Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

cavallino

Does Alonso Always Crack Under Pressure?

Recommended Posts

And again why not look at the video and see with your own eyes before listening to somebody's words and making any opinion?

Hmmmm it's like sarcasm is the universal language, even in writing. So the response would be - maybe you should try listening to somebody else's information (in this case Ferrari's and Alonso's) before you form an opinion based solely on your own eyes? :whistling:

You want me to watch the video and judge exactly what happened through the video alone and with no other external information whatsoever? Don't you think that is a touch myopic? There are countless times that car failure has looked like a driver mistake and vice versa.

I have seen the video, but I am afraid I cannot see what you're seeing. It seems all you want me to do is look at the video and agree with your point of view, without questioning the logicality of what you're saying.

Are you suggesting that there was a steering failure, but Ferrari covered it up and somehow pursuaded Alonso that it was in his best interests for him to cite a driving mistake as the reason for the accident? Or are you suggesting that there was a steering failure that the team and Alonso still haven't discovered yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine if we all started making sense; they'd have to shut the forum down through inactivity. I'm sure that's why Chris went; he actually started saying stuff that wasn't moustached meanibabble.

Or maybe not but once a thread is started everyone else will just post "I agree", "indeed", "yep", " :thbup: "...thread closed but that said I must say that I rather surprise to see people here saying that my POV on the last case was incorrect, I find it hard to asimilate but probably they think the same about me but I think I am right because I know I am right about what I said about that but once again they probably think the same way which is weird so maybe for some of you this is getting boring but to me is not, is rather interesting to find people who think they are right even when they have what in my opinion is a wrong interpretation of the events, the reason why is this happening it is really irrelevant for the case, besides their reason there must a logic behind that thinking and I would like to find it but at the same time I will defend my position until proven wrong or until I understand the thinking of the other side or course there must be some funny moments in the process :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe not but once a thread is started everyone else will just post "I agree", "indeed", "yep", " :thbup: "...thread closed but that said I must say that I rather surprise to see people here saying that my POV on the last case was incorrect, I find it hard to asimilate but probably they think the same about me but I think I am right because I know I am right about what I said about that but once again they probably think the same way which is weird so maybe for some of you this is getting boring but to me is not, is rather interesting to find people who think they are right even when they have what in my opinion is a wrong interpretation of the events, the reason why is this happening it is really irrelevant for the case, besides their reason there must a logic behind that thinking and I would like to find it but at the same time I will defend my position until proven wrong or until I understand the thinking of the other side or course there must be some funny moments in the process :P

Have you been drinking essence of Ron?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How any overtakes at Monaco can be considered as 'gingerly' is laughable. Did you see how animated Alonso was before he got past his first kill, Di Grassi?

OH MY GOD HE OVERTOOK Da Grassy! MY god it's a miracle, beatify him, the holy blessed Alonso.

When Michael finished fifth in 2006 with a twenty car grid, did you consider it a gingerly drive? Alonso finished one place lower with a twenty four car grid. I thought his driving (especially in light of him having an unfamiliar car) was excellent. He did everything he could.

Don't be ridiculous. Michael actually passed cars, he actually overtook almost everyone he got past on the track, some of them TWICE, and there wasn't a single car on the grid that was as far off the pace as the 6 Alonso actually overtook. I expect more from you Dribs - look beyond the f$cking mathematics of 24 minus 6. You have a video of Monaco 2006? Go watch it, I promise you'll enjoy it.

By the way autosport rated Alonso's performance at Monaco a 5/10 - so may I am not the only one who thinks that way.

I say all of this without the fanatical comparison with Michael obsession that you have developed.

It's not fanatical, it's jsut that poorly researched responses like yours annoy me - 24-6 is greater than 20-6 so Alonso much have done much better - bullsh#t, that's just lazy posting. And it annoys me.

I never said he was better than Michael, you brought Michael up, AGAIN.

I never said anyone's better than anyone, I just said there is no comparison between Michael's 2006 drive at Monaco and Alonso, 2010 Monaco.

Also, why mention Michael's penalty. What the hell does that have to do with the quality of Fernando's drive at Monaco? Michael overtook him, so what? It was contentious circumstances. Alonso was correct, Michael screwed up.

No Alonso fell asleep and Michael overtook him. Disagreeing implies suggesting that drivers should disobey flags on the track - that's ridiculous and dangerous and stupid. That's why for the only time in history the F1 media is positively unanimous in supporting Michael and Mercedes on this issue - saw the latest autosport editorial?

As for the tyres? How the hell do you know how many laps the tyres would have done? Are you a Bridgestone engineer? No, neither am I. Massa had done far less laps on his hards, not that I saw Alonso being particuarly cautious anyway.

