2012 Formula One Season

[lomatopo]

Any comments on the new F1 track at Austin, TX? I've been watching some of the practice sessions - on HD no less - and it looks interesting, with some changes in elevation.

And the Ron Howard film, "Rush" - which retells the 1976 title duel between James Hunt and Niki Lauda - due next year looks to be a great F1 film? I still like the 1966 John Frankenheimer film, "Grand Prix".

Track looks great.

Best F1 movie is "Senna". Ron Howard's new movie will have to go some way to beat it. Looking forward to seeing it though.

Yes, "Senna" was fantastic, however that is a documentary rather than a dramatic/action feature film.

I didn't watch the race (live) but Ferrari's strategic hijinx certainly helped keep Alonso in the hunt.

[Mosha]

Any comments on the new F1 track at Austin, TX? I've been watching some of the practice sessions - on HD no less - and it looks interesting, with some changes in elevation.

And the Ron Howard film, "Rush" - which retells the 1976 title duel between James Hunt and Niki Lauda - due next year looks to be a great F1 film? I still like the 1966 John Frankenheimer film, "Grand Prix".

Track looks great.

Best F1 movie is "Senna". Ron Howard's new movie will have to go some way to beat it. Looking forward to seeing it though.

Yes, "Senna" was fantastic, however that is a documentary rather than a dramatic/action feature film.

I didn't watch the race (live) but Ferrari's strategic hijinx certainly helped keep Alonso in the hunt.

That should not be allowed.

[JetsetBkk]

Any comments on the new F1 track at Austin, TX? I've been watching some of the practice sessions - on HD no less - and it looks interesting, with some changes in elevation.

And the Ron Howard film, "Rush" - which retells the 1976 title duel between James Hunt and Niki Lauda - due next year looks to be a great F1 film? I still like the 1966 John Frankenheimer film, "Grand Prix".

Track looks great.

Best F1 movie is "Senna". Ron Howard's new movie will have to go some way to beat it. Looking forward to seeing it though.

Yes, "Senna" was fantastic, however that is a documentary rather than a dramatic/action feature film.

I didn't watch the race (live) but Ferrari's strategic hijinx certainly helped keep Alonso in the hunt.

That should not be allowed.

The Ferrari team and Stefano Domenicali have no concept of "sportsmanship". Win at any costs is their motto.

Scumbags, the lot of 'em.

Alonso is quite the opposite - I'm surprised he can work with that bunch. I just heard his comments about that decision, so deleted what I wrote.

Edited November 19, 2012 by JetsetBkk

[Guest]

The Ferrari team and Stefano Domenicali have no concept of "sportsmanship". Win at any costs is their motto.

Scumbags, the lot of 'em.

Alonso is quite the opposite - I'm surprised he can work with that bunch. I just heard his comments about that decision, so deleted what I wrote.

Alonso seems to be as bad as Schumacher when it comes to the foul play. Actually even worse as he makes others to do his dirty work. At least Schumacher crashed the other drivers by him self

We just need to remember what did happen on 2008 Singapore GP when Senna hit to the wall, to get the safety car to the track. For sure Alonso knew and approved the plan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Formula_One_crash_controversy

Those drivers are there to win. Some with foul play involved.

To be honest, I used to like Alonso before. Now I'm tired of his and Ferrari constant mantra "Alonso was perfect, but the car is shaite". When we look how well Massa is now driving, being quite often faster than Alonso, I'd like to contradict that talk. Maybe Alonso is not after all so good as they wish to say, but these talks will keep the Satander money flowing.

[rixalex]

Even by Ferrari's standards and their way of gearing the team solely around Alonso, i have to admit i was pretty staggered at the move they made of deliberately penalising Massa on the grid to get him out the way and give Alonso a clean start. It says a lot not only at how focused the team is on one man, but at how poorly they think of Massa, because surely it would have been possible in normal circumstances of having a competitive number two driver, for them to help their team mate out potentially by taking points of the championship contender. If say Vettel had slipped down the order, having Massa further up the field and in front of Vettel could have taken vital points of him. But this isn't normal circumstances. Massa as i have said before is nothing more than an average driver, but an average driver in a highly sought after seat. OK this year the Ferrari may not have been as good as the RBs or the McClarens, but still they have a car that come the end of Sunday afternoon can be fighting out for at least a podium, with some decent consistent driving and some decent team work and tactics.

