Jump to content


Photo

Ferrari & #1 status policy [split]


  • Please log in to reply
455 replies to this topic

#251 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:09

Just want to say that I always thought there was an 'agreement' at Ferrari in 2010 - not that Alonso was number one, the evidence of the first half of the season disproves that - but that after the early races when Alonso was held up behind Massa, they came up with this plan of the second driver dropping back 3 seconds and then having a mini 'shoot out' on lap times to see who should be in front.

I believe they came up with this as a fair way of dealing with situations like Australia/Germany where the slower driver was in front but would fight too hard and risk a crash with his team mate. Alonso had the chance to pass Massa at Hockenheim and almost got it done, I think he was expecting Massa to realise the game was up and not fight too hard, but (as with most of 2010) Massa was far more concerned with beating Alonso than anything else. This is where the 'This is ridiculous' radio message stems from imo. Not that Massa had 'dared' to be in front of him and not jump out of his way, but that he was fighting too hard and was not respecting an agreement about letting the faster driver through.

Massa's problem in 2010 was that he only wanted to finish in front of Alonso. Alonso wanted to finish in front of everyone. That is the difference between these two.


Well when you're in first place I can only assume you want to beat the person behind, and secure it.

Secondly doesn't the old saying go, the first person you want to beat is your team mate?

Advertisement

#252 thechin

thechin
  • Member

  • 315 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:11

I believe this theory cropped up on a forum. If I remember right, it was pretty much debunked when the FIA hearing information came out, which revealled that the gap fluctuations coincided with fuel saving measures rather than any mythical "3 second shootout" (or, if they did do the "3 second shootout" they completely rigged it by forcing Massa to drive in that period with lowered engine settings!).

Maybe not the three seconds then but I still believe there was some agreement about whoever is faster being let by, due to not wanting them to crash into each other. It was frustrating to watch Massa that season as he would fight like hell with Alonso but seemed to give up when fighting anyone else. No-one wants to be beaten by their team mate but such behaviour is destructive and doesn't help the team.

#253 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,096 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:12

I thought it was quite clear that the point I was responding too, was that Alonso got his status by performing better when in reality the team mates were actually close points wise until Massa's run of bad luck in three consecutive races ruined his championship hopes.


So Massa was close points-wise until he had bad races and wasn't. I thought that's part of the game, my mistake.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 16 August 2012 - 10:13.


#254 thechin

thechin
  • Member

  • 315 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:14

Well when you're in first place I can only assume you want to beat the person behind, and secure it.

Secondly doesn't the old saying go, the first person you want to beat is your team mate?

Your first point, I was referring to the season as a whole. What team wants a driver like that?

Of course you want to beat your team mate, my point is the different mindset that separates these two. Alonso was out to win the title from day one, Massa would be delighted just to beat Alonso. This is the difference between the good and the greats.

I notice a similar thing over at McLaren - i guess it's down to expectations. Button doesn't seem to care if he's had a bad race as long as he beats Hamilton, whereas Hamilton is out to win. If that makes sense!

#255 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:15

So Massa was close points-wise until he had bad races and wasn't. I thought that's part of the game, my mistake.


Bad races which I think we're down to bad luck and not an error on his part, and yes they are part of the game, they shouldn't however be used to reflect performance which is what I was pointing out.

#256 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,452 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:17

I think I explained it better in my second post to as65p: "no "in race" (ie vs "in championship") strategy reason to make the switch".

In 08, the team stood to gain extra points by making the switch (and did make those extra points), as there were opponents ahead of Kova for Hamilton to attack and Hamilton was on a different strategy in that he had much fresher tyres. In 10 the team gained, and stood to gain, no extra points.

Again, I am not saying this distinction makes one ok and the other not - I think both were ok. But I think it makes differing reactions to the two understandable (because the two were different in a crucial respect) and therefore makes those reactions explainable by something other than just "they don't like my favourite driver/team".

I think everybody who has been here long enough knows my position on team orders. My issue is that there seems to be a moral or sporting outrage when it involves one form of team orders and not the other.

In my opinion the hold station order, often referred to as team strategy, is just as bad as swapping positions because it essentially rules one driver out of fighting for the position. I find this particularly disturbing because it is these who believe positions should be settled on track and not by the pitwall.

#257 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:23

Your first point, I was referring to the season as a whole. What team wants a driver like that?

Of course you want to beat your team mate, my point is the different mindset that separates these two. Alonso was out to win the title from day one, Massa would be delighted just to beat Alonso. This is the difference between the good and the greats.

I notice a similar thing over at McLaren - i guess it's down to expectations. Button doesn't seem to care if he's had a bad race as long as he beats Hamilton, whereas Hamilton is out to win. If that makes sense
!


The problem is you have no basis for that statemet except on track battles when they were together and from that you can only draw an inference. With both drivers being in the same car with the same strengths and weaknesses, it makes overtaking harder and defending easier, the majority of overtakes happened pre DRS because a cars would catch each other in different sectors, and so Massa fighting harder against Alonso might be just the illusion of two drivers in the same caar. Furthermore I heard the same thing about Massa from some ham fans in regard to Lewis Hamilton, however did you not see his spirited defense against Button for 13th place I think, putting him right out on the kerbs, or his defence against Hamilton in Monaco 2010, his overtake on Button in Malaysia 2010, defending against Button in Aus 2011 (when Alonso just cruised by), Massa making contact defending against Bruno Senna in Aus 2012.

There are numerous examples of Massa battling hard against a variety of drivers and while I can't say with any certainty the psychological motivations that underpin the driving of each driver, what I can say is that every driver is happy when they beat they team mate

#258 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,452 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:25

I thought it was quite clear that the point I was responding too, was that Alonso got his status by performing better when in reality the team mates were actually close points wise until Massa's run of bad luck in three consecutive races ruined his championship hopes.

Well, here you are doing it again. It is my recollection that Alonso also had his fair share of misfortune in those same races except Canada. The same safety car incident you speak about in Valencia and then having to serve a drive through after a safety car in Silverstone.

And are we really going argue about Alonso outperforming Massa in 2010?

#259 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,096 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:26

Bad races which I think we're down to bad luck and not an error on his part, and yes they are part of the game, they shouldn't however be used to reflect performance which is what I was pointing out.


I don't even want to get into the "luck" argument because it opens the court for anyone to argue whatever outlandish stuff he fancies. "Alonso had bad luck to have a slow car in the first place, so he had to take extraordinary risks which caused his errors." That would be IMHO not even be totally incorrect, but does not lead anywhere. Massa was behind overall, that's it.


Advertisement

#260 RedOne

RedOne
  • Member

  • 1,670 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:28

Well, here you are doing it again. It is my recollection that Alonso also had his fair share of misfortune in those same races except Canada. The same safety car incident you speak about in Valencia and then having to serve a drive through after a safety car in Silverstone.

And are we really going argue about Alonso outperforming Massa in 2010?

:up:

#261 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:41

I don't even want to get into the "luck" argument because it opens the court for anyone to argue whatever outlandish stuff he fancies. "Alonso had bad luck to have a slow car in the first place, so he had to take extraordinary risks which caused his errors." That would be IMHO not even be totally incorrect, but does not lead anywhere. Massa was behind overall, that's it.


