2007 Formula One Thread [Archive] - Page 4

JFreak

Oct 7, 2007, 08:49 AM

Shame it now has to come to the final race, but it does make things more interesting.

Yep — Kimi should've secured the title already, but what can you do if your car's hydraylics let you down twice down the road. That unreliability means about 20 points advantage to Hamilton, who only has retired once for team stupidity. Same kind of stupidity cost Kimi points in Monaco, but there seems to always be at least one bogus race in the season and that just has to be accepted.

I hate this current points system which means reliability is everything. Victory is not valuable anymore. Back in 80's when not all races count there was a lot more racing going on. In my opinion F1 can have as many races during the season but only so many should be counted in to the championship. Say 10-12 or so. That would reward victors no matter the points system.

Pole is a joke as well, but that's another irrelevant story because they don't give points to the "fastest". In my opinion F1 should get back to the old qualifying rules, perhaps modifying it so only 10 fastest on friday quali would be allowed to enter the saturday quali, but whatever the change the race fuel load must go. It makes qualifyin boring, it is not even worth watching!

Ok, enough off-topic...

EDIT: checked out the facts. During 1985-1990 only 11 best results of 16 races were counted. That was a mighty interesting era! Since 1991 every race was counted and victory earned 10 popints instead of 9 — and that has been boring.

1991 was Senna's year, 1992 Mansell's and 1993 Prost's domination. Nobody could touch them. 1994-1995 had racing between Schumacher and Hill, but Schumi won because he bent the rules and didn't get caught. Had Senna not died in 1994 that would've been Senna domination again for many years, because 1992-1997 Williams had the invincible car and Senna finally got that in 1994, which ultimately wasn't a good move for him. So, that would have been 7 years of boring F1 had Senna not lost his life. Instead it was only 5 boring years as the Schumi-Hill battles were the most interesting racing since 1990 and old rules.

(speculation)Perhaps there would not ever have been the Schumacher era if Senna had not died in 1994, because a lot of Schumi's Ferrari domination was built with the personnel he got used to during the Bennetton years. If that wasn't success, most probably not many of them had followed him to Ferrari.(/speculation)

After the boring 6-year Williams-domination era FIA introduced groove tyres, which gave McLaren a chance, because after all they have always been good in getting used to new regulations faster than others. 1998-1999 saw good racing between Häkkinen and Schumi, but that was it, the rest of the series was boring. And we all know what happened between 2000 and 2004, nothing much, because Schumi took it all. FIA tried its best to make things more interesting and introduced a new points system in 2003, but that made things even less interesting because after the first season with new rules drivers got over-careful and began to fear making mistakes instead of driving boldly to the victory.

(speculation)This might become third time Kimi loses the championship title due to car unreliability. Or because Germany doesn't suit finns; each time (2003/2005/2007) a DNF in Germany due to car unreliability.(/speculation)

I know, I sound like old fart that longs back to one's youth. But the fact is, I enjoyed watching F1 racing more during the 80's when finnish drivers were not winning rather than now that Kimi is fighting for the title for the third time. There is very little racing in F1 today.

JFreak

Oct 7, 2007, 08:50 AM

Or Raikkonen has an engine blowup and Alonso crashes on the oil...:D

He's not with McLaren anymore :D It'll be Hamilton's engine that blows in the last race...

AlBDamned

Oct 7, 2007, 09:43 AM

...1992-1997 Williams had the invincible car and Senna finally got that in 1994, which ultimately wasn't a good move for him.

That's one way of putting it.

It's an interesting point. Hakkinen is one of my favourite drivers ever, it was criminal the car problems he had which made him want to retire and the world was worse off for it (Makinen was also amazing in the rallying).

It's just a shame Kimi has the personality of turnip.

R.Youden

Oct 7, 2007, 09:44 AM

(speculation)Perhaps there would not ever have been the Schumacher era if Senna had not died in 1994, because a lot of Schumi's Ferrari domination was built with the personnel he got used to during the Bennetton years. If that wasn't success, most probably not many of them had followed him to Ferrari.(/speculation)

Well from what I understand Senna wanted to go to Ferrari in '94 but they said that their car was so bad it wasn't worth it and to come back in '96.

We all know what happened in '94 and the natural replacement for Senna in '96 was Schui so it could have turned out a lot different!

bartelby

Oct 7, 2007, 09:50 AM

I was half asleep through most of the race, but I can't believe they were willing to take a risk so big just to keep him out. It was plainly obvious that he was falling apart and they took out Alonso's tyres!

They brought out tyres in unnamed warmers. Because it didn't say 'Hamilton' on them Ted Kravits assumed they were Alonso's.

aerove

Oct 7, 2007, 10:05 AM

three way battle for the title !! oh yea!! go kimi gooo!!!!!:D

aerove

Oct 7, 2007, 10:08 AM

FAN BOY!:D

I was wondering, do you guys support a specific team or a specific driver? Personally I support the McLaren team and no specific driver.

only one team!!! scuderia ferrari !!! alonso is a suker.. he keeps ranting abt everything!! last year he was complain ing abt how renault wasnt supporting him cause he was leavin them and now this!!! he's a great racer but an even bigger sucker!!!!!

xUKHCx

Oct 7, 2007, 10:10 AM

FAN BOY!:D

I was wondering, do you guys support a specific team or a specific driver? Personally I support the McLaren team and no specific driver.

I support McLaren alsov (but i do have a fondness for Hamilton), I even told that to a guy at shell who was showing me around their fuel development site for Ferrari, he didn't look best pleased.

JFreak

Oct 7, 2007, 10:11 AM

Hakkinen is one of my favourite drivers ever, it was criminal the car problems he had which made him want to retire and the world was worse off for it.

Me too. Did you know Häkkinen was going to move to Williams in 1993? Too bad Williams had some trouble with FIA and to be able to enter the championship Frank needed to have all other teams' support for participating in the series; but Lotus boss Peter Collins didn't want to let Häkkinen go, so he made an ultimatum: "Want Häkkinen? Come back in 1994. Want to race in 1993? Do not sign Häkkinen." So he was forced to let Mika go to McLaren and take Prost instead.

Back then I wondered what would the world look like if that had happened. For sure he would have won the 1993 championship but would it also mean he would have driven "the Senna car" in 1994 Imola race? You never know. But imagine what Mika could have done with the 1993-1997 Williams :)

It's just a shame Kimi has the personality of turnip.

Your opinion ;) OTOH, nobody has seen Kimi in a winning team yet. I thought he had it in 2005, but unreliable car and bad team mate were just too much. Maybe he'll "develop" a personality once he has it all?

bartelby

Oct 7, 2007, 10:12 AM

only one team!!! scuderia ferrari !!! alonso is a suker.. he keeps ranting abt everything!! last year he was complain ing abt how renault wasnt supporting him cause he was leavin them and now this!!! he's a great racer but an even bigger sucker!!!!!

He'll fit right in with Ferrari then.

aerove

Oct 7, 2007, 10:43 AM

ferrari seems to be missin ross brawn very badly though.. this year's reliability is soo bad and their strategy got messed up lotsa times :( hopefully he'll be back next year and i srsly dont wanna see alonso in a ferrari !! NEVER!!!!! hope he ends up without a drive for next year!! or worse ends up with a team like toyota!! look wat its done wit ralf!!

Counterfit

Oct 7, 2007, 02:30 PM

1994-1995 had racing between Schumacher and Hill, but Schumi won because he bent the rules and didn't get caught. Had Senna not died in 1994 that would've been Senna domination again for many years, because 1992-1997 Williams had the invincible car and Senna finally got that in 1994, which ultimately wasn't a good move for him. So, that would have been 7 years of boring F1 had Senna not lost his life. Instead it was only 5 boring years as the Schumi-Hill battles were the most interesting racing since 1990 and old rules.

Schumi (or rather Bennetton) did get caught in 94, hence the two race ban that kept Hill in the championship in Adelaide. I also don't think Senna would have won in 1994 anyway. Three DNFs in the first three GPs, vs. Schumi's 3 wins. Senna would have been down 30 points to him, and 7 down on Hill.

Also, the best 11 results was only 85-90 and 1970.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 7, 2007, 02:39 PM

Your opinion ;)

Bernie's opinion as well...for whatever that's worth.

I thought Kimi was the next World Champion after Schu, but the unreliable car robbed him in 2005. But he has some serious competition from Alonso and Hamilton. If he's going to win a title he'll really have to earn it.

At any rate, despite "Stepneygate" we are set for a dramatic finish with a three-way drivers' championship battle.

R.Youden

Oct 7, 2007, 03:15 PM

Me too. Did you know Häkkinen was going to move to Williams in 1993? Too bad Williams had some trouble with FIA and to be able to enter the championship Frank needed to have all other teams' support for participating in the series; but Lotus boss Peter Collins didn't want to let Häkkinen go, so he made an ultimatum: "Want Häkkinen? Come back in 1994. Want to race in 1993? Do not sign Häkkinen." So he was forced to let Mika go to McLaren and take Prost instead.

The 'trouble' was that someone forgot to lodge registration with the FIA so Williams had to have all the other teams agree to let them race. It was crazy for Lotus because Hakkinen didn't drive for them either. He tested for McLaren most of the year and then got 3 races at the end of the season I think.

JFreak

Oct 7, 2007, 03:32 PM

Schumi (or rather Bennetton) did get caught in 94, hence the two race ban that kept Hill in the championship in Adelaide.

Actually, it was personally Schumi who bent the rules.

As you probably remember, JJ Lehto drove Bennetton at that time too; another finnish driver, who after his career has been a commentator on a TV channel. Anyway, he has many times been asked about the Benetton times, and he has said (rough translation): "There was always something strange going on around Schumi's car and his steering wheel had buttons that only few people knew about. Surprisingly enough, when he had to drive another car [than his own race car] with his own exact settings he was always half a second slower."

This guy finished his Sauber 5th on the famous heavy-rain 1993 South African GP (where the rain master Schumi spun off on lap 39/72). I bet he has no reason to make up stories.

JFreak

Oct 7, 2007, 03:42 PM

I thought Kimi was the next World Champion after Schu, but the unreliable car robbed him in 2005. But he has some serious competition from Alonso and Hamilton. If he's going to win a title he'll really have to earn it.

Yes, but don't forget Kovalainen, Rosberg and Kubica. Those guys will be as fast as their car can be, perhaps they're even able to bo a little further too. Here we have six (relatively) young top drivers that will be battling for the title for some time.

We can forget about Ralf, Jenson, Felipe and Nick. Those have shown to be nice 2nd drivers that don't have "it".

Guys like DC, Fisi, Rubens and Jarno should just go away. The rest I don't have a definite opinion just yet. I hate that Rubens never found his success, he would have sort of earned it...

Lord Blackadder

Oct 7, 2007, 03:49 PM

Guys like DC, Fisi, Rubens and Jarno should just go away. The rest I don't have a definite opinion just yet. I hate that Rubens never found his success, he would have sort of earned it...

I agree on those four. Button will probably retire with his single win...and I'm also disappointed in Barichello. I guess he was only fast because of Ferrari.

R.Youden

Oct 7, 2007, 04:31 PM

Actually, it was personally Schumi who bent the rules.

As you probably remember, JJ Lehto drove Bennetton at that time too; another finnish driver, who after his career has been a commentator on a TV channel. Anyway, he has many times been asked about the Benetton times, and he has said (rough translation): "There was always something strange going on around Schumi's car and his steering wheel had buttons that only few people knew about. Surprisingly enough, when he had to drive another car [than his own race car] with his own exact settings he was always half a second slower."

