curiouswanderer
Expert Member
I was hoping F1 had everything to do with race - but we know its not about real racing anymore![]()
hehe...unintended pun there...
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
I was hoping F1 had everything to do with race - but we know its not about real racing anymore![]()
But if you ain't white then you are ..... ????.
Also "Coloured" is an apartheid definition and besides he is from the UK and not S.A.
Get your definitions right.
[OUPA]MrNutz;1060577 said:Mclaren should receive the penalty..
Ron CLEARLY said that they decided ALONSO should win.
So even if HAMILTON would set the fastest lap time , and push ALO the whole race , it would be a waste because he "wasn't allowed" to win.
IF H is faster than A , but A is selected for position 1 , how can H get 1.
not possible!
race rigged.
Ah tibby.dude ! tell me is there anything that can be discussed without you bringing race into it !!! Its got sweet f.ck all to do with race its about money !!!
Its got sweet f.ck all to do with race its about money !!!
Yip, why take a chance of having your cars take themselves out when trying to pass each other when you've got a definate first and second place. First and second place equals big money for the team.
I don't like Alonso and would have rather had Hamilton win but what Dennis did was the best I think. If this was any other race I believe he would have told them to go for it.
Monaco is not the place to have scraps at.
Yip, why take a chance of having your cars take themselves out when trying to pass each other when you've got a definate first and second place. First and second place equals big money for the team.
I don't like Alonso and would have rather had Hamilton win but what Dennis did was the best I think. If this was any other race I believe he would have told them to go for it.
Monaco is not the place to have scraps at.
think he's referring to tibby's comments that Hamilton was not allowed to challenge Alonso cos of racism.
I agree, but it's sad, isn't it? I don't see why they shouldn't just scrap monaco
I hear you, its one of those very technical tracks... and winning pole doesn't guarantee you won't clip the wall. But it's not exactly side by side racingI know. He said it's because of the money. I'm agree with his statement by saying what I said.
The money they get from a one-two win justifies (in their eyes mind you) NOT taking a chance on a racecourse notorious for no overtaking and high speeds through narrow streets.
Weirdly enough, I actually like Monaco.Who ever wins pole basically wins the race at the end of the day. But I like it all the same. Don't know why.
![]()
The full statement from the FIA
Wednesday, May 30th 2007, 13:42 GMT
Full statement from the FIA following the investigation of McLaren's one-two finish at the Monaco Grand Prix:
Having studied the radio traffic between Vodafone McLaren Mercedes (McLaren) and its drivers, together with the FIA observer's report and data from the team, it is clear that McLaren's actions during the 2007 Monaco Grand Prix were entirely legitimate and no further action is necessary.
The facts
1. A two-stop strategy is the optimum at Monaco unless the safety car is deployed, in which case one-stop can sometimes be better.
2. The safety car has been deployed during four of the past five Monaco Grands Prix.
3. Under current rules the choice between a one-stop and two-stop strategy must be made before the final qualifying period.
4. It is clear from FIA measurements taken after qualifying that McLaren fuelled Hamilton for five more laps than Alonso.
5. This allowed Hamilton the option of a one-stop strategy should the safety car have come out during his first stint.
6. The safety car was not deployed.
7. The McLaren was significantly faster at Monaco than any other car.
Background
The primary objective of any team is for one of their drivers to win. If this can be achieved they will try to ensure their other car finishes second.
With no safety car during Alonso's first stint, there was a small but finite risk that it would come out during the five laps before Hamilton had to refuel. This would have put him behind the field and at a significant disadvantage to any car on a full (as opposed to optional) one-stop strategy. The latter cars would be expected to refuel around lap 40 - ie after the safety car had pitted if it came out during Hamilton's extra laps.
For similar reasons Hamilton was called in early for his second pit stop, thus assuring his second place, with or without a safety car.
Had the car in front of Hamilton not been his teammate, McLaren might (probably would) have decided to risk the safety car and let Hamilton run for as long as his fuel load allowed in the hope that he would come out of the pits in the lead after one of his pit stops. There is, however, no obligation on them to take this risk in order to overtake their own car. Indeed it would be foolish to do so.
It is standard procedure for a team to tell its drivers to slow down when they have a substantial lead. This is in order to minimise the risk of technical or other problems. It is also standard practice and entirely reasonable to ask the drivers not to put each other at risk.
McLaren were able to pursue an optimum team strategy because they had a substantial advantage over all other cars. They did nothing which could be described as interfering with the race result.
thankfully logic prevails...
Now I hear rumours of Hamilton leaving, if he does he is bloody ungrateful.
thankfully logic prevails...
Now I hear rumours of Hamilton leaving, if he does he is bloody ungrateful.
Yip linked to Ferrari but the story seems to have disappeared now![]()
thankfully logic prevails...
Now I hear rumours of Hamilton leaving, if he does he is bloody ungrateful.
In Kimi's case it was understandable, he had bad luck through the season and McLaren sucked balls. Horrible reliability and (from their previous standards) a horrible car overall.