Head To Head Jenson Button vs Lewis Hamilton

[The Artist.....]

PS. For those who use the McLaren pitwall as proof that radio messages were not made, please remember that the pitwall does NOT show every radio conversation.

As such, you cannot say that one driver definitively didn't say "I don't want to pit this lap" (for instance at Malaysia) - all you can say is that certain messages were passed, but you cannot say what messages were NOT passed!

 

[ExtremeNinja]

Hmm. This year ALL radio messages are made available to the media and to race control. I'm not sure the media provide us with full access to this anywhere, though.

 

[The Pits]

I think that the list of information that we have no visibility of is far greater than the list which we do, therefore any opinions and conclusions which we draw are not based on a full set of data.

That is not to say that our conclusions are not correct, as they may well be, more that it is not possible to state that at the time the decision was made, that the information available better supported an alternative which would have led to a better outcome.

I think it is easy to cast aspersions, and criticise, I know I do, but sometimes, with all the data available it is more obvious why a de vision, which later proves incorrect, was made.

Maybe that is the issue, paralysis by analysis? Who knows, I just think that more openness to the possibilities may help.

 

[FB]

I wish I had the same sort of insight into the internal workings of an F1 team and was able to predict the outcome of a race so accurately based on a load of ifs, buts and maybes.

Perhaps conspiracy is the wrong word but it would appear some on here believe Button is being favoured over Hamilton in some respects which, personally, I think is a load of old bollocks. If and when there is a "Jenson is faster than you" radio com from the pit wall when both still have a chance of a tilt at the title will I accept that there is some sort of favourtism. Otherwise this just veers off into the World of fantasy as far as I can tell.

 

[Cookinflatsix]

but it does reduce the frankly risible and increasingly tiresome "conspiracy" speculation that is being beaten around on this thread...

Have you read the whole thread or did you get so disgusted and tired that you gave up and jut decided to jump in and complain? The only people who have mentioned any conspiracy in the last 40 pages or so have been those coming on here to complain about conspiracies, can you point us in the direction of this conspiracy thats been bandied around over and over again?

ren. If you are looking for an alternative, what is that alternative? People will always accuse you of spreading conspiracy theories if you bandy about ideas like this, but without providing any other alternatives! The implication of the statements is always that there is something that is (deliberately or otherwise) compromising Hamilton's races.

I really can never understand why its so hard for some to see whats there instead of what they want and expect to see, if you can be bothered to look at 4 or 5 posts of mine where i have repeatedly explained the 'alternative' to conspiracy but with the same outcome of disadvantaging LH more than JB on balance. Ill give you a hint, it involves on the fly strategy decisons and pit calls etc been made by the same person for both drivers leading to sub optimal outcomes for individual drivers.

You havent checked for an alternative, you just want to get on with expressing disdain at those who are ridiculous enough to suggest that there might be any conspiracy in a genteel and altruistic sport like F1 that has no previous for intrigues, conspiracies and hindering drivers for the good of the team, even as far as asking one to crash on purpose. Nah, forget the past, lets jump on the bandwagon

Conspiracy is a valid speculation and was looked at ages and ages ago, but as there is no evidence of an organised and efficient attempt to nobble one driver, but instead general errors and silly mistakes and calls disadvantaging both but one more than the other on balance then instead of being lazy and not thinking for ourselves, some like to speculate and theorise endlessly as more and more info is available.

This thread was created to spare the delicate sensibilities of those members who are not comfortable with 'frankly risible and increasingly tiresome speculation'

Dont understand why some, having been warned, still insist on visiting the thread looking for a reason to have a pop, read the thread, participate but why sling mud?

 

[ExtremeNinja]

Jenson is just less volatile and easier to get on with, I would imagine. I think that just means that he fits in and finds it easier to communicate with the team. It's nobody's fault. We're all made differently.

 

[Cookinflatsix]

Jenson is just less volatile and easier to get on with, I would imagine. I think that just means that he fits in and finds it easier to communicate with the team. It's nobody's fault. We're all made differently.

This is an avenue I have considered also in a previous post. That JB is an easy going guy who the crew probably go drinking or have steak dinners with whereas LH will probably do his job and leave.

This could be why there is this situation where it appears on balance LH gets whats left after JB

I also concluded that this would be easy to be the case but would point to unprofessionalism, the type that I do not think Ron would have let fester

If a guy is capable of winning just like the other guy but is a moody and abrasive type, so what do your job, be professional, after all you are geting paid. Yes I realise that business is about relationships and is part of the job of the driver, but LH was brought up to trust the team implicitly, so he suffers for this arrangement by having to compete for popularity to get good service

My current beleif is that 2 no1 drivers going for the WC should not be sharing data or strategies, or engineers. There should be a chinese wall between the two sides of the garage, that would allow both to be given the best strategy and service for both, but at the slight detriment of th team. Maybe better to have a no1 and no2 sharing data etc

I dont know, its not my area of expertise, but the Mclaren management has looked constantly amateurish and naive too many times since Ron left to brush it under the carpet, its like the leader has no street smarts and places too much faith in textbook and computer models

I guess the guy who builds an F1 team up from scratch by definition would have these street smarts

anyone looking to get upset by these views, feel free to express yourselves, forgive me if I dont respond further though

 

[ExtremeNinja]

forgive me if I dont respond further though

I might even thank you.

 

[RasputinLives]

anyone looking to get upset by these views, feel free to express yourselves, forgive me if I dont respond further though

I'm pretty sure you will. If you don't I'm gonna hold a parade with trombones and elephants and everything.

 

[FB]

Mod Comment

Can I just ask that we avoid the point by point quotes and rebuttals. I appreciate everyone has a point to make but I think anyone reading a response will know who it is aimed at and what it is referring to.

