Jump to content


Photo

Fernando Alonso thread [merged]


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
14493 replies to this topic

#2101 kosmos

kosmos
  • Member

  • 6,632 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 08 July 2010 - 11:49

Ecclestone: "Alonso is the best but he needs a competitive Ferrari".

http://www.marca.com...1278579298.html

Bernie :drunk:

Advertisement

#2102 Jelinski619

Jelinski619
  • Member

  • 533 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 11:50

Its not about how often they beat each other. Why would you just completely disregard the other 20-odd drivers? They were both aiming to get as many points as possible. Points gets you championships. And they drew. Alonso, a two time world champion, drew with a rookie. But got less wins. So he didn't draw. He was beaten. By a rookie. Embarrassing.

I'm heading back to the Lewis Hamilton thread now..

#2103 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:01

Its not about how often they beat each other. Why would you just completely disregard the other 20-odd drivers? They were both aiming to get as many points as possible. Points gets you championships. And they drew. Alonso, a two time world champion, drew with a rookie. But got less wins. So he didn't draw. He was beaten. By a rookie. Embarrassing.

I'm heading back to the Lewis Hamilton thread now..


How many wins did Lewis and Alonso get in 2007 again?

Last time I checked both won four races each and ended on equal points.

Mclaren beat Alonso by a mere second spot finish. "We were not racing against Kimi, we were racing against Fernando" Remember?

Edited by fabr68, 08 July 2010 - 12:04.


#2104 Jelinski619

Jelinski619
  • Member

  • 533 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:03

Oh was it a second place? I thought it was one less win. If so, my bad.

#2105 kryziuotis

kryziuotis
  • Member

  • 131 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:06

To me, I think the points system gives a better judgement on how the drivers have done over the course of the season than "who beat who" the most times. Beating someone by a lot is worth more than beating them by a narrow margin under the points system and therefore I think it gives a more precise view. Not a perfect view, but a better one than the system you seem to like.

That's a good point, but you missing one important thing there. Drivers rarely beat each other by a big margin simply by showing better pace. There's usually some element beyond driver control involved in all these big victories - incidents, car problems, safety car, etc. So it's simply showing who is more lucky and not who is better. And if we look only at the races with no incidents in 2007, then we have 7:2 in Alonsos favor, moreover only two of them were by a big margin (Britain and Turkey) and again it was Alonso who beat Hamilton.
So it was Alonso who showed better pace in 2007, Hamilton simply had more luck.

#2106 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:10

Well, to me it is pretty obvious:

[...]

Oh, yes, DRIVER B finished in all the races out of points (in FIA's game), but now you tell me this isn't unfair? :rolleyes:

Well, it would perhaps make more sense to criticise on the basis of the actual points system. Of course with an extreme points system you can come up hypotheticals that produce extreme results (that I agree are unfair). On the other hand, under your "who finished ahead of who" system, if 2 drivers finish 19th/20th for the entire season but one race, where it's 20th/1st, the guy who finishes 19th 16 times gets the nod. Which seems unfair to me.

I still think the FIA graded points system in place for 2007 produces a better examination of performance, particularly for drivers who (with the car they have) run consistently in the points paying positions, than a simple "who finished ahead of who" the most.

fia point system is not the only indicator of performance I am sorry _ leave that for the teenagers who are lazy. We are all adults with critical minds who can do a deep down analysis and come up with our own conclusions.

I agree, I am not saying it is the only barometer of performance. But if you think "who finished ahead of who the most" is a deep down analysis ...

I also think that if you analyse the performance of the two drivers over the season, they were incredibly evenly matched.

#2107 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:16

That's a good point, but you missing one important thing there. Drivers rarely beat each other by a big margin simply by showing better pace. There's usually some element beyond driver control involved in all these big victories - incidents, car problems, safety car, etc. So it's simply showing who is more lucky and not who is better. And if we look only at the races with no incidents in 2007, then we have 7:2 in Alonsos favor, moreover only two of them were by a big margin (Britain and Turkey) and again it was Alonso who beat Hamilton.
So it was Alonso who showed better pace in 2007, Hamilton simply had more luck.

Interesting way of analysing it, and it would be good to know which 9 races you considered "incident free" and what were the incidents that negated the other 8.

Just looking at Hamilton's 4 wins, for example, I can see why you would exclude Hungary. I assume USA is included. Which leaves us with Canada and Japan. Given you only score 2 for Hamilton, I assume you have excluded at least one (if not both) of those. And whilst Alonso had incidents in both, I'm not sure they weren't either of his own making or whilst he was already running well behind Hamilton.