This guy finished his Sauber 5th on the famous heavy-rain 1993 South African GP (where the rain master Schumi spun off on lap 39/72). I bet he has no reason to make up stories.

The story of the 1993 - 1994 Benetton was a good one. When the FIA asked to see all the code from the control systems Benetton refused, saying that they did not trust the FIA secrecy policy. The FIA then called in a military test company and still Benetton refused. At one event the FIA delegate asked to look at the Benetton steering wheel whilst it was plugged into the car. On the LCD there was 12 options, plus a blank entry. When the FIA delegate pressed this button it said "Traction Control Activated". Now this was when traction control had been banned. So I guess it was 1994. When questioned Benetton said it was cary over code from 1993 that could not be removed without a rewrite of the whole software!

One example of when this was used was at the Pacific GP in 1994. After Senna crashed at the first corner he sat and watch Schumacher. At one point he ran wide onto the damp grass at turn 1 and pulled away with no wheel-spin! Hmmm.

JFreak

Oct 7, 2007, 05:56 PM

Hakkinen (...) tested for McLaren most of the year and then got 3 races at the end of the season I think.

Yep. His McLaren debut happened in Estoril. Starting grid was spectacular: First row went to the invincible Williams cars, but then on the second row it was Häkkinen before Senna and not the other way around. People were amazed! And I bet so was Senna. Neither finished the race, but qualifying was something special.

Imagine what could've happened if Senna and Häkkinen had partnered the whole season. First 13 races Senna and Andretti earned 60 points, which is 4.6 points per race. Last 3 races Senna and Häkkinen earned 24 points, which is 8.0 points per race — that even includes one GP which saw both McLarens retire. Maybe the Williams would not have appeared so invincible at all? Remains a mystery.

Too bad the sucker-boy Andretti got to race for the most part of the year. He never qualified in the top two rows and only finished once without being lapped. Surprisingly he achieved one podium finish while one lap behind the winning driver. Earned 7 points in 13 races (only 5 finishes), compared to 4 points for Häkkinen in 3 races (only 1 finish, 3rd place).

This whole 1993 season bugs me because that season McLaren had rather good performance, while reliability problems already begun to lift its ugly head. It would have been nice to see Mika racing in that car instead of Andretti. Mika got the ultimate drive through penalty as he had to suffer 3 utterly disastrous years with McLaren and its engine partners until 1997 they finally got their act somewhat together. Five years of waiting before the reward is rather much, I'd say...

Lord Blackadder

Oct 7, 2007, 06:01 PM

Five years of waiting before the reward is rather much, I'd say...

Kimi obviously decided it wasn't worth waiting for. But can Ferrari give him a title-challenging car, and can he out-drive Fred/Hamilton?

AlBDamned

Oct 7, 2007, 06:51 PM

Kimi obviously decided it wasn't worth waiting for. But can Ferrari give him a title-challenging car, and can he out-drive Fred/Hamilton?

I think Kimi can outrun either of them on his day, but I don't think he can out race or out think them most of the time. He's superfast but not supersmart if you ask me.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 10, 2007, 01:42 PM

Dennis favors Hamilton (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/formula_1/article2617378.ece)...looks like he spilled the beans bigtime.

Fred has not made too many friends this season, but if Dennis says both drivers will be treated equally he should mean it...does he?

Counterfit

Oct 10, 2007, 07:25 PM

Too bad the sucker-boy Andretti got to race for the most part of the year. He never qualified in the top two rows and only finished once without being lapped. Surprisingly he achieved one podium finish while one lap behind the winning driver. Earned 7 points in 13 races (only 5 finishes), compared to 4 points for Häkkinen in 3 races (only 1 finish, 3rd place).

This whole 1993 season bugs me because that season McLaren had rather good performance, while reliability problems already begun to lift its ugly head. It would have been nice to see Mika racing in that car instead of Andretti. Mika got the ultimate drive through penalty as he had to suffer 3 utterly disastrous years with McLaren and its engine partners until 1997 they finally got their act somewhat together. Five years of waiting before the reward is rather much, I'd say...

Andretti got screwed in his time with McLaren. He rarely got to test because Ron wanted Mika to do it, or because he had to commute.

iGav

Oct 12, 2007, 09:25 AM

Andretti got screwed in his time with McLaren. He rarely got to test because Ron wanted Mika to do it, or because he had to commute.

It was somewhat unfortunate for Andretti that he joined F1 in a season when major changes were applied to testing. That did disadvantage him somewhat.

It was entirely his fault that he wasn't prepared to move to Europe though, that was nothing other than a demonstrable lack of commitment to not only his team, but also the sport.

And of course it was somewhat unfortunate that he just happened to be paired with arguably F1's second greatest driver ever too. ;)

xUKHCx

Oct 12, 2007, 06:10 PM

McLaren under scrutiny (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7038494.stm)

Formula One's governing body has stepped in to ensure McLaren give equal treatment to Fernando Alonso and Lewis Hamilton at the Brazilian Grand Prix.
The FIA is appointing a special scrutineer for the race at Interlagos to ensure there is no favouritism.

I personally don't get this. To be fair they should put people in each team especially Ferrari where we know there will be 'unfair' treatment for Massa. Alonso is seeming more and more like a cry baby each day.

sananda

Oct 12, 2007, 06:11 PM

McLaren under scrutiny (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7038494.stm)

I personally don't get this. To be fair they should put people in each team especially Ferrari where we know there will be 'unfair' treatment for Massa. Alonso is seeming more and more like a cry baby each day.

i don't get it either.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 13, 2007, 01:21 PM

I personally don't get this. To be fair they should put people in each team especially Ferrari where we know there will be 'unfair' treatment for Massa. Alonso is seeming more and more like a cry baby each day.

Yes, but Ferrari don't claim that their drivers get equal treatment. Nor does any team other than McLaren...

xUKHCx

Oct 13, 2007, 01:23 PM

Yes, but Ferrari don't claim that their drivers get equal treatment. Nor does any team other than McLaren...

Be that as it may why do they have an external authority backing it up. In fact it is all the more reason why they shouldn't have this imposed on them.

bartelby

Oct 13, 2007, 01:25 PM

Yes, but Ferrari don't claim that their drivers get equal treatment. Nor does any team other than McLaren...

So it's obvious that they're not treated equally so why pick on them.
All teams should be scrutinised or none should be.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 14, 2007, 01:13 AM

I agree that it seems strange that the FIA feel the need to actually get involved, but I was just pointing out that McLaren is the only team where this could happen, since nobody else claims to give their drivers equal treatment...

...But like you said, why does the FIA need to enforce a team policy not (AFAIK) subject to FIA regulation? The only thing I can think of is that Alonso complained that McLaren are in breach of contract somehow.

Counterfit

Oct 14, 2007, 01:56 AM

Massa's not in the running for the championship, and has said both this season and last that he would help his teammate however possible (within the rules I presume) if necessary.
That's not the case at McLaren. Neither driver would help his teammate out in this case (and anyone who would expect one of them to is, well, naïve at best), but I think the FIA wants to make sure it's decided on the track at some point, rather than in a back office in the motorhome.

iGav

Oct 16, 2007, 09:48 AM

But still, braking is the most intersting aspect to me. Currently brakes are so great that the distance it takes to decelerate the car is close to nothing. If it took hundred meters more to make the car stop, there would also be more variance in when to begin braking. Now everyone brakes at the same spot, which makes overtaking very hard. Change regulations so brakes would lose power! That would mean drivers would have to adjust to the situation, but they surely would. After that, because nobody wants to hit the wall top speed, drivers would begin braking earlier; and that would again give drivers something to "race" about. Currently, you either hit it or miss it, but were the brakes so powerful, things would be a lot more interesting. Someone would be able to drive a turn a little faster, thus being able to brake a little later. Someone else would take it on the safe side and brake a little earlier. Those differences turn into overtaking opportunities more likely than adding one more groove to the tyres.

The braking ability of the cars is very much relative though.

At the moment the systems allowed in F1 are no where near the absolute optimum obtainable technically speaking, they're very much restricted by the regulations otherwise the braking distances would be reduced even more by the inclusion of larger discs, more exotic materials, active as opposed to passive cooling and more advanced implementations of existing technologies such as A.B.S. and torque-transfer devices.

But as I said, it's relative though... whilst the implementation of steel discs would increase braking distances, they'd still have the optimum braking point like carbon discs and in that respect I don't think it'd make the slightest bit of difference to be honest. Imagine if the FIA allowed the implementations of the technologies I mention above, and the braking ability was reduced by a similar amount as from the transition from steel to carbon, in 10 years time we'd all be saying we should move back from actively-cooled-super-duper-techno-brakes back to plain old carbon because the braking distances would be increased, and that'd lead to greater overtaking opportunities, when really... it wouldn't make much of a difference because it's all relative.

I see where you're coming from, I just don't think steel brakes would necessarily make that much of a difference, when it's really not the brakes that are currently the source of the problems in F1.

bartelby

Oct 16, 2007, 09:51 AM

I'd hate to think what F1 would be like now if they'd continued the development of the supertech cars they were getting to in the 80/90s with ABS and active steering and the like!

iGav

Oct 16, 2007, 10:15 AM

I'd hate to think what F1 would be like now if they'd continued the development of the supertech cars they were getting to in the 80/90s with ABS and active steering and the like!

It'd be intriguing.

In some ways, I'd maybe like to see the return of the Group B ethos... you know, like anything goes. :D

bartelby

Oct 16, 2007, 10:17 AM

It'd be intriguing.

In some ways, I'd maybe like to see the return of the Group B ethos... you know, like anything goes. :D

Maybe they could have a "No Holds Barred" support race when the teams can get as techy as they like.

xUKHCx

Oct 16, 2007, 10:22 AM

Maybe they could have a "No Holds Barred" support race when the teams can get as techy as they like.

I would love to see that. Watched a program once where the were interviewing people about how the regulations are holding back the progress and if they had their way the cars would have 6 smaller wheels instead of 4 (taller). Would make for interesting viewing. However for that to happen tthe current F1 would disappear.

bartelby

Oct 16, 2007, 10:25 AM

I would love to see that. Watched a program once where the were interviewing people about how the regulations are holding back the progress and if they had their way the cars would have 6 smaller wheels instead of 4 (taller). Would make for interesting viewing. However for that to happen tthe current F1 would disappear.

1200bhp 6lt V12s, active everything and rubber skirting!!

Lord Blackadder

Oct 16, 2007, 03:33 PM

It'd be intriguing.

In some ways, I'd maybe like to see the return of the Group B ethos... you know, like anything goes. :D

Turbos! I want to see tiny, tiny engines producing 4-digit power numbers again. :D

I like the idea of a no-holds-barred racing series that would truly showcase bleeding edge technology. The group B cars are so wild they capture our imagination decades after they stopped racing. But any hope of such a series would likely be sunk by some sort of safety or cost-control campaign.

iGav brought up a good point about relativity though - to a certain degree tech changes in F1 don't affect the racing so long as everyone is doing things the same way.

I would love to see that. Watched a program once where the were interviewing people about how the regulations are holding back the progress and if they had their way the cars would have 6 smaller wheels instead of 4 (taller). Would make for interesting viewing. However for that to happen tthe current F1 would disappear.

That sounds sort of familiar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrrell_P34), though the Tyrrell's wheels weren't all the same size.

Counterfit

Oct 17, 2007, 01:01 AM

Let's just bring back Can-Am, toss in a few McLarens in orange, and Porsches in Gulf and Sunoco colors and be done with it.

