Current Fernando Alonso

Suprised there's no thread (although I had one for his blogs), so i'll start off:

A double world championship vs Raikkonen and then Schumacher in 2005 and 2006 respectively elevated Alonso's status but, apparently, no one told his rookie teammate at his brand new team of a theoretical 'pecking order' the following season ... and the Spaniard was 'seen off' by the young Englishman, Hamilton, into two years of Wilderness while both Hamilton and an even younger Vettel began to make their mark through '08 and '09.

Arguably, Alonso was in the Top 3 of all the Formula One 'Aces' in the 2000s following Hakkinen's retirement - up there with either Schumacher/Raikkonen and, then, Raikkonen/Hamilton - and remains so in the early 2010s along with Hamilton/Vettel...with only Kubica knocking on the door until the Pole's horrible Rallying accident.

A question mark initially over 2004 during which Trulli lead him in the standing until the Italian fell out with ex-manager and team boss Flavio Briatore (Alonso's then business manager) under dubious circumstances after the French Grand Prix.

Another question mark is...Who has progressed more since the end of 2007: Hamilton or Alonso?

A fan. Then came the unfortunate blackmail allegations against McLaren boss Ron Dennis on the morning of the 2007 Hungarian GP which came to light at the highly costly FIA 'Spy-Gate' hearings before Spa...followed by the odour of the deliberate crashing of the Number 2 Renault car at Singapore in 2008 which lead to Alonso finishing 1st in the event and ended in the banning of Briatore and Pat Symmonds a year later.

2009 was a poor year with 'Nando's' mind likely on the prospect of Santander paving the way to better prospects at Maranello one year earlier.

2010 was a fresh start at Ferrari (who no longer had Schumacher walking through the premises regularly) but first half season mistakes ultimately cost him a title inspite of being infamously aided by a Team Orders switch w Massa at Hockenheim (which lead to more world-wide criticism).

Relatively fast, relatively consistent but prone to mistakes and a possible insecurity complex (*) based on wanting sole focus from a team and being only happy with a Number 2 in the other car running behind him. Anything else and it seemingly rattles him.

(*) This is my own personal opinion.

..and so to 2011...

He's underperformed only at Malaysia (hit Hamilton) and China (invisible while Massa challenged McLarens and Red Bulls) and, arguably, Canada...but has maximized his chances in the other 6 races culminating in the British GP win.

He said in his post-Monaco blog that 'Silverstone would be the WDC cut-off'...and so, after some major upgrades, the Ferrari looks a winner again. It might be too late for 2011 given Vettel's finishing rate...but the 2012 regs means they should keep the hammer down at Maranello.

He's signed on through to 2016...So hopes are high of a WDC at some juncture...but not yet.

 

[Josh]

How do you know he wasn't going flat out?

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

How do you know he was?

He wasn't going flat out on the 2nd Soft stint because he was trying to make them last. Had he gone 'Vettel-Flat', he'd have degraded them earlier and, hence, come in for a 3rd set of softs (like Vettel did).

I've already said they left their 3rd set of their fastest/best tyre unused...so I'm not going to waste my time on this anymore.

Cheers, Josh.

 

[RasputinLives]

He wasn't going flat out on the 2nd Soft stint because he was trying to make them last. Had he gone 'Vettel-Flat', he'd have degraded them earlier and, hence, come in for a 3rd set of softs (like Vettel did).

Yeah I guess that makes sense as every car treats their tyres identically

 

[Sarinaide]

Oh dear Ray Ray.........still thinking Ferrari have a fast car do we?

 

[ExtremeNinja]

Oh dear Ray Ray.........still thinking Ferrari have a fast car do we?

They do. Alonso had a chance at a win if they had got the strategy right.

 

[Sarinaide]

I think it would have been pot luck though, the dramatic fall off in pace would have meant that it is to difficult to even suggest that. I have my doubts over Ferrari winning another race this season, the car has a deficiency on the harder compounds that results in a fall off that is far more significant than that of the competitors.

 

[ExtremeNinja]

I think it would have been pot luck though, the dramatic fall off in pace would have meant that it is to difficult to even suggest that. I have my doubts over Ferrari winning another race this season, the car has a deficiency on the harder compounds that results in a fall off that is far more significant than that of the competitors.

That's why I said if they got the strategy right. Button and Schumacher only did three and four laps respectively on the hard tyre. If Alonso had gone for a three stopper with minimal use of the hard tyre he would have been a lot more competitive for the duration of the race. OK, they hadn't burned any tyre in qualli but then there was Vettel and a handful of others. There was no need for Ferrari to run so long on the hard tyre, and it was a poor decision given that they know they can't make good use of it. It would not have been pot luck, it would have been good decision making.

 

[Sarinaide]

It does all seem easier in hindsight, but we must consider;

Button and Schumacher had extra set(s) of new Softs.

Button and Schumacher started on the Hard compound by virtue of not making the top 10 shootout.

Button had taken damage and needed to pit, so they got the hard tyre phase out of the way almost by default.

 

[ExtremeNinja]

It does all seem easier in hindsight, but we must consider;

Button and Schumacher had extra set(s) of new Softs.

Button and Schumacher started on the Hard compound by virtue of not making the top 10 shootout.

Button had taken damage and needed to pit, so they got the hard tyre phase out of the way almost by default.

