Alonso vs Hamilton - Ding, ding. Seconds out, round two
- Thread starter FB
- Start date
..
Well I think it's pretty clear Alonso is an intelligent man, and one would have to question why he would have chosen to follow the unorthadox strategy with no justifiable reason. An it's true his name does keep cropping up during these shenanigans... Personally I think he's a win at all cost kinda guy and he knew about the whole 'crashgate' mess, and the only reason he got out of it is because Flav (his manager, really unibiased) kept him out of it, knowing it's better to keep some foothold in F1 by being Alonso's manager.
OK chaps, you may see me as a refusenik and I'm known to be an Alonso fan, but even Baldrick couldn't have come up with this cunning a plan.
Singapore 2008 - Alonso starts on the grid at 15th, with Piquet at 16th (I think). Lap 8 and Alonso was running in 11th position; he then refuelled early after 11 laps (i.e 3 laps later) - sadly, I can't find/remember what position he slotted into after this, but quite a way back I would think.
Nelson had his little turn on lap 14, the safety car was deployed and Alonso ended up in 5th position after it went in, mostly because he had been running light and on the soft tyres and already been in to the pits.
After the SC, Massa got a drive through for the fuel line foul-up and Rosberg received a 10 second stop-go penalty because he pitted too early.
After 28 laps the running order was Trulli , Fisichella, Alonso, Rosberg and Coulthard. At lap 39 it was Alonso, Rosberg, Coulthard and Hamilton - this out of a 61 lap race and the finishing first three were Alonso, Rosberg and Hamilton.
In the interview after the race, Alonso said it would take him " a couple of days to realise we've won a race this year"
We have to believe that Briatore and Symonds set up Piquet's "crash" - only because it has been found so in the courts.
But you have to wonder if they (Briatore/Symonds) realistically thought that a SC on lap 14 would actually create a winner, particularly one starting from 15th on the grid - so soon in a race that had no history.
For me, and more importantly, you have to wonder if a man with Alonso's intelligence and skill would have fallen for it.
All racers are a bit dodgy (at least the champions are), but none are stupid - so I don't think Alonso knew anything about this half-arsed plan.
Singapore 2008 - Alonso starts on the grid at 15th, with Piquet at 16th (I think). Lap 8 and Alonso was running in 11th position; he then refuelled early after 11 laps (i.e 3 laps later) - sadly, I can't find/remember what position he slotted into after this, but quite a way back I would think.
Nelson had his little turn on lap 14, the safety car was deployed and Alonso ended up in 5th position after it went in, mostly because he had been running light and on the soft tyres and already been in to the pits.
After the SC, Massa got a drive through for the fuel line foul-up and Rosberg received a 10 second stop-go penalty because he pitted too early.
After 28 laps the running order was Trulli , Fisichella, Alonso, Rosberg and Coulthard. At lap 39 it was Alonso, Rosberg, Coulthard and Hamilton - this out of a 61 lap race and the finishing first three were Alonso, Rosberg and Hamilton.
In the interview after the race, Alonso said it would take him " a couple of days to realise we've won a race this year"
We have to believe that Briatore and Symonds set up Piquet's "crash" - only because it has been found so in the courts.
But you have to wonder if they (Briatore/Symonds) realistically thought that a SC on lap 14 would actually create a winner, particularly one starting from 15th on the grid - so soon in a race that had no history.
For me, and more importantly, you have to wonder if a man with Alonso's intelligence and skill would have fallen for it.
All racers are a bit dodgy (at least the champions are), but none are stupid - so I don't think Alonso knew anything about this half-arsed plan.
Funny isn't it? How Renault have to manipulate the result to win a race, and by luck of the draw win the race afterwards on merit...
Almost
That's what happens when you get involved - thank God Spesh isn't aboutAlmost
...and the fact that Symonds, at least, has offered a full and frank confession of what they did. The Piquet crash isn't some conspiracy theory, there is documented proof.
I'm sorry, jen, the theory was sound.
Under 2008 rules, if you were the only stopper before a Safety Car period, the world is your oyster.
No-one can dive into the pits because they're closed, so Alonso (as the only man already taken his first stop (apart from the Red Bulls, who're behind him anyway)) can cruise up to the back, knowing:
I'm afraid the plan was well-thought out, executed well and worked. It did not guarantee Alonso the win, but by unfair means it gave him a chance that he would otherwise not have had.
As for Alonso not knowing, I find it difficult to imagine him not questioning a strategy presented to him by his team as much as he possibly could. However, the remark "lucky we had that Safety Car" to Flav at the end of the race is not an indication of a guilty conscience.
So I don't know if he is guilty, but controversy does seem to stalk him, which I tend to believe is rarely coincidental!
Under 2008 rules, if you were the only stopper before a Safety Car period, the world is your oyster.
No-one can dive into the pits because they're closed, so Alonso (as the only man already taken his first stop (apart from the Red Bulls, who're behind him anyway)) can cruise up to the back, knowing:
- Everyone has to stop bar the Red Bulls [behind him]
- He is less than 25 seconds behind anyone
- Anyone who has stopped already has a drive-through hanging over them
I'm afraid the plan was well-thought out, executed well and worked. It did not guarantee Alonso the win, but by unfair means it gave him a chance that he would otherwise not have had.