That would be outlandish

The car that qualified 2-3 and won in Bahrain was slow. Qualified 3-4 Aus, 4th in China (ahead of the McLarens), 4th in Spain behind the Red Bulls and Lewis, 3rd in Canada (behind Lewis and Vettel), fourth in Valencia (Red Bulls and Lewis and 3rd in Silverstone (ahead of Lewis and behind Red Bulls) and was a favourite for pole in Monaco until Alonso dropped it was slow..please.

Results wise yes that its, performance wise, no.


#262 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,096 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:44

That would be outlandish


I said that, but that's what you get when you go down that road.

#263 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:49

Well, here you are doing it again. It is my recollection that Alonso also had his fair share of misfortune in those same races except Canada. The same safety car incident you speak about in Valencia and then having to serve a drive through after a safety car in Silverstone.

And are we really going argue about Alonso outperforming Massa in 2010?


I'm not arguing that Alonso wasn't outperforming Massa, I'm arguing that Massa's performances was closer to Alonso and that he only 11 points behind Vettel and 7 behind Alonso before 3 consecutive non point finishes down to bad luck before Ferrari decided to back Alonso. This show that when Ferrari chose to back Alonso it wasn't because he had been performing to some ultra high standard in comparison to Massa its just that he had substantially more points by virtue of the lay of the land after those three bad races.

Yes Alonso had bad luck with the safety car in Valencia but he unlike Massa was able to score points in that race with Massa (thanks to being second in the double stacking) being dropped out of the top ten on a track you can't overtake on. His only non-point finish in those three races was Silverstone and while he was unlucky with the safety car in Silverstone the drive through was his fault and so were the consequences flowing from that.

#264 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,712 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:55

I thought it was quite clear that the point I was responding too, was that Alonso got his status by performing better when in reality the team mates were actually close points wise until Massa's run of bad luck in three consecutive races ruined his championship hopes.


Bad luck, eh? Ain't that reserved for Hamilton? :p

Anyway you're right that Massas championship hopes were ruined already before Hockenheim. Glad you finally acknowledge that.

#265 thechin

thechin
  • Member

  • 315 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:57

The problem is you have no basis for that statemet except on track battles when they were together and from that you can only draw an inference. With both drivers being in the same car with the same strengths and weaknesses, it makes overtaking harder and defending easier, the majority of overtakes happened pre DRS because a cars would catch each other in different sectors, and so Massa fighting harder against Alonso might be just the illusion of two drivers in the same caar. Furthermore I heard the same thing about Massa from some ham fans in regard to Lewis Hamilton, however did you not see his spirited defense against Button for 13th place I think, putting him right out on the kerbs, or his defence against Hamilton in Monaco 2010, his overtake on Button in Malaysia 2010, defending against Button in Aus 2011 (when Alonso just cruised by), Massa making contact defending against Bruno Senna in Aus 2012.

There are numerous examples of Massa battling hard against a variety of drivers and while I can't say with any certainty the psychological motivations that underpin the driving of each driver, what I can say is that every driver is happy when they beat they team mate

No, you're wrong. I know Felipe personally and he has told me all this........

Of course it's only an inference. My impression from 2010 was that Massa just wanted to beat Alonso. Look at Australia that year, he didn't try and attack the cars in front, just keep Alonso behind. Of course that doesn't mean he won't fight anyone else, and I believe he has got this out of his system now and has resigned himself to his place in the pecking order.

It's all relative. Even Massa at his worst is still a damn good driver, just not compared to the some of the others.

#266 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,712 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:58

I'm not arguing that Alonso wasn't outperforming Massa, I'm arguing that Massa's performances was closer to Alonso and that he only 11 points behind Vettel and 7 behind Alonso before 3 consecutive non point finishes down to bad luck before Ferrari decided to back Alonso. This show that when Ferrari chose to back Alonso it wasn't because he had been performing to some ultra high standard in comparison to Massa its just that he had substantially more points by virtue of the lay of the land after those three bad races.

Yes Alonso had bad luck with the safety car in Valencia but he unlike Massa was able to score points in that race with Massa (thanks to being second in the double stacking) being dropped out of the top ten on a track you can't overtake on. His only non-point finish in those three races was Silverstone and while he was unlucky with the safety car in Silverstone the drive through was his fault and so were the consequences flowing from that.



Yeah, yeah, only Alonso is accountable for everything while particular others you chose to use for an argument always suffer bad luck in spades. It's really strange, isn't it? :D

#267 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 11:06

Bad luck, eh? Ain't that reserved for Hamilton? :p

Anyway you're right that Massas championship hopes were ruined already before Hockenheim. Glad you finally acknowledge that.


I never said otherwise I just don't fully agree with the statement it was solely down to his performances.

#268 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 11:10

No, you're wrong. I know Felipe personally and he has told me all this........

Of course it's only an inference. My impression from 2010 was that Massa just wanted to beat Alonso. Look at Australia that year, he didn't try and attack the cars in front, just keep Alonso behind. Of course that doesn't mean he won't fight anyone else, and I believe he has got this out of his system now and has resigned himself to his place in the pecking order.

It's all relative. Even Massa at his worst is still a damn good driver, just not compared to the some of the others.


TBF in Aus the lead group led by Massa at one point was catching Rosberg, Kubica, its just the cars (Hamilton, Webber, and Alonso) were all catching him faster. Webber with the dominant Red Bull got past, which allowed Hamilton to slip through, however after Webber went off and Hamilton had to repass he than had to hold Alonso off and by doing so got a podium.

#269 Fontainebleau

Fontainebleau
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,132 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 11:28

I think I explained it better in my second post to as65p: "no "in race" (ie vs "in championship") strategy reason to make the switch".

In 08, the team stood to gain extra points by making the switch (and did make those extra points), as there were opponents ahead of Kova for Hamilton to attack and Hamilton was on a different strategy in that he had much fresher tyres. In 10 the team gained, and stood to gain, no extra points.

Again, I am not saying this distinction makes one ok and the other not - I think both were ok. But I think it makes differing reactions to the two understandable (because the two were different in a crucial respect) and therefore makes those reactions explainable by something other than just "they don't like my favourite driver/team".

I see your point, but I disagree in your statement that Ferrari didn't gain anything by making the switch. In a year in which WCC was too far away to be a possibility, the team got itself within striking distance of the other title (WDC) by making that switch.

Hamilton was on fresher tyres that Kovalainen, but that does not mean he was on a different strategy at that point, only that he was in a better situation. Kovalainen could have tried to defend his position but he didn't. In my opinion, both McLAren and Ferrari used team orders, and both were right in doing so, as it served the best interests of the team - serving the best interest of a certain driver too was secondary.

Kovalainen received the same message than Massa did - "your teammate is faster than you". The only difference is that, according to Dennis, Kovalainen behaved as a "super-cooperative" driver and let Hamilton by of his own accord, while Massa needed a bit more inisistence from the team to get to the same conclusion  ;)

#270 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,628 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 16 August 2012 - 11:42

I'm not arguing that Alonso wasn't outperforming Massa, I'm arguing that Massa's performances was closer to Alonso and that he only 11 points behind Vettel and 7 behind Alonso before 3 consecutive non point finishes down to bad luck before Ferrari decided to back Alonso. This show that when Ferrari chose to back Alonso it wasn't because he had been performing to some ultra high standard in comparison to Massa its just that he had substantially more points by virtue of the lay of the land after those three bad races.

