You appear to have omitted the overtaking of a Ferrari by a McLaren and what would have happened in the race if Heikki wasnt sidelined.
2008 Turkish GP - Race 5/18
- Thread starter rpstewart
- Start date
You appear to have omitted the overtaking of a Ferrari by a McLaren and what would have happened in the race if Heikki wasnt sidelined.
What, The Messiah™ getting by Massa on a vastly different fuel load? Had they been on similar fuel levels, I don't think he'd have gotten inside the Ferrari quite as easily.
Not to take anything away from him - it was a pretty good pass as modern F1 goes. But it was only possible thanks to his being much lighter.
Precisely.
I actually think that the McLaren is just as fast as the Ferrari. The difference is in the setting up of the cars. The Ferrari is fairly easy to get right, but the McLaren is very finicky, eg. in today's race, Hamilton was forced onto hard tyres and into a 3 stopper. The Ferrari seems to be more adaptable. In 1994, Williams was just the same, where in the right hands and set-up it could potentially go fastest (Senna qualified that car on pole 3/3 times).
When set-up correctly, I have no doubt that in Hamilton's hands, it will win races, but setting up cars (as we saw last year and are continuing to see in 2008), isnt Hamilton's strong point. Last year he copied Alonso's setups to get the best out of his car, this year, he is on his own and isnt getting any help.
Perhaps messing about with fuel/tyre strategies is the best way forward for McLaren to beat the Ferraris. Of course, the best way wouldve been to get the 2 best drivers that money could buy (which they did have last year and as result lost both titles due to in-fighting and Ferrari's Internation Assistance).
Did Hamilton really copy Alonso's setups though? I see this mentioned time and again but never have I seen any shred of evidence!
I find it hard to believe that someone can go all the way from karts, through GP2 and make it to F1 without knowing about setting up a car. In GP2 you don't have hundreds of physics buffs analysing tons of data and running simulations and Hamilton seemed to manage just fine...
There were numerous races last year where McLaren struggled to set the car up right even with Alonso's help.
Every driver has a different style and Alonso and Hamilton certainly had very different styles. So whatever setup Alonso came up with surely wouldn't work terribly well for Hamilton too?
I think the McLaren was just a better car last year. Which is why it was beating the Ferrari's more often. This year the car is either not quite as good or the Ferrari team have taken a step forward.
We will see in Monaco... this is a track that Ferrari say their 2008 has been optimised for. I.e. riding over big curbs etc. So we shall see.
I find it hard to believe that someone can go all the way from karts, through GP2 and make it to F1 without knowing about setting up a car. In GP2 you don't have hundreds of physics buffs analysing tons of data and running simulations and Hamilton seemed to manage just fine...
There were numerous races last year where McLaren struggled to set the car up right even with Alonso's help.
Every driver has a different style and Alonso and Hamilton certainly had very different styles. So whatever setup Alonso came up with surely wouldn't work terribly well for Hamilton too?
I think the McLaren was just a better car last year. Which is why it was beating the Ferrari's more often. This year the car is either not quite as good or the Ferrari team have taken a step forward.
We will see in Monaco... this is a track that Ferrari say their 2008 has been optimised for. I.e. riding over big curbs etc. So we shall see.
It wouldnt have made any difference.
Hamilton is a superior driver compared to Heikki and Heikki isnt in the same league as Hamilton.
Hamilton belongs in the top 3 (Alonso, Raikkonen, Hamilton). And I think Kubica leads the best of the rest.
Heikki is a reliable No.2 driver, just as Barrichello once was to Schummie. Nothing wrong with being a good No.2.
I cant believe that people on this forum are mentioning Heikki in the same breath as Hamilton. Probably the same people who said Ferrari's pre-season testing dominance wouldnt translate into race pace. And probably the same people who thought lack of traction control was going to re-shuffle the grid
I cant believe that people on this forum are mentioning Heikki in the same breath as Hamilton. Probably the same people who said Ferrari's pre-season testing dominance wouldnt translate into race pace. And probably the same people who thought lack of traction control was going to re-shuffle the grid
I don't think Heikki or Kubica are any less than Hamilton. The former has less experience using a race winning car. The latter is not in a race winning car - yet.
