140 replies to this topic

[Johnrambo]

Oh no, not again this suspension story! His results were the same with both suspensions.
However, my opinion is that Massa of 2010 was equally good as Massa of 2008. The differences were in cars and teammates.

And that is why it's good (for Ferrari) that Alonso did not sign for Red Bull .

Oh I think it's time to update my signature! You would have thought this thread was about Alonso but:

"Ferrari had no reason to keep Kimi beyond 2009"
"About Kimi's contract, it wasn't about Santander. Ferrari simply wanted him out and they would have found the way in any case."
"Ferrari became disappointed with Kimi already in 2007"
"You probably refer to the final contract termination in 2009 but as a Ferrari fan, I can only feel it came a year or two too late."

[bourbon]

If Alonso had gone to RBR, it'd have been interesting to see who would have had the Ferrari drive this and last year - they surely wouldn't have kept Raikkonen still considering what went on, so would they have got Button or Webber or ...?

They didn't bring Alonso in because they wanted to replace Raikkonen. They got rid of Raikkonen in order to bring Alonso in. If they couldn't get Alonso, they would have kept Kimi for sure. He certainly could have done what Alonso has done so far in Ferrari, and Ferrari was well aware of that at the time. RBR tried for Raikkonen, Alonso and probably Jenson once the news was out - they were 2nd WCC after all, but I don't think anyone realized at the time what they would go on to do in the present.

[DrewishPrince]

They didn't bring Alonso in because they wanted to replace Raikkonen. They got rid of Raikkonen in order to bring Alonso in. If they couldn't get Alonso, they would have kept Kimi for sure. He certainly could have done what Alonso has done so far in Ferrari, and Ferrari was well aware of that at the time. RBR tried for Raikkonen, Alonso and probably Jenson once the news was out - they were 2nd WCC after all, but I don't think anyone realized at the time what they would go on to do in the present.

But that would have made sense. Ferrari wouldn't replace Kimi with a lesser diver. If they couldn't get Alonso, they could have kept Kimi if no other top driver was prepared to step in. But I think Ferrari were left with no illusions about Kimi early enough to start the process of finding the replacement.

[Raziel]

Alonso definitely stands out as THE driver of the post-Schumacher era (never minding Schumacher's return as it's just a hobby now). Taking all factors into account, noone of his peers so far came close overall.
He won with 3 teams (sometimes, as in Japan 2008 with very indifferent cars), with different tyres in very different eras (just compare the 2005 no-tyre-change-with-refueling rules with today's ones), always showinig great speed and consistency. Even his worst season, 2007, was in fact a great display of driving in a hostile environment against rivals in faster cars.

Since 2007 and arrival of new boys:

Sebastian Vettel:

Wins 16
Podiums 27
Pole positions 22
Fastest laps 7
Career points 567

Lewis Hamilton:

Wins 15
Podiums 39
Pole positions 18
Fastest laps 9
Career points 593

Fernando Alonso:

Wins 11
Podiums 29
Pole positions 5
Fastest laps 10
(Points since 2007) 535

mmhmm no, i don´t think so! and no, 2007 was not his worst season, it´s his best in the last 4 years, 109 points in comparison to 101 in 2010.

[DrewishPrince]

Raziel, you forgot to factor in the differences in car levels. Alonso won Japan 2008 in a Renault way inferior to several other cars.
True, Vettel won at Monza the same year in Toro Rosso but it was a wet race while in Japan it was dry. Etc....

Edited by DrewishPrince, 06 July 2011 - 20:23.

[fabr68]

Since 2007 and arrival of new boys:

Sebastian Vettel:

Wins 16
Podiums 27
Pole positions 22
Fastest laps 7
Career points 567

Lewis Hamilton:

Wins 15
Podiums 39
Pole positions 18
Fastest laps 9
Career points 593

Fernando Alonso:

Wins 11
Podiums 29
Pole positions 5
Fastest laps 10
(Points since 2007) 535

mmhmm no, i don´t think so! and no, 2007 was not his worst season, it´s his best in the last 4 years, 109 points in comparison to 101 in 2010.