#2108 Mungo Fangio of the Year

Mungo Fangio of the Year
  • Member

  • 565 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:23

I totally expect 2 time WDC to bounce back from his current slump in performance!


#2109 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:31

Alonso is good but his problem is Lewis Hamilton - Alonso simply isn't driver of Hamilton's calibre. Hamilton is calibre of Schumacher and Senna, Alonso is more in the likes of Hakkinen, Raikkonen, Button, Villneuve, etc.

#2110 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:34

That's a good point, but you missing one important thing there. Drivers rarely beat each other by a big margin simply by showing better pace. There's usually some element beyond driver control involved in all these big victories - incidents, car problems, safety car, etc. So it's simply showing who is more lucky and not who is better. And if we look only at the races with no incidents in 2007, then we have 7:2 in Alonsos favor, moreover only two of them were by a big margin (Britain and Turkey) and again it was Alonso who beat Hamilton.
So it was Alonso who showed better pace in 2007, Hamilton simply had more luck.


If you actually watched races you would have seen that it was Hamilton who was usually faster. And it was Hamilton who had more car problems and worse strategies given by McLaren. Of course he won hearts of everyone in McLaren, including McLaren fans! Alonso is great driver, but a little bit weaker than Hamilton (well, much weaker this season).

#2111 Massacrator

Massacrator
  • Member

  • 1,361 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:36

velgajski1 I love your deep analisys of everything :smoking:

#2112 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:44

velgajski1 I love your deep analisys of everything :smoking:


There isn't that much to analyse. I saw that Hamilton is superb driver already in Australia. After Monaco it was perfectly clear to me that he is at least on par with Alonso and after Canada it was also perfectly clear that he is simply better and more consistent driver.

If you take off 'McLaren conspired to screw Alonso season' glasses off you'd see he got :
1. Better engineering crew (the one Raikkonen beat Coulthard and Montoya with),
2. Car was designed for his style (we McLaren fans listened to stories about car being designed specifically for Alonso as soon as Alonso transfer was confirmed), Hamilton had to adapt his driving style heavily for that car, but also for F1 in generally.
3. Full strategy support at beginning of the season to create gap to Hamilton (and make him 2nd driver)
4. McLaren team made more errors with Hamilton and his car/strategy than with Alonso - this is the bottom line, McLaren did better job for Alonso than for Hamilton if you only look facts (team errors for both drivers, they happened more often with Hamilton).

And yet, Hamilton finished by notch in front of Alonso.

Edited by velgajski1, 08 July 2010 - 12:46.


#2113 bonjon1979

bonjon1979
  • Member

  • 1,117 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:50

There isn't that much to analyse. I saw that Hamilton is superb driver already in Australia. After Monaco it was perfectly clear to me that he is at least on par with Alonso and after Canada it was also perfectly clear that he is simply better and more consistent driver.

If you take off 'McLaren conspired to screw Alonso season' glasses off you'd see he got :
1. Better engineering crew (the one Raikkonen beat Coulthard and Montoya with),
2. Car was designed for his style (we McLaren fans listened to stories about car being designed specifically for Alonso as soon as Alonso transfer was confirmed), Hamilton had to adapt his driving style heavily for that car, but also for F1 in generally.
3. Full strategy support at beginning of the season to create gap to Hamilton (and make him 2nd driver)
4. McLaren team made more errors with Hamilton and his car/strategy than with Alonso - this is the bottom line, McLaren did better job for Alonso than for Hamilton if you only look facts (team errors for both drivers, they happened more often with Hamilton).

And yet, Hamilton finished by notch in front of Alonso.


Good post. Can you imagine the uproar if the mysterious gearbox failure in Brazil happened to Alonso!?


#2114 moorsey

moorsey
  • Member

  • 623 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:54

There isn't that much to analyse. I saw that Hamilton is superb driver already in Australia. After Monaco it was perfectly clear to me that he is at least on par with Alonso and after Canada it was also perfectly clear that he is simply better and more consistent driver.