As for Alonso not knowing, I find it difficult to imagine him not questioning a strategy presented to him by his team as much as he possibly could. However, the remark "lucky we had that Safety Car" to Flav at the end of the race is not an indication of a guilty conscience.
So I don't know if he is guilty, but controversy does seem to stalk him, which I tend to believe is rarely coincidental!
This could not guarantee victory - and the flaw in the plan was exposed! Alonso came out behind Fisichella's FI and was slowed down to such an extent that Rosberg nearly got far enough away to jump Alonso after his drive through.
I'm afraid the plan was well-thought out, executed well and worked. It did not guarantee Alonso the win, but by unfair means it gave him a chance that he would otherwise not have had.
A tad ambiguous tb, but I get your drift
OK, I’ll accept that Briatore, Symonds and Piquet were all guilty of race-fixing.
But one has to admit that they were clutching at straws and there was no guarantee that the plan would work.
Both Rosberg and Kubica had to pit on laps 15 and 16 respectively whilst the pit lane was closed (and knowing that they would receive a penalty) because they were short of fuel – so Alonso’s pitting on lap 12 can be seen in a little more perspective and perhaps not as "odd" as everyone assumes. It wasn’t that much ahead of the other two – btw Rosberg had started in p9 and Kubica in p4.
In 2008 the safety car was deployed again on lap 49 when Sutil went into the wall.
There were also safety car incidents in 2009; on lap 21 and two in 2010, on lap 1 and lap 30 – although one could say this was in hindsight, it would seem fairly obvious that there would be a need for a safety car at some stage on a street circuit, particularly at night – so it seems even more bizarre to me that Renault would choose to manufacture something that was bound to happen anyway.
As for Alonso not knowing, I find it difficult to imagine him not questioning a strategy presented to him by his team as much as he possibly could. However, the remark "lucky we had that Safety Car" to Flav at the end of the race is not an indication of a guilty conscience.
So I don't know if he is guilty, but controversy does seem to stalk him, which I tend to believe is rarely coincidental!
“A first podium of the season and first victory as well and I am extremely happy. I cannot believe it right now, I think I need a couple of days to realise we won a race this year. It seems impossible all through the season to be close to the top guys and here suddenly we have been competitive from Friday. Obviously we started at the back and the first safety car helped me a lot and I was able to win the race”. Alonso after the race.
.
Piquet and Alonso were among those who appeared before the FIA hearing after which the 26 members of the WMSC met to decide what action to take. Alonso was cleared of any involvement in the conspiracy – from an article in Times Online, 21 Sept 2009 by Ben Smith.
There was also a comment (and I can't find the article from whence it came, sorry) that said " Alonso was cleared of wrongdoing; the FIA found no evidence that he or his mechanics knew anything about the scheme.
I have found that controversy is not an indicator of truth and many people have been accused regularly of trumped up charges because public perception is always blinkered by it's own prejudices.
.
Apologies for this mish-mash of a response - sometimes technology defeats me - one of the few things that does though
I have conceded on this. In the same vein, there is a lot of the "conspiracy theory" about Alonso's involvement!
Absolutely! He's either not involved or he's a very good actor.
The Red Bulls pitted on lap 14. However, the pitstop windows were far narrower in 2008 than they are today - it was unusual to see a car pit a full 2 laps before everyone else. In addition, the standard procedure for a car outside the top 10 if chaos was expected was to run long, and Nelsinho Piquet very nearly won the German Grand Prix on this ploy. Indeed, the top 10 were always likely to pit earlier as they tended to be light due to qualifying on the fuel.
Of course, but you cannot guarantee that any plan would work. If someone ahead of him had pitted early it would not have. But it was Symonds and Briatore's job to maximise Renault's potential; this plan, risky as it was, would be better than trundling around and finishing 15th and 16th.
But, jen, the whole point isn't that Renault needed any Safety Car. Renault needed a Safety Car after Alonso's stop and before anyone else stopped. As you have pointed out, that is a particularly narrow window. That they got one was surprising - it was mentioned on the F1 Rejects podcast how odd it was at the time, as I seem to remember. This quote is from 2008:
ie. it was the timing of the Safety Car, not just the fact of the Safety Car which contributed.
For ease of reference, which thread Bro?
Thanks Bro - learning all the time (you must get so fed up with me sometimes!)
I've already conceded on Renault's masterplan to manipulate the race.
However, if the races are/were so easy to gauge, from a strategy point of view, then it rather makes a mockery of racing at all - yes, I know there have been endless threads on the efficacy of this or that but wonder why anyone would still be watching when they are not actually races - just team principals "placing" their drivers were they want them to be.
That is a private take on the nature of the beast at the moment and it makes me quite sad.
But glad to see that you are still in two minds about Alonso - except, like all "pilots", he's just there to fool the public.
Wouldn't want to cause extra work for you - I expect others have a handle on this - so I'll just keep asking questions.
No problem - I've started a new question & answer thread here: http://cliptheapex.com/threads/how-do-i.2256/
Similar threads
- Article
