MJSpeed

That's what the FIA claims. As for Hamilton, we all know he won't be penalized and as a matter of fact the FIA did something this year that they'd never done (AFAIK), that is to retract an official, announced penalty, all just to not penalize Hammy. Ex: Vettel for the incident in the Japanese GP.

+1

PeanutinCA

I know posting articles is someone else's job, but I could resist this one. I love that the Hammster had to holt the interview to re-launch his breakfast. Much like re-loading the cars systems. I see Dennis is trying hard to say it wasn't Ham's fault, but a failure;

From : http://www.dailyf1news.com/dailyf1ne...php?nwsID=3963

Dennis denies Hamilton finger trouble
Tuesday 23 Oktober at 13:15 : Ron Dennis has denied that finger trouble cost Lewis Hamilton the 2007 world championship.

Hamilton, whose McLaren dropped through the field last Sunday when his gearbox slipped into neutral, reportedly told the French newspaper La Presse that he accidentally pressed a wrong button on his steering wheel.

The Briton's claim is backed by on-board camera footage that depicts Hamilton's left thumb as pressing a button before he slowed.

But Dennis is on Tuesday quoted as saying: "There was nothing that Lewis did that had any relevance to the gearbox."

Team boss Dennis speculates that the problem may have been caused by a faulty sensor, but insisted that it was a mechanical rather than human glitch.

"The only reason that we did not win the world championship was the gearbox problem," Dennis told reporters.

Hamilton, who had to pause an interview with reporters in his Sao Paulo hotel room on Monday afternoon to throw up, called the incident a "small hiccup" that cost him a place in F1's record books.

"But I didn't wake up this morning thinking 'oh shoot'," he added. "I've just got to get on with it."

Meanwhile, Mercedes-Benz competition director Norbert Haug has indicated that Hamilton's wish for the 'cool fuel' protest to be dropped is unlikely to change the team's decision.

"Those teams had a competitive advantage," Tuesday's Bild-Zeitung quoted him as saying. "We cannot brush that aside."

p.s. I know this has already been said but it's great that he puked. Nah, he's not upset about losing the WDC is he?

Nano

mmm... it shifts responsability for losing the wdc to a technical gremlin, vs himself, internal issues and pressure and strife between drivers... but who knows

multi21

This is the 2nd time Ron has absolved Hamilton. He said it was not Hamilton's fault that he beached his car in China. The team should have brought him in earlier.

Once again Daddy protecting his son.

multi21

I just watched the Brazilian GP all over again. This time without the yelling and screaming as I couldn't believe what was happening as Lewis threw everything away.

But aside that, lost in the excitment was the drive from Nico Rosberg. He beat both BMW's fair and square in a Williams Toyota and came in 4th!!! What could he do in a Ferrari or McLaren? He needs a better car.

Can you imagine the fireworks, if he teamed up with Hamilton at McLaren? That kid is getting better and better all the time and is flying under the radar in a less than stellar car.

mdrums

I would love to see Nico in better equipment and he would fit well at McLaren...plus that would make my wife extra happy seeing her pretty boy doing well each week. Nico is very talented and an excellent driver for sure and I hope he get a break and chance for '08

A.Wayne

Yes, that's right. You have my Word, lewis did not use his finger

MJSpeed

Ron Dennis has turned McLaren into a laughing shell of what once was a great team. If Ron really believes what he always says, that Team McLaren is bigger than any one person, then it's time he steps down and more importantly shuts the **** up!

A.Wayne

www.itv.com

Lewis Hamilton encountered two barriers to his clinching the world title during the Brazilian Grand Prix: the transmission malfunction and his race strategy.

He could conceivably have recovered from either one to collect the fifth place he needed, but not both.

The transmission problem has been covered in depth already, with the finger of suspicion having moved on from a software glitch through a dismissed conspiracy of driver error and onto a valve malfunction within the hydraulics caused by an unusual magnetic field.

This lost him around 30s before the system was successfully rebooted, and although he was then back in 18th place, it was only lap eight, with 63 still to go.

As he completed that fateful eighth lap he was 28.6s behind fifth place. He needed therefore to make an average gain on that fifth place of at least 0.45s per lap for the remainder of the distance.

By the time he made his first refuelling stop from 10th place at the end of lap 22, having made his way past seven cars (and benefitted from a retirement ahead of him), he was 22s behind fifth with 49 laps to go – keeping the average gain per lap needed at 0.45s.

He was potentially much more than 0.45s per lap quicker than the cars between his target position and where he was, but would obviously suffer some delay as he found a way past them – as well as past the slower traffic he would drop into after his stops. Whether those delays would more than cancel his car’s lap time advantage when running in clean air was a close call.

Had the team decided to keep him on the originally planned two-stop strategy (with a long middle stint and a short one at the end on the super-soft tyres, the same as Alonso), he would have had an evens chance of depriving Nick Heidfeld of fifth before the end.

So McLaren decided to try to improve the odds.

They put him on the super-soft tyres (which were expected to be slower than the softs in the sweltering track conditions) for a very short second stint of just 14 laps.