If you take off 'McLaren conspired to screw Alonso season' glasses off you'd see he got :
1. Better engineering crew (the one Raikkonen beat Coulthard and Montoya with),
2. Car was designed for his style (we McLaren fans listened to stories about car being designed specifically for Alonso as soon as Alonso transfer was confirmed), Hamilton had to adapt his driving style heavily for that car, but also for F1 in generally.
3. Full strategy support at beginning of the season to create gap to Hamilton (and make him 2nd driver)
4. McLaren team made more errors with Hamilton and his car/strategy than with Alonso - this is the bottom line, McLaren did better job for Alonso than for Hamilton if you only look facts (team errors for both drivers, they happened more often with Hamilton).

And yet, Hamilton finished by notch in front of Alonso.


Very good post. :up:

#2115 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:54

Good post. Can you imagine the uproar if the mysterious gearbox failure in Brazil happened to Alonso!?


If that happened to Alonso and Hamilton won WDC even I wouldn't be 100% sure that McLaren did a fair job for both drivers... :)

#2116 Massacrator

Massacrator
  • Member

  • 1,361 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 12:57

There isn't that much to analyse. I saw that Hamilton is superb driver already in Australia. After Monaco it was perfectly clear to me that he is at least on par with Alonso and after Canada it was also perfectly clear that he is simply better and more consistent driver.

If you take off 'McLaren conspired to screw Alonso season' glasses off you'd see he got :
1. Better engineering crew (the one Raikkonen beat Coulthard and Montoya with),
2. Car was designed for his style (we McLaren fans listened to stories about car being designed specifically for Alonso as soon as Alonso transfer was confirmed), Hamilton had to adapt his driving style heavily for that car, but also for F1 in generally.
3. Full strategy support at beginning of the season to create gap to Hamilton (and make him 2nd driver)
4. McLaren team made more errors with Hamilton and his car/strategy than with Alonso - this is the bottom line, McLaren did better job for Alonso than for Hamilton if you only look facts (team errors for both drivers, they happened more often with Hamilton).

And yet, Hamilton finished by notch in front of Alonso.

First time I hear of these, lol.

I'm obviously not believing these made up facts until you prove evidence on any of them.

#2117 richard01

richard01
  • Member

  • 104 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:02

Well, it would perhaps make more sense to criticise on the basis of the actual points system. Of course with an extreme points system you can come up hypotheticals that produce extreme results (that I agree are unfair). On the other hand, under your "who finished ahead of who" system, if 2 drivers finish 19th/20th for the entire season but one race, where it's 20th/1st, the guy who finishes 19th 16 times gets the nod. Which seems unfair to me.

I still think the FIA graded points system in place for 2007 produces a
better examination of performance, particularly for drivers who (with the car they have) run consistently in the points paying positions, than a simple "who finished ahead of who" the most.


I agree, I am not saying it is the only barometer of performance. But if you think "who finished ahead of who the most" is a deep down analysis
...

I also think that if you analyse the performance of the two drivers over the season, they were incredibly evenly matched.

I know that they were evenly matched and all things considered, Lewis being a rookie and Alonso falling out with his team, they both did a remarkable job to score as many points as they did.

#2118 Hole

Hole
  • Member

  • 2,232 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:03

There isn't that much to analyse. I saw that Hamilton is superb driver already in Australia. After Monaco it was perfectly clear to me that he is at least on par with Alonso and after Canada it was also perfectly clear that he is simply better and more consistent driver.

If you take off 'McLaren conspired to screw Alonso season' glasses off you'd see he got :
1. Better engineering crew (the one Raikkonen beat Coulthard and Montoya with),
2. Car was designed for his style (we McLaren fans listened to stories about car being designed specifically for Alonso as soon as Alonso transfer was confirmed), Hamilton had to adapt his driving style heavily for that car, but also for F1 in generally.
3. Full strategy support at beginning of the season to create gap to Hamilton (and make him 2nd driver)
4. McLaren team made more errors with Hamilton and his car/strategy than with Alonso - this is the bottom line, McLaren did better job for Alonso than for Hamilton if you only look facts (team errors for both drivers, they happened more often with Hamilton).

And yet, Hamilton finished by notch in front of Alonso.


Good post? Only for those with the bias glasses on.

To start with, how is that after Canada Lewis proved to be more consistent if we take into account the following:

Alonso points in Canada: 40
Hamilton points in Canada: 48


Alonso points by the end: 109
Hamilton points by the end: 109

How can someone say Hamilton was consistend than Alonso if actually Hamilton lost grounds to Alonso after Canada? :lol: Hamilton fanboys are priceless.

Actually what we can deduce after Canada is that Alonso actually did better and that's why Hamilton lost grounds :)




About strategies, Alonso always got the "heavier" strategy, that as happened to Kimi it was proved those strategies were not very favorable unless you have a middfield car.