Pictures of Alonso's tyres after the race, his lap times, a radio transmission to Massa saying he had zero wear on his tyres. Zero.

The big picture is: it was a battle for 6th place, one team ****ed it up based on an unclear rule, the stewards couldn't do much else besides handling a 20 sec penalty, they moved on, end of story.

WTF? Another attempt at self righteous summing up? If the rule is unclear, how did they **** up? Why are you trying to desperately to have the last word, and yet avoiding all actualy debate on ths issue because you don't have a leg to stand on.

I like p**sing people off. You have to admit yourself its gone on far too long. The answer's always gonna be the same. Damon Hill is now the new Max Mosley. Alonso is Lucifer incarnate and Michael is holier than thou.

Because it's a pretty clear case of who screwed up, any reasonable arugment is going to reach the same conclusion. And Damon put his name on a piece of paper giving a ridiculous judgement, so he can't plead innocence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WTF? Another attempt at self righteous summing up? If the rule is unclear, how did they **** up? Why are you trying to desperately to have the last word, and yet avoiding all actualy debate on ths issue because you don't have a leg to stand on.

The rule was unclear. All teams EXCEPT Mercedes (or all drivers EXCEPT Schumi, pick your victim) chose the interpretation that was deemed right. For an unclear rule, you can't say that opinions were that evenly divided. Apparently it was more unclear to Merc/Schumi/you than for anybody else. But you should know all this already. I guess you actually read the other threads where this was exhaustively argued and you might have noticed that the support for the "Schumi did the right thing" theory is currently only sustained by Schumi, his bathroom's mirror, Stirling Moss and you. And Moss fell down an elevator shaft so he probably is still suffering from concussion :P

Phrases like "self righteous summing up", "trying to desperately have the last word", "avoiding all actualy debate", "you don't have a leg to stand on" don't bring any new argument to the debate, not to mention that they all apply to you, so you either reply to my "self righteous summing up" with something of substance (that wasn't argued against to death...read George's excellent explanation before repeating yourself) or save your sarcasm and snide comments for the next debate. :P

EDIT: Oh, and BTW, I am not expecting to have the final word. That's only of value for you and Tommy for reasons unknown. I replied to your attacks here and at the DoD threads (and my own sarcastic comment on other thread, but that was just because it was soooo tempting! :P) You can have the last say on these 3 threads and say that I didn't reply to whatever you think that wasn't already explained. You can jump around and do a victory dance. Go ahead, indulge yourself! That isn't going to change a thing, as it hasn't changed in the past days and we only come back because of the constant personal attacks. But I found that these sacrcastic posts of mine don't really give me any pleasure so if you think that you won the debate, be my guest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OH MY GOD HE OVERTOOK Da Grassy! MY god it's a miracle, beatify him, the holy blessed Alonso.

Not worthy of a response.

Don't be ridiculous. Michael actually passed cars, he actually overtook almost everyone he got past on the track, some of them TWICE, and there wasn't a single car on the grid that was as far off the pace as the 6 Alonso actually overtook. I expect more from you Dribs - look beyond the f$cking mathematics of 24 minus 6. You have a video of Monaco 2006? Go watch it, I promise you'll enjoy it.

That's still a subjective comparsion. That, and we have no idea how much more difficult it probably is to ovetake the new generation of cars. Implying that Fernando seemingly has less overtaking ability or less motivation than Michael isn't just untrue, it's pretty stupid. Do you believe that Fernando doesn't want to win the title this year then? Why is it that I am able to look at all drivers in an objective way whereas your blind hatred for Alonso clouds you? You have a very good brain, it's a shame that Alonso is inside it, fiddling around.

By the way autosport rated Alonso's performance at Monaco a 5/10 - so may I am not the only one who thinks that way.

I'm not saying you are the only one who thinks that way. But leaning on Autosport is a cheap shot and it proves nothing.

It's not fanatical, it's jsut that poorly researched responses like yours annoy me - 24-6 is greater than 20-6 so Alonso much have done much better - bullsh#t, that's just lazy posting. And it annoys me.

I had to use something as a comparison. You choose to rubbish Alonso, I merely suggested that you are inconsistent in your ability to judge performances because Michael's achievement was lesser. You manipulate the maths however it suits you.

No Alonso fell asleep and Michael overtook him. Disagreeing implies suggesting that drivers should disobey flags on the track - that's ridiculous and dangerous and stupid. That's why for the only time in history the F1 media is positively unanimous in supporting Michael and Mercedes on this issue - saw the latest autosport editorial?

