Home  |  News  |  Forums  |  FAQ  |  Classifieds  |  Events  |  914 Info  |  Blog  |  Members Map
IPB
 
 
 
 
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 

2 Pages V  1 2 >
entry May 3 2013, 11:54 AM
The FIA, Looking Out For The Fans? Huh…
Posted: May 2, 2013 | Author: johnpierre rivera | Filed under: F1, F1 News, Racing | Tags: 2013 F1 Season, F1, F1 News, FIA, Formula One Stewards, Penalties in F1 | Modify: Edit this |4 Comments »

I just read an article on YallaF1, Stewards Told To Be Lenient For 2013 Season. As the title states, it is about the stewards taking a more lenient view on race incidents and driver’s behavior this year. There is one line in particular that is really telling. “You can feel that the drivers have more confidence. Rarely have we seen as many die-hard, wheel-to-wheel battles as we saw in Bahrain.” The article goes on to say, “It has made racing better.” I’m not sure that steward leniency is the single largest factor behind the “better” racing this year, I think that tires have a lot to do with it. Had this article not brought this new steward leniency to my attention, I might not have even realized that this effort has been made on my behalf to enhance the show. Whatever the degree, thank you, FIA. That’s a change, right? I just complimented something the FIA did! Wow.

It is definitely true that over the years penalties that were handed out (or not handed out) have had a negative affect on the sport. Controversial? Definitely. Consistency? Absolutely lacking. And some of the penalties were just plain silly. We’re RACING for chrissake, aren’t we?

A couple of years ago the FIA started to use the expertise former F1 drivers to help with the calls that the stewards make on race day. Nigel Mansel, Emanuel Pirro (not from F1, but endurance racing), Johnny Herbert, Damon Hill, Mika Salo and many more have played the role of guest steward. This placated the fans and reduced the number of silly penalties. But there’s still a problem with many FIA penalties in this blogger’s opinion.

Here’s a good example of a misplaced penalty, yes, it concerns Fernando Alonso and if any one has read just a few posts of mine, you know this is the driver that I favor the most. In 2010 at the British GP, Fernando is trying to pass Robert Kubica in his Renault, which Kubica is making as wide as possible. So Fernando makes an attempt to pass and Robert pushes (drives him, if we are to be honest about it) off the track. Because of the physics of an object in motion the Ferrari continues on and when Fernando comes back on track, he is in front of the Renault.

Immediately Ferrari is on the radio to race control checking with the FIA to see what their view is so Fernando can do the right thing. While waiting for an answer, which took an inordinately long time, Kubica’s car develops an issue and has to retire. Logically now that there is no Renault the issue should be null and void, since the Renault’s retirement had nothing to do with the incident. But instead it was illogically concluded that regardless of the Renault’s problems the Ferrari had to serve a penalty, a drive-through penalty, which cost Fernando about 20+ seconds. In Formula One time that is like 10 years of your life and there went any chance of a good result. Really at this point I’m speech-less. That year Alonso lost the drivers title by 4 points so clearly this penalty affected the Driver’s Championship.

But you don’t have to take this Ferrari fan’s Ferrari example as the only proof of inconsistent or silly penalties. Let’s look at a couple of Lewis Hamilton’s infractions, for example.

Hamilton is one of the most exciting drivers on the grid, and has definitely brought new fans to the sport. He’s had 30+ penalties handed to him in his career as an F1 pilot. some of them were deserved but 30? Here are just a few from that long list.

Trying to pass Kimi in Belgium in 2008 in the final laps, he has the pace so Kimi pushes him off the track and he has nowhere to go but back on the track ahead of Kimi, and because he cut the chicane, Lewis gives the position back. They resume racing, Lewis passes Kimi when he crashes out and some how Lewis is penalized. Apparently he did not wait long enough before he resumed racing. Riiiiiight. This next paragraph is right from Wikipedia and since I can’t paraphrase it better, here it is in its entirety:

[The original penalty received mixed reactions in the world press. Byron Young in Britain's Daily Mirror said that it was the stewards' decision "that mars sport and turns fans away, that ruins the efforts of even the best competitors, taints the day and leaves fans wondering what exactly they are 'fans' of". The Finnish daily newspaper Helsingin Sanomat noted that though the Grand Prix had "crushed" Räikkönen's championship dreams, Hamilton had adhered "with the rules of racing" in giving the position back. The newspaper put Räikkönen's disappointment down to his crash, rather than the chicane incident. In Italy, La Gazzetta dello Sport declared that the decision was justified, stating that Hamilton "should have waited at least another turn rather than attacking so soon".]

Then there was the safety car debacle at Valencia. Hamilton basically raced the safety car to get out ahead of it when it was deployed due to the fact Mark Webber showed everyone in F1 (that did not already see it at Le Mans) how a car can fly. It took the FIA 20 minutes to assign a penalty, TWENTY, by then Hamilton had built up such a huge lead that his drive-through penalty didn’t penalize him at all, and he went on to finish 2nd. (In the interest of disclosure, the driver that I like, Alonso, who was behind Hamilton, got the shaft. But that still doesn’t address the ridiculous amount of time it took the FIA to react to the situation.) This incident caused such a reaction that I believe the FIA changed the safety car rules to prevent a similar situation occurring again.

Hamilton is not by any means being singled out by the stewards. Most of the top drivers have too many infractions levied at them. That’s because the top drivers push their machinery and their driving to the edge. I’ve always thought that penalizing them for what they are hired to do. For racing hard, was at cross-purposes with what the FIA really wants, which is to keep racing exciting so the fans are interested and keep coming back. Well maybe the FIA is finally realizing this. According to the YallaF1.com article, FIA stewards were encouraged in an off-season meeting to be more lenient when it came to on-track scraps between drivers in an effort to entice them to take more risks. Better late than never, I am all for it!

The penalty on a race car driver, unlike any other sport that I know of, often ends any chance of winning the race right there and then. It is not like a foul in basketball, or pass interference in football, or tripping in soccer. In each of these other sports, play is stopped and in each case a free throw, a new set of downs at the infraction or a free kick or kick at the goal is performed. However, each team or player that has been penalized can still go on to win the game or have a good game despite this. A player is only removed from the game for a very severe violation, or repeated violations. And a team only forfeits a game when they don’t show up or are found to have egregiously cheated, like when college teams are found to have violated the recruiting rules extensively. Using these criteria, a drive through, a stop and go, or a time-add penalty should only be handed out when absolutely necessary.

Anyway, the penalty of crashing out if you try making a pass too aggressively is far worse than a drive-through. It’s also true that the offending driver is not the only one that loses out, so we do need some balance. Drivers are risking more than their own race or neck when they are aggressive. So where is the tipping point? Has the FIA of late been too pro-penalty-active? I think so. We need to see more of the wheel-to-wheel action. The kind that Webber and Hamilton, Button and Perez were engaged in during the Bahrain GP. And if one, or even all four drivers suffered a spin, on off-track excursion, or a broken suspension then that would have been on each driver equally. It looked quite fair to me. One exception, if Perez had damaged Button’s car he surely should have been given a penalty, but that did not happen, so no harm no foul. The McLaren teammates might think that kind of driving is too aggressive but I say again it’s RACING for chrissake. Exciting stuff that we don’t see often enough in F1!

