Poll: 2008 Brazilian GP - Race 18/18
- Thread starter rpstewart
- Start date
- Status
Oh, it did that alright. Perfectly. Just not sure the mods would be desperately happy with it
Senna only won twice in five starts at Interlagos, failing to finish twice and going from pole to third the other time. Those were his only Brazilian GP wins - he never won at Jacarepaguá (where the GP was held between stints at Interlagos) in six starts, failing to finish four times. So not great by his standards. Remember that when the ITV commentary team go off on their "Senna-esque" twittering 
Can't disagree with these comments
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/29/itv-f1-goodbye-or-good-riddance/
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2008/10/29/itv-f1-goodbye-or-good-riddance/
Pressure does indeed play a massive part. However, Alonso had 3 opportunities to win the title and won it 2 of those times. Ive never seen him crack under pressure.
Kubica - I cant comment, as we've only seen him under pressure twice (1. for his first win, which he won and 2. when he needed to win in China and cracked).
This is why I keep saying, out of Kubica, Alonso and Hamilton, Alonso is presently, the the most complete.
So you are saying that it is just a HUGE coincidence that:
2006: McLaren are not a title challenging team and Renault are
Alonso moves to McLaren and away from Renault.
2007: McLaren now have the fastest car over the course of the season and Renault are nowhere (ie. they win no races in 2007)
Alonso moves back to Renault.
2008: Ferrari now seem to have a slight edge, with regards having the fastest car over the course of the season, while Renault are (as if by magic), a race winning car again.
Are you saying that the above is all just one big coincidence that is working in Alonso's favour and making him look good?
A lot of people said what you are saying about MS. But look at this way, if MS (and Alonso), werent that great, then why werent other drivers able to emulate what they did?
If any decent driver could've done what MS did at Ferrari and Bennetton, then why didnt they?
Last edited:
I don't understand why people perceive this as "squabbling" and "arguing". It's just friendly banter that F1 fans always chat about before a race...
Yep. I think that those who dont like the "banter", prefer to have empty threads that only come alive during the race and basically end as soon as the race ends.
For those people, I strongly suggest you use the IGNORE button and also UNSUBSCRIBE once the race is over.
Expect this thread to be very very long as it will probably be used to discuss rumours during the long Winter season, etc. So unless you are seriously into F1, you really need to unsubscribe once the race is done.
Without the arguments/squabbles/debates, these F1 threads would be extraordinarily boring, short and empty.
He didnt just crack last season, he completely shattered before getting himself together towards the end of the season
Dont forget Alonso first challanged for a WDC in his 4th or 5th season, completely different kettle of fish to competing straight from the off with no real chance to get used to each track in a particular car, other people's driving styles etc etc
Given his experience I would suggest that like most drivers, if you know a given car on a given track, you then get given a better car while you wont know every detail, it would be relatively easy to compare and guess how the better car will handle before getting to the next track.
Then take a rookie driver in the same formula - he has to learn all of this while still trying to challange for the WDC (which the car deserved) /CWC , surely you can see there is plainly a huge benefit (which DIDNT bare fruit at all last season, and the defending champion only just managed to get equal on points)
How do you know Hamilton couldnt have won a WDC in the 2005/2006 Renault? Maybe Alonso added 5-10% or whatever to the performance, (while possibly causing a detriment to his team mate) - while in no way would it be the same car, there is nothing to show that Hamilton couldnt have done the same (and plenty to show that given LH being the "lead" driver, the team mate doesnt is still capable of performing as well
Plenty of times in the history of F1 over a winter break, a leading team has gone the wrong way in development and produced a duff car the next season, just as often as a mid grid team has moved to the front - it might be down to Alonso's developement skills, it could be down to changing of rules aiding/not aiding Renault (or Ferrari in MS's case)
The fact of the matter is however it was done, mentally and on the track LH slaughtered Alonso with little to no actual knowledge of those around him, of racing on numerous tracks, and of racing a F1 car - for the first half, 3/4 of the season, IF Alonso was so good he shouldnt have let that happen.
edit - I never meant to spoil the thread for anyone and Im sorry if thats happened, Im just trying to be a little less biased here than some. I really wanted BMW to really push to the end of the season, to see what they could do - but it was never going to be (Hopefully 09 will bear more successful fruit for them, because I think they really deserve it)
Last edited:
Sunama, I'm gonna join in the Anti-Alonso stuff, it's always good fun 
Just thought I'd make a slight criticism of this first. Firstly, in 2005, ferrari weren't just 'pretty bad', they were awful, schumacher wasn't even close to challenging for the title, or even race wins, raikkonen was a challenge and the only reason Alonso won that championship was due to the mclaren being horrendously unreliable.