Anyway, all things considered, i think Ferrari's decision was the best one for Alonso and maximised his race finish and kept him in with a shout for the last race, so even if it does seem a bit of a screwed up way to run an F1 team and perhaps border-line bad sportsmanship, i'm sure Alonso and Ferrari couldn't care less about what anyone else thinks.

[Totster]

I don't like Alonso, not sure why... however he is in the running for the championship, don't forget it is a team sport and as such they will make decisions based on what is best for the team. They obviously believe that Alonso winning is best for the team and plan around that. There is nothing unsporting about it, F1 regulations allow it and all the teams are able to employ these methods if they choose.

I hope that Vettel doesn't win, I like it when he doesn't win.. I can't stand it when he says "that's what I'm talking about", I like it when he is disappointed and subdued. To that end I am prepared to see Alonso win..

totster

[Guest]

My wishlist for the Brazilian GP:

Vettel will have an tire puncture at the start and have to retire.

Alonso get's the lead and is driving for the win. When there is only 5 laps left, he'll suffer gearbox failure and retires

[Totster]

My wishlist for the Brazilian GP:

Vettel will have an tire puncture at the start and have to retire.

Alonso get's the lead and is driving for the win. When there is only 5 laps left, he'll suffer gearbox failure and retires

More likely Vettel may suffer the same problems that Webber had.. Be nice to see Webber win.

totster

[rixalex]

They obviously believe that Alonso winning is best for the team and plan around that. There is nothing unsporting about it, F1 regulations allow it and all the teams are able to employ these methods if they choose.

Deliberately tampering with the gear box to incur a grid penalty is a method i have never ever seen used before. Obviously the regulations did allow it, but perhaps they allow because it would be hard to police if it wasn't allowed, rather than because the FIA wants this sort of thing to be a part of the sport.

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

There is nothing unsporting about it, F1 regulations allow it

<snip>

Unbelievable statement, Totster. I'm surprised at you.

Of course it was unsporting. The rule is that if you break the seal - i.e. because you need to change the gearbox - then you will be penalised 5 grid places of the car that needed its gearbox changed.

To break the seal on the gearbox, NOT change the gearbox, but to demote your second driver out of the way of your preferred driver and get your preferred driver on to the good side, is unsporting. The rule wasn't there for teams to do that.

Just because the FIA didn't expect anyone to be so underhand as to break the seal to promote another driver, does NOT mean that "the regulations allow it". They never thought of it. They never thought any team would be so unsporting. The rules were clearly written in the days when sportsmanship was considered more important than "win at all costs", which is the Ferrari way and has been for several seasons.

[Totster]

<snip>

There is nothing unsporting about it, F1 regulations allow it

<snip>

Unbelievable statement, Totster. I'm surprised at you.

Of course it was unsporting. The rule is that if you break the seal - i.e. because you need to change the gearbox - then you will be penalised 5 grid places of the car that needed its gearbox changed.

To break the seal on the gearbox, NOT change the gearbox, but to demote your second driver out of the way of your preferred driver and get your preferred driver on to the good side, is unsporting. The rule wasn't there for teams to do that.

Just because the FIA didn't expect anyone to be so underhand as to break the seal to promote another driver, does NOT mean that "the regulations allow it". They never thought of it. They never thought any team would be so unsporting. The rules were clearly written in the days when sportsmanship was considered more important than "win at all costs", which is the Ferrari way and has been for several seasons.

Yup, I get it.. However the regulations DO allow it, Charlie Whiting and Co were fully appraised of what was happening, and thus the teams will use any means they can to make sure they win.

Let's not forget what Red Bull did at the Abu Dhabi Race. Penalised and sent to the back of the grid for not having enough fuel for qualifying, they then used the regulations to make changes to his car under parc ferme to gain an advantage and had to start from the pit lane. Seems equally 'unsporting' to me.

totster

Edited November 21, 2012 by Totster

[rixalex]

Let's not forget what Red Bull did at the Abu Dhabi Race. Penalised and sent to the back of the grid for not having enough fuel for qualifying, they then used the regulations to make changes to his car under parc ferme to gain an advantage and had to start from the pit lane. Seems equally 'unsporting' to me.