Okay, maybe a Chaparral or three.

iGav

Oct 17, 2007, 06:10 AM

1200bhp 6lt V12s, active everything and rubber skirting!!

Wouldn't a 6 litre V12 be nearer 2000bhp if we take into account F1's current ability to be able to produce somewhere in the region of 325-340bhp per-litre? :D

Heaven knows what they'd be though if they bolted a couple of turbos on there as well. :D

bartelby

Oct 17, 2007, 06:13 AM

Wouldn't a 6 litre V12 be nearer 2000bhp if we take into account F1's current ability to be able to produce somewhere in the region of 325-340bhp per-litre? :D

Heaven knows what they'd be though if they bolted a couple of turbos on there as well. :D

Yeah, I did think that after I posted. I just couldn't be bothered to edit my post.:o

iGav

Oct 17, 2007, 06:19 AM

Yeah, I did think that after I posted. I just couldn't be bothered to edit my post.:o

I've often wondered what the absolute fastest time possible around somewhere like Suzuka (or Spa) would be with an unlimited type car compared with todays restricted F1 cars.

Active aerodynamics alone would contribute massively... super skinny on the straights and near vertical come the corners... :D

bartelby

Oct 17, 2007, 06:21 AM

I've often wondered what the absolute fastest time possible around somewhere like Suzuka (or Spa) would be with an unlimited type car compared with todays restricted F1 cars.

Active aerodynamics alone would contribute massively... super skinny on the straights and near vertical come the corners... :D

Yeah, anyone brave enough would be able to do fastest laps too.
All they need to do is point the car in vaguely the right direction and keep their foot planted on the throttle!

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 11:39 AM

drlunanerd

Oct 21, 2007, 12:23 PM

Ok, here we go.

Predictions please!

Mine:
Hamilton on the podium and win the championship, IF the team don't f it up!
Alonso will bin it doing some ridiculous desperate move.
Kimi will either finish 2nd or have a reliability problem

Slight edit:
Hamilton will bin it doing some ridiculous desperate move.
Alonso on the podium and win the championship.

A sad end to a weekend of British sport unfortunately beckons :(

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 12:25 PM

Slight edit:
Hamilton will bin it doing some ridiculous desperate move.
Alonso on the podium and win the championship.

A sad end to a weekend of British sport unfortunately beckons :(

Hamilton only has to get to 7th and he's 11th at the moment.

drlunanerd

Oct 21, 2007, 12:28 PM

Hamilton only has to get to 7th and he's 11th at the moment.

Thanks for that :D
Thought he was out - last I saw he was coasting along apparently in trouble :eek:

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 12:30 PM

Thanks for that :D
Thought he was out - last I saw he was coasting along apparently in trouble :eek:

Gear box issues apparently.
Hamilton 10th!

MalcolmJID

Oct 21, 2007, 12:41 PM

What an overtake! :eek:

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 12:46 PM

What an overtake! :eek:

It was mental!!!

Hamilton 10th?

drlunanerd

Oct 21, 2007, 12:48 PM

Does Lewis only need to get to 7th irrespective of Alonso's position? Surely not?

Lord Blackadder

Oct 21, 2007, 01:19 PM

Look at the Iceman! :eek:

Hamilton in seventh with a few laps to go, but he needs fifth to take the title...

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 01:33 PM

I'm gutted.:(
But at least Alonso didn't win:)

Lord Blackadder

Oct 21, 2007, 01:37 PM

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 01:40 PM

So, out of nowhere, Ferrari win yet another drivers/constructors championship...could things look any worse for McLaren? :eek:

Credit to Kimi, he did what he had to do to win the title and deserves it.

Maybe we'll see Kimi smile!!

Well, McLaren lost the championship for themselves in China.

scotthayes

Oct 21, 2007, 01:53 PM

Gutted...

And hope this doesn't sound like sour-grape, but Alonso should have been thrown out of the championship for using data from Ferrari and Ferrari should have lost the points from Melbourne for an illegal floor. Guess it helps when FIA stands for Ferrari's International Aid!!!

vendettabass

Oct 21, 2007, 01:55 PM

Much Ado

Oct 21, 2007, 01:57 PM

This is worse than the 2007 WWDC aftermath... :(

scotthayes

Oct 21, 2007, 02:02 PM

in absolute utter complete agreement.

absolutely broken :(

But on a positive note, we have seen a future World Champion who will challenge MS for just about every record in F1

iGav

Oct 21, 2007, 02:10 PM

Got to feel for Hamilton... he's been far and away the most consistent of the top 4 this season, and to be let down by McLaren 2 races on the trot. :eek: :rolleyes: :(

Still... Kimi wins :D and Fred didn't ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. :D

And at least there's some justice in the fact that McHeater didn't win either of the Championships. :D

Lord Blackadder

Oct 21, 2007, 02:10 PM

To be sure, the Constructors' Championship was decided off-track, which sucks.

Alonso made an ass of himself this year with his antics, and only has himself to blame. McLaren cheated and ultimately paid the price.

At least this race was on the level, and Kimi won it fair and square on the track. I don't really want to see another Ferrari dynasty, but you have to admit that the current McLaren cars are tainted goods...Ferrari have done their share of rule-bending but McLaren's transgressions were so massive the FIA had no choice but to act and it could very well have been much worse for them. As it stands they must all be sitting around wondering where it all went wrong in a season where they should have easily taken both titles.

Alonso to Renault next season, I can't imagine that Ron Dennis can stand the sight of him at this point.

Hamilton was probably the best driver over the course of the season...no title this time, but if he keeps driving like this he'll be a world champion sooner rather than later.

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 02:16 PM

The scary thing is Alonso has been just as consistent as Hamilton.
If Alonso and Hamilton finished with equal points today, they'd countback to number of 5th places won. As they have the same 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4ths.

iGav

Oct 21, 2007, 02:18 PM

Alonso made an ass of himself this year with his antics, and only has himself to blame. McLaren cheated and ultimately paid the price.

Fred's behaviour this season made Schumacher look like a Pontiff in comparison. I've never seen anything like it. :eek: :rolleyes: :p

As for McLaren... :rolleyes:

scotthayes

Oct 21, 2007, 02:19 PM

Alonso made an ass of himself this year with his antics, and only has himself to blame. McLaren cheated and ultimately paid the price.

Agree about Alonso and his antics, but it was Alonso who cheated by knowing the Ferrari setup and changing his car.

At least this race was on the level, and Kimi won it fair and square on the track. I don't really want to see another Ferrari dynasty, but you have to admit that the current McLaren cars are tainted goods...Ferrari may have bent the rules as well but McLaren's transgressions were so massive they basically forced the FIA to act and it could very well have been much worse for them. As it stands they must all be sitting around wondering where it all went wrong in a season where they should have easily taken both titles.

But why no punishment for Ferrari for using a movable floor in Melbourne? If the FIA had no issue with it, why did they change their testing requirments?

Alonso to Renault next season, I can't imagine that Ron Dennis can stand the sight of him at this point.

And good riddance to him!!! Would love to see Mark Webber along side Lewis next year.

JFreak

Oct 21, 2007, 02:19 PM

YES!

After 7 years, Kimi finally got the title. This time car was reliable enough (as it wasn't in 2003) and the team mate didn't manage to take him down (as it was in 2005).

YES!!

iGav

Oct 21, 2007, 02:22 PM

The scary thing is Alonso has been just as consistent as Hamilton.

There's lies, damn lies... and then there's statistics. ;)

iGav

Oct 21, 2007, 02:27 PM

YES!

After 7 years, Kimi finally got the title. This time car was reliable enough (as it wasn't in 2003) and the team mate didn't manage to take him down (as it was in 2005).

YES!!

Could you neck one back for me when you go out to celebrate later... now that we're supporting the same driver and all. :eek: ;) :D

I was screaming at the telly to get Ferrari to let Kimi through once it it hit 75% distance, I had visions of a Brazil 2003 situation happening and Fred ending up winning because of Massa leading!

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 02:30 PM

Could you neck one back for me when you go out to celebrate later... now that we're supporting the same driver and all. :eek: ;) :D

Yeah, now he's won:rolleyes::p:D

iGav

Oct 21, 2007, 02:31 PM

But why no punishment for Ferrari for using a movable floor in Melbourne? If the FIA had no issue with it, why did they change their testing requirments?

Because Ferrari's floor passed the test and was thus legal. A clarification and change to the testing procedure was issued and not only Ferrari (but also McLaren and other teams I believe) had to make changes to their floor designs.

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 02:34 PM

Why has driver fairness only just become and issue. Why was it never scrutinised and monitored when Schuy was around?

iGav

Oct 21, 2007, 02:35 PM

Yeah, now he's won:rolleyes::p:D

I'll always support whoever drives the red car... apart from Fred that is. ;)

Kimi had a piss poor start to the season, I don't think that's up for debate, but he's really nailed the second half.

It's a shame Flippy suffered the number of mechanical gremlins that he did, otherwise he'd have been fighting for the championship as well, in pure pace stakes... there's little to choose between them both. :eek:

Now... how many more years do I have to wait until Mick Schumacher is old enough for a Super License??? ;) :D

iGav

Oct 21, 2007, 02:37 PM

Why has driver fairness only just become and issue. Why was it never scrutinised and monitored when Schuy was around?

Different situation... Ferrari weren't actively screwing with Schumacher's teammates cars, unlike McLaren were alleged to be doing.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 21, 2007, 02:39 PM

Agree about Alonso and his antics, but it was Alonso who cheated by knowing the Ferrari setup and changing his car.

True, but other McLaren employees acquired and used that information before Fred knew it existed.

But why no punishment for Ferrari for using a movable floor in Melbourne? If the FIA had no issue with it, why did they change their testing requirments?

<shrug> I don't know why they weren't punished, but you have to admit that what McLaren did goes far beyond illegal aerodynamic devices - they had the entire ferrari car design and all of the Scuderia's operational procedures in their pocket!

And good riddance to him!!! Would love to see Mark Webber along side Lewis next year.

Fred needs a Latin boss like Flav to reign him in, not a phlegmatic, stiff-upper-lip Brit.

Is Webber good enough though, or is he another Button?

I'll always support whoever drives the red car... apart from Fred that is. ;)

After this season Alonso will be a tough sell for anyone other than Renault IMHO. I can't see him staying at McLaren, and Ferrari now have a new world champion driver plus a very good No.2 driver.

JFreak

Oct 21, 2007, 02:42 PM

Shut up now, just celebrate Kimi's title :) He won most races this year and deserves the crown. Even if McLaren drivers did or didn't gain from having Ferrari tech in their cars (or not), Kimi won 6 races compared to 4 wins each for Hamilton and Alonso.

Celebrate! :)

iGav

Oct 21, 2007, 02:45 PM

He won most races this year and deserves the crown.

Just how it should be... :D

I still can't believe it though... it's like 1986 all over again. Incredible finish to the season. Literally the championship was open until the very last lap. :eek:

Lord Blackadder

Oct 21, 2007, 02:54 PM

LOL, well no matter how much we talk about McLaren, Kimi won it in a season that came down to the last race - something I've never experienced before. I hope I don't have to wait to long to see it happen again!

I have to say that Raikkonen deserved it more than the other two, after a couple heartbreaking runner-up finishes.

scotthayes

Oct 21, 2007, 02:55 PM

Because Ferrari's floor passed the test and was thus legal. A clarification and change to the testing procedure was issued and not only Ferrari (but also McLaren and other teams I believe) had to make changes to their floor designs.

