They're baaack...

#11

In message <565lpsF26ouh2U1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net>, Shevek
<shevek99 (AT) gmail (DOT) com> writes

Quote:

Richard Miller escribió:

Not really. There was never any sign that Alonso was all over the
back of Hamilton except when Hamilton got held up by backmarkers.
Alonso was not even hovering close for a fair bit of the time, he was
two to five seconds behind. If, which I don't believe, he was "just
being nice to the rookie", then more fool him.

The difference was consistently 2s, but anyway it's interesting how the
same data can be read in opposite ways.

I've been lurking on some Spanish and British F1 forums and the
analysis are almost unanimous:

According to the British forums, Alonso was not able to get close to
Hamilton (much less overtake him), and only because FA pitted later and
Sato get caught in between, did he get the second place.

Also, the fact that Alonso pitted later than LH shows that the team
orders are there to favor Alonso.

I don't believe a word of that! As I said elsewhere, I think Alonso
deservedly got second place through better tactics, and would have taken
the spot regardless of Hamilton getting held up by backmarkers. But that
is the point - better tactics. For pace, they appeared very evenly
matched.

Quote:

According to the Spanish forums, Hamilton was never able to detach
himself from Alonso, but when FA got in from of him, the champion
managed an advantage of 10s almost immediately, showing what he was
capable of.

Yes, well, they would say that, wouldn't they!

Quote:

Also, the fact that LH pitted later than FA the first time shows that
Ron Dennis has a soft spot for his new protegé, Hamilton.

Aren't people fun?

Indeed.
--
Richard Miller

#12

Shevek wrote:

Quote:

The difference was consistently 2s, but anyway it's interesting how the
same data can be read in opposite ways.

Is there an easy way to get hold of the data without subscribing to
forix or waiting for visionf1.com to catch up? I'm fairly sure the
difference was consistently about 1.3-1.6s in the first stint, much
longer at the beginning of the second, a bit shorter at the end of the
second and then reversed after the second pitstop, but I've no data to
back it up, just what I remember. And the race has already been erased
because apparently the space on the hard disk was needed for Grey's Anatomy.

Quote:

I've been lurking on some Spanish and British F1 forums and the analysis
are almost unanimous:

According to the British forums, Alonso was not able to get close to
Hamilton (much less overtake him), and only because FA pitted later and
Sato get caught in between, did he get the second place.

This I agree with, although Hamilton clearly didn't like the softer
tyres and might well have been passed by Alonso had he not jumped him in
the pits.

Quote:

Also, the fact that Alonso pitted later than LH shows that the team
orders are there to favor Alonso.

On this I agree with Brundle - Alonso's race engineer saw the writing on
the wall and cleverly fueled Alonso longer than Hamilton, which is
entirely fair play.

Quote:

According to the Spanish forums, Hamilton was never able to detach
himself from Alonso, but when FA got in from of him, the champion
managed an advantage of 10s almost immediately, showing what he was
capable of.

There was a point at the start of the second stint where Hamilton was
consistently 0.4s a lap faster for several laps, but the British
commentators thought that Ron was going to have to tell him to calm
down, simply because he was a metre closer to the wall than Alonso on
every corner where there was a wall on the outside.

Quote:

Also, the fact that LH pitted later than FA the first time shows that
Ron Dennis has a soft spot for his new protegé, Hamilton.

Ron Dennis clearly does have a soft spot for Hamilton, and that's
dangerous for Alonso - see also Mika Hakkinen.

Quote:

Aren't people fun?

Indeed.

--
Phil

http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31307.html

#13

wrote in news:1174240509.287923.36970 (AT) n59g2000hsh (DOT) googlegroups.com:

Quote:

I'm a Kimi fan but lets be honest, Alonso won 2 WDC in the 2nd
fastest car, in both years. If Kimi/MS were in the 2005/2006 Renault
they wouldn't have had a fucking hope in hell of being WDC, with
Alonso in he McLaren and Ferrari during those respective years.

So tell me dufus why Alonso only finished second to Kimi when a rookie in
the same car finished third?

--
CatharticF1

'What you thought was freedom is just greed'

#14

CatharticF1 wrote:

Quote:

wrote in news:1174240509.287923.36970 (AT) n59g2000hsh (DOT) googlegroups.com:

I'm a Kimi fan but lets be honest, Alonso won 2 WDC in the 2nd
fastest car, in both years. If Kimi/MS were in the 2005/2006 Renault
they wouldn't have had a fucking hope in hell of being WDC, with
Alonso in he McLaren and Ferrari during those respective years.

So tell me dufus why Alonso only finished second to Kimi when a
rookie in the same car finished third?