Edited by AdamKOR, 08 July 2010 - 13:04.


#2119 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:06

Good post? Only for those with the bias glasses on.

To start with, how is that after Canada Lewis proved to be more consistent if we take into account the following:

Alonso points in Canada: 40
Hamilton points in Canada: 48


Alonso points by the end: 109
Hamilton points by the end: 109

How can someone say Hamilton was consistend than Alonso if actually Hamilton lost grounds to Alonso after Canada? :lol: Hamilton fanboys are priceless.

Actually what we can deduce after Canada is that Alonso actually did better and that's why Hamilton lost grounds :)




About strategies, Alonso always got the "heavier" strategy, that as happened to Kimi it was proved those strategies were not very favorable unless you have a middfield car.


I'm confused, consistency only counts after canada but not before?
And Alonso was lighter at monaco so what are you talking about.

Your comment about hamilton fanboys is hilariously ironic

Advertisement

#2120 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:09

That's a good point, but you missing one important thing there. Drivers rarely beat each other by a big margin simply by showing better pace. There's usually some element beyond driver control involved in all these big victories - incidents, car problems, safety car, etc. So it's simply showing who is more lucky and not who is better. And if we look only at the races with no incidents in 2007, then we have 7:2 in Alonsos favor, moreover only two of them were by a big margin (Britain and Turkey) and again it was Alonso who beat Hamilton.
So it was Alonso who showed better pace in 2007, Hamilton simply had more luck.


I think you'll find that 'incidents' such as b&ggering up your start (alonso in canada) and crashing all by yourself (Japan I think) are down to the driver not luck.

Your conclusion is beyond ridiculous, even more so when you consider hamilton's luck in the last 2 races.



#2121 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:15

Alonso points in Canada: 40
Hamilton points in Canada: 48


Alonso points by the end: 109
Hamilton points by the end: 109

How can someone say Hamilton was consistend than Alonso if actually Hamilton lost grounds to Alonso after Canada? :lol: Hamilton fanboys are priceless.

Did you watch the last two races :rolleyes: ? Hamilton was very unfortunate on both occasions. If they were both normal races, then Lewis would have won by a handful of points.

#2122 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:18

Good post? Only for those with the bias glasses on.

To start with, how is that after Canada Lewis proved to be more consistent if we take into account the following:

Alonso points in Canada: 40
Hamilton points in Canada: 48


Alonso points by the end: 109
Hamilton points by the end: 109

How can someone say Hamilton was consistend than Alonso if actually Hamilton lost grounds to Alonso after Canada? :lol: Hamilton fanboys are priceless.

Actually what we can deduce after Canada is that Alonso actually did better and that's why Hamilton lost grounds :)


I meant straight after Canada race, not 'at the end of season'.


#2123 kryziuotis

kryziuotis
  • Member

  • 131 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:36

Interesting way of analysing it, and it would be good to know which 9 races you considered "incident free" and what were the incidents that negated the other 8.

Ok, incident free races where Alonso finished higher: Australia, Malaysia, Monaco, Britain, Turkey, Italy, Belgium.
Incident free races where Hamilton finished higher: Bahrain, US.

Races with incidents and who was higher at the time:
Spain - first corner incident between Massa and Alonso, Alonso higher.
Canada - Alonso had to pit during SC, Hamilton higher.
France - Alonso couldn't do a lap in third part of qualifying because of gearbox problem.
Europe - car problem for Hamilton in third part of qualifying.
Hungary - stewards decision during qualifying.
Japan - Alonso crashed, but there was one more incident earlier what damaged Alonsos car and dropped him out of the points - contact with Vettel coming out of the pits. Hamilton higher.
China - Hamiltons tyres/ending in the gravel. Technically Hamilton was higher, but the whole cause of mistake was "fighting Alonso" and trying to come out of the pits before him.
Brasil - Hamiltons gearbox/wrong button. Alonso higher.

So theres two races (Spain, Brasil) where Alonso would have finished higher without incidents and two for Hamilton (Canada, Japan), it's very hard to say what would have happened in others. As for the blame of incidents there can be neverending discussions - I would say mistake-wise they were pretty evenly matched.

#2124 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:39

I don't know what all the constant attempts to big one up over the other are intended to achieve. Alonso and Hamilton are two bloody good F1 drivers that we, as fans, are priveleged to watch.

Isn't that enough?