I’m not advocating crashing people out or driving people into the gravel (or worse the barriers, a la Mr. Schumacher) or for that matter parking your car at the exit of a turn (another stunt courtesy of the 7 times world champion), but F1 could do with a little roughing it up, and at least Michael always fought until the bitter end, and didn’t worry about penalties too much.

I believe its true that if a driver feels he will be hit with a penalty for what looks like a questionable move to the stewards, then he will not even attempt it since a drive-through penalty can end his hope of a good result. And so, as if we don’t have enough issues that cause “the procession” in modern F1, add to that list the fear of the penalty, which in turn causes drivers to either wait several laps for the clean pass or a pass via the undercut and pit stop rotation. Not very racy is it? But when the stakes are so high, when most of the cars on the grid have bulletproof reliability, when for so many years the championship has been won by 10 or less points, then you start to sympathize with the drivers protecting the points they have and doing nothing foolish to upset the stewards.

I think we all want the drivers to pass more, (even the FIA, there I said it) to pass a lot more, to create more excitement, but then when a driver attempts to pass and there is a little bit of drama, i.e. some wheel-to-wheel racing everyone gets all bent out of shape and the stewards levy a penalty.

So I am all for this new perspective that the FIA has discovered. If this is yet another piece of the “lets make the racing better” puzzle then bring it. Hopefully the FIA is on to something and lets just have fewer penalties, OK? I mean it’s RACING for chrissake!

-jp- (glad I’m not a steward on race day)

entry Apr 23 2013, 12:27 PM
Vettel Whips The Compitition, Alonso Loses Ground, Hamilton Shows Why He’s Worth It. And The Buddha…
Posted: April 22, 2013 | Author: johnpierrerivera | Filed under: F1, F1 News | Tags: Bahrain Grand Prix, Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, Lewis Hamilton, Mark Webber, Mercedes AMG, Nico Rosberg, Red Bull, Sebastian Vettel | Modify: Edit this | 2 Comments »
Sebastan Vettel - What a way to come back after the misery of China.

Sebastian Vettel – What a way to come back after the misery of China.

I have said this many a time, I will never just blog, that is not my intent nor does it make for anything interesting. So I normally stay away from recapping a race. I am however, going to say a few (ya right, when has that every happened) words about the Grand Prix of Bahrain that I think are worth mentioning.

As impressive as Alonso was last weekend, Vettel was equally sensational this past one. From the repass on Alonso after the first couple of laps to controlling the race, Vettel did not put a wheel wrong. My dad would always say, give credit where credit is due. Vettel and Red Bull deserve all the credit for Sunday’s win.

You have to always admire athletes, teams, politicians (even though some are scoundrels), business man, anyone really, who, when their chips are down, backs are against the wall, turn around a setback, disappointment, mistake, a gross error, a miscalculation of judgment. Alonso and Ferrari did just that with a win last week after a horrible gamble in Malaysia. Now Red Bull pulled out the same feat.

With everything that Vettel and Red Bull have endured in the season already (and we are only 4 races in people) this speaks volumes about their resolve and tenacity. I have never hid my lack of enthusiasm for Vettel; I like the guy with the big eyebrows in the red car. I am not the kind of journalist that reports in a balance way. I am 100% bias, oh and I by the way I’m not a journalist. I am just some guy that loves this sport so much I started my own blog. And what I love the most about F1, is how everyone has to perform at the highest level, all the time, in every aspect, in all places.

That to me is what makes F1 so awesome. Think of a diamond. It can be cut perfectly in all of it’s hundreds of facets, but if one, just one is not cut as accurate as the rest, the entire stone will falter. F1 is not so different. As much I wanted to see Fernando on that top step, well any step really, what I loved even more and as painful as it is to admit, was seeing how Vettel drove his socks off in the first stint and then controlled the race to the end. The credit is all yours sir.

Moving right along, question to all of you. Has anyone had a DRS wing failure yet? If it has indeed happened, I have absolutely no memory of it. Man, I can’t believe the luck that Fernando has sometimes. I know there is plenty of bad luck that goes around for all the drivers, but it just seems that when Fernando’s comes around, it really boarders on rotten. Of course I should keep in mind that he’s 31, makes millions of dollars, travels all over the world, has an insane number of fans, gets to drive a cool red car around on most Sundays and races for the most prestigious marquee in all of racing. Right.
Fernando Alonso - Feeling very good about Sunday. If only he knew...

Fernando Alonso – Feeling very good about Sunday. If only he knew…

Did I mention that he is only one of a handful of drivers currently that has won mulitple races, not to mention couple of WDC’s? So I guess he is not that unlucky in retrospect.

That being said I guess the carbon fiber lining sort to speak if any, is this. With two extra pit stops, Fernando and Ferrari still finished in the points (4 of them), was only 37 seconds down from the first place car of Vettel despite having to make two unscheduled pitstops, and manage to finish in front of most of the field. Sunday also confirmed that the F138 fast, well balanced and will yield more results as Ferrari fine tune it.

If nothing else, like all great drivers having to rebound from some issue or problem in a race, (17th place in this case) Fernando’s drive was that of a champion. In situations like this, what’s done is done, there is nothing you can do about it, and there is really no sense in getting all out of sorts. You just keep you foot in it, drive as hard as you can and see where you finish. So well done Fernando.

One last thought on this. It seems to me that there are really two places that show the talent of a real champion in a driver. One is at the front and having that killer instinct to stay there and the second is at the back, and hauling yourself up no matter what the circumstances are. Fernando has been in both positions in the last 2 weekends. For that matter so has Vettel.
Lewis Hamilton - Produced the the highlight of the race in my opinion

Lewis Hamilton – Produced the the highlight of the race in my opinion

How could I not mention Hamilton. Due to a bad qualifying session and a penalty he starts 9th on the grid, has a quiet race for most of the 57 laps, and then comes alive in the final stint finishing off in a great battle with Mark Webber for 5th.

For me, this was the highlight of the grand prix. This is the type of wheel-to-wheel racing that I grew up with as a kid and what the fans (remember us everyone, teams, FIA, manufactures) all to often don’t get enough of. These last laps speak for themselves, in which Hamilton show’s on this day why he is a champion and worth every penny that Mercedes is paying him and why he was pursued by the likes of Niki Lauda, and Ross Brawn.

I only want to say this, Big ups to both of these drivers Hamilton and Webber, for racing in a manner that you cannot have the ultimate respect for. Driving hard, not taking each other out. The sequence of laps that those two put tougher was some of the finest driving I have seen in a while.

