|
|
Post by charleselan on Oct 28, 2021 20:14:49 GMT
Absolutely Mikael. Honda have worked so hard to get where they are now, and Alonso has always managed to disgrace himself in some way or another over the years.
I am keeping everything crossed for Max to win this year, I didn't warm to him initially but I have to say he has matured so much this year in particular and is driving beautifully. What strikes me about him is that he is so calm in the car when on the radio, just out for a Sunday afternoon drive, many others are breathing hard and find it hard to talk and race.
|
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Oct 28, 2021 20:25:08 GMT
I have just read a piece by Mark Hughes at Motorsport about the "duel" between Max and SLH, according to him the RB cars are far easier on the rear tyres than the MB vehicles. He is heaping praise on SLH by the bucket load in this article which is a bit hard to take to be honest. Regarding the tyre wear issue, I had read that the RB cars were actually running on very well worn tyres at the end and this was from several sources , yet Mark Hughes says it was not the case. He also stated that the Red Bull was the better & faster car at COTA and that the area MB were ahead was in straight line speed. I also felt there was a bit of a bias, Charles, and not for the first time in the last 18 months. Peter Windsor's YouTube review of the race also differs somewhat from Mark Hughes' version. Whilst I don't have a problem with praise where it's due I never picked up in previous years how superior the Mercedes cars were as often as I have heard the Red Bull is better this year. I also don't like insincerity. My view is that since 2014 Mercedes have had such a big performance advantage, or the huge resources necessary to develop the car during the season, that until this year they have never been pushed to the point of unreliability. In fact Mercedes have now taken 10 ICEs instead of six. Honda have used eight but the two extra were because of damage caused to the motor after collisions with Mercedes. Completely agree Rob. I read in several different places about the tyre degradation of the RB cars but according to Hughes they were supreme and it was down to SLH's absolute brilliance that he caught Max so quickly. OK he made his tyres last a good length of time in his middle stint enabling him to have fresher ones at the end but that wasn't the whole story. The fact that he has tried to construe the fact that the Merc's have always been up against it and many of the wins over the past few years have been down to SLH is ludicrous. When Ferrari were doing well with their "ingenious engine management systems" they were apparently better than the Merc's and according to Mr Hughes SLH would have won the championship in one (2019 I believe?). I personally do not think that Ferrari playing with their fuel flow or whatever, was any worse that MB's moveable steering system, yet they got off Scott Free. |
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Oct 29, 2021 6:32:06 GMT
I do not find the politics of F1 particularly interesting and remember when Ferrari were the favoured ones with Michael and Ross about how you measure a barge board etc, and now it appears MB are the ones who can do what they want and won't be apparently punished, perhaps a very simplified view of things - my problem is I just don't understand why F1 bosses want multiple champions instead of competition
|
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Oct 29, 2021 7:52:01 GMT
I also felt there was a bit of a bias, Charles, and not for the first time in the last 18 months. Peter Windsor's YouTube review of the race also differs somewhat from Mark Hughes' version. Whilst I don't have a problem with praise where it's due I never picked up in previous years how superior the Mercedes cars were as often as I have heard the Red Bull is better this year. I also don't like insincerity. My view is that since 2014 Mercedes have had such a big performance advantage, or the huge resources necessary to develop the car during the season, that until this year they have never been pushed to the point of unreliability. In fact Mercedes have now taken 10 ICEs instead of six. Honda have used eight but the two extra were because of damage caused to the motor after collisions with Mercedes. Completely agree Rob. I read in several different places about the tyre degradation of the RB cars but according to Hughes they were supreme and it was down to SLH's absolute brilliance that he caught Max so quickly. OK he made his tyres last a good length of time in his middle stint enabling him to have fresher ones at the end but that wasn't the whole story. The fact that he has tried to construe the fact that the Merc's have always been up against it and many of the wins over the past few years have been down to SLH is ludicrous. When Ferrari were doing well with their "ingenious engine management systems" they were apparently better than the Merc's and according to Mr Hughes SLH would have won the championship in one (2019 I believe?). I personally do not think that Ferrari playing with their fuel flow or whatever, was any worse that MB's moveable steering system, yet they got off Scott Free. Charles, Mark Hughes seemingly forgot to mention that Max did 27 laps on his last set of hard tyres, which was three laps more than SLH did on his in the middle stint. An admirable feat even given the lower fuel loads. Max also set the fastest first sector of the race on his last lap, again not mentioned. Like you, I was somewhat put off by Max but have become increasingly respectful of the way he has behaved and matured this year. After all he is only 23, an age where most of our previous favourites were only just starting F1. |
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Oct 29, 2021 7:57:26 GMT