There are two boxers in a ring. The bell sounds to end the round, one of the boxers lowers his guard whilst the other seizes the opportunity and smacks him clean on the nose. Is the boxer who lowered his guard asleep? Is the one who hit him some sort of amazing boxer? No. One of them understands the rules and one of them disobeyed the rules. You are clever enough to understand the analogy.

Pictures of Alonso's tyres after the race, his lap times, a radio transmission to Massa saying he had zero wear on his tyres. Zero.

I would like to see them pictures. Mentioning Massa's tyres is useless. I'm still to be convinced that Alonso was lazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule changes this year made it much easier for Alonso to make his way through the field imho. His early pitstop was only possible because of the no refueling regulations for 2010 and allowed him to lap in free air with fresh tyres. Back in 2006, Schumi had it harder it seems to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule changes this year made it much easier for Alonso to make his way through the field imho. His early pitstop was only possible because of the no refueling regulations for 2010 and allowed him to lap in free air with fresh tyres. Back in 2006, Schumi had it harder it seems to me.

Old hag, you are missing the point.

Look at the title of the thread. Then look at who started it. Then look at his latest post.

Yep. You've got it. It has nothing to do with rules, Alonso, Schumacher, or any some such. It's all about contradiction man going off because... who gives a sht.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmm it's like sarcasm is the universal language, even in writing. So the response would be - maybe you should try listening to somebody else's information (in this case Ferrari's and Alonso's) before you form an opinion based solely on your own eyes? :whistling:

You want me to watch the video and judge exactly what happened through the video alone and with no other external information whatsoever? Don't you think that is a touch myopic? There are countless times that car failure has looked like a driver mistake and vice versa.

I have seen the video, but I am afraid I cannot see what you're seeing. It seems all you want me to do is look at the video and agree with your point of view, without questioning the logicality of what you're saying.

Are you suggesting that there was a steering failure, but Ferrari covered it up and somehow pursuaded Alonso that it was in his best interests for him to cite a driving mistake as the reason for the accident? Or are you suggesting that there was a steering failure that the team and Alonso still haven't discovered yet?

Well I try not to build my logic on somebody's words (taking into account that often what people in F1 say in microphones finally appeares to be not very frank. For example I can recall right away Michael said that his retirement had been provoked by outstanding performance of Alonso:))))). I see lots of judgements are based not only on what f1 guys say but in most cases on what journalists say and on the phrases ripped off by journalists from the contexts. We know nothing what is goin on behind the curtains. My classmate was a pop singer and I read overwhelming lies about her in papaers. Of course it's silly to believe nobody and of course I consider what people say but this time I believe in what I see more than in what people say and in this manner I try to create my opinion

And this time the accident did not look like... it was obvious that there was something wrong with the steering. And it is better not to ignore what you see and try to think logically why. Maybe something got into the front suspension? The investigation results of Barrichello's crash can prompt that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I try not to build my logic on somebody's words (taking into account that often what people in F1 say in microphones finally appeares to be not very frank. For example I can recall right away Michael said that his retirement had been provoked by outstanding performance of Alonso:))))). I see lots of judgements are based not only on what f1 guys say but in most cases on what journalists say and on the phrases ripped off by journalists from the contexts. We know nothing what is goin on behind the curtains. My classmate was a pop singer and I read overwhelming lies about her in papaers. Of course it's silly to believe nobody and of course I consider what people say but this time I believe in what I see more than in what people say and in this manner I try to create my opinion

And this time the accident did not look like... it was obvious that there was something wrong with the steering. And it is better not to ignore what you see and try to think logically why. Maybe something got into the front suspension? The investigation results of Barrichello's crash can prompt that.

I agree that you have to take a lot of what's said in F1/the media, under advisement, but you also have to look at the possible motives behind a statement, etc. In this case, I can't think of a reason for Ferrari/Alonso to mislead us, but I am open to suggestion on that.

However, I think you're coming from a fault that they haven't identified perspective, unless I am mistaken?

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what the reference to Barrichello means, unless you think whatever caused his suspension failure might have happened to Alonso?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what the reference to Barrichello means, unless you think whatever caused his suspension failure might have happened to Alonso?

Yes. I was surprised to know that it was a manhole... heh:) Last year we saw the flying spring. Why can't it be something like that? Ok.. I value Alonso very high but I'm not trying to blindly justify him. I can agree that it was his mistake and maybe I'm agree:))) ...but why can't I be doubtful? And the reason of my suggestions is not just being doubtfull in this case. I have to repeat that his wheels should have turned more than they have provided that the steering wheel was turned completely left. I agree as for the speed in the corner it can look like it was enough for turning... but as for the wheels... they did not respond:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule changes this year made it much easier for Alonso to make his way through the field imho. His early pitstop was only possible because of the no refueling regulations for 2010 and allowed him to lap in free air with fresh tyres. Back in 2006, Schumi had it harder it seems to me.

