2008 German GP - Race 10/18
- Thread starter rpstewart
- Start date
Thats a good point. I overlooked that. You might be weaker on the tighter/twisty tracks like Hungary though.
well we have saved an extra 8KG between Germany and Hungary so things may improve,wet clutch problems prevail though.
And this is any different to this season? Aside from one freak result (Kubica winning in Canada thanks to Lewis "Kamikaze" Hamilton's moment of brainfade), every single race has been won by one of three drivers - Hamilton, Massa, Raikkonen.
1992 - five drivers won a race. Mansell won 9, Senna won 3, Berger won 2, Patrese won 1, Schumacher won 1. And Schumacher's win wasn't just a result of the top guys falling off the road - both the Williams cars were on the podium, and Senna was still running in 4th.
1993 - four drivers scored a win. Prost with 7, Senna with 5, Hill with 3, Schumacher with 1. And again, the 'freak' result of Schumacher beating the Williams cars was done with both Prost and Hill on the podium right behind him (think about 10 seconds seperated the three cars by the end?).
Really? I do - Hamilton, Massa or Kimi. Anything else takes something strange to happen. Like, oh I don't know, say one of those guys slamming into the back of one of the others in the pitlane because he wasn't looking where he was going.....
1992 - regarding qually, you're not far off the mark. It was all Mansell's Williams, asde from two occasions. Canada, Senna got pole. Hungary, it was Patrese's Williams at the front. But fastest laps of the race were a different story. Schumacher netted that honour twice IIRC. Berger grabbed it at least once. I'm sure Senna got one, and I'm pretty sure Patrese got more than one.
1993 - again, qually was pretty much a Prost benefit. Twice Hill took it, once for Senna, but the rest was all Prost. But then you get to the fastest laps again. Schumacher took that honour five times that year (had to check that on the Wiki page!). Hill four times. Prost six times, with Senna picking up the remaining one (at Donington, unsurprisingly).
But it can, can't it? It'll either be a Ferrari or Hamilton. How is that any different to the '92-'93 years where it was always going to be either a Williams, a McLaren or Schumacher on the top step of the podium?
*cough* Australia 2008
I see 3.... add another 3 on the other side....6
Renault have the same system apparently too.
That doesn't have to be the same. One could be a hand pull in clutch and one to select upshift one for down shift.
I remember reading an article which said some drivers liked one paddle for up and downshift while others liked two seperate paddles. It would be easy to have switched functions.
How can you have one paddle that does up AND down shifting?
Have a very small finger so you can push it back and forwards.
But in that picture i cant see hamilton doing 190 odd trying to fit his finger in between the wheel and paddle would work.
Its different now, because before the race start, you have no idea who will win out of those 3 drivers (or even if another driver will steal the win). In 1992/3 (as an example), Mansell (92) and Prost (93) were immediate favourites. The only time they would lose is if rain came down or something out of the ordinary happened.
In 2007 any of 4 drivers could win the race. In 2008, this was effectively reduced to 3, as Heikki is lacking in ability.
As an example, Hungary is coming up. No single driver is favourite. I would say the 3 drivers mentioned above are joint favourites. In 1992/3 this was not the case.
Yep, the favourite is a 3 way tie between those drivers you mentioned above. But like I stated, in 1992/3, this was not the case. Only 1 driver was the favourite, before the race started - Mansell (92) and Prost (93).
But what's interesting that you missed Heikki's name out from there. Earlier in the season, yourself and others on this board, were coming up with a myriad of excuses for why he wasnt scoring big points. The real reason, as far as I'm concerned was due to his lack of sustained speed. Plain and simple. Perhaps you have finally seen the light?
I found it strange that I was the only one who was seeing this. Though I would love to hear some more excuses for his poor race performances in the last 2 races, as the forumites can be quite creative.
Oh and for all those new to F1, complaining about McLaren getting a raw deal with the smallest of rule infringements. In 1993, Hill was prohibited from beating Hill. The team orders were so obvious: Prost and Hill would pull away from the rest of the field and Hill would follow Prost home, closely. At times Hill would drop back by a few seconds, to see how quickly he could catch Prost up. This fact was never hidden. It was common knowledge that Hill was not allowed to beat Prost. The outcome of many races that season was decided in Prost's contract who had No.1 driver status.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 15,660
- Location
- The land of milk & beans
The paddle upshifts when the accelerator is pressed and it downshifts while off the accelerator or braking.How can you have one paddle that does up AND down shifting?
It's used rarely on other forms of racing. The two-paddle system is far less open for errors.
Id hate to think what happens when youve got your foot on the brake and throttle and then hit the paddle.. you'd get some sort of inter dimensional gear..
How can you have one paddle that does up AND down shifting?
You push forward for downshifts and pull towards for upshift. Thats exactly how villeneuve used to change gear.
Jacques Villeneuve is the only person that I know of who used a single paddle shift - towards for up and away for down on the right side of the wheel. I don't know whether it was a long term thing but it was certainly talked about at length during his first season with Williams.