“Quite clearly, any such device would be designed to permit flexibility and is therefore strictly prohibited by Article 3.15 of the Technical Regulations.” Charlie Whiting... Said when McLaren sought clarification from the FIA if the would allow a device intended to pass the test but function at much higher forces.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57650

oh and the interesting word when it comes to Ferrari and the testing of the floor is "circumvent"!!!

bartelby

Oct 21, 2007, 02:59 PM

oh and the interesting word when it comes to Ferrari and the testing of the floor is "circumvent"!!!

Isn't that the word to describe how Ferrari deal with most rules?:)

scotthayes

Oct 21, 2007, 03:00 PM

LOL, well no matter how much we talk about McLaren, Kimi won it in a season that came down to the last race - something I've never experienced before. I hope I don;t have to wait to long to see it happen again!
.

you mean you didn't experience 86 or 94? Wow, now I feel old :(

Markleshark

Oct 21, 2007, 03:06 PM

GET IN!!!!!!

Come on Kimi!

devman

Oct 21, 2007, 03:31 PM

I'm not a regular F1 watcher but wow, that was great theater. I really enjoyed watching it. I felt a bit sorry for Hamilton (who created some of his own problems though) but Kimi was a very worthy winner who had an excellent second half of the season, won 6 races, and should have won a world title before now.

I wondered why they didn't put more fuel in Hamilton's car on the 2nd stop? Was it too much weight for too long on the tires? (be gentle - I'm no F1 expert).

R.Youden

Oct 21, 2007, 04:07 PM

At last Fernando found out what that extra button on his steering wheel was for... (make Lewis go slow for 30 seconds)

I think Alonso may have been a bit cheeky at the start of the race a hit the brakes a few meters early into turn 3. Not sure, I will have to see it again.

But Kimi did deserve to win the title. He scored the most points. Lewis had more than his fair share of chances to win the title and a combination of himself making mistakes and the team screwing up, he didn't take it.

Bring on next season, yay.

When do we start the 2008 Formula One Thread?

R.Youden

Oct 21, 2007, 05:10 PM

Bloody Hell! Lewis could still win it.....

Link (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63547)

Three cars that finished ahead of him are under investigation!

sananda

Oct 21, 2007, 05:15 PM

Bloody Hell! Lewis could still win it.....

Link (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63547)

Three cars that finished ahead of him are under investigation!

oh!!

MacDonaldsd

Oct 21, 2007, 05:16 PM

He better not !!!

R.Youden

Oct 21, 2007, 05:19 PM

Didn't it surprise you the pace and competitiveness of the BMWs and the Williams this weekend? The thing is that you would not be able to tell the difference if you told Kimi he had not won the championship!

Lord Blackadder

Oct 21, 2007, 05:40 PM

They'll doc points or fine them, but I can't see it effecting the overall classification.

R.Youden

Oct 21, 2007, 05:44 PM

They'll doc points or fine them, but I can't see it effecting the overall classification.

If the doc points the Hamilton will win.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 21, 2007, 05:47 PM

R.Youden

Oct 21, 2007, 05:53 PM

I was thinking they might not DSQ them but instead tell them that they score no points - they would stay ranked in front of Hamilton, but not be awarded any points for those positions...

It would probably be simpler and less messy just to fine them.

Yeah that would be a bit messy. I imagine they will just get a fine, but if they get a performance advantage then they may get disqualified.

TurboLag

Oct 21, 2007, 06:16 PM

R.Youden

Oct 21, 2007, 06:22 PM

after all the fia has done this year to ensure Hamilton wins,and don't get me started on that, this would be the last straw. If the championship were to be decided by teams who were not in contention and given to a driver in a silver un-badged Ferrari , I'll be watching a1gp next year. Thats my two cents.

So if the 3 cars concerned are illegal then you will let them off just because it isn't fair? Unfortunately if they have gained an extra 5-10hp from this then they have broken the rules and deserve to be kicked out, sorry. I would be very sorry for Kimi as I think he deserved it, but they have to stick by the rules.

displaced

Oct 21, 2007, 06:48 PM

This is a really unfortunate situation...

Logically, I agree that some sanctions must be placed on any team that breaks the rules. However, I don't think Hamilton would like to 'win' in this manner.

The way the season's ended, points-wise, is superb. The three drivers have all been outstanding and although there can be only one champion, Alonso and Hamilton both ran some great races.

Emotionally, I'd hate to see Kimi denied a championship in this way, just as I think it'd be a disservice to Hamilton for him to win on a technicality. Kimi's worked damn hard for this and is a worthy champion.

I don't know how this'll unfold, but I sincerely hope it won't change the final drivers' standings.

(by the way, I watched this race at Bluewater Cinema... Absolutely awesome up on the big screen, with some commentary which underlined how poor James Allen is.)

I wondered why they didn't put more fuel in Hamilton's car on the 2nd stop? Was it too much weight for too long on the tires? (be gentle - I'm no F1 expert).

I believe that was the stop they sent Hamilton out on the super-soft tyres (with the white stripe on them). They wouldn't have lasted more than about 15 or so laps anyway, so they only fuelled him for the distance the tyres would last, thus ensuring he had the lightest car possible with which to try to make up some time.

smueboy

Oct 21, 2007, 07:24 PM

If they go so far as to disqualify/penalise Rosberg, Kubica and Heidfeld and in doing so install Hamilton as champion it will be a really sour end to the season.
Considering that the issue relates to the fuel the BMW and Williams team were using (having possibly fallen more than 10C below air temperature, which is not allowed in the regulations), this seems like a relatively minor issue that should not result in Kimi losing the title.

Edit: Speed TV just said that the FIA would not penalise the teams so the current standings will remain.

sananda

Oct 21, 2007, 07:26 PM

(by the way, I watched this race at Bluewater Cinema... Absolutely awesome up on the big screen, with some commentary which underlined how poor James Allen is.)

i saw it at the greenwich odeon. watching the highlights now on itv and i must say martin's commentary shows just how poor the f1 in cinema one was.

UPDATE: no penalty for sauber and williams. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63567

Counterfit

Oct 22, 2007, 02:10 AM

FORZA!

C'mon Kimi, it's red wig time! :p

bartelby

Oct 22, 2007, 03:12 AM

Things go Ferrari's way yet again...:rolleyes:

I'm sure if it was the other way round and McLaren won the FIA would have disqualified BMW and Sauber.

scotthayes

Oct 22, 2007, 03:49 AM

Things go Ferrari's way yet again...:rolleyes:

I'm sure if it was the other way round and McLaren won the FIA would have disqualified BMW and Sauber.

Of course things go Ferrari's way again, that's because FIA stands for Ferrari's International Aid.

It's not like it was a one off thing with the fuel temps.

From the BBC...

"Heidfeld's fuel was 13C lower than ambient at his first stop and 12C lower at his second.

Kubica's varied by 14C, 13C and 13C at his three stops, while Rosberg's was 13C and 12C out at his two stops."

Now it may not have made any difference to the final placing in the race due to Hamilton's problems when his car slowed down, but rules are rules. If they found a problem and it clearly breached the rules then Heidfeld, Kubica and Rosberg should be disqualified.

R.Youden

Oct 22, 2007, 03:56 AM

I think that over the winter the FIA needs to sit down with the rule book and outline punishments for each breach of a particular rule. In my opinion any breach which gives you any advantage during the race deserves a DQ, even if you may not have gained any more points.

scotthayes

Oct 22, 2007, 03:58 AM

Markleshark

Oct 22, 2007, 04:00 AM

<Crap>

So did you bother to read the rest of that article, or just the parts that suit you?

However, the total advantage for each car over the race distance was almost certainly no more than a second.

There is some form of precedent not to exclude the cars.

In 1995, the Benetton-Renault of Michael Schumacher and the Williams-Renault of David Coulthard were initially disqualified from first and second in Brazil because their fuel did not conform to samples approved by the FIA.

But a week later the FIA, who said no advantage had been gained, reinstated the drivers' points, preferring instead to dock points from their teams.

They set the president for that a long time ago, I guess we've all forgotten that Hamilton broke the rules on Friday and only the team was punished?

Oh yeah, and then there was the whole spy saga. In my opinion, it could be argued Hamilton and Alonso shouldn't even have finished the season.

bartelby

Oct 22, 2007, 04:12 AM

I guess we've all forgotten that Hamilton broke the rules on Friday and only the team was punished?

Not just Hamilton remember.

scotthayes

Oct 22, 2007, 04:14 AM

So did you bother to read the rest of that article, or just the parts that suit you?

They set the president for that a long time ago, I guess we've all forgotten that Hamilton broke the rules on Friday and only the team was punished?

Oh yeah, and then there was the whole spy saga. In my opinion, it could be argued Hamilton and Alonso shouldn't even have finished the season.

Wow, you are a happy chappy...

Yes I did read the whole article, but posted the bit that states where the rules were broken.

So did you read my whole post? You know the bit where I mentioned that it wouldn't have made any difference to where they finished? Or did you just read the bit that suited you?

Markleshark

Oct 22, 2007, 04:16 AM

Not just Hamilton remember.

Ok, so Button and Sato (?) as well... For the difference it makes...

Wow, you are a happy chappy...

Yes I did read the whole article, but posted the bit that states where the rules were broken.

So did you read my whole post? You know the bit where I mentioned that it wouldn't have made any difference to where they finished? Or did you just read the bit that suited you?

Point being, it would have made a difference, had Hamiltion finished higher...

bartelby

Oct 22, 2007, 04:17 AM

Wow, you are a happy chappy...

Yes I did read the whole article, but posted the bit that states where the rules were broken.

So did you read my whole post? You know the bit where I mentioned that it wouldn't have made any difference to where they finished? Or did you just read the bit that suited you?

Ferrari fans read things to do with rules like the team.;):D

Markleshark

Oct 22, 2007, 05:38 AM

Ferrari fans read things to do with rules like the team.;):D

I'm not even going to bother... :rolleyes:

:D;)

Evangelion

Oct 22, 2007, 09:21 AM

If they decide to alter the scores afterwards, then they should punish Hamilton for the crap he pulled with the safety-car a while back. They should also re-evaluate the punishment for the spying-affair, for which they came off lightly.

Seriously: Even if the gasoline-complaint has merit, it's effect on the final results would have been neglible (IIRC, about one second). McLaren really shouldn't start throwing stones when they are in a glass house.

iGav

Oct 22, 2007, 09:24 AM

“Quite clearly, any such device would be designed to permit flexibility and is therefore strictly prohibited by Article 3.15 of the Technical Regulations.” Charlie Whiting... Said when McLaren sought clarification from the FIA if the would allow a device intended to pass the test but function at much higher forces.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57650

oh and the interesting word when it comes to Ferrari and the testing of the floor is "circumvent"!!!

The Ferrari floor, as it stood at the time was legal. It passed the testing procedure that was then in place to establish the legality of the car. Was it within the spirit of the rules? That would certainly be up for debate.

Interestingly, if we consider that McLaren also had to make changes to their own car to pass the new procedure, would could assume that McLaren themselves were maybe not operating within the spirit of the rules either, otherwise no changes would have been required by them.

We should maybe also not forget that McLaren's clarification was based on stolen confidential information from a rival team.

Of course things go Ferrari's way again, that's because FIA stands for Ferrari's International Aid.

And where was this Aid the last 2 previous seasons?

Or the proceeding 16 years prior to 1999?

Or 1990 perhaps?

bartelby

Oct 22, 2007, 09:32 AM

We should maybe also not forget that McLaren's clarification was based on stolen confidential information from a rival team.

Don't forget Nigel Stepney had details of the McLaren car whilst he was employed by Ferrari.

iGav

Oct 22, 2007, 10:28 AM

Don't forget Nigel Stepney had details of the McLaren car whilst he was employed by Ferrari.