I agree to some extent, Graham, but if this was the optimal race strategy, why didn't anyone else do the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule was unclear. All teams EXCEPT Mercedes (or all drivers EXCEPT Schumi, pick your victim) chose the interpretation that was deemed right.

And every single creditable journalist or commentator who has expressed a view backed Mercedes, including everyone at autosport for example. I don't know what the fact that noone else tried to voetake prove - none of them tried to overtake in the rest of the face either, when overtaking was allowed.

For an unclear rule, you can't say that opinions were that evenly divided.

Nowhere close. Every credible voice has backed MErcedes.

That's still a subjective comparsion.

There's a difference of 4 years in a series where everyone has different cars, of course it's a subjective comparison. Deosn't make it an invalid ocmparison.

That, and we have no idea how much more difficult it probably is to ovetake the new generation of cars.

It wasn't easy to overtake in 2006 either..

I had to use something as a comparison. You choose to rubbish Alonso, I merely suggested that you are inconsistent in your ability to judge performances because Michael's achievement was lesser. You manipulate the maths however it suits you.

I never use such simplistic mathematics to argue anything either way..

There are two boxers in a ring. The bell sounds to end the round, one of the boxers lowers his guard whilst the other seizes the opportunity and smacks him clean on the nose. Is the boxer who lowered his guard asleep? Is the one who hit him some sort of amazing boxer? No. One of them understands the rules and one of them disobeyed the rules. You are clever enough to understand the analogy.

Bad and invalid analogy.

For example I can recall right away Michael said that his retirement had been provoked by outstanding performance of Alonso:))))).

No he didn't. You imagined it. Go look around and see if you actually find any evidence of him saying it.

Maybe something got into the front suspension? The investigation results of Barrichello's crash can prompt that.

Pixies? They're small and get up to all kinds of mischief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. I was surprised to know that it was a manhole... heh:) Last year we saw the flying spring. Why can't it be something like that? Ok.. I value Alonso very high but I'm not trying to blindly justify him. I can agree that it was his mistake and maybe I'm agree:))) ...but why can't I be doubtful? And the reason of my suggestions is not just being doubtfull in this case. I have to repeat that his wheels should have turned more than they have provided that the steering wheel was turned completely left. I agree as for the speed in the corner it can look like it was enough for turning... but as for the wheels... they did not respond:)

You can be doubtful, that's completely your right to be :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Old hag, you are missing the point.Look at the title of the thread. Then look at who started it. Then look at his latest post.Yep. You've got it. It has nothing to do with rules, Alonso, Schumacher, or any some such. It's all about contradiction man going off because... who gives a sht.

:lol:

Translation: yep, right you are dear late murray (and Cav) but wait... I think... I'm about to _smile_ like Alonso on six tenths of crack.

I agree to some extent, Graham, but if this was the optimal race strategy, why didn't anyone else do the same?

I was wondering that myself tbh. I don't know why they all waited so long since we have such a bizarre rule set this year. But still, maybe they had their reasons - I only meant that Alonso had it easier than Schumi did in 2006 because the rules penalise you less for pitting early this year. So Alonso still might have had a disadvantage relative to the others but nothing like Schumi's in 2006 imho. Going to the back, even at Monaco, seems to hardly disadvantage you at all this year. Although maybe he was also helped by the safety cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys seems to have some kind of super power that I wish I had too...

You guys apparently can exactly separate what was due to luck, what was due to the car conditions and differences to others, what was down to backmakers been nice, to finally come to the final conclusion about which of these two drivers did the best job...

F1 is too complex for me, but apparently is not for you. So you must have a superpower that I miss...

For instance:

- I only meant that Alonso had it easier than Schumi did in 2006 because the rules penalise you less for pitting early this year. So Alonso still might have had a disadvantage relative to the others but nothing like Schumi's in 2006 imho.

One could easily say that in 2006 Ferrari had more flexibility in strategy, as refuel was allowed.

One could also say that backmakers was far slower this year, but still impossible to overtake if they decided so. (They just had to put the car in the middle of the track). In the end, Alonso lost much more seconds behind slower cars...

Or you can consider that the backmakers for one reason or another were more respectful, while last GP they were trying to take advantage of some minutes of popularity, showing they could hold a Ferrari...

In fact, during all MS career all I heard from backmakers was that they did not want to interfere in the WDC...

They simply did not realise that letting him overtake them so easy was also a way to interfere in the WDC...