Could it be that the Ferrari is a faster, better package than the
McLaren?

--
Paul-B Formula 1 - cheat-free version coming soon.

#15

Paul-B wrote in news:566um6F27u99vU1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net:

Quote:

CatharticF1 wrote:

wrote in news:1174240509.287923.36970 (AT) n59g2000hsh (DOT) googlegroups.com:

I'm a Kimi fan but lets be honest, Alonso won 2 WDC in the 2nd
fastest car, in both years. If Kimi/MS were in the 2005/2006 Renault
they wouldn't have had a fucking hope in hell of being WDC, with
Alonso in he McLaren and Ferrari during those respective years.

So tell me dufus why Alonso only finished second to Kimi when a rookie
in the same car finished third?

Could it be that the Ferrari is a faster, better package than the
McLaren?

Well I guess - and perhaps the Renault was too huh?

;-p

--
CatharticF1

'What you thought was freedom is just greed'

#16

CatharticF1 wrote:

Quote:

Paul-B wrote in news:566um6F27u99vU1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net:

CatharticF1 wrote:

wrote in
news:1174240509.287923.36970 (AT) n59g2000hsh (DOT) googlegroups.com:
I'm a Kimi fan but lets be honest, Alonso won 2 WDC in the 2nd
fastest car, in both years. If Kimi/MS were in the 2005/2006
Renault >> > they wouldn't have had a fucking hope in hell of being
WDC, with >> > Alonso in he McLaren and Ferrari during those
respective years.
So tell me dufus why Alonso only finished second to Kimi when a
rookie >> in the same car finished third?

Could it be that the Ferrari is a faster, better package than the
McLaren?

Well I guess - and perhaps the Renault was too huh?

;-p

Not this year. And that awful, awful colour scheme...

--
Paul-B Formula 1 - cheat-free version here now.

#17

BigBird escribió:

Quote:

What I am amused by is that the Alonso fans on this group seem rather more
partisan and the Brits a little more pragmatic with regard to these extreme
views.

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but
considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

--
Shevek

#18

Shevek wrote:

Quote:

BigBird escribió:

What I am amused by is that the Alonso fans on this group seem
rather more partisan and the Brits a little more pragmatic with
regard to these extreme views.

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but
considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

What is that supposed to mean? I haven't seen anything exactly partisan
in Bird's contribution to this thread, rather the reverse, actually.

--
Paul-B Formula 1 - cheat-free version here now.

#19

Paul-B escribió:

Quote:

Shevek wrote:

BigBird escribió:
What I am amused by is that the Alonso fans on this group seem
rather more partisan and the Brits a little more pragmatic with
regard to these extreme views.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but
considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

What is that supposed to mean? I haven't seen anything exactly partisan
in Bird's contribution to this thread, rather the reverse, actually.

Well, it depends from your point of view, obviously.

BigBird opinions and conveniently selected data only support the
hypothesis that Hamilton was superior, that Alonso couldn't reach
Hamilton, and that only Hamilton's bad luck of being behind Sato allowed
Alonso to make a substancial difference in the third stint.

--
Shevek

#20

Shevek escribió:

Quote:

Paul-B escribió:
Shevek wrote:

BigBird escribió:
What I am amused by is that the Alonso fans on this group seem
rather more partisan and the Brits a little more pragmatic with
regard to these extreme views.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but
considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

What is that supposed to mean? I haven't seen anything exactly partisan
in Bird's contribution to this thread, rather the reverse, actually.

Well, it depends from your point of view, obviously.

BigBird opinions and conveniently selected data only support the
hypothesis that Hamilton was superior, that Alonso couldn't reach
Hamilton, and that only Hamilton's bad luck of being behind Sato allowed
Alonso to make a substancial difference in the third stint.

And, on a more personal matter, he has resorted to insult those that not
agree with him, accsing all that support "Alonso's position" of
ignorant, dishonest or directly, liars.

--
Shevek

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

They're baaack...

Formula 1 Formula 1 motor racing discusions (rec.autos.sport.f1)

Re: They're baaack... - 03-18-2007 , 05:40 PM

Re: They're baaack... - 03-18-2007 , 05:51 PM

Re: They're baaack... - 03-19-2007 , 03:17 AM

Re: They're baaack... - 03-19-2007 , 04:07 AM

Re: They're baaack... - 03-19-2007 , 04:48 AM

Re: They're baaack... - 03-19-2007 , 05:15 AM

Re: They're baaack... - 03-19-2007 , 06:21 AM

Re: They're baaack... - 03-19-2007 , 07:02 AM

Re: They're baaack... - 03-19-2007 , 07:11 AM

Re: They're baaack... - 03-19-2007 , 07:15 AM