As soon as Rosberg served his stop-go and actually came off for the better, did you notice how the commentators got very close to suggesting he hadn't served the full ten seonds? If he had come out behind Hamilton, it never would have been mentioned; it ws kind of like Brundle suggesting Alonso brake-tested Hamilton when Hamilton ran into him at Bahrain as soon as it happened, even though Renault's telemetry showed Alonso never slowed.
In short, the BBC commentary can't come soon enough.
I can't tell the difference between the two as they sound a little similar, but Brundle is defiantely the better of the two, even if only because he was a racer himself. I'm still disgusted with Allen for likening Hamilton's performance at Monaco to Senna because there's no replacement for the Brazilian, and I believe one man has ever come close to a drive worthy of being likened to him: Sebastian Vettel at Monza. In the wet, in a car that is not known to be competitive (until Vettel got his hands on it), on the fastest circuit in the championship and constantly under threat from the faster cars is something worthy of Senna. Winning after twenty minutes' rain on a circuit that is known and notorious for processional racing does not make for a Senna-like drive.I'll say that Allen is unbearable though at times, point in case - his "OMGZ BEST PASS EVER!" comment when Hamilton went past Coulthard, or his repeating of the same line over and over, e.g. his line "this reminds me of Long Beach" at Valencia.
Somebody at Ferrari needs to be fired. First they didn't refuel Massa in Canada, then his engine blows in hungary, now... this stupid digital lollypop thing. I think now they have sucessfully taken his champioship.
Good job Ferrari 👍
He's simply too aggressive.
I'm still disgusted with Allen for likening Hamilton's performance at Monaco to Senna because there's no replacement for the Brazilian, and I believe one man has ever come close to a drive worthy of being likened to him: Sebastian Vettel at Monza.
No, I'm saying that long dives down the inside on a dangerous part of the track are irresponsible. Sure, Hamilton's favourite tactic is to cross them and frce the other driver to take the corner wide and recover in time to beat them in the drag-race out of the corner, but he did it to Webber in Italy and they both went off ... what would have happened if he and Coulthard had touched?Okay so based on your quote no one should overtake unless there is a gap the width of the track or maybe everyone should just qualify and then we can call it the end of the race weekend and give the points.
Alonso.
<3
Have you noticed how Fisichella has gone from last to first, then back to last?
And yet you admire Senna? One of the single most agressive drivers the sport has ever seen, a man who deliberatly took a competitor off the track to ensur ehe won the world championship!No, I'm saying that long dives down the inside on a dangerous part of the track are irresponsible. Sure, Hamilton's favourite tactic is to cross them and frce the other driver to take the corner wide and recover in time to beat them in the drag-race out of the corner, but he did it to Webber in Italy and they both went off ... what would have happened if he and Coulthard had touched?
Maybe it was just that everyone else who caught someone at that corner had a faster car than the other, but they had pulled alongside the other driver long before Hamilton caught up with Coulthard.
Massa, Alonso and KR make starts as agresivly as Hamilton does, and MS made the lot of them look liek rank amaturs when it comes to aggresive starts.Maybe it's just because Hamilton has a history of aggressive starts and passing moves when everyone else is much cleaner.
I think we may be getting a little closer to it now.Maybe it's because I just don't like the kid and think he's an arrogant little four-letter-word-that-will-be-blocked-by-the-swear-filter
Um thats much more a product of the press than it is of Hamilton itself. So he races with similar colours to Senna on his helmet, because he admired him as a driver.for violating the holiest of holies in making himself out to be the Second Coming of Ayrton Senna, as if Senna's soul somehow settled in Hamilton's body on May 1st, 1994.
I personally think you are getting a little carried away here (and as I say above if you admire Senna so damn much go and take a look at how he drove - aggresive doesn't come close to describing it - and I still rate Senna as the second best driver ever).
Once again I think your personal preferences cloud your judgement here. I think the Ferrari pit operation is more of a danger given current conditions, but thats just my opinion and it doesn't make it fact.Maybe it's because I think he's one of the most over-rated drivers to have ever raced in the sport, but I think he's dangerous.
What is a repeated theme here is that anything LH does gets turned into a dangerous drive or luck by yourself.
I happen to think Alonso is an arrogant, sulky SOB with no loyalty to any team at all, doesn't mean I don't accept that he is a stunning driver.
Regards
Scaff
Don't get me wrong, I think the kid is good. But I think the problem is that he was born into his F1 career with a silver spoon in his mouth, as it were. Sure, this is only his second year, but everyone else who is competitive - Raikkonen, Massa, Kovalainen, Alonso; even Vettel - has had the experience of a bad year. They've all had to fight their way through bad cars and bad races. To me, it's like they've earned the right to be comptitive. Kubica is the only real exception given that he's also quite new, but I imagine an almost-but-not-quite-as-good season would be just as frustrating as parking the car eighteen times in eighteen races.What is a repeated theme here is that anything LH does gets turned into a dangerous drive or luck by yourself.
To be honest, I think being arrogant - or so self-confident that you look that way - is a part of being a good racing driver. You have to have this kind of narcissistic super-confidence to be able to propel a Formula One car around a cicuit ar 300km/h on you own, much less while competing with twenty other like-minded individuals. I just think Alonso takes it one step further. Tactically, I don't think he has any equals in the current grid. His problem is really Flavio Briatore; every other team seems to have this unspoken policy that they'll favour both drivers equally until it emerges that one is no longer in contention for the title. But Renault don't do that; they favour one driver from the outset and by and large leave the other to his own devices. They'll still support him, just not as much. Alonso's problem was that he expected the same kind of preferential tratment from Ron Dennis and the boys over at McLaren. In theory, he had a point: Hamilton was just this green kid in his debut season, and while great thigns were expected of him, I don't think people were really anticipating nine straight podium finishes in his first nine races.I happen to think Alonso is an arrogant, sulky SOB with no loyalty to any team at all, doesn't mean I don't accept that he is a stunning driver.