A little further back there was also some wheel-to-wheel racing or at the very least some wheel to front wing racing. I relished the battle between Sergio Perez and Jenson Button as well. Not quite sure why Button is so irate.

Quick note: Jenson, stop complaining and drive faster. Your radio transmission “tell him to calm down” referring to Perez, reminds me of Brazil 2009 whey you were complaining about Kamui Kobayashi in the Toyota and how you could not get by, which was a must for your championship at the time.

Jenson, here is the job description just in case you missed it. The driver behind is to throw everything and the kitchen sink at you to get by, it is your job to throw everything and the kitchen sink, plus the fridge, and the dishwasher back, to make sure he doesn’t. If what you said about that type of racing not being the kind that you want to be in, then I am not to sure this is the formula for you.

Lastly, I would like to quote the first of the four noble truths.

Life means suffering. To live means to suffer, because the human nature is not perfect and neither is the world we live in. During our lifetime, we inevitably have to endure physical suffering such as pain, sickness, injury, tiredness, old age, and eventually death; and we have to endure psychological suffering like sadness, fear, frustration, disappointment.

Let me add to that. The suffering of having to wait 20 days, 5 hours, and well you get the point… Until the next race.

To wait until Ferrari and Alonso get the chance again to put it all together, make the right call on setup, and strategy, react to all variables and reach the top step, show why they have been champions in the past and will be champions in the future.

P.S. Now excuse me while I suffer as I update the drivers standing for this blog. -jp- (and I’m no buddha)-

entry Apr 23 2013, 12:25 PM
I Always Did Like History Class
Posted: April 18, 2013 | Author: johnpierrerivera | Filed under: F1, Fi History, Racing | Tags: Jim Clark, Lotus, Racing |

I recently signed up to follow Peter Windsor’s blog. I can’t tell you why it took so long. Maybe because every morning when I get up I go the 20 or so web and blog sites and his is one of them. Anyway I finally signed up and now receive an email when Mr. Windsor logs a post. I just finished reading his most recent effort. This one in particular goes by the title “The win that Clark tried to share” and appears to be part of a series that he is doing. Jim Clark’s 1963 Season.

I can’t recommend it enough. For fans, especially fans like myself that were not old enough to enjoy the earlier beginnings of F1 (my dad would consider this the golden age of this particular formula), it is a great way to re-live this golden era.

From the read, one gets a sense of just how racing was and how far it has evolved into the juggernaut that it is today. I recognize most of the drivers names and the teams from when i was a little kid so nothing really to report there. However it is the smaller details that Mr. Windsor goes into that really make the post come alive. Very easy to paint the picture in one’s mind. I have a link to Peter Windsor’s site here or you can click on the title above.

One last note, history is, it would seem to be, is also a specialty of Joe Saward as well, who’s site is linked from this blog to. He sometimes has such obscure and completely off the map posts about a driver or a team, a particular car that raced in the great race of so and so, you get the picture, that I find myself re-reading his post several times and then have my own history lesson with Wikipedia… -jp-

entry Apr 16 2013, 03:08 AM
Alonso Wins Big In China, But It’s The Tires That Steal The Show!
Posted: April 16, 2013 | Author: johnpierrerivera | Filed under: F1, F1 News | Tags: Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, Kimi Raikonen, Lewis Hamilton, Lotus, Mercedes, Pirelli Tires, Racing, Red Bull, Sebastian Vettel | Modify: Edit this | Leave a comment »


It was all celebration for Alonso, Kimi and Lewis but behind the scenes Pirelli was getting the shaft.

It was all celebration for Alonso, Kimi and Lewis but behind the scenes Pirelli was getting the shaft.

“Do you like the old-style F1 or the new tyre-dominated F1 best?” Raikkonen: “Makes no difference. This is what we have and you’d better like it or do something else.” I got this wonderfully deadpan delivered Kimi-ism from Andrew Benson’s twitter feed after the race, which at least gave me a smile as I sadly realized that “the tires” were going to sabotage any conversation about the great drives from Fernando, Raikkonen and Hamilton. Of course TIRES would be the talking point for the next week and probably throughout the race weekend in Bahrain, and so fingers to keyboard to get in my POV, although I’d really rather be telling you what an awesome drive Fernando had.

No need to go into the details of the race, that is what all the real websites and journalists are for. Vettel and Red Bull didn’t have their usual “gives you wings” pace that generally results in beating the crap out of everyone on Sunday, so they qualified mid-pack but still came up with a strategy that almost worked. Mark Webber had a disastrous race due to a combination of driver error and an uncharacteristic pit stop issue. I guess when you are going for sub-two second pit service there are bound to be a few hiccups. So Red Bull effectively took themselves out of the GP of China and somehow we are to believe it is Pirelli’s fault.

Mercedes, another one of the finger pointers at Pirelli, finished with one car on the podium and one car in the garage. Hamilton qualified on pole but could not match Ferrari’s early pace when they were both on the same soft tires. Was this down to the tires or is the Ferrari just faster? I would say the latter until proven otherwise. Rosberg just didn’t seem to have the pace that Lewis did and then a broken anti-roll bar put him out of the race anyway. Was that Pirelli’s fault?

It never ceases to amaze me how much complaining goes on in F1. I say that lovingly because I do a lot of it myself, but in this case it is not as though Red Bull, Mercedes and McLaren were given tires that were a different spec from what Ferrari, Lotus or anyone else for that matter received. It is not as though there hasn’t been several opportunities to collect the data from them. Here is a simple fact: Everyone is given the same opportunity and information to develop their chassis any way they like in any direction (as long as it comply’s with the sporting regs of course).

Ferrari over the last few years has been better on its tire wear with full tanks then in qualy trim. So has Lotus. That is a design choice that it would appear they [Ferrari] have taken and continued to follow. Ditto for Lotus. Throw Sauber into that group as well. And now all of a sudden because of Red Bull’s design decisions the tires are not good? Really, I didn’t hear too much complaining in Australia, and yes there were issues with the tires in Malaysia, but it was still a Red Bull 1-2.
Pirelli's tire line, public enemy number 1 if your Redbull and Mercedes...

Pirelli’s tire line, public enemy number 1 if your Redbull and Mercedes…

The most common complaint as far as I can tell is that racing is not racing anymore, that drivers are not going flat out start to finish. That everyone is more concerned about preserving the tires than racing hard, that there is some kind of shadow racing going on. Not to pick a fight with anyone but come on, really? No racing happened on Sunday? I think we saw a lot of incredible racing on Sunday.

Instead of tires, lets talk about fuel for a minute. When a driver uses up most of his fuel during his first two stints he goes into fuel saving mode. Now he loses some of his weapons; he can’t drive flat out, he can’t attack the car in front, he’s vulnerable to attack because he can’t use all the available engine power. Is he now driving the car at 70% of his ability? I don’t think most people would say so, its just a way of racing that requires different skills. So is tire-saving mode so very different than fuel-saving mode?

