[Official] Abu Dhabi Grand Prix 2016: Grand Prix Weekend Thread

[2GRX7]

Originally Posted by bobec

Just been busy defending TDI engines in the US

LOL, and how'd that work out? WAIT?!!!nevermind!

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by 2GRX7

Actually, I think you're discounting his intellect! Nico was the worst perp when it came to calling his pits for advice/intel on driving technique (compared to Hammy). Don't know if you heard those conversations where you are, but Nico's pit calls made him look completely incompetent. I remember when the first stages of the ban was enforced, Nico was nowhere near Hamilton (Singapore Grand Prix Sept 2014). It was Nico that needed to up his game, not Hamilton.

I think that you have the roles reversed.

Hamilton needed to have assistance over the radio from his engineers to solve problems; Rosberg overcame the identical issues, and others, with little or no outside assistance. Rosberg spends much more time with his engineering team trying to understand the complexities of a modern F1 car, whilst Hamilton likes to spend his time partying.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Rosberg spends much more time with his engineering team trying to understand the complexities of a modern F1 car, whilst Hamilton likes to spend his time partying.

So less Prost/Senna, more Lauda/Hunt then.

Everyone lauds Hunt for his playboy lifestyle and driving skill.

[steve_r]

Mountain out of a molehill. He didn't ram anyone off the road like F1 greats like Senna and Schumacher did in the past during title deciding finales. He didn't even try a dodgy move like Rosberg did in Austria earlier this year.

The team have let them race in the past, and should have done so again. To be honest, after the amazing 3 seasons this team have had, it would not have been the end of the world if they did end up losing the race. The WDC and WCC titles were already in the bag a long long long time ago.

Still at least it has given us something to think / talk / moan about.

[old man]

Auto sport have published the Team Principles driver table, but what do they know?

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by old man

Auto sport have published the Team Principles driver table, but what do they know?

About the same as Gary Anderson who has published his take on the happenings in Abu Dhabi: http://www.autosport.com/premium/fea...URTM-weak-link

(Which means I personally agree with all of this).

[Akrapovic]

It is quite funny when people compare Senna and Lewis. Lewis is nothing like Senna at all. Lewis is more interested in partying than work. However, that being said, the man has won 3 World Championships and is driving better than he ever has done. So if it works for him, then it works for him.

I still don't think he's really done anything wrong. He had some bad starts this year (you could argue those cost him the championship too), but got his act together. He tried to win the title any way he could within the rules but didn't make it. Nico isn't as good a driver as Lewis, but that isn't always what decides titles. Both drivers were excellent this year.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Mountain out of a molehill. He didn't ram anyone off the road like F1 greats like Senna and Schumacher did in the past during title deciding finales. He didn't even try a dodgy move like Rosberg did in Austria earlier this year.

The team have let them race in the past, and should have done so again. To be honest, after the amazing 3 seasons this team have had, it would not have been the end of the world if they did end up losing the race. The WDC and WCC titles were already in the bag a long long long time ago.

Still at least it has given us something to think / talk / moan about.

Exactly, he's no saint, but he didn't do anything out of order. And it's funny when people point out Lewis said he wouldn't do it before the race, didn't Mercedes say they wouldn't interfere?

[2GRX7]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I think that you have the roles reversed.

Hamilton needed to have assistance over the radio from his engineers to solve problems; Rosberg overcame the identical issues, and others, with little or no outside assistance. Rosberg spends much more time with his engineering team trying to understand the complexities of a modern F1 car, whilst Hamilton likes to spend his time partying.

Nope, not reversing roles, and WOW, how soon we forget. Yes, THIS YEAR, Nico exhibited better problem-solving technique compared to Hamilton, but that was something he learned to do over the course of that radio ban.

If you go back to Singapore race of 2014, Nico's issues with maximizing performance and getting his head wrapped around his driving were put on display.

It's all out there to see; Thanks Google!

On a different note, what sportsman/sporting ideology SHOULD F1 mirror? Pick a sport/event of your choosing. It doesn't have to be a sport-could be dueling! Really curious on that one.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Mountain out of a molehill. He didn't ram anyone off the road like F1 greats like Senna and Schumacher did in the past during title deciding finales. He didn't even try a dodgy move like Rosberg did in Austria earlier this year.

The team have let them race in the past, and should have done so again. To be honest, after the amazing 3 seasons this team have had, it would not have been the end of the world if they did end up losing the race. The WDC and WCC titles were already in the bag a long long long time ago.

Still at least it has given us something to think / talk / moan about.

Suzuka 1990 was not ramming Prost off the road, watch the replays. Intentional it was, but it has a background story to it - from qualifying, and from the 1989 incident, which was ramming someone off the road. And Senna said he would do it. He said he won't yield if he lost the position before the corner and he did just that.