Thanks

FB

 

[F1ang-o]

forgive me if I dont respond further though

You forgot to add..........' at the moment'

 

[Bill Boddy]

I find it odd that anyone is saying or implying that McLaren or one or more of it's employees are favouring Button.

The final(ish) design for the season was unable to be tested fully due to weather conditions.

The first two free practice sessions were marred by the rain, no proper testing could be carried out, there was insufficient usable time for the team to test everything in FP3. The was so little useful data that the team did not even know how much fuel the drivers were going to use, having to tell the driver to go in fuel save mode after about ten laps showed this. Similarly they did not know how long the first set of tyres would last on a full(!) load of fuel, on the BBC coverage one of the presenters said that up and down the paddock there was talk of nineteen laps.

When the tyres began to go off the team had to make a quick decision, did they bring the two drivers in on the same lap and take a chance on there being no problem for the first racing pit stop of the year, or should they bring Hamilton in a lap late. As it turns out WITH HINDSIGHT it would have been better to have brought them in together. I can only imagine what would have happened on here if both drivers had been brought in together and Button's wheelnut had acted the way it did in China.

The second stops they took the chance, bringing the drivers in together with very little, if any, holdup for Hamilton. They were just unlucky with the timing of the safety car.

In Malaysia we saw the sequence of messages between the pit crews and the drivers. Much seems to have been made of the fact that the wording to the two drivers was different. Well, presumably the drivers and their crews talked before the season even started and sorted out exactly how the messages should be structured. If they did not then that is the fault of the drivers for not making it clear what information they wanted.

At the first stop what the sequence showed was that Hamilton had first choice, being the leading river and said no thank you, I'm OK. Button was then offered the choice and took it. At the later pit stop Hamilton was left out as long as possible in case it rained again in which case he would be a pit stop up on his rivals. It didn't, so he was called in before he was in danger of losing a place later. He didn't.

In Q3 in China Hamilton went out fairly early to get a banker lap in, he was going to do another lap later in the session where he could go all out for it. Button was only going to have one go, so he was delayed to allow the track to rubber in further. Unfortunately the track temperature dropped, making it slower than earlier on in the session (see http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2012/4/13227.html ) so Hamilton aborted what was going to be a slower lap whist Button had to complete on a slower circuit.

Then during the race at the first stops Hamilton was dropped in to some traffic, behind Kovaleinen and Ricciardo. It may be that the McLaren team thought that it would screw him up being held up behind such redoubtable car/driver combinations on well worn tyres, but unluckily for them Hamilton got past Ricciardo on his out lap and Kovaleinen pitted before the end of Hamilton's second lap (yes, it is irony). We all know what happened later to Button.

Overall I see no sign of bias, the only driver to really suffer was Button and that was just one of those unfortunate things that happen in motor sport.

 

[Brogan]

I find it odd that anyone is saying or implying that McLaren or one or more of it's employees are favouring Button.

Why?

The same thing was said in 2007 when Alonso was paired with Hamilton, but apparently it was Hamilton who was being favoured.

Despite the now infamous "observer" being placed in the garage and unable to identify anything untoward, the rumours still persisted and do now to this very day.

 

[FB]

There have been moments when you watch a race and think "what the ..." but, overall, I don't see any serious favouritism for one driver over another at Mclaren. I do think Mclaren are a bit crap at strategy these days though - although China 2007 seems to indicate that it might not be that recent.

 

[Bill Boddy]

OK, maybe I should have said something like "I can see no evidence of one driver being hampered by one or more of the team members to the advantage of the other driver".

 

[Senna's_right_foot]

There have been moments when you watch a race and think "what the ..." but, overall, I don't see any serious favouritism for one driver over another at Mclaren. I do think Mclaren are a bit crap at strategy these days though - although China 2007 seems to indicate that it might not be that recent.

That's exactly what most of us were trying to say, and debate, about 10 pages ago!

 

[FB]

Some people, sometimes, take it too far though. And others overact in response...

Quid pro quo?

 

[Senna's_right_foot]

Yup, as i've said before, in this thread I think, the BS is not as one-sided as 'some' would like others to believe Shame, as it had the makings of a decent discussion.

 

[The Artist.....]

I think, on the whole, this argument can be summarised by the following 2 camps:

Lewis Hamilton fans - have been used to seeing Hamilton beating all of his team-mates, so if he is no longer consistently beating his team-mate, then there must be something else occurring which causes Hamilton to no longer being superior. Furthermore, they are likely not to have rated Button very highly based on his time at Honda... On the occasions that Button beats Hamilton, there has to be some reason why this has happened.

Jenson Button fans - Have (often) followed Button for much longer, and were not surprised when they saw him performing well in 2009, and considered him under-rated by the media and many of the viewing public. They were not as surprised when Button performed on a similar level to Hamilton (even though the media had written him off prior to the 2010 season). As such, they are less likely to see bias within McLaren, as they already rate Button. If anything, they had expected to see bias towards Hamilton, as McLaren was "His team".

I'm not saying this exactly characterises the camps, but I would say that almost everyone commenting on these threads have some characteristics relating to one camp or the other.

 

[RasputinLives]

Now I'm not a fan of Eddie Jordan - in fact part of me hopes they don't let him out of China - but I do agree with him on one front - I've always though that Mclaren over think things and all these centres they have set up to figure out race strategies etc etc lead to too many people being involved and logic being forgotten.

Having said that though Ferrari have had some pretty appaling races tactic wise too over the last few years - Kimi on wet tyres when it was bone dry in Malaysia? Massa's pit stop in Singapore?

Also I remember at their height and dominance the Williams team always had a tendancy to try and throw things away with bad pitstops and race strategy.