Yes, drivers have to look after the tires in a more comprehensive way now but that is part of the package, and it was FIA-mandated to spice up racing. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the whole reason for requiring different compounds was because racing was so “I need 20 espressos just to make it to the trophy presentation” boring and usually ended being a single file parade with Schumacher leading. We can’t have it both ways folks! While there were great battles between Schumacher and Haikkonen from that era, I think racing is so much better and more interesting in its current form.

And by the way, all this complaining sounds remarkably like arguments from the not-too-distant past against the introduction of DRS. I can still remember Jacques Villenueve insisting that the pass (the essential thing that makes Formula 1 so bad-ass, so exciting, so sweet) is now faked or engineered and why should the faster car in front be penalized? Never mind that he was not even piloting an F1 car at the time. And he may even have a point. Whatever the case, this issue has seemingly gone away. For the record, DRS was also instituted to spice up racing.

It is true that new strategies must now be considered for a Grand Prix, but is this a bad thing? Or is it just adding to the complexity and excitement of racing, just as all sports evolve over time? We already have KERS, DRS, all the buttons and adjustments that the drivers have to manage, in addition to shifting some unimaginable number of times while driving on the edge of a car’s ability. Add in the skillful art of driving super fast in a way that does not punish the tires as much as the next guy, this is just another part of being a GP driver in the modern age.
Jacque Villenuve in his Williams FW19 - When tires were a lot more innocent.

Jacque Villenuve in his Williams FW19 – When tires were a lot more innocent.

I’m not completely disagreeing with anything that has been said, although I think comparing Formula 1 to the WWF (Mr. Webber) is overstating the issue somewhat. I’m all for debating rule and policy changes, but when it drifts into stating or implying that the best teams are not on the podium because of these tire issues, you’ve gone too far. Seems to me the teams that made the podium were the ones that performed the best that Sunday, and they all had the same rules, same tires, same opportunity.

So maybe Pirelli tweaked their soft tires too much (by the way the other two tires used in by far the majority of the race laps seemed just fine but no one is talking about those tires). We’re just three races in but there is already a whole bunch of not so nice talking (whining?) up and down the pit wall from all sides: Drivers, Team Principals, and the Fans. Niki Lauda, a great racer, an expert on all things F1, has all but called for Pirelli to be tied and quartered on this issue. He may single-handedly bully Pirelli into changing their tire compounds. Maybe a little adjustment is in order. Or maybe not. As (only) Kimi would say, “This is what we have & you’d better like it or do something else.” -jp-

entry Apr 16 2013, 03:07 AM
Are You A #1 Or A #2
Posted: April 14, 2013 | Author: johnpierrerivera | Filed under: F1, F1 News | Tags: Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Mercedes AMG, Nico Rosberg, Ross Brawn, Team Orders | Modify: Edit this | Leave a comment »
Will this picture be looked back on with the sentimant, if i only new then what i know now. L to R, Ross, Nico, Lewis, and Toto Wolf.

Will this picture be looked back on with the sentiment, if i only new then what i know now. L to R, Ross, Nico, Lewis, and Toto Wolf.

All this talk of team orders has got me thinking about another issue and that is the issue of having #1 and #2 drivers within a team. Not because of the Vettel and Webber affair from the Malaysian GP; clearly Sebastian Vettel is Red Bull’s #1, just as Fernando Alonso is Ferrari’s #1. No, this is in response to the problem with the Mercedes boys.

While Red Bull politics were causing all kinds of drama, a quieter yet just as controversial issue was brewing at Mercedes between Nico Rosberg, Lewis Hamilton and Ross Brawn the team principal. Before you get any ideas, no, this is not an F1 love triangle. Far from it. Rosberg has three years of seniority at Mercedes, during which he effectively dominated 7 time World Champion Michael Shumacher fair and square, plus he just re-upped with them in a multi-year, big money contract. Yet he was ordered to hold station and let Hamilton (the new guy) take the last step on the podium for the Malaysian GP. It generally appeared to all watching the race that Rosberg had the pace and life left in his tires to take the position away from Hamilton, yet as the laps counted down Brawn continued to reiterate the ‘hold position’ team order. At one point over the radio Rosberg replied to Brawn, “Remember this one,” for the entire F1 world to hear. Cheeky wouldn’t you say? But quite effective.

Quick note: there is some discussion being floated that there were fuel load issues due to the Mercedes cars having been short filled in anticipation of more rainfall which did not materialize. I don’t want to get into the technical aspects of the situation, suffice to say there were a number of factor in Ross’s “team order.” I am more interested in exploring the human aspect and how this issue is going to play itself out over the season.

So not only do we have this black cloud known as team orders hanging over the pit lane, along with the debatable issue of whether to follow them obediently or pull a Vettel and disregard them, we also have the problem of who is and who isn’t a team #1. Because team orders generally exist in order to favor one driver or another.

On the surface of it, this should be a very easy problem to sort out. Which driver has collected the most points (for the team) either in seasons past or so far in the current season? By this method we have a way to determine who is the #1 driver, it is nice and tidy and stats like this are not ambiguous. Lets take the top three teams for the last three years as an example and look at that in detail.

Here are the points for both drivers for the last 3 years.

Red Bull

2010 2011 2012

Vettel-256 Vettel-392 Vettel-281

Webber-242 Webber-258 Webber-179

Conclusion: Vettel is the #1, simple as that.

Ferrari

Alonso-252 Alonso-257 Alonso-278

Massa-144 Massa-118 Massa-122

Definitely no question here about who is the #1.

McLaren

Hamilton-240 Hamilton-227 Hamilton-190

Button-214 Button-270 Button-188

Ah. Interesting. Over 3 years, clearly Hamilton is the #1. But if we look at just 2011, was Button the #1 that year? And they weren’t so very far apart in 2012.

I say no. Even when the points favor Button I would still consider Lewis as McLaren’s #1 driver by virtue of this simple fact: They are both World Champions but Lewis is more capable of winning races than Button. Period. Now we can see how trouble begins. They’ve both won a World Championship (Button with a different team). Button outscores Hamilton in 2011, how does McLaren justify possibly favoring Hamilton? Not very comfortably when Button’s in the room.

Trying to solve the problem neatly with point totals also does not address Hamilton’s new team and teammate. There is virtually no comparable data between the two, yet because of Ross’s decision and Nico’s compliance some on the pit wall are already giving Lewis #1 status. Seems to me a cruel punishment for Nico doing the right thing.

We had the same problem back in 2010 over at Red Bull. Webber had a higher points tally than Vettel for most of the year. In fact right up to the last race. However, no one that watches F1 was under any illusion, Red Bull clearly treated Vettel as its #1 driver. I personally am OK with this, but don’t confuse this with me thinking that it is fair. (I posted about this issue when Front Wing-gate happened to Webber at the British GP if you’re interested.)

