2008 Canadian Grand Prix - Race 7/18
- Thread starter rpstewart
- Start date
Im going to hide in a box until this is overTo many people after me now
I actually wasn't after you there
Earlier in the thread, I reckoned that this time we'd call his performance Schumacher-esque since Senna 'only' won twice in Canada and Schumacher won seven times. But quite why the motorsport press can't call his performances Hamilton-esque I'll never know. Lord knows the kid is good enough to warrant it....****edit****
Ooh, ooh, ooh....I know! We'll go with Alesi-esque! Jean won there in '95.
His only win, in fact. And wasn't that a criminal waste of talent? I remember almost being in tears when he won, it was justice for all those times he was thwarted by his car.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 6,552
- Location
- Bournemouth
I think Hamilton, was just generally amazing! He was quickest in q1 and q2, so there was no reason why q3 wasn't genuine skill! Bring on the Hamilton win 
Regarding the track coming apart - can the poor darlings these days not cope with that sort of thing? The Dallas track in '84 came apart rather more, with terribly high temperatures (150° F track temperature at one point). In fact, Keke Rosberg couldn't see what the problem was back then:
Which is why Keke won, I expect
I actually wasn't after you there
I would say that lap was senna esque.
Senna, for me, was the best qualifier the world has ever seen. He may not have won at Canada many times, but how many poles did he get there, I wonder...
Nice to see you acknowledge that he is the real deal.
If Hamilton can win the WDC this year, it will cement his place as won of the future greats. It will only be a matter of time where the record books reflect his skill.
I also noticed that Hamilton absolutely hammered his team-mate, who IMO simply isnt good enough to be in the 2nd McLaren. I would rather have Massa, any day of the week. If I was McLaren, I would seriously try and make a move for Vettel - I rate his highly and though he wont challenge Hamilton, he will score a bucket load of points and help McLaren win the Constructors title - something Hamilton cant do by himself.
If the rumours that Alonso will be moving to Ferrari are true, then McLaren really need to prepare for it, as Alonso could well have a better car than Hamilton and the full support of his team in 2009 or 2010.
Great work by Kubica and Alonso, too. Along with Hamilton, these were the outstanding drivers of qualifying.
My gut feeling is that Ferrari still have the best car and are perhaps running with more fuel. What Ferrari dont have though, is Hamilton or Alonso.
with rain we could be spoilt
It would seem corner 7 will be the one to watch, the hairpin will fall apart more as it normally does but there is room there to absorb a mistake, the other corners are a bit less forgiving.
the main problem compared to races of years ago is how much more sensitive modern cars are to issues, they have been developed so close to the edge for maximum performance in the average conditions that it doesn't take much to knock them off that peak.
brundle did a pre race feature once where he tried following another car at speed and was shocked at how unstable the car became.
the main problem compared to races of years ago is how much more sensitive modern cars are to issues, they have been developed so close to the edge for maximum performance in the average conditions that it doesn't take much to knock them off that peak.
brundle did a pre race feature once where he tried following another car at speed and was shocked at how unstable the car became.
Not sure, to be honest. 1990 and 1988 for definite, can't remember if he got pole any other times though.
Oh, God....
Right. One last time, and I'm going for font size 7 just so you all might finally get the message.
I like Lewis Hamilton. I think he's a great driver, and hope he becomes World Champion one day. I think it's great that he's beating all those dastardly Johnny Foreigners. It's just his God damned fan club that I can't stand.
It will. It won't make or break his career though - if he doesn't win it this year, then he will win it at some point.
So you'd rather have a guy who currently has 10 points to his name in his F1 career as opposed to a guy with 45?
Oooooooookay.
I agree, I'd rather have Massa. But I only say that because unlike the vast majority of people on here I don't think he's got a 99% chance of binning it into a wall every weekend. Besides, Vettel has a contract with Red Bull I thought? And I can't imagine Ron wanting to buy that out given that Vettel is still unproven in a car that performs up at the pointy end of the grid with any regularity.
To go on to become a great, you have to win the WDC multiple times. And even if you dont win it every year, you put in performances that make you stand out, right from the word go. MS, Senna, Prost all did this. Mansell was a late developer.
Yep. Vettel has potential to be a good solid (No.2) driver, who can score many points. Heikki has had 1.5 seasons, during which time, he hasnt set the world alight. This year, he is getting hammered by his team leader and both the Ferrari drivers. Like it or not, those are Heikki's 3 main, realistic, competitors and he isnt in their league.
If I could have anyone at McLaren, then I would like to see Hamilton paired up with Kubica (will never happen). Hamilton WILL have to work very hard to finish ahead of Kubica, though, I feel he will outscore Kubica. Right now, it doesnt even seem as if Hamilton even recognises Heikki as one of his competitors, as he seems so incapable of scoring decent points.
Hamilton (McLaren) vs Alonso (Ferrari) would be a mouth-watering prospect. You just know that when those 2 race, its personal.
Should I honestly name all the really good drivers who only ever won one title? Hawthorn, Hill, Surtees, Rindt, Hunt, Andretti, Rosberg, the aforementioned Mansell....
Seriously though - what's the big deal if Hamilton didn't win it this year? He's young, he's got a nigh-on watertight McLaren contract, and he has serious talent even if he can't quite work out how to take it easy on his tyres at certain tracks.
He has potential. Great. Super. Wonderful. So does Heikki.
One season in a Renault team that was seriously missing it's star lead driver, and this season in a rather Lewis-centric McLaren.
And you honestly think he'll *never* get to the point where he can string a set of decent results together without a wheel coming apart or the electronics buggering up or someone puncturing his tyre in Turn 1?