Don't think the comparison holds up.

I think Red Bull used regulations to their advantage, but they didn't compromise other people's races by doing so. Ferrari on the other hand twisted regulations, and in a way that affected a lot of other drivers who had their start position changed. And then of course there was the way in which Massa was affected.

Admittedly the sportsmanship line is a blurry one that is hard to precisely define, and some will say, as you seem to be doing, if it is within the regulations and rules, it is fair game. For me though Ferrari teetered over the edge and took things a little too far. I guess you can't blame them, but i don't think it is particularly good for the sport. (perhaps sport should be written in inverted commas)

[Totster]

Let's not forget what Red Bull did at the Abu Dhabi Race. Penalised and sent to the back of the grid for not having enough fuel for qualifying, they then used the regulations to make changes to his car under parc ferme to gain an advantage and had to start from the pit lane. Seems equally 'unsporting' to me.

Don't think the comparison holds up.

I think Red Bull used regulations to their advantage, but they didn't compromise other people's races by doing so. Ferrari on the other hand twisted regulations, and in a way that affected a lot of other drivers who had their start position changed. And then of course there was the way in which Massa was affected.

Admittedly the sportsmanship line is a blurry one that is hard to precisely define, and some will say, as you seem to be doing, if it is within the regulations and rules, it is fair game. For me though Ferrari teetered over the edge and took things a little too far. I guess you can't blame them, but i don't think it is particularly good for the sport. (perhaps sport should be written in inverted commas)

To clarify, I'm not saying I agree with it... what I am saying is that if it's in the regulations then it is fair game. It's the same with any sport, there isn't a single sport that will not employ any method within the rules/regulations to win even if that means exploiting a loophole, there are some where they will even try and play outside the rules if they can get away with it, Football for one..

totster

[Totster]

Don't think the comparison holds up.

I think Red Bull used regulations to their advantage, but they didn't compromise other people's races by doing so.

The comparison does hold.

No other car could gain an advantage like Red Bull did, they turned a penalisation into a racing advantage over the other cars who qualified within the rules.

Why don't the teams who are always at the back of the grid employ this tactic ? (answer is it probably wouldn't make much difference, but for a car like Red Bull has it makes all the difference)

Totster

[rixalex]

The comparison does hold.

No other car could gain an advantage like Red Bull did, they turned a penalisation into a racing advantage over the other cars who qualified within the rules.

Why don't the teams who are always at the back of the grid employ this tactic ? (answer is it probably wouldn't make much difference, but for a car like Red Bull has it makes all the difference)

Totster

I don't think it was a clear cut racing advantage because although yes they were able to work on the car, the decision meant that Vettel was not able to instantly get past half a dozen cars or so going into the first corner, which i think he would have been able to do had he started on the grid rather than from the pits. Actually i think it was quite a ballsy move from Vettel. It gave him a lot more work to do getting past traffic. Of course it turned out he was helped out a lot by safety cars, but he wasn't to know that on Saturday.

[jpinx]

FIA wrote the rules, but anyone with half a brain could drive a bulldozer through them. Teams will always push the boundaries - that's their job!

[JetsetBkk]

Yup, I get it.. However the regulations DO allow it, Charlie Whiting and Co were fully appraised of what was happening, and thus the teams will use any means they can to make sure they win.

Let's not forget what Red Bull did at the Abu Dhabi Race. Penalised and sent to the back of the grid for not having enough fuel for qualifying, they then used the regulations to make changes to his car under parc ferme to gain an advantage and had to start from the pit lane. Seems equally 'unsporting' to me.

totster

I didn't know what RB did at Abu Dhabi until I Googled it just now. So, basically, Renault told RB to stop Vettel "because of a fuel cell problem" and the FIA found only 850 ml of fuel although Renault were "convinced" that the other 150 ml was in the tank somewhere.