In an article by Andrew Benson titled “Chinese Grand Prix: Webber & Vettel Wounds Have Never Healed“, Webber states, “Yeah, well, They didn’t exactly lay it on a plate for me in 2010, did they?” referring to Red Bull and how they never really supported his 2010 title campaign and at times lobbied against it. That doesn’t seem right in any context does it? Such is the issue that has been thrust on to the F1 stage, front and center.

Further muddying the waters, some teams are historically structured to have a #1 driver and a supporting driver, and they make no apologies about it. Many people would complain that it is not very sporting, but at the end of the day it is the team’s decision and their right to run their team as they see fit. The #1/#2 style has Ferrari written all over it and you can throw Red Bull into that camp as well. Now it looks like Mercedes might be joining their ranks, we’ll see. Ross Brawn was very successful with this strategy when he was at Ferrari, after all.

This issue has been causing problems as long as F1 has had teams – Williams had to deal with it during the Mansel and Piquet pairing going back some years. Let’s talk about Lewis and Fernando for a moment. I am 100% convinced that Mclaren lost the Drivers Championship to Kimi and Ferrari because due to in-team fighting, between both Lewis and Fernando. You can argue all you want that Ron Denis was right not to support Fernando that year and let Lewis race him, but the result was zero drivers championship. And of course the mother feud of them all, Senna and Prost when they both drove for McLaren. These passionate drivers made great copy and gained legions of fans but I am pretty sure their team owners were not too keen on the fallout and distractions that come along with feuding teammates. It did make for compelling racing and you know what I always say, as much as we fans complain about this and that, what is fair and not fair, we love the conflict, the drama, the struggle, the crash and burn, and ultimately the triumph. It’s what makes F1, well, F1.

Look, top teams are always going to try to employ the best drivers that can net them the most points and with that comes some particular issues. It makes logical sense that if a driver is a World Champion then they would expect different treatment. Is Vettel wrong to feel a little entitlement? Hamilton was brought to Mercedes to add World Champion cachet to the team. He took a risky chance leaving McLaren, shouldn’t he get some kind of preferential treatment? Fernando fits the big-ticket item that is Ferrari and one must say that even though he has yet to win them a championship, he has managed to keep the Scuderia relevant these last three years.

And then there is Schumacher. Ah Schumacher, who did bring multiple championships to Ferrari, but also demanded that the other Ferrari driver be contracted to play the supporting role. It seemed to work right up until Luca DiMontezemolo wanted Kimi Raikkonen and Kimi being Kimi was never going to sign that kind of deal. General consensus is that this is what forced Michael out of racing early the first time.

Back to Hamilton, he was hired by Mercedes to win a championship. Maybe not this year but definitely for 2014. Has he already established himself as the team’s #1? Many people think Ross’s team order did that for him. I’m not sure I would agree just yet.
Friends now, but what does the future hold in store for these two...

Friends now, but what does the future hold in store for these two…

I think Hamilton learned quite a bit from the feuding with Fernando, in retrospect he must see that his obsession with beating his teammate distracted from winning the championship. He corrected his behavior slightly while teammates with Button. Now he has mastered it even more. At the last GP, Hamilton was very gracious about the team order from Ross and all but gave the trophy to Rosberg by saying that Rosberg should have been on the podium for Malaysia. But don’t be fooled. Inside Lewis is a gritty fighter, like Fernando, like Sebastian. I think Hamilton is subtly but definitely drawing a line for Rosberg. His most recent pole and the first for Mercedes is playing right into this. I’m sure he is not feeling all that bad about Malaysia and now starting from pole he must feel justified that he was treated as a #1 three weeks ago.

So over at Red Bull the feuding and fireworks will continue, even though everyone except maybe Webber knows Vettel is the #1 driver. At Mercedes I don’t think Rosberg should, nor will, accept #2 very easily. A lot depends on this weekend in China. If Rosberg outperforms Lewis in the race, then message sent. He can fight for it. But he’s already missed one chance to send that message, since he could only manage 4th in qualifying while Hamilton took pole. So he better have a killer race. I don’t think Rosberg thinks he’s a #2 driver, and if he starts to feel that Ross has engineered something behind the scenes, similar to how Rubens Barrichello felt at Brawn GP when Button was being treated like a #1, then all bets are off and Mercedes could go the way of the Bull… -jp-

entry Apr 13 2013, 11:53 AM
Posted: April 13, 2013 | Author: johnpierrerivera | Filed under: F1, F1 News | Tags: Felipe Massa, Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, Grand Prix of China, Kimi Raikonen, Lewis Hamilton, Mark Webber, McLaren, Mercedes, Pirelli Tires, Qualifing for Chinese GP, Racing, Red Bull, Sebastian Vettel | Modify: Edit this |1 Comment »


Well that was very interesting. Don’t think I have ever seen such little qualifying for a gp. I suppose we all know the reason for the lack of track action (not even the back markers wanted to go out in the beginning of Q1).

The impression that one gets is the option tire that Pirelli brought which is the soft tire with the yellow band around the outside is not as durable as most teams would like. In fact the prediction with 300+ kilos of fuel is for a pit stop after 5 or 6 laps, tops. Ok that is easy enough.

Now for what we don’t know. In no particular order:

1. What’s the real reason that Mark Webber stopped on track in the middle of Q2. Redbull says fuel pressure. Seems to me you have to have fuel to have pressure. This would not be the first time Redbull has short fueled a driver because the pace was not there. We will see what the stewards think.

2. Will the Mercedes be as kind to its tires as the Ferrari or the Lotus. Quick note: if Lewis and Vettel ever become teammates every other driver can kiss their chances of pole position good-bye. What a spectacular lap from Lewis. However, you don’t get any points on Satuerday, so the saying goes.

3. What happened to Nico? This does not look good for the power struggle that must be brewing at Mercedes AMG. But lets see how nico’s race pace is.

4. Sorry all you Massa fans the dream is over. He did not out qualify Fernando for a 5th race. Still, that being said, he [Massa] is definitely back.What we don’t know is can Massa reach the podium. remember he started 2nd in Malaysian but finished 5th. That being said, congrats Felipe to your new form now maybe Ferrari can win the constructors championship this year.

5. That Mclaren still has lots of problems and it does not look like They know what it is. Button is down in 8th, Perez is in 12th

6. The F138 is now officially a fast car, but is it a winner? This being the first dry qualifying without changing conditions (aside from the soft tires) we could see a more complete picture of each teams performance. Fernando qualified a solid 3rd. Felipe in 5th.

7. The million dollar question. Will the stragey that Redbull employed pay off. Vettel has a last minute tire change in Q3 to the prime also called the medium tire (with the white strip) and then finishes p9. At some point he will inherit the lead, question is, will that be enough for Vettel and Redbull to convert it in to a win or at the very least a podium which considering their pace this weekend would be a great result.

We shall see. Who is going to be on that top step? This one is hard to call. Kimi in P2 with Lotus’s tire wear will be the favorite in my mind. Fernando is threat from positions 1 to 12, Nico has something to prove, as does Massa, and Vettel is not 3x champ for nothing, Lewis is staring the race from the best position possible. It’s a coin toss really.