At the same time, Hamilton has rammed Rosberg off the track plenty of times during the past three years. There were no collisions because Rosberg always elected to go off the track instead.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Exactly, he's no saint, but he didn't do anything out of order. And it's funny when people point out Lewis said he wouldn't do it before the race, didn't Mercedes say they wouldn't interfere?

And they didn't. They didn't tell him what to do except race. His job is to race. That's what he gets paid for. From the team's point of view, doing what he did is more like sabotaging their position in the race and also their prestige.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by 2GRX7

LOL, and how'd that work out? WAIT?!!!nevermind!

You tell me. You put me in that position, didn't you

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Still at least it has given us something to think / talk / moan about.

Oh hasn't it just.......

[Mike Harte]

An interesting view of the history behind the team orders at Mercedes, and the possible ramifications that might arise because of Hamilton's refusal to follow instructions. It actually follows my own reasoning, but with much more clarity.

See: http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/op...he-855425/?s=1

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by bobec

And they didn't. They didn't tell him what to do except race. His job is to race. That's what he gets paid for. From the team's point of view, doing what he did is more like sabotaging their position in the race and also their prestige.

May I point out both titles were their's, so it was no gain to get involved. Be grateful. We got a close race, not a boring procession. End of

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by S griffin

May I point out both titles were their's, so it was no gain to get involved. Be grateful. We got a close race, not a boring procession. End of

Apart from the start, when Max got clipped and Nico's overtake of Max later on, it was the usual fare, up until the last 7 laps or so.

[Oldtony]

This whole kerfuffle comes down to the fact that F1 has, and has had for many years, something of an identity crisis.
Is it an individual event OR Is it a team event.
The Formula One championship started as a DRIVERS championship, which almost by definition indicates it is an individual event.
Very quickly it became apparent that no individual could win races without a TEAM behind him, and recognition of this came about with the introduction of the Constructors Championship.
For me one of the fascinations of the sport I have been following since the 1950s is the management problems involved in balancing team v individual goals.
Now, personally, I believe that in the modern hi-tech state of the art F1 competition we enjoy now the team must be the dominant force. The team provides the money, the resources, most of the know-how and personnel and employs the driver. To me that means the driver should be a team player.
If we are to look at F1 as a pure individual drivers championship it should be a spec series with the driver being responsible for putting togrther the funding and resources to compete.
How would that satisfy the people who moan about "Pay Drivers".
Nico is a team player, Lewis is demonstratively less so.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Oldtony

This whole kerfuffle comes down to the fact that F1 has, and has had for many years, something of an identity crisis.
Is it an individual event OR Is it a team event.
The Formula One championship started as a DRIVERS championship, which almost by definition indicates it is an individual event.
Very quickly it became apparent that no individual could win races without a TEAM behind him, and recognition of this came about with the introduction of the Constructors Championship.
For me one of the fascinations of the sport I have been following since the 1950s is the management problems involved in balancing team v individual goals.
Now, personally, I believe that in the modern hi-tech state of the art F1 competition we enjoy now the team must be the dominant force. The team provides the money, the resources, most of the know-how and personnel and employs the driver. To me that means the driver should be a team player.
If we are to look at F1 as a pure individual drivers championship it should be a spec series with the driver being responsible for putting togrther the funding and resources to compete.
How would that satisfy the people who moan about "Pay Drivers".
Nico is a team player, Lewis is demonstratively less so.

OK, fair comment, but the team had already won the constructors championship, and whether it be Lewis or Nico, one of the team drivers would also win the drivers championship.
Both drivers do drive for the team, but they also drive for themselves, and they were both seeking the best result for themselves (which also means the team) in this race. Lewis was trying to ensure that he scored enough points to retain his World Championship, Nico was also trying (and did so successfully) to do the same thing.
I don't think that Lewis put Nico into any personal danger (accident and possible hurt) in his actions, and Nico did a brilliant job by keeping his head and not buckling under pressure (as he has done many times in the past). It also gave us an excellent final race of the season, and it looks like it's provided us with a talking point that will go on to the start of next season!

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

An interesting view of the history behind the team orders at Mercedes, and the possible ramifications that might arise because of Hamilton's refusal to follow instructions. It actually follows my own reasoning, but with much more clarity.

See: http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/op...he-855425/?s=1

An interesting article Mike, but one thing I don't understand. Jonathon Noble is saying that it is important that team protocol is closely followed and that Lewis gained from these protocols as he could pit first being the lead driver. He then says that if Nico had gone against this protocol & pitted before Lewis, he may have gained advantage from this, and due to the undercut got in front of Lewis. Surely, this could not happen (without collusion from the team), if Nico just came in on his own accord for tyres, there wouldn't be any ready for him (plus the crew would still be sitting in the garage).
I also don't believe that there was any risk of Vettel getting past Hamilton if the backing up enabled him to pass Rosberg. In driving slowly, Lewis had saved his tyres, fuel and probably battery power too, the second that Seb got past Nico, Lewis would have been away down the road like a scalded cat!