So, starting from the back of the pack, Vettel could have overtaken several slower cars at the race start. But RB thought that as he was so far back they may as make some adjustments and start from the pit lane, meaning that he couldn't overtake the slow cars at the start, but had to join at the back once they'd all gone past. Not an obvious advantage if you ask me, other than whatever adjustments RB made - as anybody could make - if they choose to start from the pit lane.

So I don't think there was anything unsporting in what RB did at Abu Dhabi because any car can start from the pit lane - i.e. last - if you want to make adjustments. And that is in the rules.

I'm sure Ferrari kept Charlie Whiting appraised - they wouldn't want Alonso to be penalised after the race. However, I'm equally sure that Charlie Whiting and Co were scratching their heads thinking "Jeez! Why didn't we think of that before? - that someone would actually do that just to gain an advantage for their other driver?"

Did you see the interview with Domenicali after the race? He kept saying how if any other team boss says he would not do what Ferrari did, then they were lying. What a disgusting thing to say! Trying to pre-empt any statements from other team principals. The obvious retort to that is: RB could have sent Alonso back to the dirty side by breaking a seal on Webber's spare gearbox. But they didn't.

As I said earlier: Ferrari - scumbags the lot of 'em.

[Totster]

The comparison does hold.

No other car could gain an advantage like Red Bull did, they turned a penalisation into a racing advantage over the other cars who qualified within the rules.

Why don't the teams who are always at the back of the grid employ this tactic ? (answer is it probably wouldn't make much difference, but for a car like Red Bull has it makes all the difference)

Totster

I don't think it was a clear cut racing advantage because although yes they were able to work on the car, the decision meant that Vettel was not able to instantly get past half a dozen cars or so going into the first corner, which i think he would have been able to do had he started on the grid rather than from the pits. Actually i think it was quite a ballsy move from Vettel. It gave him a lot more work to do getting past traffic. Of course it turned out he was helped out a lot by safety cars, but he wasn't to know that on Saturday.

They could further optimise the car for overtaking, if that's not an advantage based on his grid position I don't know what is..

totster

[Totster]

Yup, I get it.. However the regulations DO allow it, Charlie Whiting and Co were fully appraised of what was happening, and thus the teams will use any means they can to make sure they win.

Let's not forget what Red Bull did at the Abu Dhabi Race. Penalised and sent to the back of the grid for not having enough fuel for qualifying, they then used the regulations to make changes to his car under parc ferme to gain an advantage and had to start from the pit lane. Seems equally 'unsporting' to me.

totster

I didn't know what RB did at Abu Dhabi until I Googled it just now. So, basically, Renault told RB to stop Vettel "because of a fuel cell problem" and the FIA found only 850 ml of fuel although Renault were "convinced" that the other 150 ml was in the tank somewhere.

So, starting from the back of the pack, Vettel could have overtaken several slower cars at the race start. But RB thought that as he was so far back they may as make some adjustments and start from the pit lane, meaning that he couldn't overtake the slow cars at the start, but had to join at the back once they'd all gone past. Not an obvious advantage if you ask me, other than whatever adjustments RB made - as anybody could make - if they choose to start from the pit lane.

So I don't think there was anything unsporting in what RB did at Abu Dhabi because any car can start from the pit lane - i.e. last - if you want to make adjustments. And that is in the rules.

I'm sure Ferrari kept Charlie Whiting appraised - they wouldn't want Alonso to be penalised after the race. However, I'm equally sure that Charlie Whiting and Co were scratching their heads thinking "Jeez! Why didn't we think of that before? - that someone would actually do that just to gain an advantage for their other driver?"

Did you see the interview with Domenicali after the race? He kept saying how if any other team boss says he would not do what Ferrari did, then they were lying. What a disgusting thing to say! Trying to pre-empt any statements from other team principals. The obvious retort to that is: RB could have sent Alonso back to the dirty side by breaking a seal on Webber's spare gearbox. But they didn't.

As I said earlier: Ferrari - scumbags the lot of 'em.

Whichever way you choose to look at it, both teams used the regulations to their advantage.

