FORMULA 1™ ING MAGYAR NAGYDIJ GRAND PRIX 2008

To be honest Kimi did nothing until Alonso´s second stop. Then all of a sudden he seemed to wake up. If he had driven like that all race, he may have got second or possibly even a win. I don´t recall him trying a single move on Alonso, I may be wrong. Considering how much quicker the Ferrari is to the Renault and how Kimi is fighting for the championship, you would´ve expected Kimi to be a lot closer to Alonso and trying the odd move every now and again. Even if he didn´t get passed, at least it would´ve looked as though he tried, and maybe forced Alonso into an error.

I was really gutted for Massa, he so deserved that win. Glock was brilliant, I was expected him to be way lighter then everyone in the top 8 and end up 7th or 8th, but the guy did well. Toyota certainly seem on good form at the minute.

I would say Mclaren still have an edge on Ferrari, then it´s BMW (desite todays race) then Toyota, Renault, Redbull. That´s how I expect it to finish at least.

gav Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Joe_Satriani Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ferrari has usually been faster than McLaren in
> > race trim. The only race where this wasn't the
> > norm was Hockenheim. We have to discount the
> rain
> > races, since the pace becomes more
> responsability
> > of the driver than the car.
>
> I don't think it's more the responsibility of the
> driver as such. In rain mechanical grip is
> everything. Say if you've got a 5% advantage in
> mechanical grip in dry conditions, then in the wet
> it becomes a 50% advantage. All of a sudden,
> aerodynamic downforce is insignificant, and it's
> all about getting traction out of the corners.
>
> Certain drivers can take advantage of that more
> than others, but the effect of the driver is much
> less than I feel a lot give credit for.
>
> A good example is Spain '96. Not many would have
> put Alesi (a supposed wet weather specialist) down
> as being more than a minute slower than
> Schumacher. Schumacher was great, and it's rightly
> seen as one of the best drives of all time, but
> was he really 1 minute better than Alesi and
> Villeneuve?


Or Brazil '96, Schumi was nowhere in Brazil and Hill was totally dominant in the rain in that race but come the Spanish GP it was the other way round. Having confidence with the cars grip and traction makes all the difference. If a car is not set up right for the wet it cannot be fast no matter how good the driver is.

chet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In all honest it doesnt look like its the
> equipment! The engine failure was probably just
> random.. Its about time Ferrari had an engine
> problem, though its quite funny as rare as they
> are they often come at the worst times or best
> depending on who you like

dam you chet

but in a way its true with what you're saying. Last time we got an engine failure was Suzuka '06 and at the crucial point in the championship. Ferrari have got to get their engine working to its maximum by changing and gaining a couple of horsepower through engine development (Renault and Alonso?) and power forwards, because right now kimi keeps getting a bad setup every race meaning he's not there to support Felipe when he has a stronger hand.

I also think Ron Dennis will never ever say "No, heikki will not be supporting Lewis but winning the race," because his main championship contender went out and gained itty bitty points

Didn't both Ferraris retire in Melbourne with an engine failure? Technically it was down to something in the electronics, but still.

Regarding Kimi, he was never going to overtake Alonso unless Alonso made a mistake. The team could have short filled him, but they didn't.

He showed he still had a leading pace as soon as he was released. It was just his qualifying that let him down.

n00binio Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> in line with peter watson i´ll call things like
> liberalism an idea. and such ideas are invented by
> mankind. as mankind itself ideas go through a
> process of evolution. such ideas are not static
> cause the needs of mankind change. let´s take
> you´re liberalism example: originally liberty
> could mean to be able to go whereever you want /
> that no person owns another one. today we could
> say liberalism means beeing able to utter your
> opinion freely or freedom of religion. these two
> expressions of the same idea are strongly linked
> but obviously there is a difference between the
> two. the need of not beeing owned by another
> person was fulfilled so other needs are in the
> foreground (hierarchy of needs). this is a flowing
> process and nobody is saying "from now on
> liberalism means ...".
> it´s the same with patriotism: you´re right of
> course when you name napoleon etc... they were
> patriotic. but as i said many countries are now
> built up on the same values. so that direct clash
> of two different systems of values is not possible
> today. the feeling of loving your nation is still
> there but the original ways of uttering it have
> vanished. so people search for alternatives and
> supporting /identifying with countrymen and women
> in competitions against other countries in times
> of win and defeat is a means of showing pride for
> your nation. you don´t hide but stand up and show
> everybody where your from and that you´re proud
> of beeing part of that certain nation. therefore
> it is a expression of patriotic feelings

Hogwash...