Proof?

Didn't think so. ;) :p

Don't panic

Oct 22, 2007, 10:34 AM

Of course things go Ferrari's way again, that's because FIA stands for Ferrari's International Aid.

:rolleyes:
i guess you must have missed the part of the season when it was PROVEN that McLaren CHEATED, but FIA only gave them a slap on the wrist and handed Alonso and Hamilton a booklet of free 'get out of jail" cards....

the temp issue is a non-issue:

- there are contradicting reports on what the ambient temp was and what the fuel temp was. some scenario would make the temp illegal, some not. no penalty were issued because it couldn't be decided which the correct data were.

- bmw and williams were apparently the only two teams tested, the refueling rigs are standardized and the temperature in brazil was much higher than anticipated. maybe the teams were not in control of the temp situation?

- the OVERALL gain from a difference of 2-3ºC at refueling would add up to whopping grand total of LESS than 1 second advantage over the entire race distance.

- precedent suggest that these kind of infractions (if they occur) are penalized with a fine or at most constructor's points. the effect on the WCC would be exactly zero, all the teams would maintain the exact same position s even if the constructor points were docked from bmw and williams

Lewis lost the championship because he choked in the last two races, and particularly yesterday with two major mistakes.

If anything, FIA and FOM have protected hamilton all season, so Ron Dennis should just let it go, and realize that he doesn't need to add "sore loser" to the 'cheater' title he already won this year.

start working on the '08 car already, and give hamilton a chance to win fair and square.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 22, 2007, 11:33 AM

Markleshark

Oct 22, 2007, 11:34 AM

So, apparently Mclaren are appealing the ruling in an attempt to get Heidfeld, Kubica and Rosberg DSQ'd - and Hamilton the title. Fred is not happy about it. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7056308.stm)

He said he'd be embarrassed if Hamilton won it because of that, and tbh, I'd have to agree.

BanjoBanker

Oct 22, 2007, 12:06 PM

So, apparently Mclaren are appealing the ruling in an attempt to get Heidfeld, Kubica and Rosberg DSQ'd - and Hamilton the title. Fred is not happy about it. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7056308.stm)

Hamilton lost the title fair and square when Raikkonen won. DSQing Heidfeld and Kubica would not affect the outcome. Kimi was the man, let him enjoy.:)

Lord Blackadder

Oct 22, 2007, 01:48 PM

He said he'd be embarrassed if Hamilton won it because of that, and tbh, I'd have to agree.

I also agree with his words, but I doubt his motives. Fred doesn't want to see justice done so much as see Hamilton lose. I am very happy Kimi won, he deserved it, and I don't want to see anything changed.

iGav

Oct 22, 2007, 02:04 PM

Fred doesn't want to see justice done so much as see Hamilton lose.

Though, at least Hamilton beat Fred in the Championship. Still makes me :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p that does.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 22, 2007, 02:46 PM

Yeah, you can't get around the fact that Alonso was only the third-best driver this season. He's still championship material in terms of skill, but if he wins another drivers' title he'll really have to earn it with Hamilton and Raikkonen around. And he'll have to keep his temper, something he's failed to do thus far.

I expect all three to be contending next season, as Formula One enters what might be a golden age of sorts...

R.Youden

Oct 22, 2007, 02:57 PM

Lord Blackadder

Oct 22, 2007, 03:05 PM

But if Freddie isn't in a car that is capable of winning then there will be only 2 plus their team-mates will have half a sniff.

True, though Alonso won his first title in a car that was slower than some of its rivals...though it made up for it in other ways. I'm not up on the Renault's capability this season, though the results indicate it isn't a contender.

SpookTheHamster

Oct 22, 2007, 04:15 PM

BMW are steadily getting better (let's ignore the fuel issue), I can see them challenging a little more next year. It would be nice to see more than two teams battling out at the top.

iGav

Oct 23, 2007, 10:51 AM

Don't (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63606) you even f**kin' think about it Monty.

bartelby

Oct 23, 2007, 10:52 AM

Don't (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63606) you even f**kin' think about it Monty.

He's an arse!

He tried to stop Alfa from making the C8!

iGav

Oct 23, 2007, 10:59 AM

He tried to stop Alfa from making the C8!

That's baby ***** in comparison to what this dude is doing now... he's trying to charm Fred. He must've being watching an entirely different F(**kin')1 season than the one I've been watching.

Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.

Only substitute the word worlds for F1

bartelby

Oct 23, 2007, 11:00 AM

That's baby ***** in comparison to what this dude is doing now... he's trying to charm Fred. He must've being watching an entirely different F(**kin')1 season than the one I've been watching.

Like I said, the guy is an arse!

I'd love to see Alonso at Ferrari though or maybe STR:D

Lord Blackadder

Oct 23, 2007, 02:02 PM

Do you really think they'd dump Kimi if they had the chance to get Alonso? That sounds like a pretty stupid move.

iGav

Oct 23, 2007, 02:14 PM

Do you really think they'd dump Kimi if they had the chance to get Alonso?

Nope. Montezemolo wanted Kimi.

They'd either bump Massa to another team, or they'd drop him back into the ranks of test driver, which is kind of ironic when you think about it, considering he's been consistently quicker than Kimi for much of the season, and the only reason he wasn't fighting for the championship in Brazil was down to reliability.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 23, 2007, 02:28 PM

I don't know what he's thinking then...it's true that Alonso is very fast, but he has been a cancer for McLaren this year. Kimi certainly won't want him around, and I can't see Alonso playing nice with Kimi any more than he did with Hamilton. Alonso will want to move to a team where he will be treated like the primadonna he is, and the other driver is merely a sidekick - a mobile chicane to hold off the rest of the field while Fred takes the glory.

bartelby

Oct 23, 2007, 02:36 PM

Do you really think they'd dump Kimi if they had the chance to get Alonso? That sounds like a pretty stupid move.

Make Alonso the test driver!

Squonk

Oct 23, 2007, 02:39 PM

Make Alonso the test driver!

Somehow that would just not feed his ego enough...

Spyker baby!

iGav

Oct 23, 2007, 02:46 PM

Spyker baby!

Spyker (AKA Force India :p) is never gonna have enough time this winter to work their way through the queue of drivers wanting a drive for next season. :p

JFreak

Oct 23, 2007, 03:12 PM

the only reason he wasn't fighting for the championship in Brazil was down to reliability.

You mean if Kimi hadn't retired twice and Massa once for tech trouble? Sure, it would've helped :)

If we're talking about the same F1 season, as I remember it, Kimi had two tech troubles in Spain (electrical failure) and in Germany (hydraulics failure) and one personal mistake in Monaco qualifying. On the other hand, Massa had one tech trouble in Italy (suspension failure) and two personal mistakes in Canada (where he was disqualified) and Hungary (where he finished out of points).

As far as I can calculate, Kimi had more car problems than Massa (who had more "operator problems" than Kimi).

iGav

Oct 23, 2007, 03:45 PM

You mean if Kimi hadn't retired twice and Massa once for tech trouble? Sure, it would've helped :)

If we're talking about the same F1 season, as I remember it, Kimi had two tech troubles in Spain (electrical failure) and in Germany (hydraulics failure) and one personal mistake in Monaco qualifying. On the other hand, Massa had one tech trouble in Italy (suspension failure) and two personal mistakes in Canada (where he was disqualified) and Hungary (where he finished out of points).

As far as I can calculate, Kimi had more car problems than Massa (who had more "operator problems" than Kimi).

Massa suffered mechanical problems in Australia (engine/gearbox change) and Silverstone (car cutting out on the grid, no he didn't stall it) that resulted in him starting from the pit lane/back of the grid in both instances heavily compromising his ability to score points.

He also experienced tyre problems during the final stint of the European GP, a GP that Räikkönen made an error in when entering the pits, arguably costing him the victory.

In Hungary his qualifying was compromised by the team when they failed to actually fill the car up with fuel for a second run during Q2 resulting in failure to reach Q3.

His strategy was also compromised for the last 3 races in support of Kimi (and rightly so) who was then in the stronger points position.

As I said, had it not being for reliability (mechanical and operational) he'd have still been in the hunt along with the other 3 in Brazil.

Would he have won the WDC? Who knows... all I know is, they were both very evenly matched over the duration of the season.

R.Youden

Oct 23, 2007, 03:45 PM

iGav

Oct 24, 2007, 11:57 AM

From what I can remember:

Massa:

Qualifying - Australia - Gearbox
Race - Malaysia - Mistakes
Race - Canada - D/Q
Race - GB - Stalled on Grid
Qualifying - Hungarian- No fuel in car during Q2
Race - Italy - Suspension
Race - Japan - Wrong tyres

Kimi:

Race - Spain - Suspension
Qualifying - Monaco - Accident
Race - European - Hydraulic
Race - Japan - Wrong tyres

So from that Kimi only made one mistake all season (Monaco, probably the worst place to make it) whilst Massa made three mistakes whilst Kimi had 3 car issues and Massa 4 car issues.

Massa suffered with a tyre vibration problem in the European GP, which accounted for his drop off in performance after the last stop, which was not caused by the rain as some in the media erroneously reported at the time.

The car stalling on the grid at Silverstone cannot be attributed to him, there was a fault with the start systems on the car.

Räikkönen made an error in the European GP on entering the pit lane that dropped him from the lead down to 7th, though of course as rightly pointed out he suffered a mechanical failure in that race.

He also made a blinding error in qualifying for the Italian GP.

Anyway, the point of my original post wasn't to degenerate Räikkönen or his validity as champion, it was merely to suggest that it was a shame that Massa (because of circumstances outside of his control) wasn't able to fight for the championship in Brazil, or indeed for the last 3 races of the season. Which was a shame considering his pace all season.

iGav

Oct 24, 2007, 12:04 PM

In other news...

Engine development frozen for ten years (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63626).

&

Night race and 2008 calendar confirmed (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63631).

On the former... I'm not sure what this means for the introduction of energy recovery systems and more environmentally friendly tech. Either way I don't much like the sound of being stuck with sub 800bhp F1 cars for another 11 years.

On the latter... I'm disappointed that Imola hasn't made a return, I looked forward to seeing F1 cars on the new layout, which now features a straight run from to Rivazza all the way down to Traguardo/Tamburello. :(

JFreak

Oct 24, 2007, 12:38 PM

F1 is not EU-series anymore. It used to only have few distance races but now it seems BE wants to distribute races evenly to every continent.

I've always liked to watch Australian, Brazilian, Canadian and Japanese races. I'm not so sure if I want to watch Bahrain, Malaysia, Shanghai and whatever BE might have in mind.

If I could make the rules, they would only count best 10-12 races for each driver, depending on how many races there is in the series. It might reflect my age, but I liked the championship battle in the 80's and therefore I would want those rules back.

Like that would ever happen... ;)

Lord Blackadder

Oct 24, 2007, 01:11 PM

I think engine development freezes start to make Formula One sound like a spec series. Lame.

SpookTheHamster

Oct 24, 2007, 03:50 PM

Worst. Idea. Ever. Ten years?! Are they expecting the entire engineering world to freeze with them or something? In other (future) news; nobody cares about F1.

bartelby

Oct 24, 2007, 03:52 PM

Worst. Idea. Ever. Ten years?! Are they expecting the entire engineering world to freeze with them or something? In other (future) news; nobody cares about F1.

Yeah, I think this may just about kill my interest in F1...