Hamilton has way more rain performances than Vettel - to the point Hamilton's known to be right at home in the wet. Just look at Spa - lagging behind most of the race; as soon as it starts raining, BAM; utter domination.
Its a poor analogy mainly because it simply doesn't apply, if anything it would actually be better aimed at KR (rather well known for his party attitude and dislike of testing).Don't get me wrong, I think the kid is good. But I think the problem is that he was born into his F1 career with a silver spoon in his mouth, as it were. Sure, this is only his second year, but everyone else who is competitive - Raikkonen, Massa, Kovalainen, Alonso; even Vettel - has had the experience of a bad year. They've all had to fight their way through bad cars and bad races. To me, it's like they've earned the right to be comptitive. Kubica is the only real exception given that he's also quite new, but I imagine an almost-but-not-quite-as-good season would be just as frustrating as parking the car eighteen times in eighteen races.
Let's put it this way: I have a friend in my college who does thirty-hour weeks. It's her first year, she never has a night off, somehow manages to do all this extra-curricular stuff as well, and in short barely has time to eat or sleep. Yet last semester, she pulled one high distinctions, two distinctions and a pass (but it was the kind of unit where you either passed or failed; there were no grades). I have a lot of respect for her, because I've seen how hard she works, and she's earned everything she gets. But there's another person, one who lives on my floor who does exactly the same course. She goes out every other night, comes back home drunk at two in the morning and has more noise complaints filed against her than anyone else in the college for her tendency to turn her music up as loud as it will go when she gets home, I've never seen her do any work (nor has anyone else, for that matter), she sleeps in until well after noon and only goes to class when she has to. And yet last semester she pulled four high distinctions. Maybe it's just natural talent, but she wonders why no-one respects her. She hasn't earnt her stripes, she just shows up and takes full marks without giving anything.
My point is that all the other drivers are like my frend: they've done the work, and they've endured. Hamilton is like the girl on my floor: while she has talent, she just sits back and doesn't do anything. I know it's not a perfect analogy, but do you see where I'm getting? I respect hard work over natural talent any day. Yes, Hamilton deserves his McLaren drive, and I'm not trying to take that away from him. But put him in a car that isn't a McLaren or a Ferrari, and see what he does. Personally, I think he'll flounder because on the occasion where he has started from a position that didn't allow him to control the race, he hasn't done that well for himself. Monza is an exception, probably because of the rain thing.
So why is this acceptable in the case of Alonso, but not of Hamilton?To be over-rated doesn't mean people think you're good when in reality you shouldn't be there in the first place. I think Hamilton is a good driver. I just don't think he's so great it's worth having an orgasm every time he makes a pass regardless of whether it was clean or not.
To be honest, I think being arrogant - or so self-confident that you look that way - is a part of being a good racing driver. You have to have this kind of narcissistic super-confidence to be able to propel a Formula One car around a cicuit ar 300km/h on you own, much less while competing with twenty other like-minded individuals. I just think Alonso takes it one step further.
In theory he had a point, but anyone with even a modest understanding of F1 teams and how they behave would know that McLaren don't work that way. Never have and never will. Alonso must (or should) have known that before signing on the dotted line, to then moan about it contantly didn't do him any favours.Tactically, I don't think he has any equals in the current grid. His problem is really Flavio Briatore; every other team seems to have this unspoken policy that they'll favour both drivers equally until it emerges that one is no longer in contention for the title. But Renault don't do that; they favour one driver from the outset and by and large leave the other to his own devices. They'll still support him, just not as much. Alonso's problem was that he expected the same kind of preferential tratment from Ron Dennis and the boys over at McLaren. In theory, he had a point: Hamilton was just this green kid in his debut season, and while great thigns were expected of him, I don't think people were really anticipating nine straight podium finishes in his first nine races.
Didn't see that one; I have a position around my college and that position requires me to close everything up of a night, and the Powers That Be usually like that done early on, so I missed about twelve or fifteen laps of the race.Do You Race? - Rosberg went up the inside of Trulli at that same corner. He was completely locked up, and therfore out of control to a certain extent, yet I don't see you complaining about him.
Didn't see that one;
Have some ownage back.I call this massive ownage.
youtubeThe URL contained a malformed video ID.
No, I'm saying that long dives down the inside on a dangerous part of the track are irresponsible.
Scaff, let's just agree to disagree. I don't know where you stand on the matter, but it's obvious I don't have a hard-on for Hamilton (I'm not implying you - or anyone else for that matter - does), and I don't think there's much that's going to change my view of him (I'm stubborn like that). I don't like Hamilton, I don't have any respect for him beyond the respect that comes with doing something I know I'll never be able to do, and many of his comments make it less and less likely that I ever will. I'm not sure what you're trying to do here, but whether it's telling me my opinion is slightly flwed for whatever, or rope me onto the Hamilton bandwagon, but it's not going to happen. I might be judging from an armchair, but instinct tells me Hamilton isn't deserving of anything resembling what I show for others like Massa and Vettel, and I've learned to trust my instincts.
Funny that the night race was the one where we could clearly see inside the driver's face inside the helmet.