2 years ago in 2006, Ferrari was the back row yet somehow turned it into a 5th and 9th place finish. This puzzles me beyond believe.
You're watching a British television company broadcasting to a British audience and British fans, why wouldn't they concentrate on the British drivers? If you don't like that watch some other country's broadcast.
I posted in this thread: http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=199073&page=3 But it seems that all the regulars have congregated here. I pose a question: why be so harsh on Kimi? How many people here have raced? Out of how many of you has something gone wrong on the car, in the pits, etc that is completely out of your control? And of those, how many of you have just wanted to stuff the ***** into the armco just to get the day over with because its gone from bad to worse? What I posted: Not a mention as to HOW Sutil got into 4th place. Passing under yellow. The stewards called him in to reprimand him post-race. Well good race from the man, but if you want to start counting "well, what ifs" then suppose Ferrari had Kimi's tyres on in time. Suppose Kimi and Massa were put on dries instead of intermediates. Blah blah blah. You know who lost the race for Kimi and Massa? Ferrari. Anyone who wants to blast Kimi, think about a few things: DC's huge shunt during practice in the same place, only in the dry, and he DIDN'T SAVE IT. Kimi wrangled in a car pitched 8 ways fcuked at 170 mph after almost 2 hours of torture. Consider: Ferrari problems getting heat into tyres on out-laps. Slow, inexperienced driver in front of him (c'mon, Lady Luck got Sutil up there). IT WAS A RACING INCIDENT!!!! Those who said this is the best thing to happen to Sutil, long term, are 100% correct. Also, Kimi manned up and apologized, sympathized with him, and Sutil even commended him for his sportsmanship. Nothing scripted from the PR machine like Hamilton (who drove an amazing race, except the time he blew his rear wheel apart. DAMN i thought it was game over right then!). Massa drove a great race in the end finishing 3rd, but realistically, he didn't have many issues and no drive-through penalty, and WAS getting his ass handed to him throughout the race by Kubica. And started on pole. It was bloody good racing though. Most exciting Monaco race in 10 years! With this I end: Why so harsh on EITHER of Ferrari's drivers? Its quite clear that Ferrari as a TEAM lost the race for its drivers. Kimi got the worst of it, but like last season, Felipe's been there too. I'd like to add that watching replays of the incident, Kimi gave Sutil a ton of room, he braked well early showing me that he was of course aware of the lack of performance and wasn't trying to press the issue of a pass or anything. Just a real sh*tty racing incident because of a completely unpredictable track. In fact, in the slow-motion replay, you can see Sutil and other cars get out of line in the same spot, but perhaps due to Kimi braking earlier there was more force biting the brakes, allowing the rear to lock up where as if you braked later, the force biting the brake at the wet spot would not have been enough to lock it up. We can really dissect the incident, or we can go around being ignorant because it makes for better internet fights.
In comparison, I find it very interesting after being at the Historics a couple weekends ago, that there were no track issues like at this one - the comments about them getting out of line at the same spot, etc. Perhaps it may be that those guys driving the one of a kind cars are far better drivers - not to mention the racing too. Carol
It would be a great race if he started 14th and ended up 3rd. Going from pole to 3rd at Monaco, of all places, losing position by being passed, is NOT a great race. It is a forgettable one.
I'm still absolutely pissed for the tire/3 minutes rule thing. Ferrari is one of the most professional teams on the grid and they let this rookie mistake happen to the reigning F1 World Champion, that's just disgraceful and disrespectful. Ferrari of all team should know who vital 1 point is after last season and they certainly cost Kimi a couple this weekend. They didn't exactly help out Felipe either.
Pit rotation. When Hamilton tagged the armco, the team spent 9.0 sec loading him up with fuel. Then he ran for 48 laps. When Ferrari decided to copy McLaren, they spent 11.7 sec loading up Felipe. He came out behind Lewis, heavy. Then Phil only ran 23 laps before they brought him back in for tires. (And spend 8.8 sec just changing tires -- which let Kubica by.) The worst part was that the heavy fuel load not only kept Massa from keeping up with Lewis, but blocked Kubica (who stayed on a 2-stop) from catching up Lewis, too. Hamilton had a lot of ground to make up on heavy fuel after his first stop, but the first SC period gave him back the pit time -- somewhere around a 25-30 sec advantage, including in/out. And Ferrari *knew* Lewis had gotten a freebie from the SC, and *still* decided to abandon their strategy to copy McLaren. Must'a been a heckova party, the night before, judging from the hang-overs the strategists must have had.
It wasn't like they forgot about the 3:00 minute rule. Kimi stated that they were one of the firsts to put their tires on, but there was a problem with the wheel, and by the time they got the tire on it was past the 3:00 minute mark. Felipe going from pole to 3rd isn't nearly as bad as what could have happened. Granted he did make a mistake, but so did most everyone. Ferrari's strategy just wasn't there this weekend and that is what caused the 3/9 result. Had they not given Felipe a 1 stop strategy, he may have won, or at least got 2nd. At the worst of the weather, he was driving the best, you can't deny that. I don't blame either of the drivers, I think they both did a great job. Can't always be perfect, sometimes stuff just doesn't go as planned (Kovalainen). They'll bounce back and be strong at Montreal like they more often than not are.
^^ Last 2 posts are great. Some common sense and clarity. Most of the time people just look at a driver's final position and then blame HIM for that finish.