Back to what we know. It all depends on the first stint and how the soft tires perform even though we don’t really know - what that is going to be like.

Well I know this, It should end up being a very fascinating race no matter what. wink.gif -jp-

Here are the results:
Chinese Grand Prix 2013

Qualifying
Driver Teams Time
1 LC Hamilton (GBR) Mercedes 1’34.484
2 KM Räikkönen (FIN) Lotus 1’34.761
3 F Alonso (ESP) Ferrari 1’34.788
4 N Rosberg (GER) Mercedes 1’34.861
5 F Massa (BRA) Ferrari 1’34.933
6 R Grosjean (FRA) Lotus 1’35.364
7 D Ricciardo (AUS) Toro Rosso 1’35.998
8 J Button (GBR) McLaren 2’05.673
9 S Vettel (GER) Red Bull -
10 N Hülkenberg (GER) Sauber -
11 P di Resta (GBR) Force India 1’36.287
12 S Perez (MEX) McLaren 1’36.314
13 A Sutil (GER) Force India 1’36.405
14 M Webber (AUS) Red Bull 1’36.679
15 P Maldonado (VEN) Williams 1’37.139
16 JE Vergne (FRA) Toro Rosso 1’37.199
17 V Bottas (FIN) Williams 1’37.769
18 E Gutiérrez (MEX) Sauber 1’37.990
19 J Bianchi (FRA) Marussia 1’38.780
20 M Chilton (GBR) Marussia 1’39.537
21 C Pic (FRA) Caterham 1’39.614
22 G van der Garde (NED) Caterham 1’39.660

entry Apr 13 2013, 11:52 AM
Ferrari, Are You Kidding Me???
Posted: April 11, 2013 | Author: johnpierrerivera | Filed under: F1, F1 News, Racing | Tags: F1, F1 News, Fernando Alonso, Ferrari, Malaysian GP, Racing, Stefano Domenicali | Modify: Edit this | 1 Comment »



This could be the shortest post so far of my short blogging career or maybe not. I could easily sum it up by saying Ferrari WTF, why gamble this early in the season? And be done with this post and move on.


However, the impassioned, crazy F1 fanatic with an opinion on everything just can’t let it go. Guess you’re going to get the long version. Why am I so irate you ask? With only one lap completed in the Malaysian GP, Ferrari’s race came to an abrupt end. Never mind that Felipe finished the race in 5th. Whatever.


Here’s the set-up for those of you that did not see the race. Due to rain that fell just before the start, everyone chose to start the race on intermediates (rain) tires. OK, lights out and Fernando, as is the norm, has a great start and gains second position from his teammate Felipe with ease. Fernando, who is usually error-free, then commits a big error and runs into the back of Vettel. Right about here, I want to tell Fernando that you very rarely win the race on the first turn, or in this case the second. Anyway, Alonso breaks his front wing, not the best thing to do if you want your car to steer properly. Ok damage done, no use crying over spilled/broken carbon fiber. At this point the thing to do is pit and replace the wing, despite the penalty of being dropped down to last place. At least you’re racing. Right? That is what I think just about any of the other 11 teams would have done. Second race of the year, your driver is in second position in the driver’s standings and your team is in first in the team category. Limit the damage and see how the race plays out, RIGHT? RIGHT? Wrong…


That is not quite how it went. Instead Ferrari opted to keep Fernando out due to a calculated gamble (more on that in a minute) and try and stretch his first stint to coincide with the changing of slick tires due to the fact that the rain had stopped and the track was drying out. The logic being Fernando would not have to incur an extra stop, and thus be penalized further. Now all this sounds reasonable unless like me you were watching this and saw how badly the front wing was damaged. Note: Stefano Domenicali the team principle, Andreas Stella Fernando’s race engineer, Pat Fry the technical director and the rest of the pit wall team would have also been seeing what I was seeing. I can assure you I am not saying this in hindsight, but without any doubt in my mind I could see that the pylons (the parts that support the front wing) could not hold the thing together for another lap, let alone the seven or eight laps that most drivers did on the intermediate tires.

And predictably, while traveling down the pit straight (one of the longest pit straights in F1) the downforce gets the better of the pylons and the front wing rips apart and lodges itself under the Ferrari and Fernando is now unable to drive the car which then becomes marooned at the end of the straight in the run off area, game over. For the record this was one of only two retirements of the race, the other being Pastor Maldonado’s Williams. Quite embarrassing if you ask me.


I have made it a point of calling out anyone and everyone when they engage in bizarre or questionable behavior, be it driving, statements to the press, team politics, F1 governance or when someone just plain F’s it up. Now although I feel Alonso is the most complete driver on the grid (which most people will agree with up and down the pit lane), period, and have stated that quite clearly on this blog many times I will be the first one to say, “FERNANDO YOU Fd’ IT UP.” That being said, I forgive you, you were just doing what we as fans want to see. Drive hard, take chances and find a way to win no matter the circumstances or your car’s potential. You are in the heat of the moment, you are all by yourself and you have to make split second decisions not to mention you are dealing with 21 other drivers on the same piece of tarmac so you are not always in control of your destiny.


However what is hard for me to understand or accept are bad, really bad decisions that are made by very smart people, people being plural, on the pit wall. Shouldn’t some engineer have come forward and said, “Hey you guys that wing will not hold”? Simple as that. I mean what good is all that telemetry and all those computers that the teams use to aid in the most complex calculations and haul around all over the world not to mention the shitload of servers and towers that are connected back at the factory watching everything in real time if they can’t determine something as simple as how a stressed part will last after impact. Personally my eyeballs were really the only equipment I needed to surmise the outcome of this calculated gamble.


Back to the pit wall, I will not go into details, but Abu Dhabi 2010 comes to mind also concerning a pit stop judgment call. And last year at Canada is another sore spot for me. That missed opportunity to not call Fernando into the pits and instead (a calculated gamble) to keep him out on tires that were worn out, allowed Sergio Perez to pass him and Vettel as well. That cost Fernando at least 2 points with Vettel right there, possibly 7 when you take in account Perez. How many points did Alonso lose the championship by? I don’t want to put too fine a point on it, but it does seem that when Ferrari takes a gamble, calculated or not, and throws the dice it too often comes up snake eyes.


So Ferrari I’m calling YOU out. Stop with these bullshit Hail Mary plays (here come some American football references for all of you across the pond), save those for when time is running out, and you’re 4th and long and a first down will not get it done. Right now it is the beginning of the first quarter and there is no need to stray from the playbook. Last year you and Fernando almost won the championship in a car that was at most 5th best on the grid. You did that through consistency, cool heads and just getting on with the task at hand, no film flam, no weird strategy, and good old plain hard racing.


China is up next. Last year Fernando finished 9th which yielded only two championship points. Clearly we can improve on that. Lets call Malaysia a mulligan (another American sports term) get that car set up right, get the pit strategy right and if Fernando is on any of the podium steps at the race end we will call it even.


