McLaren - were they right to favour LH over FA?
- Thread starter ps3ud0
- Start date
In the sense of taking the team forward and carrying on with the desire I think had Ferrari gone for alonso instead of kimi then the last 6 years would be a completely different picture.
He is just so much better than kimi, especially from a consistency point of view. Even in the year kimi won the title for Ferrari he was heavily tipped to be dropped due to only showing up for half the races. He finished strongly but only because mclaren imploded.
Massa had a shot because kimi was a shadow of the driver he was at mclaren, much like alonso didn't fit at mclaren. Alonso would have bagged that title too with ease. Kimi is supreme when he turns up gets in the car and it works. Alonso though would have worked round the Ferrari issues and would have Atleast 2 Ferrari world titles by now had they gone for him instead of kimi.
Kimi won a title then took them no where, alonso for me would have driven on and on from that much like MS did.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,282
Agreed, he would be better off in a team that gives him 100% backing. Can't see he has any choice though. Quite a waste of talent imo, I can't see McLaren getting out of this slump any time soon.
And long may the slump continue!
Haven't they always been in a slump?
There model works kind of. It means they are consistently at the top, but it also means they don't win as often as. They should, but neither do they fall down. The grid like they should either. No flare, no soul, no gut instinct. Just cold hard logical computing. That's. Seems to bring as many problems as it solves and means there always in the thick of it, but never right at the front.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 10,140
- Location
- Europe
Lewis would have been better off starting with a team at the back of the grid. He would have learned humility, and would have more patience and not bitch on the radio all the time.
The oddity is, that McLaren was Alonso's favourite team. Why they let a rookie racea world champion is anyone's guess. Alonso was fantastic that year in a new team with a new type of tyre that he wasn't familiar with.
Had they allowed Alonso to win the championship that year, and Lewis to play number two, I think Lewis would be a better driver now. the pair then could have been allowed to race in 2008, which would have been close.
The oddity is, that McLaren was Alonso's favourite team. Why they let a rookie racea world champion is anyone's guess. Alonso was fantastic that year in a new team with a new type of tyre that he wasn't familiar with.
Had they allowed Alonso to win the championship that year, and Lewis to play number two, I think Lewis would be a better driver now. the pair then could have been allowed to race in 2008, which would have been close.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
You seem to think Hamilton complains more than other drivers, the difference is, Alonso often does it now in Italian or Spanish, and few people are interested in midfield drivers saying anything, they all talk to their teams, some constantly, some not much, some drivers like to talk some don't, what they put on the air is down to the directors.
Likewise few teams screw up as much as Mclaren. He doesn't need humility, most of the best drivers and best sports stars in the world aren't "nice guys" or full of humility, they are winners who get angry when they lose. Guys who are happy to lose.... don't win.
Anyway, the thread supposes Alonso is a better driver, he might be, its not proven. Winning more and being ahead this year, in a better car, isn't better driving, its having a better car, nothing more or less.
Who is a better driver, ALonso, Vettel, Hamilton, we won't ever know. Even if you made a team with three drivers, had those three and they had the same car every week, even supposing that you could negate a bad gearbox or anyone hitting off a piece of wing during a race. If you gave all three 10 laps each, they wouldn't get 3 identical laps in qualifying, so whoever ends up on pole could have the advantage, or whoever gets a DRS boost might have the advantage, the team could make a 0.3second error in a pitstop and change their positions, whoever pitted first might get track position. Send them round for 60 laps of a track solo and see who gets the best time, maybe, some tracks suit certain drivers, track conditions can't be identical, tyres won't always be identical, then you have the car itself, one car will work better with one style than another. All three are excellent drivers, that's about as far as you can go in comparison, even saying they are the three best drivers on the grid is a stretch of the truth. Vettel has spent two years with such a car advantage its impossible to say exactly how good he is.
The fact is, Button won the title with brawn because it was the best car by a mile, Hamilton won when his car was capable of winning, Vettel won when his car was capable of winning, Alonso has won when his car is capable of winning. None of them have or will win titles when they don't have a car that can match the best car of the year at least for most of the year.
We could potentially say(and this is really with bad memory) that Button's title came with the biggest car quality gap I can remember, Vettel's title came when his car had a huge advantage for huge portions of each season, Alonso/Hamilton probably had the least "car advantage" but certainly didn't have a poor car and couldn't have done it on driver ability alone in other years when the car wasn't there.
Was it a mistake favouring FA, I don't think Mclown would have any more titles with Alonso there, Hamilton has made very few errors this year, driving the third best car(at best, in several races not even that good) into multiple good finishes and in multiple races where the team DID cost him having more points.
My gut feeling is Hamilton is the best driver on the grid with the "worst" top car, Alonso is a ridiculously close second and Vettel can put in an awesome qualifying lap, but I'm not convinced with his ability to compete when trying to slice through a field without the best car. Smooth driver, out front looks great, but I'm not sure he's a great racer, I don't get that feeling as you do with Alonso/Hamilton that he can defend a position or put a crazy good overtaking move to get through the field without the best car behind him.
Last edited:
The gap the Brawn had over the field was tiny compared to the gap other cars have had in the past. Its funny how a 'dominant' car now means one that can be half a second quicker than others, yet not so long ago, dominant meant on pole by over 2 seconds and lapping the whole field 
.
.The gap the Brawn had over the field was tiny compared to the gap other cars have had in the past. Its funny how a 'dominant' car now means one that can be half a second quicker than others, yet not so long ago, dominant meant on pole by over 2 seconds and lapping the whole field
It was also the best car for less than half the season and two of the first batch of races Jenson won vettel should have. Amazing how quickly that is forgotten and some bull about it being the biggest dominant gap is banded about.
As DM now knows alonso is whinging in Italian and Spanish perhaps he can translate some clips for us, or he can't and is making it up?
Alonso almost won the title in neither the fastest car or the most reliable, this year he has no right to be topping the title. To even suggest Lewis is better right now is laughable. Alonso keeps winning in a car that's not even a match for the Mclarens pace.
Last edited:
The BGP 001 was a lashed-up contraption that had no right to be anywhere near the grid. The only reason that there was any car advantage at the start of the year is because McLaren and Ferrari screwed the pooch, and Red Bull kept dropping the ball. Hell, in the opening race of the year Vettel was keeping Button honest for much of it.
The stats say that Button won six of the first seven (and finished on the podium in the other). People take that and run with the idea that the car was some ass-kicking wonder machine. In the back half of the year, it becomes clear that it was maybe the 3rd best in the field once McLaren got their **** together and RBR were able to show their pace.
Yeah....I think that says more about your selective memory than anything
You want a dominant car? Look at the Williams FW17B, and the results from the GP in Adelaide that year.
When was the last time you saw a GP car win by that kind of margin?
You do like to make things up don't you? What has been his complaints in Italian or Spanish? You do realise just because the Sky team can't translate it does not mean nobody else can? Anything Ferrari or Alonso say in Italian or Spanish is translated instantly on any decent F1 forum, and guess what they are not complaints.
Alonso has no reason to complain when everything is going well.
Button complains when things go wrong, look at vettel after the overtake at the weekend.
All drivers complain.
Mclaren were making the most mistakes in pit stops / strategy and so their drivers complain more...
Button complains when things go wrong, look at vettel after the overtake at the weekend.
All drivers complain.
Mclaren were making the most mistakes in pit stops / strategy and so their drivers complain more...
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 10,140
- Location
- Europe
That race was hilarious - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5vEUaaVKkg
Hill won because every other competitor crashed or broke down. Even Panis who finished 2nd had an engine problem. lol