Domenicalli was absolutely right with his statement. The top teams have always pushed the letter of the regulations to the limit, there are constant complaints to FIA when a team comes up with an innovation that helps performance that they think is unfair (because they didn't think of it first). It's the game they play.

totster

[JetsetBkk]

Whichever way you choose to look at it, both teams used the regulations to their advantage.

Domenicalli was absolutely right with his statement. The top teams have always pushed the letter of the regulations to the limit, there are constant complaints to FIA when a team comes up with an innovation that helps performance that they think is unfair (because they didn't think of it first). It's the game they play.

totster

I think it must be a generational thing. Or maybe it's because I'm a long-time snooker player where, if I make a mistake and break a rule, I will step back from the table and let the ref or opposition know if they didn't see it.

But these days it seems people will bend or break the rules deliberately if it gives them an advantage, irrespective of what the spirit of the rule is or whether it's considered unsporting or cheating.

I think it's a shame, but I know a lot of younger people think it's acceptable. Says a lot about the world these days, I guess.

Edit:

Oops, forgot to add that Domenicalli wasn't right since RB did not do what Ferrari did, although they could have.

Edited November 21, 2012 by JetsetBkk

[JetsetBkk]

They could further optimise the car for overtaking, if that's not an advantage based on his grid position I don't know what is..

totster

Any team can do that if they don't mind starting the car from the pit lane. But pretending that you have to change a gearbox, but not actually doing it, just to promote your other driver one place on to the clean side, is not the same. I'm amazed that you cannot see that.

But since you already said...:

"I hope that Vettel doesn't win, I like it when he doesn't win.. I can't stand it when he says "that's what I'm talking about", I like it when he is disappointed and subdued. To that end I am prepared to see Alonso win.."

...I can understand your position.

[tinfoilhat]

The Ferrari team and Stefano Domenicali have no concept of "sportsmanship". Win at any costs is their motto.

Scumbags, the lot of 'em.

Alonso is quite the opposite - I'm surprised he can work with that bunch. I just heard his comments about that decision, so deleted what I wrote.

Alonso seems to be as bad as Schumacher when it comes to the foul play. Actually even worse as he makes others to do his dirty work. At least Schumacher crashed the other drivers by him self

We just need to remember what did happen on 2008 Singapore GP when Senna hit to the wall, to get the safety car to the track. For sure Alonso knew and approved the plan.

http://en.wikipedia....ash_controversy

Those drivers are there to win. Some with foul play involved.

To be honest, I used to like Alonso before. Now I'm tired of his and Ferrari constant mantra "Alonso was perfect, but the car is shaite". When we look how well Massa is now driving, being quite often faster than Alonso, I'd like to contradict that talk. Maybe Alonso is not after all so good as they wish to say, but these talks will keep the Satander money flowing.

if you are going to draw spurious paralells at least get the actors right, it was Piquet Jr, not Senna.

As for Ferrai's strategy, it was just that, a strategy, a tactic, and it worked. Just like Redbull and Horner deciding to start from the pits and rework the setup on Vetels car in the race previous. An unorthodox, but extremely effective solution to a problem.

The teams are playing for millions upon millions of dollars, and complain all you want, it was within the rules. F1 is not about the spirit of the rules, it is about circumventing them to achieve an advantage that no one else has.

it always has been.

without such a tradition the cars would get slower every year, instead, the FIA takes away and geniuses like brawn and Newey give back by outsmarting the bureaucrats at their own game.

it is why i love the sport, and i would not have it any other way.

Given his excellent start and Massa's brilliant result i would say the action was pretty well justified.

As for Hamilton, it was a great drive, but hardly worthy of this unbearable display of hubris:

Lewis: I've stamped my mark on F1

Why is it every semi decent showing lewis puts in is his best drive ever?

Did anyone note the reaction of his compatriots on the podium? it seems neither of them can stand him either.

they are still fighting for the world championship and Hamilton is strutting around like he won it.

it will be years before Hamilton achieves another wdc if ever, and one can only hope he will learn humility in the interim.

I would far rather see alonso or vetel on the podium, both excellent, consistent drivers who are able to focus when it is necessary, race in and race out, or raikkonen who takes the win, but realizes it is small potatoes compared with what he truly hopes to achieve.

No blame, no fingers pointed no excuses and no stupid remarks. no tweets, no digs, just drive.

