Malaysian Grand Prix 2011, Sepang International Circuit - Race 2/19

FrankJH · 10 Apr 2011 at 11:46

CLEAN and FAIR Overtaking is what Alonso should be concerntrating on - something NOT at all possible from the position he was in

I guess you are totally ignoring the fact Alonso's end plate was knocked off from LH's REAR wheel - just face it Alonso was never going to make it

Please stop with the personal abuse

NathanE said:
Don't be silly. Hamilton did the exact same thing to Alonso in Bahrain 2008 and there was no penalty back then either. And that was the year of the infamous Spa incident.

So the stewards havent asked to talk to Alonso then ? If there was nothing wrong with what he did they wouldnt want to would they!!

Cant see much wrong with McLaren's 3 stop stategy as JB got 2nd place out of it - Im pretty certain they wanted LH to do 3 stops also

Glaucus · 10 Apr 2011 at 11:48

God a i hate dc this year you really are retarded. It is noting like kers or turbos. Anyone can. Use them when they feel like it, if the team doesn't run it that's their fault. DRS however is only available. To one driver and as such is unfair is not racing and most of the moves today where totally uninteresting and rubbish.

Emlyn_Dewar · 10 Apr 2011 at 11:52

FrankJH said:
Cant see much wrong with McLaren's 3 stop stategy as JB got 2nd place out of it - Im pretty certain they wanted LH to do 3 stops also

They might have wanted it, but it had no chance Hamilton didn't have it in him, the tyres were never going to last.

Glaucus · 10 Apr 2011 at 11:55

Ha ha eddie couldn't find any words.

iamtheoneneo · 10 Apr 2011 at 11:56

Haha hilarious I love him always the source of much entertainment

NathanE · 10 Apr 2011 at 11:58

Emlyn_Dewar said:
They might have wanted it, but it had no chance Hamilton didn't have it in him, the tyres were never going to last.

His tyres looked fine. He had 2 fresh sets of hard rubber and neither of them worked. It was almost like he couldn't get them up to temperature.

drunkenmaster · 10 Apr 2011 at 11:58

Emlyn_Dewar said:
You are what is wrong with racing. Demanding punishment for any mistakes. I'M not sure if you were actually watching the race? Hamilton was always going to have to stop again. He was slow on those tyres at all times, they were never going to last.

Did you forget that Alonso had to make a much longer stop to replace the wing he destroyed?
Hamilton had no chance due to mclaren strategy.

Edit: I keep reading your post, it's utterly clueless, gets worse each time.
The logic is totally flawed and I can only conclude you weren't watching and didn't know of the Ferrari stop.

You're ignoring the fact that he was slow on the NEW set of tyres he got after his last pit stop, so pitting didn't magically improve his pace, ergo, not pitting wouldn't have magically ruined his race. It is highly likely the right rear that got hit was the cause of the extra pit stop.

Whatever made Hamiltons car slow was NOT the tyres, 3 sets of hard tyres were used, the pace dissappeared and two fresh sets of tyres didn't bring the pace back, the problem was NOT the tyres. Something happened, his hard tyres after 10-12 laps suddenly got changed, new tyres were slower, new tyres on the next pit were no faster....... while every single other car (pretty much) had one set of hard tyres and had no issue lasting beyond 15 laps.

Lets pretend Hamilton is hard on his tyres, so 3 separate sets of hard tyres, in the first 10 laps were still slow before any potential wearing down?

Theres no explanation of simple tyre conservation that explains Hamiltons drop in pace, 2 fresh sets of tyres didn't get any slower over the course of his time out there, they weren't fast then dropped off, they were just slow, flat out, start to finish.

Should Alonso have been punished probably, why, because you're suggesting anyone can hit anyone in the back when there is entirely no reason to, and not have any penalty, is that fair? Alonso was massively faster, people make mistakes, thats life, but he was essentially overtaking a back marker at that point and hurt the other guys car with his mistake. I'm caught between thinking he should be and shouldn't be punished, I'm not sure which is fair.

But its highly likely that the hit did cause Hamiltons last pit stop. if he'd hit someone who was up to race pace, in second and they had to pit again most people, you included would suggest a time penalty as fair, he shouldn't get it just because Hamilton was already going slowly.

drunkenmaster · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:00

NathanE said:
His tyres looked fine. He had 2 fresh sets of hard rubber and neither of them worked. It was almost like he couldn't get them up to temperature.

Would be possible but Hamilton was exceptional on a light fuel load(lighter car, less load on tyres) on the hard tyres in qualifying, so that doesn't seem all that likely. Button's car had no issue with hards, Hamilton had no issue on hards in quali or first race, I just can't see that being the issue.

I think something went wrong which caused the move to the early pit stop rather than the long stint on that set of hard tyres, then Alonso's hit caused the right rear to be dodgey and an extra pitstop was required.

NathanE · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:03

The only possible thing is that he couldn't get them up to temperature really. Which would be an absolute first for Hamilton who can normally just flick a switch and change back to his 2007 driving style. Or maybe pre-scrubbed hard tyres = bad idea, this season.

Emlyn_Dewar · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:04

Alonsos pit for a replacement wing was more than punishment. If he'd smashed into hamitlon and NOT damaged his own car, I'd agree with your viewpoint.
This wasn't the case though, he was punished by breaking his car, wing ruined for a whole lap, extended stop for wing. Hamilton's damage was extremely minor, he'd have to pit anyway for tyres.
None of these ex drivers seem to agree with your view, does it for me.

NathanE · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:06

I don't think Hamilton's car was damaged at all really.

Setroc · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:08

What I dont understand is why McLaren pitted so early for their final stop. They weren't losing any time to the leader at that point, and were not under threat from people behind, so why risk it all making the tyres last for an unprecedented amount of time?

Glaucus · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:10

Remember about getting them out into clean air.

drunkenmaster · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:11

Emlyn_Dewar said:
Alonsos pit for a replacement wing was more than punishment. If he'd smashed into hamitlon and NOT damaged his own car, I'd agree with your viewpoint.
This wasn't the case though, he was punished by breaking his car, wing ruined for a whole lap, extended stop for wing. Hamilton's damage was extremely minor, he'd have to pit anyway for tyres.
None of these ex drivers seem to agree with your view, does it for me.

See thats wrong, the incident and punishment should NOT change based on how well you come out of the incident, these aren't mutally exclusive things. People last year who broke the rules (or was it the year before) on refueling and pit lane "racing", you get fines even if you came out of it badly.

Most of the ex-drivers are morons AND making assumptions that don't tally with the race, theres no indication he had to pit for new tyres, if there was, where was the increase in speed from the fresh set, there wasn't ANY at all, so the tyres weren't worn out, or he pitted and put on an identically worn set on......... does that really seem particularly likely.

Only, and I mean ONLY if Hamiltons tyres were completely degraded and he needed a new set would he absolutely had to come in for a fresh set, there was no indication of that. Again look how long everyone else did on hard tyres, yet Hamilton barely did half the laps but you insist he had to pit anyway?

I think he could certainly have gone to the end on his set of tyres, but the right rear caused an extra stop to be required.

Think about it Button pitted, what, 1 lap after Hamilton, was going fast enough to be 19 seconds ahead, you think Hamilton ruined his tyres in less than 10 laps going far far slower than Button, who eventually did 19 laps on that set ALL much faster than Hamilton, that makes no sense at all.

NathanE · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:13

Setroc said:
What I dont understand is why McLaren pitted so early for their final stop. They weren't losing any time to the leader at that point, and were not under threat from people behind, so why risk it all making the tyres last for an unprecedented amount of time?

The only explanation is they were too afraid of encountering "The Cliff".

Emlyn_Dewar · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:14

I guess they also want to avoid the tyres going off during a lap also?
keep hearing the "fall off the cliff" line, they wouldn't pit for no reason, they must have data to say "pit now or regret it".

drunkenmaster · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:15

Setroc said:
What I dont understand is why McLaren pitted so early for their final stop. They weren't losing any time to the leader at that point, and were not under threat from people behind, so why risk it all making the tyres last for an unprecedented amount of time?

Well I think Button's was as schedualed, on soft tyres, Hamiltons, earlier pit despite being on hard tyres already which, as was showed Button had no issue taking the hard tyres for 19 laps, no one had trouble with the hard tyre. I think Hamilton had an issue, then the options were lose, what was he almost 2 seconds a lap slower for 10 laps, then pit. In that 10 laps he "could" have theoretically done everyone behind would have gained, then he pits, and they all get past. if he pits then and there he comes out ahead of those guys and has a slim chance of with track position, holding some of them off.

Tyres just doesn't explain it, everyone else manages 15laps + on hard tyres, Hamiliton has 3 separate sets, none of which last 10 laps before supposedly massively degrading, the first set he was marginally slower than Button who was on softs at the time, the second two sets showed no degredation over time, just rubbish performance from first to last lap on them.

drunkenmaster · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:16

NathanE said:
The only explanation is they were too afraid of encountering "The Cliff".

Emlyn_Dewar said:
I guess they also want to avoid the tyres going off during a lap also?
keep hearing the "fall off the cliff" line, they wouldn't pit for no reason, they must have data to say "pit now or regret it".

Yet we heard in the race to Button, no ones done more than 16 laps before then said he'd be doing 19, yet Hamilton they panicked after 10 laps, twice....... makes no sense.

But again, the hards and softs get slower after 4-5 laps, every lap, then the cliff is rather than a few 10th's a lap slower maybe, you're talking about becoming dreadful in the space of a lap or two(we've yet to actually see this cliff). Hamilton didn't even experience the slow "normal" degredation let alone approach "the cliff".

Explaning his pace just down to tyres doesn't make sense any way you cut it.

Emlyn_Dewar · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:18

I could use the same sort of logic to say, "everyone else had fine pace on the hard tyres, Hamilton shouldn't have been driving so slow."
There was clearly a problem, he was off the pace, it will have caused accelerated tyre degradation. He had to stop, if he didn't and it was the fault of Alonso. He would have said it during his utterly dejected interview.

Remember, his pace was awful BEFORE this incident. It wasn't caused by the collision.

MikeHunt79 · 10 Apr 2011 at 12:24

Haiku said:

Flying Lotus?