I think what a lot of people are ignoring is that if you were watching the sport, not just reading Wikipedia pages on the results/points situation, you could see that it was gonna be Alonso, not Massa, who took up any championship challenge if it was gonna be possible at all. Both had their share of bad luck, but Alonso was more often than not, the clear better performer on-track.

And its also important to note the series of events that lead to Hockenheim, not just the points situation in Hockenheim itself:

First off, Ferrari had a slump after the first several races. They started as clear 2nd best car, but Mclaren seemed to overhaul them quite quickly for that spot. It really wasn't until Valencia that Ferrari started to gain ground back(Monaco and Canada being unique and hard to judge as 'representative' tracks). As a Ferrari fan, or anybody who was looking after Ferrari's interests, it was a positive first couple days of the weekend. But then the race turned into a disaster for the team, completely ruining any chances the team had at actually using their newfound performance for any good. So thats just one race, ok, we could get over that. So Silverstone rolls along and yet again, the car proves competitive and there were reasons to be positive about Ferrari's chances in general(and not just at this race). And yet again, the race proves to be a disaster, results-wise. So at this point, all the hard work and effort Ferrari had gone through to get competitive again was going to waste. What did not look so bad, points-wise, just a few races ago, was now turning into something that most people thought was a hopeless cause. Alonso was 50 points behind in the standings, Massa 70+. Alonso said he could still fight for the championship, people laughed, and nobody gave a second thought about Massa having a chance, cuz frankly, that would be far more outrageous considering that if Alonso was a far-fetched WDC prospect, what would that make Felipe, who wasn't driving as well as Alonso and was a further 20+ points off the leader?

So Hockenheim rolls around and for the first time since 2008, Ferrari found themselves with the best car on the grid. I feel its also worth noting that Alonso had been clearly quicker all throughout the weekend prior to Sunday and had outqualified Felipe by half a second(although himself just missing pole due to a brilliant lap by Vettel). So the race comes around, and this is truly a make-or-break affair for Ferrari. They cannot afford to have another bad race, especially when they find themselves with the fastest car. Vettel squeezes Alonso, allowing Massa to get by at the 1st corner but Alonso still managing to stay ahead of Vettel. The two Ferrari's break off into the distance for now and its Alonso vs Massa. We all know that Massa isn't the most predictable driver to overtake. Sometimes he'll leave a door wide open, sometimes, he'll race you like y'all are in tin-tops. So Alonso attacks once. Doesn't quite come off as Massa defends hard. As somebody who cares about Ferrari, this was pretty nerve-wracking, especially after what happened with the Red Bulls in Turkey. If they crashed into each other, it would not only mean they were a complete laughing stock, having 3 disaster races in a row culminating in them throwing away an easy 1-2 with the best cars on the grid, but they could kiss any championship hopes goodbye. So was it really wise to have Alonso attacking Felipe? I know people want to see racing and no doubt team orders would take some entertainment out of the race, but if you put yourselves in Ferrari's shoes, or the shoes of anyone that has an interest in seeing Ferrari do well, having Alonso overtake Massa on-track was a scary proposition. Remember this was before DRS or the Pirelli tires or anything like that. Overtaking was more difficult in 2010. So Ferrari made a difficult decision and wanted to see Massa let Alonso by without having to risk both their cars. It ensures them the safe 1-2 they wanted, and it meant just possibly bringing Alonso in with a glimmer of hope for the title.

Looking at the entire picture, I find it hard to say the team orders weren't justified. The situation wasn't handled well within the team, whether you want to blame management or Felipe's side of the garage or Alonso getting upset over the radio, which I think is what caused the biggest stink by fans and the media, but the actual switching of the drivers seemed ethical enough to me if you cared at all about Ferrari doing well in the championship, which Ferrari themselves certainly do. It probably wasn't the way they wanted things to happen either, but they did what they thought was best for themselves and its hard to deny that it was the right decision in hind-sight.

Edited by Seanspeed, 16 August 2012 - 11:43.


#271 Slartibartfast

Slartibartfast
  • Paddock Club Host

  • 4,525 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 16 August 2012 - 11:50

Well, the sense of double standards comes from the F1 media in general.

Prior to 2011 there were many cases of a Team asking the no. 2 driver to move over or not challenging the no. 1 driver weather the no. 2 was mathematically out of contention or not. The press never made a big deal about it and swept it under the carpet without making too much noise about it. If you compare these events to what happened in 2010 Germany, there is a clear indication of media overreaction which in turn railed up all the fans with negativity towards Alonso and Ferrari.

Never before, I heard the media telling a driver to his face that he should be kicked out of the race, that he is a dirty champion or that he could not win on his own skill. Specially when the guy who wanted him kicked out of the race once said that it was ok for teams to order their drivers not to challenge each other when the team orders were totally prohibited.

I have never heard of any driver treated this way



This is why I say there are double standards when it comes to team orders, no. 1 and no. 2 status when talking about Alonso or Ferrari.


Post Qualifying Press Conference, Monaco, 2006:

Q: (Anne Giuntini - L’Equipe) To Michael, do you think the championship will continue on that kind of basis, sportingly speaking, and some incidents may be arbitrating the battle between two great champions?

MS: I don’t get your question completely right…

Q: (Anne Giuntini – L’Equipe) To be honest, I have talked already to some drivers – professionals like you – who said it is too big, what happened today, to be credible, so on that basis I think that maybe there is some ‘interrogation’ and maybe it is a bit of a shame if it is true…
MS: It would be a shame if it is true, absolutely, but I think it is as usual whatever you do in certain moments. Your enemies they believe one thing and the people that support you believe another thing and that is what our sport is about.

Q: (Anne Giuntini – L’Equipe) It is not a question of friends or enemies, it is a question of sport.
MS: I think it is because I explained you what really happened and if you want to believe this you believe and some people may not believe this but, unfortunately that is the world we live in.

Q: (Anne Giuntini – L’Equipe) It is a big shame.
MS: Yes, unfortunately that’s it…

Q: (Byron Young - Speed Sport News) Fernando do you think anything less of Michael today?
FA: I have my opinion and I won’t tell it here.

Q: (Byron Young - Speed Sport News) Michael do you think you cheated today?
MS: No. And I don’t know why you ask such a bad question. I think it is pretty tough I have to say. If you were to drive around here, at Monaco, you would probably not ask this question.

If you think Alonso had it bad, you have never heard James Hunt talk about Riccardo Patrese.


Here's Michael Schumacher explaining his and Ferrari's view on team orders in 2002, before the ban:

Q: Michael, in terms of pure sporting spirit don't you think Ferrari's strategy is not really fair?

MS: Imagine at the end of the season I have missed the championship by two points, yes, it is sport to win it like this as well. Listen, I think it is a different philosophy Ferrari has on that against McLaren and I think you simply have to accept the different philosophies - you don't have to like it, but that's the way it is. I think this sport is involved a lot of things - a lot of money, a lot of pressure, and all that counts in the end is the championship to be honest. And as long as we don't work against the rules I think we're quite fair to do this and the rules say quite clearly that there is nothing stopping that, so for sure there will be some people disagreeing, there will be other people who agree, that's the way of life.

DC: Please don't get it banned before I, once in my career, get the benefit of this!