Edited November 21, 2012 by tinfoilhat

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

As for Ferrai's strategy, it was just that, a strategy, a tactic, and it worked. Just like Redbull and Horner deciding to start from the pits and rework the setup on Vetels car in the race previous.

<snip>

Another one who just doesn't get the difference between a rule that says you must start from the pit lane if you want to make changes to the set-up of a car, and the five place grid position loss if you want to change a gearbox (which they didn't actually do).

<snip>

The teams are playing for millions upon millions of dollars, and complain all you want, it was within the rules. F1 is not about the spirit of the rules

<snip>

And that makes it acceptable to break the rules?

<snip>

without such a tradition the cars would get slower every year

<snip>

Nonsense. There is no 'tradition' of cheating. No one has pretended to want to change a gear box by breaking the seal and then not doing it. Looking for loopholes in the rules is cheating.

<snip>

Given his excellent start and Massa's brilliant result i would say the action was pretty well justified.

<snip>

Ah! So the end justifies the means. That's a slippery path.

As for what Hamilton or anyone else said about his performance, it doesn't change what Ferrari did - just like the infamous "Fernando is faster than you" radioed to Massa in 2010. Why didn't they say "Slow don't and let Alonso pass!"? Answer: Because it was against the rules.

Perhaps you need reminding of that event:

[b19bry]

if you are going to draw spurious paralells at least get the actors right, it was Piquet Jr, not Senna.

As for Ferrai's strategy, it was just that, a strategy, a tactic, and it worked. Just like Redbull and Horner deciding to start from the pits and rework the setup on Vetels car in the race previous. An unorthodox, but extremely effective solution to a problem.

The teams are playing for millions upon millions of dollars, and complain all you want, it was within the rules. F1 is not about the spirit of the rules, it is about circumventing them to achieve an advantage that no one else has.

it always has been.

without such a tradition the cars would get slower every year, instead, the FIA takes away and geniuses like brawn and Newey give back by outsmarting the bureaucrats at their own game.

it is why i love the sport, and i would not have it any other way.

Given his excellent start and Massa's brilliant result i would say the action was pretty well justified.

You are 100% correct in what you say here. As you say 'it has always been' even back in the 60's and 70's when the likes of Colin Chapman and Gordon Murray were looking for that 'extra' advantage.

[b19bry]

<snip>

The teams are playing for millions upon millions of dollars, and complain all you want, it was within the rules. F1 is not about the spirit of the rules

And that makes it acceptable to break the rules?

As tin says 'it was within the rules' i.e. no rules were broken.

without such a tradition the cars would get slower every year

Nonsense. There is no 'tradition' of cheating. No one has pretended to want to change a gear box by breaking the seal and then not doing it. Looking for loopholes in the rules is cheating.

You may look on it as 'cheating' but it's what all F1 teams from the designers to the managers and drivers have been doing for the last 40-50 years.

It's really not cheating, it's exploiting the rulebook and all teams look to do that all the time.

You're allowing your blind hatred for one driver to cloud your judgement

[b19bry]

Any comments on the new F1 track at Austin, TX? I've been watching some of the practice sessions - on HD no less - and it looks interesting, with some changes in elevation.

And the Ron Howard film, "Rush" - which retells the 1976 title duel between James Hunt and Niki Lauda - due next year looks to be a great F1 film? I still like the 1966 John Frankenheimer film, "Grand Prix".

Track looks great.

Best F1 movie is "Senna". Ron Howard's new movie will have to go some way to beat it. Looking forward to seeing it though.

Yes, "Senna" was fantastic, however that is a documentary rather than a dramatic/action feature film.

I didn't watch the race (live) but Ferrari's strategic hijinx certainly helped keep Alonso in the hunt.

The Austin track looks great with the gradient changes andRaikkonen's pass through the esses seems to indicate exciting overtaking possibilities.

As you say "Senna" was a documentary but certainly one with an 'agenda' which clearly suits Senna fans. Even in the day he was a contentious character but this documetary does nothing to address this. It simply glorifies all that he did, and sadly in some cases along with clever film editing, at the expense of the truth.