When this stint was completed the plan was to fuel him to the end – which would make a final stint of 35 laps. The thinking was that he would be on the faster tyre at the end, when the cars he needed to pass would be faster than the ones he would be passing when on the slower tyre in the second stint.

There was an understandable logic to the plan.

However, as he left the pits from his first stop the team looked at the (harder-spec) tyres they had just removed – and to their dismay found the fronts were very badly worn. If they had only just withstood 22 laps, there was no way a set of the same spec of tyre was going to do 35.

This was against the backdrop of his tyre failures on China and Turkey, remember.

Given that they had just short-fuelled him, they were now committed to bringing him in 35 laps from the end. As such, they had to plan on an extra fuel stop – incurring a delay of around 25s, minus a few seconds the lighter fuel weight would bring.

A three-stop at Interlagos was only ever going to be almost as quick as a two-stop if the three-stop guy could get in clear air in each of his stints – as with Robert Kubica.

And even he emerged from his final stop behind his two-stopping team-mate Nick Heidfeld. He was able to be close enough that he could beat him on the track in the last stint, but the point is that even in ideal conditions for a three-stop, it was marginal.

When running all the way back in traffic, as Hamilton was, a two-stop strategy was always going be significantly faster.

So excessive tyre wear was the final nail in the coffin for Hamilton’s chances. Had Hamilton’s car been kind enough to the rubber to run a 35-lap stint on a two-stop strategy, he just might have got that fifth place.

The McLaren has been harder on its tyres all year than the Ferrari, something that has played a big part in it being better relative to the Ferrari in qualifying than in the races. At a scorching hot Interlagos, where the hottest track temperatures of the season were recorded, that was a trait that was punished heavily.

That said, Alonso managed a middle stint of 30 laps on the harder compound on his two-stop strategy, but Alonso was not trying to make up from an earlier delay or being forced to scythe off-line through traffic, and was simply cruising in a safe third.

Comparisons between Michael Schumacher’s great comeback drive in Brazil of last year are not valid.

Here, Hamilton did not have the car/tyre combination to emulate that feat. Schumacher’s drive was done with a huge grip advantage over most of the field, don’t forget.

It was done on a tyre that allowed Sakon Yamamoto to set the race’s seventh fastest lap in a Super Aguri.

To do great comeback drives, you need everything in your favour.

At Interlagos Hamilton’s tyre wear, the team’s strategy decisions and an overheating engine that forced him to run for much of the distance at reduced revs put paid to that.

You might ask why Hamilton didn’t insist on staying with the original standard strategy. But it is not a fair criticism. He did not have the lap time and position information that the team enjoyed.

A driver is not in a position to make calls such as these as he’s coming through the field with no way of knowing precise gaps to traffic and target position. It had to be the team’s call, and on this occasion they gambled wrong, just as they had in China – although in this case it was a much more understandable gamble.

When they took the Brazil gamble they did not have the information at their disposal of the rate of Hamilton’s tyre wear, whereas in Shanghai it was painfully obvious.

Hamilton should however take some of the criticism for the decision to stay out on the failing rear tyre in China. In Shanghai the team were telling him to stay out while they tried to work out if inters or full wets were needed, reckoning that with each lap they would be better informed.

Only he could feel how dire his lack of grip was. A more experienced driver would surely have insisted he was coming in and taken the decision out of the team’s hands.

Similarly, he looked like a rookie in the opening two corners in Brazil.

At the first turn he was sold the oldest trick in the book when Kimi Raikkonen lifted off mid-corner, forcing him to do the same, thereby meaning he was still off the throttle as Kimi then accelerated.

The loss of momentum also allowed Alonso to pass. A few seconds later Hamilton went off trying a move – a pass on Alonso for third – he didn’t need to make.

As it happened, that was not what did for his title chances. But it could so easily have done.

Lewis has posted a sensational rookie season but he has not been flawless.

Furthermore, his two main opponents, Alonso and Raikkonen, have been below-par on account of making the transition from Michelin tyres that demanded a very different driving style.

There is no way of weighing up the net advantage/disadvantage of their tyre adaptation against Hamilton’s lack of previous F1 experience.

Next year, all three start with those excuses deleted.

Larry Herman

Thanks for the info Wayne. That was a very informative examination of what happened. It is knowing these underlying reasons that allow for a better understanding of what a driver is capable of vs what they actually achieved.

multi21

That last post from itv.com is perplexing. It appears to be shaded from the side of the British press with some facts mixed in with opinion and speculation to top it off. Why is the British press covering for Hamilton's mistakes?

1. It appears Hamilton didn't manage his tires properly as Alonso was able to go 30 laps with the prime tire and Hamilton used them all up in 22 laps. Granted he was driving like mad to make up time, but isn't this about managment?

2. It is true that the Ferrari's were more gentle with the tires all year.

3. What does the author mean when he compares the 2006 race from the back of the field and says Schumacher's drive was done on a huge grip advantage over the field? I don't get this quote.

4. I also don't understand what Yamamoto's tire combination and his 7th fastest recorded lap time ahve to do with this. Can someone explain where he's going with this?