...

Q: Michael, you just explained the philosophy of the Ferrari team but isn't that in a way cheating the public as well?

MS: You know usually after such events there's a little row in a room coming up, but by the next race people tend to forget this. Remember what happened in Melbourne with McLaren, it is not only like Ferrari is doing something completely different to anyone else so I think it is part of the sport. There are some people who don't like it, other people who understand what we want to do... you're free to have a different opinion but accept our opinion as well. Wait till the next races and you will see what McLaren will do.

Q: I'm talking about this race.

MS: Yeah, but in this race already it was clear what will be the future because Mika hasn't finished a race, David is in a good position for the championship and you have to think a little bit ahead and not say after 'actually we should have done that before' so there is a lot of calculation, there is very clever people involved who know what they are doing. I can't tell him (Rubens), to slow down, it's not me who is the only person saying that, it is the philosophy of the whole team and as I said again, some people agree, other people disagree. Some people would want to do it that way, other people would do it in a different way and if you do look at motor sport in general - if you look at saloon car races and if you look at other series it has always been part of racing.


There were a number of other questions about team orders in that press conference, so I think it fair to say that the press were making a big deal about it - at a time when there was no rule against it.

I doubt whether Ferrari's philosophy is much different in 2012 to what it was then, and I see no reason for it to be. The evidence suggests that it works.

#272 FirstWatt

FirstWatt
  • Member

  • 425 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 16 August 2012 - 11:55

[...]Alonso was 50 points behind in the standings, Massa 70+. Alonso said he could still fight for the championship, people laughed, and nobody gave a second thought about Massa having a chance, cuz frankly, that would be far more outrageous considering that if Alonso was a far-fetched WDC prospect, what would that make Felipe, who wasn't driving as well as Alonso and was a further 20+ points off the leader? [...]

That was one very point I wanted so show with my analysis:
Even in his best races (i took all his podium finishes as a tangible data base) Massa was by quite a margin less strong than Alonso during his podium finishes.
Given this and the championship scores, it had to be done to leave a small WDC hope alive.

#273 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 12:01

^ Still I never saw MS called to be kicked out of a race or a dirty champion on his face by the media in a n official F1 press conference.

When drivers talk about drivers is one thing. But when the media in an official event promote mass hysteria through outrage overreactions is much different thing.

#274 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,452 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 August 2012 - 12:11

I'm not arguing that Alonso wasn't outperforming Massa, I'm arguing that Massa's performances was closer to Alonso and that he only 11 points behind Vettel and 7 behind Alonso before 3 consecutive non point finishes down to bad luck before Ferrari decided to back Alonso. This show that when Ferrari chose to back Alonso it wasn't because he had been performing to some ultra high standard in comparison to Massa its just that he had substantially more points by virtue of the lay of the land after those three bad races.

Yes Alonso had bad luck with the safety car in Valencia but he unlike Massa was able to score points in that race with Massa (thanks to being second in the double stacking) being dropped out of the top ten on a track you can't overtake on. His only non-point finish in those three races was Silverstone and while he was unlucky with the safety car in Silverstone the drive through was his fault and so were the consequences flowing from that.

Kvothe, go and watch 2010 again. Massa was nowhere near Alonso in terms of pace apart for the odd race here and there and even with Alonso's numerous mistakes in the first half of 2010 he was still ahead of Massa points wise.

Alonso gave Massa a drubbing in terms of pace that year. Anybody who argues otherwise is clutching at some really small straws.

Also, regarding Canada, Massa was entirely to blame for a large part of what happened to him. He tangled with Sutil as well as Schumacher later in the race.

Anyway, this debate is going nowhere as nobody here can prove that Massa is a defacto number 2 and nobody seems willing to address the point I brought up with regard to China 2011. Should anyone care to do so then that will really be an interesting debate because I would really like to hear them swing that one.

#275 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 12:30

Kvothe, go and watch 2010 again. Massa was nowhere near Alonso in terms of pace apart for the odd race here and there and even with Alonso's numerous mistakes in the first half of 2010 he was still ahead of Massa points wise.

Alonso gave Massa a drubbing in terms of pace that year. Anybody who argues otherwise is clutching at some really small straws.

Also, regarding Canada, Massa was entirely to blame for a large part of what happened to him. He tangled with Sutil as well as Schumacher later in the race.

Anyway, this debate is going nowhere as nobody here can prove that Massa is a defacto number 2 and nobody seems willing to address the point I brought up with regard to China 2011. Should anyone care to do so then that will really be an interesting debate because I would really like to hear them swing that one.


Ferrari I'm going to spell it out because I don't think you get what I'm trying to say.

First of all I'm only referring to the first half of 2010 pre Hockenheim, not Alonso's stellar second half.

Secondly I've acknowledged that Alonso was faster on pace.

What I'm saying is that Massa's performance was better in the first half compared to the second half, and while Alonso was faster, as I was reminded daily last year in the Lewis v Jenson thread, pace means nothing if you're making mistakes. Alonso made a quite a few which meant Massa was more consistent (with him even beating Alonso a couple of times) and despite being slower was relatively close. It was only three consecutive non point finished due to factors outside of his control in the three races proceeding Hockenheim which meant he was further behind his team mate than he should have been and which aided the decision of Ferrari to support his team mate (the one closer to the lead of the championship). The main point is that Massa was performing well against his team mate pre Hockenheim.

#276 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 12:33

I think what a lot of people are ignoring is that if you were watching the sport, not just reading Wikipedia pages on the results/points situation, you could see that it was gonna be Alonso, not Massa, who took up any championship challenge if it was gonna be possible at all. Both had their share of bad luck, but Alonso was more often than not, the clear better performer on-track.

And its also important to note the series of events that lead to Hockenheim, not just the points situation in Hockenheim itself:

First off, Ferrari had a slump after the first several races. They started as clear 2nd best car, but Mclaren seemed to overhaul them quite quickly for that spot. It really wasn't until Valencia that Ferrari started to gain ground back(Monaco and Canada being unique and hard to judge as 'representative' tracks). As a Ferrari fan, or anybody who was looking after Ferrari's interests, it was a positive first couple days of the weekend. But then the race turned into a disaster for the team, completely ruining any chances the team had at actually using their newfound performance for any good. So thats just one race, ok, we could get over that. So Silverstone rolls along and yet again, the car proves competitive and there were reasons to be positive about Ferrari's chances in general(and not just at this race). And yet again, the race proves to be a disaster, results-wise. So at this point, all the hard work and effort Ferrari had gone through to get competitive again was going to waste. What did not look so bad, points-wise, just a few races ago, was now turning into something that most people thought was a hopeless cause. Alonso was 50 points behind in the standings, Massa 70+. Alonso said he could still fight for the championship, people laughed, and nobody gave a second thought about Massa having a chance, cuz frankly, that would be far more outrageous considering that if Alonso was a far-fetched WDC prospect, what would that make Felipe, who wasn't driving as well as Alonso and was a further 20+ points off the leader?