Secondly, in 2006, from what I remember Alonso built up fairly comfortable lead over schumacher when he was in a better car (eg a car with a 'mass damper') once that was removed schumacher caught up fairly rapidly and it was only a mistake in the last race that cost him. But I'll give Alonso this one, he got the lead and held onto it, but it's not an outright 'Alonso > Schumacher' claim, more a renault > ferrari claim, put a top driver (eg alonso, hamilton, kubica, massa, raikkonen, schumacher...) into that renault in 2006 and they probably/should've been able to get the job done.
This I also disagree with, first point is correct, in 2006 Renault was a title contender, McLaren weren't, both due to unreliability and a complete lack of pace.
2007 Alonso moves to McLaren and they quick straight from the word go (2nd/3rd in australia 7s behind raikkonen then 1-2 in malaysia), now this is in a new team for both drivers so they won't be fully settled, in fact you could say that Alonso was never fully settled in the team. And also the development of the car didn't shoot forward at any point during the season.
But in 2008 he moves back to Renault, but note here that they don't manage to go immediately from the back of the field to podium, in fact renaults first podium was when, Germany with Piquet? the 10th round, and that down to luck more than any pace.
Yes the Renault is now vaquely competitive with the BMW kinda pace, after some 7 months for Alonso to work his magic.
So how come he managed to make the McLaren a championship worthy car during winter testing, in a team that he had only just joined, and yet when moving back to a team where he had spent several years and won 2 world championships it took him almost the entire season to get the car potentially to podiums, and then there is a question mark over the engine in the renault from a few races ago, it certainly got a damn sight quicker down the straights somehow...
Alonso is hardly a bad driver, and he is certainly capable of developing a car (to drag that renault up to podium chances, and probably fighting for wins next year is no mean feat), but he's not some godlike person who can change a teams fortunes over just the winter testing, this year proved that.
We've yet to really see whether Hamilton can develop a car in the same way, Raikkonen can't really judging by 2006 and previous years in the McLaren, I'd say Kubica can't seem to do it either, BMW has developed but not at the rate Renault have this year.
On top of this you seem to have a blinkered view of Alonso's season last year, he made some bad error's, almost as soon as Hamilton showed signs of properly challenging for wins (Canada as the first example, Alonso drove a very poor race whilst Hamilton, in his 6th ever F1 race won), yes he did buckle down and do some decent work towards the end of the season, and helped by some n00b mistakes by Hamilton/McLaren he matched him on points.
As for how much discontent was in the team I don't know, who on the team he was or wasn't on speaking terms with was reported a few times, but with how much accuracy? And when it came to setups yes he stopped sharing data with Hamilton during the season, but I also seem to remember him getting hamiltons setup information at the brazilian grand prix when hamilton was easily faster than him during practice...
imo whether Alonso or Hamilton is the more complete driver is something that can't be answered yet, Both have shown big weaknesses, but both are quick and are likely to win several more world championships between them over the next few years.
Just thought I'd make a slight criticism of this first. Firstly, in 2005, ferrari weren't just 'pretty bad', they were awful, schumacher wasn't even close to challenging for the title, or even race wins, raikkonen was a challenge and the only reason Alonso won that championship was due to the mclaren being horrendously unreliable.
Secondly, in 2006, from what I remember Alonso built up fairly comfortable lead over schumacher when he was in a better car (eg a car with a 'mass damper') once that was removed schumacher caught up fairly rapidly and it was only a mistake in the last race that cost him. But I'll give Alonso this one, he got the lead and held onto it, but it's not an outright 'Alonso > Schumacher' claim, more a renault > ferrari claim, put a top driver (eg alonso, hamilton, kubica, massa, raikkonen, schumacher...) into that renault in 2006 and they probably/should've been able to get the job done.