5. On the first lap, T1, Kimi was on the outside trying to get around Massa and his car went sideways. Did he lift? I don't know, but he scrubed some speed because of the slide. How does the author know Kimi was trying to use "the oldest trick in the book" and then accelerate out of it? Only Ferrari telemetry can tell if he lifted or not, but from watching it twice, it's clear that Kimi slid.

6. It's clear that Alonso changed his driving style from the early part of the season to the latter part. The first few races, he had the abrupt turn in style he used with Renault and the Michelin tires. As the season progressed, the on board shots of the McLaren showed that he was much more smooth with his imputs.

A.Wayne

M3Pete Wrote:

That last post from itv.com is perplexing. It appears to be shaded from the side of the British press with some facts mixed in with opinion and speculation to top it off. Why is the British press covering for Hamilton's mistakes?

1. It appears Hamilton didn't manage his tires properly as Alonso was able to go 30 laps with the prime tire and Hamilton used them all up in 22 laps. Granted he was driving like mad to make up time, but isn't this about managment? Alonso is always better with his tires . china proved this beyond doubt...

2. It is true that the Ferrari's were more gentle with the tires all year. YES

3. What does the author mean when he compares the 2006 race from the back of the field and says Schumacher's drive was done on a huge grip advantage over the field? I don't get this quote. Schumacher won 5 WDC on custom Tires , Last year was no different for him and his tires ....

4. I also don't understand what Yamamoto's tire combination and his 7th fastest recorded lap time ahve to do with this. Can someone explain where he's going with this? Yamamoto's tires selection was superior to hamiltons is my guess


5. On the first lap, T1, Kimi was on the outside trying to get around Massa and his car went sideways. Did he lift? I don't know, but he scrubed some speed because of the slide. How does the author know Kimi was trying to use "the oldest trick in the book" and then accelerate out of it? Only Ferrari telemetry can tell if he lifted or not, but from watching it twice, it's clear that Kimi slid.
Agree pure speculation on Kimi's intent....

6. It's clear that Alonso changed his driving style from the early part of the season to the latter part. The first few races, he had the abrupt turn in style he used with Renault and the Michelin tires. As the season progressed, the on board shots of the McLaren showed that he was much more smooth with his imputs. The michelin Tires required that driving style. Alonso adjusted to the Bridgestones ,nicely , Hammy did not and still throws his car around like a go kart, he will have to learn to save the tires and pace himself to win a WDC, Kimi and Massa is now settled at Ferrari , Alonso has shown his worth in being able to adjust and dig in, there will be no freebe's for Hammy next year Alonso will start as he ended , focused and will not throw points away like last , Hammy won't find it as easy as it was this year, Frankly i don't see a WDC for Hammy over the next 2 years

__________________

Nano

From my recolection and how I interpreted the events.

Raikkonen was totally side by side with Massa, on the outside instants before turn 1. It would have been a very tricky overtaking manoeuver for Raikkonen. Massa was driving for the lead, as anything less would have risked Alonso or even Hamilton going through. Raikkonen risking overtaking massa on the outside did not make sense at this stage, so he lifted and threw himself behind massa. The monoeuver was made at the limit in the smallest of spaces and the rear end twitched as he got back on the power aggressively.

Was more to not risk taking out himself or massa than anything else, imho.

Flawless start by massa, and ice coolness for Raikkonen.

Now hamilton beside Alonso on the outside, did the exact opposite (did he have to?) and tryied to overtake Alonso.

multi21

Wayne,
I know you had to throw that dig against MS, but last year the Michelin tires were better than the Bridgestone tires and both Renault and McLaren had them. I still remember MS passing Kimi in the closing stages of that race. A thing of beauty.

Once again, no one can tell me what the hell he is talking about with Yamamoto?

Hamilton is arguably the best rookie to come into F1. The WC was his to lose and he did, however, I have no doubt when he retires, he will have won multiple WC.

When McLaren and the British press gloss over his mistakes it's a disservice to him as at this level of motorsport, its the person who makes the least mistakes that wins. They should objectively look at his performance and make sure he knows about them and does not repeat them, but as was the case in China, why blame the team for LH beaching it? Why do they not even mention the fact he shouldn't have been racing against Kimi in China and eating away at his tires or Alonso on the first lap in Brazil? I have seen no mention of this in the British press.

When a certain senior driver, that shall go unnamed, made mistakes last year, everyone said that he didnt make those mistakes in the past and he was too old and should retire. Conversely, Lewis is too young and made unbelievable mistakes. Mistakes that he didn't make in the early part of the season. If he is made to believe that everything is not his fault, then God help us how his ego will be when he does win one.

Nano

I agree 99.9% Pete, for the same reason, I think Bernie's comments are a disgrace to F1 and Hamilton, they do Hamilton no honor, he is better than that.

I have nothing against hamilton, he's proven to be competitive and has a roaring fire within that makes everyone else pale in comparisson. He made mistakes, but he was grossly miss managed this year, he is somewhat a victim of Mclaren (read Ron Dennis).

I agree on Schumacher as well, but let wayne rant, he still doesn't make up for the number of fanatic Schumacher fanboys who rant the other extreme.