So Hockenheim rolls around and for the first time since 2008, Ferrari found themselves with the best car on the grid. I feel its also worth noting that Alonso had been clearly quicker all throughout the weekend prior to Sunday and had outqualified Felipe by half a second(although himself just missing pole due to a brilliant lap by Vettel). So the race comes around, and this is truly a make-or-break affair for Ferrari. They cannot afford to have another bad race, especially when they find themselves with the fastest car. Vettel squeezes Alonso, allowing Massa to get by at the 1st corner but Alonso still managing to stay ahead of Vettel. The two Ferrari's break off into the distance for now and its Alonso vs Massa. We all know that Massa isn't the most predictable driver to overtake. Sometimes he'll leave a door wide open, sometimes, he'll race you like y'all are in tin-tops. So Alonso attacks once. Doesn't quite come off as Massa defends hard. As somebody who cares about Ferrari, this was pretty nerve-wracking, especially after what happened with the Red Bulls in Turkey. If they crashed into each other, it would not only mean they were a complete laughing stock, having 3 disaster races in a row culminating in them throwing away an easy 1-2 with the best cars on the grid, but they could kiss any championship hopes goodbye. So was it really wise to have Alonso attacking Felipe? I know people want to see racing and no doubt team orders would take some entertainment out of the race, but if you put yourselves in Ferrari's shoes, or the shoes of anyone that has an interest in seeing Ferrari do well, having Alonso overtake Massa on-track was a scary proposition. Remember this was before DRS or the Pirelli tires or anything like that. Overtaking was more difficult in 2010. So Ferrari made a difficult decision and wanted to see Massa let Alonso by without having to risk both their cars. It ensures them the safe 1-2 they wanted, and it meant just possibly bringing Alonso in with a glimmer of hope for the title.

Looking at the entire picture, I find it hard to say the team orders weren't justified. The situation wasn't handled well within the team, whether you want to blame management or Felipe's side of the garage or Alonso getting upset over the radio, which I think is what caused the biggest stink by fans and the media, but the actual switching of the drivers seemed ethical enough to me if you cared at all about Ferrari doing well in the championship, which Ferrari themselves certainly do. It probably wasn't the way they wanted things to happen either, but they did what they thought was best for themselves and its hard to deny that it was the right decision in hind-sight.


Sean I appreciate the post and I actually had no problems with Ferrari's no 1 driver policy, I'm just arguing about the effect it, and the shift of the team towards Alonso might have had on Massa.

#277 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,452 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 August 2012 - 12:52

Ferrari I'm going to spell it out because I don't think you get what I'm trying to say.

First of all I'm only referring to the first half of 2010 pre Hockenheim, not Alonso's stellar second half.

Secondly I've acknowledged that Alonso was faster on pace.

What I'm saying is that Massa's performance was better in the first half compared to the second half, and while Alonso was faster, as I was reminded daily last year in the Lewis v Jenson thread, pace means nothing if you're making mistakes. Alonso made a quite a few which meant Massa was more consistent (with him even beating Alonso a couple of times) and despite being slower was relatively close. It was only three consecutive non point finished due to factors outside of his control in the three races proceeding Hockenheim which meant he was further behind his team mate than he should have been and which aided the decision of Ferrari to support his team mate (the one closer to the lead of the championship). The main point is that Massa was performing well against his team mate pre Hockenheim.

This is where you're mistaken. Massa performed better relatively to Alonso in terms of results and pace post Germany. He stayed within 10 seconds of Alonso in Hungary, stayed within 4 seconds at Monza, beat him in Spa, showed pace in Singapore but had mechanical trouble in qualifying.

#278 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,628 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 16 August 2012 - 12:53

The main point is that Massa was performing well against his team mate pre Hockenheim.

Depends on how you define 'performing well', I guess. If you insist on JUST looking at points, it does seem somewhat close, but reality was different. The excuses about Massa's accident hampering his ability were popping up well before Hockenheim. Performance-wise, Alonso made Massa look 2nd rate.

Either way, whatever effect Hockenheim had on Massa, it took a while to manifest cuz Massa was perfectly competent in the 3 races following Hockenheim. People like to ignore this fact.

EDIT: I see you're making the same point 2183, :up:

Edited by Seanspeed, 16 August 2012 - 13:08.


#279 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 13:14

This is where you're mistaken. Massa performed better relatively to Alonso in terms of results and pace post Germany. He stayed within 10 seconds of Alonso in Hungary, stayed within 4 seconds at Monza, beat him in Spa, showed pace in Singapore but had mechanical trouble in qualifying.



Depends on how you define 'performing well', I guess. If you insist on JUST looking at points, it does seem somewhat close, but reality was different. The excuses about Massa's accident hampering his ability were popping up well before Hockenheim. Performance-wise, Alonso made Massa look 2nd rate.

Either way, whatever effect Hockenheim had on Massa, it took a while to manifest cuz Massa was perfectly competent in the 3 races following Hockenheim. People like to ignore this fact.

EDIT: I see you're making the same point 2183, :up:


Massa dropped a place at Hockenheim to Hamilton but was saved by his hydraulics failure.
Spa, had a series of extraordinary circumstances which render any comparison in the final part of quali and during the race meaning less, and Monza Ferrari had the faster car, but I don't remember him putting the same amount of pressure on Button as Alonso did, and it seemed that while Alonso was managing the gap after an attacking first part of the race, Massa was doing his best to hang on.
After that his results fell sharply although I appreciate he had an issue during Singapore quali which also makes a comparison meaningless.

I think the main issue was that he barring Spa (which was a nightmare of a weekend for Alonso and which can't be used to judge performance) he never outqualified or beat Alonso again on performance.



Advertisement

#280 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,452 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 August 2012 - 13:43

Massa dropped a place at Hockenheim to Hamilton but was saved by his hydraulics failure.
Spa, had a series of extraordinary circumstances which render any comparison in the final part of quali and during the race meaning less, and Monza Ferrari had the faster car, but I don't remember him putting the same amount of pressure on Button as Alonso did, and it seemed that while Alonso was managing the gap after an attacking first part of the race, Massa was doing his best to hang on.
After that his results fell sharply although I appreciate he had an issue during Singapore quali which also makes a comparison meaningless.

I think the main issue was that he barring Spa (which was a nightmare of a weekend for Alonso and which can't be used to judge performance) he never outqualified or beat Alonso again on performance.

Why is Spa meaningless? Everybody races in the same conditions.

Also, prior to Germany, Massa outqualified Alonso on only 3 occasions. Bahrain, Monaco and Turkey. If we look at the other races during that period Alonso convincingly outqualified Massa. His race pace was also superior bar two grand prix which was Turkey and Malaysia (Alonso had an iffy gearbox).

#281 revlec

revlec
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 14:33

What I'm seeing isn't so much people caring for Massa or over fairness, but people being pi**ed that Massa isn't able to distract and take points from Alonso the way Webber does to Vettel or Button to Hamilton. That's the real underlying issue IMO.


People feel that Alonso has an "advantage" compare to his rivals whom have to fight harder and worry about the gap between them and their team mates. Races like Valencia 2011 or Monaco 2012 where ALO is ahead, doing his pace and is sure MAS just behind will not attack or undercut him are luxuries other drivers don't have.

I am a Lewis's fan, and I certainly prefer his 2007, 2010, 2011, or 2012 seasons where he had a competitive team mate.

Well, it's Vettels and Hamiltons job to spank their teammates as bad and as consistently as Alonso does to Massa. Vettel did manage last year but not this year, but surprise, that's neither Alonsos nor Ferraris fault.