AlBDamned

Oct 24, 2007, 06:52 PM

Worst. Idea. Ever. Ten years?! Are they expecting the entire engineering world to freeze with them or something? In other (future) news; nobody cares about F1.

See here:

Lord Blackadder

Oct 25, 2007, 12:42 AM

AlBDamned

Oct 25, 2007, 01:00 AM

R.Youden

Oct 25, 2007, 08:25 AM

To me, the essential element of Formula One is the fact that it brings bleeding-edge technology out to the racecourse and puts said tech into the hands of the world's best drivers. By removing the element of constant technological development, you are ripping the heart out of the sport.

This is something I have been thinking about for a while:

From a personal point of view, having worked, and hopefully to work in F1 again, it is a shame that technology is being removed from the sport. However there are still plenty of areas where teams can push the boundaries of technology. What the FIA wants is for technology developments within F1 to be related to "real-world" scenarios. Areas such as crash testing and the idea of survival cells have had a massive impact on road car safety. One area that a lot of teams are investing money in is to develop more cost effective carbon composite manufacturing techniques, something which could have a huge advantage to road car manufacturers and the environment. Now engine development, how much of that ever gets into road cars? Very little, maybe the idea of making engines more efficient, but that is about it.

But from a sporting point of view I don't think that making the cars 'slower' is a bad thing. I would rather see cars with less grip go 5-seconds a lap slower if improves racing. I think people are saying "oh reduction of technology is a bad thing" when they don't look at the big picture. In a way this secures the future of the series for a upto 10 years. The FIA wants more privateer teams in F1 and by freezing engine development then ensure that smaller teams can buy engines cheaper as the Honda, Renault, Toyota don't have to spend millions of pounds developing the engines.

i think this is a shrewd move by the FIA and I tentatively agree with it.

iGav

Oct 25, 2007, 08:41 AM

Schumacher in the F2007 for the first time (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63637). :D :D :D :D :D :D

AndyR

Oct 25, 2007, 09:17 AM

This is something I have been thinking about for a while:

From a personal point of view, having worked, and hopefully to work in F1 again, it is a shame that technology is being removed from the sport. However there are still plenty of areas where teams can push the boundaries of technology. What the FIA wants is for technology developments within F1 to be related to "real-world" scenarios. Areas such as crash testing and the idea of survival cells have had a massive impact on road car safety. One area that a lot of teams are investing money in is to develop more cost effective carbon composite manufacturing techniques, something which could have a huge advantage to road car manufacturers and the environment. Now engine development, how much of that ever gets into road cars? Very little, maybe the idea of making engines more efficient, but that is about it.

But from a sporting point of view I don't think that making the cars 'slower' is a bad thing. I would rather see cars with less grip go 5-seconds a lap slower if improves racing. I think people are saying "oh reduction of technology is a bad thing" when they don't look at the big picture. In a way this secures the future of the series for a upto 10 years. The FIA wants more privateer teams in F1 and by freezing engine development then ensure that smaller teams can buy engines cheaper as the Honda, Renault, Toyota don't have to spend millions of pounds developing the engines.

i think this is a shrewd move by the FIA and I tentatively agree with it.

Similar boat to you and yes I agree totally. What F1 needs is "racing" not "following" or "pit stop passing" which is the way the sport has been going recently.

I can also speak from another side of the coin, as a driver. I have raced semi-pro in a lot of categories all the way up to Champ Car Barber Dodge and testing in Champ Car Atlantic. The racing in the US Champ Car series is second to none and something F1 would be wise to try and replicate. With the exception of Nascar which is huge, the Champ Car race for example at Surfers Paradise last weekend attracted 300,000 spectators over the weekend. F1 NEVER gets this many people at a race weekend, why, its too dam expensive and its not designed for the fans but is more for the sponsors.

I hope F1 does get better, esp with Lewis in it now, but if it doesn't there are always other series to watch.

R.Youden

Oct 25, 2007, 10:32 AM

Similar boat to you and yes I agree totally. What F1 needs is "racing" not "following" or "pit stop passing" which is the way the sport has been going recently.

I can also speak from another side of the coin, as a driver. I have raced semi-pro in a lot of categories all the way up to Champ Car Barber Dodge and testing in Champ Car Atlantic. The racing in the US Champ Car series is second to none and something F1 would be wise to try and replicate. With the exception of Nascar which is huge, the Champ Car race for example at Surfers Paradise last weekend attracted 300,000 spectators over the weekend. F1 NEVER gets this many people at a race weekend, why, its too dam expensive and its not designed for the fans but is more for the sponsors.

I hope F1 does get better, esp with Lewis in it now, but if it doesn't there are always other series to watch.

Hold on a minutes, I am not saying Formula One should become Champ Car, hell no.

I think it is important that you have the definition of teams rather than the choice between two chassis and two engines. The question is, how much would the fans notice if the engines had 25 less bhp?

This also brings up the question, what if before the teams choose the engine for the freeze, they bring out an absolute dog of an engine, are they stuck with that for 10 years.

The thing that most people don't get is that building a car to go fast is pretty easy. Even making a car that can go round corners pretty quick isn't that hard. When the teams spend the millions of pounds per year on is making a car go quick within certain limitations. If they don't spend money on engines they will spend it on something else. You just need to look at the new wind-tunnels springing up around central England these days. The technology in them is world leading and is benefitting other industrial sectors. For example the knowledge from F1 is being used in road cars to make them more aerodynamic or therefore more fuel efficient.

So without the engine budget for each year they will now start investing in areas that have a REAL impact on road car manufacturing. That is, at the end of the day, why Honda, Toyota, Renault etc.. are involved in motorsport. What they learn from engine development will never go into road cars. A few years ago the FIA banned exotic materials from the engines, it was the manufacturers who pushed this idea because they didn't want to pay for it as there was not overall gain from it, but they had to develop it otherwise they would get left behind the likes of Ferrari and Toyota who didn't care if it was financially viable.

Markleshark

Oct 25, 2007, 10:51 AM

Ten Years? Stupid, just plain stupid.

Lord Blackadder

Oct 25, 2007, 10:58 AM

Some good points. Is the FIA still toying with the idea of spec aero packages, or is that dead?

I guess I'm automatically suspicious of attempts to freeze technology in Formula One, though if it improves the racing it would be hard to argue against it...I suppose we'll have to wait and see what happens.

I get the feeling that the Bernie wants to see more privateer teams, but he also wants them doing their own chassis and engines. it's going to be a tall order to get such teams truly competitive.

bartelby

Nov 2, 2007, 04:42 AM

What do you guys think about Max saying Lewis is not good for F1?

Why would Lewis being dominant be bad for F1 when Schumy's reign was good?

Would it make a difference if Lewis drove for Ferrari?

AlBDamned

Nov 2, 2007, 04:48 AM

What do you guys think about Max saying Lewis is not good for F1?

Why would Lewis being dominant be bad for F1 when Schumy's reign was good?

Would it make a difference if Lewis drove for Ferrari?

I think his comments are a) taken out of context and have been skewed quite badly and b) mildly carry his dislike of Ron Dennis within.

A good angle for a news story. nothing more IMHO.

iGav

Nov 2, 2007, 08:27 AM

Alonso secures exit from McLaren (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7074737.stm).

Never saw that one coming.

Markleshark

Nov 2, 2007, 08:33 AM

Who will fill that McLaren seat? My money is split between Nico Rosberg,
Nick Heidfeld and Robert Kubica.

More importantly possibly, where will Alonso go? I can see where he'll go. :confused:

koobcamuk

Nov 2, 2007, 08:36 AM

Alonso secures exit from McLaren (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7074737.stm).

Never saw that one coming.

Me neither. :)

Alonso's face is so.... big

AndyR

Nov 2, 2007, 08:37 AM

I reckon Kovalinen will be sent to McLaren now and Alonso will end up back at Renault.

AlBDamned

Nov 2, 2007, 08:38 AM

Alonso's face is so.... big

LOL, what a pic...

Markleshark

Nov 2, 2007, 08:53 AM

I reckon Kovalinen will be sent to McLaren now and Alonso will end up back at Renault.

Kovalainen won't leave Renault. He is Flavio Briatore's Lewis Hamilton. If anyone looses their seat at Renault it'll be Fisichella.

scotthayes

Nov 2, 2007, 08:55 AM

that has to be the biggest shock in sport since Spurs fired Martin Jol

R.Youden

Nov 2, 2007, 08:57 AM

I heard a whisper from a 'contact' that Freddie could be off to Red Bull. It would make sense for all parties. Red Bull are ploughing a lot of money into Formula One and it would be a massive challenge for Alonso, similar to the way Schumacher turned things around at Ferrari.

EDIT: Just seen that the BBC say he could be off to Red Bull too.

iGav

Nov 2, 2007, 09:15 AM

similar to the way Schumacher turned things around at Ferrari.

Well, Fred almost achieved the exact opposite during his brief stay at McLaren. :p

Red Bull has been mooted as a potential destination since Spa (Alonso spied in discussion with Red Bull bosses), I'm just praying he doesn't end up at Ferrari, the press release announcing Massa's contract extension was oddly worded to say the least.

bartelby

Nov 2, 2007, 09:18 AM

Well, Fred almost achieved the exact opposite during his brief stay at McLaren. :p

Red Bull has been mooted as a potential destination since Spa (Alonso spied in discussion with Red Bull bosses), I'm just praying he doesn't end up at Ferrari, the press release announcing Massa's contract extension was oddly worded to say the least.

Fred for Ferrari!!!
That would be fantastic!:D

iGav

Nov 2, 2007, 09:38 AM

Would it make a difference if Lewis drove for Ferrari?

Max hates Ferrari.

Otherwise he wouldn't have kept changing the rules every season since 2000 to stop them (and Schumacher) winning.

;)

smueboy

Nov 2, 2007, 09:49 AM

LOL, what a pic...

A walking caricature!

I'd be surprised if he went back to Renault, though Red Bull is quite a step down from McLaren. But Kovalainen could go to McLaren, and Fisichella is not exactly performing well for Renault.

AlBDamned

Nov 2, 2007, 10:02 AM

A walking caricature!

I'd be surprised if he went back to Renault, though Red Bull is quite a step down from McLaren. But Kovalainen could go to McLaren, and Fisichella is not exactly performing well for Renault.

He's only marginally more photogenic than I am ;).

Could Red Bull be the surprise package of next year? With a full year of Newey's cars and influence under their belts, perhaps?

iGav

Nov 5, 2007, 06:43 AM

Could Red Bull be the surprise package of next year? With a full year of Newey's cars and influence under their belts, perhaps?

Don't forget the extra 6 tenths if Fred does go there. :rolleyes: :p :p

iGav

Nov 6, 2007, 05:52 AM

"It's probably a one-off. Michael does not intend at all to go back to F1"

Or he's about to make the greatest comeback (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7080715.stm) since Elvis in '68. :D :D :D

smueboy

Nov 6, 2007, 08:58 AM

Or he's about to make the greatest comeback (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7080715.stm) since Elvis in '68. :D :D :D

Not surprising really - he'll probably get more involved in testing etc. as time goes on.

Lord Blackadder

Nov 6, 2007, 09:15 AM

Schu would make a great test driver, to be sure.

What is it with F1 drivers and big faces? The Schu Bros, Fred, Coulthard...

bartelby

Nov 6, 2007, 09:16 AM

Schu would make a great test driver, to be sure.

What is it with F1 drivers and big faces? The Schu Bros, Fred, Coulthard...

Their faces mold to the insides of the helmets!

iGav

Nov 8, 2007, 09:01 AM

bartelby

Nov 8, 2007, 09:03 AM

Renault summoned (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63853) to appear before the WMSC to answer charges of spying.