The F138 has good race pace and Fernando always gains some places on the start. Stop messing with the program and leave the rest of it to Alonso. Bitches… >jp<

entry Apr 10 2013, 01:48 AM
Vettel Ignores Team Orders And The F1 World Goes Crazy…


Team orders, do they suck? Yes. Are they going away? No. To give you an idea of the emotion that Vettel’s action stirred up, on JamesallenonF1.com (one of my favorite sites) there were over 1100 comments by the time the sounding off was done. Wow.

I am a long-time F1 fan and I can’t remember a time when something has caused such uproar. I don’t even think there was this much hoopla in 2006 when Michael Schumacher parked his Ferrari at La Rascasse during qualifying to prevent Fernando Alonso from taking pole for the Grand Prix of Monaco.

It is not as if this is the first time a driver has decided he was more important than the team that is paying his salary. But the press acts as if Wonderboy’s true colors have suddenly been revealed and (shocker!), he is a cunning, calculating, weasel with no scruples and a moral compass that points down. Please. I was never under any other illusion as to what kind of a driver Sebastian Vettel is ever since he caused a crash while trying to pass Mark Webber in 2010 at the Grand Prix of Turkey and then arrogantly made the international sign for “Cuckoo!” as in “Why would you get in my way, don’t you know I’m the chosen one at this team and I get what I want. Always.”

Clearly the overriding feeling is that Vettel should not have disobeyed the radio transmission, and should have held his position. So he has proven his detractors correct, he is a spoiled brat and when things don’t go his way he throws a tantrum. And maybe he has disappointed some F1 fans that thought he was the prince of this generation of drivers. By and large most fans want their heroes to have some sort of concept of right and wrong. This has long been a complaint against Schumacher, by the end of his career you either loved him or hated him. As fans we can put up with quite a bit of nastiness, but in the end what really counts is did your guy play fair or not? And Vettel did not play fair.

But then again, maybe playing fair doesn’t make a great racecar driver. We watch F1 because we like to see great racing. And drivers that race hard and win at all costs have always found a way into our hearts and minds — despite some heartless moves or mindless actions. Look at Michael Schumacher, the most popular driver of the last decade, despite numerous ‘unfair’ actions that didn’t sit well with fans. Who would you rather be, Michael Schumacher or a gentlemanly driver without seven world titles?

Or lets look at my favorite driver, Fernando Alonso. I remember Fernando acting like a petulant child sitting in the pit box to destroy Lewis Hamilton’s chances of completing his last qualifying run in Hungary in 2007. It was in response to Hamilton’s action on the previous lap, purposefully trailing Alonso (not playing fair) so he could have the last lap. They were both ignoring team orders. At which point all hell broke loose between them and the team with both drivers fighting for #1 status. Does that mean I like Alonso less? Absolutely not, in my eyes it makes him look like a true fighter.

So this issue of team orders and following them or not following them is a messy affair. The fans that revered Vettel probably like him more now and the ones that didn’t have another reason not to.

Ron Denis once famously said that drivers are like political animals. I will add to that a little, the top drivers are the ultimate political animals. Aryton Senna, Alain Prost, Nigel Mansel, Nelson Piquet, Schumacher, Hamilton, Alonso, and now let me introduce to you the club’s newest member, Sebastian Vettel. These drivers do more than just drive very fast and win. They, like all great leaders, from the time of the Roman Empire to the present, possess one additional quality and that is the ability to understand that you don’t win just by being fast, or a great orator, or a courageous fighter. You must anticipate all the factors and variables around you. You must know when to strike even if it is your friends and comrades that you will hurt. Most importantly you must never let the act of doing the right thing get in the way of what is right for you.

Echoing my point, an article in YallaF1 today quotes Gerhard Berger saying, “There are drivers like Senna or Schumacher or Vettel who develop an extra selfishness on the track.” Note he mentions all drivers with multiple world championships, a good club to be in no matter the context. He also says, “Guys like Schumacher, Senna and Vettel” will always ignore team orders “unless it is to their advantage.” And therein lies the rub for people like Mark Webber. When you’re as good as Vettel you can just plain get away with it.

All of the great drivers I’ve mentioned have this extra ‘selfishness’, if you call it that. Or maybe they’re just following the old adage, “It is often easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission.” Did Fernando ask permission to overtake Felipe Massa when he made that great pass on him coming into the pits at the GP of China back in 2010? No. Did Schumacher care about Rubens Barichello when he pushed him into the concrete at the end of the start/finish line straight at the Hungarian GP also back in 2010? No. And yet again in 2010, did Schumacher ask about the safety car rules or care about Fernando in Monaco with that pass on the last lap? The answer again is definitely no. Clearly Vettel really didn’t care about the pre-race arrangement, or “his word” which we assume he gave to the team and to Webber with ten laps to go at the Malaysian GP, driving around in 2nd place. Will he regret the seven points he ‘stole’ if he wins the world championship by as slim a margin as it has been won the last two out of three years? Most definitely, no.

One last thought before I check out. F1 drivers are some of the most scrutinized and criticized people in the world of sports (unless you’re Tiger Woods, or Lance Armstrong) so this kind of microscopic treatment is nothing new to either Vettel or Webber. It was the same for Lewis and Fernando back in the acrimonious year they spent as teammates at McLaren. This will pass, things will calm down, if Vettel wins a fourth Driver’s Championship no one will really care aside from this just being the way all great drivers are, have been, will be: win at all costs. For me, aside from the copy that this conversation has created, (which I shamelessly love) at the end of the day, I think this is really nothing more than a racing incident.

F1 will get over it, if we have a different winner in China that will be the big story, if Webber gets the measure of Vettel that will be a bigger story, if Mercedes wins in China that will be a bigger story yet. Personally, for me, I am still smarting about Alonso who is usually error-free running into the back of Vettel, breaking his front wing and being kept out on the track by Ferrari. Huh? Stefano, explain to me again why Fernando was allowed to drive down one of the longest straights on the F1 calendar with a broken front wing? It’s not like there’s a ton of downforce wanting to rip the thing right off is there? :/ -jp-

PS By the way I have read now almost everything there is to read on the Vettel-Webber Multi21 debacle (I have multi21 of the brain by now) and if you only read one story, article, or blog (besides mine, ha ha) in regards to Vettel and the greater issue of team orders it should be Joe Saward’s post by the title, A Little Background On Team Orders. I encourage everyone to give it a read. Mr. Saward eloquently gives some history, touches on the moral aspect of, and adds his perspective to this long-standing aspect of F1. It really is a jumping off point for this issue of team orders that will clearly become a hot topic this season.