This I also disagree with, first point is correct, in 2006 Renault was a title contender, McLaren weren't, both due to unreliability and a complete lack of pace.
2007 Alonso moves to McLaren and they quick straight from the word go (2nd/3rd in australia 7s behind raikkonen then 1-2 in malaysia), now this is in a new team for both drivers so they won't be fully settled, in fact you could say that Alonso was never fully settled in the team. And also the development of the car didn't shoot forward at any point during the season.
But in 2008 he moves back to Renault, but note here that they don't manage to go immediately from the back of the field to podium, in fact renaults first podium was when, Germany with Piquet? the 10th round, and that down to luck more than any pace.
Yes the Renault is now vaquely competitive with the BMW kinda pace, after some 7 months for Alonso to work his magic.
So how come he managed to make the McLaren a championship worthy car during winter testing, in a team that he had only just joined, and yet when moving back to a team where he had spent several years and won 2 world championships it took him almost the entire season to get the car potentially to podiums, and then there is a question mark over the engine in the renault from a few races ago, it certainly got a damn sight quicker down the straights somehow...
Alonso is hardly a bad driver, and he is certainly capable of developing a car (to drag that renault up to podium chances, and probably fighting for wins next year is no mean feat), but he's not some godlike person who can change a teams fortunes over just the winter testing, this year proved that.
We've yet to really see whether Hamilton can develop a car in the same way, Raikkonen can't really judging by 2006 and previous years in the McLaren, I'd say Kubica can't seem to do it either, BMW has developed but not at the rate Renault have this year.
On top of this you seem to have a blinkered view of Alonso's season last year, he made some bad error's, almost as soon as Hamilton showed signs of properly challenging for wins (Canada as the first example, Alonso drove a very poor race whilst Hamilton, in his 6th ever F1 race won), yes he did buckle down and do some decent work towards the end of the season, and helped by some n00b mistakes by Hamilton/McLaren he matched him on points.
As for how much discontent was in the team I don't know, who on the team he was or wasn't on speaking terms with was reported a few times, but with how much accuracy? And when it came to setups yes he stopped sharing data with Hamilton during the season, but I also seem to remember him getting hamiltons setup information at the brazilian grand prix when hamilton was easily faster than him during practice...
imo whether Alonso or Hamilton is the more complete driver is something that can't be answered yet, Both have shown big weaknesses, but both are quick and are likely to win several more world championships between them over the next few years.
Awwww. I thought we could keep this for after the race (after all, we have a good few months to argue this out until the start of the 2009 season), so I will bite.
Of course for MS or Alonso to work their magic, they need a good back up team. This includes a huge workforce who all have to play their part to make it all happen.
But what is intrumental in putting a winning package together has to be delivered ultimately by the driver on the track.
Lets take for example, Heikki. Let us suppose that McLaren had another driver of his callibre. Heikki would be found wanting against the Ferraris, even though the McLaren, on some tracks is a faster car than the Ferrari. I totally agree that to allow the driver to put the car in front, the staff in the factory have to play their integral part. However, Lewis Hamilton (for McLaren), has played a massive part to allow a McLaren to compete for wins and the WDC.
Similarly, Alonso is a driver through whom a lot of the effort is focussed. By having him at the team, the factory staff know that their car will be driven to the limit and might possibly be competing for wins. This can only help motivate staff to work harder and pull out all the stops.
MS arrived at Ferrari, where Ferrari had not won a WDC since 1979. He arrived and 4 years later they got their first WDC in over 2 decades. This cannot be a coincidence. The driver makes a HUGE difference, as do the technical team and their team principals.
Another example might be this year. Ferrari believe that they have had the best car over the course of the season and that their drivers havent really got the best out of the car, in the same way that Alonso or MS mightve.
In 2008 with the cars being a lot closer together, the driver is very very important and you cant rely on an average driver bringing home the title; Heikki is testament to this.
The technical team behind the driver are important. But so is the driver.
- Status