You can not spank if your strategy is not optimized to fight your team mate. Do MAS and his engineers try strategies during the race to beat ALO as other top team drivers do? You see it all the time with WEB, VET, HAM, BUT. I know you will argue saying ALO is just superior and MAS can not match him. False. It's simply impossible to beat your team mate in 100%(I'm exaggerating) of the races without the complicity of your team.
Look at the stats and you will not find a similar gap even in HRT or some midfield team.

_

+ MAS was fighting ALO with the risk of crashing(as it should be) up until China 2010. It all went downhill since then.

+ I see some guys you the "excuse" of the new team atmosphere to justify ALO mistakes in the first part of 2010. But they forget that a certain BUT who was new in McLaren was leading the 2010 WDC after the very first races.

Edited by revlec, 16 August 2012 - 14:36.


#282 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,628 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 16 August 2012 - 14:34

Massa dropped a place at Hockenheim to Hamilton but was saved by his hydraulics failure.
Spa, had a series of extraordinary circumstances which render any comparison in the final part of quali and during the race meaning less, and Monza Ferrari had the faster car, but I don't remember him putting the same amount of pressure on Button as Alonso did, and it seemed that while Alonso was managing the gap after an attacking first part of the race, Massa was doing his best to hang on.
After that his results fell sharply although I appreciate he had an issue during Singapore quali which also makes a comparison meaningless.

I think the main issue was that he barring Spa (which was a nightmare of a weekend for Alonso and which can't be used to judge performance) he never outqualified or beat Alonso again on performance.

Massa qualified 4th in Hungary right behind Alonso. And he was actually closer to Alonso in qualifying here than he was in Hockenheim. Finished 4th whatever way you look at it and it wasn't a bad performance. You cant look at the weekend and say, "Oh yea, look how bad Massa is now, clearly he was affected by Hockenheim." There was absolutely no sign of it whatsoever. It was the same sort of performance he had been putting in all year long.

Spa, it was the same conditions for everyone so its not 'meaningless'. Was the gap to Alonso in qualifying not representative of the norm? Of course. But Massa still did what Alonso could not, and that is qualify decently and finish the race in a respectable position. Again, we're looking for signs that Massa had 'lost something' and there were none here.

In Monza, you say the Ferrari was faster, but you sure it wasn't just Alonso making the difference? Massa may not have been doing as well as Alonso(who was brilliant that weekend), but he was still right up there, fighting at the front not far behind the two guys ahead. It was actually one of his better individual performances of the year, even if he did finish behind Alonso. I actually remember there were a lot of people coming out after that race saying, "See, Massa is driving well now, so Ferrari weren't justified in using team orders blah blah blah". So again, there were no signs that Massa was struggling or doing any worse than he had at any other point during the season.

You're trying to dismiss a perfectly valid argument cuz it doesn't support what you want to believe and it isn't going to work.

#283 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 14:50

Why is Spa meaningless? Everybody races in the same conditions.

Also, prior to Germany, Massa outqualified Alonso on only 3 occasions. Bahrain, Monaco and Turkey. If we look at the other races during that period Alonso convincingly outqualified Massa. His race pace was also superior bar two grand prix which was Turkey and Malaysia (Alonso had an iffy gearbox).


Because in qualifying Alonso was on a totally different set-up and than the final qualifying session was hit by rain which meant having the fastest time depended on when you were on track with only the McLarens going faster. Alonso had been favourite to get pole

In the race Alonso was hit by Barrichello on the first lap, and then changed to inters which was the wrong strategy and meant he had to pit again, and than he crashed out.

I don't see how anybody could draw any meaningful comparison in performance between the two from that, which is what we're arguing about :confused:

It doesn't matter how many times he outperformed Alonso in the first half what's significant is that he didn't do it in the second.

#284 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 15:00

Massa qualified 4th in Hungary right behind Alonso. And he was actually closer to Alonso in qualifying here than he was in Hockenheim. Finished 4th whatever way you look at it and it wasn't a bad performance. You cant look at the weekend and say, "Oh yea, look how bad Massa is now, clearly he was affected by Hockenheim." There was absolutely no sign of it whatsoever. It was the same sort of performance he had been putting in all year long.

Spa, it was the same conditions for everyone so its not 'meaningless'. Was the gap to Alonso in qualifying not representative of the norm? Of course. But Massa still did what Alonso could not, and that is qualify decently and finish the race in a respectable position. Again, we're looking for signs that Massa had 'lost something' and there were none here.

In Monza, you say the Ferrari was faster, but you sure it wasn't just Alonso making the difference? Massa may not have been doing as well as Alonso(who was brilliant that weekend), but he was still right up there, fighting at the front not far behind the two guys ahead. It was actually one of his better individual performances of the year, even if he did finish behind Alonso. I actually remember there were a lot of people coming out after that race saying, "See, Massa is driving well now, so Ferrari weren't justified in using team orders blah blah blah". So again, there were no signs that Massa was struggling or doing any worse than he had at any other point during the season.

You're trying to dismiss a perfectly valid argument cuz it doesn't support what you want to believe and it isn't going to work.


If you'd been following my argument I said a downward trend in performance from Hockenheim, and although he finished fourth he was unable to pull a big enough gap to prevent being undercut by Lewis and was saved by a hydraulics failure, despite having the faster car.

See my explanation to Ferrari in regards to Spa

The Ferrari team brought a special optimised rear wing with DRS specifically for Monza while McLaren kept their barn door rear wing with DRS, and brought a low downforce set-up nether of which were particulary optimised for Monza, secondly Alonso qualified on pole, and Massa in third, just behind Button. That would suggest to me Ferrari had the fastest car, furthermore Alonso went into the back of Button into the first chicane at the start damaging his diffuser and which McLaren admitted cost them performance.

No I'm not I've got my point of view, and I can't help but think the reason Ferrari fans are being so vehement is that they don't want to acknowledge the effect team policy may have had on Massa.

#285 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,096 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 15:04

If Massa's results are directly affected by any team policy, what he should do is to finish most races right behind Alonso, and looking faster if possible. If he cannot do that it's his own problem, whether it's due to his speed or his mental stability. Simples.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 16 August 2012 - 15:05.


#286 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,452 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 August 2012 - 15:15

Because in qualifying Alonso was on a totally different set-up and than the final qualifying session was hit by rain which meant having the fastest time depended on when you were on track with only the McLarens going faster. Alonso had been favourite to get pole

In the race Alonso was hit by Barrichello on the first lap, and then changed to inters which was the wrong strategy and meant he had to pit again, and than he crashed out.

I don't see how anybody could draw any meaningful comparison in performance between the two from that, which is what we're arguing about :confused:

It doesn't matter how many times he outperformed Alonso in the first half what's significant is that he didn't do it in the second.

Kvothe, Massa didn't outperform Alonso in the first half apart from Turkey. Go ahead and show me which other races he had better quali and race pace... The times he found himself ahead of Alonso was due to Alonso mistakes.

Seriously, if Germany had such an impact on him how come he performed better relative to Alonso in Hungary, Spa, Monza for the first time since Turkey?





#287 Suntrek

Suntrek
  • Member

  • 1,796 posts
  • Joined: August 07

Posted 16 August 2012 - 15:18

We can of course debate Alonso - Massa til the cows come home.