Let's not forget Heikki out qualified Hamilton by a rather large margin. If it wasn't for his unfortunate puncture he would probably have beaten Hamilton in the race... Although Heikki got a bad start compared to Hamilton... go figure!
The only thing about Hamilton that sets him apart is he seems to have more passion than just about anyone in recent years. But that's probably just a biased view because he gets so much media coverage in the UK.
It was talked about a lot. In the latter half of last season, after the Hungarian GP, Alonso stopped sharing setup info with Hamilton. Then soon after Alonso resumed info sharing, however, Hamilton got a little big-headed and said that he wants to go in his own direction and doesnt need to copy Alonso. This didnt workout too well and Hamilton admitted as much. He did this for 2-3 races (Turkey, Monza, Belgium). Alonso finished ahead of Hamilton in all these races. After that, Hamilton decided to start copying setups again (with minor changes to suit his style) and was immediately back on the pace and beating Alonso. From all this, I gathered that Hamilton was faster than Alonso, when using similar setups/cars, however, Alonso was a more complete driver, as you would expect from a double world champ.
No one has ever said that Hamilton cant set up his car. Its just that he isnt as good as Alonso.
True. And what this shows is that even Alonso has his limits.
What was happening last year was that Hamilton would generally copy Alonso's set-up and then adapt it to his liking. It wasnt a perfect copy, but it formed the basis for Hamilton's setup. Alonso merely pointed Hamilton in the right direction, much like a teacher pointing his student in the right direction, without telling him the answers.
Its possible. Or if you want to believe Alonso: he brings with him about 0.5s in terms of developing the car and setting it up. We have seen it already with Renault this year, where the car has already moved up the field, after his arrival. Similarly, Alonso leaves McLaren and they seem to have gone backwards. Is this a coincidence? You decide.
I was not aware of this. McLaren might to do some damage limitation and go for 3rd and 4th place.
You do realise that Hamilton had already passed Heikki before he pitted for his puncture - considering his relative past performances I think you are clutching at straws thinking he would have beaten Hamilton in todays race. Kova is a good driver, just not as consistent - his parade of fastest laps near the end of the race in the first 2 openers show that...
ps3ud0
Last edited:
It was talked about a lot. In the latter half of last season, after the Hungarian GP, Alonso stopped sharing setup info with Hamilton. Then soon after Alonso resumed info sharing, however, Hamilton got a little big-headed and said that he wants to go in his own direction and doesnt need to copy Alonso. This didnt workout too well and Hamilton admitted as much. He did this for 2-3 races (Turkey, Monza, Belgium). Alonso finished ahead of Hamilton in all these races. After that, Hamilton decided to start copying setups again (with minor changes to suit his style) and was immediately back on the pace and beating Alonso. From all this, I gathered that Hamilton was faster than Alonso, when using similar setups/cars, however, Alonso was a more complete driver, as you would expect from a double world champ.
No one has ever said that Hamilton cant set up his car. Its just that he isnt as good as Alonso.
True. And what this shows is that even Alonso has his limits.
What was happening last year was that Hamilton would generally copy Alonso's set-up and then adapt it to his liking. It wasnt a perfect copy, but it formed the basis for Hamilton's setup. Alonso merely pointed Hamilton in the right direction, much like a teacher pointing his student in the right direction, without telling him the answers.
Its possible. Or if you want to believe Alonso: he brings with him about 0.5s in terms of developing the car and setting it up. We have seen it already with Renault this year, where the car has already moved up the field, after his arrival. Similarly, Alonso leaves McLaren and they seem to have gone backwards. Is this a coincidence? You decide.
I was not aware of this. McLaren might to do some damage limitation and go for 3rd and 4th place.
You seem pretty convinced that your view on this is completely correct
I guess we have to agree to disagree. Well it's not that I disagree - I just would prefer to have some proper proof rather than one pundit's opinion Out qualifying is one thing. Out racing is another. Similar to Massa out qualifying Kimi. Yet we all know who the No.1 driver at Ferrari is. The fact that Ferrari pay him vastly more than Massa would tell us that even Ferrari management know who the top dog is.
...and the fact that he matched the pace and points total of the reigning double world champ last year and only missed out on the WDC by 1 point. That is simply unheard of in F1. I doubt that any driver in recent years could have matched this feat.