#2125 Hole

Hole
  • Member

  • 2,232 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:42

Did you watch the last two races :rolleyes: ? Hamilton was very unfortunate on both occasions. If they were both normal races, then Lewis would have won by a handful of points.


What Hamilton did in China was his own fault. Did you even watched that race? He spinned while entering to pits, and went off-track near the pits entrance. Excusing Hamilton for that is, once again, priceless.

And anyway like if Alonso had not been unlucky during the season, so let's cut the cinism here. Canada is an example, with his tyres going shit and even a S.Aguri being able to overtake him. If Alonso had not suffered from that he would have won the championship too :)

I'm confused, consistency only counts after canada but not before?
And Alonso was lighter at monaco so what are you talking about.

Your comment about hamilton fanboys is hilariously ironic


Someone said Hamilton after Canada proved to be more consistent and I'm just pointing out that was not true presenting facts.

And that Alonso was lighter in Monaco doesn't mean Alonso always got the lighter extrategy during the whole season. :lol:

Besides stating things out of your imagination, you guys also seem to be free to twist others' words. How honourable.

I meant straight after Canada race, not 'at the end of season'.


And during that straight Alonso did better, as I proved.

#2126 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 08 July 2010 - 13:48

What Hamilton did in China was his own fault. Did you even watched that race? He spinned while entering to pits, and went off-track near the pits entrance. Excusing Hamilton for that is, once again, priceless.


Hamilton's error was not taking control of the situation and insisting that he pit. However, considering he was a rookie I hold the team, who were even being urged by bridgestone to pit him, fully to blame.

By the way was it massa or alonso who did exactly the same thing this year but were lucky enough to get out of the gravel trap?


And anyway like if Alonso had not been unlucky during the season, so let's cut the cinism here. Canada is an example, with his tyres going shit and even a S.Aguri being able to overtake him. If Alonso had not suffered from that he would have won the championship too :)


So what about alonso's start in canada?

And that Alonso was lighter in Monaco doesn't mean Alonso always got the lighter extrategy during the whole season. :lol:


Please point me to where I said it did.
I simply pointed out the first race that came to mind that proved what you had said was incorrect. Just to remind you said -

'Alonso always got the "heavier" strategy'

#2127 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 4,963 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 14:01

ah i feel in 2058, people will still be arguing over 2007... its sorta pointless, cos pples biases about that year are already set in stone.

what matters is now, they both have competitive cars and Hamilton is drinking Alonso's milkshake :D

#2128 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 14:10

What Hamilton did in China was his own fault. Did you even watched that race? He spinned while entering to pits, and went off-track near the pits entrance. Excusing Hamilton for that is, once again, priceless.

And anyway like if Alonso had not been unlucky during the season, so let's cut the cinism here. Canada is an example, with his tyres going shit and even a S.Aguri being able to overtake him. If Alonso had not suffered from that he would have won the championship too :)

I think China was half Lewis fault half the team for keeping him out on destroyed tyres. He was in his first season, and obviously strategy is something he relied on the team for (like all rookies do). Brazil was car failure. So the point you made about Alonso being better in the second half based on the points he gained is void because considering these races means that the points are not a good measure of comparison of the two drivers. The best measure was to simply watch the races and see the comparative pace and ability. And of course that is a subjective measure. But in my opinion Lewis (considering he was in his first season) showed his natural quality over Alonso, and deserved to win in the WDC.

#2129 teejay

teejay
  • Member

  • 3,632 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 14:17

ah i feel in 2058, people will still be arguing over 2007... its sorta pointless, cos pples biases about that year are already set in stone.

what matters is now, they both have competitive cars and Hamilton is drinking Alonso's milkshake :D


Does he bring all the boys to the yard?

And their like "my drivers better than yours, I can prove it but ill have to charge"

#2130 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 July 2010 - 14:17

ah i feel in 2058, people will still be arguing over 2007... its sorta pointless, cos pples biases about that year are already set in stone.

what matters is now, they both have competitive cars and Hamilton is drinking Alonso's milkshake :D


Definatly - I'll tell you this - the perfect team would still be Hamilton and Alonso and 2 court gag orders!!!

#2131 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,615 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 14:22

First time I hear of these, lol.


I'm glad you feel enlightened!! :up:

#2132 Hole

Hole
  • Member

  • 2,232 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 14:26

I'm glad you feel enlightened!! :up:


So If I tell you Germany is in Asia, as this is the first time you hear it, it means you are being enlightened? :lol:

Definitely some people live in different realities.