In my point of view it all boils down to that Alonso has extracted the most of what the car is capable of - while Massa hasn't.

Winning the WCC means - IF you have a good car - ýou have to have two good drivers who can score points. McLaren have Button and Hamilton. RBR have Vettel and Webber. Ferrari has Alonso. That simply isn't good enough and before anyone of you starts to yada yada about #2 drivers , I'd like to remind you of Giancarlo Fisicella in the Renault the two years in row Alonso won the WDC AND Renault won the WCC. Fisichella did a pretty good job here. His results at that point - in the same Renault as Alonso, and even as a #2 driver - contributed much more to Renault winning the WCC in these two years than I've seen Massa contribute to the Ferrari point score nowadays. Sorry to say.

Edited by Suntrek, 16 August 2012 - 15:34.


#288 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 15:26

Kvothe, Massa didn't outperform Alonso in the first half apart from Turkey. Go ahead and show me which other races he had better quali and race pace... The times he found himself ahead of Alonso was due to Alonso mistakes.

Seriously, if Germany had such an impact on him how come he performed better relative to Alonso in Hungary, Spa, Monza for the first time since Turkey?

You said it yourself, Bahrain, and Turkey in quali, and he was in a position to capitalise in Australia, Malaysia and Monaco. This never happened again not even at Brazil.

Since Turkey?
Because following Turkey was the three consecrative no point finishes due to factors outside of his control, after that any result was going to look better relative to Alonso.

I'm speaking of a downward trend from Hockemheim, and as I said after a potential first any result downwards supports my conclusions, its just that as the season went on (beyond Monza) he grew more and more dismal.

#289 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,452 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 August 2012 - 15:36

You said it yourself, Bahrain, and Turkey in quali, and he was in a position to capitalise in Australia, Malaysia and Monaco. This never happened again not even at Brazil.

Since Turkey?
Because following Turkey was the three consecrative no point finishes due to factors outside of his control, after that any result was going to look better relative to Alonso.

I'm speaking of a downward trend from Hockemheim, and as I said after a potential first any result downwards supports my conclusions, its just that as the season went on (beyond Monza) he grew more and more dismal.

I did not say since Turkey, I said apart from Turkey.

Go ahead, tell me where Massa had better pace. And are you saying that Massa wasn't in a position to capitalise in Hungary, Monza? Alonso just stopped making mistakes and the results came but at the same time Massa pace relative to Alonso actually improved. You can't take Germany in isolation and draw conclusions from there. Even the sun shines on a dogs ass from time to time.

#290 revlec

revlec
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 15:39

Fernando Alonso faces test threatening Ferrari harmony
At Indianapolis in 2006 he was at odds with his Renault team when team-mate Giancarlo Fisichella was running ahead of him, insiders telling of him screaming over the radio to move 'Fisi' aside.

An almost identical situation arose a year later at the same venue, with McLaren when Lewis Hamilton was running ahead of him and Alonso felt he was being held up.
In between times, he was publically critical of Renault in the aftermath of China 2006 when the team did not prevent Fisichella from taking advantage of Alonso's tyre problems.

He made a now infamous speech in which he talked of "feeling alone" in the team. Whereas the Indianapolis '06 incident had been contained within Renault at the time, this was the first public appearance of a previously unsuspected chink in the champion's armour.

It was a chink that was prised open at McLaren by Hamilton's speed.

Alonso's failure to gel at McLaren, and his ill-judged attempts at using the team's difficulty with governing body the FIA as 'spy-gate' unfolded to get internal championship priority, led to him being dropped after just one year of what was originally a long-term contract.


http://news.bbc.co.u...one/8593478.stm

It's a 2010 article.

I have been following ALO career even if I am not one of his fans. I know he prefers absolute #1 policy.Before we had Fisichella(who won the first race in 2005 and then was nowhere or was fast if asked by Briatore like in China 2006 to beat MSC who was ALO rival for the WDC), Grosjean, Piquet. And now MAS.
All drivers people like to call mediocre, but we should start to ask how is like to work with ALO in his team.


Edited by revlec, 16 August 2012 - 15:45.


#291 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,852 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 15:46

I did not say since Turkey, I said apart from Turkey.

Go ahead, tell me where Massa had better pace. And are you saying that Massa wasn't in a position to capitalise in Hungary, Monza? Alonso just stopped making mistakes and the results came but at the same time Massa pace relative to Alonso actually improved. You can't take Germany in isolation and draw conclusions from there. Even the sun shines on a dogs ass from time to time.


Note which part of your reply I'm replying too.

#292 BruisedLee

BruisedLee
  • Member

  • 100 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 16 August 2012 - 15:58

I can't help but think the reason Ferrari fans are being so vehement is that they don't want to acknowledge the effect team policy may have had on Massa.


And don't forget Alonso's mind games.

Massa was familiar with Ferrari's policy when he drove with Schumacher, when Kimi won the championship in 2007 and when he got n1 treatment in 2008. It may be the case that this policy suddenly affected him a great deal, but I doubt that was the main reason, specially because it doesn't explain his performance the following years. The downward trend you mention could have lasted until the end of the season. I imagine at the start of the new season he would have felt eager to start again from zero and show 2010 was just a bad season.

For me, the most plausible explanation has been always the cars and Massa's relative position in the grid. The seasons of 2007 and 2008 were the odd years of his career. I don't remember people having him in high regard before 2007. In 2007, he started 7 times from the first line in the grid and 4 times from the second row. In 2008, 10 from first row and 3 from second row. I think that and the difficulty to overtake during those years made his life a lot of easier. Those were the only years he shined.

I think having such a bad performance compare to your team mate may have had in itself a compounding negative effect. Domenicalli mentioned something to that effect. He said Massa had to forget about Alonso and focus on driving the best he knew. Everyone in Ferrari has been trying to help him. I don't understand why people keeps thinking these policies are there to hurt him or to hurt the team. You may agree or not with them, but Ferrari has them because it works for the team. I don't remember any other team giving so many chances to a driver and still getting a lot of flak for it. It is ridiculous.

#293 revlec

revlec
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 16 August 2012 - 16:09

I think having such a bad performance compare to your team mate may have had in itself a compounding negative effect. Domenicalli mentioned something to that effect. He said Massa had to forget about Alonso and focus on driving the best he knew. Everyone in Ferrari has been trying to help him. I don't understand why people keeps thinking these policies are there to hurt him or to hurt the team. You may agree or not with them, but Ferrari has them because it works for the team. I don't remember any other team giving so many chances to a driver and still getting a lot of flak for it. It is ridiculous.


Fact is, after a poor start WEB VET HAM BUT immediately think of alternative strategy if they can not beat their team mate using their speed alone.
It doesn't happen with MAS. You will say he doesn't have the speed, even if it was the case, the compounded not optimal strategies compare to his team mate will only increase the gap in points.

The only solution is to let the drivers go for the WDC. At the end, the faster/stronger will prevail, even though many want the easier route.
Drivers should start the race with the idea to beat their team mate.

Edited by revlec, 16 August 2012 - 16:11.


#294 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,628 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 16 August 2012 - 16:48

If you'd been following my argument I said a downward trend in performance from Hockenheim, and although he finished fourth he was unable to pull a big enough gap to prevent being undercut by Lewis and was saved by a hydraulics failure, despite having the faster car.

