situation' at McLaren.

But he was asked to let Michael by on more than one occassion near the beginning of the season. How demotivating is that? Its not the same situation at McLaren. They will go with the driver who is delivering.

[scotty]

But he was asked to let Michael by on more than one occassion near the beginning of the season. How demotivating is that? Its not the same situation at McLaren. They will go with the driver who is delivering.

Hmm, no, i still disagree on both counts i'm afraid. However, you won't find me dedicating any more effort to 'defending' Schumacher here cause i still think he's scum, so i'm happy to leave this as agreeing to disagree.

[Gaz]

i can see how people look at it and see Hekki doing badly and Lewis getting pole by a mile.

But if Mclaren are saying they are treating the drivers equally and are not doing so then why say it? its not illegal to have a number 1 driver..?

[scotty]

i can see how people look at it and see Hekki doing badly and Lewis getting pole by a mile.

But if Mclaren are saying they are treating the drivers equally and are not doing so then why say it? its not illegal to have a number 1 driver..?

I do think they have that mentally generally, certainly compared to, say, the late 80's/early 90's days in teams like Ferrari where one driver's car would break down much more than the other... however McLaren's (and Renault's too i guess!) situation with the updates this year shows that the goalposts can easily move in pursuit of success, which no one can really blame them for. However, this situation is not true equality.

[Gaz]

i can see how people look at it and see Hekki doing badly and Lewis getting pole by a mile.

But if Mclaren are saying they are treating the drivers equally and are not doing so then why say it? its not illegal to have a number 1 driver..?

I do think they have that mentally generally, certainly compared to, say, the late 80's/early 90's days in teams like Ferrari where one driver's car would break down much more than the other... however McLaren's (and Renault's too i guess!) situation with the updates this year shows that the goalposts can easily move in pursuit of success, which no one can really blame them for. However, this situation is not true equality.

Well Mclaren is still a racing team they want to do the best they can at the races.

If i was Martin - even tho i am for the pursuit of equality i would of done the same thing based on the fact Lewis is the better option for the win.

Its also worth noting Hekki did REFUSE upgrades for the race after testing with them.