#2133 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 08 July 2010 - 15:45

Thanks for taking the time to set that out. :up: My quibbles would be as per the below.

Ok, incident free races where Alonso finished higher: Australia, Malaysia, Monaco, Britain, Turkey, Italy, Belgium.

With the split strategy (team decision, outside the control of the drivers) I would ignore Monaco on the basis of this method. Which, beofre anyone jumps on me, isn't to say I don't think that was a well deserved win. Just that given the intention of this approach is to only look at races where outside factors didn't have an influence, I think excluding this one is fair enough.

I would also ignore Turkey because of Hamilton's puncture whilst running ahead, although whether you see that as Hamilton's fault or not I guess dictates that one.

Spain - first corner incident between Massa and Alonso, Alonso higher.
Canada - Alonso had to pit during SC, Hamilton higher.
France - Alonso couldn't do a lap in third part of qualifying because of gearbox problem.
Europe - car problem for Hamilton in third part of qualifying.
Hungary - stewards decision during qualifying.
Japan - Alonso crashed, but there was one more incident earlier what damaged Alonsos car and dropped him out of the points - contact with Vettel coming out of the pits. Hamilton higher.
China - Hamiltons tyres/ending in the gravel. Technically Hamilton was higher, but the whole cause of mistake was "fighting Alonso" and trying to come out of the pits before him.
Brasil - Hamiltons gearbox/wrong button. Alonso higher.

Canada - disagree, the SC had no impact on who finished ahead of who.
Spain - disagree, I think you could argue that Alonso was responsible for that incident, so shouldn't be excluded if we are trying to take things outside of the driver's control out of the equation.
France - agree.
Europe - agree.
Hungary - agree (the drivers were both the architechts of that, but as Hamilton had as much of a role I think excluding is fair enough).
Japan - disagree, I think these were factors Alonso was in control of.
China - I could see an argument to include that one actually. I'd consider that the team played a huge part in what went wrong, so it should be excluded, but I recognise this is definitely the persepctive of a Hamilton fan and could see why someone would take the contrary view.
Brasil - I would include this one - it was obviously a gearbox problem IMO (video shows no button was pressed before the car problems began) but it had no impact on who finished infront of who.

So I'd have it 6-5, with Alonso's being: Australia, Malaysia, Britain, Italy, Belgium, Brazil; and Hamilton's: Bahrain, Spain, Canada, US, Japan.

Still mightly close. So I'd still go with them being a very evenly matched pairing.

Incidentally, the scores for my 11 races (FIA points) is 71 Hamilton, 68 Alonso. The scores for your 9 are: 70 Alonso, 63 Hamilton. Agin, I think this supports the "very matched pairing" view.

#2134 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 16:10

So I'd have it 6-5, with Alonso's being: Australia, Malaysia, Britain, Italy, Belgium, Brazil; and Hamilton's: Bahrain, Spain, Canada, US, Japan.

Still mightly close. So I'd still go with them being a very evenly matched pairing.

Incidentally, the scores for my 11 races (FIA points) is 71 Hamilton, 68 Alonso. The scores for your 9 are: 70 Alonso, 63 Hamilton. Agin, I think this supports the "very matched pairing" view.

interesting that you count japan but not germany :drunk:

#2135 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 08 July 2010 - 16:17

interesting that you count japan but not germany :drunk:

Hamilton had two problems that weren't his fault prior to the ones that were. One was the issue in qualy - similar reasons negate things for Alonso in France.

I am sure there are plenty of things people could argue with in my list. It's always going to be subjective (as was kryziuotis'). To me, though, on any decent attempt you're still always going to end up with similar numbers for the two drivers. Even kryziuotis' has Hamilton on 90% of Alonso's points, which is hardly a shellacking.

#2136 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,117 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 08 July 2010 - 16:46

why should the slower driver be on pole?


He was!

#2137 Campeador

Campeador
  • Member

  • 296 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 17:09

Did we? I can't recall seeing any signs of favouring eithr driver at McLaren in 2007. Monaco was a prime example of this, I think.

We can talk about Monaco for ages but Alonso was faster than Hamilton and if you look at the times lap by lap he would have never passed Alonso no matter how many laps he remained out pushing. He could only risk his 2nd place and McLaren 1-2 if a Safety Car took the lead. When you are faster you pick the best strategy because the only choice for the other driver is to start with a heavier car or a three-stopper. If two drivers pick the same strategy and one is faster you know what the result is beforehand.