EDIT: Beaten like an ugly kid.....
EDIT: Beaten like an ugly kid.....
Yeah thats why I say that shot from last year doesnt really give evidence that Macca used the extra paddles for Torque control earlier. That could just show upshift downshift and clutch. Depending on how the driver likes his wheel set up.
'The only time', huh?
I don't recall much weather, or unreliability (except for Senna blowing up), or mutant badgers invading the track disturbing the results at, say, the 1993 Portuguese GP. That was a Schumacher win with Prost and Hill just behind him, for those who don't recall or those who are too young to remember.
Your point about rain - I've never held much sway in this. It's not as if it's more wet for certain drivers comapred to others. It's just a factor that they all have to deal with, rather than an unbalancing factor that only certain drivers can cope with.
So, just like 1992 then. Except 1992 had a proper wildcard in the form of one Michael Schumacher.
I'm honestly not certain here, sunama. D'you honestly think that McLaren are such idiots that they'd hire a completely sub-standard driver? Really? In this day and age?
He's no Hamilton. But DC was no Hakkinen. Berger was no Senna. De Cesaris was no Watson. Mass was no Hunt.
Should I go on?
At the risk of sounding desperately stupid, I'd say Hamilton is favourite this year. No in-fighting in the team. Nobody's caught them spying. Their drivers aren't really both in the hunt for the title. How on Earth can Hamilton not be favourite?
He's not inexperienced - he's done an entire season at the pointy end of proceedings.
He's in a damned good car, certainly one of the top two. Probably even the best right now.
He's not got to fight his team-mate all that heavily.
Seriously - how is he not favourite???
1992 - yes, it was a Mansell benefit. I'm pretty certain I've stated that on this forum before, but it might have been another one.
As for 1993 - Prost didn't seal it until Portugal, and there were only two rounds to go at that point. So yes, it could have been tighter. Or it could have been a 2002 or 2004 style walkover. Which would you prefer? Teams being allowed to have serious technology and the title being won near the end of the season, or teams being vastly restricted and one team and driver running away with it?
But what's interesting that you missed Heikki's name out from there. Earlier in the season, yourself and others on this board, were coming up with a myriad of excuses for why he wasnt scoring big points. The real reason, as far as I'm concerned was due to his lack of sustained speed. Plain and simple. Perhaps you have finally seen the light?
Would you mind pointing out these excuses on my part?
I'm pretty sure one of them came when his wheel/tyre destroyed itself in Spain. I also posted a slight excuse when his steering wheel electronics buggered up before the start in Monaco. Oh, and another one for his tyre getting popped by Kimi at Turn 1, Lap 1 in Turkey
Well, you'll have to hear them from someone else. You ain't going to get 'em from me.
Hil was prohibited from beating....Hill?
Did you perhjaps mean Prost?
France was the really obvious one. Hill planted himself under the rear wing of Prost for quite a few laps, and they crossed the line very close indeed. I believe I've already mentioned that as the Williams 'train' a few posts back. Just like the old Mercedes train between Moss and Fangio back in '55. And I defy anyone to call that boring....
Oh, and on the subject of No1 status - d'you honestly think that McLaren aren't operating that way right now?
Last edited:
Thats exactly what it is, though. Rain seems to cause some drivers to be unable to cope with the conditions, while others tend to adapt better. I believe that the "naturally talented" individuals tend to be quicker in wet conditions, while the drivers who have to work at their driving skills, tend to be unable to adapt fast enough. This is why you see the likes of Hamilton dominating in wet conditions, as he has bundles of natural ability.
Erm. MS only won a single race in 1992...did he not?
At the time they hired Heikki, they may have honestly believed that he would make a great No.2 driver. This means having the ability to follow your team-leader home. If your team leader crashes out, then its your responsibility to score as many points as possible, in his absence. Its your responsibility also, to win the constructors title, providing that your team-leader does his job (which Hamilton, is).
Unfortunately, the way its worked out is that Heikki just cant cut it. He isnt as quick as Massa, who inexplicably is much maligned on this forum, yet the guy who is consistently slower and scores fewer points, seems to get good support.
After winning the last 2 races, you are saying this. However, before those 2 races, I doubt you would have said that he was favourite. If Kimi goes on to win the next 2 races, with DNFs from Hamilton (not an impossible scenario), then I'm sure your attitude will change.
For those reasons, I dont believe any single driver is favourite to win a race, before it starts.
Compare this to 1992, when Mansell, will have qualified 0.5-1.0s faster than anyone else. Its difficult to see anyone else winning the race, barring mechanical failure or rain. Similarly, in 1993, when Prost qualified in pole, knowing that Hill would not challenge him for the race win, it was difficult to see anyone else winning, barring mechanical failure or rain.
OK, so thats 3 races, Heikki has excuses for. What about the other 7? What about the fact that Massa retired in the first 2 races of the season, yet came back to lead it the WDC?
That fact is that Heikki has found himself totally outclassed by Hamilton, who has exactly the same amount of experience in F1 as he does.