Button and Schumacher started on primes and then dumped them. Most of quali was wet so Fernando had only burned one set of tryres in qualli. The tyres that he started the race on. He had two new sets of softs waiting in the garage for him and only used one of them.

This is not a question of hindsight, and I really do hate when people play that card. Ferrari had all the information they needed to have the foresight to run a different strategy. They knew they were poor on the hard tyre, they knew they had two brand new sets of softs to play with and yet they still chose not to.

Button and Schumacher were indeed an exception, as I stated, but this doesn't excuse Ferrari making an arse of it, again.

 

[Sarinaide]

I won't deny that Ferrari could have done a great many things this year a lot better, but that said the car is just not good enough and most wouldn't argue against that.

 

[ExtremeNinja]

I won't deny that Ferrari could have done a great many things this year a lot better, but that said the car is just not good enough and most wouldn't argue against that.

It's not good enough for a championship but when they get it right it's good enough to win races. Now the season moves on to hotter climates I think we will see a marked change in performance. They have not built a good all-rounder but when the conditions suit them, they can be as fast as anybody.

 

[Sarinaide]

It's not good enough for a championship but when they get it right it's good enough to win races. Now the season moves on to hotter climates I think we will see a marked change in performance. They have not built a good all-rounder but when the conditions suit them, they can be as fast as anybody.

It is definately not good enough for a championship, and most of the Ferrari faithful will tell you that the results obtained are well and truely deserved, it has been a big failure this season more so than any in recent memory. I would expect nothing less than a almost religious persuit to make the 2012 car competitive and potentially a title winner,.....something Ferrari have seemed to have not had for a while.

Most would say that it is somewhat naive to think that Ferrari should, or ought to have a potential race winning and championship car, and this is not really correct, Ferrari may be seen as the Man United of Formula 1, there were the bad years, but the resources and capabilities the team has, to be doing this badly is not acceptable.

 

[RasputinLives]

I don't think its a big a failure as 1991 or 1992 or 1993 or 1994 or 1995

 

[ExtremeNinja]

It is definately not good enough for a championship, and most of the Ferrari faithful will tell you that the results obtained are well and truely deserved, it has been a big failure this season more so than any in recent memory. I would expect nothing less than a almost religious persuit to make the 2012 car competitive and potentially a title winner,.....something Ferrari have seemed to have not had for a while.

Most would say that it is somewhat naive to think that Ferrari should, or ought to have a potential race winning and championship car, and this is not really correct, Ferrari may be seen as the Man United of Formula 1, there were the bad years, but the resources and capabilities the team has, to be doing this badly is not acceptable.

They are not doing that badly. There are two other teams with massive resources who are doing a little better. It's the nature of competition.

For example, in terms of race wins, McLaren has a higher hit rate than Ferrari in the time they have been around. It's the nature of competition. Of course their aim is to win but that is also the aim of their competitors, who are equally as competent and equally as competitive.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

RayInTorontoCanada said: ↑​

He wasn't going flat out on the 2nd Soft stint because he was trying to make them last. Had he gone 'Vettel-Flat', he'd have degraded them earlier and, hence, come in for a 3rd set of softs (like Vettel did).​

Yeah I guess that makes sense as every car treats their tyres identically

It makes sense because Vettel was going Flat Out on ALL 3 sets of Softs because that was the strategy - i.e. use them up and pull out as big a gap as possible...Alonso, meanwhile, used up his 2 sets of Softs in such a way so as to ensure their longevity - i.e. he went "slower" than was possible on each set of Softs and theroetically "made up" some/most/all of that "lost time" by not having to do an extra stop.

So what I said made perfect sense. The concept is the same whether its a Sauber or an HRT or a Ferrari or an RBR.

 

[RasputinLives]

I might be wrong (god knows I usually am) but weren't Ferrari able to go longer on their softer tyres because unlike Red Bull they hadn't set their camber lower than Pirrili recommended in Quali and blistered them to bits and not because Alonso was 'backing off'?

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Ferrari setting their camber within recommended limits meant they could go longer on 3 sets of Softs than RBR could on 3 sets of Softs.

That's all it meant. Correct?

Had they done that, they would have spent less time on the Prime.

Correct?

I've repeatedly said Alonso/Ferrari left a set of Softs unused thus wasting an opportunity to have a faster race.

Stupid...wasn't it?

 

[Vortex]

Or, if Alonso had made that extra stop were speaking off maybe he could have ended up back where Massa ended up when he was forced to make an extra stop too because of a slow puncture. They were running fairly close before that point.

 

[Sarinaide]

The safety car took away any chance of Alonso trying to build a gap, and even after Vettel's second stop, DC and MB talked about the fact that Webber and Alonso upfront were only 13 seconds ahead which is not enough for a pit gap. In a perfect world Alonso/Ferrari use the extra set but fall behind Button anyway, and it wasn't like Button was going slow in the end anyway.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

...Webber and Alonso upfront were only 13 seconds ahead which is not enough for a pit gap...

It doesn't seem to be registering, does it?

The gap would have been bigger had Alonso done his Option (Softs) stints with "speed only" in mind as opposed to "longevity".

That's what Vettel did. He went out 10-10ths on all of his set of softs and let the chips fall where they may. Vettel's modus operandi was go as fast as possible on each set of softs until they were about to fall apart...Alonso - because he didn't use his third set - was "nursing" his two sets in comparison.