Just imagine LH in 2007 when he needed just a couple of points more.... Should Williams let him by in such a way to not interfere?

I am not saying Alonso had the easier job. All I am saying is: how the hell can you tell from a sofa in front of a TV????? Maybe (I said maybe) engineers with all telemetry could try to make calculations and come up with some numbers proving which driver did the best. But I dont think they can either, and furthermore, they have more interesting stuff to think about...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you're right, Mr Shields: I was only stating my opinion, rather than a scientifically proven fact. But still, isn't that the point of discussing a sport?

I've often made your point myself actually. One of the big problems with F1 is that the fans know far too little. Each driver has a different car and we have no idea whether the winner of a race actually did the best job. You have this issue in all sports but it's particularly pronounced in F1. Most sports go to considerable lengths to make everything as fair as they can whereas F1 seems to revel in its unfairness.

It seems fairly clear to me, even without doing any calculations, that the rules this year penalise you less for starting at the back than they did before. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[Lots of words]

Damn fine post, sir.

Although I agree partially with Muzza, as well. You always give an opinion, and as such is based on many subjective things. If we only were entitled to give an opinion when 100% sure about what happened, then we should as well close the Forum altogether. That still does not make crappy posts or dumb ideas any smarter, of course :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...That still does not make crappy posts or dumb ideas any smarter, of course :)

Speak for yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys seems to have some kind of super power that I wish I had too...

No, the problem is you have no interest in doing any research, you just post the first thing that comes to your mind, so your opinions are ill informed.

Which of the following have you done:

1) Watched both races with a window showing live timing open right next to the screen.

2) Looked through charts of relevant lap times -you can find lap times for every single driver for every single race, track the difference between two drivers every lap.

3) Looked through lap charts, this is a chart that shows you positions throughout the race - you can pick out overtakes, pit stops etc.

4) Read comments about both races from the best F1 resources available anywhere, written by the best people working in F1 journalism.

5) Listened to or read interviews with the drivers, their team members, team bosses etc.

It's not magic.

One could easily say that in 2006 Ferrari had more flexibility in strategy, as refuel was allowed.

One could, if one was not ignorant. The truth is, Monaco has always been a one stopper because the track is not hard on tyres, and because it's a shorter, slower race. Also that Alonso had the best strategy of all drivers through luck and good judgement, whereas exactly the opposite happened in Monaco 2006, a race you know nothing about.

One could also say that backmakers was far slower this year, but still impossible to overtake if they decided so. (They just had to put the car in the middle of the track).

No. There are limits on what you can do - you can't brake test drivers, you can't weave, you cna't deliberately drive very slowly. Not doing any of that and driving in the middle of the track, you'll get passed easily, even in Monaco.

Or you can consider that the backmakers for one reason or another were more respectful, while last GP they were trying to take advantage of some minutes of popularity, showing they could hold a Ferrari...

Except they weren't. You're just speculating about something you are completely ignorant about.

In fact, during all MS career all I heard from backmakers was that they did not want to interfere in the WDC...

When? How? Who? See that's the problem with the quality of your posts. If you said something like 'Bernoldi said he let DC past in 2001 so that he would not interfere with the championship' (he didn't, he did the opposite, but as a hypothetical example), then you would be stating a verifiable fact that would help the point you're making. 'I remember everyone saying...' doesn't mean much.

I am not saying Alonso had the easier job. All I am saying is: how the hell can you tell from a sofa in front of a TV?????

By engaging your brain, and obviously I do a lot more than just watch races (read above) - I haven't done that much in 2007-09, but for the two relevant races here, I have.

Maybe (I said maybe) engineers with all telemetry could try to make calculations and come up with some numbers proving which driver did the best.

It's not about numbers. And it's not true that anything you can't break down to numbers is something you can't logically argue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are right...

Maybe its my fault.... I shouldnt try to be so objective ... It is a forum for god sake...

:)

But maybe it is the way some forumers write their thoughts as if they were undeniable truths...

Maybe I havent been around for long enough, but I never seen a fanboy writing:

"Although I cannot be sure, and although I realise how special the circumstances were, I still have the feeling that driver A was the best driver ever in F1... Or that driver A did a better job than driver B, regarding backmakers...

Some radical guys even call us idiots for not agreeing, which only shows how insane they are... That is the point where I feel they are not just passing an opinion...

I am sorry... I will try to be less objective from now on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

Because everyone including the FIA admitted the rules were completely unclear. The only people to whom they seem blindingly obvious are you and Andres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because everyone including the FIA admitted the rules were completely unclear. The only people to whom they seem blindingly obvious are you and Andres.

You are right altought I think there are some others who should be included in that list :whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...