I do not find the politics of F1 particularly interesting and remember when Ferrari were the favoured ones with Michael and Ross about how you measure a barge board etc, and now it appears MB are the ones who can do what they want and won't be apparently punished, perhaps a very simplified view of things - my problem is I just don't understand why F1 bosses want multiple champions instead of competition I don't understand it either Chris. Back when I first started following F1 with real intent it was totally unexpected if a driver won two championships in a row. I remember JYS saying how difficult it was to lift oneself mentally to win two in a row and that was back in the days when there were only a dozen or so races. I would love to know what has changed that makes it possible for teams and drivers to win four championships on the trot. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Oct 29, 2021 10:20:09 GMT
Completely agree Rob. I read in several different places about the tyre degradation of the RB cars but according to Hughes they were supreme and it was down to SLH's absolute brilliance that he caught Max so quickly. OK he made his tyres last a good length of time in his middle stint enabling him to have fresher ones at the end but that wasn't the whole story. The fact that he has tried to construe the fact that the Merc's have always been up against it and many of the wins over the past few years have been down to SLH is ludicrous. When Ferrari were doing well with their "ingenious engine management systems" they were apparently better than the Merc's and according to Mr Hughes SLH would have won the championship in one (2019 I believe?). I personally do not think that Ferrari playing with their fuel flow or whatever, was any worse that MB's moveable steering system, yet they got off Scott Free. Charles, Mark Hughes seemingly forgot to mention that Max did 27 laps on his last set of hard tyres, which was three laps more than SLH did on his in the middle stint. An admirable feat even given the lower fuel loads. Max also set the fastest first sector of the race on his last lap, again not mentioned. Like you, I was somewhat put off by Max but have become increasingly respectful of the way he has behaved and matured this year. After all he is only 23, an age where most of our previous favourites were only just starting F1. Rob, Thanks for the extra information there, I had not gone into it with that much detail, but what you reveal is very telling. I did read many times earlier in the year that the performance of the tyres on the two respective cars was very much temperature dependant. As the RB cars generated more apparent downforce they tended to like cooler temperatures and this was where they performed the best, the Merc's not so. However in hotter conditions the Merc's were the better package as they demanded less of their tyres in hot conditions, hence their performance at the races in warm weather. Now tell me what were the temperatures in Austin, I doubt that Checo Perez would have thought it cool! So in fact with those excessive high temperatures then the Merc's would have been at the biggest advantage, something Mr Hughes fails to mention ins article. Apparently Checo was so ill in the car that towards the end of the race he was experiencing vision issues, all of course compounded by not having a working drinks system. I find that a real shame as he was looking so good last weekend which i hope he can continue over the rest of the season. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Oct 29, 2021 10:34:09 GMT
I do not find the politics of F1 particularly interesting and remember when Ferrari were the favoured ones with Michael and Ross about how you measure a barge board etc, and now it appears MB are the ones who can do what they want and won't be apparently punished, perhaps a very simplified view of things - my problem is I just don't understand why F1 bosses want multiple champions instead of competition I don't understand it either Chris. Back when I first started following F1 with real intent it was totally unexpected if a driver won two championships in a row. I remember JYS saying how difficult it was to lift oneself mentally to win two in a row and that was back in the days when there were only a dozen or so races. I would love to know what has changed that makes it possible for teams and drivers to win four championships on the trot. Probably quite a few factors come into play here Rob. Firstly the incredible reliability that the cars now have, plus the fact that the "big boys" have at their disposal pockets of cash that are enough to support a third world country for years. I also believe that the modern day circuits play a role as well, especially in respect of reliability issues. The tracks are so smooth in the main, and the only time you get issues are when they have some with rather aggressive curbs. Another thing to consider is the fact that although there were far fewer Grand prix races back in JYS's time the drivers were racing more or less every weekend in a variety of machinery, and often many races on one day. I am sure you remember JYS travelling so much back and forth across the Atlantic it gave him an ulcer. |
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Nov 2, 2021 8:52:25 GMT
Yep Charles I agree with all the above and add to the fact that at least for the last seven years there have been restrictions on development via the token system which have prevented teams from catching up within a season or two. Also the fact that they have to drive well within the limits to preserve the tyres doesn't properly stress the cars. The you have the engineers monitoring the cars minutely and warning the drivers of pending malfunctions. There is not much left to chance these days.
So maybe the real reason is that the teams have to much say in the regulations resulting in piecemeal changes to the rules being made which result in unintended consequences.
I remember in 1972 JYS was doing F1, Can-Am plus European Touring Car with the Cologne Capris plus I imagine he had many sponsor commitments to meet as well.
|
|