Oh, I knew that this was the direction they were heading in as soon as the got rid of Alonso, last year. You dont get rid of arguably, the best driver in F1, unless you are going to have a serious change of plan in how you operate. McLaren learnt last year, that in this day and age, its too risky to try and back 2 drivers for the WDC - a better strategy is to have a No.1 and No.2 driver and ensure that your No.1 driver gets as many points as possible, without the No.2 driver taking points away from him. MS and Ferrari operated in exactly this way during their domination. The could've chosen a better No.2 driver. Obviously Hamilton is happy as he doesnt have to worry about his own team mate at all, but it doesnt bode well for the constructors title, unless your No.1 driver can almost single handedly win you the Constructors title as well.
only due to one fluky result at Silverstone otherwise they would be equal, and every single year JB has actually ended up being considerably ahead (not to mention that all the BAR driver changes where expected to partner JB and not RB next season)
Obviously you know better than probably the best engineering team manager in F1 for the last 15 years+
Do you honestly believe that Ron is neive enough to believe he can win the Constructers championship with one consistant driver?
I honestly think Ron originally thought Kovi could actually compete more evenly with LH and get some 1-2 's for the team, of course NOW the writing is on the wall (well it has been for a few races) but there is no doubt that McLaren have been let down by several poor performances by Kovi - and I honestly dont think Ron will get his hands on the team WC this year ( have a feeling it will be a split year with Ferrari winning the team and Hamilton winning the DWC)
It didnt help that there were no top drivers out of contract at the end of last year - McLaren just havent been lucky
Last edited:
After what happened last year I think McLaren would be relieved and satisfied just to win the WDC this year to be honest!
All their marketing/sponsorship at the moment is focused on Hamilton and that's what its all about I guess.
I think Heikki will get over his "tyre temperature and graining" issues soon enough. But IMO it's too late for him to challenge in the WDC now.
I think Ferrari have had a development blip. It looks to me like they put something on the car for Silverstone and it broke their car basically. They, in the typical Ferrari way, just blamed it on the British weather and wind. But then they realised there was a very serious problem at the next race! If they have fixed that problem now then they could be competitive again. But I guess the 2 races of uncompetitiveness has screwed up their momentum and development direction... I really suspect McLaren are still going to be slightly ahead.
All their marketing/sponsorship at the moment is focused on Hamilton and that's what its all about I guess.
I think Heikki will get over his "tyre temperature and graining" issues soon enough. But IMO it's too late for him to challenge in the WDC now.
I think Ferrari have had a development blip. It looks to me like they put something on the car for Silverstone and it broke their car basically. They, in the typical Ferrari way, just blamed it on the British weather and wind. But then they realised there was a very serious problem at the next race! If they have fixed that problem now then they could be competitive again. But I guess the 2 races of uncompetitiveness has screwed up their momentum and development direction... I really suspect McLaren are still going to be slightly ahead.
If you are referring to Ross Brawn, then you must understand that firstly, Brawn only arrived a year ago. Secondly, if he does get rid of Button, who will he replace him with, bearing in mind that the team car isnt particularly quick, so as to lure a top line driver. He has no choice but to stick with Button.
Even bringing in Alonso for 2009 would be a waste as there is no way that even Alonso would be able to haul a car so bad up into the podium positions. When Button and Co have developed the car sufficiently enough that they can score podiums, thats when you bring in the likes of Hamilton, Alonso, Kimi or Kubica, but until then you will be just wasting your money.
Obviously now that they know what they know, they might not have brought Heikki on board. No team principal wants to bring in a lemon of a driver. But who knows, McLaren's management have shown how weak they were last year, there is no reason to believe that they wouldnt mess up their driver line up for this year or the next.
I'm glad someone is finally agreeing with me. It did take quite a few races into the season for someone else to see what I saw quite some time ago though.
Contracts can be bought out, if you are serious enough. I actually felt that a move for Button would've been good. I still feel that if he is challenged, he will stop trying to shag every bit of skirt he sees and concentrate on F1. His problem is that he has become very comfortable at Honda, turning up to races, finishing out of the points, going home and picking up a nice pay cheque.
Button would make a good No.2 driver for Hamilton, as he tends to make few mistakes and would "bring it home" regularly. I say, he would be No.2, becuase I feel that like Heikki, Button would also been blown away, though not so emphatically.
Another option would've been to keep Alonso for another year and actually manage him. It wouldve been totally doable.
If they began a new season today, I still think that Hamilton would finish up doubling Heikki's points total. Basically, Hamilton is doing to Heikki, what MS used to do to his team mates - make them look very ordinary.
If Heikki has so many problems with his tyres (and I was unaware he did), then he has the option to copy Hamilton and have an extra pit-stop. Being hard on tyres hasnt prevented Hamilton from dominating.
I just feel that the 2nd seat at McLaren is being wasted. At least Ferrari make have Massa doing a great job in the 2nd seat, which is what you would expect.