Vettel had 1/3 of a season in BMW and one full season in Toro Rosso, Alonso had two seasons in uncompetitive Renault. Hamilton had four seasons in Mclaren and a car capable to win a race in all of them. Your stats do not mean much for comparing the three.

[toxicfusion]

There were rumours that Alonso could have been off to Red Bull in 2008 after his year at McLaren. Along with the suggestion that Ross Brawn could have also joined to establish a new dream team: http://www.guardian....torsports.sport Of course it never happened and was just rumour but the thought (in 2007) would have been mouthwatering to say the least, a team with Alonso, Ross Brawn and Adrian Newey...


The Alonso to Honda stories started at the end of 2008 and even while there was some uncertainty over the teams future, in the end Alonso needed to commit himself to Renault to ensure a drive in 2009 at a point when it seemed uncertain the Honda outfit would have even been racing in 2009.

Edited by toxicfusion, 06 July 2011 - 20:40.

[scheivlak]

Vettel had 1/3 of a season in BMW and one full season in Toro Rosso,

Let's make that 1 race in a BMW.....
And slightly less than 1 1/2 in a Toro Rosso.

[Hole]

Since 2007 and arrival of new boys:

Sebastian Vettel:

Wins 16
Podiums 27
Pole positions 22
Fastest laps 7
Career points 567

Lewis Hamilton:

Wins 15
Podiums 39
Pole positions 18
Fastest laps 9
Career points 593

Fernando Alonso:

Wins 11
Podiums 29
Pole positions 5
Fastest laps 10
(Points since 2007) 535

mmhmm no, i don´t think so! and no, 2007 was not his worst season, it´s his best in the last 4 years, 109 points in comparison to 101 in 2010.

If you think that is fair even if it is not taking into account the car differences, then why don't you bring the total wins of each driver since they were in F1 or something like that?

Alonso since 2007 only had for 2 years a car to fight really for wins meanwhile Vettel has had cars to fight for wins for 3 years (if you count 2011), and this year with barely any competition. Also Vettel drove a Toro Rosso, one day a BMW... Really, I don't see we can get anything from that list to do comparisons.

Edited by Hole, 06 July 2011 - 21:14.

[freya]

Oh no, not again this suspension story! His results were the same with both suspensions.
However, my opinion is that Massa of 2010 was equally good as Massa of 2008. The differences were in cars and teammates.

And that is why it's good (for Ferrari) that Alonso did not sign for Red Bull .

Not necessarily this post, but all of yours in this thread: what a bunch of rubbish. If you really wanna analyze stuff and then also post them on some public forum too, at least open your eyes and take a look at the whole picture and sometimes try to be slightly fair.

Edited by freya, 06 July 2011 - 21:21.

[Aietes]

Alonso definitely stands out as THE driver of the post-Schumacher era (never minding Schumacher's return as it's just a hobby now). Taking all factors into account, noone of his peers so far came close overall.
He won with 3 teams (sometimes, as in Japan 2008 with very indifferent cars), with different tyres in very different eras (just compare the 2005 no-tyre-change-with-refueling rules with today's ones), always showinig great speed and consistency. Even his worst season, 2007, was in fact a great display of driving in a hostile environment against rivals in faster cars.

What's so funny smartass? I am a KIMI fan and i still agree with this statement. Stupid hater...

[Zava]

Vettel had 1/3 of a season in BMW and one full season in Toro Rosso, Alonso had two seasons in uncompetitive Renault. Hamilton had four seasons in Mclaren and a car capable to win a race in all of them. Your stats do not mean much for comparing the three.

yeah, Vettel had 2 seasons not competing/backpack team/midfield teams. it is not an advantage not to be in the field, you know.