See my explanation to Ferrari in regards to Spa

The Ferrari team brought a special optimised rear wing with DRS specifically for Monza while McLaren kept their barn door rear wing with DRS, and brought a low downforce set-up nether of which were particulary optimised for Monza, secondly Alonso qualified on pole, and Massa in third, just behind Button. That would suggest to me Ferrari had the fastest car, furthermore Alonso went into the back of Button into the first chicane at the start damaging his diffuser and which McLaren admitted cost them performance.

No I'm not I've got my point of view, and I can't help but think the reason Ferrari fans are being so vehement is that they don't want to acknowledge the effect team policy may have had on Massa.

Yes, you keep saying a downward trend from Hockenheim on, but you're ignoring that actual downward trend did not start til 4-5 races after Hockenheim in which case its hard to point at Hockenheim as the singular event that caused it.

For Hungary, Lewis being faster than Felipe in a slightly slower car isn't a surprise. Lewis is a very good driver, I'm sure you'll agree. This is nothing different than what had been happening before, even before 2010. You CANNOT say that he was off-form there or that he 'lost anything'. Downward trend did not start in Hungary.

Your points about Spa are only relevant if you can say for sure that Alonso would have won or something if not for his setup gamble or something. Otherwise, Felipe's performance that weekend looked perfectly adequate to me.

In Monza, the most you can say is that things were very close between Mclaren and Ferrari. Mclaren brought two packages, BOTH optimized for Monza, but both taking very different approaches. And Alonso qualifying ahead of Button means the Ferrari is faster? That couldn't have just been Alonso being a very quick guy, which we all know he is? He barely got pole, too, if you remember. Difference was like a tenth of a second. Oh lord, look at all that proof! No way could he have been a tenth faster than Button in an equal car.... C'mon now. Either way, Massa put in one of his best performances of the year. Wasn't his best, result-wise, but individually, he was competitive all weekend and hung right there with the front-runners. So, if anything, the trend was looking a little up at this point!

Its not that we dont 'want' to acknowledge that Hockenheim affected Massa, its just that the evidence isn't really there to suggest it did.

Its speculation at most, but I think if anything affected Massa negatively, it was his own realization that he simply wasn't as good as Alonso. He spent a few years in the limelight looking mighty good against Kimi but then when faced with an opponent more akin to a prime Schumacher, he fell short again. That was probably hard to take. But he's played the no.2 role before. With Schumi and then at the end of 2007 with Kimi. He even had no.1 status for a fair amount of time in 2008. So its not like he was a stranger to these sorts of things happening. In 2010, he was somewhat close to Alonso on occasion and spent a large part of the year chalking it up to tires and how things would be different in 2011. Well, when 2011 rolled around and he proved similarly weak against his partner even with the new tires, THIS is when I think he might have getting properly discouraged. Cuz he had no excuses left. <---All speculation, though, again. I'm not saying this what I definitely believe, I just think its more plausible than Hockenheim somehow 'breaking him' or however else people want to spin it.

#295 BruisedLee

BruisedLee
  • Member

  • 100 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 16 August 2012 - 16:48

Fact is, after a poor start WEB VET HAM BUT immediately think of alternative strategy if they can not beat their team mate using their speed alone.
It doesn't happen with MAS. You will say he doesn't have the speed, even if it was the case, the compounded not optimal strategies compare to his team mate will only increase the gap in points.

Massa's lack of performance is not due only to strategy and it is not the main reason either.

The only solution is to let the drivers go for the WDC. At the end, the faster/stronger will prevail, even though many want the easier route.
Drivers should start the race with the idea to beat their team mate.

Or neither will prevail (McLaren 2007). And I don't think it would be a great solution for the hundreds of people working on those cars or for those investing millions on state of the art technology. It is understandable that people tend to focus on drivers rather than teams, but that doesn't mean the teams are there to serve them. It has always been quite the opposite.

#296 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,628 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 16 August 2012 - 16:57

Fact is, after a poor start WEB VET HAM BUT immediately think of alternative strategy if they can not beat their team mate using their speed alone.
It doesn't happen with MAS. You will say he doesn't have the speed, even if it was the case, the compounded not optimal strategies compare to his team mate will only increase the gap in points.

The only solution is to let the drivers go for the WDC. At the end, the faster/stronger will prevail, even though many want the easier route.
Drivers should start the race with the idea to beat their team mate.

Many people see F1 as a competition between drivers, but Ferrari(and many of their fans) still see the important team element. Until Massa proves he's a title challenging driver again(which Webber, Vettel, Lewis and Button have done), then its foolish to let him get in the way of Alonso's chances, cuz its not only compromising Alonso himself, but Ferrari's chances of a championship. Ferrari will enact a no.1 policy whenever they have one driver in with a shot and the other out of the picture. Just like most teams would do, although the specific line of when that happens might be a bit different for some. Felipe knows this better than anyone.

All Massa has to do is start driving better. Unless you want to think that Ferrari sabotages Felipe's car, there's nothing Ferrari can do about Massa outqualifying Alonso and then pulling away in the race. If they're running front-to-back with no other cars around, yea, there's usually room to play, but otherwise, if even a single car gets inbetween them, then Felipe is safe. The net gain of having Felipe give up two spots just so Alonso can gain one is not worth it. Bottom line is that Felipe has put himself in the position he's in and no one else. You cannot point the blame at Ferrari, cuz they are simply doing what they need to do. If Massa doesn't want to ever be a no.2 driver, all he has to do is not drive like one.

#297 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,860 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 16 August 2012 - 17:01

Yes, you keep saying a downward trend from Hockenheim on, but you're ignoring that actual downward trend did not start til 4-5 races after Hockenheim in which case its hard to point at Hockenheim as the singular event that caused it.

Is it your contention that the application of team orders in Hockenheim, and the manner in which this was done, can have had no affect at all on Massa?

#298 intothepits

intothepits
  • Member

  • 409 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 16 August 2012 - 17:16

A few thoughts of mine... Ferrais number 1 policy is what's killing them. Yeah sure theyre doing okay with Alonso right now, but it's not healthy to think just cause you could to it in the 2000s, that it's gonna work now.

Summins happened to Massa, hey maybe hes just driving really bad, but i suspect more things are going on in that company, and you can see it in his face in an interview after a race, theres no way one car... thats meant to be the same, that one car comes 2nd or something and then the other car comes 18th, theres something not right.

My advice? Just make a decent car and THEN let them both race.... THis old idea that just cause youre gonna have one number 1 driver and a number 2 is not going to work these days, it's also going to not wash with people who watch the show that is F1, and again, you see why ticket prices are lowering.

#299 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,628 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 16 August 2012 - 17:22

Is it your contention that the application of team orders in Hockenheim, and the manner in which this was done, can have had no affect at all on Massa?

As an absolute statement, no of course I wouldn't say that. Whats possible is very different from whats likely, though.

Advertisement

#300 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,452 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 August 2012 - 17:22

Is it your contention that the application of team orders in Hockenheim, and the manner in which this was done, can have had no affect at all on Massa?

Yes, because there is evidence to the contrary in Hungary, Spa and Monza. Unless you guys are of the the opinion that Massa miraculously started exhibiting delayed onset psychological battering.

I'm not even going to beat around bush and say maybe.