I'm looking forward to "Rush" and Ron Howard has made some pretty decent movies. I don't think there's been a serious attempt at making an F1 movie since Frankenheimer's "Grand Prix" back in the 60's. Be interesting to see how it turns out.

[Totster]

Ah! So the end justifies the means. That's a slippery path.

As for what Hamilton or anyone else said about his performance, it doesn't change what Ferrari did - just like the infamous "Fernando is faster than you" radioed to Massa in 2010. Why didn't they say "Slow don't and let Alonso pass!"? Answer: Because it was against the rules.

Granted, at the time it was against the regulations... and Ferrari paid the fine.

It must also be pointed out that teams issuing orders that influence the outcome of the race is no longer against the regulations after it was reviewed following the incident you mention.

totster

[tinfoilhat]

<snip>

There is nothing unsporting about it, F1 regulations allow it

<snip>

Unbelievable statement, Totster. I'm surprised at you.

Of course it was unsporting. The rule is that if you break the seal - i.e. because you need to change the gearbox - then you will be penalised 5 grid places of the car that needed its gearbox changed.

To break the seal on the gearbox, NOT change the gearbox, but to demote your second driver out of the way of your preferred driver and get your preferred driver on to the good side, is unsporting. The rule wasn't there for teams to do that.

Just because the FIA didn't expect anyone to be so underhand as to break the seal to promote another driver, does NOT mean that "the regulations allow it". They never thought of it. They never thought any team would be so unsporting. The rules were clearly written in the days when sportsmanship was considered more important than "win at all costs", which is the Ferrari way and has been for several seasons.

i think you have missed the point entirely.

if everyone thought like you many aspects of development in the sport would remain static: ie no f duct or double diffuser to name but two.

Also by extending statements like the one below to the greater context of the law, any lawyer who finds some sort of a loophole that benefits a client is in fact a criminal and breaking the law. Rules (and laws) are quite clearly documented and are there for all to interpret and apply as their own understanding dictates. A loophole exploited shows the up the shortcomings of the body that wrote the rules and of the rules themselves, not the teams who have read and understood them for what they actually say, not what one might assume they were meant to say.

Just because the FIA didn't expect anyone to be so underhand as to break the seal to promote another driver, does NOT mean that "the regulations allow it". They never thought of it. They never thought any team would be so unsporting. The rules were clearly written in the days when sportsmanship was considered more important than "win at all costs", which is the Ferrari way and has been for several seasons.

[rixalex]

if you are going to draw spurious paralells at least get the actors right, it was Piquet Jr, not Senna.

Deliberately crashing so as to bring about a safety car and thus hand advantage to Alonso, and deliberately breaking the seal on a gearbox to bring about a grid penalty and thus hand advantage to Alonso, seems a far from spurious parallel to make.

As for Ferrai's strategy, it was just that, a strategy, a tactic, and it worked. Just like Redbull and Horner deciding to start from the pits and rework the setup on Vetels car in the race previous. An unorthodox, but extremely effective solution to a problem.

The teams are playing for millions upon millions of dollars, and complain all you want, it was within the rules. F1 is not about the spirit of the rules, it is about circumventing them to achieve an advantage that no one else has.

There is certainly truth in that but i still think there is a line in what is going too far and, ok, sometimes teams may cross the line and get away with it, but it doesn't make it the right thing to have done. I think judging by the number of articles written over the last week about the way in which Ferrari twisted the rules, there are many who think that this did cross some sort of line and if what Ferrari did was no different from what other teams have done, why did it create so much controversy?

As for Hamilton, it was a great drive, but hardly worthy of this unbearable display of hubris:

Lewis: I've stamped my mark on F1

Why is it every semi decent showing lewis puts in is his best drive ever?

Did anyone note the reaction of his compatriots on the podium? it seems neither of them can stand him either.

they are still fighting for the world championship and Hamilton is strutting around like he won it.

it will be years before Hamilton achieves another wdc if ever, and one can only hope he will learn humility in the interim.

I would far rather see alonso or vetel on the podium, both excellent, consistent drivers who are able to focus when it is necessary, race in and race out, or raikkonen who takes the win, but realizes it is small potatoes compared with what he truly hopes to achieve.