[Fontainebleau]

They didn't bring Alonso in because they wanted to replace Raikkonen. They got rid of Raikkonen in order to bring Alonso in. If they couldn't get Alonso, they would have kept Kimi for sure. He certainly could have done what Alonso has done so far in Ferrari, and Ferrari was well aware of that at the time. RBR tried for Raikkonen, Alonso and probably Jenson once the news was out - they were 2nd WCC after all, but I don't think anyone realized at the time what they would go on to do in the present.

You are very wrong there - Ferrari wanted Raikkonen out. We can discuss if they were right or wrong, but there is no point in denying the fact that they were not interested in keeping him. Had Alonso not been available, they might have kept Raikkonen for one more year, particularly after Massa'a accident. But with Kubica available, they might have considered that alternative too.

[KnucklesAgain]

lol what, Alonso not being boring? Let's being honest, at least Vettel is being childishly funny while Alonso totally a PR machine (though the two both great in driving)

And Schumacher/Alonso didn't "drag" a slow car. Even prior to 1996, Ferrari were always top 3 team, and Renault in 2003-2004 had a pretty solid car. In case you'll argue about 2008-2009, it was just the mclaren didn't work out for Alonso and he was waiting for a super fast red car to come.

Oh come on, you're totally forgetting for example Alonso's pretty funny sock puppet performances in 2005/2006. Let's see Vettel when he's thirty and has had 3 demoralizing seasons under his belt. He did get pretty sulky last year already. (Nothing against Seb, it's just life).

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 06 July 2011 - 22:24.

[Zava]

You are very wrong there - Ferrari wanted Raikkonen out. We can discuss if they were right or wrong, but there is no point in denying the fact that they were not interested in keeping him. Had Alonso not been available, they might have kept Raikkonen for one more year, particularly after Massa'a accident. But with Kubica available, they might have considered that alternative too.

Alonso had a pre-contact (or whatever the word is for that) with ferrari signed in 2008 monaco, it's been reported. strange thing, that is the last time Raikkönen was in the lead in the '08 championship, and starting there came his mystical underperforming, which immediately vanished when the team needed someone to take points off Hamilton for the sake of Massa, their only contender left. strange, huh?

Edited by Zava, 06 July 2011 - 22:24.

[bourbon]

You are very wrong there - Ferrari wanted Raikkonen out. We can discuss if they were right or wrong, but there is no point in denying the fact that they were not interested in keeping him. Had Alonso not been available, they might have kept Raikkonen for one more year, particularly after Massa'a accident. But with Kubica available, they might have considered that alternative too.

I suspect that the way I stated that confused you, but I wasn't actually talking about what Ferrari wanted in terms of Kimi at all. My point was that they wanted Alonso rather than some random replacement.

[ArtShelley]

How do you know he would of beaten Alonso? posts like this just make you look stupid

Of course I don't know. My point though is that there is a higher risk of him being beaten by a driver like Seb. And given that Alonso went a little nuts when beaten by Lewis in 2007, I can't imagine a second helping of young almost-rookie beating would sit that well with him, IF it did happen.

[Kohque]

Of course I don't know. My point though is that there is a higher risk of him being beaten by a driver like Seb. And given that Alonso went a little nuts when beaten by Lewis in 2007, I can't imagine a second helping of young almost-rookie beating would sit that well with him, IF it did happen.

You haven't raise the bar with your previous comment. Still stupid

[Kohque]

Alonso could have ended up getting badly beaten by Vettel had Vettel been his team-mate at RBR. He could beat Webber with not much trouble, but I'm not sure of Vettel.

It could have gone either way, but I doubt either of them would be "badly beaten" by the other.

[Kohque]

Oh, look, it's that same old arguments again that have been totally dismissed. Yes Monza 2008 in a TR (pure skill no matter what the antis say, most F1 experts, drivers, ex drivers, critics, team bosses, engineers agree) and his other achievements in that car.