entry Mar 19 2013, 02:29 AM

Posted: March 19, 2013 | Author: johnpierrerivera | Filed under: Australia GP, F1, F1 News, Lewis hamilton, McLaren, Mercedes, Racing, Ross Brawn | Leave a comment »
you can also view this at amerF1can.com
> There are many things that the prognosticators were wrong about this past weekend.
.
>
>
> "Sebastian Vettel and Red Bull will run away with the Australian GP."
>
> Nope, the best they could do was THIRD.
>
>
>
> "Ferrari and Fernando can't race at the sharp end of the grid."
>
> Yet there they were, ON THE SECOND STEP. (Another inspired drive by the BEST driver on the grid.)
>
>
>
> "Kimi Raikkonen doesn't want it enough to win."
>
> WRONG AGAIN. He gave Lotus F1 the first win of the season and himself 25 points to lead the driver's championship.
>
>
>
> But what were we all really the most wrong about?
>
>
>
> We were dead wrong about Lewis Hamilton's decision to move away from the only team he has ever known, McLaren, one of the most winning racing organizations in the history of the sport, and the one responsible for his only Driver's Title. When Hamilton dropped that bombshell on the F1 world, I don't think there was one person, reporter, team principal, bloggers (including my dumb ass) not to mention thousands of fans, that didn't think he was completely nuts.
>
>
>
> Well let me be among the first to say to Hamilton: "I'm sorry that I thought I knew better than you." Its funny when experts get it so wrong, isn't it? At the end of the day, what does anyone know really? I have been critical of Hamilton on this blog before, be it his driving style (crashing out too often), his choice of girlfriend (I still think he should lose her and concentrate on racing for the moment), his interaction with his team (at times it was so disrespectful), the tweet-gate issue, whatever. And then last year he decides it's time to leave McLaren for that crappy two-seconds-off-the-pace Mercedes? I was shocked! Hamilton, what are you thinking?
>
>
>
> Well apparently the answer to that is: he was the only one thinking and the rest of us were assuming! Upon reflection, it's clear that no one can ever, with any real certainty, know how his team's car is going to perform from year to year. Even the mighty Red Bull had it's ups and downs last year. They won a race early on, but did not come on strong until the final five races. It is difficult to know when to jump ship based on car performance. Fernando guessed correctly after his two championship years at Renault when he left to go race at McLaren and it paid off. Nico Rosberg left Williams for Mercedes and that guess paid off as well, but it could have easily gone the other way. Leave a team just as they get it right, and you are left thinking "If only I would have stayed another year…"
>
>
>
> So everyone reacted to Hamilton's decision based on the car's then-performance. Hamilton was wisely answering the question "What environment is best for me?" Not "What car is going to provide me with another Driver's Title?" Go race for a team that you are comfortable and happy with and you have the first ingredient to a driver's winning success.
>
>
>
> So the car has some good pace in it. Hamilton qualified third and ended the race fifth. I think on any given day with decent machinery he is just as good as Vettel. It is a good start for Hamilton and Mercedes. If Ross and his group can develop the car in the right direction, surely they will be race winners. Oh and by the way, where did McLaren, Hamilton's previous team finish? Jenson Button - 9th, Sergeio Perez - 11th.
>
>
>
> I can just about hear Lewis saying, "How do you like me now?"
>
> -jp out!-

entry Mar 19 2013, 02:25 AM
Posted: March 11, 2013 | Author: johnpierrerivera | Filed under: F1, Racing | 1 Comment »

you can also view this at amerf1can.com
Well it finally happened, one of my favorite websites and a leader in motorsport reporting (one of them at least) has decided that I go to their website way too often. The other day I got up, made my coffee, sat down at the computer and hit the Autosport tab, more than likely for the first of several times. Not for the day, but for the morning before I take a break from F1, and then pick it up again in the afternoon. I then selected the desired article. At first, I thought I did something wrong because a big white window came on the screen asking for money. So I closed that and hit the article link again, and the same big white window came on the screen and I thought “That’s weird I didn’t select one of the pay-to-view articles.” (Autosport has specific articles and analysis that you can read for a one time fee). So I repeated the process again and as before the same thing happened. At this point I decided to read the fine print under the big white window asking for money. It very politely stated that I had used up all my free views and that if I wanted to continue I needed to pay. Whaaaaatt????


As far as I’m concerned, I’m already ‘paying’ for the site by viewing the ads on the top banner, the sidebar, and of course the bottom. (I won’t complain too much about those because you might see them on this blog someday if more than five people ever read it.) But on the topic of ads, I do wonder why I need an ad to sell me the product that I just Googled? Seems that if I found it without the ad, then maybe advertisers should figure out something similar to show me that I haven’t seen. Nothing more irritating than being shown pictures of something you just purchased, or decided not to purchase. I never quite understood that, but then again I have never purchased something because a women with exaggerated measurements was holding it and smiling, or because some guy in race gear was telling me I need energy for 5 hours (that was for all you NASCAR buffs), or in the case of a car, seeing as that is the fundamental beginning of all racing, and this is a racing blog, no ad or commercial would ever make me want to buy say, an Infiniti, even though Red Bull’s livery now features it predominately on the new RB9. (Actually that makes me less likely to buy it, now maybe if it was on Ferrari’s livery …)


But back to Autosport’s pay-to-view policy. Now I have to view ads AND pay for access to this site, seriously? Oddly enough while I could not read any more articles last month, I was able to watch testing live, go figure, of course I had to stay up until one a.m. to do it but at this point I didn’t want to look a gift tail pipe in it’s opening. I just can’t think why Autosport would put another restriction on their website. I am already being limited in my viewing due to the fact that the good articles are pay-to-view anyway. Most of what is available for free are just snippets of commonly known news from around the racing world, not insightful analysis. Truth be known I would get a subscription, but this is a weekly magazine and with the overseas shipping it is just too expensive for me.


I guess this is just another sign-o-the times that nothing is free in this day and age, and now the Internet, that one last cool place that was free, is free no more. For the record I believe I have 30 free views (i could go through that in a day, no problem) per month, for now. However we all know that will soon be reduced to 20 and then to 15, 10, 5 and surely to 0. I guess Autosport is trying to wean me off my steady diet of free news gently, isn’t that so sweet of Autosport, how considerate. Whatever.


I suppose Autosport's logic is that I will end up being a paying customer. Well I have just one word for you, Mr. Autosport Accountant. Actually I have several: YallaF1, BBC F1, Planet F1, James Allen on F1, Joe Saward, ESPNF1, Speed, Adam Cooper, Peter Windsor, Formula1.com, Formula1OnLive.com, and I have not even touched the surface of all the foreign language websites.



The list is almost endless. Autosport, what are you thinking? It doesn't cost you anything when I look at your site, except its an opportunity to gain a fan that might buy the money articles some day, or the print magazine. You are not losing money by making your site free to me. I will not be paying for access, therefore you are not going to make any money on me, except for the fact that you can sell more ads since my eyeballs go to your site multiple times everyday, but I guess that soon will not be the case, will it? And if by chance I did want to pay for your content, it will be for the magazine from my local newsstand. Oh yeah, and I really do have one more word for you. Bitches! I'm out of here. -jp-

2 Pages V  1 2 >