> so you want to say what all the historians do is
> senseless? nobody wants a 100% answer. if you have
> a deeper understanding of a process you can at
> least say what is possible and what is not
> possible. the only thing i wanted to show with
> this question is that it is difficult to say in
> what way events that are more linked to money than
> patriotic feelings influence events like a
> revolution.
> there´s a saying that puts the point out, i hope
> i translated it correctly: why strive for a noble
> aim if a lower motif is perfectly obvious.

No, I am telling you, as a historian, what history is, and what history is not.

... you really didn't read my post at all did you? This is pointless...

---

It's only after we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything.

Morbid schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------

> ... you really didn't read my post at all did you?

well, only because i don´t share your point of view does not mean that i didn´t understand or even read your previous post

> This is pointless...

now that is right, i don´t think that we´ll come to an agreement.

but i really wonder in what way such a comment as mine can lead to such a discussion. im quite happy that it happened, always a pleasure to talk to intelligent persons. (no sarcasm - to make it clear)

Has anyone noticed how when Massa was going for the 1st pitstop, Mclaren pitcrew came out as well, and went immediately back. No, it wasn't a pitstop bug ala GP4, it was probbably a bluff to make Ferrari think Hamilton was coming in.
They've done it before in Magnycours with Renault and Wurz called their bluff when doing play by play for Austrian TV.

---

GPGSL career;
Current team: Team ShadowSubaru, Previous teams: MPR, Minardi
starts:100 Wins: 12, Podiums: 34, Fastest Laps: 14, poles: 12 Points: 708
winner of Belgian GP (s1), Australian GP (s1), Canadian GP (S1), Brazilian GP(s4, s5), Hungarian GP(s3), Italian GP(s3), French GP (s5,s7), Monaco GP (s4) and USA GP

Jordan did it, or had it done to them in Indy one year - 2001 perhaps. That's the first time I remember such a move.

That said, it could just be that they were marginal on fuel and only decided at the last minute that they could do another lap. Ferrari were all out before the McLaren guys ventured out anyway, so as bluffs go, it would have been a pretty poor one.

I think the scene was, camera showing the pitlane, Macca guys being out and going in, and then moments after we saw Massa coming in. So it appeared Mclaren's pitcrews stood their for a while.

---

GPGSL career;
Current team: Team ShadowSubaru, Previous teams: MPR, Minardi
starts:100 Wins: 12, Podiums: 34, Fastest Laps: 14, poles: 12 Points: 708
winner of Belgian GP (s1), Australian GP (s1), Canadian GP (S1), Brazilian GP(s4, s5), Hungarian GP(s3), Italian GP(s3), French GP (s5,s7), Monaco GP (s4) and USA GP

Nah, just looked back, and the Macca crew only started coming out once the Ferrari guys were there... and immediately turned around and went back again.

Ah, OK. Would love to hear what they were saying/thinking though.

---

GPGSL career;
Current team: Team ShadowSubaru, Previous teams: MPR, Minardi
starts:100 Wins: 12, Podiums: 34, Fastest Laps: 14, poles: 12 Points: 708
winner of Belgian GP (s1), Australian GP (s1), Canadian GP (S1), Brazilian GP(s4, s5), Hungarian GP(s3), Italian GP(s3), French GP (s5,s7), Monaco GP (s4) and USA GP

Probably something like... "Did he say go out now? Yes! ... Wait, no".