You should have a look at Indianapolis where Alonso was faster FP1, FP2, FP3, Q1, Q2 and only Hamilton grabbed the pole because they gave Hamilton an extra lap so the rookie had a lighter car. That happened so many times during the season, so many times he took advantage of the extra lap... I could say Alonso's car in Bahrain was damaged as a lighting pod fell from the ceiling hitting his car and they had to have a look at it at Woking after the race but I think Hamilton did a better job there.

MONACO 2007: Hamilton accused his team of cheating against him during the FIA post-race press conference. That provoked an unfair investigation on Alonso and McLaren's victory in the Principality. Despite it all, Ron Dennis backed Hamilton before the media while avoiding to support Alonso's fantastic job in the amazing McLaren's 1-2 in the Monegasque GP. The team took no action whatsoever against Hamilton. During the race, Hamilton stepped over the continuous line when exiting the pit lane and he got away with it.

INDIANAPOLIS 2007: Pit stop strategies and team orders (rev. limit) were in favor of Hamilton and detrimental to Alonso. Alonso got p**sed off when the team ordered him to hold position and drive conservatively but he obeyed them. Of course, The FIA didn't investigate Hamilton's victory and Ron Dennis was delighted while he looked like attending a funeral in Monaco.

FRANCE 2007: Alonso faced problems with his gearbox cover during Q3 ending up on the tenth position of the starting grid. De la Rosa explained during the race that the defective part had been perfectly identified and removed.

GERMANY 2007: Many drivers slipped off the track when it was raining heavily. Despite what the rules say on that matter, a crane put Hamilton, and only him, back on the track under a high risk of collision with other drivers. Although the rules clearly specify that a driver must turn off his engine and get out of the car safely Hamilton was not penalised.

HUNGARY 2007: Despite the agreement with the whole team, Hamilton did not let Alonso take advantage of the extra lap he was entitled to on that Q3. After a controversial pit stop where they put worn tyres on Alonso's car, the Spanish managed to get the pole. Hamilton denounced his team and teammate before the Stewards and it cost McLaren the loss of points in the constructors' championship. Alonso got 5 grid penalty and, of course, Hamilton got away with it again.

ITALY 2007: Hamilton placed his car in the start box pointing to Alonso's. It was in clear breach of what the rules say about the start of a Grand Prix. There was no penalty for him nonetheless.

JAPAN 2007: Both Alonso and Hamilton had a racing incident with Vettel and Kubica respectively, but only the Pole was unfairly penalized despite the poor track conditions. The Spanish suffered serious damage on the back of his car and crashed into a wall a few laps later. Under the Safety Car, Hamilton skipped the rules completely causing an accident between two other cars. He got no penalty whatsoever, and the Stewards justified their decission because of the poor track conditions.

CHINA 2007: Alonso faced strange problems in Q3 after a flawless Q1 and Q2. The Spanish had been faster than his teammate in the three practice sessions but both tyre pressure and tyre warmers were not adjusted properly for the decisive round Q3. After the race, Ron Dennis admitted publicly that they were not racing against Raikkonen but against Alonso. The tyre warmers were sent to Woking for inspection.

Qualifying:

LH: 1:35.798 1:35.898 1:35.908
FA: 1:35.809 1:35.845 1:36.576
Df: Q1 0.011 Q2 0.053 Q3 0.668


Alonso and Hamilton are two racing drivers of the same caliber and only small details decide who beats who. In 2007, those small details almost always favoured Hamilton. Only a harsh penalty in Hungaroring decided the title in 2007 and the same thing might be said in 2010 about penalties so far.

From Monaco to Hungaroring Alonso did as much as he could to remain loyal to McLaren, it was Hamilton who denounce the team twice and he was always backed up by Ron Dennis. In the end Alonso didn't have any reason to trust his own team and he took revenge in Brazil 2007.

#2138 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,023 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 08 July 2010 - 17:25

ITALY 2007: Hamilton placed his car in the start box pointing to Alonso's. It was in clear breach of what the rules say about the start of a Grand Prix. There was no penalty for him nonetheless.

Plenty to disagree with in your post but so much of it has been seen and done before I'll limit myself to this one, which I've never heard before. What rule?

#2139 Biggles Flies Undone

Biggles Flies Undone
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 17:46

What Hamilton did in China was his own fault. Did you even watched that race? He spinned while entering to pits, and went off-track near the pits entrance. Excusing Hamilton for that is, once again, priceless.