Hamilton and Kubica would be a bad match-up, if you wanted both the drivers and constructors titles. You'd get the constructors no problem, but the two would take so many points off each other you'd end up with someone like Raikkonen nipping in and swiping it right at the end. But it'd make for a great spectacle....
Last edited:
I dont think the tyre problem is in fact a problem. His driving style works great on the other tracks, apart from Turkey (was it, I cant remember). He has adapted to this by stopping 3 times, as opposed to 2. Other drivers probably wouldnt have the skill/speed to pull something like this off - bar Alonso and maybe Kimi.
Heikki is getting his chance and is showing that he doesnt have the ability to keep up with his more illustrious team-mate. If Heikki had had Alonso as his team- mate last year, then he wouldve got similarly, hammered. I cant believe that I am the only one who is seeing this. His points totals are proof.
Some people have said on this forum that Heikki will win a race this year, on merit - I disagree totally. For him to win a race this year, Hamilton and both Ferraris will have to have serious problems - unlikely.
He might get a chance, however, I doubt he will take it. Bad luck follows him and when he doesnt get bad luck, he doesnt do great. Either way, he struggles to score points and that is the main purpose of the No.2 driver.
I beg to differ. If McLaren can manage both drivers, then last year's debacle neednt repeat itself.
The key is to choose a race by which time, the team must agree to back a single driver, say 3-4 races before the end of the season. Both drivers must be informed of this, before the season starts. This way, both drivers know that they have to finish ahead of their team mate by Race 15, say, AND need to finish ahead of other non-McLaren drivers by the end of the season.
Besides, if Kubica (or any other top driver arrived), Hamilton would know the rules by which he was playing the game. Heikki arrived to be a No.2 driver as McLaren and Hamilton were comfortable with the fact that Heikki wouldnt be able to live with Hamilton, points-wise. What they didnt expect was for him to be so far behind in the points standings and his inability to assist Hamilton in taking points away from the Ferraris (to win the Constructors title).
What actually happened to Heikki at Monaco?
IIRC, he started at the back (was this his fault?), but even when the race started, he wasnt particularly outstanding. He messed up on the last SC formation lap. The multiple SC incidents shouldve brought him closer to the lead, however, he just didnt take advantage of this.
One thing I have noticed that Heikki is fast over 1 lap. This goes for qualifying, where usually he is able to keep pace with Hamilton (Canada excepted) and also in the race, where he has a habit of putting in a single fast lap, when it doesnt really count. Hamilton, however, rarely does this, but instead, opens up the gap by putting in the fast laps, when the pressure is on and it really counts.
Remember, its easy to put in a single fast lap, when you are not in the points, as you are not tense and can take risks, due to the fact that you have nothing/little to lose. Heikki does do this a lot - ie. put in fastest laps of the race in the final few laps of the race, when he is usually in low/non-point scoring positions.
Does anyone care to explain why Heikki is so far off the pace in Canada?
...its a different excuse every time.
IIRC, he started at the back (was this his fault?), but even when the race started, he wasnt particularly outstanding. He messed up on the last SC formation lap. The multiple SC incidents shouldve brought him closer to the lead, however, he just didnt take advantage of this.
One thing I have noticed that Heikki is fast over 1 lap. This goes for qualifying, where usually he is able to keep pace with Hamilton (Canada excepted) and also in the race, where he has a habit of putting in a single fast lap, when it doesnt really count. Hamilton, however, rarely does this, but instead, opens up the gap by putting in the fast laps, when the pressure is on and it really counts.
Remember, its easy to put in a single fast lap, when you are not in the points, as you are not tense and can take risks, due to the fact that you have nothing/little to lose. Heikki does do this a lot - ie. put in fastest laps of the race in the final few laps of the race, when he is usually in low/non-point scoring positions.
Does anyone care to explain why Heikki is so far off the pace in Canada?
...its a different excuse every time.
sunama said:
Which goes against McLaren's supposed ethic regarding driver parity in their team. It never made much difference in the Mika-DC era because Mika was that much quicker for the most part. That continued under the Kimi-DC and Kimi-Montoya years. Now, if they were to get two drivers who honestly were on a par with each other (and I think that with equal cars Kubica and Hamilton would be very close indeed) then that ethic would bite them on the arse pretty quickly.
It's got the potential to hurt Ferrari this year if Massa continues to rack up the points and Kimi regains his form. Where do you call it if you've got two drivers in with a very realistic shot at the title, and a driver from another team challenging? You can end up with 2007 all over again, and the other team's driver swiping the title from right under your nose in the final few races.
Heikki is the perfect No2 for Hamilton this year if the drivers title is the only concern. Not got the raw speed, sheer talent or obscene luck to challenge in every race, but can end up in the way of other challengers on a good day (finishing 2nd in Japan last year springs to mind, I seem to recall him holding off a rather determined Kimi despite the disparity between the Renault and Ferrari). Adding the constructors title into the mix makes things a bit sticky - I think on present form it'd be a bit of a risk to bet against Ferrari. But these things have a habit of changing around quite rapidly....
To be honest, I don't think I want to see a Ferrari win tomorrow. And for my sanity's sake, I'm not sure I'd want to see Lewis win either as the press coverage would be unbearable. But a Kubica win.....that would be something. Kubica-Massa-Raikkonen would make me rather happy
Electronics problem. He had to change steering wheels certainly, not sure what the specific issue was.
As for him not covering himself in glory that weekend, he wasn't alone there. Two world champions managed to make a meal of it all. Monaco can be a lottery at the best of times, and when the car isn't 100% these days that just spells trouble.
Its certainly looking that way. And yes, money isnt a problem for BMW.
I think BMW are trying to do with Kubica, what Bennetton did with MS and Renault did with Alonso.
If Hamilton hadnt done such an outstanding lap, Kubica couldve been on pole and you can bet that he isnt short filled. His fast time is on merit.