This is why Hamilton is rated so highly...and not just in the UK, but in motor racing circles around the world.
Regarding the Heikki debate: Hamilton has already doubled Heikki's points total this year. Heikki vs Hamilton. No contest.
What about the whole BMW thing today. Their dilusion that they believed they were racing Hamilton. And that their press releases constantly pin point their performance compared to Ferrari and not McLaren. Is this arrogance of the highest order or am I miss reading it? Possibly ignorance too considering, if I remember correctly, the only races they performed well in were due to either Ferrari or McLaren having some sort of incident with at least one of their drivers.
...and the fact that he matched the pace and points total of the reigning double world champ last year and only missed out on the WDC by 1 point. That is simply unheard of in F1. I doubt that any driver in recent years could have matched this feat.
This is why Hamilton is rated so highly...and not just in the UK, but in motor racing circles around the world.
Regarding the Heikki debate: Hamilton has already doubled Heikki's points total this year. Heikki vs Hamilton. No contest.
hmmm, Jacques Villeneuve 1996. 1st year in F1, took it down to the last race of the season at Suzuka. Damons' points tally doesnt really show how close it really was as Villenueve retired due to a wheel falling off.
My point with the Villeneuve comparision is, like Hamilton, Villeneuve was as good as his car. When in the best car they both perform very well, when in an average car, Villeneuve was seen as poor. Both Villeneuve and Hamilton had amazing first years in F1 but Hamilton could so easily disappoint for the remainder of his career - like Villeneuve.
Its my view that Hamilton is a very good driver yes, but totally overrated by the British media and his fans. F1 history is littered drivers who were praised as the next sensation, only to be relative failures: Montoya, Alesi, Frentzen, Zanardi. I'm not saying Hamilton will fail in his career, but to place him as the next Schumacher is totally unrealistic.
First off, Damon Hill cannot be put in the same class as Alonso. Alonso is the only guy to beat the all-conquering MS/Ferrari combination, since they became a force to be reckoned with. Hakinnen did it, however, Ferrari were still getting it all together at that time. Alonso on the other hand, did it 2yrs in a row, when Ferrari/MS were dominating F1. Damon Hill tried to beat MS many times, while he was Bennetton, but couldnt and only won the title after MS moved to Ferrari and the Ferrari/MS combo was still in its infancy. D.Hill is not the same as Alonso.
Furthermore, Villeneuve was a rookie in F1 circles, but not in America. In fact, he was the reigning PPG CART IndyCar World Series (America's F1 equivalent) Champion. He arrived in F1 and immediately won his first race in F1. He wasnt really a rookie.
Hamilton is a completely different animal to J.Villeneuve. Now, if you had said Gilles Villeneuve, then maybe we wouldve had a good debate.
Villeneuve was unable to win the title, in what was the best car when he had to deal with D.Hill. It was only when D.Hill left, that he was able to outscore his team mate and win the title. Hamilton on the other hand, matched his team mate's points total in his first year (unheard of) and leads his (different) team-mate's pts total this year, too. A pattern is beginning to emerge here and I'm thinking Senna, rather than Schumacher.
He has actually made an impact on the world stage, not just in England.
http://www.f1technical.net/news/8288
Those 4 drivers you mentioned never had a world champion as their team mate in their debut year then went on to match his points total. Once again, Montoya and Zanardi were ex-Indycar Champions and cant really be looked at as a true rookies.
I know where you are coming from, in that many drivers have ended up disspointing, but Hamilton does seem different, firstly because of how he handled Alonso, who was in great form last year and secondly, because he is the only guy who seems capable of taking on the seemingly unbeatable Ferraris. Senna used to do the same where he mixed it with the Williams' in his inferior McLaren.
Or maybe it is because last year McLaren had a direct feed into Ferrari and where stealing technical information from them.
Now McLaren are on their own, they can't beat them, hmmmm coincidence? I wonder why ITV never mention that? hmmm
The other problem is, McLaren dont have anyone with any experience on developing a car. Alonso claimed he gave Mclaren half a second improvement. Which, especially looking at this year, isn't entirely unbelievable. But now you have 2 drivers who just don't know anything about developing a car, McLaren are struggling.
A bit of a sweeping statement there. I'm pretty sure both drivers know how to setup and develop a car..