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

An interesting article Mike, but one thing I don't understand. Jonathon Noble is saying that it is important that team protocol is closely followed and that Lewis gained from these protocols as he could pit first being the lead driver. He then says that if Nico had gone against this protocol & pitted before Lewis, he may have gained advantage from this, and due to the undercut got in front of Lewis. Surely, this could not happen (without collusion from the team), if Nico just came in on his own accord for tyres, there wouldn't be any ready for him (plus the crew would still be sitting in the garage).
I also don't believe that there was any risk of Vettel getting past Hamilton if the backing up enabled him to pass Rosberg. In driving slowly, Lewis had saved his tyres, fuel and probably battery power too, the second that Seb got past Nico, Lewis would have been away down the road like a scalded cat!

We are now entering the 'What if' part of the debate.

If Rosberg started to feel pressured by Vettel, he may well have started an attack on Hamilton, which may have had undesired results. Rosberg might well have indulged in a risky move, and Hamilton, in the mood that he was in, would have made it as hard as he could to stop being passed resulting in goodness only knows what.

At that point, there is no doubt in anyone's mind that at that point Hamilton was acting like a spoiled brat, and his actions had become unpredictable. Mercedes obviously weren't prepared to take the risk, so asked him to speed up.

As to the matter about pitting, there are ways that Rosberg could have contrived an earlier stop. He could radio in claim that he thought he had a puncture, or that he had flat-spotted his tyres, or something equally innocent. The team would have been forced, under those sorts of circumstances, to bring him in before Hamilton. No doubt Hamilton would have whinged about it, but one way or another, he was probably going to end up whining anyway.

And as the article said, Hamilton really cannot complain considering that Rosberg let him by in Monaco without any fuss whatsoever, which ultimately led to Hamilton winning the race. Without that win, I don't think that Hamilton would have even been a title challenger in Abu Dhabi.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

We are now entering the 'What if' part of the debate.

If Rosberg started to feel pressured by Vettel, he may well have started an attack on Hamilton, which may have had undesired results. Rosberg might well have indulged in a risky move, and Hamilton, in the mood that he was in, would have made it as hard as he could to stop being passed resulting in goodness only knows what.

At that point, there is no doubt in anyone's mind that at that point Hamilton was acting like a spoiled brat, and his actions had become unpredictable. Mercedes obviously weren't prepared to take the risk, so asked him to speed up.

As to the matter about pitting, there are ways that Rosberg could have contrived an earlier stop. He could radio in claim that he thought he had a puncture, or that he had flat-spotted his tyres, or something equally innocent. The team would have been forced, under those sorts of circumstances, to bring him in before Hamilton. No doubt Hamilton would have whinged about it, but one way or another, he was probably going to end up whining anyway.

And as the article said, Hamilton really cannot complain considering that Rosberg let him by in Monaco without any fuss whatsoever, which ultimately led to Hamilton winning the race. Without that win, I don't think that Hamilton would have even been a title challenger in Abu Dhabi.

Thanks Mike, as you say, we are now entering into the 'what if' part of the debate, which if followed properly should continue this debate well past the first race of next season!

[bauble]

My own view is that Hamilton was less concerned about being Champion again, but in trying to stop Rosberg taking the title. I appreciate that the result would have been the same if he had succeeded, but I think Lewis did not want Nico to win more than he wanted to win himself. If you can follow my tortured reasoning. Either way in trying to drop Nico into the clutches of Vettel, he overdid it, while a legal tactic he took it to the extreme. The actions of a poor loser in my opinion. But then .. I never did like the guy.

[gert]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

OK, fair comment, but the team had already won the constructors championship, and whether it be Lewis or Nico, one of the team drivers would also win the drivers championship.

You are correct in pointing out that both the team and drivers championship were already won by Mercedes even before the race started.

Apart from the drivers championship, there was also a race win at stake. It probably mattered little to Hamilton or Rosberg, or anyone rooting for 1 of them; but I think it mattered a great deal for Mercedes.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by gert

You are correct in pointing out that both the team and drivers championship were already won by Mercedes even before the race started.

Apart from the drivers championship, there was also a race win at stake. It probably mattered little to Hamilton or Rosberg, or anyone rooting for 1 of them; but I think it mattered a great deal for Mercedes.

Yes gert, that's right, but as I said earlier, I am sure that if (or when) anyone got past Nico, due to his conservative driving, mLewis would have had sufficient extra reserves (fuel, tyres & electrical energy) to ensure that he would have been away up the road and still win the race for Mercedes.

[gert]

One can never be sure. Even though I was rooting for Rosberg, I also think it was highly probably that Lewis would still hang on to win, no matter what.

However, there was no guarantee. Even Lewis could have underestimated Vettels advantage on his fresher and faster tires - especially if Vettel got past the Red Bulls and Rosberg fast.
The only guarantee for the win was for Lewis to speed up a bit.

I am not taking sides, I am merely trying to explain what I think is their rationale.