The Mclaren has been faster in 3 races this season, Vettel won 2 of those and last season his car was pretty much the most unreliable car in the field losing at least 3 times more points through that than the next championship contender.

And the Renault in 2005 and first part of 2006 (until parts were banned on it) was the best car to be in to win the championship. So has Fangio, Prost, Senna, Mansell, Stewart, Schumacher, Hamilton won their championships...by being in the best car that season...the horror, how dare they be in the best car, that's cheating... So I guess Alonso and all champions in F1 are also boring champions who haven't proven anything.

Gone are your arguments. It is the same for every champion.

On topic: Alonso made very unwise decisions because he followed his heart more than his head. He was offered a seat at Brawn GP and RBR and he declined both. In hinsight yes, but that goes for everything. From a sporting point of view (so leave out the nostalgia thing of driving for Ferrari) he has wasted 3 seasons of his career by being in the wrong place at the wrong time by his own decisions. Even his most fanatical fan won't believe when he says he cares more for driving in the red car than winning a race/championship because that is now how real champions think.

Don't think so. It was far from certain that RBR or Brawn GP would bring any victories at the time (i.e. No one would have bet for Brawn GP). He went back to the safest option. A team that he knew and car that had given him championships in the past. "Heart" is what so many people use when writing about Alonso as far as I can see.

[Kohque]

Well, it's always easy to be smart afterwards. The positive thing about Alonso not going to Red Bull Racing is that now the team can say that they have made the car fast and not Alonso.

That's a sore comment. A car cannot be outperformed unless you try to place a leg outside to gain grip , but it is only obvious that when comparing Alonso to his teammate, he is pushing the car a bit faster, in general, than his teammate.

[Kohque]

All in all, it's very nice that Alonso didn't go to RBR. He would have claimed credit for the improved form of the team, just like he does in every team he goes to. Ferrari have placed themselves in a situation in which the car and the team is always at fault, not Alonso. Nice way of painting themselves in a corner...

Again, another sore comment. He has never claimed he is outperforming the car. People here do, because they feel it that way. Alonso's situation is only comparable to Massa's. How would fault Alonso when he is usually making better races than Massa? I mean, following your logic, Kimi was definitively underperforming in Ferrari, because the car was "great", the teammate was "great", but Kimi was just not doing a good job (I don't believe that, just following your strange reasoning...).

[Kohque]

Alonso had a pre-contact (or whatever the word is for that) with ferrari signed in 2008 monaco, it's been reported. strange thing, that is the last time Raikkönen was in the lead in the '08 championship, and starting there came his mystical underperforming, which immediately vanished when the team needed someone to take points off Hamilton for the sake of Massa, their only contender left. strange, huh?

Right. So you are saying that Ferrari decide to screw itself because Alonso was coming in 2010. . In 2008, Kimi played second driver to Massa because Massa was doing better, nothing mystical about it. In 2009, they just didn't have the car to lead the championship and both drivers were struggling. Not much mystery, I think.

[Muppetmad]

Raziel, you forgot to factor in the differences in car levels. Alonso won Japan 2008 in a Renault way inferior to several other cars.

At that point in the season, I disagree. The Renault was on the way up and by Japan was probably the third best car on the grid, overhauling BMW. Kubica didn't have the car to keep up with Alonso, and Kubica did a brilliant job of keeping Raikkonen behind so Alonso wasn't challenged by him either. A very valid, deserving victory indeed, but I wouldn't say it was the quality of the car that made it impressive.

[DrewishPrince]

At that point in the season, I disagree. The Renault was on the way up and by Japan was probably the third best car on the grid, overhauling BMW. Kubica didn't have the car to keep up with Alonso, and Kubica did a brilliant job of keeping Raikkonen behind so Alonso wasn't challenged by him either. A very valid, deserving victory indeed, but I wouldn't say it was the quality of the car that made it impressive.

3rd best it may have been...but how many victories are scored with 3rd best car, meaning there are 4 drivers in faster cars? What to say about Kimi then, who was beaten by way slower cars?

Edited by DrewishPrince, 07 July 2011 - 06:44.

[BRK]

@ kohque: Learn to use the multi-quote feature before rambling on. FFS.

[Muppetmad]

3rd best it may have been...but how many victories are scored with 3rd best car, meaning there are 4 drivers in faster cars?

In that season? Just Alonso's victory and Kubica's victory in Canada.

[DrewishPrince]

In that season? Just Alonso's victory and Kubica's victory in Canada.

Yes, and in 2007 there was none, in 2009 there was none, etc. And Kubica is (hopefully still will be) a brilliant driver.

[e34]

I think in that situation, it would still have been a better gamble than Renault who was going nowhere.

In that situation, it was an Honda, and not Brawn, actually, the team that made him the offer. In fact, Brawn, as Brawn GP, were as poor as they get, so they could not have afforded Alonso. The offer came from Honda, and it is, even today, anybody's guess whether Honda had stayed in F1 with Alonso on board, and what would have happened if Honda, and its engine, had remained in F1.

On the other hand, Alonso, on a Renault, (and with Singapore), had scored more points than anybody else, in the second half of 2008. That data may not be perfectly accurate (made it 5 points less than the second most scoring, if you want), but I am not trying to establish a second half championship, but debunking the myth that Renault was not going anywhere. In the second half of 2008, even getting Singapore out of the image, Renault was going places. It was in 2009 when they lost the plot (as McLaren and Ferrari did), and they haven't found it again since.

Pre 2009, Alonso said that he was only interested in getting one year long contract, and nobody offered him a contract for a single year. Brawn/Honda said that they wanted him long term, and RBR said that they were interested (IIRC, they said something along the lines "who would not be interested in having a driver of such standing here") but that they could not offer (yet) what Alonso was looking for.

Personally, I believe that Alonso was tied to Ferrari before the end of 2008, and he knew that he had to be available for 2010, either because he already got a seat at Ferrari for that season (and that seat would probably have been Massa's) or because it was highly probable that he could get one. In that situation, as he had an agreement with Renault, which had a very good second half of the championship, which allowed him to opt out of the agreement at the end of each season, he tested the waters with other teams, but he was really not so interested, and neither were the teams, considering the possibilities that he was going to Ferrari at the end of the season, no matter what.

[ed24f1]

Alonso could have ended up getting badly beaten by Vettel had Vettel been his team-mate at RBR. He could beat Webber with not much trouble, but I'm not sure of Vettel.

Even Webber could beat Vettel through many parts of 2009 and 2010, so I'm sure Alonso would have been ahead through most of that time.

If Alonso was there, it may have been a much bigger mountain for Vettel to climb to reach his current dominance, as well.

[Kohque]

@ kohque: Learn to use the multi-quote feature before rambling on. FFS.

Was I rambling on? Forgive me Father...

[DrewishPrince]

Was I rambling on? Forgive me Father...

Kohque, ramble on :-)

[Kohque]

Kohque, ramble on :-)

Dude, that's cool. Let's ramble then!

[ashnathan]

Alonso definitely stands out as THE driver of the post-Schumacher era (never minding Schumacher's return as it's just a hobby now). Taking all factors into account, noone of his peers so far came close overall.
He won with 3 teams (sometimes, as in Japan 2008 with very indifferent cars), with different tyres in very different eras (just compare the 2005 no-tyre-change-with-refueling rules with today's ones), always showinig great speed and consistency. Even his worst season, 2007, was in fact a great display of driving in a hostile environment against rivals in faster cars.

Disagree. He won his titles when Schumacher still raced, and since then hasn't achieved that much. He was gifted a win by his team cheating, and although drove a good race, had ALOT of luck in Fuji in 08 with the front runners being down the field or dropping out due to mechanical problems. I don't buy into this whole Alonso love fest that he is 'the man' at the moment, and Martin Brundle seems to not shut up about him at the moment. He is no better than Hamilton, Button, or Vettel (this year). In fact, since Schumacher left, hes achieved the description that he can't have competative teammates or he'll spit the dummy, as he did in 07 when he couldn't beat a rookie like someone of his calibre (then) should have.

[Kohque]

Disagree. He won his titles when Schumacher still raced, and since then hasn't achieved that much. He was gifted a win by his team cheating, and although drove a good race, had ALOT of luck in Fuji in 08 with the front runners being down the field or dropping out due to mechanical problems. I don't buy into this whole Alonso love fest that he is 'the man' at the moment, and Martin Brundle seems to not shut up about him at the moment. He is no better than Hamilton, Button, or Vettel (this year). In fact, since Schumacher left, hes achieved the description that he can't have competative teammates or he'll spit the dummy, as he did in 07 when he couldn't beat a rookie like someone of his calibre (then) should have.

Well, the hate fest is not less obvious.

IMO, any of the drivers you mention is doing better than Hamilton this year (so far).

[DrewishPrince]

Disagree. He won his titles when Schumacher still raced, and since then hasn't achieved that much. He was gifted a win by his team cheating, and although drove a good race, had ALOT of luck in Fuji in 08 with the front runners being down the field or dropping out due to mechanical problems. I don't buy into this whole Alonso love fest that he is 'the man' at the moment, and Martin Brundle seems to not shut up about him at the moment. He is no better than Hamilton, Button, or Vettel (this year). In fact, since Schumacher left, hes achieved the description that he can't have competative teammates or he'll spit the dummy, as he did in 07 when he couldn't beat a rookie like someone of his calibre (then) should have.

Alonso did very well in 2007 in a new team, on new tyres, with an unfamiliar car, extremely well prepared teammate and in a hostile environment.

[Johnrambo]

Alonso did very well in 2007 in a new team, on new tyres, with an unfamiliar car, extremely well prepared teammate and in a hostile environment.

You described Kimi's season perfectly except he won the WDC which Alonso could not do against a rookie.

[ashnathan]

Well, the hate fest is not less obvious.

IMO, any of the drivers you mention is doing better than Hamilton this year (so far).

The this year tag was for Vettel, I thought twice before posting it like that but I thought the majority would understand it was coupled with Vettel and not the rest. And as someone else stated he did well under the circumstances in 07, that he did, but a driver of his calibre that is expected, and Kimi went one better and won the title, so that is no excuse. Quite frankly, I think people associate him as the 'best' cos he was the last driver to take it to Schumi and win, although I believe one of his titles was gained by having a more reliable car, because I still believe Kimi would have romped o the 05 title given better reliability, but that is in turn unfair on Fernando cos that isn't his problem. Until he has a driver up to scratch in the other seat and wins, then to me its a little obtuse to label him the best, cos the only other time he had a teammate of equal speed/talent, he was beaten, and that teammate was only his his 'learning' year.

[Kohque]

The this year tag was for Vettel, I thought twice before posting it like that but I thought the majority would understand it was coupled with Vettel and not the rest. And as someone else stated he did well under the circumstances in 07, that he did, but a driver of his calibre that is expected, and Kimi went one better and won the title, so that is no excuse. Quite frankly, I think people associate him as the 'best' cos he was the last driver to take it to Schumi and win, although I believe one of his titles was gained by having a more reliable car, because I still believe Kimi would have romped o the 05 title given better reliability, but that is in turn unfair on Fernando cos that isn't his problem. Until he has a driver up to scratch in the other seat and wins, then to me its a little obtuse to label him the best, cos the only other time he had a teammate of equal speed/talent, he was beaten, and that teammate was only his his 'learning' year.

Fair enough, though that can be said for any other driver. Hamilton vs Alonso was too close to call, so I cannot say Alonso was beaten as much as Hamilton's fans like to repeat it. One more year would have made things more clear.

I don't know who is the best. For me is Vettel this year (so far).

[slmk]

Well, the hate fest is not less obvious.

IMO, any of the drivers you mention is doing better than Hamilton this year (so far).

Right. Let's forget their awful races at the start of the season and only focus on Hamilton's recent misfortunes.

[Kohque]

Right. Let's forget their awful races at the start of the season and only focus on Hamilton's recent misfortunes.

Refresh me then. I have seen Hamilton doing more unforced errors from the start of the season, but if you can find more errors from other drivers, I am happy to change my opinion.

[velgajski1]

Refresh me then. I have seen Hamilton doing more unforced errors from the start of the season, but if you can find more errors from other drivers, I am happy to change my opinion.

If errors are what makes or breaks the driver then Button is without a doubt best driver in F1.

[Kohque]

If errors are what makes or breaks the driver then Button is without a doubt best driver in F1.

Nope, that would be Vettel, but I am not talking about the "best" driver. I was answering to ashnathan about the drivers that are performing better this year in IMO.

And yes, I think errors obviously count in performance and scoring. If you don't count errors in the performance of a driver you are leaving out one of the main variables to assess him, if not the main one.

Edited by Kohque, 07 July 2011 - 09:01.

[ashnathan]

Fair enough, though that can be said for any other driver. Hamilton vs Alonso was too close to call, so I cannot say Alonso was beaten as much as Hamilton's fans like to repeat it. One more year would have made things more clear.

I don't know who is the best. For me is Vettel this year (so far).

Yes but what your missing is, it was too close for a rookie to beat a double world champion in his 7th season in the sport, who at the time was regarded as the best in the sport, and rightly so as he was the back to back reigning world champion. Whereas Lewis Hamilton had little experience in an F1 car, yet only took him 3 races to out-qualify and beat Alonso in a Grand Prix, and would have beaten Alonso in Monaco for the win too but for team orders. That is why the argument is so strong, because Alonso on all accounts should have beaten Lewis that year. That's the point that argument is making.

[Kohque]

Yes but what your missing is, it was too close for a rookie to beat a double world champion in his 7th season in the sport, who at the time was regarded as the best in the sport, and rightly so as he was the back to back reigning world champion. Whereas Lewis Hamilton had little experience in an F1 car, yet only took him 3 races to out-qualify and beat Alonso in a Grand Prix, and would have beaten Alonso in Monaco for the win too but for team orders. That is why the argument is so strong, because Alonso on all accounts should have beaten Lewis that year. That's the point that argument is making.

Not necessarily. Hamilton was a rookie in the championship, but not with McLaren. The "rookie" in the team was Alonso. The outqualifying didn't happen. They outqualified each other during the whole season. The team orders in Monaco were for both. Alonso was not pushing either, team orders were for both drivers. All these comments don't help. They were very close, and as you mention earlier, luck always plays a good part. When two drivers are close in performance, it can go either way, which is what we saw in 2007.

I saw Alonso struggling in the first part of the season with the car and Hamilton struggling due to inexperience in the second. It is quite simple. Everything else is, I think, is just trying to blow things one side or the other.

[Cesc]

The honor will go to Vettel after this season. Back-to-back WDC, younger than Alonso and more wins/poles than Alonso (at similar ages). There's no way it isn't Vettel.

Well, Vettel is a super driver, no doubt, but I still miss from him some super drive in difficult conditions (in fact, Monza 2008 was almost hi best win). All his victories came after getting the pole and driving the best of all cars. 12 out of his 16 victories are from pole (14 of 26 in Alonso's case). Only time will tell, Vettel is to me a fantastic driver lucky to be in the right place (as Button was lucky in 2009 of having a Brawn). I think we all know that luck is part of this sport. And in that sense, I think Alonso never had that luck, because he never had a dominant car (in 2005 the McLaren was faster almost everywhere, and in 2006 the Ferrari-Bridgestone was quite faster for 2/3 of the year). So having that in scope, I think Alonso is the man of the current era because he could be there is extremely variant conditions (different teams, different rules, different tires...).