Hamilton didn't spin ! His rears were worn down to the canvas and he had to go so slowly that not enough heat was being generated to provide turn in grip.
100% the team's fault IMHO, asking a rookie to drive on tyres worn like that.



Posted Image

Edited by Biggles Flies Undone, 08 July 2010 - 18:15.


Advertisement

#2140 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 8,157 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 17:51

:rotfl: The Hamilton obsession continues. I suppose there is a lot for the average Alonso fan to 'get over' with regards the unique racing talent that is Hamilton. Best of luck to you all.

#2141 Campeador

Campeador
  • Member

  • 296 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 17:59

Plenty to disagree with in your post but so much of it has been seen and done before I'll limit myself to this one, which I've never heard before. What rule?

I'll tell you if you tell us what rule they used to penalise Alonso in Hungaroring 2007.

#2142 Campeador

Campeador
  • Member

  • 296 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 18:07

:rotfl: The Hamilton obsession continues. I suppose there is a lot for the average Alonso fan to 'get over' with regards the unique racing talent that is Hamilton. Best of luck to you all.

I have never posted on Hamilton's thread, not even once. Who's obsessed here? :wave:

#2143 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,117 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 08 July 2010 - 18:15

GERMANY 2007: Many drivers slipped off the track when it was raining heavily. Despite what the rules say on that matter, a crane put Hamilton, and only him, back on the track under a high risk of collision with other drivers. Although the rules clearly specify that a driver must turn off his engine and get out of the car safely Hamilton was not penalised.

Hamilton stayed in the car as other cars were sliding off in the same place...safest place for him. The rules stipulated that a car deemed to be in a dangerous position could be put back on track. The rules were changed after this event.

#2144 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 08 July 2010 - 18:21

I'll tell you if you tell us what rule they used to penalise Alonso in Hungaroring 2007.


You're being asked to back up a claim you made with some facts, why are you avoiding this?


#2145 Anssi

Anssi
  • Member

  • 1,899 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 18:22

Fernando is still very much in the hunt for the WDC.

Fernando fans need to stop worrying so much about Lewis Hamilton.

#2146 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 08 July 2010 - 18:23

I have never posted on Hamilton's thread, not even once. Who's obsessed here? :wave:


Really. The Alonso threads gets more Hamilton, Mclaren, Raikkonen and Massa fans posts than any of their respective threads themselves. :rotfl:

#2147 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,017 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 08 July 2010 - 18:37

good stuff from alonso and hamilton at the press conference, shaking hands before and then batting back questions aimed at stirring up stuff about their time as teammates. :up:

#2148 abc

abc
  • Member

  • 1,953 posts
  • Joined: July 05

Posted 08 July 2010 - 18:48

Good post? Only for those with the bias glasses on.

Hamilton fanboys are priceless.

About strategies, Alonso always got the "heavier" strategy, that as happened to Kimi it was proved those strategies were not very favorable unless you have a middfield car.

This is truly ridiculous.

Alonso heavier: Bahrain, Silverstone, Italy, China

Hamilton heavier: Australia, Malaysia, Spain, Monaco, Hungary, Turkey, Spa

Hamilton/Alonso - 7:4

#2149 Biggles Flies Undone

Biggles Flies Undone
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 08 July 2010 - 18:51

Hamilton stayed in the car as other cars were sliding off in the same place...safest place for him. The rules stipulated that a car deemed to be in a dangerous position could be put back on track. The rules were changed after this event.


In addition, the McLaren was the only car put back on the track because it alone had cylinder cut-off software. The other cars that went off in the same place either stalled, where damaged or had to switch the engines off because they couldn't idle for extended periods.

Kudos to Hamilton and the team for realizing that if they waited the race was likely to be stopped allowing them to rejoin.

Edited by Biggles Flies Undone, 08 July 2010 - 18:55.


#2150 F.M.

F.M.
  • Member

  • 5,577 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 08 July 2010 - 18:51

From today's PC:

Q: Fernando? (about the relationship with his teammate, F.M.)
Fernando ALONSO: Very good as always.
Q: As always?
FA: Yes.
Q: You have always had a good relationship with your team-mate?
FA: Yes.
Q: Working relationship or...?
FA: Both.
Q: Lewis, would like to comment?
Lewis HAMILTON: About what?
Q: Team-mates. Previous team-mates even.
LH: I have had great team-mates and great relationships.

:rotfl: