129 replies to this topic

[Jean-Pierre]

Best race of the year! What a drive by LH and Vettel.

Shamacher should be penalised for unsportsmanlike conduct, again. He just lost the sympathy he had gain by comming back at such an old age and almost doing good. His move was unacceptable, dangerous and unlike a true world champion. Have you ever seen Button, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel or any other champion act like this? Never.

That is why I say there will always be an asterisk beside his name in the record book.

[HandyNZL]

Jean-Pierre, on 19 November 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

Best race of the year! What a drive by LH and Vettel.

Shamacher should be penalised for unsportsmanlike conduct, again. He just lost the sympathy he had gain by comming back at such an old age and almost doing good. His move was unacceptable, dangerous and unlike a true world champion. Have you ever seen Button, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel or any other champion act like this? Never.

That is why I say there will always be an asterisk beside his name in the record book.

I always thought the asterisk was for spelling mistakes.....

[Peeweev]

Jean-Pierre, on 19 November 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

Best race of the year! What a drive by LH and Vettel.

Shamacher should be penalised for unsportsmanlike conduct, again. He just lost the sympathy he had gain by comming back at such an old age and almost doing good. His move was unacceptable, dangerous and unlike a true world champion. Have you ever seen Button, Hamilton, Alonso, Vettel or any other champion act like this? Never.

That is why I say there will always be an asterisk beside his name in the record book.

HandyNZL, on 19 November 2012 - 06:16 PM, said:

I always thought the asterisk was for spelling mistakes.....

there may well be many asterisks (and even an obelix;) )

[Quiet One]

HandyNZL, on 19 November 2012 - 06:16 PM, said:

I always thought the asterisk was for spelling mistakes.....

And I always thought that asterisks in America were known as Nathan Hales. You know, because of that "I only regret that I have but one asterisk for my country" phrase

[AleHop]

BradSpeedMan, on 19 November 2012 - 07:56 AM, said:

Correction......From Singapore Lewis actually had the best car, it just proves more fragile than the RB. It's Vettel's driving (and I know you're going to disagree...AGAIN) that made the difference also in inheriting a win from Hamilton.

As a matter of fact, Mclaren had the most dominant car for the whole of the season, in the hands of Vettel the season would have been wrapped up by Singapore probably.....

Red Bull always had a very good package from Singapore to be able to fight for the win everywhere. McLaren was very competitive before Singapore but they had reliability problems, faulty pit-stops, etc. That's why Hamilton isn't in the fight.

Red Bull 7 wins
McLaren 6 wins
Ferrari 3 wins
Others 3 wins

I agree McLaren could have already clinched the title if they hadn't made so many mistakes but Vettel wouldn't be in a better position than Hamilton in the same circumstances.

Rainmaster, on 19 November 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

All I can say is the evidence doesn't support this. Yes - there are examples of RB manipulating their drivers, but not to the extent Ferrari have (both in races and now before races), and yes they certainly seem to prefer Vettel winning. Nevertheless, if we look at facts, Webber was supported enough in his 2010 title bid that he was still second in the points, ahead of Vettel, at the final race. Not bad for a number two driver. If Red Bull were favouring Vettel so much, I somehow doubt they would have allowed that to be the case. Truth is, Webber lost his championship by spinning out in the Korean GP of his own accord, and not performing under pressure in Abu Dhabi qualifying where Vettel did. Massa would never have been good enough to fight for the 2010 title with Alonso in the other car, but it doesn't mean every time Ferrari acted against him that season and since then, can be dismissed because "Alonso would have beat him overall anyway". On that logic, we might as well just crown Alonso champion every year, since we all agree he's the best driver. It's still team orders, whether you agree on the justification or not.

I don't think Ferrari acted against Massa. If you read the link I posted before they were very surprised with Massa's performance in Australia and they gave him a new chassis for Malaysia just to be absolutely sure there was nothing wrong in the car. There's nothing Ferrari could have done to help Massa, nothing.

Rainmaster, on 19 November 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

Nah, you can't run a team like that (and Ferrari don't run their team like that or they'd fire Massa). You cannot say one week "move over, kid, the other guy is coming through" and next week complain when the guy you asked to move over underperforms and say "why aren't you indirectly helping your team mate again by beating his title rival when the car is good enough"! It's a simplification: the point is you cannot so easily separate the performance of your driver from the way you treat your driver. Massa is treated as an absolute number two not fit to clean Alonso's shoes, and so ultimately he drives that way and Ferrari have no qualms about continuing to employ him; they know the deal. You cannot separate those three things, that 1) Massa is the worst performing Ferrari driver in 50 years, 2) Ferrari treat Massa as they do, and 3) Ferrari hired Massa again. Three inseparable concepts there that all go together.  

Massa is treated as an absolute number two when he proves he's an absolute number 2. I think Ferrari can ask Massa for much more to be honest. You mean Massa is underperforming because he knows Ferrari won't let him finish ahead of Alonso? I don't think that's the case.

First 8 races Massa's score card: (ret), 15, 13, 9, 15, 6, 10, 16

He earned his number 2 status from race 1 so I don't think it was Ferrari to blame about not giving him equal treatment or whatever. Then there was no choice for them but to support Alonso no matter what, their season could have been an absolute disaster and they are still fighting for the championship.

Rainmaster, on 19 November 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

Webber is not treated as an absolute number two, in his case the preference to Vettel is much more subtle than Ferrari's drivers (doesn't take much), and it's even subtler still (and lately becoming extremely mixed due to Hamilton being p**sed off) at Mclaren. Funnily enough you will notice these gradations of subtlety of team favouritism appear (at least to me) directly proportional to how the teams' two drivers actually compare to each other performance wise (Button being much closer to Hammy's talent than Massa is to Alonso's, and the gap between Webber and Vettel in the middle). As I said above, you could make that a justification for Ferrari treating Massa like dirt, personally I think it's a good argument for letting them race considering that Alonso will win 9/10ths of the time anyway. I digress..

I agree but I have no doubt Ferrari let them race, it's Massa who hasn't been able to make a good enough job for a long time this season. Now he's performing but it's too late so he can only expect a number 2 driver treatment for the remaining of the season.

Rainmaster, on 19 November 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

I think we need some of that perspective stuff here. Vettel was 12 points ahead in the championship during 'wing-gate'; the wing seemed to make barely any difference to laptime (Webber's estimate: 1 tenth); Webber won the race with the old wing anyway. He's always been a driver who performed badly under pressure and blew hot and cold (like Massa) but tended to not take being kicked lying down and perform better in that situation (unlike Massa).

I agree the wing decision may well have been more insulting to Webber than the gearbox to Massa (based on their respective comments), although again I think it's more the case that Massa is a doormat and used to this whereas Webber wouldn't put up with it. I'm talking more from a sporting POV not a team one, like I said before and contrary to what this post might suggest, I don't really have too much of an issue with team orders (my main issue is when people deny their existence, say every team is completely equal with them, or simply deny their consequences on drivers by reducing them to robots). This [gearbox penalty] was worse than the wing change because it 1) exploited a loophole so blatantly for the advantage of a driver, and 2) affected other drivers outside of the team. Worth saying again, no real issue with Ferrari here, more an issue with the rules/FIA.

I wouldn't like Ferrari treating Massa as a number 2 driver if he's doing a good job in the championship. That was the case with Webber and Red Bull, there was no need for taking his front wing for Vettel when both drivers were fighting for the title. If that isn't tasteless...

Rainmaster, on 19 November 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

I don't care what Massa says, unless it happens to support my argument But you should care because Massa is occasionally doing a generous, thankless job for Alonso and the team and he is doing it with grace, without stirring up controversy. I hope Alonso appreciates that even if his fans don't, I'm sure he does, actually. One day he might not have it so sweet. And don't even bring the "he gets a nice pay cheque so I don't feel bad for him" argument (not that I do). All the drivers in top teams get paid without having to face the stuff Massa does.

Massa stirred controversy as much as he could in Hockenheim 2010. There's no controversy to stir at the moment even if they put him in a red painted HRT.   I'm sure Ferrari and Alonso are grateful but they expect much more from him.

Rainmaster, on 19 November 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

Well, the underlined isn't true In fact, for Massa to get better results than Alonso he not only has to drive the car slightly better than Alonso (like Button does in Mclaren with Hamilton or to a greater extent Webber has to with Vettel in Red Bull), he has to drive it so that he has at least one car between himself and Alonso. Considering Alonso's talents, that would require Massa to drive...like a god to keep his results? Tough standard there.

I think any competent driver can beat his teammate no matter how good he may be. The hard job is doing it on a regular basis. Once a driver has earned in a season his #1 or #2 status it's very difficult to change that, Massa achieve such a difficult task in 2008 and Ferrari won't make him fail if he shows his talent of the past.

Rainmaster, on 19 November 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

Yes, I agree Massa isn't in the title, I'll give you that. I understand Ferrari re-hiring him perfectly, they like him because he is placid and does not make a fuss out of his situation the way Webber has in the past and like Barrichello did. Again, you would not find Red Bull re-hiring Webber if his results were like Massa's, and that's a fact. This all comes back to the difference in the way those teams are run and I can say that without vilifying Alonso or Ferrari, or on the other hand exonerating Red Bull or Vettel (and I think that's the main misunderstanding here and a failure on my part).

I agree, that was a failure on your part.

[Massa]

The race got a .42 TV rating on SPEED in the U.S.  Someone said that was about 500,000 viewers, though my math calls it 630,000.  That's a very typical rating for F1 on SPEED.  Conclusion?  This race did nothing to draw up interest in the U.S.  Fortunately for F1, they're just fine without us.

For perspective, the NASCAR race got a 3.5.  A typical IndyCar race gets a 0.2.  So, F1 is more popular than IndyCar, at least.

[HandyNZL]

Nastycar is on the main networks though isn't it?  Annnnnd, it was the final race....might be different next year on the NBC?

[Massa]

NASCAR is on ESPN, which is cable and often in the same tier as SPEED.

When F1 is on FOX, it gets a 0.8 to a 1.1, so yeah, on NBC, it will get around there.  On NBCSN, it has a risk of doing worse than a 0.4.

Anyway, these TV numbers don't matter a ton.  Just have enough of us to sustain a race or two and that's fine, I'd think.  As long as that "or two" means a revival of all these failed New Jersey dreams...

[HandyNZL]

And bear in mind that Nastycar is for all intents and purposes a North American only broadcast, whereas F1 is hands down global in comparison.  Just so long as there are bums on seats, Austin GP will survive.  No one in F1 will really give a rats about the actual US coverage figures (totally made up as they are anyway by the TV people to generate ad income)

[Massa]

HandyNZL, on 21 November 2012 - 04:27 AM, said:

And bear in mind that Nastycar is for all intents and purposes a North American only broadcast, whereas F1 is hands down global in comparison.  Just so long as there are bums on seats, Austin GP will survive.  No one in F1 will really give a rats about the actual US coverage figures (totally made up as they are anyway by the TV people to generate ad income)

Yep.