No blame, no fingers pointed no excuses and no stupid remarks. no tweets, no digs, just drive.

Hamilton has this season without doubt made a right royal prick of himself this season off the track at times. No question about that. He is truly his own worst enemy at times.

That said, his driving this season has been exceptional, and of all the drivers at the top of the table, he has lost the most number of points due to various errors to do with the team and the car that have been completely outside of his control. Had those points not been lost, he would either be at the top or at least very near it, and certainly in with a chance for the title going into this last race. Alas - or hoorah depending on your point of view - ifs, buts and maybes are of no use to anyone, and it is fair to say that all the drivers suffer in the same way to some degree, so i'm not suggesting sympathy for Hamilton, gawd forbid, but just acknowledgement of the way he has driven this year.

In the above you do ever so briefly acknowledge how well he drove in America, but then are falling over yourself to tell us what an idiot he is essentially for just enjoying his success and daring to talk about it. What i heard him saying after the race a lot was he felt he won it because he wanted it more. Not because he was that much faster, or because he was so awesome, but because Vettel wanted it less and he want it more. Seemed a fair thing to say to me. Vettel was clearly more concerned simply about finishing the race than winning, and that gave Hamilton the edge. He had one chance to overtake and he took it. Judging by the speed of Vettel's last lap, the fastest lap of the race, he could have pushed Hamilton harder, but didn't.

As far as the podium is concerned, when Hamilton has been on the podium previously this season but not looking that cheerful, he gets accused of being a sore loser, and being arrogant. But when Alonso has a face like a smacked arse, as he did on the podium in America, it's not because he is a sore loser or arrogant, oh no, it's because he hates Hamilton cos Hamilton is such an idiot and so that's ok.

A lot of double standards going on here.

Another one: just imagine for a second it had of been McClaren going to Lewis after he qualified behind Button and putting to him the idea of penalising Button by breaking the seal on his gearbox, and Lewis saying "yeah ok, let's do that". The furore would have been enormous. "That Hamilton he's so arrogant, can't qualify faster than his team mate and so has to trick the system to get an advantage... what an ass". But because it is Alonso, instead we get all the "this is just the way the sport is, nothing unusual, always been this way, don't attack Alonso" comments and justifications.

Or imagine Hamilton had been the one a couple of races ago saying to his team over the radio "yes, yes, yes... leave me alone, i know what i'm doing". Again, the furore had he done that, would have been massive. "What an arrogant man. Thinks he knows better than the team". But because it is Kimi, instead we get, "now there's a driver who knows what he is doing and who pulls no punches".

People accuse others of having an unfair hatred for Alonso, but it often seems the same people doing this accusing have within themselves the most passionate hatred of all. To the point where they are hoping and praying that Hamilton's career turns into a complete flop. Nothing i think would give them greater pleasure. I can say that whilst i don't like Alonso, i recognise his talent and recognise how important he is to the sport. The last thing i would want is him running around at the back of the field in an HRT. His skill deserves a decent car. Same goes for Hamilton. People who think otherwise are obviously more interested in the battle of the personalities than the battle of the fastest drivers.

[rixalex]

As you say "Senna" was a documentary but certainly one with an 'agenda' which clearly suits Senna fans. Even in the day he was a contentious character but this documetary does nothing to address this. It simply glorifies all that he did, and sadly in some cases along with clever film editing, at the expense of the truth.

Senna the movie failed in terms of baring all the ugly truths but having listened to comments from the director, i don't think that was what he set out to do. What he wanted to do was to convey all of the excitement and tension that comes with the life of an F1 driver, and i think he did a fantastic job of this. The problem of getting the sheer speed and danger across on the screen, which i find is often not achieved when watching races on TV on a Sunday afternoon, was cleverly solved. People i know who don't have any interest in F1, in fact even some people who don't like it and find it boring, loved this movie. Yes it was a documentary, but one more focused on entertainment than giving details of all the facts. I'm ok with that. I understand people who aren't.

I too look forward to Ron Howard's F1 movie, although his last movie i saw, Dilemma, was easily the worst movie i saw last year, so it could be great or it could be awful. Wait and see...