Vettel records are to me some statistical anecdote, equaly as Schumacher is topping all tables in stats but Senna is still remembered as the best one.

PD: I would say that currently, recent championships are remembered as the "Red Bull - Newey" dominance most than Vettel's dominance...

[Fontainebleau]

Yes but what your missing is, it was too close for a rookie to beat a double world champion in his 7th season in the sport, who at the time was regarded as the best in the sport, and rightly so as he was the back to back reigning world champion. Whereas Lewis Hamilton had little experience in an F1 car, yet only took him 3 races to out-qualify and beat Alonso in a Grand Prix, and would have beaten Alonso in Monaco for the win too but for team orders. That is why the argument is so strong, because Alonso on all accounts should have beaten Lewis that year. That's the point that argument is making.

This is one of those examples of a lie that, if repeated often enough, ends up being considered the gospel truth.

The only person to defend that idea was Hamilton himself. Dennis acknowledged that the pressure of the British press, to whom Hamilton had complained, forced him to try and soften Hamilton's hurt feelings, damaging his relationship with Alonso in the process, but that there was no doubt of who was the true winner at Monaco:
http://www.duemotori...ando_Alonso.php
"Dennis admits that Alonso was particularly annoyed after Monaco, when the McLaren boss openly admitted to holding back Lewis Hamilton rather than simply celebrate Alonso's dominant win.
Dennis replied: "I am not perfect. The British press jumped on me, attacked me.
"It was difficult. I had to think about what was best for the team. What was put about in the media did affect our relationship. But we are trying to improve that.
"He absolutely deserved to win in Monaco. He drove one of the best races that I have even seen.""

Andrew Benson offered a similar report on the BBC site:
"As a McLaren insider revealed to me: "Fernando won in Monaco fair and square in 2007.
"Lewis was generally quicker through the weekend, but in qualifying Fernando did it and Lewis didn't. Lewis was quicker in the first run but then he made mistakes and Fernando got pole.
"Fernando won the race because he pulled an 11-second gap in the first stint when Lewis had (tyre) graining and after that Fernando was just cruising because we had rear brake issues.
"But after the race, Ron said to Fernando: 'Be nice to Lewis because we had to (pit) stop him early.' And Fernando said: 'What do you mean? I was just cruising.'
http://www.bbc.co.uk...in_reargua.html

And finally, it only takes for someone to be patient enough and follow all the lap times during the race to check that there was no way Hamilton could have overtaken Alonso, even if he had stayed out for those three laps - try this site, for example http://www.visionf1....R05_monaco.html (it is quite fun too).

Edited by Fontainebleau, 07 July 2011 - 09:53.

[Fontainebleau]

I suspect that the way I stated that confused you, but I wasn't actually talking about what Ferrari wanted in terms of Kimi at all. My point was that they wanted Alonso rather than some random replacement.

My mistake, apologies for that.

[toxicfusion]

the thread on Alonso going to Red Bull has descended into a thread about 2007, Lewis and Kimi.

there are many other threads for that ;)

[Fontainebleau]

Alonso had a pre-contact (or whatever the word is for that) with ferrari signed in 2008 monaco, it's been reported. strange thing, that is the last time Raikkönen was in the lead in the '08 championship, and starting there came his mystical underperforming, which immediately vanished when the team needed someone to take points off Hamilton for the sake of Massa, their only contender left. strange, huh?

Have you checked Raikkonen vs Massa's results in 2008? I am asking because Raikkonen finished behind Massa in Monaco (2 vs 1), and then ahead of him in the next three races: Canada (3 vs 6), France (1 vs 2) and Britain (3 vs 9). It wasn't till Germany that Massa started finishing ahead his teammmate. If there was a conspiracy, it took them some time to get it working!