Does anyone know about how long between Hamilton passing pit-out and Massa emerging from his first stop? Speed TV managed to be in a commercial break for both of Massa's pit stops (and Hamilton's 2nd stop, too). Looking at the left-over commentary on f1-live, it showed Hamilton 1.3 s ahead of Massa on lap 36, after Felipe's first stop on lap 33. But I figure that changing the strategy added between three and four sec to Phil's stop. (A lap or so before the stop, Hamilton set fast lap, and then Massa re-set it.) If Ferrari had stuck to the original strategy, Massa would have come out of his first stop with a similar fuel load to Hamilton, but with fresh tires. But would Phil have come out behind Lewis, or in front? (You should'a seen the one that got away. ) (But then, it looks like Felipe's tire-only stop on 56 was more than a sec longer than Lewis' tire+fuel stop on 54, so Lewis might have taken it on pit stops anyway.)
Did you honestly expect anything else? I really don't think we should be bashing Massa or Raikkonen, maybe Kimi a little bit. Ferrari didn't exactly help our drivers too much this weekend, even with the driver mistakes we should have had 2 drivers on the podium.
have you watched it at all ?? DGS was spot on with his analysis and just highlights how little you know except that your bet looks like it's going south LH, drove a good race with what was handed to him, nothing spectacular but good honest lap times, while RK and FM copped the sticky end of the decisions for the day
I 'd give his post's more credit ,if or when he ever stop's trying to take away the shine of whatever Lewis does on the track, ie Ferrari handed him the race , lucky, saftey car and etc, he wasnt saying that when the 2nd SC car come out .. I dont dislike Massa but that sure doesnt help... At the end of the day when you look in the history book's it doesnt have a post note next to it saying , oh Massa could have won this IF Ferrari ..had..etc, just the result's.
I didn't realise he said Lewis was rubbish, I don't think any of them are rubbish....quite the contrary, they are all very good, even the ones people here criticise for buying their way in. You put these "heroes" on this forum in a car that weighs less than 600kg with 800+ HP and put them on a wet track and all they'll do is go 'round in circles All these guys are racing for positions on the marbles occasionally in the wet in the fastest cars around a closed circuit and some people bag them ?? And what is so strange about LH's style of driving that Bridgestone said his car alone needed to do 3 pit stops at Turkey ? That suggests a style that is not smooth enough to make tyres last long enough for a 2 stop strategy
Right on. I remember when Ferrari was not good on the Bridgestones but MS made those thing look unused after 20 laps. It is amazing what some drivers can do to overcome shortcomings such as tires not holding up because of the chassis. LH is having trouble with that but his driving is still good.
Only a total plank, would say he is rubbish....he aint perfect who is , but last year he was getting bashed for being that, ie a robot. Agreed ,he does appear hard on his tyre's.
That's the way it played out. I don't have the brit commentators "shining" me on. When you have to pit first, that puts you about 30 sec back. If the opposition can take advantage of a clear track up front and put down fast laps, you're toast. *BUT* if the SC comes out between your stop and your opponent's, that 30 sec evaporates, and you're, in effect, 30 sec ahead of where you should be. Then, when the opposition pits, they drop back 30 sec -- to where you were before the SC moved you forward. (Plus or minus fast laps) That's the "luck" that Lewis got. Lewis was a distant 2nd before his stop, 4th after his stop, and 1st after the pit rotations. That came from (a) SC, (b) Kimi's drive-thru, and (c) Massa's 11.7s pause in the pits. Lewis was running some fast laps around 30-32. But so was Phil. Without the SC, there's no way those laps were fast enough to leapfrog over both Kubi and Phil. Lewis was ahead of Kubica before his stop. In a normal rotation, you'd expect him to be ahead after the stop (plus or minus fast laps). Lewis got a 30 sec boost from the SC, and still only beat Kubi in the rotation by roughly two or three seconds. That 28 sec or so time loss came of having to carry the extra fuel load. But that early stop came from hitting the armco. But Ferrari inflicted the same kind of weight penalty on Massa, and then didn't have a way to benefit from it. Put the shine where it's due. Was it Lewis or McLaren that won that race? (And Ferrari botching their strategy contributed quite a lot, too.) Lewis has run some very good drives. He did a good job here. But it wasn't his driving alone that won this one. Hamilton has out-driven Massa at times. This wasn't one of them. Objectively, Massa's drive was just a bit better than Hamilton's: Phil's off didn't damage his car, and his fast laps before his first stop were just a hair quicker than Hamilton's. (Kimi lost his nose going off on the same corner as Massa --- but Phil might have remembered Shumi pulling a similar escape road U-turn on that corner in a wet Monaco race in '97. ) (The second SC period was after everyone's pit stops. On another track, having the opponent catch up in a SC period would make for a possible pass at the end. But at Monaco, with a single dry line, that second SC period didn't help anybody who was already on the lead lap.)
I have one sitting in my garage. An S&W dragster with a 509 Chevy. Oh...sorry...I am mistaken....It has 1,100 horsepower...
That's your take, it's not one I totally disagree with, but there's alway's a BUT and a "if "this and that, it make's no odd's as with the Turkey GP, oh he was fueled light!! the car he was driving was not as fast as the ferrari's yet he got a result, it's a team effort. At the end of the day it doesn't matter, however he did it he did it, fact remain's he started 3rd finished 1st, Massa started 1st finished 3rd.