Lucky Ferrari's there to uphold the integrity of F1 really isn't it... what with McLaren, Renault, Toyota and Honda cheating and all. :p :p :p

And still Ferrari get away with cheating!

Stepney has admitted he had confidential data on other teams when he was still employed by Ferrari!

iGav

Nov 8, 2007, 09:07 AM

Stepney has admitted he had confidential data on other teams when he was still employed by Ferrari!

The man's the epitome of integrity. I believe every word he says. :p

R.Youden

Nov 8, 2007, 12:33 PM

This is getting a bit silly now. What happens is EVERY team is found to have information from other teams at their factory? Will every team be fined $100million and leave Max on a big fat windfall?

smueboy

Nov 8, 2007, 01:17 PM

This is getting a bit silly now. What happens is EVERY team is found to have information from other teams at their factory? Will every team be fined $100million and leave Max on a big fat windfall?

HA! $100 million fine for all, and nobody scores constructors points next year - except Ferrari. :eek:
:D

iGav

Nov 8, 2007, 01:48 PM

Will every team be fined $100million and leave Max on a big fat windfall?

Didn't Max say the fine would be proportionate to the size of the team and thus its ability to pay? In which case you could probably halve the $100 million for a team like Renault.

What I wonder is, if the reason why McLaren were not kicked out of the 2008 season was because potentially (bear in mind that the FIA and the WMSC were aware of Renault at the time of Spygate) the precedent would've been set meaning that (if they're guilty of course) the 2008 championship would've fought between just 9 teams then. :eek:

Lord Blackadder

Nov 8, 2007, 01:59 PM

I think that's exactly the case - everyone knew that if McLaren got what they deserved, the FIA would be compelled to come down on several other teams, and the 2008 season would be a total farce. Justice had to take a back seat to potential revenue disaster.

Besides, every team in the paddock cheats in some way, even if it is limited to sneaking a look in a competitor's garage...it's just that some teams go much, much farther than others.

iGav

Nov 9, 2007, 06:33 AM

Hill asks more questions (http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19851.html).

But still obviously doesn't understand the answers. :rolleyes:

R.Youden

Nov 9, 2007, 03:21 PM

Renault are in the brown and very smelly. If anything this is even worse than what McLaren had...

Autosport Link (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63878)

bartelby

Nov 9, 2007, 03:24 PM

The man's the epitome of integrity. I believe every word he says. :p

I think the same about Jean Todt, Max Mosley, Bernie Ecclestone and the FIA in general.

So will Renault lose all their constructors points for the 2007 season?

R.Youden

Nov 9, 2007, 03:51 PM

They must fine Renault an equivalent amount and kick them out of the championship. But if they have gone further than McLaren then they may get kicked out for next year.

emotion

Nov 9, 2007, 03:53 PM

They must fine Renault an equivalent amount and kick them out of the championship. But if they have gone further than McLaren then they may get kicked out for next year.

Alonso to Red Bull then?

So who leaves at Red Bull, Webber or Coulthard?

Squonk

Nov 9, 2007, 03:56 PM

Alonso to Red Bull then?

So who leaves at Red Bull, Webber or Coulthard?

I've been thinking Alonso to Red Bull all along. Seeing as how Flavio manages Webber, then maybe Webber to Toyoto or keep Webber at RB and DC out to pasture? I hope not, I like DC.

R.Youden

Nov 9, 2007, 03:59 PM

Alonso to Red Bull then?

So who leaves at Red Bull, Webber or Coulthard?

It would have to be Webber, although DC may leave if they don't change the wing mirrors!

R.Youden

Nov 9, 2007, 04:02 PM

I've been thinking Alonso to Red Bull all along. Seeing as how Flavio manages Webber, then maybe Webber to Toyoto or keep Webber at RB and DC out to pasture? I hope not, I like DC.

Toyota are after Glock for next year to partner, there is something kicking off that means it is going to the CRB as BMW are willing to let him go to Toyota but only for a year and the contract Toyota have offered is a long term deal.

iGav

Nov 9, 2007, 04:02 PM

I think the same about Jean Todt, Max Mosley, Bernie Ecclestone and the FIA in general.

You forgot to add... Ron Dennis, McLaren, Renault, Honda, Toyota... ;) :p

So will Renault lose all their constructors points for the 2007 season?

If what they've admitted is true, they should be retrospectively kicked out of the 2007 championship, and will likely suffer a similar, though proportionate fine to McLaren. The man in question only joined Renault in 2006 so it's unlikely that season will be affected.

Still, thankfully the good ship Ferrari is able to help carry and maintain the integrity of the Formula 1 World Championship. ;) :D Watch now, as Ferrari are implemented in some type of spying scandal... *sighs*

iGav

Nov 9, 2007, 04:04 PM

I've been thinking Alonso to Red Bull all along. .

Rumour has it that Fred though is only willing to sign a year contract in anticipation/hope that Ferrari will have a vacant seat in '09... but that's unlikely given Schumi will back in the seat then to claim title number 8! ;) :D

bartelby

Nov 9, 2007, 04:06 PM

You forgot to add... Ron Dennis, McLaren, Renault, Honda, Toyota... ;) :p

I think Frank Williams is/was the only decent F1 bod out there.

I'll ignore the Ferrari comment:)

emotion

Nov 9, 2007, 04:07 PM

I've been thinking Alonso to Red Bull all along. Seeing as how Flavio manages Webber, then maybe Webber to Toyoto or keep Webber at RB and DC out to pasture? I hope not, I like DC.

Despite dc's love of thatcher (!) I still admire his spirit.

iGav

Nov 9, 2007, 04:10 PM

I think Frank Williams is/was the only decent F1 bod out there.

But he blackmails his drivers. ;)

Squonk

Nov 9, 2007, 04:11 PM

Rumour has it that Fred though is only willing to sign a year contract in anticipation/hope that Ferrari will have a vacant seat in '09... but that's unlikely given Schumi will back in the seat then to claim title number 8! ;) :D

Really. So that is why Fred only wants a one year contract? Does he think that Massa is going to go poof? I'm thinking that Ferrari are very happy with Kimi and Massa, no? Of course, there were those all too kind words about Fred from Di Montezuma (I really need to keep his name handier...) :rolleyes:

Squonk

Nov 9, 2007, 04:12 PM

Despite dc's love of thatcher (!) I still admire his spirit.

Terri Hatcher? I had no idea. :D

iGav

Nov 9, 2007, 04:12 PM

Hill asks more questions (http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19851.html).

And the FIA answers (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63877) them. :p

bartelby

Nov 9, 2007, 04:13 PM

But he blackmails his drivers. ;)

:rolleyes:

Damn you!!!:D

I think I've had enough with F1, to be honest.
All the crap in the last few years has totally detracted from the whole thing.

iGav

Nov 9, 2007, 04:16 PM

So that is why Fred only wants a one year contract?

Apparently so.

That anyone still wants to sign him after not only being schooled by a rookie, but also using stolen confidential information, blackmailing his boss and screwing his teammate... is a little surprising.

bartelby

Nov 9, 2007, 04:17 PM

Apparently so.

That anyone still wants to sign him after not only being schooled by a rookie, but also using stolen confidential information, blackmailing his boss and screwing his teammate... is a little surprising.

After getting away with all that he'd be prefect for Ferrari:p

iGav

Nov 9, 2007, 04:22 PM

Damn you!!!:D

*whistles* (http://www.grandprix.com/ft/ft00132.html)

I think I've had enough with F1, to be honest.
All the crap in the last few years has totally detracted from the whole thing.

It's always been there to some degree, it's just it's more prominent and obvious now thanks to the dissemination nature of the web.

bartelby

Nov 9, 2007, 04:24 PM

It's always been there to some degree, it's just it's more prominent and obvious now thanks to the dissemination nature of the web.

"Some degree" being the significant phrase.

Yeah, it's been there. But nothing on this scale.

R.Youden

Nov 9, 2007, 04:25 PM

Rumour has it that Fred though is only willing to sign a year contract in anticipation/hope that Ferrari will have a vacant seat in '09... but that's unlikely given Schumi will back in the seat then to claim title number 8! ;) :D

Schui will be off to McLaren. After all he did start his career with Merc and always said he wanted to drive for them.

http://galeria.forocoches.com/data/500/medium/1996_-_D_Coulthard_Schumacher_s_helmet_-_McLaren_-_Monaco.jpg

Squonk

Nov 9, 2007, 04:29 PM

It's always been there to some degree, it's just it's more prominent and obvious now thanks to the dissemination nature of the web.

I know!!! Just like Ron Dennis has been going on about! :eek:

iGav

Nov 11, 2007, 06:26 AM

Yeah, it's been there. But nothing on this scale.

I don't know, the aftermath of Suzuka '89 was somewhat comparable, it's just that unless one read the motorsport magazines of the time then the general public at large (outside of the title deciding collision in the race) were very much unlikely going to be aware of the increasingly bitter politicising that was going on behind the scenes and in the courts for much of the following year. The difference then of course, is that it wasn't any where near as widely reported as would be possible now.

To be honest, I'm glad it's going on... at least now there is a degree of transparency that simply didn't exist before, imagine though without it, we could have been faced with a situation where a team, that had made use of stolen, confidential data from a rival team could've won both championships due to that unfair advantage. That would've been a far worse situation IMHO.

R.Youden

Nov 11, 2007, 07:02 AM

Jenson Button reveals why all the girls after after Lewis Hamilton rather than the other drivers on the grid...

"He (Hamilton) is a great driver, but there are lots of great drivers in Formula One who did not have his package,"

Lord Blackadder

Nov 11, 2007, 10:43 AM

I can't see Schu coming back, especially at a team that isn't Ferrari...if he were ever to return it would be with the Scuderia.

I don't see how Fred would want to go to Red Bull though; despite Adrian Newey and their experienced driver team they are pretty average...Alonso would be faster, probably, but would it matter?

R.Youden

Nov 11, 2007, 10:55 AM

But where would Alonso go?

Ferrari - 2 driver under contract
Mclaren - erm, no
BMW - 2 drivers under contract
Renault - obvious choice but if they get a massive fine then they won't be able to afford him
Williams - 2 drivers under contract
Red Bull - 2 drivers under contract but they would easily biff one of them
Toyota - Trulli, plus they are after Glock so they appear to be out of the race
Honda - 2 drivers under contract
Toro Roso, Super Aguri and Force India F1 - ha yeah right!

Lord Blackadder

Nov 11, 2007, 01:03 PM

I agree with that assessment...I suppose he could do a year at Red Bull and then switch to Renault when the money's available.

It's not like he really needs cash anyway...why be greedy? He's be better off taking a big paycut in exchange for the Renault job, in terms of competitive career moves. Of course, if it's just money he's after (Since he already has 2 titles), he can pull a Coulthard and drive just fast enough to keep his job in a mediocre teams for years, raking in the cash.

iGav

Nov 11, 2007, 01:18 PM

Almost any team, with the exception of Ferrari (and that's doubtful) and McLaren would quite happily relegate one of their contracted drivers onto the test team to procure Fred's services for a single season, even after his behaviour this season, he's still undeniably one of the top 5 drivers in F1.

It'd be interesting to see if he could ever do a Schumacher and join an underperforming team (Toyota, Honda) and drag them up to the sharp end.

Lord Blackadder

Nov 11, 2007, 01:22 PM

It'd be interesting to see if he could ever do a Schumacher and join an underperforming team (Toyota, Honda) and drag them up to the sharp end.

I don't know...some drivers are good at aiding car development, others are not...which is he?