---

K*bots UK, specialist providers of 'fun science' Curriculum Enhancement days for Primary and Secondary schools in Britain.
Please find us on [en.wikipedia.org] for more information.

Or maybe just maybe they were going for the bluff , then they noticed Massa was going in anyway, and it wasn't neccessary. That's my story and I'm sticking to it

---

GPGSL career;
Current team: Team ShadowSubaru, Previous teams: MPR, Minardi
starts:100 Wins: 12, Podiums: 34, Fastest Laps: 14, poles: 12 Points: 708
winner of Belgian GP (s1), Australian GP (s1), Canadian GP (S1), Brazilian GP(s4, s5), Hungarian GP(s3), Italian GP(s3), French GP (s5,s7), Monaco GP (s4) and USA GP

actually thi is not new at all, i saw it back in 2000 Ferrari did it and it did worked out, can't remember the race but i do remmebr the guys coming out and then going back in...

as usual, Mclaren just copied Ferrari, but that is not new at all...

Slash Wrote:

> today's race reminded me of Shumacher's 2003 at
> Monza, not that i'm comparing them both, obviously
> i rate Schumachers a lot more, but it was pretty
> muhc the same, beating the competition in what it
> seems to be bit of a lower equipment

that was the race where a couple of days earlier the FIA changed the tyre rules so michelin had to build a new tire with new width. previous to that montoya looked like he was going to win the championship, but once the rules changed, the ferrari and schumacher had the upper hand, and that is what won schumacher the championship, otherwise it was montoyas or kimis. that tire rule change pretty much gifted schumacher the win at monza as he was in the best bridgestone equipped car, and the michelin equiped cars all had to use tires with new dimensions for the last 3 races.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/04/2008 09:39PM by Locke Cole.

dkpioe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Slash Wrote:
>
> > today's race reminded me of Shumacher's 2003 at
> > Monza, not that i'm comparing them both,
> obviously
> > i rate Schumachers a lot more, but it was
> pretty
> > muhc the same, beating the competition in what
> it
> > seems to be bit of a lower equipment
>
> that was the race where a couple of days earlier the FIA
> changed the tyre rules so michelin had to build a
> new tire with new width. previous to that montoya
> looked like he was going to win the championship,
> but once the rules changed, the ferrari and
> schumacher had the upper hand, and that is what
> won schumacher the championship, otherwise it was
> montoyas or kimis. that tire rule change pretty
> much gifted schumacher the win at monza as he was
> in the best bridgestone equipped car, and the
> michelin equiped cars all had to use tires with
> new dimensions for the last 3 races.


let me remind you a little bit, THE MICHELIN runners still had the upper hand, and the BMW Williams where unstoppable!, or take a look at Barrichello's race, in a place where he knows how to do really well...

MIchael was the only one who challengued and beat the opposition that race, his race was the best i've sen from him, he destroyed the opposition and humilliated Montoya to a point where the guy started blaming Frentzen and dind't talk to anybody after that, and then at Indy the Michelin's where in front as well, or remember Shumy qualifying 6 or something?, there was no chance he could've beat them, but then the rain fell and Schumi again beated the opposition.. THAT gave him teh championship... because in Suzuka the Michelins where the better tyre again, and teh qualy made Schumacher started last!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/04/2008 09:40PM by Locke Cole.

Bridgestone's where better in the wet at Indy 2003 no question. If it hadn't rained then Schumi may very well not have been the champ.

Also the timing of the Michelin tyre saga did affect the performance of the Michelin shod teams, they had to change the design and were unable to test those tyres until the Monza GP.

Renault have also pulled off the pitcrew trick a few times, with success as well.

Well just seen the gp as i was away at the weekend.

Was nothing special, feel bad for massa who done everything right. You could see kimi's car bouncing really bad in the last 4 laps looks like something broke.

Well done Kovy for the win was lucky but sometimes u need that.

Well done Glock as well good race pace.

Kimi could not really do much more than he did, its so hard to pass.

Bad luck for lewis in this race but did well to get 5th.