I'm sure that he's getting all the offers he could want.

iGav

Nov 11, 2007, 01:25 PM

I don't know...some drivers are good at aiding car development, others are not...which is he?

Well, he did bring 6 tenths to McLaren when he joined them. ;) :p :p :p

Lord Blackadder

Nov 11, 2007, 01:30 PM

Well, he did bring 6 tenths to McLaren when he joined them. ;) :p :p :p

LOL, given the fines I don't think any of the teams are interested in that kind of development right now...:D

iGav

Nov 12, 2007, 05:26 AM

Ferrari's Brawn to be Honda boss (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7090180.stm).

Quite the coup. :eek: :eek: :eek:

R.Youden

Nov 12, 2007, 06:38 AM

Ferrari's Brawn to be Honda boss (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7090180.stm).

Quite the coup. :eek: :eek: :eek:

Yeah good move for them. The problem that I perceived with Honda is that they never had a true leader, they where always like a ship with no rudder. Now hopefully Ross can put this is place and the departments can start working together. Geoff Willis was never really a technical director, yes he was a chief designer (and a bloody good one at that) but he couldn't man manage, thats why the team went down-hill when Prodrive got sacked. Now with Ross Brawn hopefully he can get everyone pulling in the right direction, and give Rubens a confidence boost.

bartelby

Nov 12, 2007, 07:35 AM

Now we'll see how good The Prawn is!

Lord Blackadder

Nov 12, 2007, 09:53 AM

He's got his work cut out for him, that's for sure.

Squonk

Nov 12, 2007, 10:12 AM

Ferrari's Brawn to be Honda boss (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7090180.stm).

Quite the coup. :eek: :eek: :eek:

This is very exciting! I wonder if he'll bring any Ferrari documents with him.... (just kidding!) :p

iGav

Nov 13, 2007, 08:10 AM

No words needed. :D

M. Malone

Nov 13, 2007, 09:21 AM

This is very exciting! I wonder if he'll bring any Ferrari documents with him.... (just kidding!) :p

Ross Brawn is the breathe of fresh air Jenson Button has been looking for, I have been waiting for Button to realize that Honda has no hope. He is too good of a driver to be with Honda. He's easily top of the second tier with Massa and Heidfeld, he just hasn't gotten the hardware yet. I REALLY hope Ross Brawn will be able to produce a decent car for him and help him start winning races. Such a shame to see such a driver waste his talents with a team that gets slower as years go by. :rolleyes:

iGav

Nov 13, 2007, 09:59 AM

Top 11 (last update: 15:18)

1 Michael Schumacher Ferrari F2007 1:22.270 40
2 Pedro de la Rosa McLaren MP4-22 1:22.687 + 0.417 48
3 Gary Paffett McLaren MP4-22 1:23.349 + 1.079 33
4 Heikki Kovalainen Renault R27 1:23.412 + 1.142 47
5 Luca Badoer Ferrari F2007 1:23.879 + 1.609 38
6 Franck Montagny Toyota TF107 1:24.047 + 1.777 30
7 Jarno Trulli Toyota TF107 1:24.413 + 2.143 23
8 Sebastian Vettel Scuderia Toro Rosso STR2 1:24.559 + 2.289 40
9 Nick Heidfeld BMW Sauber F1.07 1:24.621 + 2.351 29
10 Nico Rosberg Williams FW29 1:24.689 + 2.419 22
11 David Coulthard Red Bull Racing RB3 1:25.032 + 2.762 18

:D :D :D :D :D :D

Markleshark

Nov 13, 2007, 10:03 AM

Todt replaced as Ferrari F1 boss.

Changing times at Ferrari. Full Story. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7090726.stm)

Lord Blackadder

Nov 13, 2007, 10:09 AM

If Shu wanted another title I don't think it would be much trouble, would it? :D

I was tired of Schu winning races and was ready to see a new winner...but Alonso has soured with me. if it hadn't been for Kimi's surprise victory in the Championship I'd say "welcome back Michael".

R.Youden

Nov 13, 2007, 01:10 PM

Pos Driver Team Time Laps
1. M.Schumacher Ferrari (B) 1:21.922 64
2. Badoer Ferrari (B) 1:22.129 76
3. de la Rosa McLaren-Mercedes (B) 1:22.687 63
4. Kovalainen Renault (B) 1:22.802 81
5. Kubica BMW-Sauber (B) 1:22.883 56
6. Paffett McLaren-Mercedes (B) 1:23.008 46
7. Nakajima Williams-Toyota (B) 1:23.187 66
8. Coulthard Red Bull-Renault (B) 1:23.332 55
9. Trulli Toyota (B) 1:23.624 46
10. Heidfeld BMW-Sauber (B) 1:23.671 75
11. Rosberg Williams-Toyota (B) 1:23.847 58
12. Montagny Toyota (B) 1:23.861 61
13. Vettel Toro Rosso-Ferrari (B) 1:24.048 77
14. Zuber Honda (B) 1:24.065 77
15. Bourdais Toro Rosso-Ferrari (B) 1:24.193 51
16. Davidson Super Aguri-Honda (B) 1:24.246 70
17. Rossiter Honda (B) 1:24.480 69
18. Chandhok Red Bull-Renault (B) 1:24.896 39
19. van der Garde Force India-Ferrari (B) 1:25.317 84
20. Rodriguez Force India-Ferrari (B) 1:26.973 87

That Schumacher bloke doesn't look too bad, maybe give him a go in a feeder team to see if he can find his feet in F1?

Maybe this should be the start of the 2008 F1 thread?

smueboy

Nov 13, 2007, 09:55 PM

.... which is HERE (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=386528)

iGav

Nov 14, 2007, 06:11 AM

R.Youden

Nov 14, 2007, 06:26 AM

Because this concerns the 2007 season, I decided this thread was the more suitable of the two.

Ecclestone warns over appeal verdict (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63923).

I'd forgotten it was tomorrow.

I agree with the little man, it is just crazy that the FIA can't set down a list of rules with a list of punishments. Now if McLaren win the appeal will Ferrari appeal over Hamilton not being properly penalised for using two sets of wet tires on Friday? (I know they can't because of time issues but if they knew that this was going to happen I bet they would have).

iGav

Nov 15, 2007, 07:32 AM

McLaren lawyer seeks title for Hamilton (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63949).

Only a couple of days after McLaren CEO Martin Whitmarsh said...

"Finding a way to award the drivers' championship to Lewis retrospectively is not at all, however, what this is about."

:rolleyes:

iGav

Nov 16, 2007, 09:47 AM

Decision day today.

Will Kimi remain as the 2007 World Drivers Champion, or will the sport see its first ever rookie champion?

I have a feeling it might just swing McLarens way.

iGav

Nov 16, 2007, 09:58 AM

Pitpass (http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=33411) reporting that the International Court of Appeal have rejected the appeal.

But...

We repeat, this has not been officially confirmed but does come from a very good source.

R.Youden

Nov 16, 2007, 10:11 AM

It will be interesting as to the exact ruling.

If they have totally rejected the appeal and BMW and Williams get no penalty then that is wrong, they broke the rules and must be penalised. However if the teams have been penalised but not the drivers then that is fairer.

Lets see...

iGav

Nov 16, 2007, 10:21 AM

If they have totally rejected the appeal and BMW and Williams get no penalty then that is wrong, they broke the rules and must be penalised. However if the teams have been penalised but not the drivers then that is fairer.

I didn't think it had be proven with certainty that they had? hence the Stewards original rejection?

iGav

Nov 16, 2007, 02:50 PM

DECISION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF APPEAL (http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Releases/FIA_Sport/2007/November/161107-01.html).

Having heard the explanations of both parties and having examined the various documents and other evidence, the Court decided that the appeal lodged by Vodafone McLaren Mercedes is inadmissible.

R.Youden

Nov 16, 2007, 03:42 PM

What I find concerning is there was doubt over the ambient temperature! Now the FIA provide live timing during the race and included in this data is a temperature reading, surely they can sync the time of the stops to the ambient temperature.

Even so, why have a rule that they obviously can't enforce?

This has just created a load of bad publicity for Formula One because, procedurally, there was a momentous cock-up.

Thats the FIA for you ;)

Probably the bloke supposed to be doing the temperatures was busy making sure Alonso and Hamilton had the same equipment available to them.

iGav

Nov 17, 2007, 09:14 AM

What I find concerning is there was doubt over the ambient temperature! Now the FIA provide live timing during the race and included in this data is a temperature reading, surely they can sync the time of the stops to the ambient temperature.

Even so, why have a rule that they obviously can't enforce?

This has just created a load of bad publicity for Formula One because, procedurally, there was a momentous cock-up.

Thats the FIA for you ;)

Williams (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63997) Statement is enlightening.

AlBDamned

Nov 17, 2007, 02:08 PM

Williams (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63997) Statement is enlightening.

Enlightening in the fact that they didn't have the balls to issue such a statement before or during the hearing? It's another level of farce that it went all this way only to be rejected.

However, I'm glad no points have been affected, but it would have been amusing if they had, if only to read your reaction, Gav. ;)

iGav

Nov 17, 2007, 03:02 PM

Enlightening in the fact that they didn't have the balls to issue such a statement before or during the hearing?

Well, it's certainly preferable to having the CEO speak of not wanting to win the championship in the courts, then the first words to leave the mouth of their solicitors is, their driver should be champion. ;) :p

It's another level of farce that it went all this way only to be rejected.

For one second, imagine the uproar had the FIA refused to allow the appeal.

At least this way it was dealt with in a reasonably transparent fashion. Though McLaren should perhaps have followed the correct appeals procedure to start with, that would've helped. :p

However, I'm glad no points have been affected, but it would have been amusing if they had, if only to read your reaction, Gav.

:D

AlBDamned

Nov 17, 2007, 03:44 PM

For one second, imagine the uproar had the FIA refused to allow the appeal.

At least this way it was dealt with in a reasonably transparent fashion. Though McLaren should perhaps have followed the correct appeals procedure to start with, that would've helped. :p

Definitely a year to forget for the Woking team bar Lewis' exploits. I'm sure most people will find them quite deserving of their pit lane placing next season.

R.Youden

Nov 17, 2007, 04:07 PM

Definitely a year to forget for the Woking team bar Lewis' exploits. I'm sure most people will find them quite deserving of their pit lane placing next season.

This whole scenario is a farce. How can you have a rule if you can't enforce it because you have no way of measuring the ambient temperature? Utter joke.

As for the McLaren pit lane, the best bit is that at almost all the circuits they won't be able to get their massive motor-home parked! Maybe Lewis will have to do his golden craps in a porta-loo!

iGav

Nov 18, 2007, 09:35 AM

I'm sure most people will find them quite deserving of their pit lane placing next season.

I don't. I don't think they even deserve to be in next years pit lane.

Sam Michael's interview (http://www.itv-f1.com/Feature.aspx?Type=General&PO_ID=41314) is even more enlightening.

Especially...

ITV-F1.com: You state that your fuel temperature was 31 degrees. How did that compare to the other teams at the ICA?

SM: Well that was very close to the temperatures that we know BMW and Ferrari were running from the ICA hearing. However McLaren refused to give theirs so we don't know what they were running.

And...

I don't know how much it cost them to turn up with the four or five lawyers they had. You wouldn't have expected them to spend that just to clarify a regulation when you can turn up for free at any TWG and do the same thing.

And...

But still it is being painted as if there is something underhand going on and that is disappointing.

We play a very straight game and if there is implication that it is not like that – and I don't mean just Williams, but at the FIA's level – I'm sorry that is just not the case here.